Playland amusement park opening in jeopardy: 'It would be heartbreaking'
A summer without Rye Playland is now a possibility.
The historic amusement park has opened every summer, except for COVID, since Calvin Coolidge was president.
But after the company that signed on to run the park abruptly ended its 30-year deal this winter, the park's future is still in jeopardy.
WESTCHESTER COUNTY - With summer fast approaching, the opening of Rye Playland, the 96-year-old amusement park that sits along the Long Island Sound, is in jeopardy.
What we know
The historic Playland Park has opened every summer, except for COVID, since Calvin Coolidge was president.
But after the company that signed on to run the park abruptly ended its 30-year deal this winter – just three years in – the park's future is still in jeopardy.
The thought of not seeing Playland reopen is emotional for one Rye couple, who remember the days when admission was less than a dollar. "It would be heartbreaking," they said.
The backstory
Playland's roller-coaster ride began over a decade ago when Standard Amusements took on the project. In a controversial privatization deal, Westchester County would own the 280 acres of land, while Standard Amusements would run it.
In the middle of winter, however, a sudden about-face – Standard Amusements at the time claimed the county did not meet construction obligations and missed contractual deadlines. The county has denied the allegations.
What they're saying
Meanwhile, Westchester County Communications director Catherine Cioffi puts the blame on the previous Republican administration, calling the deal to privatize it a "sweetheart deal" to "unload public treasures at the expense of our county's most cherished residents – our children."
Cioffi goes on to say that county taxpayers are now on the hook to return 100% of Standard Amusements' investment, a whopping $125 million.
In his state of the county address last week, County Executive Ken Jenkins still promised that Playland would open this summer in some form. When FOX 5 NY pressed the administration on what rides or attractions would be available, officials said they're still assessing – and with no set date yet.
The other side
In a statement, Christine Sculti, a Republican candidate for Westchester County executive, said, in part: "The operating agreement for Playland that recently collapsed is not the deal struck by the Astorino administration. That original 2015 agreement was supported by then-Legislator Ken Jenkins as part of a unanimous vote by the Board of Legislators."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
22 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Why dozens of Democrats left Texas and how Republicans want to punish them
AUSTIN, Texas — Dozens of Democratic state lawmakers in Texas have scattered to points across the country in a last-ditch effort to prevent Republicans from adopting U.S. House maps that President Donald Trump wants in place before the 2026 midterm elections. The Republican-controlled state House scheduled a vote on a district map for Monday afternoon. By leaving the state, Democrats are beyond the reach of Texas law enforcement, and they can effectively shut down the vote by ensuring the 150-member House does not have the quorum required to do business. Gov. Greg Abbott and fellow Republicans are threatening to try to remove the Democrats from office, levy daily fines and even have the lawmakers arrested if they don't return to the Capitol. The Democratic response? 'Come and take it.' Here are some things to know about the scene unfolding in Texas. Trump wants to redraw the Texas congressional map in hopes of adding five more GOP seats in Texas in the midterm elections to boost his party's chance of preserving its slim U.S. House majority. Republicans currently hold 25 of the state's 38 seats. As the minority party in the state House and Senate, Democrats simply do not have the votes to stop the plan under normal legislative procedures. The maps were passed by a committee last week and swiftly scheduled for a floor vote. Sizing up their limited power and options, Democrats chose to deny the quorum as their only chance to put the brakes on Trump's plan and to rally national support. Many went to Illinois and New York. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker welcomed a group of Democrats who landed Sunday in Chicago. Prizker, a potential 2028 presidential contender who has been one of Trump's most outspoken critics during Trump's second term, had been in quiet talks with Texas Democrats for weeks about offering support if they chose to leave the state. Last week, the governor hosted several Texas Democrats in Illinois to publicly oppose the redistricting effort. California Gov. Gavin Newsom held a similar event in his own state. While hosting Texas Democrats who left the state in Albany, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said the fight over congressional lines in Texas has implications nationally. 'I have a news flash for Republicans in Texas: This is no longer the Wild West,' Hochul said. 'We're not going to tolerate our democracy being stolen in a modern-day stagecoach heist by bunch of law-breaking cowboys.' Abbott, a Republican, quickly warned Democrats that he will seek to remove them from office if they don't return by Monday afternoon. He cited a nonbinding 2021 legal opinion issued by Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton. It suggested a court could determine that legislators had forfeited their offices in a quorum break. Abbott also suggested the lawmakers may have committed felonies by raising money to help pay for fines. A lawmaker refusing to show up is a civil violation of legislative rules, and they can be fined $500 for every day they aren't at the Capitol. In 2021, the Texas Supreme Court held that House leaders had the authority to 'physically compel the attendance' of missing members, but no Democrats were forcibly brought back to the state after warrants were served that year in a similar quorum break. Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows has promised that 'all options will be on the table.' Texas Democrats have fled the state before in attempts to thwart the Republican majority. They twice denied the GOP a quorum in 2003 to stop Republican efforts to redraw voting maps, at one point leaving for Oklahoma and later for New Mexico. In 2021, Democrats left the state in the final days of the session over an elections bill and new voting restrictions. They stayed away for 38 days. Both efforts only delayed the Republican-led measures that were ultimately passed once Democrats eventually returned to Austin. And while the current special session ends Aug. 20, Abbott has the authority to keep calling lawmakers back to the Capitol for 30-day special sessions to pass the redistricting bill and any other item he believes should be addressed. The current special session agenda includes help for communities devastated by the the July 4 floods that killed at least 136 people. As part of their walkout, Texas Democrats have accused Republicans of prioritizing the politics of redistricting over flood victims. Abbott defended the redistricting plan as an effort to redraw lines to better reflect voters who supported Trump in the 2024 election, when he easily won Texas. 'Gerrymandering can be done, or drawing lines, can be done on the basis of political makeup, as in Republicans versus Democrats. And there's nothing illegal about that,' Abbott said Monday in an interview with Fox News. 'All of these districts that are being added are districts that were won by Trump.'
Fox News
23 minutes ago
- Fox News
SC gubernatorial candidate Nancy Mace: We have a huge opportunity to address our challenges
Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., opens up about her bid for South Carolina governor on 'The Story.'
an hour ago
Texas dispute highlights nation's long history of partisan gerrymandering. Is it legal?
When Democratic lawmakers fled Texas to try to prevent the Republican-led Legislature from redrawing the state's congressional districts, it marked the latest episode in a long national history of gerrymandering. The word 'gerrymander" was coined in America more than 200 years ago as an unflattering means of describing political manipulation in legislative map-making. The word has stood the test of time, in part, because American politics has remained fiercely competitive. In many states, like Texas, the state legislature is responsible for drawing congressional districts, subject to the approval or veto of the governor. District maps must be redrawn every 10 years, after each census, to balance the population in districts. But in some states, nothing prevents legislatures from conducting redistricting more often. In an effort to limit gerrymandering, some states have entrusted redistricting to special commissions composed of citizens or bipartisan panels of politicians. Democratic officials in some states with commissions are now talking of trying to sidestep them to counter Republican redistricting in Texas. If a political party controls both the legislature and governor's office — or has such a large legislative majority that it can override vetoes — it can effectively draw districts to its advantage. One common method of gerrymandering is for a majority party to draw maps that pack voters who support the opposing party into a few districts, thus allowing the majority party to win a greater number of surrounding districts. Another common method is for the majority party to dilute the power of an opposing party's voters by spreading them among multiple districts. The term dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed a bill redrawing state Senate districts to benefit the Democratic-Republican Party. Some thought an oddly shaped district looked like a salamander. A newspaper illustration dubbed it 'The Gerry-mander' — a term that later came to describe any district drawn for political advantage. Gerry lost re-election as governor in 1812 but won election that same year as vice president with President James Madison. Not under the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a 2019 case originating from North Carolina, ruled that federal courts have no authority to decide whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: 'The Constitution supplies no objective measure for assessing whether a districting map treats a political party fairly.' The Supreme Court noted that partisan gerrymandering claims could continue to be decided in state courts under their own constitutions and laws. But some state courts, including North Carolina's highest court, have ruled that they also have no authority to decide partisan gerrymandering claims. Yes. Though it's difficult to challenge legislative districts on political grounds, the Supreme Court has upheld challenges on racial grounds. In a 2023 case from Alabama, the high court said the congressional districts drawn by the state's Republican-led Legislature likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black residents. The court let a similar claim proceed in Louisiana. Both states subsequently redrew their districts. Statisticians and political scientists have developed a variety of ways to try to quantify the partisan advantage that may be attributable to gerrymandering. Republicans, who control redistricting in more states than Democrats, used the 2010 census data to create a strong gerrymander. An Associated Press analysis of that decade's redistricting found that Republicans enjoyed a greater political advantage in more states than either party had in the past 50 years. But Democrats responded to match Republican gerrymandering after the 2020 census. The adoption of redistricting commissions also limited gerrymandering in some states. An AP analysis of the 2022 elections — the first under new maps — found that Republicans won just one more U.S. House seat than would have been expected based on the average share of the vote they received nationwide. That was one of the most politically balanced outcomes in years.
