There can be no doubt that The Coney, the Coney Island bid from Thor Equities, the Chickasaw Nation and others, has been the most controversial of the eight proposals vying for three downstate New York casino licences.
If The Coney’s first hearing 26 August was rowdy, then its second hearing Wednesday at the Coney Island YMCA bordered on losing control.
At two different points, police had to step in to restore order. Several speakers on both sides of the issue broke into screaming matches, threw up middle fingers and brandished hand-written signs. It seemed as though most speakers started calmly and became increasingly furious as their two-minute allotments went on.
All told, the spectacle lasted more than four hours. It would have run longer if not for a hard cutoff by the project’s appointed community advisory committee (CAC), which is now tasked with casting a binding vote to decide whether the $3.4 billion mixed-use project continues in the process.
The committee faces a 30 September deadline to cast its vote, which is supposed to reflect the project’s level of public support. Four of six CAC members must approve the project for it to advance to the next round. More hearings could be scheduled, but there are none currently listed.
The discontent of the community was palpable Wednesday, and for Thor and its partners, approval based on local support seems unlikely at this point.
The Coney gets no love from city, state officials
The furor that was to escalate throughout the evening began with testimonies from elected officials, all of whom were opposed. These included Senator Steve Chan, Senator Sam Sutton and former City Council member Ari Kagan.
Chan explained that he voted in favour of the competing Metropolitan Park proposal in the state Legislature because the stakeholders behind it engaged him personally. Though he opposes casinos and gambling, he ultimately supported it because of that outreach. But for The Coney, “nobody ever explained” the benefits in the same way, he said.
Kagan was more animated, decrying the casino as an erosion of progress he worked for on the council.
“The only thing a casino will bring to Coney Island is increased congestion, huge traffic, more crime, especially muggings against seniors,” Kagan said. “Tons of mental issues, tons of bankruptcies, and don’t tell me about jobs. You can go to Atlantic City to see how many jobs were created for local residents.”
Sutton spoke briefly in opposition, before he was interrupted by the arrival of police, followed by a short recess. This moment set the tone for the rest of the hearing.
Strong start, but only temporary for The Coney
The first half-hour of the hearing encompassed the bulk of support. Many of the first few waves of speakers brandished “Yes to The Coney” signs, hats and T-shirts. The green font and lowercase styling of the logo was reminiscent of the Nathan’s Famous Hot Dogs logo, a Coney Island staple.
“I happen to be for the casino,” said a resident named Jay. “Not saying to get rid of the Coney Island we all know and love, but it’s just an expansion, it’s an extension, an add-on. Plus we need jobs. YGS — that means ‘You Gotta Survive’, and in order to do that, you gotta create opportunities.”
As has become common in this process, the motivations of the proponents came under question. Many accused supporters of being bought, with the figure of $80 being mentioned throughout. Some also griped that supporters stayed in the building, not allowing opponents to cycle in. CACs for several bids have submitted such accusations to state gaming regulators, but that was not mentioned Wednesday.
That said, there were some seemingly unaffiliated residents who supported The Coney.
“Investing in this community means a brighter future for our children to uplift this community,” said resident Sheila Smalls. “I am very excited about this community agreement, $200 million will go a long way and I’m sure they have much more to contribute.”
Smalls was alluding to the $200 million community-led trust fund The Coney is pledging. It is perhaps the biggest community sweetener, along with a separate $75 million pledge toward emergency services in the area.
Residents call on CAC member to sway votes
The opposition to the Coney was perhaps made starker by the relative lack of union reps and business groups during the hearing. Resident after resident stepped to the podium, and a fair number used the full allotment of time.
“It’s a direct line to our ruination, it is a direct line to a very financially unstable neigbourhood,” said Patrick Wall, one of several officials to testify from the group Coney Island USA. “It’s going to destroy what we have left. Please, if you are the stewards that we want you to be, please protect us.”
Coney Island is a small community, and the CAC members were known personally by many. One member of the committee who had been critical of the proposal at its first presentation was Marissa Solomon. Solomon, appointed by Assembly member Alec Brook-Krasny, had long advocated against The Coney prior to the CAC process.
“We just need two of you to join Marissa [Solomon] to vote no and we could put this issue to bed today,” resident Pat O’Brien said. “All it takes is three of you to vote no, and the application does not move forward to the New York State Gaming Commission.”
The Coney has been the most controversial of all the New York casino proposals, and that was on full display during its second hearing in Coney Island.