Special Comment: Lighthouse Must End Media Blackout

Now, a special comment on the Lighthouse Project and the decision that now risks losing them everything for which they claim to fight.

From the beginning, the Lighthouse Project promised something fresh and new for Long Island: a future containing badly-needed apartment housing, mixed-use communities, and a fresh perspective on the suburban concept we pioneered with Levittown many decades ago.  The developers, Charles Wang and Scott Rechler, sought to deliver Long Island from the backward thinking that has paralyzed our economic progress and seen us search for an identity since Grumman left, taking the last vestiges of Long Island's aerospace industry with it.  Outreach meetings were held, plans put out in the open, and dissenters both engaged and challenged.  This active engagement led to near-record levels of support for the project, and a passionate turnout among supporters that in many ways motivated the Town of Hempstead, which expected the idea to simply fade away, to take the thought of this new island dream seriously.

Community activists who had been clamoring for this type of development for years were suddenly joined by casual observers and, in some cases, Islanders fans, some of whom merely supported their team and wished they could spend more time talking about the intricacies of the team's power play.  Despite many events being largely jersey-free, fans delivered, coming out in force and ensuring that many public hearings had over 90% supporters in the audience.  Nobody can say these folks did not go above and beyond their duties.

This support level culminated on August 4, where all speakers in favor of the project were greeted with thunderous applause, including Mr. Wang himself.  It appeared, at long last, that a new day was dawning.

The wheels began to fall off during a re-zoning hearing filled with grandstanding on the stage and acrimony in the seats.  Some Lighthouse consultants seemed unprepared to answer even basic questions, and the project presented some numbers, such as new vehicle trips to the region, that seemed a stretch at best.  Some within the project, and their enablers in the blogosphere, took up the cause and railed against the Town of Hempstead for doing something that is both largely kabuki theater and completely normal for a hearing of that type.  Dissenting voices, which are far outnumbered in the general populace, began to feel emboldened.

Then, it came, like a swift punch to the stomach, as I sat in a business conference in Midtown Manhattan: a report from the Long Island Press claiming the Lighthouse Project had been abandoned.  Anxious fans vented on blogs – some even calling or texting me to beg for any information (of which I had none).  Faced with this report, the Lighthouse Project made the biggest in a string of mistakes: it sat on a statement denying the report until almost noon the next day – a full 19 hours after the report first surfaced.  It seemed, to many, to be an insult to those who volunteered their time and energy to push for this project out of nothing more than ardent belief.

Since this incident, the Lighthouse has gone into complete media blackout, refusing to speak to anyone on the record for nearly 2 months.  Tom Suozzi, the main cheerleader for the Lighthouse Project, seemed to forget that running for a new term actually involved running, and he fell victim to an orchestrated tax-based revolt led by Ed Mangano of Bethpage.  Suddenly, the entire equation has been thrown into flux, with all players needing to adjust to this new reality.

The silence has motivated many to go digging in places that may have otherwise been left alone.  Randi Marshall of Newsday reminded us that other developers would want to step in should the Lighthouse fall by the wayside, a fact that seemed to encourage opponents who now believed they had an effective counter for the "If not this, then What?" attitude of many supporters.  Many sources began to raise questions about Mr. Wang's ability to gain financing and his conduct, with the Long Island Business News naming him one of the political losers of 2009.  B.D. Gallof uncovered a bombshell on Hockey Independent, hearing from a source familiar with the negotiations that the Lighthouse Project owed F.P. Clark, the environmental consultancy, over $200,000, had stopped payments, and refused to back off of estimates that have been roundly criticized, claiming traffic estimates must be sound because the state signed off on them.  I followed up on a tip and discovered tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to incoming County Executive Mangano since Election Day, all coming from either large developers or groups connected to prominent politicians.  This seemed to momentarily put a jolt into some political operatives, since a Republican source was quick to alert me that Newsday tweeted about Ed Mangano's key supporters being pro-Lighthouse in the aftermath of this revelation.  Reports are flying that the Town and the developers are far apart on a proposed reduction in scope, with sources and bloggers close to Mr. Wang pushing a 10% reduction and some connected to the Town floating numbers closer to 35%.  Even in light of this string of revelations, including some that threaten the very viability of the Lighthouse Project, the developers have said nothing.

Meanwhile, the very hockey fans that formed a motivated core of support (though did not turn out in force for the election) are beginning to fracture under the weight of uncertainty.  Some believe it would be most helpful to argue over new options, such as Brooklyn, a project that appears to be breaking ground in the immediate future, as Fast Company magazine reported today that traffic detours are being put in the neighborhood (though it would require new plans if it were to accommodate a hockey rink).  There are also rumblings about Willets Point in Queens, which recently closed a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), an initial step in what  will not be a quick and painless process.  Opponents have become even more brazen, seeking to cheapen the goals of the Lighthouse and boil something that was never just about hockey to an issue surrounding a hockey team.  General consensus seems to be that the Lighthouse Project is dead, merely waiting for some merciful soul to call time of death.

This is why enough is enough.  Mr. Wang, you and your group must step out of the Cone of Silence and back into the work that got you to this place to begin with.  Yes, the Town of Hempstead has made many mistakes, showing its arrogant handling of large development projects, and some of their complaints have been petty.  However, you, a man who should know how to "play the game," have made your own share of mistakes; one source connected to the Republican Party told me you didn't even bother to call and congratulate Kate Murray on her electoral victory.  It may seem like a small gesture, but it would have taken 3 minutes, at most, and sent a major symbolic message.  Your behavior does not look judicious, it looks like a genuine slap in the face to the thousands who have fought with and supported you in any way they could – from the thousands who signed petitions to people like The Sign Man, who stayed up all night with his family before the October 3 deadline to make hundreds of pro-Lighthouse signs.

To make matters worse, your silence has led you to lose complete control over the public discourse.  The days of Katrina's official blog, which offered near daily updates on the goings-on in the Lighthouse world, seem to be at least on hiatus, as it has not been updated in 5 weeks.  Opponents who feel emboldened by election results that were predictable (I don't think anyone genuinely expected Kate Murray to lose this election based on a decision she hasn't even made and against an opponent who barely campaigned) and seem to have forgotten their minority status are suddenly turning loud, claiming that this was all a whim on your part, Mr. Wang, and done out of pure greed, not necessity mixed with business sense.

I say this with as much admiration and respect as I can muster, sir: I admire you for building a business from nothing into the Fortune 500.  As a person working on a business idea myself, I can currently only hope for that level of success.  That having been said, you do not come off looking very intelligent now.  I understand your reluctance to negotiate through the media, sir, and nobody is asking you to do that.  I am asking you to talk to us, to acknowledge our sacrifice in support of your dream that we have made our own. I am asking you to see this project through and force the Town of Hempstead to, if nothing more, actually vote on and own the outcome of this sorry state of affairs.  To get this far and not even progress to a vote, well, that would be a horrible shame.

More than anything else, Mr. Wang, we are asking you to be honest with us.  If the project is dead, tell us – I'll shut this site down tomorrow and continue working on the cause of my life.  If there is a deal in another location, at least begin to tamper expectations.

Mr. Wang, after all we've done for you, communication is not much to ask.  End this media blackout, give the Lighthouse side of the story, and restore the other side to a debate that has become little more than vultures picking at an imaginary corpse.

Speak up, and tell us: Are you committed?

Yes, or No?

Good night and good luck.

(Special thanks to B.D. Gallof for letting me use his "Cone of Silence" Photoshop)

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

Related articles by Zemanta

• APOCALYPSE TOH: A Timely Satire The Battle Over The Lighthouse Project (islandersindependent.com)
• A NON-LABOR DAY SPECIAL REPORT: FP Clark Fiasco and Town of Hempstead's Intentions with the Lighthouse Project (islandersindependent.com)
• Isles to explore all options, including moving (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Mr. Wang, Close the Deal - A Special Comment

(Blogger's Note: As with all opinion pieces, this is better if more people comment)

Now, as promised, a Special Comment about Charles Wang, owner of the New York Islanders and principal visionary behind the Lighthouse Project. Whether the Town of Hempstead acknowledges the legitimacy of it or not, Mr. Wang's October 3 deadline for "certainty" - meaning approval of re-zoning - is approaching rapidly. The horizon is fast approaching, with free agency for the New York Islanders awaiting on the other side.

Not surprisingly, this ticking clock is being met with a mixture of anxiety, fear, and outright anger from the Islanders' fan base, a group that has, through fraudulent owners, falling scoreboards, and silly trade after silly trade, already experienced enough heartache to last a thousand lifetimes. An upcoming game in Kansas City - which, by no accident, is being played the same day as the Lighthouse Project re-zoning hearing, serves to remind the frozen faithful that glittering new homes await across this continent if the local government is not willing to protect its asset.

Image via Wikipedia

Mr. Wang, whether we like it or not, has earned the right to explore all the options for a team that is, at the end of the day, his. We know his losses have been severe, and I know that, had I been in his shoes, I would have lost patience long before this. It is clear that, with a re-zoning hearing occurring on September 22 and a Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) not near completion due to the antics of Frederick P. Clark Associates, the October 3 hearing will pass without a firm commitment. The Lighthouse process will not suddenly stop as if encased in carbonite; it will endure, and, hopefully, to a happy end. However, representatives from other cities dying to get their shot (or a second shot, in some cases) at NHL hockey will be at the ready to woo a four-time Stanley Cup champion team, and Mr. Wang should hear them out like any potential free agent would. It is not pleasant, but from a business perspective this may be necessary.

Let me be clear: I do not believe that this coming free agency period means the Lighthouse Project is dead or dying. In fact, we are the closest we have ever been to making our Island Dream a reality, even though Mr. Wang's self-imposed deadline will soon come and pass.

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

However, something about this does not feel right. The Lighthouse Project is a visionary proposal whose very existence has already altered the course of Long Island history, and the eventual decision rendered by the Town of Hempstead will do no less than shape the future of one of the first suburban communities in human history for generations to come, but we cannot forget that its initial existence was to ensure the survival of the New York Islanders, an anachronism of a team whose past success is perhaps the only reason the team has not yet moved to a major city with a glittering new arena and a sweetheart lease deal. The Lighthouse Project will all but certainly assure the New York Islanders make a permanent home on Long Island, and we cannot lose that in light of the myriad other benefits this proposal will reap for the community.

The Lighthouse Project will almost certainly pass, albeit after Mr. Wang's deadline. I look forward to the day I can meet all of you at a game, and I cannot wait to bring my future children to an Islanders game and tell them that we are there not only because of Charles Wang, but because of what we did in 2009. That may be the real story of the Lighthouse Project, one my friend B.D. Gallof's unfortunately-named contact "Ass-to-Mouth" even acknowledged, saying the Lighthouse Project is near the finish line thanks to us. The bloggers like Chris Botta, Doug Davidson, and Dee Karl, who had the courage to stand up to power and break through the nonsense. The citizens who inundated the Town of Hempstead with phone calls and letters. Joe Conte, whose courageous speaking out at Kate Murray's kickoff rally contributed to a chain of events culminating in the ouster of Joseph Mondello from his chairmanship of the State Republican Party. These people all stood up and fought for Charles Wang's vision because they believe that Long Island's best days can be ahead of it, and their efforts must be recognized.

In addition to these brave souls, I must also mention the reluctant ones. These fans and citizens have fallen on the crutch of cynicism, believing that the Lighthouse Project is a ruse that is meant, in actuality, to bolster nothing but Charles Wang's bank account. These people point to many examples, some borne out of not knowing the facts, such as those who wonder why Mr. Wang does not simply renovate the Coliseum, but others point to the actual terms of the agreement that Mr. Wang has currently proposed. As of now, Charles Wang, Scott Rechler, and the Lighthouse Development Group are seeking a 99-year lease on the Lighthouse site, virtually a sale by Nassau County, who will retain ownership of the land, but they are only proposing to extend the New York Islanders' lease through 2025. To many fans, this is tantamount to a head-fake, and even Joe Ra, the Hempstead Town Attorney, expressed his displeasure at this, fan-to-fan.

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Charles Wang now finds himself in an interesting position. His dream is nearing the finish line, thanks in no small part to the effort of wonderful and engaged citizens like you. However, there are still hurdles to climb, as we saw with the Town of Hempstead's sudden decision to communicate requirements before it would feel comfortable approving re-zoning and clearing a path for the Lighthouse. At the same time, some people who want to support the Lighthouse cannot bring themselves to do it out of a deep-seated fear that this, like so many other events for those who have followed this hockey team, will end in heartbreak.

I believe Mr. Wang can kill two birds with one stone by making a simple announcement. On September 22, he should stand in front of the Hempstead Town Board, elected officials, media, and citizens, and make this announcement:

I promised to seek other options for the New York Islanders if October 3 passed without receiving certainty on the Lighthouse Project, and it now appears this date will pass without action. I am disappointed in this, and I must fulfill my obligation to entertain other suitors for my team. However, I want to prove my commitment to Long Island, my lifelong home. If I receive approval on re-zoning, I will negotiate with Nassau County to extend the Islanders' lease in a reborn Nassau Coliseum for 25 years past the current end-date, through 2040.

This action would serve numerous positive goals for the Lighthouse cause. It would eliminate a Town of Hempstead talking point about not putting Islanders fans first, it would convince the lingering doubters of his sincerity, and, finally, it would prove the Lighthouse is truly Mr. Wang's priority for his team, his community, and his legacy.

While correct in the abstract, it would also represent a business sacrifice. Such a long-term deal, especially when the Islanders are currently not a money-making franchise, can be very risky. As Islander505 pointed out, this could hurt some flexibility in the longer term. However, stewardship of the land should help to ease this burden, and, in this case, it is a sacrifice that I believe must be made. 30-year leases, which this would effectively be, are common in new buildings, and you must treat the renovated Coliseum as if it were a new arena.

This may not be Mr. Wang's chosen action, but, regardless, I believe his words and actions must prove, beyond a lingering doubt, that he will do right by those of us who have fought for his dream, and his motives lie in making things work right here, on Long Island. This process has come too far, and too many people have sacrificed too much, for this to be derailed now.

Mr. Wang, we have stood behind you and helped in your fight to make the Lighthouse Project a reality. Now, you hold a trump card in your hands. You can eliminate all lingering doubts, and you can convince the reluctant among us that this truly is for Long Islanders and the Islanders. Please, sir, understand that duty and that responsibility, and strike the decisive blow for the Lighthouse Project.

As the great Edward R. Murrow would say, goodnight, and good luck.

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

"This is Suburbia" - A Special Comment

I would like to cover two quick things before jumping into today's planned Special Comment.

Final DGEIS Submitted

The Lighthouse announced that the final Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) was submitted to the Town of Hempstead last Thursday, June 11. Look for the completeness hearing to be conducted by the Town's July 7 deadline, and hopefully we will move into public comments soon afterward.

Process Still in the Works

To answer the question yesterday from Anonymous - Nassau County and the Town of Hempstead are, according to sources, still working on the process for moving approvals forward, with help from the Lighthouse. It will be released when it is finalized.

Today's Special Comment - "This is Suburbia"

As with the last opinion piece, this works better if more people comment.

UPDATE: Apparently I was on the same wavelength as the New York Times, which published an interesting piece on the Lighthouse yesterday.

"This is Suburbia"

Lighthouse opponents are taking more subversive tactics when decrying the project. According to this new paradigm, we must not build a high-density, walkable community with mass transit access and tall buildings because "this is suburbia." It is a rallying cry that calls people to defend the community from supposed infringement.

"Suburbia" was once an ideal, an idyllic community allowing returning GI's and other city dwellers to move in search of a more expansive life, a single-family home, and a new slice of the American Dream. Entire communities, Levittown chief among them, were built to serve an inanimate object: the automobile. As communities grew, strip malls and supermarkets began going up to support the automotive lifestyle. Mass transit was short-changed, with LIRR lines closing, bus lines being done in a half-hearted way, and any expansions falling by the wayside as people took to their cars. The suburban concept was born, and Long Island had an identity.

Suburbia as a Crutch

In recent decades, "This is suburbia" ceased to become an identity and was relegated to little more than a brand name. Now, Long Island seeks to define itself as much by what it is not as what it is. "This is suburbia" mostly means "this is not the city," as people who left the city to move to Long Island are deathly afraid of the city following them out here.

"This is suburbia" became a rallying cry for the small thinkers and anti-visionaries who are responsible for some of the most grievous compromises we have seen on Long Island:

The Long Island Expressway, which was too short, too narrow, and only adequate when it was completed decades ago. It is now a traffic choke-point.

The lack of freight rail on Long Island - incidentally this is the main reason there are so many trucks choking traffic on the LIE.

Nassau Coliseum itself - as I wrote in the very beginning of this blog, it was scaled down from original plans that called for a 20,000 seat arena with an underground Long Island Rail Road station in the spot currently occupied by the Expo Hall.

The undersupply of apartments - single-family homes were great when younger people attended high school and got married almost immediately after. Now, younger people are looking for other options, and they are going to communities that offer those options, in many cases never to return. Those who stay are often relegated to illegal apartments carved out of single-family homes, a problem far more prevalent than anybody in power wishes to acknowledge.

Great communities must stand for something, not simply against something.

What is "Suburban," Anyway?

It amazes me that people seek to defend "suburbia" since the idea is, in and of itself, an artificial concept. It goes against many natural human impulses, such as the need to congregate and share ideas. Never before in human history have people lived so far away from their places of business as they do in modern suburban and exurban America, and that causes its own sets of issues.

The Lighthouse pushes itself as a "New Suburban" concept, but the dirty secret is that the concept is not new. A decade before Levittown was built, the United States Government built three "green" towns to serve as public co-ops for government workers. One of these towns was Greenbelt, Maryland, a town that includes apartments, single-family homes, and a walkable, mixed-use downtown. The Town of Brookline, Massachusetts (of which I am a former resident), population 52,000, has apartments, walkable districts, and mass transit access, but many of its side streets are lined with single-family homes and indistinguishable from a street in an older part of Long Island. Arlington, Virginia has single-family options in addition to walkable, mixed-use districts like the Ballston complex, near mass transit.

Are we the arbiters of suburbia? Do we have a right to tell any of these communities that they do not fit into the suburban concept? Or, is the definition more malleable than that?

I'll tell you exactly what the "Old Suburban" concept has come to. Five years ago, my friend and I were hosting friends who play in a band (they've gotten pretty popular now - check them out). The lead singer/songwriter, who hails from Kentucky, had never been to Long Island before. My friend and I drove him around the Island, showing him the different villages, and he finally exclaimed "How can you tell the difference? It all looks exactly the same!"

Related to the Lighthouse

Many Lighthouse opponents are presenting a false choice - build the Lighthouse or keep the essence of Long Island. Some have even gone as far as calling the planned towers a "blight on our landscape" (I could be wrong here, but the only blight on our landscape I see is the actual blight that is rampant in the Town of Hempstead) and "terrorism targets," proving the fear card is alive and well. In my view, this belief is patent nonsense. We are not deciding whether to be urban or suburban; we are deciding how (and if) different ideas fit into Long Island's suburban concept.

Tom Suozzi has been very clear on this, and I stand with him. The County Executive believes that 90% of Long Island, with its residential streets and waterfront, should remain exactly the way it is, and the other 10% should be re-developed in a smart way that addresses the very real problems this community faces.

So, I pose a question - why can't we have both? Why can't we allow for different ways to realize a suburban dream? Why shouldn't we allow developments like the Lighthouse to build rental units and walkable downtown areas? Never forget that today's renter is tomorrow's homeowner if the resident feels wanted by the community. If policies force out residents in their 20's and 30's, those people will not own homes on Long Island in their 40's and 50's.

Closing Thoughts

In these turbulent times, Long Island finds itself at a crossroads. A community must be defined by what it is, not just what it is not. Many of the current figures of what Long Island is are bleak - educating children who move to other communities, the diaspora of people who grew up here, the lack of corporate support, and a stagnating population. The issue now is: How can we move forward with an eye to the past and the original intent of the community?

To move forward, Long Island must become more inclusive. Rigid definitions of "suburbia" force any resident that does not fit the criteria to leave in search of their chosen way of life. That results in both a lower tax base and an echo chamber among the community. If we continue forcing out those who do not fit a narrowing definition of suburbia, there will come a day when nobody is left.

The Lighthouse is not a cure-all, and I hope nobody believes it is, but it can be a catalyst toward a new way of thinking for the first true suburb in America. It could lead to more options for higher-density living while not infringing upon the current model of single-family homes. We should debate the Lighthouse on its merits, rather than enslaving ourselves to an artificial and malleable concept like "suburbia."

This will always suburbia. It is up to us to decide how Long Island will be suburbia, and approving the Lighthouse would be a great place to start.

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