It may be the beginning of May, but the holiday season was on everyone’s minds during Monday’s Flower Hill Board of Trustees meeting, which was dominated by the discussion of a new exhibition law.
The law would require homes that have “illumination of an outside area” that resulted in 20 or more people visiting on three days within a 10-day period to obtain a permit from the village. While it does not specifically mention Christmas lights, it would notably affect the light display of Robert Young, whose relationship with the village has been adversarial since last Christmas.
Young, sporting a tie with Santa Claus, made his first appearance at Village Hall since January. When he made his remarks early in the meeting, he said he was open to working with the board about his display on Sunnyvale Road.
But as the meeting wore on, the rhetoric grew more contentious. Several residents on Sunnyvale Road said they were frustrated by Young’s lighting display.
“I think when we speak of compromise, it can’t be one-sided, and I think the board has tried and tried to compromise and not all parties have been willing,” said one neighbor.
Village Clerk Ronnie Shatzkamer read several letters that the village received, which praised the village and called the Christmas display a “nuisance.” One letter said that the Youngs had harassed them for speaking out against the display. When Young tried to respond, Mayor Bob McNamara denied him a chance to speak again and voices were raised.
“Let’s not be dismissive of each other’s comments,” Deputy Mayor Brian Herrington said after things had cooled down. “I know there is a lot of emotion here, and… that this is very sensitive, and we all need to work through that.”
Unlike the January meeting, Young brought people speak on his behalf. Several operators of Christmas light displays from the New York metro area came to the meeting in support of Young, including Keith Shaw of Cranbury, New Jersey.
Shaw detailed how he had worked with local officials to compromise on the display, which he said was the largest in New Jersey. He reduced the number of nights when the lights flashed and worked with police to handle traffic. He said that Young would need to compromise, but that he also had a right to put up the lights.
“There’s a lot of federal law that protects Christmas lights, and you don’t want to get into that,” Shaw told the board.
Young’s wife, Marie, read an anonymous letter thanking the family for the display, as the lights and the story behind the display — it is dedicated to the Young’s late daughter, and donations are collected for an organization to help those with eating disorders — convinced the letter writer not to hurt him or herself.
“This is what we do,” Marie said, wiping tears from her eyes.
Public comment on the law will continue at the June meeting. Young said he would return.
Following the lengthy public comment session, the board discussed several other topics. The village is looking to repave roads, install new gutters and put in a new catch basin on several streets. The project is expected to cost $300,000 and will be put out to bid in June.
The board considered the installation of a flashing pedestrian crosswalk at Stonytown Road, but the measure was tabled for further study.
The village received two bids for the garbage collection contract, but one was insufficient and the bidding process will be done again.
Here is a note I sent to the village lawyer after the meeting. I think it sums it up nicely. However, I will also add I am frustrated with people who try to suggest that we are the bad guys. We have compromised and then some. Despite doing eveything requested by the village peeps this year, they reneged on their end of the agreement. they also placed a guy who works on the maintenance crew at the village in front of my home banging on cars windows and harrassing visitors to our display this year. When I complained, their maintenance worker became even more aggressive chasing people away even when there was no one else on the street. Here is the letter:
Good afternoon,
I am writing this email to see what your perspective is after this week’s meeting to open the potential for negotiating a written agreement to allow our Christmas display to continue outside of any permit process or need to pay fees and expenses. As always stated, we are open to cover reasonable costs for traffic control. I know you have told all village employees and officials not to talk to us, so Im writing this to you, to open a dialogue.
I thought there were some positives and negatives from this week’s discussion, and hope to build on the positives. I’m sure that Flower Hill does not want to be positioned as shutting down what has become a Christmas tradition for thousands of people in our community. We have 11 months of darkness, why cant we all embrace a month of light during the joyous Christmas season?
Apologies for speaking out of turn at this week’s meeting, but I felt compelled to correct the record when people talk of 3 months of blaring music,flashing lights and vandalized property. This past year, the music was barely audible at the street when played. The music played for far fewer nights that were agreed to, and the lights were off earlier than agreed to on many nights or not on at all. Also I think my wife addressed the neighbors claim of “vandalism” at the “public comment” section of your regular meeting, by pointing out the obvious that her lights right at the road were knocked down by snow plowing activity, and not vandalism, as were hundreds of feet of fencing on Port Blvd. .
When we received the village’s letter on December 28, 2017, we were much surprised given that on the night of December 25th 2017, Truistee Randall thanked me for not having flashing lights on the south side of my house, and keeping the music to levels that were lower than ambient background traffic noise. He also mentioned that the only complaint the village received from the neighbor at 5 Sunnyvale Road had nothing to do with our display, but concerned a driver going south on Sunnyvale during the restricted hours. These same thoughts were repeated in conversations I had with the village code enforcer, Robert Rocklein, on both the nights of December 26th and 27th, and then your letter came on December 28th.
I understand that I compalined to Trustee Herrington regarding a village part time employee engaging in what I though was harrassing actions in front of our home towards guests that were visitng our home to see our Christmas display, which wasnt in the spirit of our “gentleman’s agreement.” Herrington never told the employee to stop his actions, and that we believe was the catalyst for your action beginning on December 28th.
We are open to entering into a formal written agreement to allow us to continue our 20+ year tradition of decorating our home for Christmas, and avoiding unnecessary hassles and expenses on both sides. I will even use a non-family intermediary if the village feels uncomfortable speaking to us directly at non-public forums. Let us know.
Best regards,
Bob
The attorney acknowledged receipt and said he would discuss it with the village peeps. As of now, no formal response has been received.
Also the village clerk read two letters from neighbors, not several. One from 5 Sunnyvale and the other from 11 Sunnyvale. We were surprised about the letter from 11 Sunnyvale since he has never said a word to us. Her reading of the letters were not limited to the 3 minute time alotment and went on and on. One comment I will make about the neighbor at 11 Sunnyvale is that he gunned his 600 HP BMW down the street during Christmas of 2016 when we had the professional traffic control company in front of our home. I tried to make an excuse for him since he was going through a divorce that year. The traffic control officers told me there was no excuse for his act of callous disregard of safety. among other descriptive words for his behavior.