New York
Decades Ago, Columbia Refused to Pay Trump $400 Million. Note That Number.
Donald Trump was demanding $400 million from Columbia University.
When he did not get his way, he stormed out of a meeting with university trustees and later publicly castigated the university president as “a dummy” and “a total moron.”
That drama dates back 25 years.
Today, these two New York City institutions — the ostentatious billionaire president of the United States and the 270-year-old Ivy League university that has cultivated 87 Nobel laureates — are locked in an extraordinary clash. The future of higher education and academic freedom dangle in the balance.
But the first battle between Mr. Trump and Columbia involved the most New York of New York prizes — a lucrative real estate deal, according to interviews with 17 real estate investors and former university administrators and insiders, as well as contemporaneous news articles.
Some former university officials are quietly wondering whether the ultimately unsuccessful property transaction sowed the seeds of Mr. Trump’s current focus on Columbia. His administration has demanded that the university turn over vast control of its policies and even curricular decisions in its effort to quell antisemitism on campus. It has also canceled federal grants and contracts at Columbia — valued at $400 million.
The Trump Organization and the White House declined to comment.
Lee C. Bollinger, the former president of Columbia who eventually opted not to pursue the property owned by Mr. Trump and foreign investors, chose instead to expand the Columbia campus on land adjacent to the university. “I wanted for Columbia a much more ambitious project than the Trump property would permit, and one that would fit with the surrounding properties, that would blend in with the Morningside campus and the Harlem community,” he said in an interview.
The clash had its roots in the late 1990s, when Columbia was facing a common challenge in New York: Situated in one of the most expensive and congested cities in the world, it wanted more space. The federal government was supercharging the budget of the National Institutes of Health, and to compete with other universities for research grants, Columbia needed room to house more scientists and labs.
Expanding its footprint beyond its Morningside Heights campus into neighboring Harlem would be complicated. In 1968, the university began construction on a gymnasium in Morningside Park. The design, construction delays and limited access to Harlem residents resulted in “cries of segregation and racism,” according to a Columbia University Libraries exhibit. Tension between the university and community leaders in Harlem persisted for decades.
Columbia officials and trustees hoped to mend the relationship, but they knew they also needed to look for alternatives.
Enter Mr. Trump. Not yet a reality television star, he was then a brash real estate developer, with a love of tabloid press attention. He offered a home for a Columbia expansion, an undeveloped property on the Upper West Side between Lincoln Center and the Hudson River. It was known as Riverside South before he rebranded it Trump Place.
The property was at the southern tip of a much larger 77-acre site Mr. Trump had owned since the early 1970s, a former freight yard that was once the largest undeveloped parcel in Manhattan. In the early 1990s, Mr. Trump had made no progress in developing the site after amassing more than $800 million in debt, most at very high interest rates, and couldn’t afford bank payments on the property.
But in 1994, two Hong Kong investors came to his rescue. They agreed to finance his vision of high-rise residences, with Mr. Trump remaining the public face of the project. He would also seek $350 million in federal subsidies.
Yet Mr. Trump was struggling to decide what to develop on the southern edge. He pursued buyers, including CBS. He boasted that the network was close to a deal for a 1.5 million-square-foot studio on the property.
But CBS eventually balked, deciding in early 1999 to stay put in its studios on West 57th Street.
A few months later, Mr. Trump was hyping the property every chance he could. “My father taught me everything I know, and he would understand what I’m about to say,” Mr. Trump said at the wake of his father, Fred Trump. Then Mr. Trump touted his plans for Trump Place. “It’s a wonderful project,” he said.
By 2000, Mr. Trump had set his sights on a new partner: Columbia, which he had heard was looking for space. A development there would have been a departure for the university. It was more than two miles from Columbia’s campus and relatively small, requiring it to be built up, with towering buildings.
Still, the idea captured the attention of several trustees and some top administrators. For more than a year, they discussed what could become of the land, mostly with officials at the Trump Organization and sometimes with Mr. Trump himself. Mr. Trump even coined a name for the potential development: “Columbia Prime.”
But in negotiations, he frequently changed his demands, even as reports would appear in Mr. Trump’s favored tabloid, The New York Post, claiming that Columbia was close to buying it.
In private, he tossed around numerous prices, topping out at $400 million, according to a Columbia official from that era, a figure that an anonymous source leaked to The Post a few times.
No matter the amount, Mr. Trump said to Columbia officials, the university would be getting such a great deal that it should also rename its business school the Donald J. Trump School of Business.
An administrator rebuffed Mr. Trump’s request. The university does rename buildings, the person told him, noting that its engineering school had been recently named for a businessman who had donated $26 million. If Mr. Trump wished to make such a gift, the person said, there were other officials at Columbia who would be eager to meet. Mr. Trump did not make a donation.
As the discussions dragged on, many people from Columbia grew frustrated with their dealings with Mr. Trump. Still, the two sides set up a meeting in a Midtown Manhattan conference room with the intention of moving a transaction forward.
A few trustees and administrators arrived with a report prepared on their behalf by a real estate team at Goldman Sachs, which attended every meeting between Columbia officials and representatives of the Trump Organization. It outlined what the investment bank considered a fair value for the land.
Mr. Trump showed up late, was informed of the university’s property analysis and became incensed.
Goldman Sachs had assigned a value in the range of $65 million to $90 million, according to a person who was in the room. In an attempt to soothe Mr. Trump, a trustee offered that the university would be willing to pay the top of the range.
It didn’t matter. A furious Mr. Trump walked out less than five minutes after the meeting had started.
The university did not formally abandon a possible expansion on Mr. Trump’s property until after Mr. Bollinger took over as president in 2002. At that time, Columbia had been considering two options: an expansion onto the Upper West Side plot or a move north into West Harlem, where Columbia had started to buy properties.
In his inaugural address, Mr. Bollinger spoke about the university’s need to expand, calling the school a “great urban university” that is the “most constrained for space.”
“This state of affairs, however, cannot last,” he added. “To fulfill our responsibilities and aspirations, Columbia must expand significantly over the next decade. Whether we expand on the property we already own on Morningside Heights, Manhattanville, or Washington Heights, or whether we pursue a design of multiple campuses in the city, or beyond, is one of the most important questions we will face in the years ahead.”
He evaluated the Trump option for a satellite campus and also began to have conversations about mending the fissure with Harlem’s community leaders, and expanding westward, creating a contiguous footprint.
He quickly determined that Harlem, not Donald Trump, was Columbia’s future. “This is an opportunity in Manhattanville to create something of immense vitality and beauty,” Mr. Bollinger told The Times in 2003. “This is not to just go in and throw up some buildings.”
Mr. Trump’s West Side property was eventually developed after the Hong Kong billionaires who owned a majority stake in it sold the entire site for $1.76 billion.
Yet Mr. Trump was outraged. He accused the investors of selling it for far less than what he could have. He sued them for $1 billion in damages. The case was dismissed, with the judge pointing out that the development had sold for $188 million more than its latest appraisal.
If he was underwhelmed by the success of the Riverside South, Mr. Trump had another asset that was appreciating: his own fame.
“The Apprentice” made its television debut in January 2004, and became an instant hit.
But Mr. Trump’s mega-stardom did not make him forget about the failed deal with Columbia.
In 2010 — about eight years after Mr. Bollinger contacted Mr. Trump to tell him the school would be expanding into Harlem — two Columbia student journalists who had written a profile of the university president received in the mail a gold-embossed letter on thick paperstock from a displeased reader, Donald J. Trump.
He included a copy of a missive he had recently sent to Columbia’s board of trustees, in which he called the Manhattanville campus “lousy” and Mr. Bollinger “a dummy.”
“Columbia Prime was a great idea thought of by a great man, which ultimately fizzled due to poor leadership at Columbia,” Mr. Trump wrote.
He signed it with a black marker and scribbled, “Bollinger is terrible!”
Mr. Trump also shared his indignation in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. “Years after the deal fell through,” the newspaper said, “Trump is still irate. ‘They could have had a beautiful campus, right behind Lincoln Center,’” Mr. Trump told the reporter and called Mr. Bollinger a “total moron.”
Mr. Trump was perhaps staying true to principles outlined in “How To Get Rich,” an advice book he co-wrote a few years after his deal with Columbia went sour.
One chapter is titled “Sometimes You Have to Hold a Grudge.”
Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.
A new mayor, a fresh start — you know the drill. There are as many ideas out there for how Zohran Mamdani can now improve New York’s urban environment as there are New Yorkers.
I canvassed a few dozen planners, architects, academics, community leaders, neighborhood organizers, developers, housing and transit experts and former city government officials. I gave them no budgets or time lines. They gave me a mayoral to-do list of ideas big, small, familiar, deep in the weeds, fanciful and timely.
What follows is a small selection, with some kibitzing by me. You can vote “love it” or “skip it” below and help determine the ranking of priorities. Feel free to leave eye rolls and alternative proposals in the comments section.
Check back in the coming days to see how the ranking has changed and we will let you know the ultimate results on Jan. 13.
1
Create many thousands more affordable housing units by converting some of the city’s public golf courses into mixed income developments, with garden allotments and wetlands.
2
Deck over Robert Moses’s Cross Bronx Expressway and create a spectacular new park.
3
Devise a network of dedicated lanes for e-bikes and electric scooters so they will endanger fewer bicyclists and pedestrians.
4
Pedestrianize Lower Manhattan. Not even 10 percent of people there arrive by car.
5
Build more mental health crisis centers citywide.
6
Provide more clean, safe public pay toilets that don’t cost taxpayers $1 million apiece.
7
Convert more coastline into spongy marshes, akin to what exists at Hunter’s Point South Park in Queens, to mitigate rising seas and floods.
8
Dedicate more of the city budget to public libraries and parks, the lifeblood of many neighborhoods, crucial to public health and climate resilience. The city devotes barely 2 percent of its funds to them now.
9
Follow through on the Adams administration’s $400 million makeover of once-glamorous Fifth Avenue from Central Park South to Bryant Park, with wider sidewalks, reduced lanes of traffic, and more trees, restaurants, bikes and pedestrian-friendly stretches.
10
Do away with free street parking and enforce parking placard rules. New York’s curbside real estate is priceless public land, and only a small fraction of residents own cars.
11
Open the soaring vaults under the Brooklyn Bridge to create shops, restaurants, a farmers’ market and public library in nascent Gotham Park.
13
Persuade Google, JPMorgan or some other city-vested megacorporation to help improve the acoustics as well as Wi-Fi in subways, along the lines of Citibank sponsoring Citi Bikes.
14
Overhaul freight deliveries to get more 18-wheelers off city streets, free up traffic, reduce noise, improve public safety and streamline supply chains.
15
Rein in City Hall bureaucracy around new construction. The city’s Department of Design and Construction is full of good people but a longtime hot mess at completing public projects.
16
Convert more streets and intersections into public plazas and pocket parks. Like the pedestrianization of parts of Broadway, this Bloomberg-era initiative has proved to be good for businesses and neighborhoods.
17
Stop playing Russian roulette with a crumbling highway and repair the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway before it collapses.
“There’s less traffic and more parking.”
“I only drive if I have to move something large or heavy.”
“Sometimes I skip lunch at work to make up for the driving tax.” “I visit my elderly parents less often.”
“I complain to myself every time I have to pay the fee and I’m STILL 100% in favor of it.”
“I am returning my leased car six months before the lease expires.”
One year after the start of congestion pricing, traffic jams are less severe, streets are safer, and commute times are improving for travelers from well beyond Manhattan. Though these changes aren’t noticeable to many, and others feel the tolls are a financial burden, the fees have generated hundreds of millions of dollars for public transportation projects. And it has probably contributed to rising transit ridership.
The program, which on Jan. 5, 2025, began charging most drivers $9 during peak travel times to enter Manhattan below 60th Street, has quickly left its mark.
To assess its impact, The New York Times reviewed city and state data, outside research, and the feedback of more than 600 readers with vastly different views of the toll.
Some groused about high travel costs. Others cheered for a higher toll. Many shared snapshots from their lives: quieter streets, easier parking, costlier trips to the doctor.
Many findings from a Times analysis a few months into the experiment have held up. The program so far has met nearly all of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s goals, although more evidence is needed on some measures. And one question remains unresolved: whether a federal judge will decisively shield the program from efforts by the Trump administration to end it.
“Despite the threats to shut it down,” Gov. Kathy Hochul said in an interview, “the cameras are still on, and business is still up, and traffic is still down. So it’s working.”
Here’s the evidence one year in:
1. Fewer vehicles
About 73,000 fewer vehicles are entering the central business district each day, a number that has added up in the first year to about 27 million fewer entries. The decline, compared with traffic trends before the toll, has been remarkably stable across the year:
Average daily entries to the central business district
All other consequences of congestion pricing flow from this one — that fewer people are choosing to enter the area by private vehicle.
“I never drive into the city anymore. I only take the subway. It’s a relief.”
Philip Zalon Brooklyn
“I’m much more aware of driving into Manhattan and avoid it unless I have to haul a lot of stuff like a car load of Girl Scout cookies.”
Jacob White Queens
By influencing that one decision, the policy can also affect commute times, transit reliability, road safety, street life and more (as we’ll get to below).
One clear sign that behaviors are changing: Every weekday, there is now a spike in vehicles entering the zone right before the toll kicks up to $9 at 5 a.m., and right after it declines to $2.25 at 9 p.m.
Personal vehicle entries into the central business district
“I’ve decided to get up earlier to get the lower price.”
Eric Nehs Manhattan
“It is exhausting to plan the trip to cross the line at 9 p.m.”
Paul S. Morrill Manhattan
2. Faster traffic
The first consequence of those fewer vehicles is that traffic is now moving faster for the drivers who remain, and for the buses that travel those same roads. And this turns out to be true inside the congestion zone, near the congestion zone, and even much farther away.
Change in vehicle speeds, 2024-25
“Taking my kid to [doctor’s] visits in 2024 was a nightmare, every time. … After congestion pricing, it’s been noticeably less aggravating.”
Josh Hadro Brooklyn
Many readers, however, told us they didn’t believe they could see the benefits; the changes aren’t always easy to perceive by the naked eye. Readers also frequently said they believed the gains from congestion pricing were more apparent in the first months of the year and had waned since. The city’s speed data generally suggests that these improvements have been sustained, although some of the largest gains were recorded in the spring.
Average vehicle speeds in the congestion zone
But for some travelers, the speed gains have been much larger, particularly those who cross through the bridge and tunnel chokepoints into and out of Manhattan:
“Traffic approaching the [Holland] tunnel has saved me 15-30 minutes on the rides back to New York and given me hours of my time back.”
Salvatore Franchino Brooklyn
“On a typical 8 a.m. commute, there is so little traffic into the [Lincoln] tunnel that it looks like a weekend.”
Lisa Davenport Weehawken, N.J.
“I haven’t used the Lincoln Tunnel all year, probably will never use it again.”
Steven Lerner Manhattan
Improvements have also been more notable for commuters who take longer-distance trips ending in the congestion zone. That’s because those 73,000 vehicles a day that are no longer entering the zone have disappeared from surrounding roads and highways, too.
Commuters from farther out are seeing accumulating benefits from all these sources: faster speeds outside the congestion zone, much faster speeds through the tunnels and bridges, and then the improvements inside Manhattan. And people who travel roads outside the congestion zone without ever entering it get some of these benefits, too.
An analysis by researchers at Stanford, Yale and Google confirmed this through the program’s first six months. Using anonymized data from trips taken with Google Maps, they found that speeds improved after congestion pricing more on roads around the region commonly traveled by drivers heading into the central business district. That’s a subtle point, but one many readers observed themselves:
“Noticeably fewer cars driving, even way out in Bensonhurst!”
Charles Haeussler Brooklyn
“Even across the river in Bergen County, I feel that we benefit.”
Michelle Carvell Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
“I supercommute weekly from Kingston by bus. Each week, my bus round trip is 30-60 minutes faster than it was before congestion pricing.”
Rob Bellinger Kingston, N.Y.
3. More transit riders
Public transit will benefit from congestion pricing as its proceeds are invested in infrastructure upgrades; in the first year, the toll is projected to raise about $550 million after accounting for expenses, $50 million more than the M.T.A. originally predicted. But transit also stands to benefit as bus speeds improve on decongested roads and as more commuters shift to transit.
On bus routes that cross through the congestion zone, speeds increased this year, in notable contrast to the rest of the city. These improvements follow years of declining bus speeds in the central business district coming out of the pandemic.
Local bus routes
Express bus routes
Change in bus speeds, 2024-2025
“The crosstown buses are faster than they used to be, even during peak commuting times.”
Marc Wieman Manhattan
“Have gratefully noticed that they’re more on-time.”
Sue Ann Todhunter Manhattan
“It has significantly improved my bus trips from N.J., cutting about 20 minutes of traffic each way.”
John Ruppert New Jersey
Paid transit ridership is up this year compared with 2024 across the subway, M.T.A. buses, Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North Railroad as transit has continued its recovery from pandemic declines. About 300,000 more people are riding the subway each day — far more than the 70,000 cars that have been taken off the road in the congestion zone. So while congestion pricing is probably contributing to rising transit ridership, it’s not the main driver of it.
All of these added transit riders do, however, help explain why congestion pricing has not dampened activity in the busiest parts of the city, as critics feared. People are still coming, just not necessarily by private car.
“I finally taught myself to use the subway. Between the tunnel toll, congestion pricing and parking, I’m saving an enormous amount of money, time and inconvenience.”
Daniel Ludwig Weehawken, N.J.
“It’s made using the bus for short trips a more appealing option.”
John Buckholz Brooklyn
In fact, overall visits to the business district aren’t down — they were up by about 2.4 percent over the previous year, according to the city’s Economic Development Corporation. And restaurant reservations on the platform OpenTable were up inside the zone as well, by the same amount as the increase citywide.
Tom Harris, the president of the Times Square Alliance, which represents 2,600 businesses, said he had initially received complaints from some businesses. But he was pleasantly surprised that they soon stopped.
“We’re thrilled we have not seen negative impacts to local businesses,” he said. “It seems like it has been absorbed.”
4. Better quality of life
These primary shifts — fewer cars, less congested roads, more transit riders — have in turn produced a number of other effects that might more broadly be thought of as changes to qualify of life. Readers described experiencing safer crosswalks, less stressful bike rides and what feels like cleaner air.
In city data, the number of complaints to 311 for vehicle noises like car honking has declined significantly inside the congestion zone, compared with the rest of Manhattan.
Change in vehicle noise complaints, 2024-25
“Sometimes it’s almost — dare I say it? — quiet.”
Daniel Scott Manhattan
“Midtown is so much quieter now.”
Melanie DuPuis Manhattan/Hudson Valley
“It turns out that mostly when people say ‘New York is noisy’ they really mean ‘cars are noisy.’”
Grant Louis Manhattan
And the perception that roads have gotten safer is also borne out by crash data. The number of people who were seriously injured in a car crash decreased citywide, but the improvement was more pronounced in the congestion relief zone.
Change in number of people seriously injured in a crash, 2024-25
“Nobody’s trying to run me over.”
Alice Baruch Manhattan
“Fewer cars honking, fewer cars running red lights, fewer cars blocking crosswalks.”
Charlie Rokosny Brooklyn
“The number of blocked crosswalks have gone down significantly!”
Samir Lavingia Manhattan
Amid these positive changes, however, other readers described distinct declines in their quality of life, often stemming from the cost of the toll. These deeply personal observations have no corresponding measures in public data. But they make clear that some of those 27 million fewer driving trips weren’t simply replaced by transit or forgone as unnecessary — they’re missed.
“Sadly Manhattan is no longer an option for many things we once enjoyed.”
Linda Fisher Queens
“Congestion pricing has made my world much smaller.”
Justine Cuccia Manhattan
“I’m more careful about choosing events to attend, so I go to fewer of them.”
Karen Hoppe Queens
“I will not use doctors in Manhattan, limiting my health care choices.”
David Pecoraro Queens
One final aim of congestion pricing — improved air quality — has the potential to benefit everyone in the region. But the data remains inconclusive so far. A recent study from researchers at Cornell found a 22 percent improvement in one air quality measure over six months. But another analysis, by the Stanford and Yale authors, found little to no effect on air quality using local community sensors and comparing New York with other cities. And the M.T.A.’s own analysis of the program’s first year found no significant change in measured concentrations of vehicle-related air pollutants.
That doesn’t mean benefits won’t become clearer with more time and data. But the open questions about air quality underscore that even one year in, even with all the evidence gathered, there are still some effects we don’t fully understand.
“As an asthmatic, I can also palpably feel improvements in the air quality.”
Rob Hult Brooklyn
“It’s allowed me to believe that perhaps America can change for the better.”
Hanna Horvath Brooklyn
“As a car owner myself, I think it’s fair that the cost of driving is now being passed from city residents onto the drivers.”
Vincent Lee The Bronx
“I don’t like the cost but I also can’t deny its effectiveness.”
Jon Keese Queens
intentionally and knowingly combined, conspired, confederated, and agreed together and with each other to violate Title 18, United States Code, Section 924(c).
35. It was a part and an object of the conspiracy that NICOLÁS MADURO MOROS, DIOSDADO CABELLO RONDÓN, RAMÓN RODRÍGUEZ CHACÍN, CILIA ADELA FLORES DE MADURO, NICOLÁS ERNESTO MADURO GUERRA, a/k/a “Nicolasito,” a/k/a “The Prince,” and HECTOR RUSTHENFORD GUERRERO FLORES, a/k/a “Niño Guerrero,” the defendants, and others known and unknown, during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime for which they may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, to wit, for MADURO MOROS, CABELLO RONDÓN, and RODRÍGUEZ CHACÍN, the controlled substance offenses charged in Counts One and Two of this Superseding Indictment, and for FLORES DE MADURO, MADURO GUERRA, and GUERRERO FLORES, the controlled substance offense charged in Count Two of this Superseding Indictment, knowingly used and carried firearms, and, in furtherance of such crimes, knowingly possessed firearms, and aided and abetted the use, carrying, and possession of firearms, to wit, machineguns that were capable of automatically shooting more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger, as well as destructive devices, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 924(c)(1)(A) and 924(c)(1)(B)(ii). (Title 18, United States Code, Sections 924(o) and 3238.)
36.
FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS
As a result of committing the controlled substance offense charged in Count One of this Superseding Indictment, NICOLÁS MADURO MOROS, DIOSDADO CABELLO RONDÓN, RAMÓN RODRÍGUEZ CHACÍN, the defendants, shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Sections 853 and 970, any and all property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the defendants obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of the offenses, and any and all property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit,
23
25
Map: 6.4-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes the Philippine Sea
Brain Health Challenge: Try the MIND Diet
Hungarian filmmaker Béla Tarr — known for bleak, existential movies — has died
Intel is planning a custom Panther Lake CPU for handheld PCs
Pope Leo calls for Christians to treat foreigners with kindness as he closes Catholic Holy Year
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Video: ‘It Didn’t Have to Happen This Way:’ U.Va. Faculty Call for Review of Police Response to Protests
Wyoming Supreme Court rules laws restricting abortion violate state constitution
How strong are Latin America’s military forces, as they face US threats?
Trump says Venezuela will turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of oil to US | CNN Business
Video: Nvidia Shows Off New A.I. Chip at CES
Pelosi heir-apparent calls Trump’s Venezuela move a ‘lawless coup,’ urges impeachment, slams Netanyahu
-
World1 week agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
News1 week agoFor those who help the poor, 2025 goes down as a year of chaos
-
Business1 week agoInstacart ends AI pricing test that charged shoppers different prices for the same items
-
Health1 week agoDid holiday stress wreak havoc on your gut? Doctors say 6 simple tips can help
-
Technology1 week agoChatGPT’s GPT-5.2 is here, and it feels rushed
-
Business1 week agoA tale of two Ralphs — Lauren and the supermarket — shows the reality of a K-shaped economy
-
Science1 week agoWe Asked for Environmental Fixes in Your State. You Sent In Thousands.
-
Politics1 week agoThe biggest losers of 2025: Who fell flat as the year closed