Initiating the New Rochelle City Council discussion on the development of the Armory, Mayor Noam Bramson said he was “pleased to get two proposals,” one from the Good Profit group, for a farm-to-table food market/restaurant, and one from the Save Our Armory Committee for a cultural/performing arts center. Both groups provided power point presentations in August, but Bramson added, now, “We must make a choice.” Referring to a timeline procedure that brought the Council to this point, he carefully stated no formal vote would be taken, just a designation for the memorandum of understanding (MOU). Further he elaborated, the Armory must be considered in the larger context of the total Echo Bay development. He emphasized that although this is not a formal vote for the memorandum of understanding, Council must make a choice “today.”
Commissioner of Development, Michael Freimuth, was called upon to evaluate the sources of funding and overall development differences. The original guidelines by Council were included. Freimuth carefully enumerated many problems with both proposals, especially the need to raise necessary funds. He felt both proposals needed “work,” cautioning that the City probably has to take a more aggressive role in funding this project. Recounting how he had sent questions which had a deadline of August 24 to both developers about their proposals he said he had just received answers from the Save Our Armory group about an hour and a half ago. He had not had time to fully examine them. Under these circumstances at this time Good Profit had a stronger proposal.
Bramson felt the process had been fair to all parties, specifically referring to the “deadline” for the answers to questions posed by Commissioner Freimuth. Councilman Barry Fertel said he was always skeptical” about whether the Armory could be saved, but he was impressed with the Good Profit proposal. Councilman Albert Tarantino felt the end result of this process was more important. Responding to comments made by Tarantino, Corporation Counsel Kathleen Gill said there were no legal impediments to issuing another Request for Proposals. Tarantino then brought up the presentation made the night before at the meeting at City Hall which was sponsored by neighborhood associations. Councilman Lou Trangucci added both sides should be given another chance to make a presentation but his formal motion to do this failed along party lines. The only person to express concern over the Save Our Armory group was Councilwoman Shari Rackman who said she could not attend the meeting the day before because of the Jewish holiday. She said she had met with Good Profit and hoped they can provide more space for the veterans.
Citing the significant majority (five Democrats in favor, two Republicans in opposition) of the Council voting informally to designate Good Profit as the developer for an MOU with the Armory, Bramson added, he was “excited with what Good Profit is proposing.” After the meeting Commissioner Freimuth, who will be leaving his post October 15 or later for a new position, stated that he had submitted questions to the two proposed developers on August 9 and had given them a deadline of August 24 for answers. The questions were about their cost projections, funding sources, and their development programs. City Manager Chuck Strome confirmed that the vote by Council was not a formal vote, but it “provided direction to the City Staff to negotiate an MOU with the Good Profit team.”
Have the residents of New Rochelle been shut out again from an important development decision? It certainly appears that way especially since no public hearings were held on the two proposals. At the City Council meeting the week before almost every speaker at Citizens to be Heard was in favor of the Save Our Armory proposal.
In the October 4 issue of Westchester Guardian