Yesterday's blog dealt with the ramifications of failed Long Island policies and mindsets that are driving the region's young people away in droves. Today we present some numbers that point out just how drastic and dangerous the situation is.
According to the Long Island Association, the American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that from 2000 through 2007 Long Island''s population between the ages of 25 and 44 declined by 157,424, a rate of 18.99 percent. Through 2006, the loss had been 122,477, a rate of 14.8 percent.
Those are some scary numbers.
Apparently our elected officials are not concerned about these people because they have left the Island and therefore are in no position to cast votes. Since the name of the game is getting re-elected, the Powers That Be will continue to cater to those who are still here - people who shoot down every attempt to create a situation that would encourage young people to establish roots here - no matter how short-sighted this line of thinking is. Let somebody else worry about what's going to happen a few years from now when the companies start leaving - and taking their jobs with them - because there's an insufficient workforce to support them here.
We need to develop our downtowns and we need to do it now. In Suffolk we need sewers to allow for this density.
Here are some more numbers and thoughts from the LIA: From 2000 through 2007, the ACS estimates that the overall population of Long Island grew by only 5,849. By way of contrast, the ACS estimate for 2000 through 2006, showed a population increase of 41,464. So, the new estimate suggests a significant one-year decline in population growth.
Long Island continues to have the highest rate of decline in the 25 to 44 group in New York State, and in the metropolitan area. The average rate of decline in New York City was 2.24 percent, and in the other New York City suburbs it was 14.43 percent. In all New York City suburbs collectively (New Jersey and Connecticut included) it was 10.64 percent. In upstate New York, the decline was 11.57 percent. No single upstate statistical area had a rate of decline as high as Long Island''s, including Erie County. For national demographic context, the rate of decline in the 25 to 44 year old age group was 1.93 percent, about one-tenth of the rate of decline experienced on Long Island.
Reflecting the decline in people of childbearing years, the ACS estimates that Long Island's population of children from birth through 9 years of age declined by 55,599 from 2000 through 2007.
The population decline in an age group can be attributed to past birthrates and aging, as well as to out-migration. To assess the decline of Long Island''s younger population, it is important to look at the relative trends. Demographics affect all areas. If Long Island's relative rate of decline is significantly higher than other comparable areas, that suggests that there is more at work than just birth rates.
The American Community Survey of the Census Bureau annually estimates population for many areas of the country using the official methodology that will be used in the decennial census. That methodology has been approved by all major organizations of statistical professionals in the nation. It is not without its critics in public office, however. Both county executives have decided to challenge the ACS estimates using a different methodology, which in part draws upon LIPA's way of estimating population. That method uses an analysis of electrical meters and population assumptions relating to them. LIPA''s estimates have always been higher than the Census Bureau's count.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Long Island's Future Votes With Its Feet
I was asked to write a recommendation for a former colleague this morning who now lives in Washington D.C. She choose to live in Washington because there she can "live in an apartment and take the train to work," two things she can not do on Long Island unless she wants to live in Western Nassau County and work in Manhattan.
This young lady is bright, talented, hard-working. She loves Long Island and was committed to do whatever it takes to make her native region a better place. Long Island, on the other hand, has done nothing to requite that love. As a region we have blocked efforts to create workforce or affordable housing, our infrastructure renders inter-community mass transit impossible and our tax structure is so onerous that the few young people willing to try to make it here start out behind a huge financial 8-ball.
On top of all that, there are painfully few entertainment options on this Island if you are under 30.
According to the Long Island Association, more than 157,000 Long Islanders between the ages of 18 and 34 have left Long Island since 2000. This represents a significant depletion of the Long Island workforce and without workers companies cannot and will not stay on the Island. As companies move off the Island and take their jobs with them, the tax burden on the remaining families will grow even greater - to the point where Long Island will become an economic ghost town.
The Long Island Builders Institute will endeavor to make sure this does not happen. We will continue to champion the cause of building suitable housing for the next generation while at the same time doing everything we can to ensure the quality of life that makes this region so special.
I do not want to write any more recommendations for talented Long Islanders living off-Island.
This young lady is bright, talented, hard-working. She loves Long Island and was committed to do whatever it takes to make her native region a better place. Long Island, on the other hand, has done nothing to requite that love. As a region we have blocked efforts to create workforce or affordable housing, our infrastructure renders inter-community mass transit impossible and our tax structure is so onerous that the few young people willing to try to make it here start out behind a huge financial 8-ball.
On top of all that, there are painfully few entertainment options on this Island if you are under 30.
According to the Long Island Association, more than 157,000 Long Islanders between the ages of 18 and 34 have left Long Island since 2000. This represents a significant depletion of the Long Island workforce and without workers companies cannot and will not stay on the Island. As companies move off the Island and take their jobs with them, the tax burden on the remaining families will grow even greater - to the point where Long Island will become an economic ghost town.
The Long Island Builders Institute will endeavor to make sure this does not happen. We will continue to champion the cause of building suitable housing for the next generation while at the same time doing everything we can to ensure the quality of life that makes this region so special.
I do not want to write any more recommendations for talented Long Islanders living off-Island.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
What Else Don't We Know About?
Governor Paterson is making a clarion call to anyone who will listen that New York State is in desperate financial straits. Mayor Bloomberg is making a case that New York City needs to skirt the law calling for term limits that will force him out of office because the city needs his guidance through the financial difficulties that lay ahead. Elected officials at the county, town and village levels are singing the blues.
It would seem to make sense that they are. Everybody is hurting - why shouldn't government be feeling the pinch?
Then you read a story like the one Juan Gonzalez wrote in today's Daily News. Apparently the New York City Board of Education sees nothing wrong with spending $5 million in 2008 for private couriers - more than double the messenger tab before Schools Chancellor Joel Klein took over in 2002. Apparently the couriers are paid to pick up the tests from all schools and deliver them to the Department of Education's computer center in Queens. There is no explanation as to why using an overnight delivery service is not good enough.
There is also the $80 million contract NYC DOE awarded to CTB McGraw-Hill a few years ago to design all of the new assessment tests and score them. Or the $80 million contract to IBM for ARIS, the new computer database that will track all information about students, including all those test scores.
The point is this: Is anyone in government paying attention to spending that's going on? What other out-of-control spending is going on that we don't know about?
In business you watch every dime because what goes out the door comes out of the owner's pocket. Not so in government. The LIRR's disability scandal is another case in point. LIRR officials claim to be outraged that this is going on, but nobody would have done anything if the New York Times hadn't looked into the situation. And Newsday's probe of attorneys and elected officials helping themselves to state pensions that they should not be entitled to is also quite scary.
Don't even get me started about the state, the county and the Town of East Hampton lining the pockets of Dick Cavett to the tune of $18 million - buying property that no private developer would touch.
Who's looking out for the taxpayer? Who in government is going to recognize that we the taxpaying public can no longer afford to just keep feeding the cash trough? When will the we the taxpayer rise up as one and say ENOUGH!
I can only hope that this difficult economic climate we are enduring right now will result in greater scrutiny of government spending. It is incumbent upon us as taxpayers to demand the same lean and mean operations from government that we are required to maintain as business people.
It would seem to make sense that they are. Everybody is hurting - why shouldn't government be feeling the pinch?
Then you read a story like the one Juan Gonzalez wrote in today's Daily News. Apparently the New York City Board of Education sees nothing wrong with spending $5 million in 2008 for private couriers - more than double the messenger tab before Schools Chancellor Joel Klein took over in 2002. Apparently the couriers are paid to pick up the tests from all schools and deliver them to the Department of Education's computer center in Queens. There is no explanation as to why using an overnight delivery service is not good enough.
There is also the $80 million contract NYC DOE awarded to CTB McGraw-Hill a few years ago to design all of the new assessment tests and score them. Or the $80 million contract to IBM for ARIS, the new computer database that will track all information about students, including all those test scores.
The point is this: Is anyone in government paying attention to spending that's going on? What other out-of-control spending is going on that we don't know about?
In business you watch every dime because what goes out the door comes out of the owner's pocket. Not so in government. The LIRR's disability scandal is another case in point. LIRR officials claim to be outraged that this is going on, but nobody would have done anything if the New York Times hadn't looked into the situation. And Newsday's probe of attorneys and elected officials helping themselves to state pensions that they should not be entitled to is also quite scary.
Don't even get me started about the state, the county and the Town of East Hampton lining the pockets of Dick Cavett to the tune of $18 million - buying property that no private developer would touch.
Who's looking out for the taxpayer? Who in government is going to recognize that we the taxpaying public can no longer afford to just keep feeding the cash trough? When will the we the taxpayer rise up as one and say ENOUGH!
I can only hope that this difficult economic climate we are enduring right now will result in greater scrutiny of government spending. It is incumbent upon us as taxpayers to demand the same lean and mean operations from government that we are required to maintain as business people.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
No rest (stop) for the weary
No situation epitomizes the mindset that makes it so hard to get anything done on Long Island better than the seemingly annual attempt to build a small rest stop at exit 51 on the Long Island Expressway.
Generating $6 billion-plus annually tourism is Long Island's larget industry. Yet nowhere on Long Island will you find a road-side rest stop. Drive anywhere else in the United States and you will come across a rest area where you can relax, stretch your legs, use a clean bathroom and perhaps learn more about the attractions the area has to offer. And spend money, especially if you have kids along for the ride. Not on Long Island. Here the mentality seems to be, "Welcome to Long Island; You're on your own."
According to an article in "The Long Islander", a local civic association official addressed legislators at a recent reception held by the Long Island Convention and Visitors Bureau to garner legislative support for such a basic tourist-attraction tool. The civic leader said, "If they want to have a rest stop that's fine but don't put it in people's backyards." Bear in mind, folks, that the rest stop is proposed to be right alongside the LIE and that these "backyards" abut an Interstate highway.
Assemblyman Andrew Raia suggested that the rest stop belonged "further out east," but you can be sure the "Out East" folks will fight that just as strenously.
Will Long Island's tourism industry crumble because there's no rest stop on the LIE? Most likely no. But Long Island's lack of hospitality and common courtesy - as well as its 'I got mine so everybody else be damned' mindset is disturbing. So is the lack of an Island-wide government entity that can step up and say, "Hey, this is good for the region so if a few people are inconvenienced so be it."
What rules on Long Island is the notion that the civic association who can make the most noise will get whatever he or she wants, just as long as the elected official in charge can be reassured of getting re-elected. I don't see this changing anytime soon. I just hope it does not lead to the ruination of the region.
Generating $6 billion-plus annually tourism is Long Island's larget industry. Yet nowhere on Long Island will you find a road-side rest stop. Drive anywhere else in the United States and you will come across a rest area where you can relax, stretch your legs, use a clean bathroom and perhaps learn more about the attractions the area has to offer. And spend money, especially if you have kids along for the ride. Not on Long Island. Here the mentality seems to be, "Welcome to Long Island; You're on your own."
According to an article in "The Long Islander", a local civic association official addressed legislators at a recent reception held by the Long Island Convention and Visitors Bureau to garner legislative support for such a basic tourist-attraction tool. The civic leader said, "If they want to have a rest stop that's fine but don't put it in people's backyards." Bear in mind, folks, that the rest stop is proposed to be right alongside the LIE and that these "backyards" abut an Interstate highway.
Assemblyman Andrew Raia suggested that the rest stop belonged "further out east," but you can be sure the "Out East" folks will fight that just as strenously.
Will Long Island's tourism industry crumble because there's no rest stop on the LIE? Most likely no. But Long Island's lack of hospitality and common courtesy - as well as its 'I got mine so everybody else be damned' mindset is disturbing. So is the lack of an Island-wide government entity that can step up and say, "Hey, this is good for the region so if a few people are inconvenienced so be it."
What rules on Long Island is the notion that the civic association who can make the most noise will get whatever he or she wants, just as long as the elected official in charge can be reassured of getting re-elected. I don't see this changing anytime soon. I just hope it does not lead to the ruination of the region.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Welcoming the bottom
An analyst was quoted on the radio this morning saying that the last Monday in October has served as "the bottom" of several the most recent bear markets. One can only hope he is correct.
Getting this election season behind us - regardless of who wins - should also serve as the cathartic release we need to get going again. Between now and next week, however, we can expect the onslaught of cutbacks and concerns aired publicly to continue because so many corporations will seize this opportunity to unload deadwood.
That said, it should be noted the Associated Press is reporting this morning that sales of new homes recorded an unexpected increase in September as median home prices dropped to the lowest level in four years. The Commerce Department reported Monday that sales of new single-family homes rose by 2.7 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 464,000 homes. Economists had expected sales would drop from the August level.
So hang in there is the message of the day. Heck - it's the message of the year. Better times are ahead.
Getting this election season behind us - regardless of who wins - should also serve as the cathartic release we need to get going again. Between now and next week, however, we can expect the onslaught of cutbacks and concerns aired publicly to continue because so many corporations will seize this opportunity to unload deadwood.
That said, it should be noted the Associated Press is reporting this morning that sales of new homes recorded an unexpected increase in September as median home prices dropped to the lowest level in four years. The Commerce Department reported Monday that sales of new single-family homes rose by 2.7 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 464,000 homes. Economists had expected sales would drop from the August level.
So hang in there is the message of the day. Heck - it's the message of the year. Better times are ahead.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Hooray for Hollywood!
Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy was quoted in the Sunday New York Times as saying, "We'll bend over backward and roll out a red carpet...it's a clean industry that gets a major infusion into the economy." He added that he has put before the county legislature a proposal that would "spare" this industry's representatives "the hassle of getting separate permits from villages and towns."
Has Mr. Levy gotten religion and suddenly realized how difficult local municipalities make things for home builders? That solving the housing problems plaguing the region is the most crucial step he can take to turn around the local economy?
Alas and alack, my friends, he has not. Mr. Levy was referring to attracting Hollywood production companies to Long Island. Apparently television and movies are the answer to Suffolk County's future.
To be fair, Mr. Levy has made housing a priority and demonstrated his commitment to that priority by giving Affordable Housing guru Jim Morgo such a dominant role in his administration. But for the love of God, man, if you are going to take such bold steps to help an industry jump-start the economy, why not focus on the industry that is already here and in a position to create the housing so sorely needed to keep the next generation of workers on Long Island. Those workers will determine whether the thousands of companies already here get to stay here, not the glamour of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt sightings at the local Starbucks while they shoot their next great cinema classic.
Why not create a county-wide permitting procedure so our builders do not have to endure the time-consuming paper chase that creates costly delays in the construction process? Why not expedite matters so our builders can start building and putting hundreds of tradesmen and women to work - work that generates economy activity and tax dollars?
Granted, watching a young family move into their first home may not have the sex appeal of Lindsay Lohan strutting down the red carpet at a Hollywood premier but in the grand scheme of things it means a lot more to the future of Long Island.
Has Mr. Levy gotten religion and suddenly realized how difficult local municipalities make things for home builders? That solving the housing problems plaguing the region is the most crucial step he can take to turn around the local economy?
Alas and alack, my friends, he has not. Mr. Levy was referring to attracting Hollywood production companies to Long Island. Apparently television and movies are the answer to Suffolk County's future.
To be fair, Mr. Levy has made housing a priority and demonstrated his commitment to that priority by giving Affordable Housing guru Jim Morgo such a dominant role in his administration. But for the love of God, man, if you are going to take such bold steps to help an industry jump-start the economy, why not focus on the industry that is already here and in a position to create the housing so sorely needed to keep the next generation of workers on Long Island. Those workers will determine whether the thousands of companies already here get to stay here, not the glamour of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt sightings at the local Starbucks while they shoot their next great cinema classic.
Why not create a county-wide permitting procedure so our builders do not have to endure the time-consuming paper chase that creates costly delays in the construction process? Why not expedite matters so our builders can start building and putting hundreds of tradesmen and women to work - work that generates economy activity and tax dollars?
Granted, watching a young family move into their first home may not have the sex appeal of Lindsay Lohan strutting down the red carpet at a Hollywood premier but in the grand scheme of things it means a lot more to the future of Long Island.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Opportunities are available for builders to rehab foreclosed homes
This item is from this week's NAHB bulletin.
HUD is distributing nearly $4 billion to states and local communities to help them remove foreclosed and abandoned properties from the market in a process aimed at stabilizing neighborhoods that have been hit hard by the housing crisis. As part of the new Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) that was included in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act passed by Congress this summer.
Following rules established by HUD, such homes can be purchased and rehabilitated, or if they are too deteriorated, they can be demolished and redeveloped. The funds may also be used to provide financing for eligible households to purchase these properties. States and localities may choose to administer the NSP program directly or by contracting with a third party. While the law does not permit any entity to make a profit on the sale of these homes, builders may earn developer fees as part of the rehabilitation or redevelopment costs.
NAHB members should contact their local or state government to find out how the program will be implemented and what opportunities may be available for builders. For an NAHB summary of the program rules,click here. For information about the program from HUD, click here..
HUD is distributing nearly $4 billion to states and local communities to help them remove foreclosed and abandoned properties from the market in a process aimed at stabilizing neighborhoods that have been hit hard by the housing crisis. As part of the new Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) that was included in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act passed by Congress this summer.
Following rules established by HUD, such homes can be purchased and rehabilitated, or if they are too deteriorated, they can be demolished and redeveloped. The funds may also be used to provide financing for eligible households to purchase these properties. States and localities may choose to administer the NSP program directly or by contracting with a third party. While the law does not permit any entity to make a profit on the sale of these homes, builders may earn developer fees as part of the rehabilitation or redevelopment costs.
NAHB members should contact their local or state government to find out how the program will be implemented and what opportunities may be available for builders. For an NAHB summary of the program rules,click here. For information about the program from HUD, click here..
Now I am really mad!
I received an email this morning from a LIBI member who shall remain anonymous for obvious reasons. He shared with me that the "due to the 'slow down' the Town of Brookhaven has apparently cancelled their Nov. 17th Planning Board meeting and is not sure about the Dec. 15th."
The LIBI member has applications that could and should be heard but the Town can't be bothered. This is a town that is hurting financially because its tax revenues are down. And yet they can't be bothered to meet. The LIBI member writes, "the Supervisor, Town Board, and Department heads could not possibly be any more cavalier about their role in exacerbating an already difficult climate." THe LIBI member could not be more spot on.
The LIBI member also informed me that he has been given the run-around by the Town of Smithtown. He is concerned that his contracts may elapse due to bureaucratic malaise. Again, egregious behavior on the part of local government officials at a time when every dollar is crucial to both the local economy and local municipalities.
LIBI will step up its efforts to draw attention to this completely unacceptable treatment of the building community. This nonsense has got to stop.
The LIBI member has applications that could and should be heard but the Town can't be bothered. This is a town that is hurting financially because its tax revenues are down. And yet they can't be bothered to meet. The LIBI member writes, "the Supervisor, Town Board, and Department heads could not possibly be any more cavalier about their role in exacerbating an already difficult climate." THe LIBI member could not be more spot on.
The LIBI member also informed me that he has been given the run-around by the Town of Smithtown. He is concerned that his contracts may elapse due to bureaucratic malaise. Again, egregious behavior on the part of local government officials at a time when every dollar is crucial to both the local economy and local municipalities.
LIBI will step up its efforts to draw attention to this completely unacceptable treatment of the building community. This nonsense has got to stop.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Nice Work If You Can Get It
One look at the news of the day and you have a much better understanding of why things are in such bad shape.
For starters, according to published reports a NYS Parole Board commissioner and former NYS Assemblyman was charged yesterday with trying to lure two pre-teen sisters to an Albany-area hotel room for sex. If that isn't bad enough - and it is pretty bad - the man gets paid $102,000 a year for his part-time work on the Parole Board. Think about that the next time you sign a check to the New York State Tax Department.
And just to add insult to injury, the top brass at AIG were at it again. Four top AIG executives spent $86,000 on a partridge hunt at an English country manor as the feds gave their struggling firm billions to stay afloat, according to a story in the New York Daily News.
What a better place the world would be if we all just stuck to doing an honest day's work for an honest dollar.
For starters, according to published reports a NYS Parole Board commissioner and former NYS Assemblyman was charged yesterday with trying to lure two pre-teen sisters to an Albany-area hotel room for sex. If that isn't bad enough - and it is pretty bad - the man gets paid $102,000 a year for his part-time work on the Parole Board. Think about that the next time you sign a check to the New York State Tax Department.
And just to add insult to injury, the top brass at AIG were at it again. Four top AIG executives spent $86,000 on a partridge hunt at an English country manor as the feds gave their struggling firm billions to stay afloat, according to a story in the New York Daily News.
What a better place the world would be if we all just stuck to doing an honest day's work for an honest dollar.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Workforce Housing Rally Thursday at Farmingdale College
Action Long Island is co-hosting a Workforce Housing rally on Thursday, October 16, from 5:30 pm to 7 pm at Farmingdale State College's Roosevelt Hall Little Theater.
ENCOURAGE YOUR YOUNG WORKFORCE, CLIENTS, FRIENDS, AND FAMILY TO REGISTER FOR THIS IMPORTANT EVENT... ITS FREE!
CLICK HERE TO REGISTER -
Panelists will discuss the initiative to create a voice for young adults and provide political support to put in place diverse housing stock on LI. Panelists include: Michael White, LI Reg. Planning, Shannon Wall, President LIJC, and Patchogue Mayor Paul Pontieri.
ENCOURAGE YOUR YOUNG WORKFORCE, CLIENTS, FRIENDS, AND FAMILY TO REGISTER FOR THIS IMPORTANT EVENT... ITS FREE!
CLICK HERE TO REGISTER -
Panelists will discuss the initiative to create a voice for young adults and provide political support to put in place diverse housing stock on LI. Panelists include: Michael White, LI Reg. Planning, Shannon Wall, President LIJC, and Patchogue Mayor Paul Pontieri.
Monday, October 13, 2008
A Call to Arms
The Long Island Business Institute plans to be an active participant in the Town of Brookhaven’s Brookhaven 2030 charettes this weekend. If your life and/or livelihood is tied in any way to the future of Brookhaven you need to participate, as well. LIBI will host a meeting on Tuesday afternoon (5:30 pm) in the LIBI office to discuss specific issues and questions that will need to be asked of the charrette organizers.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE CHARETTE ORGANIZERS – IF ADOPTED BY THE BROOKHAVEN TOWN BOARD – WILL BE USED AS THE BASIS FOR ZONING CHANGES OVER THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS.
The concerns of the building community are the concerns of Long Island, quite frankly. Without more housing on the Island our companies will not be able to sustain themselves and be forced to leave. With them go the jobs that keep our economy working.
This issue is too important to leave to our elected officials to figure out on their own. Please be sure to attend the meeting at LIBI on Tuesday afternoon at 5:30 pm. Feel free to call me at the LIBI office if you have any questions – 631-232-2345.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE CHARETTE ORGANIZERS – IF ADOPTED BY THE BROOKHAVEN TOWN BOARD – WILL BE USED AS THE BASIS FOR ZONING CHANGES OVER THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS.
The concerns of the building community are the concerns of Long Island, quite frankly. Without more housing on the Island our companies will not be able to sustain themselves and be forced to leave. With them go the jobs that keep our economy working.
This issue is too important to leave to our elected officials to figure out on their own. Please be sure to attend the meeting at LIBI on Tuesday afternoon at 5:30 pm. Feel free to call me at the LIBI office if you have any questions – 631-232-2345.
Friday, October 10, 2008
The Dowling Report and Brookhaven 2030
This past week the Long Island Institute of Social and Economic Policy at Dowling College released a white paper entitled "Long Island Government Land Acquisition: Can Long Island Taxpayers and the Regional Economy Still Afford It?"
This report details how $859 million has been spent over the last 30+ years in Suffolk County - not including Brookhaven - to take 30,000+ acres of property off the tax rolls. It also outlines the economic impact of all that land preservation.
It makes for fascinating - and outrageous - reading.
LIBI members with a vested interest in the Town of Brookhaven need to explore the web site Brookhaven2030.org. There are charettes coming up on Friday, October 17 and Saturday, October 18 at Town Hall. See the web site for specific times and outlines of the workshops on Saturday. What happens at these workshops will determine how (or if!) we do business in Brookhaven for the next 20 years.
There will be a meeting on Tuesday - time to be determined - at the LIBI office to discuss how many LIBI members we can get to attend these charettes. Please call the LIBI office (631-232-2345) for a specific time.
This report details how $859 million has been spent over the last 30+ years in Suffolk County - not including Brookhaven - to take 30,000+ acres of property off the tax rolls. It also outlines the economic impact of all that land preservation.
It makes for fascinating - and outrageous - reading.
LIBI members with a vested interest in the Town of Brookhaven need to explore the web site Brookhaven2030.org. There are charettes coming up on Friday, October 17 and Saturday, October 18 at Town Hall. See the web site for specific times and outlines of the workshops on Saturday. What happens at these workshops will determine how (or if!) we do business in Brookhaven for the next 20 years.
There will be a meeting on Tuesday - time to be determined - at the LIBI office to discuss how many LIBI members we can get to attend these charettes. Please call the LIBI office (631-232-2345) for a specific time.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Let's Party Like It's 1999?
Perhaps AIG had it right. Some folks high up in management must have figured, "We're all doomed anyway so let's go out with a bang and blow half-a-million dollars on facials and massages at a posh resort. Then we'll draw straws to see who has to sit in front of Congress and take the public whipping." At least they did something to stimulate the economy, or at least the economy around the resort.
AIG's actions remind me of that scene from "Animal House," when the frat boys realize Dean Wormer has it out for them regardless of what they do. So they go out and have one final blast - nearly destroying the local town in the process.
LIBI's builders, remodelers and associate members would never resort to such tactics, of course. For one thing, the collective sense of decency and work ethic our members demonstrate time and again would prevent them from doing anything as heinous as partying on the public dime. Our members instead will opt to continue to work hard, cut back and hunker down until economic sanity returns and progress prevails. Let's just hope this happens sooner rather than later.
AIG's actions remind me of that scene from "Animal House," when the frat boys realize Dean Wormer has it out for them regardless of what they do. So they go out and have one final blast - nearly destroying the local town in the process.
LIBI's builders, remodelers and associate members would never resort to such tactics, of course. For one thing, the collective sense of decency and work ethic our members demonstrate time and again would prevent them from doing anything as heinous as partying on the public dime. Our members instead will opt to continue to work hard, cut back and hunker down until economic sanity returns and progress prevails. Let's just hope this happens sooner rather than later.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Newsday Misses The Point
So Newsday's editorial today questions the wisdom of the Long Island real estate community spending $20,000 to fund a brutally important study by The Long Island Economic and Social Policy Institute at Dowling College but ignores the folly of Long Island taxpayers shelling out more than $1 billion to purchase land that can be put to tax-generating use. That's rich.
It also ignores how important housing is to the Long Island economy. Companies doing business on Long Island want to stay here but they can't stay if they can't grow and they can't grow if they can't keep young people as employees. Long Islanders between the ages of 18 and 35 are voting with their feet and leaving the Island in droves, mainly because they can't find the kind of housing that meets their needs. And they can't find the housing they need because the entrenched elite on Long Island have theirs and they don't want the next generation of Long Islanders to have the same opportunities they benefitted from back in the 1960s and 1970s.
Long Island needs more housing, not more vacant space.
It also ignores how important housing is to the Long Island economy. Companies doing business on Long Island want to stay here but they can't stay if they can't grow and they can't grow if they can't keep young people as employees. Long Islanders between the ages of 18 and 35 are voting with their feet and leaving the Island in droves, mainly because they can't find the kind of housing that meets their needs. And they can't find the housing they need because the entrenched elite on Long Island have theirs and they don't want the next generation of Long Islanders to have the same opportunities they benefitted from back in the 1960s and 1970s.
Long Island needs more housing, not more vacant space.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
They're At It Again
You read the papers and listen to the news and you wonder where the bottom is and how painful it's going to be when we hit it, assuming we have not hit it already.
And then you learn that yet another municipality - this time the Town of Oyster Bay - is looking to enact legislation that will stymie construction activity. Specifically, Town Councilman Anthony Macagnone - a carpenter by trade - is proposing to reduce the maximum gross floor area ratio allowed. In other words, the economy is down, workers are idle and consumers are sitting on their hands. What does government want to do? Discourage any kind of economic activity!
These are the worst of times for homebuilders and potential homebuyers. Home values are declining in the midst of a major financial crisis. The importance of maintaining solid values should be a top priority for all levels of government. During this credit crisis only the most credit worthy buyers can be approved for mortgages. The values of owned lots could be an important source of collateral and down payment for a mortgagor. Oyster Bay is reducing the value of buildable lots at precisely the wrong time.
Today’s housing market prefers homes of at least 3,000 sq ft due to existing lot prices and the fact that families are using their home as more than a bedroom. The overall effect of the size reduction would be to create a 1970s look to all new housing in a 2010 market. Innovation and architectural style and design would be inhibited.
Most of the Town has 7,000 square ft lots and the proposal has a lot coverage requirement of 25% max which would allow a 3,500 sq ft home (that’s 1750 sq ft x 2 floors). The proposal adds a floor area ratio (FAR). Within the FAR is the garage. The proposal drops the potential 3,500 sq ft to 3,200 sq ft. When you exclude a garage of 400 sq ft the maximum living space becomes 2,800.
LIBI understands the Town’s desire to avoid oversized homes on infill lots. Exclusion of the garage from the FAR would be one solution and this would allow a reasonably sized home, consistent with today’s market needs and modest sheds or outbuildings. Perhaps the Town could consider limiting this new requirement to infill lots and not new subdivisions or lots surrounded by larger properties where the size of the home is less important.
Any single sale of a new home generates employment and spending in the Town. For the sake of reducing home size for a few hundred square feet, an action that will inhibit buyers is pure folly in this recession. Simply state, the economy needs every new home sale that occurs.
And then you learn that yet another municipality - this time the Town of Oyster Bay - is looking to enact legislation that will stymie construction activity. Specifically, Town Councilman Anthony Macagnone - a carpenter by trade - is proposing to reduce the maximum gross floor area ratio allowed. In other words, the economy is down, workers are idle and consumers are sitting on their hands. What does government want to do? Discourage any kind of economic activity!
These are the worst of times for homebuilders and potential homebuyers. Home values are declining in the midst of a major financial crisis. The importance of maintaining solid values should be a top priority for all levels of government. During this credit crisis only the most credit worthy buyers can be approved for mortgages. The values of owned lots could be an important source of collateral and down payment for a mortgagor. Oyster Bay is reducing the value of buildable lots at precisely the wrong time.
Today’s housing market prefers homes of at least 3,000 sq ft due to existing lot prices and the fact that families are using their home as more than a bedroom. The overall effect of the size reduction would be to create a 1970s look to all new housing in a 2010 market. Innovation and architectural style and design would be inhibited.
Most of the Town has 7,000 square ft lots and the proposal has a lot coverage requirement of 25% max which would allow a 3,500 sq ft home (that’s 1750 sq ft x 2 floors). The proposal adds a floor area ratio (FAR). Within the FAR is the garage. The proposal drops the potential 3,500 sq ft to 3,200 sq ft. When you exclude a garage of 400 sq ft the maximum living space becomes 2,800.
LIBI understands the Town’s desire to avoid oversized homes on infill lots. Exclusion of the garage from the FAR would be one solution and this would allow a reasonably sized home, consistent with today’s market needs and modest sheds or outbuildings. Perhaps the Town could consider limiting this new requirement to infill lots and not new subdivisions or lots surrounded by larger properties where the size of the home is less important.
Any single sale of a new home generates employment and spending in the Town. For the sake of reducing home size for a few hundred square feet, an action that will inhibit buyers is pure folly in this recession. Simply state, the economy needs every new home sale that occurs.
Monday, October 6, 2008
We Paid How Much?????????
If you have not read Rick Brand's column in yesterday's Newsday - do so right away! In fact, I have posted it below. It's must reading.
The numbers are staggering. Dick Amper can say all he wants about deer not going to school but the facts remain clear: Suffolk County has preserved plenty of property at an extreme cost to the Suffolk County taxpayer. Sadly, some of the money that went to taking property off the tax rolls could have been used to sewer the 70 percent of Suffolk County that is without sewers. Had this taken place, Suffolk County could have progressed in such a way that the developers could have built with the kind of density that would have enabled local municipalities to preserve nearly as much acreage - AT NO COST TO THE TAXPAYER!
Think about that as you contemplate just how much money $3.5 billion is.
Newsday.com
Cost of Suffolk land preservation programs questioned
Rick Brand
October 5, 2008
After three decades, Suffolk's smorgasbord of land preservation programs have delivered 34,000 acres into the public domain, but they've come at an eye-popping price tag of $3.5 billion. Or so says Martin Cantor, head of Dowling College's Long Island Economic and Social Policy Institute.
Cantor says it may be time to rethink new land purchases, especially in these tough economic times. Warning Long Island is at a crossroads, Cantor says government should redirect far more money to sewers to protect groundwater and bays and allow downtowns to develop more densely for young and old.
Those are the controversial conclusions of a new 29-page report, which Cantor acknowledged was funded with $20,000 from the real estate industry.
"The numbers we're talking about are very big," said Cantor. "And there should be a public debate before we take the next step. Up to now, we've only had discussion from people who want to buy land."
Environmentalists, who telephone conferenced Friday over Cantor's impending report, called the findings superficial, skewed and bought and paid for.
"Tobacco companies tell you smoking is good for you, oil companies say 'don't go renewable' and developers say 'don't save land,'" said Adrienne Esposito of Citizens Campaign for the Environment. "Marty Cantor is the Darth Vader of Dowling. He's gone to the dark side."
However, some are taking notice. "The findings are certainly eye-opening," said Suffolk Comptroller Joseph Sawicki, who was briefed by Cantor on preliminary findings. "And they have to cause any official to pause and seriously analyze how much deeper we want to go in purchasing open space, particularly with the economic crisis we are facing."
The Dowling report, which will get its first public airing Friday at a breakfast on the college's Oakdale campus, is likely to create an intense and lasting debate. The report is a new offensive by the real estate industry, which had success last year in helping to defeat a proposal to create a preservation fund in Brookhaven based on a real estate transfer tax. It was the first environmental defeat in 24 local land referendums.
In his report, Cantor maintains Suffolk and its towns have spent $1.3 billion in property, sales and real estate transfer taxes to borrow the money to acquire 34,000 acres - about the same acreage as Long Island's state parks. - and has lost an estimated $700 million in property taxes from lands taken off the tax rolls.
Cantor adds the county legislature has authorized $366.8 million for open space purchases through 2013, costing another $1.1 billion in property taxes.
The preservation, he said, will cost the average Suffolk household at least $10,000. When the county completes its plan to buy another 35,000 vacant acres by 2031, it will have cost the average homeowner an additional $71,000 and remove nearly 32,000 homebuyers from the residential marketplace.
But Richard Amper, executive director of the Long Island Pine Barrens Society, called Cantor's numbers "ridiculous," saying land purchases so far have cost $1.2 billion, and that when divided by Suffolk's population the cost is only $454.61 per person. He called Cantor's projections of lost tax revenues wrongheaded.
"The reason Long Islanders are paying 2 1/2 times the national average in taxes is the cost of government greatly exceeds the taxes collected from residential development," he said. "Preserving open space controls taxes because deer do not go to school."
Amper said the reason developers have gone on the offensive is to protect themselves amid the financial crisis. "They are flat on their back and don't want the land to disappear before they can get up off the canvas," said Amper.
Cantor said he expected controversy but feels the region needs to reinvent itself for the good of the next generation, especially when there's no federal money for sewers, and experts say land already saved can protect the water supply into the next century.
"We're not against open space," said Cantor, "But you have to ask the hard questions."
THE PLAYERS
Dowling institute's Martin Cantor
Environmentalists Richard Amper and Adrienne Esposito
THE ISSUE
Cost and future of public land preservation
WHAT NEXT
Roundtable forum Friday in Oakdale
The numbers are staggering. Dick Amper can say all he wants about deer not going to school but the facts remain clear: Suffolk County has preserved plenty of property at an extreme cost to the Suffolk County taxpayer. Sadly, some of the money that went to taking property off the tax rolls could have been used to sewer the 70 percent of Suffolk County that is without sewers. Had this taken place, Suffolk County could have progressed in such a way that the developers could have built with the kind of density that would have enabled local municipalities to preserve nearly as much acreage - AT NO COST TO THE TAXPAYER!
Think about that as you contemplate just how much money $3.5 billion is.
Newsday.com
Cost of Suffolk land preservation programs questioned
Rick Brand
October 5, 2008
After three decades, Suffolk's smorgasbord of land preservation programs have delivered 34,000 acres into the public domain, but they've come at an eye-popping price tag of $3.5 billion. Or so says Martin Cantor, head of Dowling College's Long Island Economic and Social Policy Institute.
Cantor says it may be time to rethink new land purchases, especially in these tough economic times. Warning Long Island is at a crossroads, Cantor says government should redirect far more money to sewers to protect groundwater and bays and allow downtowns to develop more densely for young and old.
Those are the controversial conclusions of a new 29-page report, which Cantor acknowledged was funded with $20,000 from the real estate industry.
"The numbers we're talking about are very big," said Cantor. "And there should be a public debate before we take the next step. Up to now, we've only had discussion from people who want to buy land."
Environmentalists, who telephone conferenced Friday over Cantor's impending report, called the findings superficial, skewed and bought and paid for.
"Tobacco companies tell you smoking is good for you, oil companies say 'don't go renewable' and developers say 'don't save land,'" said Adrienne Esposito of Citizens Campaign for the Environment. "Marty Cantor is the Darth Vader of Dowling. He's gone to the dark side."
However, some are taking notice. "The findings are certainly eye-opening," said Suffolk Comptroller Joseph Sawicki, who was briefed by Cantor on preliminary findings. "And they have to cause any official to pause and seriously analyze how much deeper we want to go in purchasing open space, particularly with the economic crisis we are facing."
The Dowling report, which will get its first public airing Friday at a breakfast on the college's Oakdale campus, is likely to create an intense and lasting debate. The report is a new offensive by the real estate industry, which had success last year in helping to defeat a proposal to create a preservation fund in Brookhaven based on a real estate transfer tax. It was the first environmental defeat in 24 local land referendums.
In his report, Cantor maintains Suffolk and its towns have spent $1.3 billion in property, sales and real estate transfer taxes to borrow the money to acquire 34,000 acres - about the same acreage as Long Island's state parks. - and has lost an estimated $700 million in property taxes from lands taken off the tax rolls.
Cantor adds the county legislature has authorized $366.8 million for open space purchases through 2013, costing another $1.1 billion in property taxes.
The preservation, he said, will cost the average Suffolk household at least $10,000. When the county completes its plan to buy another 35,000 vacant acres by 2031, it will have cost the average homeowner an additional $71,000 and remove nearly 32,000 homebuyers from the residential marketplace.
But Richard Amper, executive director of the Long Island Pine Barrens Society, called Cantor's numbers "ridiculous," saying land purchases so far have cost $1.2 billion, and that when divided by Suffolk's population the cost is only $454.61 per person. He called Cantor's projections of lost tax revenues wrongheaded.
"The reason Long Islanders are paying 2 1/2 times the national average in taxes is the cost of government greatly exceeds the taxes collected from residential development," he said. "Preserving open space controls taxes because deer do not go to school."
Amper said the reason developers have gone on the offensive is to protect themselves amid the financial crisis. "They are flat on their back and don't want the land to disappear before they can get up off the canvas," said Amper.
Cantor said he expected controversy but feels the region needs to reinvent itself for the good of the next generation, especially when there's no federal money for sewers, and experts say land already saved can protect the water supply into the next century.
"We're not against open space," said Cantor, "But you have to ask the hard questions."
THE PLAYERS
Dowling institute's Martin Cantor
Environmentalists Richard Amper and Adrienne Esposito
THE ISSUE
Cost and future of public land preservation
WHAT NEXT
Roundtable forum Friday in Oakdale
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Perhaps This is Why The Country is Such a Mess
The country finds itself in the midst of a financial crisis that harkens back to the days of the Great Depression. So what do our esteemed Members of Congress do? Some of them hold out their votes until the Powers That Be lard on the pork. Now, all of the sudden the Congressmen who were vehemently against the so-called bail out are all for it. Nice.
What kind of pork?
The New York Post reports this morning that the special provisions include tax breaks for:
* Manufacturers of kids' wooden arrows - $6 million.
* Puerto Rican and Virgin Islands rum producers - $192 million.
* Wool research.
* Auto-racing tracks - $128 million.
* Corporations operating in American Samoa - $33 million.
* Small-to-medium budget film and television productions - $10 million.
Also, according to the Post, another measure inserted into the bill appears to be a bid aimed at winning the support of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who voted against the original version when it went down in flames in the House on Monday.
That provision - a $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill - has been the subject of fervent lobbying by Alaska's congressional delegation.
Unfortunately for the country our elected officials are often measured by how much "government support" they bring home to their respective districts. This best explains why Washington has turned into a bottomless ATM where just about everybody has the PIN. It also explains why the government is running up scary debts, debts that future generations of Americans are going to have to pay.
Kudos to our local Congressional representatives for doing the right thing - voting for the bailout without holding the country for ransom. It's incumbent on the rest of us, however, to start making a stink about the pork that is going to choke this country.
What kind of pork?
The New York Post reports this morning that the special provisions include tax breaks for:
* Manufacturers of kids' wooden arrows - $6 million.
* Puerto Rican and Virgin Islands rum producers - $192 million.
* Wool research.
* Auto-racing tracks - $128 million.
* Corporations operating in American Samoa - $33 million.
* Small-to-medium budget film and television productions - $10 million.
Also, according to the Post, another measure inserted into the bill appears to be a bid aimed at winning the support of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who voted against the original version when it went down in flames in the House on Monday.
That provision - a $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill - has been the subject of fervent lobbying by Alaska's congressional delegation.
Unfortunately for the country our elected officials are often measured by how much "government support" they bring home to their respective districts. This best explains why Washington has turned into a bottomless ATM where just about everybody has the PIN. It also explains why the government is running up scary debts, debts that future generations of Americans are going to have to pay.
Kudos to our local Congressional representatives for doing the right thing - voting for the bailout without holding the country for ransom. It's incumbent on the rest of us, however, to start making a stink about the pork that is going to choke this country.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Speak Your Peace
The National Association of Home Builders is asking its members to call your U.S. Senator and ask for a "yes" vote on the new bailout bill with energy tax credits.
The revised financial rescue bill comes up for voting tonight in the Senate and includes a renewal of existing home energy tax credits that expired in 2007.
According to the new provision, the tax credits will be retroactive to January 2008 and will continue through 2009.
The National Association of Home Builders has been advocating for renewal of the existing home energy tax credits as it will provide incentives for home owners to remodel for increased energy efficiency.
For more information on the financial rescue bill and to obtain contact information for your Senator, visit Builder Link
The revised financial rescue bill comes up for voting tonight in the Senate and includes a renewal of existing home energy tax credits that expired in 2007.
According to the new provision, the tax credits will be retroactive to January 2008 and will continue through 2009.
The National Association of Home Builders has been advocating for renewal of the existing home energy tax credits as it will provide incentives for home owners to remodel for increased energy efficiency.
For more information on the financial rescue bill and to obtain contact information for your Senator, visit Builder Link
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
