On September 10th, the bid for The Coney casino project, a $3.4 billion proposition led by Thor Equities in partnership with the Chickasaw Nation, faced a tumultuous second public hearing at the Coney Island YMCA. This highly controversial proposal is one of eight competing for three downstate New York casino licenses.
The hearing, lasting over four hours, saw tensions escalate to a point where police intervention was necessary on two occasions to maintain order. Vocal confrontations erupted as speakers on both sides of the issue argued passionately, many resorting to gestures and holding up signs. The community advisory committee (CAC), tasked with reflecting public opinion in a binding vote, is required to decide by September 30th if the project should proceed.
Community disapproval was evident during the proceedings. Approval from Thor and its collaborators, based on local sentiment, appears increasingly unlikely after this second hearing.
The sentiment against The Coney grew as testimonies from local elected officials, including Senator Steve Chan and former City Council member Ari Kagan, were heard. They expressed strong opposition, highlighting concerns about potential increases in crime and traffic congestion. Kagan emphasized his belief that a casino would only exacerbate local problems, such as mental health issues and bankruptcies, suggesting that the supposed job creation benefits were overstated.
“The only thing a casino will bring to Coney Island is increased congestion, huge traffic, more crime,” Kagan remarked, echoing the concerns of many present. He implored the community not to be swayed by promises of economic benefits, pointing to Atlantic City as an example where such promises had not materialized for local residents.
Despite the opposition, initial moments of the hearing showed support for The Coney. Early speakers donned “Yes to The Coney” apparel, echoing the iconic Coney Island hot dog logo. A local resident, Jay, expressed enthusiasm, viewing the casino as an opportunity for expansion and job creation. “YGS – that means ‘You Gotta Survive,'” he commented, underscoring the need for economic opportunities.
Supporters pointed to The Coney’s pledge of a $200 million community-led trust fund and a $75 million commitment to emergency services as evidence of the project’s benefits. Sheila Smalls, another resident, voiced her optimism, citing these contributions as pivotal for the community’s future.
However, skepticism regarding the motivations of supporters was palpable. Accusations of financial incentives, with figures like $80 mentioned, surfaced among opponents, though these claims were not officially addressed during the hearing. Additionally, the absence of union representatives and business groups was noted, highlighting a lack of organized support.
Patrick Wall, representing Coney Island USA, appealed to the CAC members to consider the potential negative impact on the neighborhood’s financial stability. His sentiment resonated with many, urging the committee to act as guardians of the community’s interests.
Known personally to many residents, the CAC members hold significant influence over the project’s fate. Marissa Solomon, a committee member and long-standing critic of the proposal, was specifically addressed by opponents. Pat O’Brien, a resident, pleaded, “We just need two of you to join Marissa to vote no,” underscoring the community’s reliance on the CAC to halt the proposal’s progress.
While The Coney’s developers argue that the casino will rejuvenate the local economy, critics maintain that the costs outweigh the benefits. They fear that an increase in gambling could lead to social issues and undermine the neighborhood’s character.
The proposal’s future remains uncertain, hinging on the upcoming vote. The Coney faces an uphill battle, as community opposition continues to mount. With the clock ticking, both sides prepare for what could be a decisive moment in the bid for a Coney Island casino.
4.1/5
