Update 9-21-11:   It appears the jig is really up to stop the firehouse expansion. The time to file a lawsuit under one law is expired, and I do not expect the Architectural Board to be able to do any meaningful review of relevant issues. Last week I tried very hard to bring together some residents who were willing to help pay for legal representation to stop the firehouse, but this group dissolved as soon as some complications arose, and complaining how late in the game it was and no one else was supporting us.

    The attorney I selected unexpectedly questioned (by speakerphone, during our meeting) the arguments I made on lack of "hard look" performed on variance requisites, but he offered a better challenge based on the failure of the zoning board to follow state environmental review laws (SEQR).This attorney specialized in environmental not zoning law. I had assumed expertise in both areas.

    I spoke last week to a state SEQR expert in Albany, who told me that the zoning board was probably wrong to grant a Type II exemption to the fire company, which let it sidestep some environmental review. But the small group of opponents (six besides me) just did not have the perseverance in them, and felt abandoned by the community. I could not persuade them otherwise, and they quit. So as of 9/21 or 9/22, the 30-day clock expires for an Article 78 lawsuit to be filed.

    What happened? The opposition was pretty slick. They used a deceptive mass-mailing, expert misinformation by village officials, aggressive spinning in The Roslyn News, they used summer-time scheduling of the zoning action, and a quick vote with no clear advance notice to the community at large, and a sleazy pretense that the firehouse will not really change at all. (Maybe not this year, anyway.)

    Many new vehicles will be added to the firehouse right away, as they are shifted from Warner Ave. "storage" (if the fire company is to be believed), and as time goes by engines etc. will also inevitably appear. (See the company president's words in the "Legal Critique".) Just this Saturday, Newsday reported how a little snack-bar that a village permitted on the dock in Northport grew illegally over the years into a large bar and restaurant, but when the neighbors finally challenged it the town agreed to compromise with the restaurant and a court refused to act (Newsday, 9/17/11, p. 12). That is going to be the firehouse story!(I wrote a letter to The Roslyn News to this effect.)

    Despite all the efforts I made in holding meetings, publicity, flyers, knocking on doors, calling people, creating these web pages, writing to the newspapers, etc., I feel personally annoyed that I did not do more or better -- particularly re-researching the SEQR law I had originally pointed to, and consulting legal counsel earlier to pin down the defensible arguments.Also, it was important to strike harder when the issues first burst into public awareness, not wait for people to appear at the door (or Inbox). And I was willing to walk away a few weeks ago because I felt disappointed, and I thought I had exhausted all sources of assistance, when in reality there were more to be found.Alas, I too had other plans this summer.

    But that being said, the finger of blame must be truly pointed back at all the residents who waited to be led or who essentially did nothing -- no letters to the editor, no holding or attending meetings, no assistance to help organize or research the issues. A simple call to the Mayor as sme people ventured does not count as doing something constructive; it only counts as spending five minutes getting patted and massaged to make yourself feel worthwhile.

    Fortunately, it is not like we lost a forest and the firehouse will have utility, at a significant cost. (The cost is continuing urbanization and tolerance of bad government.) I personally will be better prepared next time through this experience. Another silver lining is that village officials were revealed in some ways that will not be easy to defend in some future election, if a progressive might run. In the meantime residents can try to keep an eye on what happens at the new firehouse, when built, but that is just a losing game (see "Northport", above). Then they can also try to elect better stewards of the public business. By the way, I think that begins with hiring a professional independent administrator to run this municipality, because it cannot efficiently, economically, and ethically run itself.

Update 9-6-11:   The firehouse train-wreck is well on its way down the track. The sirens during hurricane week and since are just a foretaste. Our efforts have gone almost completely unsupported by residents who prefer to be lulled by the official fairy-tale which we debunked. The zoning decision was officially "published" on August 22nd, which started a 30-day legal clock for opponents. The decision is a long, costly legalistic document that nevertheless contains distortions and childish asides aimed at denigrating the one voice that unexpectedly challenged the pre-ordained, hasty, unanimous vote.

   The Architectural Review Board is to meet on September 12 at 8 PM according to village staff today. They have supposedly promised to look at the firehouse, but have limited jurisdiction. Still it might be a useful forum for critics.

   Surprisingly, the decision contains fine-print that essentially stabs the fire company in the back by granting permission to build a large new firehouse but taking them "at their word" that no more fire trucks would be put inside. Click for the Legal Critique where we show that the fire company president specifically said that there would be more trucks in the new firehouse, to deal with the greater calls, and more "standby" staff too (a point also raised -- obliquely -- in the decision). This is a strange ruling that will likely be (a) un-enforced and (b) explicitly changed in the future. becasue otherwise this farce would result in sinking $3.4 million of fire company money into a pretty useless shell, in addition to already having sunk the integrity of the public zoning process.

   A 30-day clock for residents to file a legal challenge to the decision began August 22. A court fight should be a slam-dunk, as I have repeatedly argued, not least because the fire company apparently submitted a state corporate charter that (a) expired in 1955, and (b) specifically describes its zone as covering Roslyn exclusively (not the 10 areas it now covers). There are more-substantive failings in the process, as I have outlined in the "Legal Critique" and "Fact Sheet" linked above, particularly the lack of any studies to analyze impacts.

   But we will not act alone. Our diligent attempts to mobilize both front-line neighbors of the firehouse and residents in general has been met with lots of harrumphing but no action. A disinformation offensive mounted in the media and in person by various voices of the official local establishment seems to have easily lulled even easily-excitable local residents. We find our neighbors in this "champion community" to be pretty second-rate when it comes to following the law or fighting for its proper application. We continue to have some dialogues with residents who express interest, but there has not been any real commitment and time is short.

   The Roslyn News has continued to cover the issue, though not as productively as we would have preferred. Letters were edited in a way that seemed unfair, etc. But I have repeatedly told them I am very grateful for the coverage, and other residents should be too. It just could be better, and more balanced.

   Finally, the zoning decision distorted our testimony before the zoning board, descending into mockery while omitting material points. Still, simply being quoted was gratifying. We have formally submitted corrections to address errors in the official transcript of the zoning board testimony. (For example, one quotation was rendered amusingly as "A line in this hand....")

   Contact me at (516) 279-8941 to offer your assistance. Or Richard (AT) planet-in-peril (DOT) org.

Update 8-17-11:   A small core of concerned residents is continuing discussion of options. As of 8/16 the village has once again left residents in the dark, removing from its website any reference to the fire house variance & controversy and the next public meeting to address it, by the Architecture Review Board, whose next meeting still seems to be unscheduled.

  As we have followed up with residents who expressed initial concern, we are amazed at how malleable residents have proven when they are self-reportedly provided with basically false or unsubstantiated assurances or counter-arguments from village or fire officials. To clarify some issues, please see our Legal Critique Here which quotes extensively from the official record. In order to track this official disinformation, we have filed a Freedom of Information request with the village to determine how many calls trustees and the mayor indeed received and answered about this issue.

  The village did permit us to use a common room two evenings for an hour and a half and we certainly appreciate that generosity. We had a civil conversation with the mayor, at his initiative, which did not result in any changes in policy. This effort remains very tenuous without greater support from residents. Contact me at (516) 279-8941 to offer support. Or Richard (AT) planet-in-peril (DOT) org.

Update 8-10-11:   I am scheduling meetings at 6 PM THURSDAY 8/11 and SUNDAY 8/14 to discuss concrete steps to oppose the firehouse expansion as presently proposed. This is my FINAL effort to create a movement on this issue! Please participate! These meetings will be solely to form a group opposing the firehouse expansion. A public meeting may be held later, for Q&A etc. Participate NOW or you are probably getting a big new firehouse. The other parties who may be 'working' on this issue have demonstrated no resolve to follow through. Please contact me directly if you wish to attend. Or call if you have my number from the flyers. Email me at Richard (AT) planet-in-peril (DOT) org. (The email address is given in a format to deter spam-harvesters. Please use normal email-address syntax when writing, e.g. joe@acme.com.)
      As previously noted, we encourage you to send a letter to The Roslyn News registering your feelings. They accept email submissions. Newsday might also be pushed into coverage. Give them a call (Editor Janet Day).

Update 7-28-11: The village board meeting July 27th was jammed with people concerned about the firehouse expansion. Some expressed strong opposition due to the neighborhood impact, some objected to being kept in the dark about the zoning board hearing, some questioned the cost or necessity, some were just curious.
      Twenty people, however agreed to wear a white ribbon symbolizing their opposition to the zoning board action June 28th.
      The meeting was strong-armed by the village officials, who did not allow a public comment period, and who literally hid behind a fireman and a zoning attorney who answered all questions. And the format of the night was questions only – statements including by this writer were rudely cut off.
      In fact despite our extensive research and activism on this issue – or because of it – village officials made every attempt to silence our input, repeatedly cutting us off and threatening to eject us from the meeting.
      But we were able to get a village attorney to admit that the zoning board can re-visit the variance and re-hear the application with full public participation. (By law this can occur on the simple motion of a zoning board member, with the rest of the board agreeing.)
      Failing that, the village will have to be taken to court. But any judge who looks over the record of the zoning board hearing will find it so lacking in data and facts as to be merely an invalid “arbitrary and capricious” act, devoid of the reasoned judgment required to be rendered by a deliberative body tasked by law with answering specific questions prior to voting on a variance (NYS VIL law, Article 7-712 (b)(3)).
      The fire department representative also acknowledged that (a) there are no restrictions on how the firehouse will be used, and the firemen could soon decide to move half their apparatus into the new house; and (b) as it covers 10 nearby communities, the fire company looked at several other locations for the firehouse, including the Pall Corp. property. Why they chose Harbor Hill Rd. instead he did not say, but that is a legitimate and important question for the zoning board – which was not asked June 28th.
      Residents need to gather supporters, hold a meeting, and push the village one way or another to exercise responsible authority. Please email me at Richard (AT) planet-in-peril (DOT) org and/or post on the Facebook page “East Hills Environment”. The Roslyn News is also continuing to cover this, and will benefit from letters. And encouragement. Perhaps Newsday can also be pushed into covering it. Give them a call. (The email address above is given in a format to deter spam-harvesters. Please use normal email-address syntax when writing, e.g. joe@acme.com. Thanks!)