Ed Mangano had a celebratory photo op after the 11-7 vote to approve an 8/1/11 public vote for one item and one item only: the $400 million referendum for the renovation of the Hub.
Personally, I think a celebration is a little premature after hearing how the Democrat members of the Nassau Legislature attempted to fight for their "NO" votes to be heard. There was only one Democrat that voted YES. Newsday said it would be passed, they were right, however I don't think they thought it would have been this passionately countered.
Like many others, I streamed the proceedings on line during work. I did not make the rally at Borelli's. (Although, had I known Frank Borelli was going to be supplying Pizza, I would have tried to take the time off from work.)
From the public standpoint, it was blogger and Lighthouse promoter, Nick Giglia who used to write LetThereBeLighthouse.com who presented the most eloquent argument. (Nick now writes for HockeyIndependent.com)
Quoting a scene from Mad Men, Nick gave the definitions of Utopia as that which was perfect and that which can never be obtained. Yes, the Nassau Hub is running the risk of falling into the latter category.
While I listened to all those opposed to the August 1st vote, I wondered why Charles Wang didn't just throw up his hands and walk away. But he hasn't and he doesn't seem to be ready to.
So, the vote now is in the people's hands on August 1st. While that is a great starting point, it is in now way something to really celebrate. The referendum needs to get past*(thank you Paul the Economist) NIFA and a supermajority approval.
Yes, this is one step closer, but no where near champagne popping territory.
Posts
4 comments:
Good article, and I agree - too early to celebrate. 2 questions 1) What is the prevailing sentiment of non-Isles fans in Nassau County? and 2) Is there a fact sheet or web site somewhere that lists the facts? I don't live on LI but know folks that do, and could forward info to them and solicit their support.
In the given context, you spell passed "past."
I'm also quite confused why you or anyone else who isn't a trained economist feels they possess the expertise to comment on the merits of this plan. Unless you are simply in support because you're a fan (a word which, FYI, is derived from the word fanatic)- an entirely irresponsible position to take considering that you are supporting your fanhood with other people's money- you should have more numbers to back up your argument. Or could it be that you really, after all, haven't put much thought into it?
Paul, thankyou for the English lesson. I do always get those two confused. As for the rest of your comment, the numbers that I know of (and perhaps they are not true since politicians have a tendancy to lie through their teeth) is this referendum will add $48 - $58 per year to each resident's tax bill. If the revenue sharing does not begin until the project is complete, then that would be two years residents would have to invest in the project - $96 or $116. I believe that is a small investment to keep the property and the town of Uniondale viable. I am sure Mr. Mangano will have other figures to present to the board prior to any additional vote. Thank you for reading.
Something about Paul the Economist's comment bothered me so I went to the following educational website to check it out; http://www.educationbug.org/a/passed-vs--past.html
You were actually correct in your first use of "passed".
7th Woman no need to doubt yourself. You consistently write an excellent and insightful column. Just because you are a fan doesn't negate your ability to assess a situation truthfully.
Post a Comment