(The following letter was submitted for the public record)
I respectfully demand that the IDA and the City of Glen Cove make public an actual payment schedule, a chart that details exactly how the debt service will be paid in the first year, second year and subsequent years and account for how we get to the $400 million. This schedule should clearly show how much of the PILOTs go toward the $97 million loan and how much goes toward the tax rolls/public services, year by year. Unless and until the IDA and the City of Glen Cove publishes this information in a clear fashion that the average citizen can understand, I demand that this method of financing be put on hold.
I also request that this $97 million bond be put to referendum by the citizens of this city. This is just too grave a decision to be made by only four people… to be decided with impunity.
Up until this year, the city and Mayor Spinello has continually represented that the redeveloper was going to provide the city with the parklands, the esplanade, the amphitheater, the marinas—all the public amenities. The only thing the city/mayor publicly talked about providing funding for was the road. There may be statements made in the LDAs regarding “financial assistance” going back to the beginning, as Mr. Spinello informed me after a city council meeting, but that was never mentioned at city council meeting.
In a Newsday article dated June 28, 2015, titled “Glen Cove weighs borrowing as much as $100 million for Garvies Point project” RXR’s Frank Haftel said, and I quote: “the company has no plans to pursue a tax break.” What changed? Why are they pursuing them now? And if, as Mr. Spinello stated to me after said city council meeting, they were pursuing them all along, then Mr. Haftel’s statement was false and misleading.
I have this nagging feeling that the RXR is taking advantage of us—they are forcing something on us that we don’t want that we did not agree to… they see that this city is in a financial fix. The plans keep changing and every time it does, it is for the benefit of the developer, not the city. It looks to me like we are “giving away the farm.”