The heart of the concern, as best we can tell, stems from misconceptions that apparently have been disseminated by some leaders of the Roosevelt Island Residents Association that the Roosevelt Island Operating Corporation Board is acting secretly to prepare contracts for development of some or all of the five sites. Let me be as blunt as possible. That is not so.

The RFIP process was exactly as stated, both to residents and to those who submitted ideas for how the sites could look in the future. The confidentiality promised to those who responded to the RFIP was done to respect their proprietary business interests in the very competitive field of development, whether that development is residential, retail, not-for-profit or otherwise. Should the Board decide to move towards a formal Request for Final Proposal (RFP) process to develop one of more or the sites, then, as was done in the RFIP process, there will be strict adherence to the rules governing such an offering thereby ensuring a great degree of transparency.

Note I said "Should the Board decide," not "When the Board decides." That is because no decision has been made. We are in a discussion phase, and the February 16th public hearing was designed for us to hear the ideas of residents about what they would want to see on those sites in the future.

We set up a special e-mail account for comments on the RFIP process and many of the responses made clear that the distinction between a preliminary seeking of ideas for the sites and any final process towards an RFP was widely missed.

There were some excellent suggestions among the comments, focused on how additional housing could impact future transportation needs and how the Island’s retail stores should be overseen. But many of the comments expressed the belief that the Board was somehow secretly involved in selling off the Island’s remaining assets. Again, that is flat out wrong.

Organized support or opposition to one point of view or another is not only appropriate, it can play an essential and constructive role as this process moves forward. But those organized efforts undercut their ability to be heard as clearly as possible when they are based on misleading or wrong premises.

Several respondents questioned why RIOC is so intent on maintaining the fiscal self-sufficiency we have achieved in the years since State subsidies were cut off. The reason is obvious – we must be self-sufficient to be able to meet our financial obligations and to maintain and upgrade the Island. This is not a choice. This is a legal and ethical mandate that we cannot and will not compromise.

Change always poses challenges for all of us. As we continue to discuss the future of our Island, let us reiterate our commitment to respecting and adhering to Roosevelt Island’s unique status as a model mixed-income community in the middle of the greatest City in the world.

That’s who we are. That’s who we will stay.