It turns out, parkland is sacrosanct in Huntington

It was a full house in the so-called “people’s living room," officially called the Town Board Meeting Room at Huntington Town Hall for the July 14^th Town Board meeting.

This is definitely not the norm for a 2pm meeting in the height of summer.

Two items sat on the agenda of particular interest: a public hearing to consider overriding the state tax cap, and a planning resolution for the next phase of the Huntington African American Museum.

Not a single speaker rose for public hearing number 5 concerning the Town Board’s intention to pierce the tax cap.

That’s a huge deal as this would be the first time Huntington has been in a position to consider such a move since the tax cap was imposed in 2012.

I find it curious that the prospect of piercing the tax cap didn’t draw citizens in protest, but unfortunately I can’t say I’m surprised.

The very residents who would feel the greatest pain with a higher than usual property tax hike generally can’t attend a town board meeting in the middle of the day when they are working.

When it comes to pocketbook or development issues, Huntington residents have reasonably argued that it’s either difficult, or that they simply cannot afford to take a day from work to attend a daytime town board meeting.

The problem is there are too many who cannot afford not to be heard.

Was there a reason the Town Board could not have considered this vexing dilemma for residents when scheduling in the afternoon such a monumentally important public hearing such as piercing the tax cap?

Instead, the bulk of oxygen was consumed by Huntington Town Board Resolution 2026-404 whose caption reads: “Establishing the next phase of planning for the Huntington African American Museum, recognizing key stakeholders in implementing the planning process and establishing an implementation advisory team.”

The tension and emotion over both the Town’s park alienation of Fair Meadow Park, and/or the appropriateness of the proposed Huntington African American Museum being situated there was palpable and at times, disconcerting.

The idea of alienating town parkland struck in the hearts of enough people that it totally eclipsed the Town Board's telegraphing to its residents by way of public hearing number 5 that it intends to pierce the tax cap.  

It didn’t help that a highly manipulative (if not inappropriately worded) flyer against the park alienation to make way for a “concrete jungle” was circulated on social media to heighten the subject and controversy. Naturally, it also served to incite racial undertones.

It should be said that nearly everyone who spoke out against the establishment of the Huntington African American Museum at Fair Meadow Park prefaced their positions by stating they were not opposed to the creation of the museum itself, but rather, the location along with the need to sacrifice parkland for it.

There was but one speaker who decried any need or relevance for an African American Museum in Huntington (quite frankly this individual needs to pick up a history book to learn the facts about our town’s African American history and legacy as his presentation was so uninformed and offensive it drew open grimaces on faces from every corner of the room).

The alienated parkland, Fair Meadow Park, is an almost ten-acre parcel at the corner of Park Avenue and Pulaski Road in Huntington/Huntington Station that abuts a condominium community known as Huntington Country Farms. 

This parcel, that came into being as part of a 1970s development of that condo community, as of yesterday was in the process of being “alienated” under New York State law to accommodate the future museum. The alienation becomes final once Governor Hochul signs the bill that was very recently approved by the New York State Legislature.

I understand that the Governor may have already signed the bill into law. Either that, or it's imminent, only underscoring how quickly a park alienation can happen when government is motivated.

One speaker aptly pointed out that this will be the first time Huntington has taken steps to alienate its coveted parkland, so she emphasized twice that it’s a “big deal.”

Let me again say Huntington’s contemplation of piercing the tax cap is also a big deal, but as evidenced by the lack of speakers on that proposition (daytime meeting restrictions aside) I think it’s fair to say that parkland in Huntington is sacrosanct. There were more than a few speakers on the subject of the museum who indicated that they had to put aside other obligations to attend.

Huntington is known and admired for its prolific acquisitions of open space and park improvements over a period of many years, and not for its divestment or jettisoning of it.

Park alienation is in fact, so “alien” to Huntington residents that one speaker opposing it asked in exasperation the rhetorical question “what does alienation even mean?”

Indeed, alienation of parkland in Huntington is a bold new move, and one that for the first time, has instilled an almost horror on the part of many citizens over the realization that their parkland can slip away so easily, seemingly, without their notice.

Parkland alienation occurs when a municipality wishes to convey, sell, or lease municipal parkland or discontinue its use as a park.

From New York State’s perspective, while preservation of municipal parks is always the goal, State Parks in fact recognizes that in certain instances a municipality may conclude that a change in parkland is necessary.  

In order to convey parkland away, or to use parkland for another purpose, a municipality must receive prior authorization from the State in the form of legislation enacted by the New York State Legislature and approved by the Governor. The bill by which the Legislature grants its authorization is referred to as a parkland alienation bill.

State law, among many requirements, provides that all a town, county, or village needs to do to begin a park alienation process is ask.

So, while Huntington Station and other residents were focused on, and battling a proposal to build a McDonalds at the northeast corner of Park and Pulaski (on an abandoned bank site that sits directly across the street from Fair Meadow Park) the Town Board held a special meeting on May 19^th to urge the New York Legislature to alienate and discontinue the use of Fair Meadow Park in order to construct the Huntington African American Museum.

Apparently not too many people knew about that. 

It seems folks found out from a speaker addressing the zoning board about the McDonalds proposal, who happened to be in the know. 

Mic drop. 

This is where controversy takes root.

But it's not all bad.

Many residents turned out to passionately argue that Fair Meadow Park is not only the right, but perfect location for the proposed museum.

After all, parks are wonderful places for museums. Just look at Heckscher Park to see a perfect example of such compatibility.

But there are a host of others who contend that because of Fair Meadow Park’s location at a crossroads of two major county roads, along with its adjoining of residential neighborhoods, it’s a terrible idea to put any museum there.

It seems to come down to a matter of opinion.

One speaker failed to find documenting evidence that Fair Meadow Park is even officially recognized as a state or town park at all.

Fair Meadow Park seems to suffer from an identity crisis. 

Is it a passive park?  Or is it a conservation area or conservation easement? 

The Town Board offered no illumination on the park's nomenclature.

Another speaker, after doing research on park uses argued that museums are considered to be a park amenity and therefore allowed under state law, raising the very good question as to whether the park even had to be alienated at all.

Another mic drop.

This story and controversy plucks a familiar chord from my many years working in Huntington government, and particularly in service on the Town Board. 

That chord is almost always more about the how than about the what.

Meaning, much of this consternation could have been avoided with forethought and planning, not to mention some modest and respectful community outreach to immediate stakeholders, nothing crazy.

It's not about what you're doing, but how you went about doing it that rankles people.

Anyone who sits on the Huntington Town Board knows that its citizens, especially in our highly community-engaged Town of Huntington, like to be a part of any public process that directly affects them or otherwise threatens a quality of life they enjoy.

Where the Town ran into trouble here is in making big plans with public assets and inviting no one to the party.

Even the very sweet and soft spoken Town Board-appointed park steward for Fair Meadow Park was not informed of this move to alienate the park she lovingly looks after. Forget about the directly adjacent Huntington Country Farms community. They were completely flat-footed.

Figureheads of the museum, including the eloquent and outspoken proponent Tracey Edwards, a former Huntington Town Councilwoman and member of the NAACP National Board of Directors, argued that Fair Meadow Park was always among three locations under consideration for the museum, so this should have been of surprise to no one.

Only, it was.

The Huntington African American Museum was originally slated to be constructed in Halesite, and I happen to have my own history with it as the sponsor of the 2023 Town Board resolution to initiate an investigation of the feasibility of the museum being constructed there. It was known going in that the property just off of Mill Dam Road is surrounded by wetlands.

When plans for the Halesite location recently fell through, the museum board was left to decide between the two remaining options: a parcel in Cold Spring Harbor or Fair Meadow Park. Edwards has argued that Halesite was never the right or even appropriate location for the museum, being next to the Town’s sewer plant.

Fair enough. Maybe it wasn't such a good idea.

The museum board was only eyeing the Halesite location because of its proximity to the nearby and now demolished/deconstructed Peter Crippen house that is of significant importance to Huntington’s early African American history- the timbers of which shall become a focal point of the museum’s future exhibits.

So that’s how the road led to Fair Meadow Park. That would be the same road that led to some kind of hell resulting in a very uncomfortable experience while visiting the "people's living room” on July 14.

Interestingly, Fair Meadow Park happens to be the same location where the Huntington African American history public art project called “Redemption” was eventually placed after a thorough search by my advisory committee that determined it to be the best location (I was the sponsor and organizer of this public art project that pays tribute to past and present Huntington African American luminaries. It was completed after I retired from the Town Board).

Town Board resolution 2026-404, establishing planning steps and an “implementation advisory team” for the establishment of the museum- produced a full house at Town Hall on what would have otherwise been a sleepy, slow daytime July board meeting. It was passed by a 5-0 vote.

No surprise there.

Despite the reservations expressed by those who still harbor concerns about the location for the museum or the park alienation, or both, along with their suggestions to the town board that other locations be considered and exhausted before all is said and done-- even they understood with visible defeat that it was a “done deal.”

What's ironic is Resolution 2026-404 speaks much to the importance of and desire for community engagement of stakeholders and neighbors, but it does not include on its "Implementation Advisory Team" a single member or stakeholder from the community surrounding the park and future museum.

Whether or not that resolution will be amended to add such persons, its passage in that form and on that day did little to regain the public trust that was lost by those who were blindsided by the Town Board’s bold and unprecedented action to alienate their neighborhood park.

July 14^th could have been a very different day, a day in which the Town and many supporters should and could have been proud as they mutually endeavor to usher in a new and exciting museum that offers yet another avenue that speaks to our past.

Instead, there were more than a few guts churning on both sides of the issue, and a town board resolution that may have been too little, too late.

Not to mention, a tax cap ready to be pierced with absolutely zero public comment.

I’ve been around long enough to know that sometimes, some of the best and most worthwhile projects, like Huntington Station’s revitalization, among many others, take time and community engagement. 

It isn't always easy, and in fact, can get down right messy. But it's a key ingredient to good government, planning and the transparency that everyone wants.

In government, time is usually on your side.

I also know that when government rushes too quickly into anything, it’s never good.

To be fair, there are always people who will want nothing, anywhere. And, no matter what it does, the town can obviously never make everyone happy.

But, for the vast majority of reasonable and thoughtful people and neighbors that were caught unaware, and who were brave enough to speak their piece at the risk of being poorly judged - these are the very people who might have otherwise come out as champions for the Huntington African American Museum at Fair Meadow Park.

All they needed was to be welcomed earlier on into the big idea and be given some time to digest it and adjust to the notion that Fair Meadow Park could still be a park (or whatever one wants to call it)- only one with a museum in it.

And for those who can't or won't get around the alienation of it all, perhaps a promise by the Town Board via Town Board Resolution to re-dedicate the unused portion of the parcel as parkland will heal that wound. 

After all, I think we can all agree that wounds can, and will heal.

It just takes time.

It's the public trust that's very hard to win back.