Simple Beautification or Major Project? You Be the Judge

 At the August 28 Board of Trustees meeting, Trustee Franco raised serious concerns about the work being done at the Village Country Club, specifically on the site where the old tennis courts once stood (left-hand side of the building).

Here’s what’s been happening on that property:

• The tennis courts were removed

• A fence was installed

• An irrigation system was put in place

• The ground was prepped for sod

• Sod was (or soon will be) laid down

• Lighting will either be removed or retrofitted

Franco’s Concerns

Trustee Franco said he has asked for three things:

1. A copy of the project plans

2. The permit for doing work on a protected bluff

3. A breakdown of costs and who paid them

So far, he says he’s received no response from the Village Clerk.

Franco’s position is clear: this looks less like a “touch-up project” and more like a major undertaking that should have required Board review and approval. When he pressed for a project plan at the last Work Group meeting, the Mayor, Trustee Urginsky, and the Village Attorney all said they didn’t know if one even existed. After repeated questioning, the Mayor finally admitted that she personally approved the work.

The Mayor defended her decision, calling the work a “beautification project” to improve a blighted area and stating it was her responsibility to ensure Village property was maintained. She also said that much of the cost was covered by Lessings’s, the catering company that leases the Country Club facilities. She later confirmed—via cellphone during the meeting—that a permit had been obtained.

Trustee Urginsky added that “no decisions have been made” on how the new space will be used. Trustee Hill, meanwhile, cut the discussion short, saying it wasn’t relevant to the resolution at hand.

Blogger’s Take

Here’s where I see some red flags.

1. Use of the space.
Why would a private lessee (Lessings) spend money on a project like this without some clear benefit promised in return? While the Mayor has repeatedly said the new “Meadow” will be open to residents (not just Country Club members) for relaxation and family games, Lessings has already advertised a Labor Day BBQ on The Meadow—charging the public for entry. That doesn’t line up with Trustee Urginsky’s statement that “no decision has been made” on use of the space. Clearly, one has.

2. The MOU and “free perks.”
The resolution under discussion that night was about an MOU allowing Lessings to use a lower-level Village room as an office—at no cost. On top of that, it appears Lessen’s can use The Meadow for its own events, also at no cost. Why is the Village giving away both office space and event space to a private vendor without broader discussion or safeguards in place?

3. Transparency and oversight.
This feels backwards. Shouldn’t the Village first clarify ownership, oversight, and use of public property before allowing a private vendor to co-invest and co-use it?

What AI Research Turned Up

To better understand Franco’s concerns, I ran a quick check. While I’m not a lawyer (and AI isn’t a substitute for legal advice), here’s a summary:

“A mayor cannot legally commit public property to a joint venture without contracts, engineering oversight, and a formal board resolution. Doing so could expose the municipality to lawsuits, state audits, or intervention from the Comptroller or Attorney General.”

Final Thoughts

To me, Trustee Franco’s concerns are not only valid, they’re essential. Residents deserve transparency, clear answers, and assurance that Village property is being managed legally and in the public’s best interest. Hopefully, he receives the documentation he’s requested—because without it, this looks a lot less like “beautification” and a lot more like backdoor deal-making.

Wow! What a Night -Recap of the August 27 Board of Trustee Meeting

This discussion will be in two posts. The first deals with the disorderly groups that have been congregating in and around Village parking lots during late-night hours. And the second post will deal with the Trustee’s concerns with the creation of “The Meadow”.

If you missed last night’s Board of Trustees meeting and plan to watch the replay, here’s a little warning:

As Bette Davis once said, “Fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy night.”

The Mayor kicked things off by reading a post from the Code Enforcement Department that went up on Facebook:

“The Village is aware of and very concerned about the disorderly groups that have been congregating in and around Village parking lots during late-night hours. Please be assured that the Village is working with SCPD 6th Precinct personnel to ensure that proper enforcement measures are taken if these groups continue to disturb the peace and compromise public safety and welfare of the Village.
The matter will be further discussed at tonight’s Board of Trustees meeting.
Please continue to call 911 for all police matters that require emergency response and enforcement.”

From there, the Board and other officials laid out some possible steps to deal with what’s been happening downtown late at night. These included:

• Increasing Suffolk County Police presence in the areas where people are gathering and breaking laws
  
  

• Adjusting Village Codes tied to the issues at hand
  
  

• Raising fines for violations — anywhere from $500 to $5,000
  
  

• Hiring an additional Code Officer for weekend nights
  
  

• Using photos and videos from residents as evidence to pursue enforcement
  
  

Several residents spoke, sharing just how disruptive the situation has been — affecting their sleep, peace of mind, and quality of life.

Blogger’s thoughts:
It’s hard not to notice that the Village only seemed to take stronger action once residents started posting videos of what’s really happening downtown late at night. Like it or not, the local Facebook groups clearly play a big role in making sure residents’ voices get heard. That said, we all need to keep calling Code Enforcement and the Suffolk County Police when we see laws being broken. Keep documenting with photos and videos — they make a difference.

One resident pointed out online that this problem seems to have gotten worse since the Village stopped arming Code Enforcement and reduced their authority. I understand why that decision was made, but I don’t think the Mayor and Board fully considered the consequences.

Hopefully, the proposed actions — from more police presence to tougher fines — will finally send the message that this behavior won’t be tolerated. With any luck, it will either push the troublemakers to move on or, better yet, convince them to change their behavior.

Mayor Keeps Information From The CCE and Trustees

 At last Thursday’s Board of Trustees Work Group Meeting, Mayor Sheprow stated that the Village has received the draft of the GEI Drainage Plan and that she was not going to share it with the Trustees or her commission (Citizen Commission on Erosion). She stated that once the Village receives the engineer’s finalized, signed, and stamped version, it will be shared.

For those who may not be too familiar with this plan or process, this may sound insignificant, but in my opinion, this is a very big deal. Here is why:

1. The Drainage Plan is an integral part of the Bluff Restoration Stabilization Project. It appears that improper drainage could have been the major cause of the partial failure of Phase 1 of the bluff restoration. 

2. Transparency and informed decision-making: Sharing the draft report allows the trustees and commission to be aware of the ongoing work and initial findings of the engineer. This can contribute to a more timely and informed decision-making process. 

3. Early identification of concerns: Reviewing the draft allows trustees and the commission to identify any potential issues, ask questions, or provide feedback before the report is finalized, potentially preventing delays or rework later.

4. Facilitating discussion: A draft report can serve as a valuable starting point for discussions and deliberations amongst the trustees and the commission, fostering collaborative governance. 

5. Once the Village receives a signed and sealed document is it is not easy for the Village to raise concerns or ask for changes. It could be costly and time-consuming. 

This is so odd, especially since The Citizens Commission of Erosion has proved to be very helpful by raising legitimate concerns and suggestions over the past year. The Mayor has frequently stated how beneficial this group has been to her. Why is she now shutting them out? Since millions of dollars have been spent and continue to be spent trying to save a failing bluff, the Village should utilize every available resource promptly to ensure the project's success. It seems to me that the Mayor, once again, is engaging in Selective Transparency, where she releases information only on matters favorable to her or when it is too late to influence the outcome. 

No Fourth Floor on Proposed Hotel - Sign Petition Now

 

The Issue

For Port Jefferson Village Residents 

What's happening: The owners of the Gap site, located on Main Street,  submitted a conditional use application to tear down the existing building a build a four-story redevelopment of the existing retail property, resulting in a 40-unit hotel with ground-floor shops and a rooftop restaurant.  This application would require multiple conditional-use allowances.
 
Current zoning does not allow any building higher than three stories within downtown, but there is a method that would allow the Zoning Board to change this zoning without violating the “spot zoning” regulations.  

The zoning in this area was put in place to protect the historic charm of the village from being destroyed. Such a zoning change for this one parcel could also set a precedent allowing more developers to request the same privilege. 

Residents need to make the Port Jefferson Village Board of Trustees, the Zoning Board and the Planning Board aware that residents do not favor such a change. They need this information before they start the review process and the developer needs to know that a four-story building is not welcome in our downtown area. 

What Residents Can Do

Join other residents who have already signed a petition on Change.Org that will be sent to the Port Jefferson Village Zoning Board, the Planning Board and the Village Clerk, stressing that the residents to not want the current zoning of this property to be changed to satisfy the desires of a developer. 

The petition will be open until June 26, 2025.

Link to Petition: Change.org No Fourth-Floor on Proposed Hotel

Note: This petition does not reflect any opinion on whether a hotel should be built in this location. It only deals with resident disapproval of changing the existing Zoning to allow a fourth floor to be built on a building in the downtown historical district.

Note 2:

Change.org does not require a donation to sign this petition. Just sign and back out without making a suggested donation. 

I was the Victim of Mayor Sheprow's Bulling

At the May 28th Village Board of Trustees meeting, Trustee Candidate Matt Franco referenced an incident in which a member of one of the Village’s commissions had been bullied by the Mayor. That individual was me.

At the time, I served as the Chairperson of the Citizens’ Commission on Erosion, working on the bluff restoration project. Following one of our meetings, as I was leaving, Mayor Sheprow approached me to reprimand me for a personal Facebook post I had made regarding a prior Board of Trustees meeting. She told me that, as a Commission Chair, I was not permitted to publicly comment on village matters.

I explained that I had made the post as a private resident, not in any official capacity, and had not referenced my title or role with the Commission. I pointed out that restricting me from speaking on public issues was a violation of my First Amendment rights. She disagreed, telling me to “go home and think about what I wanted to do,” and warned that if I continued to publicly comment on village matters, I would need to resign from my volunteer position.

Although I strongly believe this was an infringement on my constitutional right to free speech, I felt intimidated and chose to resign. Despite stepping down, I have continued to attend every meeting as a resident observer, always respectfully and without disruption.

Unfortunately, the bullying didn’t end there. At a recent Commission meeting, when the Mayor was asked a question by a Commission member, she looked directly at me—sitting quietly at the back of the room—and sarcastically asked, “Are you going to write about this?” When I replied that I didn’t know, she stated that she would withhold the information if I remained in the room. Later, she again refused to answer a question, saying she would not speak while “the reporter” was present. It seemed clear to me that she was trying to pressure the Commission to ask me to leave or to intimidate me into doing so myself. I stayed.

All Village Committee and Commission meetings are open to the public. When residents volunteer to serve, they are not provided with any guidelines restricting what they may say in public forums or on social media.

No resident should be treated this way. Refusing to share information at a public meeting simply because a blogger (I am not a reporter) is present is yet another example of Mayor Sheprow’s selective approach to transparency.

Selective Transparency - Not A Way To Govern

 

If this morning’s News 12 article was the first time you heard that a developer has officially submitted a request to build a four-story hotel where the GAP building is located?

If you answered “Yes,” it is most likely because our Village is governed using an approach known as Selective Transparency. 

Wayhomestudio.com (freepix.com)

Selective transparency refers to revealing some information while concealing other information. It's a strategic approach in which an organization, government, or individual chooses to be transparent about certain aspects of its operations or decisions while maintaining secrecy or opacity regarding others. 

In the case above, the May 9 Planning Board Meeting Agenda was not released on time as required by the New York Open Meeting regulations. It is required that the meeting agenda be released to the public a minimum 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. However, I repeatedly checked for this agenda until around noon on Thursday, and it was not posted. At that time, I assumed that the only item up for discussion at the meeting would be the posted Open Meeting for an application to allow an apartment above a home.  

To me, it appears that this little “Oh, sorry for the error or late posting” is just another example of the many times this has happened during the current administration. If it were not for News 12, many of us would have no idea about the insane proposal to rezone and allow the building of a four-story hotel in the heart of our quaint historic harbor front village.

A truly transparent leader tells the good, the bad, and the ugly and looks for input from the residents before taking action. There have been too many Closed Executive, Special, and Emergency meetings resulting in immediate action by the Board of Trustees. Using this guise allows decisions to be made without input from the Village residents and does not allow the Trustees sufficient time to study the matter adequately. 

Some examples of when selective transparency was used by our current Mayor include: Removing of the firearms from Code Enforcement Officers, a lease of the Country Club, which permanently closed the restaurant/bar making the facility a catering establishment, and moving forward with the multi-million dollar Bluff Restoration Project Phase II without a referendum. I am sure you can think of many more. 

The Mayor believes that her Commissions and Committees are staffed by residents, and since any resident can join,  it ensures transparency. These groups do excellent work and I applaud the members for their service. However, the 4 -12 member groups do not provide a valid statistical sample of the voice of people since our Village has over 8,000 residents. 

I believe the Village needs a new leader who will be transparent in all instances. We can take the good along with the bad and the ugly if we are part of the process in making these major decisions. 

We have a chance to make change happen this June 17, when we go to the voting booth. Be sure you vote and select the officials you feel will provide true transparency and who truly encourage resident input PRIOR to making major decisions. 

Author Note:

I encourage comments and discussion, but if possible, I suggest you post them on the corresponding Healthy Conversations Port Jefferson Facebook page, where this post was listed. This way, all members can join in the discussion. 

More Can Be Done To Stop Dangerous Bicycle Behavior

Background:

I have been reading and hearing numerous residents complain about young men on bicycles acting dangerously on the streets and sidewalks downtown. Some residents feel threatened. For example, one resident posted, “I was in the village yesterday when I watched 25-30 young men on bicycles block the road between the Steam Room and the ferry entrance doing wheelies and riding in circles.I then witnessed them terrorize people in Harbor Front Park by doing wheelies and riding erratically across the lawn down onto the dock.” 

Life used to be simple. You just called Code, and it was handled. But, now we need to figure out who to call, the police or Code. So I decided to ask Code this question at last night’s Board of Trustees’ Meeting. The answer I received was very different than what I read in the Village Code. 

Code’s Response: 

When I asked who to call when such an incident takes place (Code or 911), I was informed that we can call Code and they will respond and talk to the offenders. This answer is very different than what I read in the Village Code. There is a lot more that can be done at the Village level. And these additional tools need to be used to put a stop to this behavior.

Village Code Related to Bicycles:

Chapt 181 - Peace and Good Order, Art IV - bicycles 181-13 Reckless Operations of Bicycles clearly outlines what is considered “Reckless Operations of Bicycles.” So it appears that violations of this code could (and should) result in a fine and not just “being spoken to”.

According to the Code 181-13 these acts are considered a violation:

No person shall operate a bicycle:

A. Without due regard for the personal safety or the safety and rights of pedestrians and drivers and occupants of all other vehicles, and to endanger the life, limb and property of any person while in the lawful use of the streets or sidewalks or any other public or private property

.

B. Without exercising reasonable and ordinary control over such bicycle.

C. By trick riding or in a weaving or zigzag course, unless such irregular course is necessary for safe operation in compliance with the law.

D. By attaching the bicycle or themselves to any vehicle being operated upon a roadway.

E. By operating the bicycle while, at the same time, also operating a cellular phone, camera or other electronic device.

F. In or on a Village athletic field, athletic court, fenced or enclosed area in a Village park, playground area, or Rocketship Park.

More Aggressive Action When Called For:

Village Code 181-14 allows the impounding of the bicycle being used in violation of Code 183-13. 

It states: “In addition to any other penalties imposed by law, whenever a person operates a bicycle in violation of the Village Code, the bicycle may be seized by any member of the Suffolk County Police Department or Village of Port Jefferson Code Enforcement Office and impounded. A bicycle so impounded will be surrendered to the owner or, if the owner is a minor, to the parents or guardians of such minor, only upon final disposition of any charges or the payment of any fines levied for all violations of this Village Code. A complete record of each such impounding shall be kept in the office of the head of Code Enforcement.”

NOTE: Mayoral Candidate Kathianne Snaden was the Commissioner of Public Safety and worked with the Village attorneys to write this legislation and pass the new Code. She has definitely proven that the safety and well-being of village residents is one of her top priorities. 

Author’s Opinion: 

The Village Code provides adequate tools for the Village Code Office to use to set clear examples that this type of behavior will not be tolerated in our Village. Sometimes, strong actions are needed to protect the safety and well-being of the people. 

Other residents have said that they approached a Code Enforcer about this behavior and were told to “Call 911”. According to the Village Code, it is their job to use the tools available to put a stop to this behavior. I suggest you take the Code Enforcer’s name and report it to the Code Supervisor and the Village Clerk’s Office. 

As we all know, the Office of Code Enforcement has recently been revamped, so let's hope this is just a learning curve.