Dear Neighbors and Friends, I hope you are enjoying this day too, enjoying the natural beauty that makes the East End unique and special Please: To ensure that is preserved along the shores of the Shinnecock Canal: WE need you to send an email. WE need a mass of emails telling this Suffolk County Committee to VOTE NO to “Intro. Reso. 1619-2015” before their hearing tomorrow, Monday August 31 at 2PM. Please: take a few minutes to copy and paste the letter included in the previous update recopied below or in the subject line of an email paste this line “ VOTE NO to “Intro. Reso. 1619-2015” with your name and address in the body addressed to: Al Krupski, Chairman of Public Works, Transportation & Energy Committee Al.Krupski@suffolkcountyny.gov please, cc: Tom Muratore, Legislator, Vice Chair tom.Muratore@suffolkcountyny.gov Thomas F. Barraga, Legislator, Member thomas.Barraga@suffolkcountyny.gov Kate M. Browning, Legislator, Member kate.Browning@suffolkcountyny.gov Steve Stern, Legislator, Member steve.Stern@suffolkcountyny.gov Gil Anderson, P.E., Commissioner of Dept. of Public Works public.Works@suffolkcountyny.gov bcc or cc: Hope Sandrow openairstudio@optonline.net You are also welcome to join us at the meeting that begins at 2pm to speak for three minutes: William H. Rogers Legislature Building 725 Memorial Highway Smithtown NY 11787 With thanks and appreciation for your continuing participation. You can copy and paste this email...edit with your personal insights.. Cut and Paste this sample letter; Edit; Add your thoughts: Al Krupski, Chairman of Public Works, Transportation & Energy Committee 423, Griffing Avenue, Suite 2 Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Objection to Intro. Reso. 1619-2015 Dear Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am a resident and taxpayer of Suffolk County. I live in the Town of Southampton and am familiar with the area where the parcels of county property are located and which are being proposed for transfer to the Town of Southampton and the developers so the developers can build their Maritime Planned Development District project. The project has no maritime benefit, making it the densest development in the Town of Southampton by allowing the density to increase from 17% to 73%. The Shinnecock Canal is a unique and historic site, recognized by the State of New York. I strongly object to any action by the County to approve the Memorandum of Understanding allowing for the transfer of county owned land to assist the developers’ plans. The neighbors living in the area of the Shinnecock Canal filed a lawsuit in May 2015, challenging not only the Town’s decision to re-zone the developers’ properties, but in particular, the proposed transfer of the parcels subject of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) this committee is being asked to review. The residents and taxpayers of Suffolk County will be severely prejudiced and harmed if their land is transferred (without any financial consideration as disclosed by this Memorandum of Understanding) prior to the court’s ruling whether the transfer is legal. If the Legislature approves the MOU now and the courts rule later that the rezoning is invalid or the transfer of the public parcels is illegal, the parcels may be subjected to significant alteration and destruction, all of which amounts to public waste. The County, Town and developers cite that substantial public benefits are being provided by the developer. This is not true. The walkway, viewing platform and 5 parking spaces being allotted for public use are simply a cheap way of making the Town Board and some in the community think a balance had been struck in exchange for eliminating the access the public used to have along the east side of the canal and for privatizing the canal with high-density residential development. Residential development was never allowed along the canal. It will add nothing to the delicate economy of this maritime center that relies on marinas, restaurants and local retail serving the fishing and tourist industries to survive. The developers’ agreement to contribute to the expense of changing the two intersections serves only their interests in their project. No one from the Town or the County has proven that reconfiguring the intersections on either side of the canal requires giving up county owned land or that the changes will result in safer roads or improved traffic conditions. In conclusion, the request before you to approve the Memorandum of Understanding is based upon mischaracterizations and is premature. I respectfully request that this Committee reject the resolution outright or table it until such time as the courts rule on the validity of the proposed transfer of these public lands. Sincerely, YOUR NAME HERE cc: Tom Muratore, Legislator, Vice Chair Thomas F. Barraga, Legislator, Member Kate M. Browning, Legislator, Member Steve Stern, Legislator, Member Gil Anderson, P.E., Commissioner of Dept. of Public Works