Lighthouse Takes Down Web Site, Replaces With Placeholder

For the last few weeks, we have heard very little about the Lighthouse process that was not rumor and innuendo.  Anxious bloggers and supporters (myself included) still hoped against hope that we would hear something from the Lighthouse to break their silence, especially in the face of rumors from well-connected sources that the Lighthouse Principals could be dissolving their partnership, thus  effectively ending the project.

In fact, the most vocal person in the past several months has been NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, who has never missed an opportunity to speak to the media and accuse the Town of Hempstead of "stalling" the project and "dragging it out" for years.  As the Town took control of the process and sent even more misleading and anti-project letters to area citizens (more on that later), we still have not heard anything from the Lighthouse.

Yesterday, in a way, the Lighthouse Project spoke, though it is likely not the way any of us would have hoped they would (hat tip to Islanderbill for first alerting me to this, by the way).  Now, visitors to the Lighthouse Project web site are not greeted with the grand, $3.7 billion vision for suburban renewal; rather, they see this:

(Click Here to see full-size)

Many, including myself, were taken aback by this, because it is the clearest broadside against the Town of Hempstead in months.  Since the Lighthouse Project refuses to speak on the record, even though some sources are still insisting behind the scenes that it's not dead, we are forced to come up with our own suggestions and questions.  As I've seen before, there is an optimistic view to this, a pessimistic view, and questions that need to be answered:

Optimistic View

Until there is official word from someone directly involved in the process, we can't assume the Lighthouse Project is dead.  In addition, the Town of Hempstead and the Lighthouse are still operating under the Designated Developer Agreement between Nassau County and the Lighthouse that was approved during the administration of the current County Executive, Tom Suozzi (current County Executive Ed Mangano voted in favor of the measure as a County Legislator). Some people believe that this is simply a gesture by Charles Wang and the Lighthouse that they are willing to work with the Town of Hempstead in an attempt to make a deal.

If the original plan is no longer available online, then it has become clear that Mr. Wang and his group recognize that they will not be able to build the project as originally proposed.  They are now signaling a willingness to work, as long as it achieves the goal of a good project that will be profitable, benefit the community, and allow the New York Islanders to remain in their rightful home.

This point of view reflects what I have previously called the "dirty little secret" in the Lighthouse process: it is easiest for both sides to come to a deal, since the alternatives are difficult for both sides:

Lighthouse Project: The options for moving the Islanders within the area, or of another project with similar commercial benefit, are slim at this point.  The Brooklyn arena continues to be built, with the last hold-out having finally sold his property last week, but it would still require a retrofit, and some, especially those against the Atlantic Yards proposal to begin with, have called Brooklyn a "fantasy" of desperate hockey fans and political hacks like the Brooklyn Borough President.  In addition, as mentioned before, Queens would require a similar process, which the Lighthouse acknowledges has already gone on for 7 years here.  The city would be on board, but the local community would not be in any way close to what we see with the Lighthouse.  I don't know whether the Lighthouse Project would want to either start over or become a tenant somewhere else, regardless of how badly many hockey fans hope it happens (count me in that group, in the event the Lighthouse can't happen).

Town of Hempstead: The Town has botched the Lighthouse process since Day 1, refusing to meet with the developers and relying on tricks like that phony stimulus drive which merely assume the stupidity of Town of Hempstead voters.  Even though Kate Murray and the Town Board were overwhelmingly returned to office, you wonder if the Town could handle the debacle of losing a project the vast majority of citizens want (remember, in the latest News 12/Hofstra poll, supporters outnumber opponents 2:1, and if you scaled the project down that number nears 3:1).  The Town loves to harp on financing, but any other developer would encounter the same financing issues as the Lighthouse Project.

In the same vein, the Town seems prepared to gut the Lighthouse Project beyond all recognition, if you trust the rhetoric.  However, as another blogger has pointed out, what message would that send?  If the Town starts using a machete on the project, the headlines write themselves:

TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD IS AGAINST A RENOVATED NASSAU COLISEUM

TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD IS AGAINST AFFORDABLE HOUSING

TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD IS AGAINST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD ADVOCATES MORE OF THE SAME

It's much harder to spin that, and we are not as gullible as the Town would like to believe.

Pessimistic View

Many others believe this is a charade that is delaying the inevitable.  To these people, the Town is going to gut the Lighthouse Project beyond all recognition in an attempt to win the post-game spin.  You could just hear the Supervisor parroting the half-truth that "The Town offered Charles Wang a reasonable proposal, and he decided to walk away."

The Lighthouse, in the same vein, could be making vague signals about cooperation, but they still stopped paying environmental consultants F.P. Clark over half a year ago.  Some, including astute reader Derek, believe this is because the Lighthouse wants to place the onus on the Town of Hempstead to tell them what can and can't be built, but still others believe that it's yet another case of actions speaking louder than words.

I do not know which side is right, but you could definitely see how many can interpret the statement on the Lighthouse web site as an opening salvo in the spin wars that will almost certainly ensue in the event the project ceases to be.  

Questions

As we move forward now, we need to ask certain questions of both sides to increase our understanding:

• Are the 2 sides meeting and negotiating?
• Are the 2 sides both demonstrating a desire to get a project done?
• What kind of reduction will either side accept?
• How hardened are those positions
• When will someone say something in public?

We may not know the sound of 1 hand clapping, but with the Lighthouse gone silent and the Town spinning and exaggerating with seeming impunity, we do know the sound of 1 side debating.  It's enough.

Bottom Line

I've said (in more of a hopeful tone than anything else) that we will likely have closure on the Lighthouse Project issue in a matter of months.  We are all hoping for a solid resolution to this that will improve our community and provide a stable home for the New York Islanders, but, more than that, we want to know the truth.  We need to know if the sides are negotiating in good faith, or whether this is just the start of what promises to be a bitter and ugly blame game.

No more slogans.  No more finger-pointing.  We want answers.

Please share your thoughts in 

comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

Guest Post: The REAL "Sixth Borough"

Marc Nicols, a loyal reader from Deer Park who has been here almost since Day 1, sent me this guest post, and while I cobble some things together for the site, I thought it was too good to keep from everyone.  

Marc writes as a Long Island resident and a father who is concerned his two young children will not have a future on Long Island once they are old enough to move away.  He speaks to many who believe Long Island requires a new way forward and that the Lighthouse Project is the perfect starting point.  

(Interesting sidenote: I witnessed the encounter with an older gentleman who opposed the Lighthouse that he describes in his piece)

Remember, you can email me if you have a guest post you'd like to share.  Also remember that the views in Marc's piece are his own, and by posting it I am saying I believe Marc is making a good, eloquent statement.

Without further ado, here's Marc:

The Town of Hempstead and the Lighthouse Project

by Marc Nicols

There's an old Yiddish saying "A cat who gets bitten by a snake is afraid of rope." This saying always come to mind when I hear opponents of Long Island developments claiming how any change to an area will turn us into a city, or "the sixth borough" of New York City. They seemed to be scared of something based on past experience without taking a good look at exactly what it is.

While the Town of Hempstead has finally take a pro-active step with the Coliseum property re-development by performing it's own zoning study, proponents must be fearful of seeing elected officials lead and determine the scope of this project. While developers Rechler and Wang have been described as "visionaries", I doubt Supervisor Kate Murray or anyone on the Town board has been described that way. Watching these bureaucrats for a few hours at the zoning meeting on September 22nd confirmed that. They reminded me of another saying, provided to me by my Micro-Economic Theory professor 16 years ago: "Anything the government does is inefficient." Let's hope Hempstead doesn't scale the project down so far that it defeats the purpose of turning the site into a destination spot and economic incubator for the area.

For those who fear that a large development will turn Nassau County into the 'sixth borough' of New York City: One must realize that the failure of Long Island to develop and sustain its own economic engines and provide apartment style housing will result in the region being wholly dependent upon New York City for jobs and housing for young adults who were educated on Long Island. That will turn us into a borough faster and deeper than developing 77 acres of asphalt in the middle of a downtown commercial area.

At the zoning meeting, several of us were involved in an animated discussion with an older gentleman, a Garden City resident, who I classify as a prototypical Lighthouse opponent and NIMBY. He was against everything and anything being built on the site for fear that it might disturb his quiet home. He was against any project that might result one more car per day to traverse his tranquil village. When I asked him what he did want, his answer was terse and forceful: "I want to be left alone."

Unfortunately for Long Island, if projects such as the Lighthouse and the Heartland in Brentwood do not move forward, Long Island will be left alone. Our young adults, many of whom were educated on Long Island with our tax dollars will continue to flee to New York City, North Carolina or Arizona. These young adults who someday might purchase a home in Garden City, will buy a one somewhere else. Jobs and industries will continue to leave the area, weakening our tax base. In the past 20 years, nothing seems to get done on Long Island. We've lost Grumman, Roosevelt Raceway, the Jets, and countless companies. With the possibility of losing the Islanders and the Belmont Stakes in the next few years, what will become of Long Island's identity?

I've met many Lighthouse supporters in the past year: Many Islanders fans who just want the team to stay; young adults, looking and hoping for a way to remain on Long Island; and many in my situation - Yes, I'm bleed Islander Blue and Orange, but I'm approaching middle age, I own a home in Suffolk County, and I have a stable job (knock on wood) in downtown Manhattan. Odds are great that I'll never personally benefit from the jobs or housing in a mixed-use development such as the proposed Lighthouse project. 

But, most importantly, I'm also a parent of two young children. As my children become adults in the next two decades, I don't want to be "left alone." I don't want to have to take a plane ride to see them. If they don't want to have the long commute into New York City for a job, I want local opportunities to be available to them. I want to be able to see my future grandchildren as often as possible. Maybe this is as selfish as the Garden City NIMBY. Yet I feel there is a profound difference. I'm for progress that will benefit the current and future generation of our area. In my field, technology, one quickly learns that you can't stop progress, you can only ignore it. And if you ignore it, you will be left behind. Maybe that's fine for a group of senior citizens in an affluent neighborhood, but it's not for an entire region.

At the August public comments meeting, I had a brief discussion with an older lady who was vehemently against the project. She asked me where I lived (Deer Park) and told me that if it was my backyard I'd be against it also. This is another easy thing to say, but it is in fact incorrect. In October 2007 the new Tanger Outlets opened up less than two miles from my home. I was in favor of the project before, and now. The added traffic that everyone was so concerned about is negligible, except during the holidays. Yet, I am okay with it since I benefit from the tax base and the discounts I receive get while shopping for clothing for my toddler and infant. Also, the proposed Heartland project, whose proposal is bigger in scope than the Lighthouse, is less than 5 miles from my home. I am also greatly in favor of the project for the housing and jobs it will bring to the area.

Long Island was once a brave new place, yet in the past decade we seem afraid to take any risks that might change our landscape. Maybe the Lighthouse and the Heartland projects are a bit too grand, maybe they need some scaling down. Yet, before we make deep cuts in the proposals, let's remember one more saying: "One who is afraid to go out on a limb will never get the fruit."

Please share 

your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

Forget the Last End-Game...THIS Is End-Game

In a stunning move that reverses years of policy, the Town of Hempstead has truly entered end-game in the Lighthouse Project negotiations.  At a press conference that began at 11 AM today, the Town called on Charles Wang to pay the over $150,000 in outstanding bills to environmental consultants Frederick P. Clark Associates, and they then took an even bolder move.  The Town announced it has retained F.P. Clark to devise a "zoning plan" for the Coliseum property, the most direct sign we have ever had that the Town will only accept the Lighthouse Project in a scaled-back form.

This represents the biggest news since Mr. Wang's "deadline" passed on October 3, something I'd been saying for weeks, if not months, earlier.  Since then, the Lighthouse has gone dark, allowing its opponents, people with an agenda, and bloggers with very little information (not a swipe, I'm including myself in that) to control and dictate the public discourse.

The whole time, Mr. Wang has repeated his mantra, which became hardened in the steamy summer months: Just tell me Yes or No.  Interestingly enough, the Town of Hempstead appears to have adhered to his previous mantra: Just tell me what I can build.


While Mr. Wang repeated his mantra, however, the behavior has been downright odd.  An organization that built its base of support through open engagement, which allowed the Lighthouse to be the most widely-supported large building project in perhaps Long Island's history, suddenly turned inward.  F.P. Clark was not paid, as the Lighthouse is obligated by law to do.  In fact, source within the Town claims the environmental review could be finished by now had the bill been paid.  Requests and pleas for any kind of indication largely fell on deaf ears.  Lighthouse representatives, including Mr. Wang himself, repeatedly denied that meetings happened with the Town since the October 3 deadline, even though multiple sources are reporting they have.

This sort of behavior is inexcusable, and it's not a stretch to ask why an organization supposedly committed to doing something on Long Island was suddenly acting like it wasn't.

The political chickens began coming home to roost, as well, an unfortunate consequence of the Lighthouse deciding to tie itself closely to a Democratic Party that no longer controls any piece of this process.  Representatives of Ed Mangano, the new Republican County Executive, claim their calls to Mr. Wang have gone unreturned, and the Town of Hempstead has allowed itself the ability to spread misinformation (such as the asinine "the Lighthouse is as dense as Manhattan's Upper West Side" argument).

The Town, as I mentioned, has decided to force Mr. Wang's hand, because they believe these amount to stall tactics.  They don't believe the Lighthouse has financing, with some sources claiming that people connected to Scott Rechler have admitted as much, and they want to back the developer into a corner.

Here's the biggest piece: a new zoning plan, puts the chance of a groundbreaking in 2010 in serious jeopardy, and it opens up the possibility that the project will be handed to another more connected developer if the Lighthouse chooses to walk away.


As per the press conference, Kate Murray re-iterated that she does not want the New York Islanders to move, and she stressed that the plan will include a renovated arena.

In fact, sources say the Town of Hempstead will vote on this "vision" tomorrow night at the Town Board meeting.  (I'm sure they'd love to see all of us...Hint, Hint.)

The Lighthouse has engaged in severely misguided behavior over the past few months, but that does not mean I'm ready to throw the Town of Hempstead a parade either.  I heard from multiple sources involved with the discussions at the time that Kate Murray has refused to participate in discussions along these lines for 7 years, citing the ridiculous reasoning that she would eventually have to vote on the project.  She believed that simple fact absolved her from any responsibility for shaping the project and any role in guiding the approval process. An open discussion could have resolved any issues before they started


Now, all of a sudden, it's happened.  What changed?  Is the Town of Hempstead suddenly not concerned about this policy, and, if not, why have they hidden behind it for years?


A source in the Town of Hempstead believes the passion of citizen supporters motivated the Town to suddenly take the Lighthouse Project seriously, since most considered it to be a sideshow.  This is not an achievement of representative government, nor should the Town be credited for suddenly taking its fingers out of its ears.

However, regardless of how we got here...we're here.

The Town is voting on this vision tomorrow night, and we now have a clear path to end-game.  There are 3 main variables:

Will the Town of Hempstead be willing to budge? As we've seen, the Town of Hempstead is prone to overreaching and has a reputation of being arrogant in its dealings with developers.  Will there be any wiggle room, or will this zoning plan be treated as a take it or leave it offer?

Will Charles Wang play ball?  The Town is doubting his motives, and the recent dark period has all but obliterated all the positive momentum. However, I have heard from sources the plan was built with compromise in mind, and we know from our back to basics post how economic benefit will be calculated.

How far apart are the 2 sides?  It has been clear for months that the Lighthouse Project will not be approved in its current form.  It will be interesting to see how much smaller the Town of Hempstead's proposal will be, because if the 2 sides are far apart and cannot bridge the gap the whole project could fall apart.

Are we nearing the end?

Ed Mangano has repeatedly said he wants the project to move forward, and now it's time for him and all the rest of us who want this to step up.  Now is the time for Ed Mangano to bring the sides together like he told me he can.  Now is the time for all of us to make one last push, urging both sides to come to a mutually-beneficial solution.

We've done so much...and we need to move forward one more time.  It appears this will be over soon.

After all, despite the rancor from both sides, one thing is clear: the easiest solution for all parties is for the Town and the Lighthouse to come to a deal.

UPDATE: The Supervisor also shared that she called Charles Wang an hour before the hearing and had a "pleasant" conversation.  She claims Mr. Wang said he is "looking forward" to the new plan.  Stay tuned tomorrow for more details.


MEDIA ALERT: Looks like I'll be sharing a reaction with News 12.  Stay tuned for more information.

Please share your 

thoughts in comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

A Preview of What's to Come

When you're a blogger, you already have a reputation as someone who plays free and loose with journalistic integrity.  Therefore, when you are asked to adhere to ethical standards and respect news embargoes, you need to be that much more respectful, lest you destroy your reputation and be forced to play catch-up for eternity.  

My friend B.D. Gallof and I had much of this information a few days ago.  We knew there would be a Town of Hempstead press conference today, and we knew in vague terms what it would mean.  Now, the Long Island Herald got the green light and shared the story: Today, at 11 AM, the Town of Hempstead will announce its intention to vote on a "zoning plan" for the Lighthouse Project.  

Some people are already going into hysterics, saying this, at long last, means a "No" for the Lighthouse Project.  Not quite; it may simply be what Charles Wang has been asking for: Just tell me what I can build.

I'm not going into more detail now...I'll be back in a couple of hours with detailed analysis.  Check out Hockey Independent if I don't have anything up by 11.

This post updated at 10:25 AM on February 10 to remove the suggestion that the reporting of this news was unethical...I don't think the Herald's actions were at all unethical; I just knew that the bloggers couldn't break the story.

No Communication? Not Quite

For about 2 weeks, sources have been whispering that "big news" about the Lighthouse Project was "imminent."  We finally got a bit more clarity on what that will be yesterday, and that's why it seemed so interesting that Charles Wang was suddenly dropping in on the Islanders broadcast, and Howie Rose suggestively mentioned a potential update on the Lighthouse Project.  

I thought this was a great plan, a way to proactively counter what I heard was coming from the Town of Hempstead.  However, the interview was fairly tame, with Mr. Wang dodging any question directly related to the Lighthouse and claiming there had been "no communication" with the Town since his October 3 "certainty" deadline passed.  

Mr. Wang repeated what has now become his mantra: Just tell me Yes or No.

You know I have little love for the Town of Hempstead's policies, especially since their asinine policy of not meeting with developers during a review has largely created the impasse.  Active communication at the beginning would have likely led to the new Coliseum being finished right now, and I think it's utterly inexcusable that, over 5 years after the project was first publicly unveiled, we still have no indication of the Town of Hempstead's thinking.  Sources have told me Kate Murray, citing that "she will eventually have to vote on it," begged off meetings with the Lighthouse principals as early as 2003.

However, when you talk about the recent issues, the blame for many of them can be laid solely at the feet of Charles Wang and the Lighthouse Project.

First, according to multiple sources, the report of no communication since October 3 is simply not true.  Charles Wang and Kate Murray apparently met over breakfast in the middle of October, with each side agreeing to keep negotiations out of the media and work together for a common purpose.  Once the election began to change, beyond anyone's expectations, each side went dark.  This was only exacerbated by that Long Island Press report that the Lighthouse Project is dead.

I've repeatedly criticized the media blackout by the Lighthouse, saying it did not serve their purposes and allowed the Town of Hempstead to seize control of the debate through ridiculous statements claiming the proposed project is as dense as the Upper West Side of Manhattan (if it were 8 times larger and had 3 times the population density).

With the economy being what it is, a favorite Town of Hempstead talking point has centered around financing, an especially salient issue given the conditions of the U.S. economy.  I've thought for a long time that financing would not be an issue because a) the project would be built over 10 years, b) the Lighthouse could sell development rights to certain parts of the project as part of the financing, and c) Messrs. Wang and Rechler have equity in the site, through the team, the Marriott, and the Rexcorp property surrounding the Coliseum site.  Others have doubted me, and it came up repeatedly in the Re-Zoning hearing.

This is where it is coming to a head.  I reported previously that the billing dispute with environmental consultants Frederick P. Clark Associates (of Westchester), which briefly flared up in September, is now back, with the consultants not working for months.

The Town of Hempstead is using this and the recent total quiet from the Lighthouse to suggest that the Lighthouse doesn't have the financing to see the project through and is now trying to run out the clock.  Given all the recent moves from the Lighthouse, it's not even an unreasonable thing to wonder anymore. 

Meanwhile, Charles Wang continues to blame the Town and insist he just needs to hear yes or no - even though they can't by law consider re-zoning for the Lighthouse until the environmental review is complete.  The environmental review can't be complete until all issues are addressed. All issues can't be addressed if the Town's environmental consultant is not working.

Both sides are about to go at each other again.  B.D. Gallof (who wrote a wonderful piece on this....drop into Hockey Independent to see what condition our condition is in) have heard whispers from other sources that we will not be sure of the true nature of this until the Town's next move.  Apparently, the Town of Hempstead will be calling a press conference to up the ante and increase pressure on Charles Wang to fulfill his part of the bargain.

It's very hard to see the end-game here.  Nassau County, which Mr. Wang re-iterated is his top preference, has its own set of problems, including an intransigent government that has not seen itself as a partner throughout this process.  Queens could be an option, but 29 developers submitted bids, so the Lighthouse would have to do significant lobbying and dealing to give themselves an edge.  Traffic detours are going up in Brooklyn - I saw them for myself last week - but the Nets are moving to the Prudential Center in Newark as a "temporary" waystation.  With the rabid Brooklyn opposition planning more lawsuits, that move could end up being permanent.

One thing is clear: after sacrificing so much for a dream we made our own, the Lighthouse Project's silence feels like a slap in the face.  It doesn't matter whether we are for it in the exact way some people wish; we want this to happen and we have come whenever asked.

In the same vein, we elected the Town of Hempstead representatives to defend our best interests.  While I do not believe Charles Wang should get everything he wants - and it is very clear there would need to be at least a 20% reduction for this to get done - I have never seen a group of people willing to invest billions of private dollars into an area treated so badly.  Economic development is not and should not be treated by our government as an inconvenience.

At this point, we deserve the truth.

We deserve honest negotiations.

Stop pointing the finger at each other.

Start working together, and, if that is no longer possible, drop this charade. 

One thing's for sure: things will get worse before they have a chance of getting better.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

The Mangano Paradox

I realize that, given recent events, it's best to move forward rather than pat myself on the back for the blog's anniversary.  Therefore, after introducing The Suozzi Effect last week, it's time to delve into another new issue that will influence the Lighthouse Project this year: The Mangano Paradox.

Ed Mangano has been in office for a little less than a month, though we do have a resolution to the countdown I began on New Year's Day.  Mangano signaled to News 12 Interactive that he wants to see the Lighthouse Project moved forward, and a comment was made on Mangano's Facebook fan page that assured the Lighthouse Project was "a top priority for [the Mangano Administration]" and "something [the administration] is working diligently on."

We begin to see the paradox taking shape, because Ed Mangano has to take that difficult leap from rhetoric to results, and there are no cut-and-dry solutions.

The Paradox

It's important to note that I'm not expressing doubt that Ed Mangano truly supports the Lighthouse Project.  He told me so during our interview in October, he has said the same thing to every outlet that has asked, and unless he does something to signal a seismic shift in his position, I have no reason to believe Ed Mangano is not telling the truth.  However, Mangano must also act to move the Lighthouse Project forward, as best he can, within the known constraints and issues:

The Town of Hempstead currently controls the entire process because they have the power to zone the land.

Ed Mangano has signaled a reluctance to involve himself too deeply before the project is sent back to Nassau County.

The Town of Hempstead, historically, uses lack of attention to its advantage, and a lack of attention from the County Executive could give them cover to stall the project ad infinitum.

However, Tom Suozzi, who seemed to take every opportunity to beat any Republican in his sight with the Lighthouse Project for over 2 years, did not substantively move the needle, either.

Legis. Dave Denenberg told me at the environmental scoping hearings that he expected 12-18 months for the environmental review.  We are now in Month 20, with no sign of improvement and no appreciable progress toward a Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS).

Trouble with the proposed development at the former Grumman property in Mangano's hometown of Bethpage has led some to question whether Mr. Mangano's credentials in land development are as solid as he claimed.

Those claiming Ed Mangano is a traditional machine politician may be over-simplifying things.  Mangano is the first Republican County Executive in literally decades to not be promoted from within the Hempstead machine, a group that has given us Al D'Amato, Tom Gulotta, Joe Mondello, and others.  To suggest he would automatically be beholden to these interests may not be accurate, and it gives the new County Executive a golden opportunity to prove his independence.

This is The Mangano Paradox: Ed Mangano now owns the Lighthouse issue in Nassau County.  He needs to take action within his power and his role in the process to move this forward.  However, both of the obvious actions (give the Town of Hempstead space and cajole the Town to move forward) could lead to failure or a near infinite stall.

Bottom Line

Ed Mangano needs to tread a very fine line, but I believe there is a way for him to do that and effect positive change in the Lighthouse saga.

Currently, the Town and Lighthouse are barely speaking and appear to be far apart on negotiations for an amended project scope (10% reductions according to the Lighthouse vs. 35% heard from the Town of Hempstead).  Kate Murray has become brazen, attempting to scare residents with density figures that are far from reality.  It's clear that a white knight is needed to make each side renounce the trenches.

Ed Mangano can be that white knight.

He can  use his demonstrated experience in land development and bipartisan negotiation to bring both sides back to the table.

I think the best possible outcome would be a summit and public press conference in Mineola in which the County Executive would re-affirm the Lighthouse as a priority and help to jump-start the stalled negotiations.  The first bits to come out of this could be baby steps such as finally publishing a process to shepherd the Lighthouse Project to a final up-or-down vote on re-zoning.

Ed Mangano has a tremendous opportunity, and I hope he seizes it.

Please share your 

thoughts in comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Islanders Foe or Prudent Politician? Hempstead's Murray Stands Her Ground (nytimes.com)
• In New York Suburbs, Republicans Bounce Back (nytimes.com)
• Return of the Megaproject: We don't get out to Nassau... (curbed.com)
• New York Islanders owner Charles Wang will consider relocation after lack of decision on Lighthouse Project (sports.espn.go.com)

The New Narrative is Developing

This story is late in coming because I was in Boston at the outdoor college hockey game between Boston University and Newton University - I'm sorry, Boston College - at Fenway Park.  My beloved alma mater won 3-2, and nobody froze to death.  It was one of the most amazing experiences of my life as a sports fan, and I thank you for understanding.  

We've all heard the comments by now - Kate Murray addressed the Long Island Board of Realtors on Thursday, mentioning the Lighthouse Project more extensively than anyone from the Lighthouse itself has since October.  The Supervisor compared the density to the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and she intimated that, with the inauguration of Ed Mangano as County Executive, there was a new, pro-scaling-down Sheriff in town.  This is a clear indication of the new narrative that is taking hold in 2010, and a precarious point for the Lighthouse negotiations.

Fuzzy Math

One little point - according to demographic data, the Supervisor is playing with some serious fuzzy statistics.  According to the 2000 Census, the Upper West Side (the third most-dense neighborhood in New York City) had 207,699 residents in 2.11 square miles, a density of around 98,000 people per square mile.  The Lighthouse is proposing 2400 residential units in an area roughly .25 square miles.  Assuming 4 residents per unit (that may be an over-estimation), you get 9600 residents and 38,400 residents per square mile, or almost 1/3 the density.*  I didn't realize the 2 numbers were equal - as those commercials say, THANK YOU KATE MURRAY!

*1 square mile = 640 acres.  Therefore, the 150 acres of proposed development would actually come to .234 square miles.  I rounded for the purpose of calculation.


Political Background

Image via Wikipedia

After witnessing the complete no-show at the polls in November, I can't help but come to one simple conclusion: our movement peaked too early, and I share some blame for that.  In March we (and many connected Republicans) were talking up Kate Murray as a challenger to Tom Suozzi for the County Executive position, since the Republicans' hold on the Town of Hempstead seemed secure.  Just as the Town of Hempstead became more receptive to the project due to your passion and dedication, they also seemed to want to hold Kate Murray in a seat that now appeared vulnerable.  Ed Mangano, a good, capable, but unknown politician who seemed outside the traditional machine, was nominated, and many in his own party declined to give him a chance.  Kate Murray ended up winning re-election in a landslide, and Ed Mangano rode a wave of anti-incumbent feelings and anger over taxes into the big office in Mineola.

Republicans are united, the Town of Hempstead's rhetoric is becoming more fierce, and you may have to wonder if the Lighthouse Project and its supporters will pay the price for, in essence, causing Kate Murray to stay in her current job.

Implications Going Forward

Seinfeld first explored the concept of "hand" - meaning the upper hand - in a relationship, and, right now, politicians have all the hand in the Lighthouse negotiations.  This is exactly why I believe the media blackout has been a terrible mistake.  The Lighthouse has stayed silent, allowing the Town of Hempstead to become more sharp in its rhetoric, and causing the support base to fracture under the weight of misinformation and unproductive arguing about other options.  At this point, the Lighthouse has completely lost control of the public debate, and it is hurting the ultimate cause.

At the same time, the Town of Hempstead seems to be out for revenge after the Lighthouse and now-former County Executive Suozzi used them as a pinata for the most part of 2009.  The Lighthouse and Mr. Suozzi criticized Kate Murray and the Town of Hempstead for dragging their feet on the project, even though the Town is not solely responsible for the delays.  This has led to the Town digging in, calling Charles Wang a "bully" to B.D. Gallof and complaining about every little slight.  One source was even upset that Mr. Wang did not call Kate Murray after the election to congratulate her on her victory, and tried to make that symbolic of a greater issue with the man.  The Town's dislike of Mr. Wang seems personal, and they clearly feel the tables have turned with Ed Mangano in office.

At the same time, Mangano is the first Republican County Executive in decades who did not rise from the traditional Town of Hempstead Republican machine.  He seems less beholden to some of the classic bosses, including Joe "Blow It Out Your Dufflebag" Mondello, and he repeatedly stressed his support for the project in interviews with me and News 12 Interactive (hat tip to the readers who told me about that).  It may be premature for Murray and her cronies to assume the Mangano camp is wholly in support of their new tactics because of the (R) next to his name.

One thing is clear - the political landscape has changed, and some in the Town are promising that this is only the opening shot.  They have promised to examine everything about the project, including the supposedly "sweetheart deal" of the lease that Mr. Suozzi signed with the Lighthouse on October 1.  New times, indeed.

Bottom Line

These are the same stories we have been hearing since October, the last time the Lighthouse and Town are confirmed to have met each other to discuss the project.  It's clear that size and scope are the main objections to the Town, and even though I wholeheartedly support the project as proposed, I realized a long time ago that there will need to be negotiations if this project ever hopes to become reality.

The sides are far apart, with Town of Hempstead sources discussing a reduction of up to 35%, something that could render the project not worth doing, and sources and other outlets close to Charles Wang floating a number closer to 10%.  Both sides seem to have dug in their heels rather than offering to meet in the middle, which has kept us at this impasse.

We first heard these numbers in October, from my friend B.D. Gallof.  We're now here, on January 10, talking about the same things, and the Town of Hempstead is still clinging to an argument that was long ago disproven by just about every objective measure.

3 months, and zero progress.  That's not good for anybody.

At this point, we need to re-visit the mediation option that has previously been offered by John Cameron of the Long Island Regional Planning Council.  Both sides have devolved the debate into a tit-for-tat about who insulted whom, and the focus has gone away from what I believe is an unassailable fact: Long Island desperately needs the new direction the Lighthouse Project can provide.  Maybe Mangano, who promised to be a uniting force after 8 years of the hyper-partisan Suozzi, could best serve the people by laying low and trying to get the two sides to forge a compromise.

The Lighthouse, without the cover of PR and community outreach that allowed it to build such unprecedented levels of support, only has three options in its fight to regain Hand: they can either wait and hope the politicians in Hempstead overplay their hand, openly flirt with other options (Brooklyn chief among them), or give in (the least likely option).

If both sides can't get past every little slight and comment and work toward a common purpose, the people, who again seem an afterthought in this equation, will lose.

The future we need will be gone.

Long Island will lose.

That is not the ending I want to see to this narrative.

Play time is over - how about people start doing their jobs?

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

The Annual Airing of Grievances

Today is Festivus, the annual celebration in which you gather your loved ones around an aluminum pole, and tell them all the ways they have disappointed you in the past year.  I have decided to do my part, in the spirit of the season.  I have gotten the pole out of the crawl space, and I am ready to begin the Airing of Grievances, where I mention all the ways people connected to the Lighthouse Project have disappointed me in the past year.

I've got a lot of problems with you people, and now you're gonna hear about it!

Let's begin...

KRUGER! My son tells me your company STINKS....oh, right, wrong occasion...

Tom "The Broker" Suozzi deserves top billing for the needless destruction of his own political career.  Suozzi chose to ignore the storm around him and seemed to forget that running for a new term actually involved running.  Suozzi lost a very winnable election to upstart Ed Mangano* and his hopes for higher office are at least temporarily dashed. (* it's worth mentioning this space is a fan of Mangano's after my interview with him, and I am cautiously optimistic he will do a good job).

Kate Murray and the Town of Hempstead are a close second.  Whether fair or not, the Town has a reputation as a place that makes it difficult to conduct large developments and which seeks to defend a long-dead idea of suburbia.  The Town has moved the Lighthouse process along at record time (for it), but there are many opportunities for improvement.  The phony stimulus drive, the fake petition, and the constant game-playing that characterized most of the early spring and summer likely cost valuable months in the process, and it has helped to engender unnecessary ill will.

Joe Mondello may have gotten the last laugh during the elections, but his ridiculous and childish insults hurled at citizen Joe Conte during Kate Murray's kickoff rally showed how out of touch and seemingly surprised the entrenched machine was at being questioned.  It was one in a series of events that led Mr. Mondello to be stripped of his chairmanship of the New York Republican Party, and with a victory under his belt he is almost certain to retire in 2010.  And now, I can never look at Joe Conte again without thinking "Blow it out your dufflebag!"

Speaking of the election, the "voters" who barely bothered to turn out deserve mention here.  Here's a little hint: if you want things to get better, you can participate in the process rather than sit on the sidelines hurling stones.

Jay Jacobs, whose hold on power in the Nassau County and New York Democratic Party is now on shaky ground, should be called out as well.  He ceded what could have been a very winnable Town of Hempstead election by nominating a candidate who, through health issues and personal decision, only campaigned for the last month of the election.  Old friend Joe Conte did an admirable job here, but there was no way he could have saved this situation.

The Lighthouse Project, which made so many intelligent moves throughout this process, has been playing a weird kind of defense the past 2 months.  I've already shared my belief on why the media blackout needs to end, so I will not repeat myself here.  I will say that the Lighthouse's refusal to engage the public after the Long Island Press report that the project was dead has given supporters a case of nerves and ceded the debate to people who believe the project is dead or wish to kill it.  To make matters worse, the project has now once again ceased payments to environmental consultants F.P. Clark, halting the review they themselves claimed needed to be done with all haste.

Frederick P. Clark Associates should not be off the hook either - they are known to be very close to the Town of Hempstead, and their work has at times been questioned.  Given their actions, such as stopping work without notification during the first billing dispute, and the fact that there are few developers lining up with such lucrative work, you still have to ask if they have any motivation to speed the process along.

Al D'Amato, probably the biggest reason Charles Wang purchased the New York Islanders to begin with, was known to be pulling the strings in the past, and he and other high-profile Republicans have been noticeably silent.  With other developers such as David Mack moving money to Ed Mangano, I think it's worth asking why.

There is a special horror reserved for the mainstream media, whose coverage of this event (save for a few quality writers and investigative reporters) has been nothing short of embarrassing.  The latest example came today, when a certain newspaper cited "sources" discussing the issue of the Lighthouse Project stopping payments to F.P. Clark, the Town's environmental consultancy.  If that sounds familiar, it's because B.D. Gallof broke the story 12 days ago on Hockey Independent, and I have written two pieces about it since.  Given the resources, and the known talent of certain people who work at these papers, there is no reason bloggers who do this in their spare time should be consistently winning the coverage battle against such mainstream outlets.  This is only the most important Island-wide issue since Levittown; there is no reason to actually cover it as such...(sorry for the sarcasm)

I also have to call out short-sighted citizens, on either side.  This has been a drawn-out issue, and in many instances things have changed seemingly on a dime (or an opinion poll...).  It is both incorrect and irresponsible to base your entire opinion on this process based on the last thing any blogger writes, especially since this is an issue that will require solidarity if we truly wish to see it happen.  Please trust your ability to think and understand that the current status is something beyond the last article you read.

Now, as Festivus Rolls On...

We come to the Feats of Strength.  Maybe we should cede this one to the principals who will be in charge of this as the new year dawns: Charles Wang and Kate Murray.  It might be an interesting method: until Mr. Wang pins the Supervisor, the Lighthouse is not approved! I'd pay to watch that....but I think the real solution is simpler.  When both sides eschew the game-playing and once again work in good faith toward a resolution (look for that to happen roughly .24 seconds after Ed Mangano takes office as County Executive), then we will hopefully see closure.

Let's hope the actual approval of this project would require a little less than a Festivus Miracle.

Feel free to add your own grievances.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email. Twitter. Facebook.

Related articles by Zemanta

• When Party Lines Divide Newcomer and Native (nytimes.com)
• THE SUMMER OF LIGHTHOUSE LOVE IS OVERNow let's see how the developers react on Oct. 3 (islanderspointblank.com)