In a statement, an ESDC spokeswoman says the agency "carefully considered whether a SEIS would be required," but determined in the end that it "was not required."

An updated June 2009 ESDC technical memorandum described proposed modifications to the General Project Plan. According to the document, a schedule change to 2019 would not change the Final Environmental Impact Statement's conclusion that the project would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts with respect to socioeconomic conditions. The memorandum also said a delay in the project's build year to 2019 would postpone the full realization of the social and economic benefits of the completed project.

The ESDC says they expected this latest lawsuit. But, the spokeswoman says, "we will vigorously defend the lawsuit and we expect to prevail on the merits. Further, she says, "we do not expect that this lawsuit will delay the project.

Baker says that in the current suit, opponents are not arguing whether or not the project's proposed site is blighted. However, he says the ESDC "ignored the fact that the deal has been changed so that blight will not be eliminated and this project won't be completed til the 2030s at the earliest."

Arguing that the Atlantic Yards project is bad for a whole host of reasons, Baker says, "we will use the courts to protect our rights when these quasi governmental agencies like ESDC are ignoring our rights."

And to those who charge the project's opponents are using the courts to delay, thus deter, perhaps even destroy plans for the development, Baker says, "that's their problem. We've never gotten an injunction. The fact that our litigation over the years has raised significant issues, and that they've not been able to get financing, to the extent they [FCRC] use the political process and their connections get favored status, we're not going to apologize for using the courts for our means."

A spokesman for FCRC said the company had no comment at this time.