One of the functions of a civic association is to keep its residents advised of issues affecting the community by supplying all pertinent information.
When questioned by a resident as to why they withheld information pertaining to the Town of North Hempstead’s possible takeover of the Roslyn Country Club, the Roslyn Country Club Civic Association responded: it “seeks to provide any information that we view as material to the issues on which we communicate and we will continue to do so.”
In other words, they will tell you only what they want to tell you. The less informed the community is, the more power the “leaders” have.
Their June 24, 2011 letter in the Williston Times, with the heading “Kaiman plan for Roslyn club takeover good for town” Heather Schwartz and Todd Zarin did not specify one reason why it would be good for the town.
Schwartz/Zarin state in their letter that Mr. Kushner “has not availed himself” of an opportunity to meet the RCCCA board or officers.
For what purpose? Were they going to make me privy to information that they haven’t told the community? That would be totally improper, and we would not want to be involved.
Further, from their letter, it seems obvious that Schwartz/Zarin, the “leaders” of the civic association, did not like the “facts” we outlined in our letter in the June 17, 2011 issue of the Williston Times, so they wrote:
“Instead of the “facts” the Kushners articulate that they have “uncovered,” we urge you to focus on the unique opportunity before us….”
Schwartz/Zarin do not want you to consider the pros and cons of this takeover – just blindly support it.
Firstly, we did not uncover these facts. These facts, that the civic association chose not to divulge to the Roslyn Country Club community, came to light at the May 31, 2011 Town of North Hempstead’s public meeting in statements made by attendees:
1. The issue of the taxes currently being paid by the Roslyn Country Club owner, which would now be a burden to not only RCC residents, but to all town residents, should the property be taken over by the town, was brought up by a resident of Roslyn Country Club.
2. The issue of $$ numbers was brought up by a number of concerned residents of the town. Supervisor Kaiman could not give those attending the meeting any information. The next town meeting is scheduled for July 12. To date, no numbers have been forthcoming, so as to be properly inform residents before the meeting.
3. The issue of a resident in negotiation with the club owner was brought up by the resident’s attorney, Mitchell Goldberg, who clearly stated the town, as well as the civic association leaders, were well aware of this.
By putting “facts” in quotation marks, by using the words “innuendo,” “unsupportable facts” and “unsubstantiated facts,” Schwartz/Zarin imply the above are not true.
Schwartz/Zarin had the opportunity to speak out at the public meeting to dispute the attorney’s statements. They did not. Instead, they accuse the messengers – us and the Williston Times’ reporter (June 10, 2011) – that “these assertions warp the facts mercilessly.”
Secondly, Schwartz/Zarin are urging the public to forego the “facts” of higher taxes, loss of easement rights, etc., in lieu of their desire to have the town takeover the Roslyn Country Club property and residents’ easement rights. In our current economy, how can they be so flippant about another tax burden! And how dare they presume that anyone in Country Club, since, as they state, its residents have a “home assessed within 10 percent of North Hempstead’s median home value” could afford to pay $1,000 to $2,000 for membership fees. Arrogance personified.
Nowhere in our letter did we state, as Schwartz/Zarin wrote we did: Suggesting that a public facility is inappropriate because not all residents will chose to partake….”
What we did say was many residents “would be unable to avail themselves of a public facility…due to the inflated cost the town would impose.”
It should be noted that, according to the town’s website, the Manorhaven facility fee is $280, the Michael J. Tully Park’s four-month fee is $220, and the yearly fee (the park has an enclosed aquatic center) is $522.
Compare these fees to the $1,000 to $2,000 the town says it intends to charge town residents for the Roslyn Country Club town park.
As an analogy, public housing is “affordable housing” not “luxury housing.”
Luxury housing is left to the private sector. This should apply to public parks as well.
If Schwartz/Zarin find it necessary to deny the “facts” that were mentioned in our letter and the Williston Times, then their credibility is most certainly questionable.
If telling Ms. Schwartz that it was presumptuous on her part to tell the council persons that she was speaking on behalf of all 668 homeowners in Roslyn Country Club, and it was taken as being “accosted,” I guess she doesn’t take criticism very well.
The fact is, when she made the statement that she was speaking for all the Country Club residents, I didn’t want to embarrass her in front of the council persons, and waited until after the meeting to let her know her statement was incorrect. So much for trying to be a gentleman!
The fact is, we all left for home on very friendly terms, and Ms. Schwartz invited us to her home for coffee to continue the discussion. We never, however, took her up on her offer.
Since no new information has surfaced to support a town takeover of the Roslyn Country Club, we once again ask all residents of the Town of North Hempstead to communicate with their representatives and urge them not to support a town takeover of the Roslyn Country Club.
Robert and Sheila Kushner
Roslyn Country Club Residents
Roslyn Heights
