Letters

Linda Wells [“Uncivil Alliance,” Letters, August 8] has a penchant for misleading misquotation, just like her collaborators on the Hampton Bays Civic Association, but I’d rather focus on her absurd claim that Mary Pazan [“Fresh Ideas”, Letters, July 18], another Hampton Bays Civic Association member, has any serious ideas for revitalization of the hamlet.

The Hampton Bays Alliance stands firmly in its belief that downtown redevelopment will benefit the hamlet, and that Hampton Bays community leaders should partner with town officials and Alfred Caiola, the man whose property is the subject of the revitalization efforts, to make revitalization a reality.

Revitalization stands to greatly improve the look of the hamlet, enhance the public use of Good Ground Park, build much needed retail and commercial office space, support local businesses by encouraging people to shop locally, make Hampton Bays a destination rather than a drive-thru, give residents the vibrant, walkable downtown they desire, and provide much needed community benefits, like affordable and workforce housing, and maybe even a cultural arts center.

While Mr. Caiola has specific plans in mind, the alliance is not currently wed to any plan at all, preferring instead that the community meet with him and town officials to negotiate conditions for development and, through compromise, obtain a plan that works for all concerned. In contrast, the Hampton Bays Civic Association refuses to meet with Mr. Caiola and the town government on anything other than adversarial terms, which, in the end, hurts the hamlet.

Of the “many ideas” advanced by Pazan, we find the preposterous suggestion that revitalization can be accomplished merely by the creation of bike paths and additional public open spaces, tree planting programs, and the installation of maritime monuments. Though Pazan recognizes that affordable housing, programs to assist new and existing businesses, and programs to assist entrepreneurs are all appropriate revitalization efforts, she does not deign to illuminate us as to how such programs could be implemented and is unwilling to acknowledge the one very obvious thing needed: additional square footage. Commercial office space and retail space, residential units, affordable housing, and workforce housing are all necessary to make revitalization successful.

And whilst vague in all her other “ideas,” the only concrete idea in her entire letter is a real head-scratcher: “How about condemning the property proposed for apartments and turning it into a new pedestrian entrance?”

As a member of a group that has been obsessed with the reliably debunked notion that redevelopment will necessarily increase our property taxes, Pazan’s call to condemn the property would take it off the tax rolls and potentiate the tax increases the Hampton Bays Civic Association has publicly feared.

How can anyone take this seriously?

John J. Leonard

President

Hampton Bays Alliance