In Stunning Result, PV Rec. Center Voted Down
Putnam Valley voters narrowly defeated a measure that would have resulted in a new recreation center in town Thursday night, halting a project town officials heavily lobbied for.
In the dead of summer, more than 1,500 voters came out with 840 rejecting the proposal and 744 supporting it. The 96-vote difference was a stunning end to an issue that lit a fire under the town the past few months. Supporters touted the proposed center as an epicenter where adults and children could take classes and play sports, but opponents decried the center as too expensive. The overall price tag would have been $3.8 million that would have been bonded and paid off over many years.
Supervisor Sam Oliverio, who pushed hard for the center, was stunned and solemn as the vote total was announced at the Ambulance Corp. building after 9 p.m.
“This would have been a real positive asset for the community, but the people aren’t ready for it,” Oliverio said.
Oliverio said he believes the town faced an uphill battle against a “lot of negative misinformation.” He said, for instance, there were fliers that the recreation building would only be open five days per week from 8 a.m.- 4 p.m., which he said wasn’t the case. It would be open daily and the hours would be longer, he said.
He did give some credit to the opposition for their hard work and also pointed to complacency among those that wanted the center. He said the day after the vote he got several calls and emails from residents that didn’t vote, but wanted the center.
“I assumed this was a slam dunk win with a huge plurality,” Oliverio said. “Who would oppose a year round rec. center?”
But Oliverio conceded the fear of higher taxes also led to voters shooting down the center. While he said $24 more in taxes for the building for several years per household might not seem like a lot, taxes in the area are already exorbitant.
“We did everything we could,” Oliverio said.
Recreation Committee chairman Phil Keating called the vote a “big setback” because programs won’t be enhanced.
The recreation center would have expanded limited gym space and led to more programs and classes that the town used to have or never had before.
“We move on, we don’t give up,” Keating said. “We’ve been doing this long enough, we know what we’re doing and we’re doing this for the kids and community and we’ll continue.”
Councilwoman Jackie Annabi said she was “deeply disappointed” with the outcome and pointed to the “bombardment of misinformation” by those opposing the project. Looking back, she believes the town would have been better served to hold more town hall style meetings about the project to better inform residents.
“We obviously failed in effectively educating the residents as to the true facts about every aspect of the proposal,” Annabi said.
She thanked the town employees and volunteers that worked hard on the proposal and vowed the town would continue to find ways to improve the quality of life for residents.
“I’m sure we’ll go back to the drawing board, learn from our failures to come up with new and exciting solutions to the lack of recreational resources available to all Putnam Valley residents,” Annabi said.
Longtime resident Patty Villanova was against the recreation center and called the results a victory for taxpayers. She panned the plan as too costly and not sustainable.
“We don’t need this building,” Villanova said. “You don’t need to spend (money) on a building like this. It’s crazy.”
While Oliverio claimed residents against the recreation center were speaking falsehoods, Villanova claimed it was town officials that were “blatantly lying.” Information disseminated by the opponents of the center came from Freedom of Information Act requests, Villanova said.
She said the town tried to build the center in secret and many people didn’t know about the center until she and others set out to get the bond to a vote.
Resident Dan Vera, also active in town, campaigned against the recreation center. In an email blast a couple days before the vote, Vera stressed the center would cost too much in taxes and fees to participate in programs.
“They’re spending our tax dollars to promote this 30-year $3.8-million bond, do you really think they have our best interest at heart,” Vera said in the email.
The proposed recreation center sparked widespread and passionate debate throughout town. The town board originally voted unanimously to approve a bond for the center and New York State Senator Sue Serino even announced a $100,000 grant for the facility, with a press release titled “Recreation Center Coming to Putnam Valley with Help from Serino.” But a handful of residents had other plans and forced a permissible referendum, which meant town residents and not just the five town board members would determine the fate of the proposed recreation center.
Villanova fears that another vote for the recreation center would be scheduled at a later date.
“They won’t accept no,” Villanova said.
And Oliverio hasn’t ruled it out. The town must wait a year before reintroducing the measure. When asked if another vote on the recreation center was possible, Oliverio said, “Yes, absolutely.”
