The unprecedented thirteenth extension of the LeCount Square proposal by the New Rochelle City Council is baffling. Why are certain members of City Council overlooking all of Louis Cappelli’s financial problems with this and other projects? Further, how are certain City Council members assessing the veracity of the Cappelli organization? A representative of the Cappelli organization claimed that Kohl’s Department Store would sign an agreement for their proposed store in New Roc no later than November 20. So on December 21 when there was no Kohl’s agreement, why were five Council members so willing to continue to approve the thirteenth extension of the adjoining LeCount Square development proposal?
The previous City Council vote for the twelfth extension had only one negative vote by Councilman Lou Trangucci. At that meeting three Council members expressed reservations about the property. Councilman Al Tarantino stated there were blighted conditions in the area. Councilman James Stowe endorsed Tarantino’s statement and added the thirteenth renewal would be the “bewitching hour.” Councilman Barry Fertel said he agreed with these concerns, finding the area had unacceptable conditions and added the Cappelli organization should implement needed changes. City Manager Chuck Strome claimed the staff had concerns about the area for the last few months and said he would do what he could to visually improve the site. Tarantino added the block was desolate at night and the blighting of this area would affect the merchants and city revenue.
Despite all these concerns and the statements at the hearings by the owners of 5 Anderson Street (in the project area) who claimed Cappelli owned them a huge amount of money, the City Council’s thirteenth approval for the LeCount Square project produced only two negative votes, Trangucci and Tarantino. This time another Councilman expressed concerns about Cappelli’s promise to bring Kohl’s to New Roc. Councilman Richard St. Paul claimed Cappelli had made contributions to the city, and he was voting “yes” because of the general economic conditions. He claimed he will not vote “yes” next time if Cappelli does not bring Target and Kohl’s to New Roc.
No Council member addressed the money Cappelli owes to 5 Anderson Street or their lawsuit. Why was the economy a reason given for an affirmative vote but no mention was made of Cappelli’s broken promises? Why is the Council giving such preferential treatment to a developer without making that developer state why they are not fulfilling their promises?
Residents are baffled. George Imburgia stated, “I don’t see why any developer should be given so many extensions. The City of New Rochelle must think highly of Louis Cappelli, but frankly I don’t see anything beneficial from his developments.” Lorraine Pierce questioned why the City Council was giving an unprecedented thirteenth approval to this proposal. Why is this developer getting such unusual preferential treatment?
[reprinted from Westchester Herald, January 18, 2010]
