At the final public hearing regarding the proposed Coney Island casino earlier this month, as locals argued about how many jobs, cars, and people the project would bring to the neighborhood, a new number began to circulate.
“Let me give you one other figure that I know many people here are very familiar with today, especially the pro-casino side, and that is $80,” said Malik Hassan, executive director of MAS Brooklyn, at the Sept. 10 meeting. “$80 is the amount of money the pro-casino side is being paid.”
Hassan was the first of several attendees that night who claimed that at least some pro-casino speakers had been paid to speak in favor of The Coney.
“Don’t take my word for it,” he added. “They have told me. I was outside, they have told me directly they are being paid $80.”
In audio recorded by Brooklynite Nat Towsen and first released by activist group Save Coney Island, two people discuss what appears to be a plan to get paid after the hearing.
“After they speak a couple of words, a couple of people speak, then we’re going to meet at Nathan’s,” a man says on the recording. “Just hang in there man, you’re going to get paid.”
Another voice instructs someone to “Keep it on the low.”
Towsen told Brooklyn Paper he recorded the conversation while he was in line outside the Coney Island YMCA on the night of the hearing, waiting to testify. A man in line wearing a branded “The Coney” T-shirt was talking with a woman who was against the casino, he said.
“He was kind of arguing with her, and then somebody else came up to him and asked him, like ‘Wait, when are we going to get paid?’” Towsen said. “Then he called some other guy up, and they were very slow in shutting him up. They were just talking really openly about [it.]”
When the meeting started at 5 p.m. the crowd was split, several attendees told Brooklyn Paper. On one side of the room sat a number of casino supporters, many with The Coney T-shirts and signs. On the other, the project’s opponents, with black-and-red “No No No Casino in Coney” signs.
“I was really surprised when I got to the auditorium that there was such a flood of ‘yes’ folks,” said Bensonhurst resident Sarah W. “This was my first public meeting, but I’ve attended other meetings virtually, and from everything I saw it seemed like the community was pretty overwhelmingly against the casino.”
Sarah said much of the pro-casino testimony felt “uniform” and “influenced,” and Towsen believed speakers may have been told what to say. After the first CAC hearing on Aug. 26, Brooklyn Paper received a photo of a speaker holding what appeared to be a pro-The Coney script.
“Talking points aren’t illegal, providing talking points is done by groups on all sides, it’s a good way to concentrate your strategy,” Towsen said. “But these people were being given free hats, free T-shirts, free ice cream from an ice cream truck parked directly outside the YMCA.”
At about 7:30 p.m., much of the pro-casino crowd left the meeting, multiple attendees told Brooklyn Paper. CAC members had been encouraging speakers to leave after making their testimony, in order to make space for those still waiting outside.
But word had spread that pro-casino speakers would be leaving at 7:30 p.m. to get paid, said Lola Star, a longtime Coney Island business owner and artist. She was standing near the door when a “flood” of people got up and left together.
Video posted online and provided to Brooklyn Paper shows people standing in line near Nathan’s, some of whom appear to be holding white The Coney T-shirts and at least one of whom is wearing a shirt with the casino’s logo. At the front of the line, a man holds what appear to be envelopes.
One person, who asked not to be named, told Brooklyn Paper he recognized one of the pro-casino speakers while riding the bus home after the hearing.
“I was like, ‘Tell me, is it true that you guys are getting paid like $80?” he alleged. “He, like, smiled, he looked excited to talk about it. He was like, ‘Yeah, did you get yours?’”
In response, the source said, he held up his “No Casino” sign.
“I was like, no, they can keep their $80.”
Locals call for state investigation
Star, who founded Save Coney Island in 2007, gathered the video and audio recordings submitted by her neighbors and sent them to the state’s Gaming Commission, which oversees the casino licensing process, and to Council Member Justin Brannan, the chair of the CAC. She urged the Gaming Commission to investigate.
A Gaming Commission representative, in response, said the Commission “is a regulatory, not a law enforcement body,” according to an email shared with Brooklyn Paper, and would not investigate.
The representative said it is “generally regarded as acceptable” for groups to organize people in support of their causes, including organizing travel to meetings, providing T-shirts or signs, or drafting talking points.
They recommended that Star and Save Coney Island report “allegations of criminal activity” to the police.
“I actually did, I called the 60th Precinct,” Star said. “And I was like ‘You might think this is crazy,” and they were like, ‘Yeah, it’s crazy.’ Like, this is not what we do … so nobody is really taking it seriously.”
A Gaming Commission representative told Brooklyn Paper that “whether such actions are considered violations of Penal Law is not for the Commission to determine.”
They added that the Commission, in partnership with the state police, is “undertaking a comprehensive suitability review of each casino applicant, which includes review of the integrity of both the corporate entity and its leadership.”
“Such allegations, especially if brought forward to law enforcement, may be considered in the context of such review,” the rep said. “This process is, of course, separate from the Community Advisory Committee process.”
Brannan said he received a similar answer.
Rebuffed by the Commission and the NYPD, Star was frustrated by what she felt was an unfair and potentially unlawful situation.
“What I would like to see is [for the Commission] uphold their law,” she said. “I didn’t make the law. They have a law which dictates how this process should legally proceed.”
Brannan said it was not clear if The Coney’s alleged actions were illegal or not.
“Even if [the Commission] came back to us and said, ‘This is technically allowed,’ it doesn’t mean that you should be doing it,” he said. “It doesn’t mean that it reflects positively on your application.”
A representative for The Coney, when reached for comment, told Brooklyn Paper “We aren’t going to comment on baseless accusations.”
Supporters of at least one other proposed casino — The Avenir in Hell’s Kitchen — allegedly offered to pay people to speak in favor of the project.
On Monday, a week before The Coney CAC is set to cast its final vote, Brannan announced he would vote ‘no.’ Three other CAC members later said they would vote against The Coney, too, all but confirming that the bid will fail.
“I think we’re smart enough to know when someone is honestly speaking in favor, or ambiguous, or conflicted about something, and when someone has just been paid off to say ‘This is the greatest thing since sliced bread,’” Brannan said. “The fact that we all came out and said we’re going to vote no for this shows that even if they were paying people off, it didn’t work.”
