Sussman: “For some poeple, this is primarily about the building; for me,
this is primarily about government not functioning.”
GOSHEN – During a court proceeding earlier this month, Orange County said it would not begin any demolition or dismantling on the dormant county government center until at least July 1st, two months from now.
A debate has raged among county legislators over whether to demolish part of the current structure, closed two years ago because of environmental issues, or go with a proposal favored by a minority of legislators, to sell the building and build a new government center.
Attorney Michael Sussman’s suit, filed on April 10th, argued that the “two building plan” is a viable and less costly alternative.
The existing government center, designed by architect Paul Rudolph and
considered by some to be architecturally significant, would be sold to
New York City architect Gene Kauffman, who would preserve the structure
and convert it to an artist colony.
“This solution would end the waste of taxpayer dollars carried forward by implementation of the current plan and will save the government center which was the legislature resolve, the bipartisan legislature resolve in February of 2013,” Sussman said. “It will allow the wonderful reuse of the government center. It will expedite reopening of the courts and it will allow this generation of architects to build a new government center which reflects the spirit and aesthetics of our time and our need.”
That plan, he said, would save county taxpayers $25 million.
During a Wednesday news conference in his Goshen office, Sussman argued that Orange County Government in general and County Executive Steven Neuhaus in particular have a history or ignoring their own intentions, ignoring environmental issues surround with their plan to possibly demolish part or all of the dormant 40-year-old building, and playing political patronage. More critically, Sussman claims that now, despite what the county offered during the April 10th court proceeding, in arguing against a temporary restraining order. The judge did not issue a TRO, largely based on a promise from the county that there would be no demolition activity until July 1st at the earliest.
Sussman further contends that the county is ignoring lawful discovery requests, seeking disclosure of all documents and information pertaining to what the county is doing and why. He said the request has been ignored.
“We have a creeping governmental not just ineptitude, that’s one problem, but we’re also … we have, when you think about what we’ve been through with this, just in the last year and a few months, we have these same folks proposing this asset forfeiture thing. Same very people are behind this. The asset forfeiture thing is patently unconstitutional. When we pointed that out, the legislature finally stopped it.”
Sussman’s final claim is that the county’s latest maneuver seeks to “… marginalize the substantial Gene Kauffman has shown in creating an arts center, renovating the court space … and constructing a new government center.”
County Attorney Langdon Chapman responded to Sussman’s latest allegations.
“Earlier, the petitioners complained that the county legislature didn’t consider the building revisions in their SEQRA,” Chapman said. “Now, they complain that the legislature is considering them in an amended SEQRA. They can’t have it both ways.”
Chapman said SEQRA determinations “are amended regularly on large scale projects – even when not absolutely necessary. They are amended for various reasons – sometimes to blunt litigation; sometimes to better reflect the project changes; sometimes for other reasons.”
He said the fact is, “the judge did not stop Orange County from doing the work we are doing, and the project remains on track. The real anger Mr. Sussman and/or his clients appear to be showing, is that they don’t get to tie this project up for years, don’t get to drive up the projects costs by millions, and don’t get to force the county to sell to their favored developer.”
Chapman noted the legislature voted 18-3 to renovate the government center instead of building new.
“That decision was made before the county executive even took office,” Chapman said. “The political games and efforts to sell to their favored developer do not serve the taxpayers – which is what we all need to be focused on.”
