Letters

Ralph Fasano, the overpaid director of Concern for Independent Living, has filed an intemperate, vicious lawsuit against the Town of Southampton for daring to deny him approval for his proposed 60-unit Liberty Gardens supportive facility on dangerous, crammed County Road 39 [“Liberty Gardens Developer Sues Southampton Town, Accusing Officials and Residents of Discrimination Against Veterans and the Disabled,” 27east.com, October 9].

Not satisfied to wait for a legal decision, he — or one of his paid mouthpieces — continues to litigate in the pages of Newsday.

Pontificating in a “guest essay” published on Veterans Day, he segues from a few platitudes about “honor” and “service” to accusations of NIMBYism (the favorite trope — or, more accurately, “tripe” — of his factotum Michael Daly) and aggressive, discriminatory, illegal tactics by the Town Board to keep his veterans out. Red-white-and-blue-lining?

“It shouldn’t have come to this,” he whines. “Reluctantly, we were left with no option but to file a fair-housing discrimination lawsuit in federal court.”

But Mr. Fasano deliberately ignored many options.

He chose to ignore the option to bring a fair and honest proposal for the public to weigh, a proposal that would have spelled out the legal requirements of eligibility mandated by the New York State Office of Mental Health. He opted instead to obfuscate and downplay this hitch, opting with Jay Schneiderman to promote Liberty Gardens as “local, affordable housing.” It fell to the public to repeatedly evoke the Fair Housing Law, which Fasano is now trying to weaponize.

He also opted not to provide documentation to support his insistence on a “desperate need” for housing for mentally and physically impaired veterans in Southampton.

He chose to ignore legitimate concerns voiced by the public and opted to vilify any opposition with ugly smears of selfishness, bias and discrimination.

He chose to ignore the option to consider other locations, less environmentally degraded.

He chose to ignore the public’s requests, and the environmental review requirement, to address development plans for the second half of his parcel, which could have resulted in a doubling of density.

Contrary to his hypocritical hand-wringing, he was far from “reluctant” to threaten litigation when he confidentially assured his factotum Schneiderman (and for the benefit of all present) that: “The state will back me in any lawsuit.”

“The message is simple and clear: Thanks for your service but we don’t want you here,” writes Fasano, the ambassador of malice. This inflammatory message created by and inserted into all discussions forms the basis of his lawsuit.

The real message is even simpler: Big money, political capital and ego are on the table. And the people whom Fasano purports to champion, and the public with their insistent demands for open, fair government and annoying calls for participation, are incidental. Collateral interference.

Raise your hand if you expect justice to triumph.

Frances Genovese

Southampton