Don't Yield To Car Biz
To The Editor:

When, a half-century ago, President [Dwight] Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense, Charles Wilson, stated that, "What's good for General Motors is good for the country," a controversy broke out that haunted Eisenhower for the rest of his tenure. With reference to that historic debacle, I wonder if we have seen the start of a similar conflict on the local level - on a reduced scale - with the creation of the new Community Board 11 "Auto Dealers Committee" for our community.

Unlike other C.B 11 committees (which ask for volunteers from the board, and non-board "community members", when the new Board 11 Chair, Steve Newman, announced that he was setting up an "Auto Dealers Committee" at the April meeting, it was a "done deal"! My April 28 written request for additional members - from among Board 11 members who live closest to the greatest concentration of automobile businesses, and residents who are most affected by these businesses - was answered with a written "No!", from Mr. Newman at the May meeting, and he then verbally repeated this, when I asked for such input by myself and others.

After his first announcement of such a "closed" committee, which Mr. Newman said he wants to be "collegiate" with the car businesses, I took a "driving survey" of all commercial locations located within Board 11 boundaries, and found that, (not including gas stations, with or without repairs/food markets,) there were 19 automobile businesses in Central and North Bayside, 5 in Auburndale, 6 in Douglaston and Little Neck, and just one in all of Bayside Hills/Oakland Gardens/Hollis Hills. (Note: I may have missed a couple somewhere, but the "ratio" is obvious, and if gas stations are included -most or all of which also require a variance- it remains that the majority of automobile businesses are in Central and North Bayside, and any such committee should have many Bayside members!)

Why is this important? In three decades of observing Board 11 meetings, (first as a "community speaker" and then as a member in recent years,) I can't remember a single time when any automobile business that was on a Board 11 agenda did not have multiple/massive complaints from nearby residents and/or civic groups. Some of these complaints have involved: (a) Noise: from horns, music, repairs, cursing, etc., (b) Smells: from oils and other fluids, barbeques outside, trash/garbage, etc., (c) Safety: From speeding, barbed wire, poison ivy, toxic spills, etc., (d) Illegal Parking by employees/customers/deliverers: blocking driveways, on sidewalks/curbs, without plates, double-parking, etc., (e) Illegal Use Of The Street: for storing cars, repairing cars, washing cars, changing oil, dumping in catchbasins, etc., (f) Violations/Fines: by the Police/Fire/Sanitation/Building/O.S.H.A./Consu mer Affairs, etc., (g) Variances: operating with no variance/expired variance, or ignoring restrictions in present or past variances, such as the number of cars allowed on the property, and (h) Other Complaints: broken fences/walls, lights into neighbor's yards, water/other runoff onto adjacent properties, missing/rundown/overgrown vegetation, looking like a junkyard, etc. Of course, none of these businesses have had all of the above complaints, but if they have any of them- proving they are not good neighbors- any variance application should be voted down by Community Board 11 and city authorities! Conversely if they have had none of these complaints of this nature by neighbors, civic groups, or city agencies, I'd gladly vote "yes" on an application.

In the meantime, any Board 11 attempt to be "collegiate" to an automobile business with a history of abuse/disregard of their residential neighbors or the local community, makes about as much sense as sheep negotiating with wolves! We will be seen as weak and naive by both the car dealers and Board 11 residents.
Frank Skala
East Bayside Homeowners
Association