Bethpage-Tribune_1975-10-09

              BETHB*GE
BETHPA&E PUBLIC LIBRARY
:
OLDBETHB<GE
also serving ISLAND TREES
PLAINVIEW PLMNEDGE SEAFORD
VOL. 9 NO. 46 Thursday, October 9, 1975 10 cents per copy
Airport Controversy Draws
Over 400 angry people crowded the day and evening
sessions at the Town of Oyster Bay hearing on October
7, 1975 to prevent Grumman Corporation, Bethpage
from enlarging its aviation facilities for private air­craft.
A good cross section of the Communities bor­dering
the great aircraft facility appeared at the
meeting and the pro and con arguments sparked
heated debate. The Town Board reserved decision.
The following statements were made by Grumman
representatives and local spokesman:
Statement of Joseph Gavin
"My name is Joseph G. Gavin
and I am Chairman of the Board
of Grumman Aerospace Cor­poration.
I am here today to formally
state for the record Grumman
Aerospace Corporation's op­position
to the anti-airport or­dinance
which the Town of Oyster
Bay is today considering.
We consider this amendment to
the town's zoning laws to be
aimed specifically at Grumman,
to prohibit our company from
"sharing the present company-owned
Bethpage Airport with
other local owners of light,
general aviation aircraft.
Our company has continuously
operated this airport at Bethpage
for almost 40 years, and has a
right to continue to do so. Our
rights to implement the .program
of shared-use of the airport are
also quite clear to us.
I specifically want to state for
the record that our plans for the
Bethpage Airport were adopted
only after an intensive two-year
study and careful deliberation by
the corporation, and after we had
notified and discussed the
proposal with local community
and governmental leaders
Every consideration has been
given to the community and the
impact of the airport on Bethpage
and surrounding towns. We
believe that there will be little or
no noticeable effects, in terms of
noise, pollution and most im­portant
of all, safety.
The importance of this airport
plan to Grumman Aerospace
Corporation's long-term health
cannot be over-emphasized. We
need to utilize the Bethpage
Airport facility in the most
economical and productive
manner, to enable the company
to continue to be competitive for
United States government
contracts.
We believe that the awarding of
these airplane design and
production contracts will con­tinue
to bolster the local em­ployment
and economic
situation, not only in Bethpage,
and in the town of Oyster Bay, but
for all of Long Island. In that
regard, the Town Board must
consider the effect of anti-business
legislation, such as the
anti-airport ordinance now being
considered.
Thank you for your attention . .
For all of the 45 years of its
existence here on Long Island,
the Grumman Corporation has
strived to be an excellent cor­porate
citizen, and member of the
great Long Island business
community.
It is a conscious effort, backed
up by the 24,000 local employees
of our firm . . . this has meant
untold hours of volunteer effort
by our employees on behalf of
numerous civic and charitable
enterprises, the company's
financial support of worthwhile
community and charitable ac­tivities,
and perhaps most im­portant
of all, a real and
demonstrated concern for our
neighbors.
We are especially proud of the
reputation that our company
enjoys not only here in Nassau
County, but also nationwide, as a
model of corporate involvement
in civic affairs, for the bet­terment
of our employees and
every resident of Long Island.
In recent years, Grumman has
been a victim of the same in­flationary
trends affecting most
other major businesses in the
United States and abroad . . . as
part of our continuing effort to
reduce overhead, and thereby
remain a competitive force in the
American aerospace industry,
our company recently announced
plans to share our Bethpage
airport facility with a limited
number of general aviation
operators.
These local residents and
business, which operate high
quality aircraft in their everyday
operations as Grumman does,
would help to offset the burden of
operating our airport out of
company revenues (we are the
only major military airplane
builder in the country to do so--all
of our competitors are located on
publicly-financed airfields).
In the contest of consciously
working to be a good neighbor,
we have explored every aspect of
the airport operation to deter­mine
the impact on the neigh­boring
communities - in terms of
noise, air pollution, ground ac­cess,
and above all, safety of
those on the ground.
In good conscience, we can
report to you that there will be
little or no impact-weighing the
economic importance of this
proposal not only to Grumman,
(Continued on Page 7)
Comments At Town Hearing
Civic Association of Bethpage
by Frank S. Burgess
To fly or not to fly. The question
of Grumman's proposed ex­pansion
to a General Aviation
Airport rests primarily with the
Town Board of Oyster Bay. The
arguments for and against the
passage of amendments to Town
zoning laws which would require
Town Board approval of any
airport in Oyster Bay were
presented at a hearing on
Tuesday, October 7, 1975. The
Town Hall was filled to capacity.
After reviewing all of the facts,
the Town Board will vote to
decide if the changes to the or­dinances
will be approved.
During the hearing, CAB
presented their position in sup­port
of Councilman Mosca's
amendment. Ron Grimaldi, Bob
Mason, Don Guarino and several
other CAB officers and members
detailed for the Town Board the
various aspects of safety,
property values and need that
form the foundation of our op­position
to Grumman's Airport
scheme. The CAB petition was
submitted with over 4800
signatures in favor of the
legislation. Additional support
was provided by several neigh­boring
Civic Associations who
spoke for the airport limitation.
We wish to thank all who ap­peared
on our behalf. It must be
emphasized that the decision
relative to the amendments has
not yet been made by the Town
Board. If you feel as we do, that
an airport has no place in Beth­page,
then write to the Town
Clerk stating your opposition and
asking the Town Clerk to forward
to the Board a copy of your letter.
Even if you have already signed a
petition supporting the amend­ment,
and attended the October
*7th meeting, please send this
letter to the Board re-emphasizing
your position. The
letters should be address to:
Mrs. Ann Ocker, Town Clerk
Town of Oyster Bay
Oyster Bay; New York
Supervisor John Burke,
Councilman Sal Mosca and the
other Town of Oyster Bay Board
members have been very im­partial
and reasonable in this
matter. We at CAB would like to
thank them for taking the time
and patience to listen to and
review our position in this very
serious situation concerning the
future of Bethpage.
The future of Bethpage con­cerns
many things besides the
airport question. The purpose of
CAB is to participate in any way
it can in Bethpage's future to
make it a better place to live.
This participation is not
planned as strictly a defensive
action where we limit our ac­tivities
to fighting off en­croachments
into our life style.
We are very anxious to work with
all areas of the community, in­cluding
Grumman, in taking
positive, constructive steps that
will lead to a Better Bethpage.
Our meetings are open to all
residents of the town and neigh­boring
areas, and we welcome,
new ideas and new faces in our
efforts. So if you are interested in
spending a few hours a week to
enhance your family's in­vestment
in this village, then
please, join us at our next
meeting. It will be held on Oct. 15,
1975 at the Central B'lvd School at
8:00P.M.
As a final reminder to those
concerned about 'the airport
legislation, please consider the
following question:
If Grumman's airport plan is
implemented; and at some future
date Grumman chooses to sell
just their airport facility to
another business, or a govern­ment
agency, would the resulting
sale and tax relief net them a
windfall profit? Could this be the
airport scheme, rather than the
increased income Grumman has
stated they will get from
operating the airport?
Twombly Speaks Up
More than as a candidate for
the Town Council, I welcome this
opportunity to speak as a con­cerned
resident of the Bethpage
community.
We are all here today to discuss
and consider the proposed
general aviation airport at
Grumman and the Town's
proposed amendments to its Code
of Ordinances which could
compel Grumman to apply to the
Town Board for permission to
expand its operations.
We in Bethpage, I am sure, are
mindful of Grumman's con­tributions
to the community, the
Town, and the Nation. We are
grateful for the employment the
corporation offers. We are proud
of its technical achievements
such as the Lunar Module. But
this issue, the expanding of the
airport operation, is an issue I, as
a resident of, and a spokesman
for the community, feel com­pelled
to oppose.
Grumman plans to operate an
airport which would maintain
some 250 planes, No one can tell
us exactly how many take-offs
and landings these planes will
make each day. The number of
take-offs and landings are certain
to increase when compared to
what we have been used to. If the
proposed business flights are
allowed, these take-offs and
landings will undoubtedly take
place at hours when children are
attending school.
The noise caused by the in­crease
in air traffic can only have
a disruptive, irritating impact on
our neighborhoods. The people
who purchased homes and moved
into the area which surrounds
Grumuian, did so while the
corporation's main function was
the manufacture of military
aircraft. It is hardly fair to ar­bitrarily
impose a general
aviation operation upon the
community, after many years of
a limited air-use facility.
A recent (Jrumman statement
published in the Bethpage
Tribune contended, "the Beth­page
airport is important to the
long term continued operations
of Grumman Aerospace Cor­poration
on Long Island."
The New York Stock Exchange
places Grumman's net worth at
$258 million. The company is the
largest U.S. producer of carrier-based
aircraft, not to mention the
L.E.M., Gulfstream II's - and
recreational vehicles and
products. All economic in­dications
do not substantiate.
Grumman's claim that the air­port
is "important to the long-term
continued operations..."
I would now like to address
myself to the Town's proposed
changes. The amendments to
Oyster Bay's Building Zone
Ordinances would prohibit
general aviation use in the
following zones: residence E;
business F and G; and industrial
H.
We should remember that
these amendments alone, if
adopted, can not rule out the
possibility that at some time the
airport could come to pass.
The proposals define
procedure. Grumman could
apply for either a zoning change
or a special use permit. The Town
Board then would have to take
action.
At this point I would like to call
your attention to two other
comparable issues. The first is a
proposed Syosset bank building
which grew into a 63 foot blight on
the suburban community. When
the Town considered the bank's
permit to erect the Syosset
skyscraper, the residents
mobilized against it. The Town
granted the permit. The voice of
the community went ignored.
When the citizens of
Massapequa were outraged over
the proposed low income housing
project, they too, mobilized
opposition, but their protests fell
on deaf ears.
We should remember that
government exists to serve the
public. Communities should be
given more attention than mere
lip service. While I support the
proposed amendments to the
ordinances, I caution my neigh­bors
the fight, as our friends in
Syosset and Massapequa can
attest, has just begun.