Thursday, October 1, 2026
The threat of litigation from the Lido Homes Civic Association lingers after school officials tangled with several members of the association at a March 22 Board of Education meeting. The association members claim that their group has been the focus of undue attention because of its opposition to the construction of a proposed multi-purpose football field at Long Beach High School.
On March 8, school district officials proposed a $118.6 million budget for 2011-12, an increase of $2.2 million, or 1.86 percent, over the current spending plan. The tax levy — the total amount raised through property taxes — would remain unchanged, at $88.9 million. That could change, however, according to school officials, who say that the mere threat of legal action could result in a tax levy increase.
Lido Homes Civic Association members contend that school officials did not properly assess the impact on the community when they proposed a new athletic field for football games at the high school — a facility that would include a five-pole lighting system and a sound system whose volume would reach 85 decibels — and the association is now considering legal action to force the project to be scaled back and to deter what its members characterize as excessive school spending.
The organization’s president, Darlene Haut, said after the meeting that the association strongly believes that the school board should taking a closer look at the fiscal prudence of the project and its attendant safety issues. Haut cited an expected increase in traffic as a main concern.
But School Superintendent Dr. Robert Greenberg said that because of the threat of litigation, the budget could be impacted. He explained that the community approved the district’s borrowing of $92.7 million in 2009 to improve its facilities and fields. To fund what the community voted for, Greenberg said, the district plans to sell $62 million in bonds.
“Because of the threat of litigation … that may impact our ability to sell these bonds at the favorable rate that we have,” Greenberg said. “Should that be the case, we will have to add money to our budget in order to take an increase in the interest that we will be charged.” He added, “Consequently, I will have to add money to the tax levy.”
Civic Association member Greg Naham, however, presented the board with an email dated Feb. 19, from Mary Anne Sadowski, an attorney for the school district, to Mitchell Ross, an attorney for the association. In the email, Naham noted, Sadowski explained to Ross that “the upcoming sale of the bonds does not relate to the field project.”
Greenberg acknowledged that assessment, but explained that the potential litigation “will affect our ability to borrow money for any project we do in
the bond.”
Asked after the meeting about the likelihood of such litigation, the district’s chief operating officer, Michael DeVito, said there is a “possibility” that the threat could turn into an actual lawsuit.
“I’ve continued correspondence to try to reach a settlement with them,” he said of the association. “We thought we reached a compromise in November. We found out they were still not satisfied. I don’t know if we’re going to reach a settlement.”
DeVito explained that the projected interest rate for a borrower selling bonds now would be 3.5 percent. Because of the threat, he said, that could change. “Our financial advisor said … it’s likely that the interest rate would change. It could likely go up to 5.5 percent.”
Haut disputed DeVito’s estimate, and said that litigation would actually benefit the district in the long run. “If expenses are kept down, school taxes are lower on
residents,” she said. “It’s a more solvent
tax base.”
Haut continued, “They’re saying the threat of litigation may increase the bond interest by up to 60 percent. If you look at the litigation, if we prevail, we will actually save the district money, and therefore it is a better
investment.”
DeVito responded that the threat of litigation would not only put the district in a tough position, but would also affect taxpayers. “We’ve been told by our financial advisor and our bond counsel that the fact that this threat exists, that the Lido Homes Civic Association wrote a letter through their attorney, puts the district in a higher-risk category for borrowing,” he said. “Which means that the lenders would charge the district a higher interest rate to compensate for the higher risk, which, ultimately, would cost the taxpayers more money in interest.”
Naham, who said he believes the association is being singled out at meetings by school officials, expressed great concern about the proposed football field. In the event of an emergency, he said, Lido Beach has “limited resources” — a small volunteer Fire Department and police presence. But Naham emphasized that the association, in considering litigation, intends only to deter school spending.
“We don’t want to sue,” he said. “It’s not necessary, but it’s up to the school board.” The association, he said, would like the district to limit the proposed project to new practice fields.
“We’re not looking for money,” Naham stressed. “It’s not a [possible] lawsuit about money. We’re asking the district to spend less money.”
Comments about this story? CEngelhardt@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 207.
