After bringing its assertions to court, the city of Rye will attempt to wrestle control of any potential upcoming projects at Playland from Westchester County.
The decision to file an Article 78 lawsuit on Aug. 10 comes after news that the county—who entered into an agreement transferring management of the park to the private company Standard Amusements back in March—had declared itself lead agency in late April for the basis of overseeing capital investment projects in the park.
“It was reckless of the county to try to sneak this through without following the law,” said Rye City Mayor Joe Sack, a Republican.
The finalization of the lawsuit brushed up against a tight filing deadline of Aug. 11; a date which marked the last day of a state-mandated four-month statute of limitations to challenge any declaration of lead agency.
According to Rye City Attorney Kirsten Wilson, while Rye hasn’t yet pushed for an injunction—a move which would put a foreseeable stop on capital projects at the park until the litigation is resolved—the city is still mulling over its right to do so.
Members of the Rye City Council have contended, in a letter sent to County Attorney Robert Meehan, that the county has blatantly ignored proper SEQRA procedures and has failed to inform the city of its intentions at the amusement park; claims the administration of Republican County Executive Rob Astornio has repeatedly denied.
“The county has offered Rye a seat at the table, seeking to balance the wishes of the neighborhood around Playland with our efforts to make the park a family-oriented and inviting attraction,” said Daniel Branda, a spokesman for Astorino.
Nicholas Singer, Standard’s co-founder, expressed dismay at the most recent turn of events.
“We have grave concerns about the city of Rye’s apparent efforts to harm its own citizens and waste millions of dollars of Rye and Westchester County taxpayer money with a meritless lawsuit,” he said.
Sack, however, feels that Standard has been complicit in the county’s failure to include the city in deciding the future of the park.
“As much as the county and Standard now want to turn this into a public relations war, the city is confident that this matter will be settled in a court of law,” the mayor said.
As of press time, an online petition created on Change.org titled “Stop Mayor Sack, Keep Rye Playland Alive” has garnered 159 signatures from numerous out-of-state petitioners. A corresponding Facebook page also materialized just a day after Rye’s decision to move forward with the Article 78.
In particular, the potential addition of a dining area in place of Playland’s pool—which residents in the surrounding neighborhood worry could exacerbate traffic conditions and noise—has given Rye’s elected officials and residents pause.
Representatives from Standard, however, have denied any intention to build a large-scale dining establishment, stating that the site of the pool could be used as “an open veranda” with “light refreshments.”
Contractually, as per the management agreement, however, Standard would have the ultimate say in the future of the space currently occupied by the pool.
The prospect of a legal battle between the county and Rye has loomed before.
In 2014, a former company seeking to take control of the park, Sustainable Playland Inc., SPI, proposed an 87,000-square-foot field house in the Playland parking lot, which sits adjacent to Rye’s residential neighborhoods.
Eventually, due to growing scrutiny and mounting public opposition to the SPI plan, Sustainable Playland walked away from the deal with the county. Despite posturing, the 2014 feud never reached actual litigation.
Rye City Councilwoman Julie Killian, a Republican who held office during the county’s tumultuous negotiations with SPI, believes the county and the city can mend their disagreements out of court.
“I would like to see a lot more communication between the county and the city,” she said. “I feel confident that if we all get in a room together, we can figure it out.”
