I was a little bit dismissive of the lawsuits against the proposed Belmont Park New York Islanders arena when they were filed last month, mostly because lawsuits claiming that the state isn’t following its own rules don’t exactly have a glorious record of success in New York, since courts have largely allowed the state to define its rules as it sees fit. But as the fan site Eyes on Isles reports, there’s one element of the suit that could be more effective:
The lawsuit sets out four pages of its petition/complaint discussing Public Trust Doctrine and how that process was ignored in this case.
New York State Franchise Oversight cannot usurp the Elective Official Authority to transfer or lease public park/state land without a legislative act. -Halop et al v. Empire State Development Corp. et al. pg.13
What is Public Trust Doctrine? Essentially, it’s the idea that the parkland can’t be sold without the authority of a legislative body, in this case, the New York State Legislature.
So why does that argument have legs? Well, it’s been used before, quite recently and it won. The same argument was used against the construction of a mall at Willets Point and it won.
That isn’t quite right — the proposed mall, though named Willets West, was actually proposed for the Citi Field parking lot — but the gist is correct: The land involved was mapped as city parkland, so the legislature was required to vote to de-map it first, and they hadn’t, so the project died.
The big question, then, is: Is Belmont Park mapped parkland? That’s not as easy a question to answer as one would hope: It’s owned by the state and run as a park, but this is all about what the official designation is — the Citi Field land had been used for parking for decades, but it was still officially parkland, so building a mall on top was ruled out of order. The state Empire State Development agency wrote in its response to Request For Proposals questions in 2018 that “No part of the Site is considered parkland that would require Legislative approval for alienation purposes,” but then, New York City insisted that the Willets West land wasn’t really parkland that would require legislative alienation, and it was. And while a hockey arena could conceivably be considered a “public purpose” that would be allowable on parkland (as the Mets’ stadium is), the rest of the surrounding development would be way more dodgy.
So, in short, dunno, but I’ll keep researching it. Of all the last-ditch attempts to block the Islanders arena, though, the parkland issue legally has the most teeth, so it’s worth watching. The next court date is set for December 6, so if nothing else, hopefully we’ll get some more info then.
I have little doubt that if Floral Park had a good case, they would have asked for and received a “Temporary Restraining Order” by now. This is not taking parks, people’s homes or jobs away like at Willets Point or Atlantic Yards. In tjis case, the land that is being used for the Arena was used about 50 times in the past 50 years: Parking on Belmont Stakes Day. Give me a break.
As noted above, the issue isn’t how the land has been used — the Willets West land had never been anything but parking. It’s about whether it’s officially parkland, which ¯_(ツ)_/¯.
Hopefully this screws up this arena plan.. move to Quebec they want a team
The developers moved in court to dismiss Floral Park’s suit.
Also, during last night Islander game they showed a rendering where there’s a hotel next to the arena, and the shopping mall was south of Hempstead Turnpike. Not much parking.
In my view Belmont Park is not run as a park but as a gambling hall. Hopefully the land is not designated as parkland as it never has been used as such, going back to August Belmont purchase of the land.