Councilman Charles Barron abstained from casting a vote at a Land Use committee hearing at City Hall on Wednesday based on his apprehensions about a commitment to the community by Ikea, the Swedish furniture company that has plans to develop a big-box store on the Red Hook waterfront.
While speaking to a colleague about his decision to withhold his vote, the East New York legislator said he didn’t feel as if the council members were well-enough informed to vote on the massive project.
“The reason I know anything about this project is because I keep on top of these things, we read The Brooklyn Papers, and I’ve been following the concerns and questions raised by the community,” Barron said, standing in the back of the council chambers following his committee’s otherwise unanimous vote to approve the Ikea proposal.
Asked about his non-vote, Barron said that Ikea’s attempts to win the community over by donating money to a few community programs was not sufficient for “one of the richest men in the world,” Ikea owner Ingvar Kamprad, whose estimated net worth is $18.5 billion.
“Why doesn’t he commit Ikea to profit sharing?” he asked rhetorically. “You want to empower them, how about putting one or two percent of the profit towards developing other parts of the community, ensuring small businesses can stay there as well.”
At the vote, Barron stated his concern that Ikea store employees are not unionized, and that the hazy promise of jobs was dubious because it lacked any signed commitments.
“You can create jobs without violating the environment. You can create jobs so people can work towards something. We don’t need a Rite Aid pharmacy, we need a right-on pharmacy, that you own. I’m all about that, ownership,” he said.
He added that no sufficient discussion had been held on traffic impacts, and thought that all new developments in Brooklyn could start to set a precedent for community involvement.
“Downtown Brooklyn is going to be a mess environmentally on traffic, on how developers use eminent domain, on how developers give out jobs,” he said, noting that he was afraid the desperation of populations like those in Red Hook’s public housing, which comprises 75 percent of the Red Hook population, focus too much on immediate needs for survival, instead of grasping a larger picture of what could be accomplished.
“What happens is people personalize these projects,” he said, “and when they get a little more than usual they are a little over enthusiastic. We need to make sure developers come into communities and have relationships that are empowering, not exploitative.”
Barron said he was afraid the kind of jobs offered would be unlikely to provide advancement or growth opportunities, which was an arguing point for opponent groups, none of which, he noted, approached him for help.
To illustrate his point about jobs, Barron brought up the Gateway Estates, a massive mall complex that was built in his district near Starrett City. Despite community agreements that each company that moved into the mall had signed pledging to hire locally, he said the jobs were of poor quality, did not offer advancement to managerial positions and led to high turnover.
“Is East New York better for it? No!” he said. “Right now those little jobs they’re offering — [the businesses are] getting it back from what you spend a thousand-fold.”
Barron seemed convinced that profit sharing would be a surefire answer to community involvement. “That’s a real commitment, to say, ‘We’ll come in and let you invest money. ’You want to raise the bar? Then raise it to there.”