Editorial: TOH public hearing on apartments fails test of quality discourse

Over an hour into Tuesday night’s Huntington Town Board public hearing on a proposed law to amend the zoning code for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), Alain Robert of Greenlawn suggested the town board should “raise the quality of political discourse.” His was perhaps the most useful and impactful comment of the evening.

Robert’s point was made among dozens of residents who spoke to the board for over two hours, many with a tone of disrespect, rudeness and privilege. Some residents in attendance laughed and booed at speakers, shouted at the board out of turn and villainized tenants within the town, calling them “undesirables” who are unwilling to work hard to afford housing and will change the “complexion” of the community.

Complex issues should be spoken about professionally, so that people don’t sensationalize them, Robert said, which is especially true with a topic like affordable housing that comes with valid opinions on both sides. A lack of information put forth by the town board before the hearing, combined with fliers and editorials opposed to the proposed law circulated among the public, further complicated the potential of a productive dialogue.

Citizens for a Sustainable Huntington sent out fliers to town residents, prior to the hearing, with the following headline: “Huntington Town Board proposes abolishing single-family zoning, apartments would be legal in all basements and outdoor structures.” The flier states that the proposed law would cause “exploding taxes,” and billions of dollars spent on expanding roads and treating wastewater. The back of the flier has a hand-drawn illustration with car-lined streets and lawn signs in front of homes stating “Cabana for Rent,” “Basement Apartment,” and “Apartment for Rent.” In the middle, a human figure is holding a sign that says “Make any offer” for his home, indicating that it can’t be sold.

The evening before the hearing, Councilwoman Joan Cergol, who called the flier “bunk,” released a fact sheet in response to the misinformation spreading on the proposed changes to the ADU code. In it, she referred to a saturation clause that would not allow ADUs in every household; the number of apartments could not exceed a 10% limit within a half-mile radius of an applicant’s property. The fact sheet also stated that ADU properties must be occupied by the owner, disallowing absentee landlords, must measure at least 300 square feet and be no larger than 750 square feet. Shed sizes, in comparison, range from 25-120 square feet, the document stated.

The town already has an ADU program that allows for one ADU per property and requires that homeowners maintain New York State building and fire safety codes, town codes, off-street parking requirements, wastewater discharge requirements of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services, and the Suffolk County Sanitary Code.

Basement apartments in the Town of Huntington were allowed between 1991 and 2019, the document states, and the proposed law would allow them again with the additional precautionary feature of required fire sprinklers. The town’s fire marshal and all relevant fire and rescue agencies must be notified when an ADU is approved under the proposed law.

“The [proposed law] sponsors have spent significant time and care engaging members of the fire and rescue communities to discuss concerns with great sensitivity to create public policy that supports and protects them,” the document states. Huntington’s fire and rescue communities agree that this measure helps them, not hurts them, the document continues, and have therefore expressed their support for it.

The document also addressed concerns related to schools and rising taxes, suggesting that the small number of apartments being approved compared to the number of homes in the town (2,200 ADUs since 1991 compared to 70,000 homes) would have a minimal impact on enrollment, and homeowners with ADUs would see properly value increases, which would be reflected in their taxes. They would also see an increase in their refuse/garbage pickup rate.

During the hearing, despite the combative and divisive rhetoric used by many in attendance, and insults directed at Councilwoman Joan Cergol specifically for sponsoring the resolution, valid points were made by those for and against the proposed law amendment.

Residents in favor of the law said that some homeowners are struggling to pay their mortgages and people, particularly young adults, are living in illegal apartments that are potentially unsafe and not to town code.

Roger Weaving, a Huntington Village resident, said that the board was brave for bringing this issue forward. “The reason you have people living in illegal apartments is because they have jobs here, they work here and want to be where they work. And when you force them to live in places that are not legal, you force them into unsafe places,” he said. “I haven’t heard a single solution on where you want these people to go,” Weaving said to the people opposed to ADUs.

Joshua Chan, a Huntington resident who will be graduating from Albany University in 2024, believes “Huntington has the potential to be a leader in affordable housing on Long Island and a beacon of hope for young people seeking housing.” By embracing ADUs, he said, the town can pave the way for a brighter future not just for young professionals, but for the entire community. Chan said that he’d love to move back home after graduating from college and contribute to the local economy, but many of his peers are leaving the island because they cannot afford it. “At some point, the only people on Long Island will be people who are older than me,” he said. “It’s soon going to become a retirement community, so we need to have affordable housing for all young people.” Chan was one of several college students and young graduates who voiced their opinions in favor of more affordable housing options in Huntington.

Adam Broadheim lives at home with his parents and echoed what many young people said at the hearing. “The American dream, which so many of you enjoy, is horribly out of reach for me,” he said. Broadheim works as a historic preservationist and said that ADUs are the perfect way to make sure our neighborhoods look the same, while still allowing people like him to live here. “This is actually how you protect neighborhood character,” he said.

Lourdes Pena is a tenant in Huntington and spoke to dispel the “bad things said about tenants” during the hearing. “Most of us are good,” she said, “I have two degrees, I’ve worked at Fortune 100 companies for almost 27 years, I was a realtor for six [years], I now work for a nonprofit. I live in a legal apartment and get along with the family who owns the house. I help them and they help me,” she explained. Pena said that she also gets along with her neighbors and follows the rules, and a lot of tenants are like her.

Hunter Gross, a 27-year-old Huntington resident, stated that 70% of Long Islanders support ADUs. The proposed law will improve the legislation that was in place until 2019, requiring that sprinklers be added to basement apartments, he added. Equating more homes with more crime is “disgusting,” he said; young people who grew up in Huntington, like he did, are the ones looking for more local housing options.

U.S. Air Force veteran Bruce Berman came to Huntington 47 years ago after living in Brooklyn. He said he took a job with UPS and married a teacher before he was able to afford a home in town. “I'm as much in the dark about where a single starting-out person can live as I was when I was 25 years old. I don’t know where a widow, where a recent college graduate – where do these people live? I can’t figure it out,” Berman said. He added that ADUs may not be the answer, but “somebody is smart enough to figure out something so that these people have a place to live.”

Residents opposed to the proposed law fear it will eliminate single-family zoning in Huntington, an aspect of the town that for many, drove them to Long Island from urban areas of the state. They pointed to septic system overload, issues with fire and emergency access, increased crime and pollution, overloaded schools and rising taxes.

The “character” of Huntington is defined by single-family units, some residents stated, and “it’s interesting” that renters will be able to vote, one speaker said. You have to move where you can live and live where you can afford, residents opposed to the law suggested, and for many speakers, living in Huntington was the result of hard work and years of saving money.

Barbara Schwenker said that not everyone can afford to live in Huntington. “I’m against the rental of all ADU structures,” she said, “I chose to live here because it’s a beautiful town – I don't want it to look like the Bronx or Queens,” she added. She also noted the increase in pollution, traffic and crime in the state, suggesting that this is why people are leaving New York.

Karen Swensen, who spoke to represent the residents of Beverly Hills Estates in Huntington, said they elected the board to be stewards of the town, and they’re “trying to turn us into Brooklyn.”

“Considering this amendment is a stab in the back to those that elected you,” she said to the board. “You want to degrade our suburban communities by allowing structures to be outfitted and used as apartments.” Every apartment puts more strain on the roads, schools, first responders and community lifestyle, Swensen said.

Margaret O’Connor said that it took her nearly two decades to afford to move out of Queens and into Huntington with her husband. “We were patient and we saved for 18 years just to come out here,” she said. She voted for the board members because they promised to maintain their suburban quality of life and the fact that the proposed law got this far feels like a complete betrayal of her trust, O’Connor added. “Density makes people angry and crazy,” she said, explaining that in Queens, she lived in a small apartment with people living below and above her.

Beth Mintz said that while the community needs affordable housing in Huntington, this is not the way. She sees no problem with elderly parents or children living in a single family home with the owners, but is opposed to strangers sharing a home. Mintz also noted that the proposed law could hurt our schools. “Our school systems are already struggling. There aren’t enough aids or support staff to even support what we have here,” she said. She suggested that Suffolk County look at vacant office buildings to address the local affordable housing issue.

Yesterday, Town Supervisor Ed Smyth, who said on Tuesday that he has a “low bar” for public hearings and schedules them to gauge community opinion, released the following statement: “For months I have expressed my concerns and opposition to basement apartments and their safety. After listening to the public hearing at Tuesday’s Town Board meeting, I have even greater skepticism of the benefits these ADUs provide.” He added, “I am hopeful this well-intentioned, yet flawed, proposal will be the catalyst for my colleagues to work together for a safe and sustainable housing policy that provides diverse housing options for Huntington.”

Working together to find solutions and common ground is, of course, the best course of action when attempting to solve a complex problem. The tone of the residents on Tuesday night, however, did not indicate that this is a realistic prospect. Hopefully, at the next public hearing that offers a potential solution for affordable housing, we keep the words of Alain Robert in mind and engage in quality discourse over sensationalism.