Clavin is wrong to stall development in Baldwin

Residents of Baldwin scored a victory of sorts this week when Hempstead Town Supervisor Don Clavin — under pressure from development advocates, business leaders and local residents — backed down from his wrongheaded attempt to institute a moratorium on development there. 

But that likely won't be the end of the battle until Baldwin — and other communities in the town — see the development they want and need.

Clavin's moratorium withdrawal says little about whether he and the town board will move beyond the politics and start saying yes to more housing, innovative downtown development, and a remaking of blighted neighborhoods. That's especially true because the "alternative" Clavin has proposed to replace the moratorium isn't much better.

In approving a plan earlier this month that would have led to the Baldwin moratorium, Clavin and the town board claimed — without evidence — that there were problems with a previous state environmental review process. At the same meeting, the board paved the way for similar moratoriums in Inwood and North Lawrence.

The move was a travesty steeped in politics, a step toward destroying years of progress and potential in neighborhoods that actually wanted new development. 

Faced with intense opposition, Clavin had little choice but to pull back on the moratoriums, but his "alternative proposal" to put the town board in charge of approvals and require a more intense review for each significant project is problematic, too. Clavin is adding new stumbling blocks to what had been a streamlined, expedited approval process. The proposal could inject even more politics, slow the process, and allow the board to say "no" to anything.

In Baldwin, the town's moves have particularly far-reaching ramifications. In 2019, Hempstead won the state's $10 million Downtown Revitalization Initiative grant on behalf of Baldwin, and already has projects on the table and promises to fulfill.

That highlights an even bigger problem: The DRI process is missing clear oversight, regulations, timelines, and guidelines. Penalties for a community that doesn't move forward, or even parameters for removing an award and giving it to another location, aren't clearly delineated. In a program involving hundreds of millions of dollars, the state's troubling lack of clarity, control and leverage could result in lost funds, failed revitalization efforts, and blighted communities left untouched. What's more, the DRI is handled by multiple agencies, including the state Department of State and Empire State Development, and it's unclear who's in charge. Before the current Albany session ends, Gov. Kathy Hochul and the State Legislature must establish clear lines of authority and improved regulations.

The state must watch Baldwin carefully, and take action if the town fails to move development forward. The real responsibility, however, lies with Clavin, who must be responsive to communities that want development.

If Clavin and the rest of the Hempstead town board aren't invested in their local communities, the state shouldn't invest in Hempstead.