Fair enough, what valid inverse condemnation claims in NY state have you observed that resulted from the revocation of a temporary permit? I can give you two common circumstances off the top of my head where these claims always fail:

A) I’m a restaurant owner and my liquor license was revoked, my business has been irrevocably damaged and I demand just compensation. These are denied because no business in NY state has an inalienable right to sell alcohol, they receive a permit which can be revoked at any time.

B) I’m a concert / event organizer and my permit to conduct my event was revoked by a county/municipality/etc. My brand is inseparable from the location where said event was held, so I demand just compensation. These are denied because no business in NY state has an inalienable right to host a high-capacity concert, they receive a permit which can be revoked at any time.

Valid inverse condemnation claims have a pretty high bar and involve assets that have been damaged due to material and reasonably unforeseeable changes (i.e an international airport is opened up next to a nature preserve for exotic birds). There were interesting inverse condemnation claims that were filed during the construction of the USA/Mexico border wall by effected property owners, for example.

Not renewing a permit is not a material change of circumstance. The permit is inherently temporary. It has an expiration date, renewal terms, cancelation clauses (I’m assuming).

If James Dolan sold you MSG under the pretense that the permit was guaranteed forever, you would have a valid legal claim against him. The city is under no obligation to renew the permit in perpetuity, therefore there has been no change to the value of the property, therefore no claim.