Hempstead seeks public input on Capri Motel condemnation, closed for safety violations
The Town of Hempstead is pursuing eminent domain proceedings to condemn Capri Motel in West Hempstead. Credit: Newsday/J. Conrad Williams Jr.
Hempstead residents can now weigh in on the town's planned seizure of a West Hempstead motel following a hearing last week.
The town is seeking to use eminent domain to take Capri Motel, also known as the Capri Motor Inn, from its owner, after it shut the business last August for alleged safety violations and declared it a nuisance due to alleged criminal activity taking place on or near the premises.
The town began eminent domain proceedings after the Hempstead hotel owner, L & S Realty Co. LLC, sued the town in federal court in September, alleging the town’s actions were unlawful and violated the owner’s constitutional right to due process. The owner’s attorney alleged last week at the hearing that the condemnation proceedings were also illegal.
Public comment will be accepted through March 1.
Retired state judge Anthony F. Marano, who was appointed by the town board in December as special referee in the eminent domain proceedings, officiated the Jan. 30 hearing. During the hearing, the town’s outside legal counsel said Marano would make recommendations to the town board after public comment ends.
Marano was hired at a rate of $700 an hour, plus expenses, according to a town board resolution.
The town’s outside legal counsel, M. Allan Hyman, of East Meadow-based Certilman Balin Adler & Hyman LLP, told the town board it was being asked to condemn the property “in order to abate what has become a major nuisance.” Hyman told the board that details of alleged criminal activity at the motel were contained in a report given to board members.
Town officials allege that the motel has been a nexus of criminal activity including prostitution and drug dealing.
"There have been so many incidents of criminal conduct at this motel for an extended period of time," Hyman said, adding this has "affected the health, safety and welfare of the residents of this community.”
As evidence, in August, the town posted three redacted arrest reports on its website involving allegations of prostitution, a drug deal and a weapon discharge at or near the motel.
The owner’s attorney, Christian Browne, of Garden City-based McLaughlin & Stern LLP, told the town board at last week's hearing that using eminent domain to seize the property without a “valid public purpose” was illegal.
“You cannot say that you’re going to take someone’s private property because you don’t like the people who operated it or you deem it to be a nuisance,” Browne said. “The town has not indicated what it intends to do with the property. We are unable to determine whether the acquisition will serve a public use.”
The town’s nuisance code allows the town to declare a building to be nuisance if certain kinds of arrests, such as controlled substances or prostitution, were made on the property.
In its lawsuit against the town, the owner’s attorney argued that the town’s nuisance code was unconstitutional, in part, because it allows the government to shutter a business “based upon nothing more than the existence of accusations of criminal conduct.”
The town and motel owner are due back in federal court on March 13.
'No one wants to pay more taxes than they need to' Nearly 20,000 Long Islanders work in town and city government. A Newsday investigation found a growing number of them are making more than $200,000 a year. NewsdayTV's Andrew Ehinger reports.
'No one wants to pay more taxes than they need to' Nearly 20,000 Long Islanders work in town and city government. A Newsday investigation found a growing number of them are making more than $200,000 a year. NewsdayTV's Andrew Ehinger reports.
