Home News Local News Public weighs in on use of Mitchell Park in Greenport

Public weighs in on use of Mitchell Park in Greenport

A series of public comment periods to discuss whether or not to allow mass public assembly permits in Greenport’s Mitchell Park commenced Monday night at a village board meeting.

Greenport Mayor David Nyce prefaced the discussion, which he said would be ongoing over a series of months, by explaining that he has asked Village Attorney Joe Prokop to look into any limitations that might be placed on the property due to state and federal funding that was used to create the park.

“This park is fairly new, in the grand scheme of things,” Nyce said, adding that the village could not tell people not to use a public park, unless someone was restricting another’s use of the space.

The currentt administration, the mayor said, has tried not to put strict controls over the park, and has not yet instituted “hard and fast rules,” instead approaching the issue on a case by case basis, generally alowing events that were organized as a village-sponsored function or for public benefit.

Nyce said comments have been made over the past seven years that the park would be overused and the time would come “when there wouldn’t be a weekend without something happening in the park. That has come to pass.”

This spring, the board looked to deny several events “due to extended use of the park.” When controversy ensued over restriction of two religious events at the park, that were denied because the board “though tthey were not appropriate,” the board “had to backtrack”, and allow the events, Nyce said.

A comment was made by Trustee George Hubbard at the time, Nyce said, “That you won’t be able to go to Mitchell Park on any given day without someone renting a portion of the park.”

To that end, the board determined that a moratorium would be placed on mass public assembly permits while a decision was made, with public input, on how the park should be used moving forward, Nyce said.

Two ideas were pitched, the mayor said, the first being to make the cost “prohibitive”; Hubbard suggested $1,000 and Nyce, $2,500, for the permits. Again, Nyce said information needed to be garnered relating to any stipulations placed on the property by New York State.

The other suggestion was to just eliminate the mass public assembly permits entirely and, if a group were to be “impeding the public’s right” to the park, they would be asked to move on, Nyce said.

Public input will be sought through meetings, email and written comment, Nyce said. “The idea is to take the temperature of what people think we should be doing.”

A lengthy discussion was held at a meeting of the Greenport Business Improvement District, Nyce said; the group would offer their thoughts in the future.

Greenport village resident Mike Osinski read the First Amendment, reminding of the “right of the people to peaceably assembly,” under the governing law of the land. “I think this board should tread very lightly on the amount of restrictions it wants to place on public property. We as residents of this nation have that right to assemble.”

Those that are rowdy or drunk are a different story, he said.

Osinski reminded of the many events that take place already in the park, including the Maritime Festival, and lightings of the village Christmas tree and menorah.

Nyce reminded that mass public assembly permits give applicants rights to specific portions of the park for their event. “If we don’t grant that, the park is what Mr. Osinski said, an open space for everyone to assemble. All the permit process will allow us to do is to authorize use of a specific structure, or deal with amplification. We cannot limit people’s right to assemble based on who they are.”

Osinski said he was in favor of the permit process.

Resident Doug Roberts said Mitchell Park was “amazing” and part of the reason many have moved to the village over the past 10 years. Other parks in the village, he said “are not so maazing.” He suggested that Mitchell Park is a “potential revenue generator,” and perhaps, a few “big money events” could be held each year to help finance village projects such as park upgrades and also, to pay off village debt. The matter, he said, could be put to a public referendum.

Joanne McEntee asked who would be making decisions as to who would be granted use of the park; Nyce said that was the village board’s decision.

“I do believe that Mitchell Park needs to bring in a lot more money. We are in a deficit right now,” she said.

Resident Bill Swiskey said charging for use of public space that was funded with state and federal monies could result in a lawsuit. He also believes village debt needs to be paid by the marina.

“To generate enough money out of that park for the debt is a pipe dream, and the park would be destroyed,” he said. 

In addition, he said, the village must to decide to allow permit all events, or nothing, except village-sponsored events such as Dances in the Park.

Swiskey added that the recent religious event in the park sparked complaints from merchants about noise and a rowdy crowd. At that point, he said, a village official should have told the group they were “out of bounds and disturbing the peace.” Enforcement, he said, is critical. “We can stop them from screaming but not from congregating,” he said.

“The success of the park has caused the problem,” Doug Moore, resident and zoning board of appeals chair, said. He said the public has generally supported village-sponsored activities and he believed a determined number of events could be allowed, through application and based on merit, public interest and benefit to the community.

Resident John Saladino said the public’s right to assemble cannot be limited, but other limitations could be placed on amplified music, especially when an event was scheduled near another village facility where people might be expecting “peace and quiet”.

He added, “They have the right to religious freedom but they don’t have the right to be disruptive.”

Saladino added that in New York, “everything is for rent”, but special event permits are necessary and high fees are charged.

He asked why the meeting wasn’t held after it was clear what would be allowed under New York State rules.

Nyce said there had been some miscommunication, and he’d asked Prokop to look into it, but he and Hubbard had decided to still hold the first public discussion to garner input and get the proverbial ball rolling.

 

SHARE