59°
GREENBURGH, N.Y. — Both opponents and backers of a proposed domed sports complex will get the chance to speak out on public access TV several days before the issue goes to a referendum Nov. 6, the Greenburgh Town Council decided.
The two sides will be given air time on Greenburgh Access Television (GATV) to discuss the 15-year lease with Game On 365 to build the sports facility at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road, said Town Supervisor Paul Feiner.
The video will feature two 10-minute segments and air on a loop on GATV on Nov. 2 — four days before the election. GATV is available on Channel 76 for Cablevision customers and on Channel 35 for Verizon customers.
"This is democracy at its best — giving people an opportunity to hear from both sides," Feiner said.
Feiner said he contacted Simon Cohen, president of Burst the Bubble, a local organization that brought a lawsuit against Feiner and the town challenging the lease, to give it an opportunity to speak. At Wednesday's town meeting, he invited other groups actively opposing the lease — like Worthington and Dobbs Ferry Roads Civic Association and the Elm Street Sports group — to participate, he said.
However, critics argue that the vote won't matter because the lease has already been unanimously approved by the town board.
"Paul has already signed the contract. Anything he does from this point on is disingenuous," said Tom Bock, who is joining Burst the Bubble and Elm Street Sports group in their lawsuit. "He knows that not many people are going to watch it and it's not going to have an impact on the vote."
But Feiner said Thursday that if the public votes against the lease, "it's dead."
"It's a referendum. If the public's going to say they don't want it, then they don't want it," he said.
Feiner also released the referendum question:
Shall Town Board resolution TB-1, unanimously approved by the Greenburgh Town Board on August 13, 2012, authorizing the town to enter into a lease with Game On 365, LLC for the construction of a sports bubble and accessories to operate a private multi-purpose, year round sports facility with access for children, adults and seniors; working closely with both town Departments of Parks & Recreation and Community Resources at the Theodore D. Young Community Center, when needed as space and schedules allow; to be located at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road, Town of Greenburgh; generating over a fifteen year period, a minimum of five million dollars in property taxes and revenue; providing for a one-time payment of up to one hundred twenty five thousand dollars for an environmental study and cleanup, be approved?
Comments (1)
Is a signed Lease a contract or not? What in the Lease says it can be voided following a Referendum? I'm thinking that Feiner can afford to be generous and host a Referendum knowing that the deciding voice will be the Judge's decision regarding the recently filed Article 78. Against the law is grounds to break the Lease; the sentiments of the Public as recorded in a Referendum is not. Feiner will be privately hoping that the Article 78 succeeds as it is the way out for him should the Referendum pass.
But what is the Referendum about.
Feiner did not allow the public to choose between selling or leasing.
Feiner did not allow the public to approve whether the proposed use is acceptable.
Feiner did not allow the public to approve whether or not an appraisal, a traffic study and soil testing should have been done before marketing the property.
Feiner did not allow the public to approve the terms of the Lease.
What Feiner did do was construct a question that ignores all the dirt and problems and risk factors (the glass half empty) and instead focus on the false benefits that he alleges will accrue
Read the longest run-on sentence in the world, referred to as "the question" and you will see that he is asking voters to approve a Resolution already passed by the Town Board which allows the Town Supervisor to sign a Lease which he has already done. Does he have a signed agreement with GameOn 365 in which they agree to void the Lease if voters do not give their consent? If so produce it now and post it on the Town website. Not an agreement that if the Judge rules against the Town, the Lease will be voided but an agreement that if voters say no that the Lease is void. I want this to be perfectly clear to Supervisor Feiner and not for him to produce a document which does not state this when knowing it will be too late to alert the public to the "mistake" before the polling date.
Furthermore, this is not a Referendum run by the private interests advocating different positions but a Mandatory Referendum run by the Town. Accordingly it is the Town which should be putting out bonafide facts, not the opposing parties who have in interest in the result but not responsible for errors and omissions.
If either House of Sports or The Westchester Field House had the legal ability to sponsor a Referendum, this might be their approach. However, this is a matter that concerns the Town from many angles that the private interests have no responsibility over. It is up to our elected officials to provide fair and balanced facts because it is them whom the public would seek to sue should they fail to discharge their responsibilities in an unbiased manner. The Town Board has already authorized the Lease and the Town Supervisor already signed it. This was done following more than 10 minutes of argument in opposition. Voters are participating in a Referendum because the public is unhappy with the actions of the Town Board. It is not too much to ask of the Town Board to provide voters with a fact sheet so that voters/taxpayers can choose on the basis of their understanding of the facts, not on the broadcast personna of the talking heads.
If the "question" as presented by the Town is an example or providing facts to enlighten the public, the Feiner/Sheehan/Lewis team needs a better grounding in "just want the facts, m'am" a la Dragnet. For example nowhere does the "question" make mention that the proposed use (commercial) is not consistent with the zoning (residential) and that no income will be forthcoming to the Town for at least 3 years; nor does he explain that it is not a 15 year Lease from execution but from the receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy which will be granted after all hurdles have passed and construction is completed. In the meanwhile, the Town will continue to be responsible for accrued taxes.
Rare is the occasion when Feiner answers what he is asked. Rather he answers the questions he wished had been asked. Which makes him the least responsible person to ask a question such as the subject of this Referendum.
Hal Samis