SFC’s LDA Made Available to Public, But Negotiations Continue

To view the latest draft of SFC’s LDA, follow the link below: http://www.cityofyonkers.com/index.aspx?page=2025

This LDA is the one that the City Council reviewed over the weekend, but it is unlikely that it will be the final version, as the five votes needed for its passage have yet to be secured, even with recent SFC concessions to build a residential tower at Chicken Island and to build a more substantially complete stadium.

The votes of three on the council – Dee Barbato, John Murtagh and Liam McLaughlin — will be the deciding factors on whetheror not the SFC/LDA will pass.

The developers, and the mayor, need all three votes in order to secure five votes for its passage, which will be combined with Council President Chuck Lesnick’s and Councilwoman Pat McDow’s votes.

Barbato and McLaughlin have asked for detailed revenue figures from the minimum development proposed in the LDA of around $400 million. They have also asked for a detailed list of incentives and infrastructure improvements to be paid for by the city, in the hopes of making a informed decision on whether or not the project is good for the city.

Several on the council have also asked for more time to review the LDA, so the finanical deadline of May 20th from SFC is no longer an issue.

Several new developments were uncovered at the council’s Real Estate Committee meeting last night:

The council is not even close to voting the LDA out of the Real Estate Committee for a  vote up or down — time is needed to read and review the LDA, and to try tonegotiate terms that could win over McLaughlin, Barbarto and Murtagh — remember all three are needed, if, as expected, Sandy Annabi and Joan Gronowski vote no.

This will require serious negotiations and more concessions on SFC’s part. The sale price of city land and properties, and the two-year hold that SFC will have on the city before they are required to build are two issues of concern.

Eminent domain (ED) also came up at the Real Estate Committee meeting, with concerns raised by Gronowski and Murtagh (Murtagh has submitted a resolution against any ED use for devleopment projects with incentives). While Lesnick explained that this deal always had an ED component, if it’s inclusion means that Murtagh votes no on the LDA, the deal’s dead.

Several members of the City Council met with Mayor Phil Amicone earlier in the day, with no resolution. While the mayor wants the council to vote on the LDA, Lesnick realizes that there aren’t five votes, not even close to passing it at this time.

So we wait …

Council Doesn’t Get Final SFC LDA; Will Receive Tomorrow

The Yonkers City Council Real Estate Committee meeting held last night was supposed to be an opportunity for the council, and the public, to get a look at the revised, or final, Land Disposition Agreement  (LDA) for the SFC downtown development project. It was also supposed to be a public hearing, where audience members could comment for or against the LDA, which gives SFC wide latitude and control over most of the downtown, while binding them to a minimum development agreement which would require them to build a scaled back $400 million project.

Several sources have said that the new agreement calls for SFC to complete the construction of a minor league stadium at Chicken Island, and for SFC to construct one residential tower, also at Chicken Island, in addition to their prior proposal to build a 300,000-square-foot retail center, new fire headquarters and a parking garage, as well as daylighting the Saw Mill River at Getty Square.

This deal was said to win over the support of Councilman Liam McLaughlin and Councilwoman Pat McDow. McLaughlin wanted a completed stadium built, and McDow wants affordable housing to be built, onsite, as part of the plan.

But no final committments of support from the Council have been made until they see the final LDA.

… Once we get it we will get it to you.

The council is under another deadline for SFC, May 24, so that SFC can continue to work on getting financing for the project.

A council vote of 5-2 last week to permit SFC to get a $4+ million HUD loan is said to be an indication of how the council will vote on the LDA.

But with this City Council, one never knows until the votes are cast.

Cavallo Takes on the Spanos to Get a Job for Dhyalma Vazquez

Westchester Independence Party Chairman Dr. Giulio is getting desperate to find a cozy job for his right hand, Dhyalma Vazquez, the Yonkers chair of the Independence Party.

Cavallo is feeling the heat from the campaign of County Executive Andy Spano, who is running for re-election and wants the Independence line. Vazquez currently works for the county DSS, at a salary of over $100,000. The Spano forces are leaning on Dr. C to stop his alliance with Sam Zherka and Dave Spano — Andy’s son.

Cavallo is in a pickle, and has completely flipped on politicians he has supported, and benefitted from, in the past — most notably Andy Spano and District Attorney Janet DiFiore. He needs to appease Zherka and sees $$$.

While Dr. C has already pitched a Vazquez job at City Hall, he has been rejected. But Cavallo has returned to Yonkers in another effort to secure a job for him, and he is once again using the Independence Party to get it.

Cavallo now wants Vazquez to be appointed a deputy city clerk, and is demanding that the current deputy, Vinny Spano, be replaced. Cavallo is using his Ind. line endorsement to “lean” on members of the City Council to appoint Vazquez. (Kudos to Hezi for getting this information  first — I confirmed it and add the following:)

This pits Cavallo against the Spanos, incluidng Nick Spano, who is another old Cavallo ally now on his s*** list.  Dr. C has been ranting about Nick lately, and the attempted removal of Nick’s brother, Vinny, is an indication of flip flop on all the Spanos — Andy, Nick and Vinny.

The Democrats on the City Council control who gets appointed deputy clerk and what, if any, changes are made. While it is unlikley that the council will buckle to Cavallo’s demands, Cavallo can use the Ind line endorsement against Council President Chuck Lesnick, who is running for re-election and wants the line.

Isn’t there a saying about playing both sides and getting burned in the end?

Wild Turn of Events With SFC’s LDA — Five on Council Now Support Modified LDA

SFC project and stadium-alive and kicking

It has been a wild, and wildly unreported, last 72 hours in Yonkers politics, specfically concerning downtown development. As of Monday, six members of the City Council had serious concerns about the Land Disposition Agreement, LDA, negotiated between Mayor Phil Amicone and developers SFC.  It appeared that the LDA would not be passed, and that the entire project was in jeopardy.

On Monday, SFC attorney Al DelBello wrote a memo to the city council in response to their letter by 6 opposing the LDA. Were are in the process of obtaining the letter, but the gist of it was that while SFC viewed all of the council’s concerns and LDA suggestions, over excessive, that SFC wished to negotiate directly with the council, new LDA terms. Mayor Amicone was not CC’d on the letter, nor notified by SFC of its origin.

On Tuesday, this sent the Mayor through the roof, and he called SFC representatives to tell them, in no uncertain terms, how PO’d he was about their efforts to divert his involvement.

later on Tuesday, the Mayor gets a call from Louis Cappelli. Cappelli claims that he knew nothing of the council letter, and offers to come to Yonkers immediately. Note: Cappelli has only been to Yonkers/City Hall on two other occassions over the past 3 years of SFC negotiations.

Cappelli rushes to Yonkers to save the project and win back the Mayor’s support. He lays his cards on the table, saying that he need this project in Yonkers, above and beyond his Catskills plan.

Negotiations ensue, with a plan that they hoped would win a majority of the council’s support. The two major details of the plan, are to add the following to the minimum development requirements in the LDA.

I-build the entire stadium, or at least a roof to the shell proposed.

II-to build a residential component, and construct one of the proposed towers, presumably at River Park Center/Chicken Island/Getty Square

Note: The specific details of this revised LDA have not been released to the public, but these two pieces above have been confirmed to Rising Times.

The Council is briefed on the revised LDA before their meeting on Tuesday. The council meeting on Tuesday night ran long, and was heated, with councilmembers exchanges shouts and accusations, most notably between CCP Lesnick and Councilman Murtagh.

The debate covered a proposal to provide SFC with a sec 108 housing loan of several million to help float their project while they obtain their multi-hundred million bank loan. After the debate the vote for the loan to SFC was 5-2 with Councilwoman Sandy Annabi and Joan Gronowksi voting no.

Several sources have confirmed their belief that the revised LDA now has 5 votes for approval. The Council will hold a public hearing on the LDA on May 5th.

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.