I really like this blog, the authors write very well, thank you very much for sharing.
http://www.gobatteryonline.com...

Malls were designed to be places for commerce, not a place for teens to hang out. Of course over the years malls became just that, basically a "babysitter" for humans in that awkward phase between being a child and being an adult. Sure adults sometimes hang out themselves at the mall, but usually they don't hang out in large groups, screaming like children (without their parents there to discipline them), running around and making other shoppers feel uncomfortable. Well, maybe if there's a sportsbar, but otherwise no. There has to be some restrictions. Malls are not "playgrounds" for teens.

Part of the reason the mall is designed like a bunker is to make it inhospitable for kids. Even if this were illegal, simply playing classical music at a loud volume would fix the problem. It frightens the natives.

As for the law however, children are not a protected class. Many establishments discriminate against children, so we once again have a city council person proving themselves to be idiots. Is it any wonder why this city is doomed?

Mall culture is dying everywhere else, Brooklyn's a throwback! Sadly, that mall's a hole. I wish they'd just turn it into Teendale and build a new nice mall someplace else.

It's nice they worded that so strangely so teen moms are still allowed to bring their children.

Urban youth are like cancerous cockroaches with attitude. If the government did their job as far as crime fighting, and stopped enabling dysfunctional lifestyles and undesirable breeding, there would be far less of an urban youth problem.

les sauvages

If the teens hanging out at the mall need something better to do, maybe Forest City should send over some representatives from the Atlantic Yards employment office to meet with the kids. (Oh, yeah, I guess they'd need an Atlantic Yards employment office first.)

Maybe Mr. Ratner needed to better understand where he was building his mall.

However this is a little complicated. It is private property but "the company stands to receive $2 billion of your tax dollars in direct and indirect subsidies." ( http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2008/04/atlantic_yards_6.php ) so I believe we're all investors in this project, although we won't ever profit from it. They destroyed a nice community to build this mall but that's a whole other issue.

I'd like to see the crime statistics of the mall to see if such drastic measures are warranted. Above all the mall is a place of business and if there are groups of kids disrupting their business then maybe these measures are necessary but if they are doing it to just eliminate a certain kind (ie Urban teens) or subset of the community because they feel it's not good for business then I say tough luck. They should have studied the area better and known what they were getting into.

On another note, these tax subsidies are the ones ruining NYC. This corporate welfare that provides an unfair advantage to these large corporations over our small businesses. According to experts the Atlantic Yards Project will end up costing tax payers $2 billion. A $2 billion tax subsidy for what? How long before we see a return on this tax payer investment. There's always the talk about jobs but a majority of these are minimum wage with no benefits, these are not the jobs we need to be investing in. How long will it take to recuperate a $2 billion investment by taxing these meager earnings? And when these uninsured workers have to go to the hospital who will pay for their bills? How many mom and pop stores were destroyed by these type of subsidies that they can't get? Local small business owners that lived, spend their profits, paid taxes and invested in OUR city, as opposed to these large corporations whose profits leave our economy. The developer, Forest City Enterprises, is based in Ohio and most of the stores are corporate-owned and their headquarters aren't in NYC so most of the profits leave the NYC economy as soon as it's generated and never come back. While the local small businesses they eliminated bought food from area supermarkets, bought cars and homes within the city, spent discretionary income going out to restaurants or other cultural events, etc.

$2 billion divided by 8 million residents comes out to about $250 each, that we are all investing in this project. Bloomberg takes our tax money and invests it in these projects that, as the shrewd businessman that he is, he would never invest in, with his personal money. But it's easy to spend our money on this bullshit in the name of "economic growth" but for whom? Who exactly grows economically from these projects?

Maybe these teens should go there after school since money that could have been used for after school programs, tutoring, sports activities, etc. went to building this mall instead. So let the teens enjoy where the money was spent, the Atlantic Terminal Mall, after all this area was one of the hardest hit by Bloomberg's latest budget cuts ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/nyregion/05cuts.html ). What else is there for them to do?

just a niggling point...

but if they are doing it to just eliminate a certain kind (ie Urban teens)

Erm, the use of "Urban" to mean minority is a silly euphemism here. Obviously every teen in the place will be "urban" regardless of their race. What, you think kids are driving in from Long Island?

I think everyone under the age of 21 should go to the mall and shoplift like crazy.

Nobody beneath the age of 21 should boutique at that mall. Nobody! Ever! When the businesses there ache a accident in sales, things may change. Forest City Ratner is demography abroad their customers. I don't anticipate best shops will ache that in silence.

www.powerlinebattery.com

Meanwhile, I agreement that I won't boutique there. Some of us adults are affectionate the arbitrary analysis of adolescence by Forest City Ratner.

It's a sad fact that people find large groups of teenaged students intimidating, and not simply because they are afraid of crime and/or violence. From my own perspective, I don't like to be in a place where kids seem to be just hanging out in a large noisy group any more than I like being a restaurant filled with babies who are crying or twenty-somethings are screaming at football on tv. I go to the mall to shop, maybe grab a bite to eat, browse, etc. I do not find dodging teenagers with time on their hands and pent-up energy after a day of school a pleasant experience. I do think it is up to mall security to make sure that teenagers in the mall behave themselves, use their inside voices, and don't block passage of people who are shopping. I also think teenagers should know how to behave indoors. Do I think this can happen? Not really?

5,000 Brooklyn Tech students are located 2 blocks away.

Most of these kids haven't done anything wrong in the mall, yet they're still barred from entering.

"Groups of four or more people under 21 years old and unaccompanied by a parent"

Is that the new cipher for "urban teenagers"? I would think that Uncle Al and the ACLU should be making a joint appearance shortly...

Nobody under the age of 21 should shop at that mall. Nobody! Ever! When the businesses there suffer a loss in sales, things may change. Forest City Ratner is taking away their customers. I don't think most shops will suffer that in silence.

Meanwhile, I guarantee that I won't shop there. Some of us adults are sympathetic the unfair treatment of teens by Forest City Ratner.

Kids under 21 don't spend nearly as much as adults. Gangs of kids hanging out, fighting and generally acting like jackasses scares those adults away, which is bad for business.

God I'm glad I'm not a teenager anymore. Their being obnoxious little fucks is somewhat justified by how crappily they are treated. God forbid they want to go to the mall like every other teenager in the world. I worked in a mall as a teenager and the security guards would follow me on the way to my store, even though I was generally dressed nicely for work and in no way looked threatening. Once one tried to throw me out, claiming I looked too young to work in the mall and claiming "I wasn't allowed in without my mom." Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Not that there aren't plenty of troublemaking punk teenagers, but I feel like treating all teenagers like troublemaking future criminals probably helps make some of them future criminals. I certainly didn't appreciate being treated like a scummy thief when I was actually quite well behaved for a teenager.

Hey Councilwoman Letitia James - private property owners can and do enforce such bans, and it's not illegal for them to do so.

Meanwhile, why are people over the age of 18 not being considered adults? That might be the illegal part.