Dougherty and others speak against halting open space program

There’s general optimism from both local and county officials that phase one of plans to preserve 80 acres at Sylvester Manor will close this month. But there’s skepticism from County Legislator Ed Romaine about whether his Democratic colleagues might try to seize money dedicated to future open space acquisitions and instead use it for general fund expenditures.

For Shelter Island, that was the subtext of an almost two-and-a-half hour Suffolk County Legislative hearing in Riverhead Tuesday on a bill to suspend future county open space acquisitions for 90 days in order to review the program and reset priorities.

There was a lot of push and pull at the hearing between legislators and six people who testified, all of whom said the bill could undermine future preservation deals.

The bill specifically excludes preservation agreements that are in the process of being completed.

And before the hearing, Mr. Romaine commented, “We have all the money we need” for the two pending purchases of development rights at Sylvester Manor. But he added, “Some of my colleagues would like to take the money and hand it over because of the county’s fiscal problem.”

That was a reference to last week’s announcement by County Executive Steve Bellone that the county is facing a long-term deficit of more than half a billion dollars.

There have been eight referenda in which large majorities of Suffolk voters supported funding for land preservation, Mr. Romaine said. If the legislature wants to roll back the county program, it should submit the issue to another public referendum.

“Otherwise, you break faith with the people,” he added.

Supervisor Jim Dougherty, in Riverhead to oppose the pending open space bill, said he fully expected the county’s check for phase one of the Sylvester Manor acquisition by the end of the month. The county has agreed to pay 70 percent of the $7.25 million cost of the development rights on two parcels containing about 80 acres. The town will pay the balance through its 2-percent preservation tax revenues paid by the purchasers of Island real estate.

County Legislator Kara Hahn of Setauket sponsored the bill that was the subject of Tuesday’s hearing. She said it was intended to assure that the county was spending its preservation money on the most environmentally sensitive parcels. She rejected the use of the word “moratorium” to describe her proposal, which calls for a 90-day suspension of steps toward new acquisitions, insisting her efforts wouldn’t delay purchases already in the pipeline.

“We are trying to take a step back and reorder acquisitions, create a prioritization list and rank parcels and then we can go after the most environmentally sensitive parcels,” Ms. Hahn said.

“We are advocates for the environment,” Legislator Sarah Anker said. “But we do need to take a pause; we have a fiscal crisis.”

Speaking at the hearing, Mr. Dougherty said that even if Ms. Hahn didn’t intend her legislation to impose a “moratorium,” that’s how the public perceived it.

He noted that he was speaking on behalf of both the town of Shelter Island and as chairman of the East End Supervisors and Mayors Association.

“‘Moratorium’ has a bad meaning to it,” Mr. Dougherty said. Moratoriums on various programs have been imposed on Shelter Island and “I regret almost every one. Appearance counts as much as reality sometimes.” Moratoriums can be “misconstrued” by the public as a disinclination to continue the program.

Any legislative move to delay land preservation “would send the wrong message,” he told the legislators. The legislature should “absolutely prioritize” its acquisitions based on environmental sensitivities but it should do so “while keeping the program in place.”

Presiding Officer William Lindsay said there’s not enough money to buy all the parcels that have gone through planning steps.

The most heated exchange occurred between Mr. Lindsay and Richard Amper of the Pine Barrens Association when Mr. Lindsay accused the environmentalist of misquoting him about opposing land preservation.

“It’s their money and they don’t want the program stopped,” Mr. Amper said, referring to taxpayers.

“But we’re running out of money,” Mr. Lindsay shouted.

“I don’t think anyone wants to destroy the program,” he said. “We just want to use what money we have in a reasonable way.”

“Maybe do some draconian pruning,” Mr. Dougherty told the legislators. “You can do your job and you can do it without a moratorium.”

Peter Vielbig, chairman of the Shelter Island Community Preservation Fund and Advisory Board, spoke at the hearing as well. There’s already been a 90-day stoppage in land preservation acquisitions by the county bureaucracy, he said, and if Ms. Hahn’s bill passes, it would be at least another 90 days before the program might resume.

“This is our heritage,” Mr. Vielbig said, calling locally preserved land “our Grand Canyon, our Yosemite, our Niagara Falls.” He also argued that preservation is fiscally responsible because it takes parcels off the tax rolls — and for every dollar received in taxes on developed land, it costs a municipality $1.30 to provide infrastructure and services.

Others who testified against the bill were Richard Murdocco of the Pine Barrens Association; Joe Gergela from the Long Island Farm Bureau; and a representative from the North Shore Land Alliance in Old Westbury.

The hearing was closed and Ms. Hahn’s bill will be up for a vote at an upcoming legislative meeting.