Dancing with the Stars: Scott Congel and the Town of Irondequoit

As has been the case for the past few years, a story on the Medley Center has left me very, very confused, optimistic, skeptical & befuddled (just because I like that word) – all at the same time. The same wonderful assurances we’ve heard since early 2009, coming up once again. Yet, if you were to ask anyone living in Syracuse, I’m sure they’ll tell you: “Don’t hold your breath – it’s Scott Congel.”

But I think we should continue to hold out hope, because this really could be a monumental project for Irondequoit, and wipe away years of disappointment and embarrassment.

Until then… there is that little item about our $500,000.

We want that money, Scott!

Since Scott Congel’s whereabouts may range anywhere from the Mir Space Station to a Denver Nuggets playoff game (he lives in Colorado, I believe), it appears he has now made our own Supervisor his de-facto spokesperson. Unfortunately, she didn’t instill confidence that Congel would be forking over the cash.

Therefore, I will do my best to outline why she might have a legal, moral and political obligation to be a tad more insistent.

One good thing about our Town is that we certainly like putting scanned files up on our Town’s website, not excluding PILOT agreements for major economic development endeavors. (NOTE: I’d advise not clicking on the hyperlink above – because it’s a very big file. So as to not freeze your computer, I’ve transcribed the two relevant passages.)

Much of this has been well documented by other “news outlets” in Town (Nice work in 2009, FOILS! )

Section 8.1.4 of the PILOT Agreement states that the $500,000 is due on the "Entitlement Date".

8.1.4 Construction Impact PILOT Payment. On the Entitlement Date the Company shall also make a non-refundable payment to the Town in the amount of $500,000 (the "Construction Impact PILOT Payment") which amount shall be available as deemed needed or appropriate by the Town to address impacts resulting from the construction and development of the Project.

Section 8.3 defines "Entitlement Date" to mean the Effective Date (which was April 8, 2009).

However, that same section also states that if litigation was commenced that prevented work on the Project for starting, or would have invalidated any zoning or other governmental determination for this Project – the “entitlement date” would have been twelve (12) months from the Effective Date. What did that mean? It meant that the PILOT, as most legal agreements do, left some wiggle room for interpretation between respective parties’ attorneys. Or, at least that what I assume, because Scott Congel seems to be good at finding loopholes in lieu of stalled development.

Section 8.3 Definitions

As used herein, the "Entitlement Date" means the Effective Date or, if litigation is commenced challenging any of the processes or determinations under the New York State Quality Review Act (including all regulations thereunder, "SEQRA"), zoning and/or any other governmental determination or process for or with respect to this Project, including, without limitation, this Agreement, and such litigation prohibits the commencement of the work on the Project or if such litigation, if successful in whole or in part, would invalidate any zoning or other governmental determination for this Project, twelve (12) months from the Effective Date. As used herein, the term "Additional Improvements" means any (a) newly constructed building improvements whether created by new free-standing construction or by expansions (horizontally or vertically) to existing improvements, (b) parking structures and/or (c) reconstruction of the existing Bon-Ton and J.C. Penney buildings. As used herein. "Full-Time Job" shall mean jobs regularly requiring at least 30 hours per week.

However, it is now April 23nd.

Scott Congel can hire all of the lawyers he wants to dispute whether he was required to make this payment at some point over the past 12 months, or not. Yet, I’m sure it wouldn’t even require a $150 email from Planning Board Attorney Dan Aureli to clarify that there is absolutely no disputing that under the 2009 PILOT Agreement, the 12-month period from April 8, 2009 expired a two weeks ago and the money is now due.

I think any candidate had the right in 2009 to make the timeliness of this payment a campaign issue. Obviously, the previous administration had their interpretation; while others thought that Mr. Congel should have been $500,000 less wealthy come Labor Day weekend of 2009. Indeed, the Republican candidates did express concerns over both the viability of the project, as well as the need for Congel to own up to his financial obligations to the Town. One, in particular, was most vocal.

“The Medley Centre situation is very alarming to our taxpayers. With millions of dollars of lost revenue, the deal was made with a lack of due diligence, refusal to disclose financing and disregard for public input. Now with a missed payment of $500,000 to the town, I say it’s time for more than a “gentle reminder” to developer Congel. Pay up or get back on the tax roll.” -Future Council woman Debbie Essley, Irondequoit Post, 10/23/09

At least Councilwoman Essley has 3 ½ more years to make a “gentle reminder.” You would have thought back in October she was ready to send in some Wise Guys to “talk” to Mr. Congel…if you could find the guy, that is.

To her credit, Mr. D’Aurizio has always been a tad more understanding, possibly because her husband was such a strong proponent of the original PILOT while he served as President of the Irondequoit Chamber of Commerce. For the most part, she’s maintained optimism in the future of Medley, as we all should. At one point this year, she said she had a “gut feeling” that something was going to happen by May 1st.

Well, it’s good to have hope. But I think the people of Irondequoit deserve to know what their new Majority intends to do to get the money we, without any cloud of legal ambiguity, were supposed to have received by now. Ray Levato states in yesterday’s piece: “She (Supervisor D’Aurizio) says it's important to the town to see some money as a good faith gesture.” That’s not exactly drawing a line in the sand, is it? I’d be interested to hear whether or not Councilwoman Essley feels this constitutes more than a “gentle reminder.”

All that being said, $500,000 represents 1/520th of the overall cost of this project. If Mr. Congel receives more than a “gentle reminder”, perhaps a subtle “wet willy,” I think our elected officials can coerce him to pay up.