To the editor:
(Plain Press July 2026) There is an extensive ‘commentary’ about the relocation of the Historical Sosiety Of Old Brooklyn museum in the current (Summer 2026) Old Brooklyn News, which is the publication vehicle for the Old Brooklyn Community Development Corporation. This corporation is the owner of the corner where the museum had been until recently, when the coporation evicted them, due to their plans to build something new to replace the historic buildings at this location. This piece in the Old Brooklyn News was written by David Robinson, the new Executive Director of the development corporation.
LETTER
He writes that “due to uncertainty regarding federal dollars”, they apparently have decided to proceed without them. Was the funding situation for the project always so “comfortable” that they could afford to proceed without federal funding?
From there, Mr. Robinson goes on to say that the development corporation is using its money to cover all the museum relocation costs, which otherwise would’ve been furnished to the developer, from a federal fund, to be used for that express purpose. He further says the developer will reimburse these monies to the development corporation out of its own funds.
If the developer is going to reimburse the development corporation for the relocation expenses, who is going to reimburse the developer??? The developer isn’t going to do such a thing out of “the kindness of his heart”; there has to be something in this for the developer. What is that something? Perhaps that could have been a transfer of the ownership of the property to the developer, but it’s been strongly demonstrated that the development corporation wants to retain ownership of the property. What is left that will satisfy the developer?
Lynette Filips – a very concerned resident of the Old Brooklyn neighborhood — says that she has requested answers to this question and other related questions from the development corporation, but her requests according to her have been ignored.
My commentary is not necessarily intended to suggest that something “shady” might be going on. It’s just that a few things might be interpreted that way, particularly since they have yet to be explained by the development corporation.
It would be truly fantastic if someone from the development corporation would respond to this letter to the editor with their own letter to the editor.
Craig Bobby
Leave a comment