There is Only One Answer: A Formal Endorsement on the Arena Referendum

(Warning: This is a long one, and not my usual tone.  No jokes, no "areener," nothing but an impassioned plea to Nassau County's electorate.  I've sent this to every newspaper on Long Island as well)

I want to share a story with you that frames my thoughts about this referendum and where my endorsement will fall.

I was in the middle of a business trip to San Francisco in February of this year, waiting to meet a dear friend for dinner outside an Indian restaurant in Lower Pacific Heights. Multiple groups of people - maybe about 10 - passed by me as I leaned against the brick wall of the restaurant.  I couldn't hear their whole conversation, but what I picked up was unmistakable.  Every group was talking about doing a startup in San Francisco with that almost naive optimism that comes from someone convinced their idea will change the world (I'm infected with it myself; I'd know it anywhere).

I was struck by this experience all throughout a lovely dinner, and in the post-dinner conversation my friend startled me.  Out of nowhere, she asked me what ever came of "that arena thing I blogged about a couple of years ago" - did we win, or lose?

Stopping and casting my gaze downward, I mumbled "We lost."

She surprised me further by looking at me and saying, in a tone that suggested both shock and exasperation, "Why?! It seemed like a perfect deal!"

That's a question, isn't it?  I had never dwelt on the dead Lighthouse Project for long enough to come up with a pithy synthesis of what had happened.  Suddenly, out of nowhere, I had a moment of perfect clarity, and blurted this out:

"Because there are people who would let Long Island sink into the ocean, while they sat on their decks and preened to nobody in particular about what a great place Long Island is."

I think my friend was as startled to hear this line as I was to have said it, and it prompted a deeper conversation on the mindset and belief system that was the Lighthouse Project's undoing.  I was almost exasperated that I wasn't getting through to her, until I had another moment of perfect clarity.

She doesn't understand.


She can't understand.


That world, and that mindset, are foreign to someone born and raised, as she was, in the go-go, can-do world of the Bay Area, a world where dreams come true for young entrepreneurs practically every day.

But that world, and that mindset, have given rise to a hideous disease that has taken control of Long Island's very soul.  The region that gave birth to the entire concept of a suburban life and symbolized the can-do optimism of post-World War II America has become a time capsule, frozen in time by its own self-defeatist ethos.  Grand visions are not welcome here anymore, and any attempt to re-set this once-runaway train that now has its emergency brake permanently on  are crushed and broken under a misguided ideology that wafts to the heavens like a terrible prayer: "This is Suburbia."

Long Island has been in a crisis for many years.  The region Charles Lindbergh carried with him across the Atlantic, that came to epitomize the ideal in American life of a suburban house with a white-picket fence, that left a piece of itself on the moon with the Grumman-designed Lunar Module, lost its identity somewhere along the way and now defines itself by what it isn't.

"We are not the city."

"We are not for young people or renters."

"We do not want to be a 6th borough."

"We do not welcome big ideas."

Residents constantly complain about issues such as choking property tax rates, yet they continue to elect and re-elect the same venal politicians who provide lip service to these issues while continuing to support and expand the very system that perpetuates them.  Partisan hackery has taken the place of true statesmanship and a willingness to band together for the common good.

Even the area's only remaining professional sports team, the New York Islanders, are an accidental team playing in an accidental arena.  The Islanders exist wholly because Nassau County wanted to keep the upstart WHA out of the soon-to-be-built Nassau Coliseum, and the NHL was all too willing to oblige.  Therefore, after a territorial invasion fee of $4 million to the New York Rangers, the Islanders opened play in 1972 in the brand-new Nassau Coliseum.

The Coliseum itself is a compromise and an accident that became obsolete minutes after the ribbon was cut.  County Executive Nickerson, who envisioned a county-wide destination on that land ever since it was ceded to the county by the Kennedy Administration in 1962, was rebuffed in his efforts to build a 20,000 seat arena with an underground station for the Long Island Rail Road.  Some undoubtedly assumed the Islanders were a placeholder and would leave the area as a distant memory once the WHA folded and a major metropolitan area came calling.

Then, on May 24, 1980, a funny thing happened on the way to obscurity.

Tonelli.

To Nystrom.

Score!

Stanley Cup Champions!

Three additional championships later, the Islanders were here to stay, and discussions about replacing Nassau Coliseum began shortly after the 4th banner was raised to its already-aging rafters.  In fact, to illustrate how truly absurd this situation has become, just imagine a new arena had been built in the mid-1980s after the Dynasty.  The time to replace THAT building would be drawing near.

The team has not had similar success in recent years, but it is still a part of all of us, possibly even moreso for me.  You see, I began following hockey in 1992 as a young boy, and I was so excited when David Volek scored his overtime winner to eliminate the two-time defending champion Penguins that I ran upstairs to tell my parents, tripped on our living room carpet, and tore a gash above my left knee by hitting the corner of our coffee table.  That scar, and the Islanders, are a part of me forever, and this team has for too long been used by both sides of the aisle as a political football instead of a symbol for Long Island and a $250 million per year economic engine for Nassau County.  For too long, fans have been talking about NIFA, supermajorities, and Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statements instead of Tavares, Streit, Strome, and Niederreiter.

I can't deny my passion, but this issue is bigger than merely a hockey team.  It goes beyond politics.  It is about a grander vision for what Long Island will be in the future, and that is why I urge you to vote YES on the new arena Monday, August 1.

I and many others wished the Lighthouse Project could become our shining utopia, but as we know, "utopia" has 2 roots in classical Greek, one meaning "the good place," and the other meaning "the place that cannot be."  The Lighthouse Project was our "good place," but political jockeying and the feelings I outlined in the beginning turned it into the "place that cannot be."

This referendum must not be considered against a now-dead development proposal; it must be weighed against the cost of doing nothing.

Independent reviews have cut through the scare tactics and presented us with a stark choice.  For example, the Office of Legislative and Budget Review pegs the cost of a new arena at a maximum of $13.80 per household per year.

The cost of doing nothing and losing the Islanders and Nassau Coliseum?  $16 per household per year, with $243 million and 2,660 jobs projected to disappear from the Nassau County economy should the team move and the arena be shuttered.  When presented with that choice, how can you choose nothing over something?

I do not believe this arena will be a cure-all for Long Island's problems, but it can serve as the first step in an admittedly long journey.  This decision can lead to other good decisions and smart ideas that will define how Nassau County chooses to be suburbia in the 21st Century.  That is the world I choose to believe in.

Voters will be faced with a stark choice when they go to the polls on Monday, August 1.  They can continue the defeatist woe-is-me that has infected this island, all under that poisonous rallying cry of "This is Suburbia," or they can stand up and say enough is enough.

I say enough is enough.

I choose to stand for building something instead of tearing it down.

I choose to stand for optimism instead of pessimism.

I choose to believe Long Island can be better than it is now.

I choose to believe one good decision can lead to others.

The choice is clear: Please vote August 1, and I urge you to vote yes.  For Long Islanders, not the New York Islanders.  For citizens, not for Democrats or Republicans.  For what Long Island can be, not for what it was.  For the belief that our best days can still be ahead and we can choose to stand for something, rather than falling for everything.

We, at this time, at this moment, can stand up and break the cycle that has gripped Long Island for generations, and help set us on a path that will hopefully result in our children being as mystified by the self-defeatist ideology as my friend in San Francisco.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time.

PLEASE SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS IN 

COMMENTS. 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.

Tick, Tick, Tick

I've talked previously about the good people with The Long Island Index, a project to gather and publish important data about Long Island. I cited them in the early days of this blog, after their report released in the fall of 2007 showed that 61% of Long Islanders favored high-density housing in downtown areas adjacent to mass transit. This proved that the myth of every resident of suburbia wanting a single-family home with a white picket fence is just that, a myth.

The Long Island Index is back with a new report, one that is accompanied by this bone-chilling video, aptly titled "The Clock is Ticking on Long Island."



I defy anyone to watch that and come to any conclusion other than this: Long Island is dying, and it is in dire need of the kind of bold thinking represented by projects such as the Lighthouse. This is something we need, and something that could do a world of good for the community.

Also, please understand something. There are naysayers out there who claim we are a threat to the community's very existence, secret assassins ready to destroy everything they moved here to build.  That could not be further from the truth, and I am deeply insulted by the inference, especially since many of the naysayers are the ones who are pushing the limited, community-choking worldview.

I'm in favor of housing options for everyone, not only those who want to buy a single-family home.  There is room for both.

I'm in favor of economic opportunities for everyone, because it's a shame to move from a place due solely to cost of living, or because you were forced to by a lack of options.

I'm in favor of bold action, not sticking our heads in the sand like ostriches and denying there is any problem at all.

We may disagree on the way to fix our problems, but we need to all agree that our community needs us, and the problems we face are too great for us to simply hurl insults at each other or refuse to have a discussion.

I'm ready to step up and stop the ticking of that terrible clock - who else?

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

Sifting Through the Rubble

Today, at around noon, Charles Wang issued a statement affirming that the Long Island Press story from yesterday declaring the Lighthouse Project "dead" was not true. This ended roughly 19 straight hours of speculation, as the Lighthouse went into a total media blackout after the story broke. This was truly a unique situation in the whole Lighthouse saga, and we should take a look at the key take-aways from this.

First, three quick things:

Appearance on HNLI Tomorrow

Tomorrow, I will appear on Hockey Night on Long Island at 5 PM to discuss the latest news related to the Lighthouse Project. I should be on for about 10 minutes, and I hope you will tune in.

Quoted in Newsday

I was quoted in Newsday's article discussing this strange scenario and the anxiety it caused fans and supporters. I'm not surprised they used that quote, and I stand by what I said. I reserved judgment on this, but people were very upset.

Kristen McElroy Interview Tomorrow

I am scheduled to sit down with Kristen McElroy, Democratic challenger for Town of Hempstead Supervisor, tomorrow afternoon. If you really want me to ask a certain question, please email me or leave it in comments.

Analyzing the Incident

The news hit many people like a gut punch yesterday, and some responded better than others. If the Lighthouse was truly caught off guard by this, and by all indications they were, I understand their desire to remain out of the media spotlight. However, that was no consolation to the people who felt like they were left twisting in the wind after a potential bombshell revelation. I understand why it was done, but I don't know if I would have made the same decision in that situation.

We had an interesting aftermath to the original story - all the major media outlets on Long Island spent hours trying to confirm the story, and they never posted anything last night save for a small blog post on Newsday that also cited an anonymous source. At the same time, the author of the original story doubled down, saying on Twitter and to Newsday that he believed the Charles Wang press release was not true and it was consistent with a group that wanted to bury a potentially devastating story.

As a pretty savvy media watcher, the thought that this was a deliberate, high-level leak does not jibe with everything we have seen. We had an anonymous, unconfirmed source who spoke to the Long Island Press, a paper which serves a reader base but has never broken a major story on the Lighthouse Project. The conspiracy theorists among us would say that this proves the Lighthouse did leak this bit of news because it was so easy to deny, but it would not make a bit of sense to do this.

At the end of the day, I believe there is one plausible explanation to this: somebody with a connection to either the Lighthouse or the political situation (or both) in a tangential way overreacted to a potential story and relayed the information to an equally-overzealous writer. The Lighthouse Project has done a very good job managing the media throughout this whole process, and if they legitimately had such devastating news to report, they would not suddenly change their tactics. This leak could have then caused the organization to go into lockdown and identify the source before making any public pronouncements. This would have the sad side effect of leaving supporters searching desperately for information, but, again, this is the only situation that, in my view, would explain everything that happened after this story hit the wire and was gobbled up by the national hockey press.

Next Steps

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Hidden inside the Newsday article was yet another gem from Kate Murray: she apparently called Charles Wang to suggest another meeting to discuss scaling down the project. Apparently the Supervisor does not understand the request from October 3 to keep the negotiations out of the media (though I'm not surprised).

This move by Kate Murray raises the legitimate question of why this had not been done in the 5 years since the Lighthouse Project was first publicly announced. As I have said many times, the two sides should be speaking, but the Supervisor is not a hero for suddenly doing something that she should have done from the beginning.

The Lighthouse is vehemently against any potential scale-down because work that has already been done would have to be re-done for the new project, of smaller size. I am trying to get more information on this so we can better understand the exact situation now.

While I am not encouraged that Kate Murray is once again up to her usual tricks, I am encouraged that the sides have spoken and agreed to speak again.

Bottom Line

A reader pointed out earlier today that solely discussing events like this distracts us from the true goal, and I could not agree more. This process has been fraught with more drama and political calculation than most people thought possible, but that is not why I am writing this blog, and I also know that is not why you are reading it. We are here because the Lighthouse Project is the right one for Long Island, a visionary undertaking that can bring badly-needed jobs, private investment, and maybe even an economic engine for a Long Island that has been stagnant for nearly 25 years, especially since the departure of Northrup-Grumman.

Ironically, yesterday started with another major point that has become lost among the tit-for-tat, the political gamesmanship, and the barely-sane commenters at Newsday who seem to believe that their opposition means the project needs to die as quick a death as possible. Newsday commissioned one of the only scientific polls on the Lighthouse Project, and the results were consistent with everything I have seen and heard throughout this process: 51% in favor, 25% against, and 23% with either no preference or no opinion. All major demographic groups and political affiliations supported the project, and only one group (women) showed less than 50% overall support.

Despite this wonderful news, I need to point something out: the insistence of many media outlets, including Newsday in this particular piece, to label the Lighthouse Project "controversial." Isn't something widely supported and endorsed by the people, by its very nature, not controversial? Seems like poor word choice to me.

The Lighthouse has, in many circles, become a proxy for the factions that currently disagree over the future direction Long Island should take. It is clear that a majority of Long Islanders understand that the current situation is unsustainable, and they endorse the vision put forward.

This, at the end of the day, is the most important thing. The people of Long Island have stood up and said how they want to be suburbia in the 21st Century. Every time we the people have shown our support publicly, the politicians that work for us (so many have forgotten that...) have taken notice and moved the process forward.

We are now at the 11th hour, and we are needed again. If we want our Island dream to become a reality, we cannot sit back as passive observers. We must continue to fight in public (and at the ballot box) to make sure yesterday's scare does not become tomorrow's reality.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email Me. Follow me on Twitter. Become a fan on Facebook.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Thank Goodness That's Over (islesofficialsoutlook.blogspot.com)
• A STATEMENT FROM CHARLES B. WANG"We will not discuss meetings in the media" (islanderspointblank.com)
• NEWSDAY: Wang Source - Project Not AbandonedMy take: the LDC could not have played this worse (islanderspointblank.com)

Offers and Mediation

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

It has been a few quiet days on the Lighthouse front. We have not heard anything from the official principals, just news that Brooklyn and Queens are making offers and the Nassau County Industrial Development Agency's (IDA) decision to take out a full-page ad in Newsday supporting the Lighthouse. This silence should not be considered a bad thing, simply the sign of an organization that is exploring its options in a low-key way.

We also had another interesting bit of news come out last week. John Cameron, Chair of the Long Island Regional Planning Committee (which, in June, recognized the Lighthouse as a "project of regional significance") publicly offered to step in and negotiate a resolution to the current impasse.

Mediation

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

I have wondered at times whether the Town of Hempstead and the Lighthouse Project needed a mediator to help toward the final goal. I speculated last month that Nassau County should have taken a more prominent role as the landowner and the government body that originated the idea for a large-scale development on the Nassau Coliseum property. However, with the County Executive himself stepping into the fray and criticizing Kate Murray personally, Mr. Suozzi's ship as a "broker" may have sailed (even though he should still be publicly advocating the Lighthouse and helping voters understand the benefit to the community and why the Lighthouse is a needed project for Long Island). Gov. David Paterson's support, combined with organized labor's renewed push to make the Lighthouse a reality, has allied these parties with Tom Suozzi, and in my opinion it might not be possible for these parties to serve as an honest broker, either. Some began to wonder whether or not a neutral broker was even possible.

Mr. Cameron, however, may be one of the best "independent" people for the role. Before Mr. Cameron made this offer, he spoke eloquently about the need for change on Long Island at the kickoff meeting for Tom Suozzi's 90/10 Project for renewing Nassau County. Mr. Cameron inherently understands that, in his own words, a lack of change on Long Island would mean "game over." He is politically connected, understands the situation, and does not stand to gain financially from successful completion of the project. If both sides are willing to talk, he may be just what the doctor ordered. Hopefully, if nothing else, this offer can help both sides realize that they should be speaking for the good of Long Island.

Politics

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

With the election approaching in less than a month, the Lighthouse Project is showing signs of calcifying into Republicans vs. Democrats in the key issues (despite many prominent Republicans, including Assemb. Fred Thiele (R-Bridgehampton) and Assemb. Bob Barra (R-Lynbrook) coming out strongly in support of the project). The Town of Hempstead and Nassau County are now talking past each other, and that is almost to be expected since there are politicians from opposite parties trying to get re-elected and hold onto their majorities in each area. Given these political realities and the ongoing environmental review, it is clear that nothing will be done before Election Day to grant "certainty," one way or the other. The issue is what will happen afterward.

Bottom Line

Mr. Cameron should be lauded for his decision to step up and offer to mediate the situation, especially since he is politically savvy. I have long believed that any mediation or "brokering" could only succeed if the party were either apolitical or, if that cannot happen, bipartisan. No agreement can be shoved by one party down the other's throat.

I think the main issue now is how serious the principals are about reaching a deal. If Mr. Wang and the Town of Hempstead are willing to bury the hatchet, we could hopefully see some positive movement, even if mediation is never truly necessary.

Do not expect any major news for the next few days, but after the loud accusations and posturing from each side last week, no news may be good news.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email Me. Follow me on Twitter. Become a fan on Facebook.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Willets Point Islanders!: An official at the Queens Chamber... (curbed.com)
• New York Islanders owner Charles Wang will consider relocation after lack of decision on Lighthouse Project (sports.espn.go.com)
• Return of the Megaproject: We don't get out to Nassau... (curbed.com)
• THE SUMMER OF LIGHTHOUSE LOVE IS OVERNow let's see how the developers react on Oct. 3 (islanderspointblank.com)

Nassau County, Increase Your Role

Image via Wikipedia

If the Lighthouse Project is to progress to ultimate approval, Nassau County must begin to increase its role. This post was previously planned and by complete coincidence comes on the same day that Chris Botta reports rumors that the long-awaited lease between the Lighthouse Development Group and Nassau County will be announced some time this week.

Out Clause

Reader BR remembered whispers about 7 months ago of an out clause in the Islanders' lease agreement, and he is correct. According to Charles Wang, the Lighthouse and the County reached an agreement in 2007 that provides the New York Islanders with an out clause in their lease with Nassau County, currently scheduled to expire in 2015. However, the out clause puts the onus solely on Nassau County and has nothing to do with the ongoing re-zoning negotiations with the Town of Hempstead. According to the out clause, as is my understanding, the Nassau County Legislature has 120 days to approve the new lease agreement after Tom Suozzi submits the agreement. If approval does not occur by then, the Islanders' lease is considered null and void.

Most of this lease is not news to people, and it has in fact been largely complete for months. This is largely a timing play given that Mr. Wang's October 3 deadline is now a week away, and it puts full pressure on the Town of Hempstead to see the process to completion.

What I'm saying is just speculation right now. As readers have pointed out, re-zoning approval has to happen before any use of the land (and the lease) can commence. However, there are ways to get around this: there could be an agreement with certain conditionals in it, such as becoming void without re-zoning, or terms that are invoked based on what the Town of Hempstead approves. I am working on getting some information, and I will report whatever I find.

Nassau County Then

Our friend NYI Fan Central has asked many times why Tom Suozzi seemed to get a free pass when discussing the happenings around the Lighthouse. I did not want to go too deeply into those issues at the time, because I didn't think it would be valuable to look backward when so much had to be done going forward. However, as I learned more about the process, I realized Fan Central had a very good point, and let's have this discussion now. As we recall, the Lighthouse Project was originally unveiled in September 2004 (about 5 years ago right now - I remember because I did a research paper on it for a class that semester - wow, was still in school back then...), and the Town of Hempstead only got the re-zoning application in late 2007 (even though they keep saying early 2008). Let's take a look at the long and winding road that got us to this point - I've put together a rough sequence of events to help out:

• Project is Proposed - Suozzi signs Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Charles Wang for the newly-christened Lighthouse Project, the proposed "downtown of Long Island"
• The project is shockingly free of politics at first, though many in the usual crowd fixate on the proposed 60-story tower
• 2005 campaign season starts off with a bang, as former Sen. Al D'Amato (also a former Computer Associates board member and the man who talked Charles Wang into purchasing the Islanders) fires a broadside and characterizes the Lighthouse as turning Nassau County into the "6th Borough." Gregory Peterson, running for Nassau County Executive, makes opposition to the Lighthouse a centerpiece of his campaign (Source - by the way, this investigative piece was very good, and you should all take a look)
• The race guarantees nothing will be done until after Election Day (even though Tom Suozzi ended up winning in a blowout)
  
• After Tom Suozzi wins, he soon decides he wants to run for governor
• Lighthouse MOU is scrapped and thrown into a competitive bidding process
• Lighthouse Project, with new partner Scott Rechler, wins the right to develop the land (though any Islanders-centric development would need to go to the team's owner...)
• Project's size and scope increased to reflect new scale of development
• Re-zoning application submitted to the Town of Hempstead

It suddenly becomes pretty clear how it took so long to get from where we were to where we are now. Hopefully, this will include lessons for both current and future developers.

Image via Wikipedia

Nassau County Now

The Town of Hempstead has a much more prominent role in the recent life of the Lighthouse because they are serving as Lead Agency for the environmental review and because they control zoning for the Lighthouse site. The County has, since June, largely stayed out of the process in public except to speak in favor at a meeting or to mention the impending deadline in the media. The County, when asked, deferred to the Town because they did not want to interfere with the Town's power throughout this process. That is a good and noble ideal, but there is still more the County could be doing to help the Lighthouse cause right now.

For example, Nassau County could be out there promoting the economic need for the Lighthouse. We saw so many residents on Tuesday try to have it both ways, saying they were in favor of a new Coliseum but against the development around the site. As we know, the whole concept of the Lighthouse came about because the County was unable to provide any public money for the construction of a new Coliseum (and I'm OK with that - I don't believe taxpayers should be shouldering the full burden of stadium/arena costs). I've proven conclusively that a privately-financed Coliseum does not work unless there is development around the area and the arena is used as, for lack of a better term, a loss leader. So many people still do not understand this, and the County should make very clear that this is both a) necessary, and b) the County's desired use for land it owns.

The County could also be taking a more active role in addressing opponents' concerns and allaying the fears of citizens who believe one of the many lies about the project. For example, there are still many residents who fear the impact of traffic (and it should be studied), and the use of natural resources such as water. The Nassau County Department of Public Works has endorsed the project and its proposed mitigation efforts, and many people did not know this until the Tuesday hearing. This could help residents who are worried about negative impact to the environment. In the same vein, Nassau County does not talk that much about specifics even though the Lighthouse is the centerpiece of Tom Suozzi's vision for a new suburbia. Our own loyal reader TheMetalChick shared her encounter with Uniondale residents who were concerned the Lighthouse would take their homes through eminent domain, when no such plans exist. The County should be doing more to get the basic facts about the project, in order to supplement the fantastic community outreach that the Lighthouse has done, almost from the beginning.

I have never doubted Nassau County's commitment to this process, but they should be more vocal as both the originating agency and the landowner. It is irresponsible to leave the Town and the Lighthouse to hash out the details, and I hope Tom Suozzi and the Legislature do not believe their work is over as soon as a lease is approved. Nobody's work is over until there are shovels in the ground.

Bottom Line

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

The Lighthouse Project is one that has implications across Long Island, from Manhasset to Montauk, and its ultimate fate will shape our destiny for generations to come. We all know there are certain powers reserved for the Town with which the County cannot interfere, but that does not mean the County should not be involved when it makes sense to be involved. There are many opportunities for the County to be out there educating residents on why this both a good idea and a necessary piece of Long Island's future (if, that is, we'd like to have a future). Nassau County owns the land and originally planted the seeds for the Lighthouse, and they must fulfill their role so the seed can soon sprout into a bright new day for our home.

Thankfully, the real crunch time is coming now. Nassau County must step up and include itself in the process to make sure that its vision for a new suburbia does not turn into a twisted nightmare. We cannot undo the countless mistakes that have been made in the past, but we can surely stop making mistakes going forward. Past failure is not an excuse to fail now, and the Lighthouse must be seen through to completion by all relevant agencies.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email Me. Follow me on Twitter.

Related articles by Zemanta

• LIGHTHOUSE LEASE TO BE ANNOUNCED NEXT WEEKCounty deal done, Lighthouse fate is up to ToH (islanderspointblank.com)

Negotiations and Love Songs

The Lighthouse Re-Zoning Hearing on Tuesday was an interesting study in contrasts. Supporters still vastly outnumbered opponents, telling the Town Board that the project was Something So Right and should be approved as quickly as possible. A more robust (but still small) opposition came out, largely centered among Garden City residents who fear a Train in the Distance (that is not part of the plan) and other citizens who profess a desire for a new Coliseum and then trash the only way to possibly get it. The hearing lasted Late In the Evening, with the Town Board bringing up legitimate issues and, at times, going into seemingly unnecessary tangents and asking questions that seem to suggest that many Board members did not read the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statements (DGEIS), proving that Long Island politics is Still Crazy After All These Years.

I came out of Tuesday's hearing convinced that it was a whole lot of political theater. These sorts of hearings never result in a public deal, and I knew there would likely be some kind of gesture to begin a negotiation. We got that last night, as a Town of Hempstead insider told my friend B.D. Gallof that the Town was preparing to offer a smaller Lighthouse Project to the Lighthouse Development Group, a move that could hopefully lead to the Town Board being comfortable enough to vote the project through.

Image by xjanix via Flickr

A Start to Negotiations

We have been waiting for months to get some kind of signal from the Town of Hempstead about where they stood on the Lighthouse issue. Theories have been thrown out there, but none of the theorists seemed to agree on much. One thing seemed clear from the beginning: while I favor the project as proposed, I realize the final product will not look exactly like what we currently see. High-ranking Lighthouse officials such as Michael Picker, Lighthouse President, have said this in public forums previously, and people connected to the Lighthouse have admitted the same to me as recently as this week.

This is the time to begin negotiations, because the other side has spoken. In my view, it would not have made sense to pre-emptively offer to scale the project down because it makes no sense to negotiate against yourself (the Town probably would have tried to make that scaled-down proposal smaller, too).

Those of us who want Long Island to have Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes always knew it would come to this, and the biggest surprise is that the Town waited so long to begin negotiations. We now know the biggest issues are the size and scope, since those also inform other issues such as traffic and natural resources, and we can, hopefully, move forward into an agreement

Analysis

The eternal optimist would lay out a simple scenario here: the Town of Hempstead counters the Lighthouse with an offer that is smaller than the project as proposed, and then both sides meet in the middle. It could even turn some opponents who support the general idea but object to the size of the current proposal.

One line in BD's piece troubled me. His source claimed that Charles Wang would negotiate, if he truly cared about the Islanders and those supporters who have done so much to advance the cause. While there should be negotiations, the Town can't expect to railroad the Lighthouse into accepting its terms, either. The public still shows vast support for the project, as proposed, and Election Day is not far off.

The Town's next move will be illuminating, because we will see if they truly intend to negotiate. A smaller but still-reasonable proposal, with room to negotiate, indicates an intention to get a deal done, and we could expect to see it in the coming months. A proposal that is insultingly small and that ignores both the economic reality and the pressing needs in the community for the solutions offered by the Lighthouse could be a very troubling sign. A move like that could be an attempt to shift the onus back to Charles Wang in the hope that Lighthouse supporters will put pressure on him to settle for less than should be built on the site.

In the same vein, the Lighthouse has taken a hard-line stance in public, with some claiming the time for negotiations has passed. If the Lighthouse truly feels this way, it shows a seeming indifference to something many of us recognized as basic fact months ago (the project as proposed may not be what is eventually built). It would be a sad day for Long Island and a shocking end to a process that many saw as an attempt to re-make the very face of our home.

At the end of the day, I just can't believe either side would torpedo the process now. The Lighthouse went into this process asking for the moon and realizing, on some level, that the final product would not necessarily look exactly like the proposal. They have spent millions of dollars - not counting the millions more lost on the Islanders franchise - to make this project a reality, and it has gone farther than many cynics ever thought possible. In the same vein, the Town of Hempstead has seen the community rise up in support of this project in a way that has never been seen on Long Island. The people are hungry for the change the Lighthouse represents, and they realize that a re-imagination of certain aspects of suburbia is the only way to preserve and support those single family homes surrounded by white picket fences that dance in the dreams and aspirations of many millions of Americans.

On the Lighthouse side, Charles Wang's partner, Scott Rechler, is likely the leading reason there will be an agreement. Mr. Rechler has been through many of these hearings, and I was heartened that he stayed cool and collected throughout Tuesday's proceedings (makes me think this is par for the course, for a man who has had so many project approved by that very Town Board). It is only a good sign.

The Town of Hempstead needs to remember that compromise has neutered many of the most promising proposals on Long Island - everything from the Long Island Expressway to the Coliseum itself, which was supposed to be an almost 20,000 seat arena with an underground Long Island Rail Road station (the "secret stairs" near the Marriott that some think are another entrance to the Expo Hall were actually meant to be the entrance to that train station). Negotiation is good and natural, but simply making the project smaller for the sake of making it smaller will leave many lamenting a missed opportunity.

Bottom Line

The real work begins now, behind closed doors, away from the glare of the media and the prying eyes of interested citizens. The tenor of the Tuesday hearing was largely grandstanding, so there is no reason to believe the Lighthouse Project is definitely Slip Slidin' Away.

The negotiations hinge largely on the Town of Hempstead's next move.

Charles Wang will see his October 3 deadline come and go. There will be inquiries from other interested municipalities, and Mr. Wang will no doubt learn there are 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover. However, if he is as committed to Long Island as he says he is, and I believe he is, and both sides negotiate in good faith, we will see a deal reached that is amendable to both sides.

And if it doesn't happen, You Can Call Me Al.

(Blogger's Note: thanks to Patrick, The Sign Man, for letting me take his picture with that wonderful sign)

Listen to the Preds on the Glass Podcast

If you weren't able to listen to my appearance on Preds on the Glass, you missed a great show. I spoke for almost 2 hours with Katrina from Psycho Lady Hockey, Michelle Kenneth, and the excellent host, Buddy Oakes. Check it out.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email Me. Follow me on Twitter.

Related articles by Zemanta

• SPARKS FLY AT LIGHTHOUSE HEARINGClowncilman Santino wises off, Wang fires back (islanderspointblank.com)
• Would anyone spend $3.8 Billion to FAIL? (7thwoman.blogspot.com)
• UNION PRESIDENT FEARS ISLANDERS WILL LEAVECastellane: "I hope they take Mr. Wang seriously" (islanderspointblank.com)
• LIVE HOT ZONING HEARING ACTION!Lighthouse Showdown at Hofstra University (islanderspointblank.com)

Grandstanding and Politicking

I mentioned to reader Mike From Garden City in Monday's comments section that Long Island loses if both sides devolve into screaming at the Lighthouse Re-Zoning Hearing. Yesterday's hearing was full of grandstanding, frustration, and a tension among residents that we had not yet seen in public. Given the screaming, the booing, and, at times, the disrespect, I would say that Long Island lost...but that doesn't mean the Lighthouse Project is lost.

I will follow my usual protocol for this, since others have already begun writeups, and share some of my key themes and take-aways. I also have some news about what we can expect moving forward.

Kansas City?

Somewhat lost in the high emotion of the re-zoning hearing was that the Islanders played a preseason game in Kansas City last night, at an arena that was barely half full (some estimates had the crowd as low as 3,000 - though other figures had it slightly over 9,000). From an Islanders perspective, this proves what many (including myself) have said all along: Kansas City was never truly an option.

The best evidence of this? Charles Wang was at the Lighthouse hearing all day - and Chris Dey, Islanders President, was there for the evening session. Neither attended the game.

FGEIS Submitted

Yesterday, the Lighthouse unveiled the over 4,000 pages worth of a Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) and submitted it to the Town of Hempstead. The Town, as Lead Agency, now has the duty to review the document, accept it, and issue what is called a Finding Statement, in which they outline their impression of the document and certify it is both complete and correct. The clock is now ticking with this.

Opponents Out, Challenged

Garden City - as I predicted on Monday - had a significant presence at the hearing, with everyone from the mayor to numerous trustees voicing opposition. Most of it was the same arguments about "urbanizing Long Island" and "eyesore towers" (I'm sure the smokestack is a much better view), as we've heard before. It always interests me that these individuals claim they want to have a conversation yet run out of the meeting as soon as they are finished speaking about how awful the Lighthouse is.

However, yesterday we decided to take matters into our own hands. A few of us, including regular commenters on this site, Art Feeney from The 7th Man, and Dom from Islandermania decided to engage the Garden City crew that remained during the first break. The conversation turned tense at times, because we pointed out some instances of hypocrisy, and the fact that they never spoke as harshly in public as they did in private. On the whole, it was amiable, and we did our best to get our points across.

Our conversation with a gentleman from the Eastern Property Owners' Association was most telling. He was against every potential option for the site, and when loyal reader Marc finally asked the gentleman what he DID want, he said I just want to be left alone. It's telling.

There were other opponents who seemed to want it both ways, saying they were in favor of a new arena but not the rest of the Lighthouse. Either these people are uninformed, or they just want Charles Wang to make a donation to Nassau County.

Still others fixated on the height of the buildings, at the expense of everything else. One kept saying "If 40-story buildings are the answer, let's build them from here to Montauk Point."

This brings up an interesting point that we should probably discuss in a full blog post. The Lighthouse has now done 213 public outreach meetings, even though the "Meet Me at the Lighthouse" commercial could do a better job of explaining the content and benefits of the project, and there has been constant (if strange) media coverage. So many people, however, still did not know what was in the project and did not understand the benefits.....and we need to ask ourselves if that's the fault of these citizens, or of the Lighthouse.

On the whole, the opposition was present, but they lacked a coherent narrative. A reader (please remind me which one of you it was) had an excellent point: if these opponents convince the Town of Hempstead to vote against the Lighthouse, they were never for it.

Rhetoric Sharpens...On Both Sides

I don't remember any Lighthouse hearing being so rough, with both supporters and opponents cheering loudly, booing loudly, and yelling at each other throughout the proceedings. Tensions were clearly high, as people on both sides realized that this was end-game. I think the real story here is that it took so long for the debate to take a nasty turn in public.

Town Board Grandstands - Lighthouse Answers, Stumbles

Most meetings like this are for grandstanding, and the Town Board did not disappoint. Councilman Anthony Santino was clearly the attack dog yesterday, as he asked most of the tough questions yesterday (even though all board members except Councilwoman Angie Cullen and Supervisor Kate Murray joined in on the act at some point or another). We should be used to this, since those of us who went to the February 24 hearing remember that two gentlemen who wanted to landscape their body shop in Bellmore were grilled about types of plants and other minutia for 45 minutes. It is not surprising, then, that the Town grilled the Lighthouse for almost 5 hours yesterday.

There were many legitimate questions, including those about water usage, sewage capacity, the types of streets built on the site, and the view of the large buildings from different vantage points. However, in my opinion, there were also times when the Town Board crossed a line. We spent 10 minutes at one point discussing what constitutes a "building," for example. Councilman Darcy questioned a proposed new traffic light by asking what would happen if somebody ran the light. Councilman Santino questioned the findings of the Lighthouse traffic consultant, even though other government agencies signed off on the methodology. Many Board members asked why certain streets were not included in the traffic study when the Town of Hempstead itself defined the scope of the environmental review and did not ask for those streets to be included. At times, Board members would ask questions and then, after they were answered, loudly ask them again, claiming that nobody answered them. It seemed very strange to me.

The Lighthouse seemed prepared and provided answers, sometimes after searching through their information to be sure the figure was accurate. However, they did not come off as fully prepared in certain instances. Their traffic consultant, a pre-eminent expert in this field who has received awards for his work, made a mistake on the stand (seeming to present a figure as the total number of new car trips as a result of the Lighthouse when he was actually presenting the new car trips per peak hour) and was taken to task by the Town Board for a long, long time. Transportation is one area where the solution must be improved as the project build-out goes on, and this consultant did not make himself look good. Other consultants were subject to grilling as well, with some feeling caught off guard by the Town's line of questioning. This is odd since Scott Rechler is such a veteran of these proceedings; he knows how they go, and he seemed the most composed at the Lighthouse table.

On the whole, I believe the Lighthouse has answered many key questions, and many mistakes they made were ones of presentation. At the same time, the Town Board asked many legitimate questions that need answers, but they also seemed to ask at times for a solution that would solve all the existing problems of Long Island. This is not possible; the Lighthouse is a catalyst that will hopefully lead to more good decisions and ensure the long-term economic and social viability of Long Island.

Media Slant

Adding to this Theater of the Absurd was a ridiculously slanted piece in Long Island's major newspaper, in which a reporter calls the Town Board "polite," the Lighthouse Project "unprepared," and dismissed supporters as "union members" (there were union members there - as is their right - but they were not the only supporters, not by a longshot). Even more troubling is that this reporter began to parrot the same lines a Town of Hempstead source gave to my friend BD Gallof - an impression that did not match those of the people actually in the room.

"Certainty"

Both sides expressed a need for "certainty" - with Charles Wang reminding everyone that his October 3 deadline is now 10 days away, and the Town of Hempstead reminding everyone that they want to make sure the project that is approved is the one that is built.

General Impressions

There were a few observations I have that didn't really seem to fit anywhere else, so I'll put them here:

• Even though the split was about 75-25 in favor of the Lighthouse most of the day, and it was never below 60-40, a disproportionate number of speakers were against the project, and many supporters did not get to speak. It was also interesting that, as Chris Botta noted in his liveblog, I was asked to "wrap it up" when 30 seconds over time, when many opponents were able to speak for 6 minutes instead of the allotted 2. Since you were asked to state your position on the Lighthouse in the sign-in cards, it makes you wonder.
• It is well known that County Executive Tom Suozzi kicked off the political gamesmanship by criticizing Kate Murray in the press. Could some of this tough questioning have been a response to that?
• Kate Murray conducted a flash poll at the end, asking supporters and opponents, in turns, to stand up. At least 75% of the room stood in favor of the Lighthouse.
• Organized labor, through leaders like John Durso and James Castellane, is standing up strongly for the Lighthouse
• Kristen "I'm Running by Not Running" McElroy was nowhere to be found. Some prominent Democrats have admitted in private that nominating her was akin to "punting the Town of Hempstead away"
  
• The hockey issue is still upon us, with some supporters speaking only about that angle, and almost all opponents trying to tie supporters together as nothing more than "mindless hockey fans"
• It is now up to the Lighthouse and the Town to get together and reach an agreement that is amenable to both sides
• We can't let up now....the passion for this hearing did not even come close to matching that from the public hearing on August 4, and we cannot let this downward trend continue.
  

Bottom Line

I will not sugarcoat or gloss over the facts and say this was a banner day for the Lighthouse Project. It wasn't. There were many troubling things coming out of yesterday, including a more vocal (though still small) opposition, a Town Board that handled questions strangely and seemed at times to favor negative speakers, and a Lighthouse that, while answering questions well, did not seem prepared for the grilling they received. The tenor seemed different, with supporters regularly booing negative speakers, and citizens yelling at both the Town Board and each other from the floor of the Adams Playhouse.

That having been said, I am not going to go Chicken Little and scream about how the sky is falling, either. The Town Board got its chance to grandstand in public, the Lighthouse now knows what to expect, and the real work will continue behind closed doors. It is time for the adults to stand up, take control of this debate, and make it clear that, for the sake of Long Island, this project cannot and will not fail.

I have a ready comparison for this: Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court. Ms. Sotomayor was grilled by Senators about minor things, given some disturbing labels, and elicited concerns out of some senators...in public. However, she still sailed to confirmation.

I spoke to roughly 10 people yesterday, all of whom had more experience with the Town Board than I, and, to a person, they all described yesterday's hearing as little more than kabuki. These sorts of hearings are for grandstanding, they said, but the Town Board will not let this fail at the end of the day. They know too much is at stake - including their jobs.

Regardless, we need to continue doing what we're doing and advocating in a strong but respectful way for the Lighthouse Project. We have come too far, and we have fought too hard to let this die now. I still believe this will get done, though the timeframe is debatable.

Where Do We Go From Here?

I pulled Joe Ra from the Town of Hempstead aside for a quick discussion during the first break. I asked him, straight-up, what it would take for us to see a vote on re-zoning. Mr. Ra told me the Town must adopt the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) and issue its Finding Statement before the vote on zoning can come. Based on previous history, I think I have a good idea of the timelines we can expect.

Everyone, mark the following day on your calendar:

October 20

This Town Board meeting will be held 4 weeks after submission of the FGEIS, and it will hopefully give the Town (assuming FP Clark doesn't stop working again) ample time to review the document and decide whether it meets the legal burden of being complete and correct, doing everything possible to mitigate negative impact on the environment. We could see a vote to accept the FGEIS on this date, though some sources I've asked believe this is not possible.

Now, here's where things get interesting. If the Town of Hempstead follows its past behavior, they could vote to accept the FGEIS and then schedule a vote on re-zoning for the next Town Board meeting:

November 10

A week after Election Day.

Buckle up, everyone. The next few weeks might be a bumpy ride.

Please share your thoughts in comments. Petition. Email Me. Follow me on Twitter.

Related articles by Zemanta

• SPARKS FLY AT LIGHTHOUSE HEARINGClowncilman Santino wises off, Wang fires back (islanderspointblank.com)
• APOCALYPSE TOH: A Timely Satire The Battle Over The Lighthouse Project (islandersindependent.com)
• UNION PRESIDENT FEARS ISLANDERS WILL LEAVECastellane: "I hope they take Mr. Wang seriously" (islanderspointblank.com)