Southern Brooklyn

Kruger Advocates For Coney Boardwalk Businesses


State Senator Carl Kruger is attempting to prod the mayor to step in and protect Coney Island’s boardwalk businesses, which are being kicked out by the new amusement operator, Zamperla USA.

New York Post reports:

State Sen. Carl Kruger – a longtime critic of the Bloomberg administration’s plans to revive Coney Island – was back on the fabled boardwalk today, this time saying he hopes to work with the mayor to help keep eight longtime boardwalk businesses from having to shut down.

… Kruger (D-Brooklyn), who met the business owners and members of the press, said he wanted to try and broker a deal with Zamperla and the city to save the businesses.

“I think what we are talking about is David taking on Goliath,” said Kruger (D-Brooklyn), on why he wanted to help the underdog merchants.

“Thank you for being the first politician to come down here and try to help,” said Anthony Berlingieri, owner of the Shoot the Freak attraction and sandy Beer Island, told Kruger.

The business owners want to remain on the boardwalk and plan to fight the evictions in court.

Whether the mayor and Zamperla will listen to Kruger is another story.

Kruger and the mayor have historically been at odds over a variety of issues – especially Coney Island.

In 2007, he paid to have 500 people bussed to a Coney Island meeting to oppose the mayor’s area rezoning plan. The meeting had to be cancelled because there was not enough room.

He also threatened to holdup the rezoning by blocking a necessary transfer of state parkland before a deal was cut last year in which developer Joe Sitt, a generous Kruger campaign donor, agreed to sell the city the land it needed to move forward with the mayor’s plan to revive the seaside area.

“I don’t consider my relationship with the mayor tense,” said Kruger, adding that he believes he could still get a deal done if all sides are willing to come and negotiate.

Comment policy


  1. those places need to go. trashy crowds. crack vials in the urine soaked bathroom. loud abnoxious idiouts. maybe if they renovated a few years ago they would have a chance. but it seems to me that they actually attempt to attract the lowlives on that ghetto. the few times i was there, half of the people were sneaking in bottles of booze and pouring it in cups.

  2. Hey, buddy, the guy who leases the property (Zamperla) has the right to determine who is there. Not you.
    Those businesses are filthy and disgusting.

  3. They are property managers, in theory working for the City Of New York, and thusly US.

    They are filthy and disgusting only in your way of thinking.

    Ruby’s is not a trash establishment. And it has been a Coney Island fixture for generations

  4. I agree. if this was the Brooklyn paper site they would all be defending these little hole in the walls seedy places. whats a yuppy site that is

  5. LisaAnne,
    I doubt if you ever went there, or had a drink in there, by the way…. Have you even walked by that part of the boardwalk? Go there today and see what it looks like… Friends of mine from outside are aghast that such prime property can look like this…. It looks like a slum. My friend’s father says they haven’t done upkeep since the 30’s…. I hope such businesses get moved next door to your residence (complete with the drunks and degenerates), suddenly, I suspect your opinion will be different.

    And your theoretics are wrong. Zamperla leases the property from the city, he determines what he wants to do with it. Who is a small group of zealots to tell him WHAT businesses he can keep. I suppose you want Zamperla to pay the rent, but YOU get to tell him what to do with the property… Other people’s money, once again, other peoples’ money….

    Of course, the final result of this group of would-be do-gooders is that my neighborhood gets to continue to look like a slum while they go back to their condos in Park Slope and Manhattan.

  6. And the City of New York (thusly US) has given the Italian company a mandate to rebuild the businesses of Coney Island. Thank the lord, it’s been 40 years overdue.

  7. The land wasn’t bought from Sitt with the intent of allowing a lessee to make decisions based merely upon business considerations. The land transaction was in large part the result of the effort of so-called “zealots”.

    If “prime real estate development” was the goal the city would have happily let Sitt go his merry way, destorying every existing structure in the vicinity.

    I’m sorry, Coney Island is too important a piece of history to be toyed with by politicians, developers and others with an agenda other than that of preserving what is left of it’s earlier aura.

    I’m old enough to remember Coney Island before plans were made to destroy it. We’re talking 50 years of planned neglect and dismantlemnet. Developers took the land that comprised the large parks such as the original Luna and turned them into housing complexes. A large number of people living in a compressed space. Hardly beneficial for a neighborhood, even with space between buildings. Oh yes, prime real estate.

    Businesses like Ruby’s kept the boardealk area alive at a time when the area was being totally written off. Of course, they don’t fit into the plans being made for a Coney Island for the moneyed class. But those are just the plans of some people. Other people have a healthier perspective, recognzing that the nine businesses whose leases were terminated are local ones, who represent the true spirit of Coney Island; sports bars and high end eateries do not.

    At any rate, it appears this is bound for the courts.

Comments are closed.