Brigham Park Receives $500k, Becomes Political Twilight Zone


by on Jul 10th, 2009

Brigham Street Park in Sheepshead Bay

Nearly a year after initial designs were unveiled for the Brigham Street Park and news of the project teetered off, the little park we’re all hoping for is back. Councilman Lew Fidler has given it new life with an injection of $400,000 of capital funds, and Borough President Marty Markowitz is kicking in an additional $100,000.

The funds will be used by the Parks Department to conduct soil testing and begin reworking the designs. “This money will begin to get us answers to turn a concept into a reality,” Fidler told Sheepshead Bites.

But the money is also creating a bit of the political surreal and stirring up serious questions about the park’s future. You see, the park initiative is spearheaded by Fidler’s electoral challenger, Gene Berardelli of the Sheepshead Bay/Plumb Beach Civic Association. And as the money funnels in they’re both using the park to pump up their campaigns, leaving us wondering what really will happen to the park after the election.

The money comes from Fidler during what may be (and would be, had he not voted to extend term limits) his last year as city councilman. Fidler is the City Council’s top porker, and has used his influence to bring his district and special interests over $1.3M in discretionary funds – this year alone! (By comparison, Councilman Mike Nelson brought in just over $500k.) And though the city may be in financial straights, Fidler nor any other councilman appears to have restrained one bit on the pork – this being an election year and all.

That brings us to the park. With Fidler in a contested seat, it might look awkward that he’s funding his opponent’s primary project. But at every chance he gets, he’s reminding voters that he’s got the power and influence to keep the dollars flowing to our beloved district and its quirky little projects.

“If I only have one more year left, then I have one more budget. I’ll never be able to fund a park,” he told us by phone. “But if I have five more years left, that’s five more budgets and I can get it done.”

Bay News/YourNabe.com noted, “Fidler also said that … a fresh term in office will afford him the opportunity to fund the Brigham Park project.”

Keep in mind: this park is going to have a price tag closer to $6 million. The half-million Fidler sent our way is just to get the Parks Department moving.

But Berardelli isn’t exactly putting politics aside and kissing Fidler’s feet. One of Berardelli’s main campaign sticking points has been Fidler’s lack of support for community initiatives – and he uses Brigham Street Park as an example. Still, his blade has not broken, it’s just dulled a wee-bit. Berardelli’s political parry appears to be a sideways attack, saying – in the case of the park – we should put politics aside and be grateful for the funds… while simultaneously pointing out Fidler’s delayed support.

To Bay News/YourNabe.com, he said, “I’m very happy that the councilman came around and funded a very worthy project.”

And here’s what Berardelli wrote on his blog about the funding:

It took a while to get Councilman Fidler totally on board with this Project (although he never said he was against the Project itself), but I’m glad he did. It may be odd for some to read that, considering that I”m running against him for City Council, but it’s true … I will not let politics taint the purity of what the community has created. (emphasis added)

It looks to us like Berardelli’s nailing the skill of political doublespeak.

But all this makes us wonder what will happen after the election. If Berardelli wins, will he have the influence he needs to steer funds to Brigham Street Park – not to mention other community projects? And if Fidler wins, will he continue to support a project led by his opponent, or will he seek punishment and let the park initiative dry up, like a raisin in the sun?

Related posts

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • http://www.gene-2009.com Gene B.

    Like I also said in my blog, Brigham Park isn’t about me, it’s about the community. Always has been and always will be. While it’s been my honor to lead the Project, I’m just one of over 100 people who have worked on this. The Project will push forward regardless of who’s running for what and who is elected.

    Councilman Fidler and Borough President Markowitz both deserve our thanks for providing this funding. Before I considered my candidacy, Councilman Fidler invited me and Pamela Governale – who’s been so instrumental in this Project – to a meeting in his office with included top-level people from Parks. It was a very good meeting that raised valid concerns in moving forward, and I left with the sense that Parks, Councilman Fidler and the Project were all on the same page.

    I’m optimistic that Brigham Park will move forward no matter who is in office.

  • Anonymous

    Whatever happens, we’ll all be better off for a bit of real green in Sheepshead Bay!

  • Lew from Brooklyn

    I am not sure what measure of cynicism this reporter, Mr. Berke, has about politics and government in general. I have a thick skin, so I will just bristle personally and not vent here.
    So let’s just say I mean what I say and I say what I mean. My record is pretty clear. I have funded parks projects in all parts of my district to a level that Commissioner Benepe said was “more than any other councilman brings back to his or her district.” I started working on funding this project—as evidenced by Gene’s post about the meeting in my office several months ago—-long before Gene even considered running for Council. I, for the record, did not become aware that Gene would be running against me until after he announced it publicly. Nonetheless, I funded this project at the exact amount that I had submitted it for in Phase I funding before I heard that Gene was running against me.
    We do not know what this project will cost because it has not been thru Parks department design yet, so it can’t even be estimated. Mr. Berke ignores comments that I made to him on that subject and explaining, btw, that there would be left over money from this allocation as a “place holder” for the full future funding of the park.
    First, I want to commend Gene for not using this as a politicial football. He has played an impressive role in moving this project forward.
    Second, I am not so arrogant as to presume that I will win the Primary and the General Election, but I do wish to point out that Gene is the Republican candidate for this Council seat. When this area last elected a Republican, well, there was no City Council. And even then, I doubt we had a Republican Alderman.
    So let’s not make too much of the politics.
    On the substance, I have never opposed a park on this site. And I hope to get this done before my chance to do so expires. Simply put.

    Lew from Brooklyn

  • Anonymous

    Thank you to both of the candidates for replying to this post and providing reassurance about their commitments to this project.

    Lew: My article was about the use of the park as a campaign point by both you and Berardelli to Sheepshead Bites, the Bay News/YourNabe.com and on Berardelli’s blog. On this point, I agree: “I mean what I say and I say what I mean.” And what you said – and what he said – appeared to be an unabashed campaign pitch. And there’s nothing wrong with that; you’ve both done something tremendous here and deserve to claim a level of credit.

    Sure, we also discussed funding of the park (for which money has disappeared in the past, and so a placeholder means very little in my eyes), and about your commitment to parks in general. Which I believe is sincere. But my article was simply me wondering about the future of this park given that it is now in between two opposing sides of a campaign – though it may not have started that way. To my knowledge, none of your other parks projects have ever been in this curious position.

    You both are making attempts to reassure me and the public about the future of this park. I appreciate that, and I hope the readers do, too. But, the intention of my article is to reflect one simple thing: we’ll be watching.

  • Lew from Brooklyn

    Ned, YOU contacted ME about Brigham Park. While yourcomment makes it sound like I reached out to you as part of some capmaign piece,that is simply not the case. Also, you did not ask me about the park funding in the context of politics, you asked me why I funded it etc. Had you asked me for an overtly political position on it, i would ahve given you one.

    Just be straight,and you will always get a straight answer from me.

    I didn’t go looking for Bites to write about the funding I got in the budget…and if my being proud of having obtained this funding sounded like an argument as to why I have earned he support of my constituents in the Bay, so be it.

    Lew from Brooklyn

  • Anonymous

    Can somebody please tell me what the overtly political position is and how I can avoid being found in such a compromising position?

  • http://www.gene-2009.com/ Gene B.

    Like I also said in my blog, Brigham Park isn’t about me, it’s about the community. Always has been and always will be. While it’s been my honor to lead the Project, I’m just one of over 100 people who have worked on this. The Project will push forward regardless of who’s running for what and who is elected.

    Councilman Fidler and Borough President Markowitz both deserve our thanks for providing this funding. Before I considered my candidacy, Councilman Fidler invited me and Pamela Governale – who’s been so instrumental in this Project – to a meeting in his office with included top-level people from Parks. It was a very good meeting that raised valid concerns in moving forward, and I left with the sense that Parks, Councilman Fidler and the Project were all on the same page.

    I’m optimistic that Brigham Park will move forward no matter who is in office.

  • Anonymous

    Whatever happens, we’ll all be better off for a bit of real green in Sheepshead Bay!

  • Lew from Brooklyn

    I am not sure what measure of cynicism this reporter, Mr. Berke, has about politics and government in general. I have a thick skin, so I will just bristle personally and not vent here.
    So let’s just say I mean what I say and I say what I mean. My record is pretty clear. I have funded parks projects in all parts of my district to a level that Commissioner Benepe said was “more than any other councilman brings back to his or her district.” I started working on funding this project—as evidenced by Gene’s post about the meeting in my office several months ago—-long before Gene even considered running for Council. I, for the record, did not become aware that Gene would be running against me until after he announced it publicly. Nonetheless, I funded this project at the exact amount that I had submitted it for in Phase I funding before I heard that Gene was running against me.
    We do not know what this project will cost because it has not been thru Parks department design yet, so it can’t even be estimated. Mr. Berke ignores comments that I made to him on that subject and explaining, btw, that there would be left over money from this allocation as a “place holder” for the full future funding of the park.
    First, I want to commend Gene for not using this as a politicial football. He has played an impressive role in moving this project forward.
    Second, I am not so arrogant as to presume that I will win the Primary and the General Election, but I do wish to point out that Gene is the Republican candidate for this Council seat. When this area last elected a Republican, well, there was no City Council. And even then, I doubt we had a Republican Alderman.
    So let’s not make too much of the politics.
    On the substance, I have never opposed a park on this site. And I hope to get this done before my chance to do so expires. Simply put.

    Lew from Brooklyn

  • Anonymous

    Thank you to both of the candidates for replying to this post and providing reassurance about their commitments to this project.

    Lew: My article was about the use of the park as a campaign point by both you and Berardelli to Sheepshead Bites, the Bay News/YourNabe.com and on Berardelli’s blog. On this point, I agree: “I mean what I say and I say what I mean.” And what you said – and what he said – appeared to be an unabashed campaign pitch. And there’s nothing wrong with that; you’ve both done something tremendous here and deserve to claim a level of credit.

    Sure, we also discussed funding of the park (for which money has disappeared in the past, and so a placeholder means very little in my eyes), and about your commitment to parks in general. Which I believe is sincere. But my article was simply me wondering about the future of this park given that it is now in between two opposing sides of a campaign – though it may not have started that way. To my knowledge, none of your other parks projects have ever been in this curious position.

    You both are making attempts to reassure me and the public about the future of this park. I appreciate that, and I hope the readers do, too. But, the intention of my article is to reflect one simple thing: we’ll be watching.

  • Lew from Brooklyn

    Ned, YOU contacted ME about Brigham Park. While yourcomment makes it sound like I reached out to you as part of some capmaign piece,that is simply not the case. Also, you did not ask me about the park funding in the context of politics, you asked me why I funded it etc. Had you asked me for an overtly political position on it, i would ahve given you one.

    Just be straight,and you will always get a straight answer from me.

    I didn’t go looking for Bites to write about the funding I got in the budget…and if my being proud of having obtained this funding sounded like an argument as to why I have earned he support of my constituents in the Bay, so be it.

    Lew from Brooklyn

  • Anonymous

    Can somebody please tell me what the overtly political position is and how I can avoid being found in such a compromising position?