The Lighthouse Project has been in an almost complete media blackout for the last few weeks, trying to get the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) finalized and waiting for the County Executive election (and Ed Mangano's almost certain victory) to be resolved. The Town of Hempstead has been similarly quiet, although we now have a piece from LIHerald.com in which Kate Murray inexplicably says the process is going "smoothly." The piece also quotes Councilman Gary Hudes, who represents surrounding communities such as Salisbury and East Meadow, saying publicly (potentially for the first time) that his constituents favor development at the site but want the Lighthouse Project "scaled back."
At this point, I think it's time to discuss both the public nature of these negotiations and something that has, in my opinion, been the largest detriment to the overall process: the Town o Hempstead's policy to not meet with developers because they will eventually vote on the zoning variance.
Negotiating in Public
I was incredulous when Kate Murray not only said the Lighthouse is going smoothly, but it is in fact going "more smoothly than they have in a while," but the Supervisor may be on to something. For too long, both sides have been talking either to the media or at each other instead of fulfilling their obligations and getting this project to completion. The Town of Hempstead was in the papers (and raised the ire of Lighthouse supporters) through such actions as the phony stimulus drive, the slanted mailers asking residents what they did not like about the Lighthouse Project, and the refusals to meet with the developers, citing "policy" and non-existent conflict of interest. It helped to set up an adversarial relationship, one that was exacerbated when sources inside the Town of Hempstead began telling B.D. Gallof and others that Charles Wang was a bully.
The Lighthouse Project has not been purely innocent, either. (Soon to be former) County Executive Tom Suozzi tied himself very closely to the project, constantly bashing Kate Murray and the Town and urging them to move forward. The Lighthouse constantly staged photo-ops over the summer with high-profile supporters such as Sen. Chuck Schumer, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and Gov. David Paterson, applying the pressure in a public way. This was solidified when, flanked by Mr. Wang and Islanders legends Mike Bossy and Bryan Trottier, Suozzi dropped the puck on Opening Night at Nassau Coliseum.
Another source of stress that has died down recently was Mr. Wang's October 3 deadline, in which the owner promised to "explore other options" if the project was not approved in its entirety. The Town of Hempstead bristled, saying they did not put deadlines on the Islanders to win the Stanley Cup and should therefore not be pushed to approve it quickly. The Town constantly trumpets its speed of approval and sites the morass in which many other large projects find themselves as evidence that the Town is moving in good faith.
I wonder if there was a middle ground with this, and I wonder if we're not seeing that playing out right now. I understand Mr. Wang's deadline, because the Town of Hempstead has a bad history with large projects. It took 18 years from closure of the Roosevelt Raceway to ground-breaking on the condo projects, and others such as the Courtesy Hotel (West Hempstead) and the Bellmore Army Base have languished for over a decade despite viable options. The Supervisor's citing of long time to approval rings hollow, because, as I so love to say on this blog, past failure is not an excuse to fail again. It's clear the Town needs to be pushed to move quickly, but there needed to be some kind of give-and-take.
As one person connected to the political scene told me, "What would you do if you were Kate Murray and saw Suozzi constantly criticizing you and blaming you for the project not going through? Would that motivate you to move faster?"
A Strange Policy
Councilman Hudes is at least one of the first people to directly say the Lighthouse Project may need to be scaled down to receive ultimate approval, and it shines a light (no pun intended) directly on the Town of Hempstead's strange policy against meeting with developers before an actual vote. Other Town Supervisors on Long Island, including Jon Kaiman of North Hempstead and Phil Nolan of Islip, cite meeting with the developers early and often as one of the key reasons large projects have been brought to a successful completion. However, the Town of Hempstead took a different tactic, instead sitting like "judges" and waiting for the environmental review process to practically finish before making their position known.
This tactic has been in place from the beginning. Let There Be Light(house) has learned that meetings were held at the highest levels when the Lighthouse was first proposed publicly in 2004, and Kate Murray refused to participate for the same reasons she did not meet with the developers until the middle of this year.
I understand the sentiment to a point, because meeting with the developer so often would create the illusion that the project would be rubber-stamped, but there had to be a better way. At this point, we have gone over 5 years, and the Lighthouse has spent tens of millions of dollars on review, and we still don't know exactly where the Town of Hempstead, which holds zoning authority over the site, stands on the project. That is ludicrous. I can't help but think that, if the Town had involved itself from the beginning and been open about what they would and would not approve, the Lighthouse Project would have already been completed.
To make matters worse, I also believe this policy is the reason the Lighthouse now seems less willing to compromise. At the beginning of the year, Lighthouse leaders, including Mr. Wang and President Michael Picker, practically implored the Town of Hempstead to tell them what they would or would not approve so the Lighthouse could take the next steps. When that communication never came, the position seemed to harden, and now the Town is trying to paint Mr. Wang as unwilling to negotiate.
Regardless of the outcome of the Lighthouse Project, I think we can agree that the Town of Hempstead's policy of not meeting with developers is a disaster, and it should be immediately put under review after this project's studies have finished.
Moving Forward
As we have speculated for months, it is now clear that the Town's major objections to the Lighthouse Project are from its size and scope. Even though I support the Lighthouse Project as it is proposed and am disappointed by this news, I have to admit that there will not be an agreement unless there is an agreement with which both sides can feel comfortable.
One positive side of this is that the Lighthouse Project will almost certainly be approved if it is changed to a degree that the Town feels comfortable with. My intelligence confirms what B.D. Gallof has previously reported on Hockey Independent: there are 7 votes on the Town Council (including Kate Murray), with 4 votes needed for the project to pass. Currently, 2 Council members are in favor of the project, with 1 against (I will not publish names - email me if curious). The other 4 (Kate Murray among them) are thought to be amenable to a project that adequately addresses their concerns.
This will require delicate negotiations, but this is a time to be bold. The Town of Hempstead must be specific in its requirements rather than asking Charles Wang to bid against himself, and it is my belief that the Town may have to make a proposal bigger than they would otherwise want in order to ensure a successful completion. Too many bold proposals have been rendered inadequate because of the phony dictum of "compromise," as if a project nobody really wants is a better solution than one side being extraordinarily happy or angry. This is something we need on Long Island, and we must not let it fail now.
The Town failed to provide a clear path to approval when things were done originally, but the opportunity is now there to right those mistakes.
Also, I have heard nothing about the ongoing environmental review. I will try to see what I can find.
Bottom Line
Both sides have made their mistakes in this process, and the project is undoubtedly delayed as a result. I do not expect any movement before the new Legislature (and possibly Ed Mangano) are sworn in on January 1, but there is still time to break ground in Summer 2010 if all sides are committed to doing that. When all is said and done, the Lighthouse Project is the right one for Long Island. We must remember that and not get caught up in the back-and-forth.
I know I have been falling down on the job lately with posting, but with the project in the doldrums and other projects of mine requiring a lot of my attention, it's been difficult to find the time to write. As I've said before, I've never been someone to write when I have nothing to say. However, I want to talk briefly about a short piece that appeared in the business section of today's Newsday (I'd link to it, but their site is being moody, and most of you wouldn't be able to see it behind the ridiculous paywall). Dee Karl from Hockeybuzz had a blistering take on the piece this morning, and while I do not like the piece, I want to take a different tactic.
The article, entitled "Slippery Surface for Islanders," paints a dire picture of a franchise that is losing value and about which nobody seems to care. I will say first off that the writer did not present a full picture of the Islanders' financial situation. The writer cites a 3%, or $5.6 million, drop in the team's value in 2009 as compared to 2008. The team is now valued at $149 million, $46 million less than Charles Wang paid for the franchise in 2000 (in absolute numbers, not counting for inflation), and, as the paper made sure to mention, "third from the bottom" in the league.
The picture is not pretty, but there are pieces left out. The author does not mention that 14 of the 30 National Hockey League franchises lost value in the past year, largely as a result of the bad economy. In addition, the author also forgets to mention that, percentage-wise, 7 teams lost more value than the Islanders (including the Colorado Avalanche, whose value plummeted 11% after a disappointing season).
The author then hits all the tired buzzwords that fans of the Islanders are so used to hearing, including the attendance that's been as low as 6,000 on weekday games. He also falsely accuses Mr. Wang of threatening to move the Islanders to Kansas City if the Lighthouse Project is not approved. It's true that the owner has promised to "explore other options," but there is not an active threat to move the team to any specific location.
There is also a quote from John Meindl, president of Sportsbrandedmedia, a sports marketing company in Rockville Centre, that hits at the crux of the issue. Mr. Meindl claimed Long Island lost its love affair with the Islanders shortly after the dynasty in the early 1980's, saying that, if the Islanders left, "there wouldn't be a lot of sleepless nights."
I had a visceral reaction to this at first, but, in all honesty, you can't blame Mr. Meindl for drawing such a conclusion. Let's take a look at a few specific issues:
2 weeks ago, an election that will largely determine the fate of the Lighthouse Project was held. Turnout was pathetically low, the Lighthouse was not a galvanizing issue, and project supporters did not play a key role in any races.
The New York Islanders are showing signs of life, yet fans still do not go to games.
Time and again, including the example of the Hartford Whalers, teams have moved, and high-level politicians have not paid for it with their jobs.
Now that the project has hit a rough patch, people are rightly clamoring for another event, such as a rally. To be honest, I don't want to schedule any kind of a rally unless there's an assurance people will come.
This is the key question: How can we expect to be given respect if we don't act in a way that demands it?
Bottom Line
If we want to be taken seriously, and if we want the Lighthouse Project to happen, we can't sit back and wait for people to take us seriously. We got this process moving along, and we made the Town of Hempstead take notice, because we organized and positively advocated for the project. We can't sit back now when there is still so much left to do.
While they slowly count the ballots to determine who our next County Executive will be**, we have been in a bit of a holding pattern related to the Lighthouse. There are many people ready to jump ship and declare the project dead, with some even indicating the Islanders' decision to hold a hockey camp for children in Flushing as an indication that the Lighthouse is dead and everyone is ready to move on. I'm going to avoid jumping to conclusions at this point, but the project is certainly in an ambiguous phase right now.
**Blogger's Note: My friend (and Hockey Independent colleague) B.D. Gallof reported on Hockey Independent that his intelligence indicates that Ed Mangano will be the new Nassau County Executive. Everyone I have spoken to has the same opinion, and I would bank on a Nassau County run by Ed Mangano in 2010 and beyond.
I'm going to out-nerd myself for a quick minute and get into quantum mechanics to explain the current state of the Lighthouse, through the famous example of Schrodinger's Cat.
Two States of Being
Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger developed his famous thought experiment in 1935 in response to a certain interpretation of quantum mechanics known as the Copenhagan interpetation. Copenhagen suggests, in simplest terms, that an occurrence that could go 2 different directions can't be known for sure until someone actually sees it. Follow the example:
Schrodinger explained his experiment: a cat is placed into a box with a vial of poisonous acid and a Geiger Counter (radiation detector) with radioactive material inside. If the Geiger Counter is activated, a hammer will fall and break the vial of acid, killing the cat. According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we won't know whether the Geiger Counter went off until we actually open the box to see if the cat is alive. Therefore, until the box is opened, some would say Schrodinger's Cat is both alive and dead.
It might make your brain hurt when you think about that cat in a box, but it's actually a perfect analogy of the Lighthouse. Until we observe the behavior of our elected officials, the Lighthouse Project is both alive and dead.
(I have a cousin who works for NASA and owns this shirt. When I first saw it I didn't know what was worse - that he owned the shirt or that I understood it)
The Lighthouse Project is Dead
The political angle of the Lighthouse Project could now cause dire consequences. The Lighthouse Project, for better or worse, has been closely identified with Democrats. Charles Wang and Scott Rechler continuously appeared at public events with Tom Suozzi, and the Islanders helped to give a platform to Kristen McElroy, Kate Murray's opponent for Town Supervisor, during her campaign appearances at Islanders games. Given the polarized political climate, it is possible that some Republicans may work against the project to extract their "pound of flesh," either by proxy against the almost-certainly-defeated Tom Suozzi or straight against Mr. Wang, whom some have described as a "bully." B.D. also reported - I kid you not - that some in the Town were upset that Mr. Wang didn't call Kate Murray to congratulate her on her victory. Regardless of how irrational that may be, I hope it does not signify another shift in the Town/developer relationship.
Mr. Mangano repeatedly stressed in our interview that the Town needed space to finish its state-mandated responsibilities. It's clear that, as County Executive, he will likely not pressure the Town of Hempstead to move forward as quickly as possible to get things done. This may give the Town space, but other debacles (Roosevelt Raceway, Courtesy Hotel, Bellmore Army Base) show that the Town does not move quickly unless it absolutely has to. I wonder how that will play, because it could go in either direction.
There are also people who are now concerned about the County portion of the approval process: specifically the lease negotiation. From a partisan stand-point, the Republicans in the Town of Hempstead have little motivation to release the Lighthouse from environmental review before a Republican-controlled legislature takes office in January, and there are already certain people firing warning shots over the lease. Legis. Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa), the possible new (old) Majority Leader, immediately blasted the lease agreement as a bad one for Nassau County, and other Republican sources have described it as a "sweetheart deal." While Ed Mangano, likely the incoming County Executive, has endorsed the project, he also raised a specter that I had never heard before: the Coliseum property would have to be appraised before the Legislature could vote the agreement up-or-down.
At this point, I'm starting to become concerned about the timeframe for approval in the project. Since we are likely to still be in environmental review at the start of 2010, the ability to break ground on a new Coliseum next summer, after hockey season, is seriously in doubt. We should continue to watch this.
The Lighthouse Project is Not Dead
There are, however, plenty of reasons to still be hopeful, because in certain ways the conditions have become more favorable. First of all, a Nassau County controlled by the Republican Party removes one of the main sources of political conflict. After all, the Town and County would not be able to blame the opposing party for the process being politicized or held up anymore. It would cause voters to focus like a laser on the most important thing: whether or not the process is moving forward.
Many factors working in favor of the Lighthouse come down to simple necessity. Ed Mangano told me in our interview 2 weeks ago that nobody wants to see the Coliseum property remain an asphalt jungle riddled with weeds, and, given the decades of failure and the strength of the current Lighthouse proposal, there is overwhelming pressure to get the project done. Failure of such a high-profile project could have negative ramifications for decades to come, and it could signal that Long Island is not a place where forward-thinking people want to do busness, Mr. Mangano, I'm sure, would love to succeed where countless others have failed since John F. Kennedy were President and bring meaningful and catalytic development to the site of Nassau Coliseum.
Charles Wang and Scott Rechler also have a motivation to get this done. They are native sons of Long Island willing to invest their own time and money to bring a transformative project to Long Island. They have continuously emphasized both their commitment to the area and their willingness to seek other opportunities if they were left with no choice.
Suffolk County (which would be an utter disaster) has proposed that Mr. Wang seek opportunities there, and Queens recently issued an RFP for the re-development of Willets Point near Citi Field in what is now the Iron Triangle. There are compelling arguments that Wang and Rechler will not continue if the Lighthouse fails. After all, Mr. Wang is impatient that the project has taken 7 years to get to this point (5 since public unveiling), and he has repeatedly shared his frustration with the time it has taken, so I doubt he would have the appetite to wait another 3-5 years and cast his lot with a new option.
At the end of the day, we have not heard public pronouncements of interest in other specific areas from Mr. Wang. This proves to me that he is committed to seeing the Lighthouse Project through to completion, and he may be willing to do what it takes to get the project approved.
What We Know
Right now, the Town of Hempstead is still plodding through the SEQR process, with the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) up for review. There is no indication of a forthcoming vote, and leaks continue to come out of Town Hall discussing so-called "serious holes" in the proposal. At the same time, many still believe there will need to be a change to the size and scope of the project before things could go forward.
However, I also want to focus on the one major, over-arching thing we know: LONG ISLAND NEEDS THE LIGHTHOUSE PROJECT. We are losing business because of the lack of a convention center. Companies are taking jobs elsewhere due to the lack of the right kind of office space. Apartment-style housing is sorely needed. Most of all, Long Island is at a crossroads, and it needs to either change or fade into oblivion. It needs a catalyst, and there is no better option than the Lighthouse Project.
I told Ed Mangano 2 weeks ago that I did not care who received the credit for the Lighthouse Project, as long as it was done. I stand by that statement, and I hope we can all meet at a ground-breaking in 6-7 months. It's doable, but many things would have to go right.
Bottom Line
This is going to be a frustrating time for us as Lighthouse Project supporters, and I don't know how much we will be able to do from here on out to influence the process (aside from showing up at the hearings and continuing to write/call). We are going to have to watch the process unfold, as the Town of Hempstead hasn't said much about the environmental review since the re-zoning hearing on September 22, and I will relay everything I find out.
Expect a series coming up about how each side (Nassau County, Town of Hempstead, Lighthouse) may be willing to make a deal and move this forward.
While the national press argued whether a few governors' races whose outcomes were fairly obvious were a referendum on the President, voters across Long Island went to the polls (in pathetically low numbers) to choose their leadership for at least the next 2 years. Some results were expected, some results not so expected, and at the end of the day we do not know the full picture here in Nassau County.
Many people have asked me what these results mean for the Lighthouse Project, and I will do my best to analyze the races while providing my take on all of this.
This entire year, most people in the press and on the ground considered a Tom Suozzi victory to be a foregone conclusion. In fact, a friend who writes for a newspaper on Long Island spoke to me about it a few weeks ago, suggesting that if Mr. Suozzi took the race for granted he would "only" win by a 10-point margin. I bought into that conventional wisdom myself, and hummed happily along believing the County Executive would romp and it didn't make sense to pay close attention to the race.
Well, as they say, a funny thing happened on the way to the ballot box. In fact, two funny things happened.
First, the whispers about Tom Suozzi began to grow louder behind the scenes. People questioned his leadership style, with some nonpartisan people going as far as saying Tom Suozzi's repeated criticisms of Kate Murray and Republicans over the Lighthouse were hurting the cause, and that he in fact may be the project's worst enemy, due to the political angle of all this. It seemed a legitimate concern, and, while I did not fully embrace it as an issue, the snowball began to roll. The signs promoting Ed Mangano were popping up everywhere, and I even began to see "Dump Suozzi" bumper stickers - not a good sign for any incumbent.
Second, I interviewed Ed Mangano last week at his office in Bethpage. I was grateful for the opportunity, though I did not know what to expect, and I honestly wondered if speaking to me 5 days out from the election rather than a larger outlet was a good idea for the candidate. 40 minutes later, my conversation with Mr. Mangano ended, and I came away thoroughly impressed. Mr. Mangano repeatedly gave full-throated endorsements for the Lighthouse Project, claiming his experience with the re-development of the Grumman property made him the ideal leader to see the project to completion. He, not surprisingly, criticized Tom Suozzi's leadership style, but it echoed many of the things that I had heard from people not involved with his campaign or the Republican Party. I was still not convinced of a Suozzi defeat, but my intuition was acting up, telling me that Ed Mangano was no pushover, and this race would be closer than anybody expected.
I won't tell you the candidate I supported, though I will tell you that I flipped back and forth between Suozzi and Mangano before making my final choice and getting out of the polling place. Rather, I will tell you that the election is, to this point, painfully close. The latest tallies have Mr. Suozzi winning by 250 votes, with the 9,000 votes going to Conservative Steven Hansen looming very large for Mr. Mangano and the Republicans. Mangano said yesterday that 12,000 absentee ballots were sent out in Nassau County, and this, combined with the almost-certain need for a recount, means we will not see a resolution to this today, or likely even tomorrow.
One thing is for certain: Tom Suozzi, if he wins, would enter his third term a badly-wounded politician who would need to make rapid progress in order to keep his hope for statewide office alive. I don't believe that there are no second acts in politics, but I believe it will take all of Mr. Suozzi's talents for him to have a second act after this showing.
When Kristen McElroy was nominated to run against Kate Murray, there were hundreds, if not thousands, of disaffected Lighthouse supporters ready to donate their time and money toward getting her elected. Phone calls and emails began pounding Town Hall, and the Town of Hempstead seemed ready to be washed under a tsunami.....
Except it never materialized. Kate Murray and her crew got the message, suddenly meeting with the developer and attending public meetings on the project. All forecasts pointed to sunny days, the movement evaporated, and McElroy never recovered. Her health issues - which were unfortunate and rightly her first priority - did not help matters, as the Democratic Party did not fulfill its duty to prop up the candidate while she was ensuring her health and her child's health. McElroy mounted a spirited campaign in the last month or so, aided by rabble-rouser extraordinaire Joe "Blow it Out Your Dufflebag" Conte, but it was, as the saying goes, too little, too late. Murray won a crushing victory, with 65% of the vote (though her margin was smaller than her race against Kevin Gorman 2 years ago).
Chalk it up as proof of Kate Murray's strength in the Town of Hempstead, and the Democratic Party's decision to not run the race as strongly as they could have.
Nassau Legislature
Conventional wisdom said that Suozzi and Murray were safe, and the only vote worth watching was the Nassau Legislature, which the Democrats held by a slim 10-9 majority and seemed ripe for plucking by Republicans. We expected drama, and we have it.
Legis. Jeffrey Toback (D-Oceanside) was defeated by challenger Howard Kopel, giving the Republican Party a seeming majority in the Legislature. Legis. David Mejias (D-Farmingdale), who represents a very Republican district and has been elected by less than 300 votes in each of his last 2 attempts, is hanging on by a thread, currently up by 50 votes with all precincts reporting.
Last night, Joe Mondello declared victory, claiming his Republicans now control the Nassau Legislature. If only Toback fell, the margin would be 10-9, with an 11-8 majority in the cards if Mejias also falls to challenger Joseph Belesi.
However, the Republican majority should not be guaranteed if Mejias prevails, because there is a potential complication for Mr. Mondello's crew....
Wild Card
....and her name is Legis. Denise Ford. Ford is a registered Democrat from a very liberal district who has nonetheless caucused with the Republican minority during her time in the Legislature. Ford often "crosses the aisle" to vote with the Democrats on major issues, though she is not a reliable vote for either party. She ran unopposed this year, on all party lines, and The Community Alliance reports that Ford has said previously she would not support Legis. Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa) as Majority Leader of the Legislature.
This begs the question: if only Legis. Toback is defeated, would the Democrats offer a plum such as Majority Leader or Presiding Officer for Ford to caucus with them and retain their majority? It would be some interesting drama, something often missing in local politics.
General Impressions
Turnout was pathetically small in this election, with Republicans motivated to turn out and many Democrats motivated to stay home. On the whole, I sensed an anti-incumbent air for the countywide election, with residents rightly upset about the high tax burdens and the terrible state of the economy.
However, much of the anger seemed misplaced, and I would not call this an endorsement of Republican ideas. School taxes, which are set by local governments, make up over 60% of the crushing taxes we pay here on Long Island, compared to 16% or so from Nassau County. Even a 25% cut in county taxes, assuming a $10,000 yearly property tax, would save about $400. This is not a small number, but 4% of much too high is still much too high. Local governments need to be on board with the cuts, and we need more of a motivation to do things as an Island rather than local Towns and villages - this is the only way we will ever achieve economies of scale and actually have a chance to lower taxes.
Republicans won many elections simply by criticizing the ruling Democrats, and dissatisfaction was high enough to propel them to victory. This is not new; after the Gulotta administration the Democrats (under Suozzi) swept to power largely as a reaction to the failure of the Republicans. However, if the majority in the Legislature holds, and if Mr. Mangano is indeed our new County Executive, Republicans will now have to govern, and governing is not the same animal as campaigning. Voters will not hesitate to change back if they believe their needs are not being met.
Lighthouse Implications
I'm sure this is the main question many of you are asking this morning, and in all truth it can go either way, and it is too early to say for sure.
Charles Wang and the Lighthouse got themselves involved in the political fray at times, appearing with Tom Suozzi and letting Kristen McElroy make campaign appearances at Nassau Coliseum, and this could cause issues if the newly-empowered Republicans want to exact their pound of flesh. Legis. Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa), who may be the new Majority Leader, has been heavily critical of the Lighthouse Project in recent history, slamming the lease to which Suozzi and the developers agreed in principle as a bad deal for the County and coming out strongly against any attempts to "sell" the County's land. We know Joe Mondello and Al D'Amato have their roles, and if Tom Suozzi is still the County Executive, with a Republican Legislature, it could spell gridlock in Mineola.
On the other hand, this could be the final wake-up call to all parties that, as Ed Mangano said to me last week, ensuring Long Island's future and making sure the Lighthouse gets done is not a partisan issue. The need to deal with both political parties on the County level, plus the Republicans in the Town of Hempstead, could be the final impetus for all sides to reach an agreement that is in the best interests of the parties and the people they are paid to represent.
Until the dust settles, we will not know the full story. This was not the best day for those of us who favor the Lighthouse Project, but it is far from the worst. Politicians from the Town and County will need to work with the Lighthouse to ensure a project is built, and that does not change if the politicians sitting in the seats change.
It is clear that the Town of Hempstead is uncomfortable with the size and scope of the project as proposed, and it is also now clear that Islanders fans/Lighthouse supporters had no discernible impact on the election. This will embolden politicians, and it will force Charles Wang to either come to the table or find another option.
Moving Forward
The Lighthouse is not quite hanging in the balance, but its future is unclear. We will know much more in the coming days, as the dust settles and our elected/re-elected officials turn their attention from campaigning to governing.
We've all been busy, and the Yankees are about to take their first crack at closing out the World Series, so I will make this short and sweet. Tomorrow is Election Day, the time when all the rhetoric, the discussions, and the debates become irrelevant, and the only thing that matters is the voice of the people.
I have said throughout this experience that Long Island sits at a defining moment of history, and I truly believe this to be true. The Lighthouse Project is on the table as something that will transform the face of Long Island and prove that we can have pockets of progressive thought while still maintaining that suburban character that lured our ancestors away from the city decades ago. In previous decades, Long Island has slid into a decline, unable (or unwilling) to compete on an equal footing with the rest of the region, as jobs and investment fled to Westchester, Connecticut, and even New Jersey. Some choose to accept the world as it is, saying that it is a cost of doing business, and Long Island should be most concerned with protecting this artificial and elusive concept of "suburbia."
I reject that.
I believe we have a duty to stand up not just for the world as it is, but for the world as it should be. It is not enough to sit on the sidelines and lob grenades; we must take our role in this political process seriously and make our voices heard.
This is more than an Islanders issue.
This is a Long Island issue, and it deals with the very future of our existence.
Tomorrow, please vote your conscience. Vote for those who endorse this vision for what we all know this special home of ours can be. And at the end of the day, commit yourselves to working with our newly elected or re-elected officials to fulfill the promise we have all pledged to keep.
I will be back tomorrow with some election reactions, and possibly a Town of Hempstead piece. Until then, good night, and happy voting.
In addition to the interview with Ed Mangano, I also had a chance to sit down for a discussion with Kristen McElroy. McElroy (D-Garden City) is running against incumbent Kate Murray for Town of Hempstead Supervisor.
I wasn't able to record this discussion, so rather than a straight question-and-answer format, I'll present the key topics of our conversation and how Ms. McElroy responded.
Quick aside, by the way: we now know that Kristen McElroy needed to rest at the beginning of her campaign due to a high-risk pregnancy. Thankfully, all health issues are now resolved, and, while things had been done behind the scenes during that time, she is now fully committed to campaigning. Ms. McElroy also reminded me that local elections do not pick up steam until the end of September.
Sincere thanks to Ms. McElroy for the generous sharing of her time, and without further ado, let's get to it:
"Kate Has Been Absent"
McElroy repeatedly criticized the current Town Supervisor, Kate Murray, saying that the residents of the Town of Hempstead need certain issues dealt with, and "[Kate Murray] is not stepping up for them." According to McElroy, it goes far beyond the Lighthouse Project, even though "A lot of people can see through what Kate Murray is doing [with the Lighthouse]." She cited the issue of wireless antennae, which were discussed at Town Hall in July. These antennae, which McElroy described as an "eyesore," were suddenly "just up" in residential neighborhoods without community feedback.
McElroy also cited a recent hearing conducted in Massapequa by AQUA, the local water department, to discuss skyrocketing rates. AQUA is proposing to close a budget shortfall by raising water rates 12% in eastern Massapequa, with a 27% hike in fire hydrants also proposed. McElroy criticized Kate Murray for not attending this hearing when many other politicians, including County Executive Suozzi, attended.
McElroy was very tough on Murray, saying that people feel "Kate has been absent...from the mailers you'd think she was everywhere."
Revitalization Efforts
The Town of Hempstead has repeatedly touted its achievements in "downtown revitalization," but McElroy criticized their efforts as little more than cosmetic changes like brick paving stones and Victorian street lamps. While acknowledging the changed "look nice," McElroy wondered whether they actually helped to revitalize a neglected area; she mentioned that "[brick on streets] will not help the Town of Hempstead attract businesses."
McElroy suggested that the Town of Hempstead could be proactive in bringing businesses into the area by doing things such as swiftly approving the Lighthouse Project. However, she also expressed frustration that many endeavors in the Town were done "half-assed," She mentioned the need to make real change in many distressed and blighted areas of the Town, including Hempstead Turnpike, whose condition McElroy described as "horrifying."
When pressed, McElroy admitted that it was hard to say exactly what she would do as Town Supervisor to bring about this needed change. She cited the need to interface with the community and discuss what the people want, including the grocery re-development in Elmont and the infamous Courtesy Hotel in West Hempstead. McElroy reminded me that "people want their voices to be heard."
Meeting with Developers
Kristen McElroy criticized Kate Murray's policy of not meeting with developers under any circumstances, even though the Lighthouse is "not a normal project." She pointed out that other towns on Long Island meet with developers for large projects, and in many instances this practice is credited for the project's ultimate success. While acknowledging that it is not possible to meet with every developer, McElroy committed that she would have sat down with the Lighthouse from day 1 - not to be a cheerleader, but in the interest of moving the project forward.
McElroy also doubted the Town's commitment to finish the project in a speedy way, and wondered if it was being done for political reasons, speculating that it could be a result of the Mondello/D'Amato group, a desire to deny Tom Suozzi a political victory, or the fear that the residences will attract more Democrats to the Town.
Overall, McElroy described the Lighthouse Process as "game after game" and called it "irresponsible" - suggesting that such behavior could not be by accident.
Lighthouse Project
McElroy re-emphasized to me that she strongly supports the Lighthouse Project as proposed, and she also acknowledged that the recent scientific polls showing strong support for the project should be kept in mind when dealing with the process. McElroy understands that this is about more than the New York Islanders - it is a project that "will bring good things to the area," including the following:
Tax Revenue: McElroy acknowledged that "nobody likes taxes" and cited the Lighthouse and its projected $71 million in yearly tax revenue as a concrete action the Town of Hempstead could take to help the issue.
Jobs: the unemployment rate is "tremendous," and McElroy supports the drive to put people to work.
Housing: the Lighthouse will bring needed apartment-style and affordable units to Long Island, and it can hopefully catalyze more developments in that area.
Build Up the Area: McElroy reminded me that the current area is little more than "cement" and claimed the area could support larger density.
Keep the Islanders home
Destination Point: McElroy acknowledged the need for a destination point on Long Island, but she reminded me that "there is no point to a destination if people are moving to North Carolina anyway." In McElroy's view, it is most important to keep current residents in the Town of Hempstead.
Finally, McElroy reminded me of the tremendous symbolism attached to the Lighthouse Project. There are two native Long Islanders willing to privately-finance the project, and not doing the project could "chase other developers away."
"Negotiations"
McElroy re-iterated that she supports the Lighthouse Project as it is currently proposed, but she declined to comment on the current negotiations due to her role outside the process. She expressed hope that "[both sides] are working it out," but she shared her worry that "anything that's being done may become an Election Day ploy." Specifically citing the Courtesy Hotel, McElroy criticized the Town of Hempstead for showing support for neighborhood land developments only through Election Day before the discussions are once again "gone with the wind."
Role of Town Supervisor
A Town Supervisor is not like a County Executive; she is one vote out of seven on the Hempstead Town Council. Kristen McElroy acknowledged that, in the end, she is 1 vote, but she expressed confidence that she could move things forward because, in her view, "Kate Murray is the burden. Council members look to her and do what she's doing." She is not suggesting "[she will] snap my fingers and everyone will be on board," but she believes that the current environment has led to game-playing, disinformation, and an overall downward effect.
McElroy committed to, if she is elected, "do the right thing and make sure the Lighthouse Project is done."
Garden City
We touched briefly on Garden City, because Ms. McElroy is a resident and many of the most vocal Lighthouse opponents live there. McElroy said she "does not blame Garden City residents because they are so close [to the planned Lighthouse development]." She also said she understood the concerns with safety, traffic, and water, because these things affect all residents who live, work, or play near the proposed site. However, McElroy also speculated that there was an element of fear, and she placed half the blame on area politicians whom she alleges are engaging in "fear-mongering."
McElroy used the example of a targeted Kate Murray mailer sent to residents of Garden City 2 weeks ago about the "proposed" light rail system, a project that has generated controversy and fed opposition to the Lighthouse even though it is not part of the plans and Charles Wang does not want it included. McElroy accused Murray of preying on residents' fears and claimed she was not working for the people of Garden City.
McElroy assured me there must be a way to "work through the anxiety" held by Garden City residents in order to guide the Lighthouse to its ultimate completion - "make [the Lighthouse] happen, but make [Garden City residents] happy."
Why Support?
Kristen McElroy believes pro-Lighthouse residents of the Town of Hempstead should support her for Supervisor because she agrees with and fully supports the vision put forth by Charles Wang and Scott Rechler. In addition, she promised me she would "sit down on day 1" with the developers and "make sure [the project] really happens." She claimed negotiations "should have happened a long time ago," but expressed confidence that, under her leadership, the Town of Hempstead would approve the project and reap the benefits of jobs, tax revenue, and a permanent home for the Islanders.
Yesterday, I had a chance to sit down with Legis. Ed Mangano (R-Bethpage), who is challenging Tom Suozzi in the election for Nassau County Executive. We had a spirited conversation that discussed the Lighthouse Project, mass transit, and economic development (we also spoke about taxes, but both the debates centered largely on taxes, and I thought it would make sense to chart new ground).
Since this is the first interview with a candidate for office that I've run, please allow me to go through the ground rules that I've established: I will not be endorsing candidates in this race, and I will not editorialize on what I have heard from the candidates. You can make your own decision after reading our discussion.
With that being said, away we go, and sincere thanks to Mr. Mangano for his time.
Nick: We will start with the most basic question...What is your position on the Lighthouse Project?
Ed Mangano: I am very excited about it. We want to see the Islanders stay here [in Nassau County], and we want to see the property re-developed. Obviously, [the land currently has] cracked pavement, with grass growing through it....the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum is worn; it could definitely support a refurbishment. This kind of public-private partnership is something the government should explore, and in particular, in this case, I am thrilled with the project in terms of its renewal to the Coliseum, and I eagerly await the Town of Hempstead's completion of its state-mandated environmental review process. I am certain that the Town of Hempstead will forward a project that is sustainable, and I look forward to supporting it. The law has to be complied with, and from what I can see, we are near the end of that process.
Nick: How do you think the Town of Hempstead has handled [the environmental review process] so far?
Ed: My understanding and my inquiries are that the Town of Hempstead is moving rapidly through a very complex New York State-mandated process. I think they have it for about 20 months. This is typically a two-year process, but they are moving as quickly as possible. There are questions, and from my understanding the process can be moved more quickly if the applicant answers those questions quickly, as well. They have to get through this process: questions asked, questions answered, and the project moves along.
Nick: On the questions side, what specific questions or concerns do you have [about the Lighthouse Project] that either need to be answered or have not been answered?
Ed: The agency responsible for the environmental review must come back to Nassau County [the land-owner] and certify that the project is sustainable...the project works. That means the ingress and egress work, there is enough water available to support the project, there is enough fire service available to support that project. Oftentimes, when you have a large project like this, these pieces are not there at the start, and the environmental review process allows the applicant to answer how they will address these, so they can solve the problems that are raised. At the end of the day, when the project is approved by the Town, it must come back with all these questions answered...The state-mandated process came out of what we used to have on Long Island decades ago, haphazard development. You can drive through many neighborhoods and ask yourself "How did that building get here?" or "Why is that building so close to the curb? Why did they cut a road off to put it up?"....Now, you have to take the bitter with the sweet. We have this state-mandated process, and we have to go through the entire thing. [SEQR] is good because it helps avoid the mistakes of the past, but on the other side it is very lengthy. My personal opinion is that New York State should take a look at the time involved with these processes, and perhaps reform the process in cutting down the time it takes to get it done.
Nick: Currently, the Town of Hempstead controls the process. What do you believe is the proper role the Nassau County Executive should take until the Town of Hempstead finishes its duties?
Ed: 1, Nassau County should be respectful of the state-mandated process. Government officials should understand it more than the private sector....because government imposed this process...Nassau County should assist in the process by providing any information that could be used to streamline the [environmental review]. I think Nassau County should be a communicator with the Town, working together to get the process completed. Unfortunately, what you see now is a lot of polarization....I believe the present County Executive [Tom Suozzi] has used [the Lighthouse] too much as a press tool and a re-election tool, rather than what would be in the best interests of the County, working together with the Town. It doesn't happen because [Suozzi] polarizes people.
In my experience with economic development, we had success re-developing 500 acres of the old Grumman property. [We worked] with the community, and every layer of government, regardless of party - if the people elected you, you get a seat at the table, which I think is a difference between me and the present County Executive....We found that, because of the high level of communication, we didn't have the objections [from the public or other levels of government], and we returned 15,000 jobs on a property that is much larger [than the proposed Lighthouse Project].
Nick: In terms of bringing people together...the Town of Hempstead and Supervisor Kate Murray did not like to meet about the Lighthouse because they knew they would eventually have to vote on it. what could have been done to bring her to the table when it was clear they were interested in going a different way? What is the role of the County Executive in that instance?
Ed: First, the County Executive needs to respect the policy of those who hold jurisdiction. You are correct that the Town of Hempstead has a policy that they will not sit with developers as elected officials. However, where [Nassau County] failed in involving the Town of Hempstead is that [the Town will] send staff to assist in guiding developers through the process that is required in the Town of Hempstead, and that is where the ball was dropped. [Tom Suozzi] cut out those who could have been involved at an early stage. Communication is king when you want to streamline a very complicated process. Rather than going in a direction that will create more bureaucracy, you might be able to go in a direction that streamlines the process. My experience in development is that communication is king. Don't assume that someone will do something or that the residents know about it; you need to make a concerted effort to bring people together and move it forward.
Nick: When you talk about bringing people together, do you think the Lighthouse has done enough to engage the population? It seems that way, since the polls show that, among those with a position, supporters outnumber opponents 2-1 [with 25% of respondents unsure or with no opinion].
Ed: I think the Lighthouse has done a good job, but the problem is you have the County Executive admonishing the Town of Hempstead and giving the impression that they're doing something wrong. That's not how you work together to streamline a process.
Nick: Do you think that policy has cost us time?
Ed: Well, why was the project languishing in the County for 5 years? That's a question I have asked but nobody has been able to answer. He is running for a third term on the same issue, and it has only been in the Town of Hempstead for 20 months. You need to work with people, not pit them against each other. [The Lighthouse] has become a polarizing issue, a political issue, and job creation is not a political issue. Everyone needs a job and an opportunity to work...and that's why you have to take politics out of job creation.
Nick: I and other bloggers have been concerned that the project has become politicized. In your opinion, has the project become politicized, and, as a Republican, does it disappoint you that more Republicans besides Sen. Dean Skelos, Assemb. Fred Thiele, and Assemb. Bob Barra, have not publicly endorsed the project?
Ed: It's politicized because [Tom Suozzi] has made the Lighthouse into "are you for it or against it?" - I have not met one elected official who is not in favor of keeping the Islanders here and re-developing the Coliseum. However, [if you follow Tom Suozzi's statements] it looks like the Town of Hempstead is the bad guy. It's not a yes or no - they need to do their job and decide the proper level. We are all for the Lighthouse Project; nobody wants the land to stay as it is, a vacant parking lot with weeds growing out of it. [Tom Suozzi has] polarized it, made it political by using it in political speeches, he's highly partisan...it's just wrong.
Nick: I've been big on the future of suburbia, and what is and isn't suburban. Do you endorse the vision that we can have pockets of density in Nassau County while maintaining the single-family homes on quiet streets favored by the majority of residents?
Ed: I endorse the vision that mixed-use property works in a suburban environment. You just need to make sure the environmental concerns are identified and addressed. Everyone who deals in this area knows SEQR is a cumbersome process, and it is not in the Town's jurisdiction to change it; they must comply with it....Nassau County should be out there telling residents how they are working together with the Town, and they should see if there are opportunities to bring in officials from the state and federal governments to answer the necessary questions more quickly. Let's bring people together so we can all come out of the room and tell the people of Nassau County that we did this for them, together, but [Tom Suozzi] doesn't want to do that.
Nick: Do you think that, at the end of the day, the project will get approved? Also, we've seen the lease agreement announced (though it can't be sent to the Legislature until re-zoning is approved)...do you think that lease is a good deal for the taxpayers of Nassau County?
Ed: Tom Suozzi can't send the lease to the Legislature because the people of Nassau County need to have their land appraised; that's the law. However, I believe the Town of Hempstead will approve the project as long as the parties continue to work together. In my experience, every project, from a 7-11 to the largest building in the state, has been negotiated and modified because of the SEQR process...Every project these days on Long Island...must have some form of remediation, and I don't think [the Lighthouse Project] is unlike that. If you look historically, the Town of Hempstead will work with the developer on some kind of resolution, and if they can do that we will have a project. The next question is, what happens then? After that, the project comes back to Nassau County, which will provide a lease for the people's land, but the lease needs to be appraised. As long as the appraisal comes back equal to the value set in the lease, there will not be an issue, and the project should pass swiftly through Nassau County. If [the County Executive and the developers] did their job on the lease, we will not see a problem in the Nassau County part. The lengthy process is happening now.
Nick: In a previous life, I worked for one of the large management consulting firms. I remember having clients in New Jersey, Westchester, and Connecticut, and taking NJ Transit and Metro-North trains packed with people who lived in the city and worked in these areas. I've been on similar Long Island Rail Road trains and had a six-seater to myself. Are you concerned that Nassau County and Long Island are falling behind the region, and what do you believe you can do if elected County Executive to attract businesses to the area?
Ed: Let's get away from the mega-projects here....Let's look at what's happening in Nassau County: if you drive through any town, vacant storefronts are rampant. Small businesses are dropping like flies, and we have a new kind of blight: the vacant auto dealership. I have a concrete plan that I believe will help to fill up these vacant properties: a Green Energy Fund. I have legislation that I've introduced that will provide homeowners and business owners loans to convert their homes or businesses to alternative energy sources, such as geothermal and solar. We will loan money, and they will pay us back through a portion of their energy savings every month...When that loan comes about, it puts home improvement businesses such as electricians and HVAC back to work. We'll encourage these businesses to locate in the abandoned dealerships and create a cottage industry of converting Long Island to renewable energy. There is a lot of work out there, many homes are candidates for green energy, and the environment gets cleaner. We will also expand this to the government, providing private sector work in converting County buildings to renewable energy. I believe the real work for a County Executive in the next term is to put people back to work, and it's beyond the Lighthouse Project, even though I believe that will go through. There are a lot of good things embodied in the Lighthouse Project, but we need to get the overall economy going.
I believe the Lighthouse Project will get done...the dark horse is whether or not the developers will be able to obtain financing. That tells me that we need to get our economy going.
Nick: I have another question about bringing businesses in. I've noticed that these other areas have different types of office buildings: walkable environments in complexes. Do you think there is a need for a different kind of "stock," both in office buildings and apartment-style housing, or do you think Long Island can improve with what it already has?
Ed: There is a statistical need for rental housing on Long Island. I think if we had more rental options, you would not see as many Long Island homeowners facing foreclosure or stuck with mortgages they can't afford. People are getting married later, the divorce rate is up, and it seems to me that there is nothing wrong with a young couple starting off in an apartment. There is room for rental housing.
Nick: I want to move to public transit, because I believe the only two ways to mitigate the traffic problem are to eliminate bottlenecks and get people out of their cars. How do you think public transit fits in Nassau County?
Ed: The present County Executive is proposing that the County stop subsidizing Long Island Bus and pass the costs onto the MTA. That sounds good...but the MTA is responding to this by cutting bus service, and people now have trouble getting to work in the morning...The dilemma for Long Island is how to deal with this, because a significant part of the population relies on the buses to get to and from work. In my mind, mass transit has to be an integral part of the County's plans to meet the needs of its people and economy. I'm for working with the MTA and trying to get them to accept the burden, but I will not cut bus service to do so. We will continue to subsidize it to help people get to work, because the subsidy is small compared to the number of people who rely on public transit to get to work, make a living, support their families, and put that money back into the local economy.
Nick: I remember reading that Long Island Bus set a record for ridership last year.
Ed: It's true - look at the buses! They're not running around empty; they are full at the peak times when people are going to/from work.
Nick: Do you think the bus system, on its own, is an adequate public transit solution for Nassau County?
Ed: When you talk about "solutions," you need to first identify the problems and come up with an idea to solve that specific problem. There have been suggestions that light rail and mini-buses can work in certain areas, and I believe there is no one solution to solve this problem of enhancing our economy. We need to look at what we want to achieve and find a way to do it. It's very simple - and you're a business person - if you have a business, you are concerned that you have a place where you can operate and your workers can easily get to and from your place of business. I've dealt with major re-developments, such as the former Grumman property, and the two questions we always hear are "Where is the labor pool?" and "How is the public transportation?" - and that is why you need to have it. If you are making a development, you need to provide a way for people to get there...I like looking at monorail and different alternate transportation systems that work.
In Bethpage, I've lobbied for an additional LIRR stop at the Grumman property - and there used to be one in its heyday, when it was a defense contractor. We should have a stop there and let people get off in the center of where they're working.....Everything comes down to funds, and that's usually where these grand plans and visions hit a bottleneck.
Nick: I hope I can end with two open-ended questions. I mentioned that I spent a lot of time in Connecticut as a consultant, and that state recently abolished County-level government. They now only have state government and local government. I'm not advocating that, but do you think, given that your major issue is taxes, that these different layers of government play a large role in the tax burden? What can a County Executive do to mitigate this?
Ed: With our levels of government, there is no room for duplicate services, and the different layers should come together to minimize that. With that having been said, look at the County's function: police, court system, judicial system, the jail, corrections, the DA's office....there is a lot of serious work that goes into providing these services, and you can't eliminate the County unless someone steps up to do this work. In the same vein, you have a park system....I'm in favor of preserving that park system...Our obligation is to oversee that and turn it over to the next generation. In the same vein, public works - who will deal with sewage?
Nick: Right, and I'm talking about the local level, too - the school taxes are the overwhelming majority of the property tax burden; how can the County work to mitigate that?
Ed: People talk about the need for affordable housing on Long Island, but, if you step back, the property taxes are making housing unaffordable. If you can get your arms wrapped around that problem, you can make Nassau County affordable for everyone who wants to live and work there...Many people currently pay more in property taxes per month than they do on their mortgage payment, and it used to not be like that...It's a serious issue, and the road to affordability has to come with real property tax reform.
Nick: And what role could you play as County Executive?
Ed: First, each level of government has to be responsible for its own budget. Nassau County has to stop blaming other levels of government and get itself together, and hopefully it could become a positive example for other levels of government as well. Maybe people from other levels of government [use the County to find efficiencies and eliminate duplicate services]. People are really asking us to stop the waste and stop the duplication, and I think there is plenty of room in government to do that.
Nick: We'll close with a brief statement...The overwhelming majority of my readers are pro-Lighthouse, so, when it comes down to it, why should a pro-Lighthouse voter in Nassau County vote for you for County Executive?
Ed: You can vote for Ed Mangano because Ed Mangano got it done in Bethpage. You can come down [to the old Grumman property] and see 15,000 people going to work every day. You'll see a community center, both blue-collar and white-collar jobs, 750 units of affordable housing, a heliport, police aviation, a college, a hotel. We have mixed-use development; it's here, and we did it the right way. I will bring my skills in job creation and bureaucratic cutting to this project to get it done.
Coming later today: an interview with Kristen McElroy, Democratic challenger for Town of Hempstead Supervisor.
Councilman Hudes is at least one of the first people to directly say the Lighthouse Project may need to be scaled down to receive ultimate approval, and it shines a light (no pun intended) directly on the Town of Hempstead's strange policy against meeting with developers before an actual vote. Other Town Supervisors on Long Island, including Jon Kaiman of North Hempstead and Phil Nolan of Islip, cite meeting with the developers early and often as one of the key reasons large projects have been brought to a successful completion. However, the Town of Hempstead took a different tactic, instead sitting like "judges" and waiting for the environmental review process to practically finish before making their position known.![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=c086f7e6-1b0f-40b8-90da-76ce5bb752c7)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=3c5b4fe4-260f-4d42-94c6-e7bf86e63c1d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=498d2a16-3dfd-4838-b880-e3e4e7697118)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=bbc1bf61-0581-496d-9007-2a3f9b09daed)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=3af78551-32a5-44b4-bd05-2bb3dfd86fa1)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=96b70b81-5d10-4312-90cc-b280f043fd06)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=dc859841-fcd2-4a18-ac01-bc44831fbd87)
