.

Sustainable Playland to Resume Review Process

Rob Astorino at a Sustainable Playland event. Patch file photo
Rob Astorino at a Sustainable Playland event. Patch file photo
The following is a letter sent from Kim Morque, president of Sustainable Playland, Inc., outlining conditions with which the group will continue with the review process for the restoration and improvement of the amusement park:

Dear County Executive Astorino:


On behalf of Sustainable Playland Inc., I wanted to follow-up with you regarding the Playland Improvement Plan review process. In the four weeks since the suspension of the PIP review by the Board of Legislators that followed our March 31 and April 9 letters to you, we have had the opportunity to assess where we are in the process, and to address the issues outlined in the letters.  We are most appreciative of the time and guidance your administration has provided in helping to clarify the path going forward.


After thorough deliberation by our board, we are prepared to resume the review.  We understand that going forward your administration will take a more active role with us in completing the operator agreements (including parking) and providing the relevant necessary information to the Board’s reviewing committees.  We further understand that the County will represent us in any current and future lawsuits relating the approval process and implementation of the PIP should SPI be named as a respondent.  


We wish to emphasize that we remain committed to the vision plan we share with you for the preservation, restoration and rejuvenation of this unique park. While we have made adjustments to our plans in response to input we have received from the public and elected officials, the goals and objectives that we put forth in our response to your Request for Proposals (RFP) to “re-invent Playland for the 21st century” are unchanged.


Our public-private partnership approach is to create multiple activities that would draw visitors to Playland year round. The goal is to make the park less dependent on attendance at the amusement component that is weather dependent and has a limited season. Multiple uses will enhance the park’s economic viability, support the Westchester Children’s Museum and bring the private investments and activity that will enable the needed restoration and preservation of buildings and grounds. Working in partnership with the County this effort can be accomplished.


Once the PIP is approved and we can move forward in our role with Playland, SPI will:


  • Set and implement goals set forth in the Vision Plan.
  • Coordinate and manage the operators of the park’s zones.
  • Advocate, oversee and fundraise for environmental projects, historic preservation and park restoration to supplement funds that will be invested by the operators and may otherwise be available from revenue generated from operator payments to SPI.


In the coming days we will work with you to finalize the operator agreements and establish a schedule for the completion of the PIP review with the Board of Legislators. We appreciate the efforts of all of those with the County who are working with us in planning for the future of Playland and who we are confident share in the goal of assuring a viable and sustainable future for the park.


Sincerely yours,

Kim Morque

President

smellypants May 01, 2014 at 11:21 AM
I seems entirely appropriate to me that the County would and should indemnify SPI. They are a non-profit group of local citizens who responded to an RFP. If they get drawn into litigation between Rye and the County over who's in charge why should they have to pay? I'm no fan of the SPI plan but this definitely seems normal and appropriate give the circumstances.
Scott Peterson May 01, 2014 at 02:14 PM
It seems likely as well smelly, that in providing them no risk, they would attach themselves to whichever side of the Vs. column has the best profit potential. SPI is private business. "Not for profit" is the type but business is the common denominator. ___________________________________________________ Investment must see a return in order for investing to continue; this is the common denominator in investment. The probable means, no matter how mean, are deemed acceptable in order to gain a fraction of a % more in profit. If the end justifies the means, and SPI is fundamentally a business, it must fundamentally profit using any and all available means possible in order to be true to its purpose. If investment is secured against loss by third parties, there is nothing but gains for the investors no matter what the third parties' losses are. The politicians and SPI’s principals have invested a lot into this so far and the tax payer is the third party. From that aspect, it may be that SPI and or the County will instigate SPI’s name being attached to any law suit brought by Rye to ensure none is brought or to make sure they get their pound of flesh no matter where it is gnawed from. In either instance SPI and the County Government only risk the reputation of titles which secures the actual people from any personal risk at the expense of those made up names and the tax payers alone. ___________________________________________________ To put it short and not so sweet, the County and SPI are probably trying to screw Rye if that’s what it takes to enjoy their pound of flesh flayed from the tax payers just to prove a point to the city that they can and thus make an example to any community that may try rebelling in the future. The means of doing so makes Rye the villain in the tax payer’s eyes while making the profiteers appear the heroes which profits all but Rye and the tax payers. Well that’s my thoughts on it anyway.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »