SFC Update

     Tonight, the Yonkers City Council Real Estate Committee met and set a date for next Wednesday, November 5, to vote on the Findings Statement for the SFC redevelopment project. While the council has reviewed the massive $1.6 billion plan for downtown Yonkers for more than one year, the vote next week will be the first in which the people of Yonkers find out where the council stands on this project.    

     A previous vote last month to accept the Final Environmental Impact Statement as complete was not a vote for or against the project, just a vote to conclude the environmental review. The council vote on accepting the FEIS was 5-2, with Councilwomen Sandi Annabi and Joan Gronowski voting no.

     Whether or not Annabi or Gronwoski’s “no” vote is a prelude to their opposing the project is anyone’s guess, and it is still unclear what the final vote is on the Findings Statement, which outlines some of the details of what the council would like to see as part of a final agreement between the developers and the city.
     But it is expected that there will be at least four votes to approve a findings statement next Wednesday. This would move the project along to the next step, which would be for the council to approve a Land Disposition Agreement (LDA) for the SFC plan.

     The LDA is where the details of the project are finalized, after negotiations between the mayor, the council and SFC. Mayor Amicone, in an effort to move along the process, has begun to draft an LDA and has had briefings on it with the City Council (these meetings are the subject of our other blog entry — mayor and Gronowski).
     Eventually, all parties must get together and negotiate the term of the LDA. These sessions have not yet begun, in part because parts of the Findings Statement will determine the details of the LDA.
     Look for LDA negotiations to take some time, because the council and the developer remain far apart on a few issues. They include:

I-Affordable housing — SFC has proposed that 6 percent of the residential units they build be set aside for affordable housing. The City Council has proposed 20 percent, led by Councilwoman McDow on this issue. The developers claim that 20 percent won’t work. An agreement north of 10 percent is the most likely outcome.

II-Yonkers Fire Department (YFD) — Yonkers Firefighters Local 628 President Hugh Fox has commented again and again at council meetings on his concern about the ability of his members to safeguard the community if the SFC project is built, without more manpower and equipment. We’re hearing mixed messages from within the Fire Department on SFC, and while Fox is opposed to the project, without increases to the YFD budget, others claim that SFC is already doing enough (building a new firehouse and fire headquarters) to more than adequately protect the public. More on this in next week’s Home News & Times.
    The issue remains unresolved, with several councilmembers questioning the SFC plan for the YFD, based on Fox’s comments.

III-Sale of land by the city to SFC — In order to build their project, SFC must acquire several parcels of land from the city. This includes parcels in and around Getty Square and Chicken Island, and riverfront property downtown.
    It’s the riverfront properties, known as parcels H&I, that are the most valuable asset. With a looming budget deficit facing the city, look for the City Council to try and negotiate a multimillion-dollar payment for the H&I parcels to ease next year’s budget pain.

    The issue of the landmarking of 87 Nepperhan Ave. appears to have fizzled, with a majority on the council not in favor of landmarking. No council vote has been planned to designate 87 Nepperhan a landmark, an indication that council may take a pass on this issue.

Lesnick Clarifies 87 Nepperhan/Rev. Cole Letter

We spoke with Council President Chuck Lesnick about our prior post concerning a letter he received purportedly from Rev. Cole of the Landmarks Preservation Board. Below is Chuck’s e-mail:

     Yesterday, the attached document was faxed to my office. My staff did not see the fax until the RE meeting was underway and, in an effort to bring what appeared to be news to the attention of the Council, the document was handed to me.
     When I read it into the record, I said that it appeared to be a letter sent from Rev. Cole reversing his vote. I said that I did not know whether a vote could be changed — and such a change was moot since the landmarks resolution passed 6-2, having the same effect as if it had been 7-1.
     Rev. Cole called me today to explain that Phil Wanderman had contacted him asking him to change his vote and had sent this to him as a suggested letter. I then called Mr. Wanderman and he explained that he had faxed it to my office as a proposal to show me that he was trying to get all of the members of the Landmarks Board to change their votes.
     The bottom line is that Rev. Cole was not the author of this letter and he has not changed his vote. The vote remains 6-2 and my staff and I have apologized to Rev. Cole for the confusion.   -Chuck

87 Nepperhan Landmarking Debate Takes Strange Turn

Lesnick to Retract Fake Letter from Board Member Rev. Cole

  

Chuck Lesnick

Last week’s City Council Real Estate Committee meeting took a strange turn when Council President Chuck Lesnick read into the record a letter, purported to be penned by Rev. Roy Cole, a member of the Yonkers Landmarks Board. 

Cole was one of two members of the Landmarks Board to vote no on designating 87 Nepperhan Ave. a landmark. Despite Cole’s “no” vote, the resolution passed and was sent on to the City Council for its review, which began with the Real Estate Committee last Thursday.

The letter states that Rev. Cole had switched his vote to yes. Lesnick read the letter and then stated that he would be changing his vote to yes for landmarking 87 Nepperhan.

The problem is, the letter is a fake! Rev. Cole has contacted Lesnick and the Mayor’s Office to inform them that he never wrote the letter.

Lesnick is said to have issued a retraction, but his future vote on the landmarking of 87 Nepperhan remains unknown. We will contact Lesnick for his response to this strange course of events. 

We also hear that Rev. Cole has been taking a lot of heat for his no vote, with one overzealous landmark supporter showing up at Rev. Cole’s church, St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, to urge him to change his vote.

The other member of the Landmarks Board to vote no on landmarking 87 Nepperhan, Zuhair Aqueel, has also been taking verbal abuse and is being urged to switch his vote.

Why do landmark advocates want a unanimous vote from the Landmarks Board so badly? We hear that it’s because they want a unanimous vote sent to the City Council to influence council members to vote for the landmarking.

Further buzz on this has Lesnick under fire for reading the letter without verifying its authenticity.

Finally, the council took no vote on the Landmarking of 87 Nepperhan, and will do so when they vote on the findings statement for the SFC project. That date has not yet been sent.

Read more about the 87 Nepperhan debate on YonkersRising.com.

 

 

City Council to Focus on 87 Nepperhan Landmarking Thursday Night

The City Council’s Real Estate Committee will meet this Thursday to discuss the proposed landmarking of 87 Nepperhan Avenue. See this week’s issue of the Home News & Times to see how important the council’s decison will be to landmark 87 Nepperhan.