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.