Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 21:26:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Louis Epstein Subject: WTC Rebuilding #247:GMAC Lawsuit,Anniversary Actions Perhaps the most important WTC-related news of recent days is the below,referring to a lawsuit by GMAC on behalf of the lenders who backed the Silverstein syndicate's purchase of the 99-year net lease: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 11:01:48 -0400 From: Save The WTC Subject: GMAC Sues Silverstein and Port Authority http://www.smartmoney.com/bn/ON/index.cfm?story=ON-20030904-000512-0340 GMAC Sues World Trade Center Leaseholder, Others NEW YORK -- GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corp., the main lender to World Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein, is suing Mr. Silverstein's group along with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, alleging the developer and agency committed to a rebuilding plan without protecting bondholders, Thursday's Wall Street Journal reported. The suit, filed in New York state court in Manhattan, represents a breach between Mr. Silverstein and his lender and further complicates already tangled efforts to redevelop the Trade Center site. A legal battle could cause delays. New York Gov. George Pataki has said he wants an office building cornerstone laid on the site by next summer and construction of a 1,776-foot-tall tower, designed by Stuido Daniel Libeskind, to be complete by 2008. Already this spring, according to the complaint, GMAC has twice denied Mr. Silverstein's requests to use insurance proceeds to pay the developer's main design firm, Skidmore Owings & Merrill. In the complaint, GMAC, a General Motors Corp. unit administering the loan for bondholders, says it has repeatedly asked Mr. Silverstein and the Port Authority, which owns the 17-acre site, to set aside $563 million, plus interest, to protect bondholders, and has been rebuffed. GMAC is asking the court to order that the money be set aside, as well as to be consulted on building plans and for approval over Mr. Silverstein's future spending on the project. GMAC also says the Port Authority has refused repeated demands that it give up its claim to $1.5 billion of the insurance proceeds for its own security. GMAC says the priority payment would only apply if the center wasn't going to be rebuilt. Howard Rubenstein, a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, last night said Mr. Silverstein's lawyers had just received the complaint and couldn't yet comment. Representatives of the Port Authority couldn't be reached. _________________________________________________________________ ---------- End forwarded message ---------- This certainly represents further opportunity to derail the misguided official efforts,but as always with such chances we must make sure to use it to make things better rather than worse, to the best of our ability. Silverstein's lenders for 7 WTC balked before,since his acceptance of a smaller footprint and smaller square footage for the new building meant that they would have less physical collateral and a smaller income stream backed by their loans.Apparently they were bought off... but the lenders for the main complex,we hope,are not out for a quick buyout but will demand construction of office towers large enough to secure their investment. If possible,we must seek to influence them in this direction, and encourage them to advocate discarding the Libeskind plan. If plans that slammed Greenwich Street all the way through the site could beat ones that didn't in a fair competition...let's see them try! I recently learned,after spotting something in maps that were produiced by the development corporation to justify "street grid restoration",that having both Greenwich and Church Streets go north-south between Fulton(originally Partition) and Liberty (originally Crown) streets is not the "normal" state of affairs in city history,as "connectionists" would like to think...Church never went south of Fulton until 1873,while Greenwich of course was closed around 1966. Other recent news of note: http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/4744.htm is an opinion piece from Steve Cuozzo,noting a law firm once based in the WTC moving into the WFC and the impending completion of the PATH station (now less than three months away). Certainly the ability of commuters to go straight Downtown from New Jersey again is going to make a difference. (Alex Butziger has noted rising prices for large buildings in Manhattan in some posts on the NYCS board). http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/4804.htm Bloomberg is calling on survivors of attack victims to sign up for the government compensation fund before the deadline. Identifications of remains are continuing. http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/4826.htm tells of survivors who have gotten over their initial desire for lawsuits and recriminations and decided to move on with their lives. http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/4820.htm on the other hand tells of the faction determined to keep making a fuss...and against whom we must be prepared to continue to fuss if we are to have the last word.This tells in particular of safety issues that should indeed be investigated...but not allowed to hamper safer-than-ever new towers that can only be so because of their heroic scale. http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/4919.htm tells of a demonstration attempt by 17 mega-memorialist relatives who want the footprints left empty-as-Osama-ordered all the way down to bedrock.They had told the press in advance, so the police were there in force and kept them behind barriers rather than letting them block construction equipment as they planned. That Sally Regenhard was part of this apparently means that the Skyscraper Safety Campaign DOES oppose emergency exits for the new PATH station leading onto the Tower footprints. Pataki's patience to pander seems to be wearing thin,from his comment in this article...but he in fact needs to be upbraided for MAKING his empty-footprints promise,not for not working as hard as the 17 demonstrators want to keep that foolish promise. A welcome side effect of the NY Times article has been some interest from international media...a German newspaper reporter will be meeting with several WTCRM members tomorrow,and a Dutch television channel will be there for a WTCRM petition session at the WTC site on Saturday morning (10:30 to about noon). We plan to be at the same corner(Church and Liberty) that the anti-rebuilders demonstrated at,and that they intend to demonstrate at again closer to the anniversary.We will show that there are other unsatisfied voices that see things just the opposite from Eckert et al...and that many want the Towers to return. On the 11th itself I will be a telephone guest of Michael Smerconish's Philadelphia-area radio show. Those with the right software may want to check out Izeklah's "rebuilding chats" mentioned on the NYCS board,part of the restorewtc.com site...both BYCS and Restorewtc are of course linked from http://www.put.com/wtc/ (the WTCRM resource page). See you on the 111th floor on 9-11-11! -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.