THE WORLD READS WHITE PLAINS CITIZENETREPORTER — 8,324,077 VISITS IN ONE YEAR

WPCNR MAIN STREET LINE. By John F. Bailey. January 7, 2003: WPCNR News has learned that Susan Chang, Publisher of the now defunct White Plains Watch, has announced to advertisers that bills will be issued on December advertising which appeared in the December issue of the paper, and refunds will be issued on any advance contracts for 2004 placements. She has made a statement to a leading advertiser that subscribers to the paper who have paid for 2004 subscriptions will receive a complete refund. WPCNR has also learned from a leading advertiser  that the Watch will not publish a January issue as WPCNR had been previously lead to believe.

The paper died, aged six years and 1 month.

The White Plains Watch was founded by Ms Chang in late 1997, first publishing in December of that year. The paper was an immediate success mixing a brand of in-depth local news stories that uniquely captured the flavor of White Plains neighborhoods, featured reminisces of White Plains residents, profiled local personalities, and rekindled memories of the city’s past with popular columns such as “Old White Plains.”

Ms. Chang recruited local personalities such as Peter Stone to write for her, and did in-depth articles on neighborhoods and their reactions to city progress, developer plans and neighborhood problems that the daily paper published by Gannett Enterprises never gave the space or the understanding, or the commitment to understanding to cover adequately.

A former financial reporter, Ms. Chang was at her best in covering the financial, detailed aspects of stories, their effects on the city and the neighborhoods. She profiled political candidates, presented forums, and published calendars of community events that were massive. She ran stories on technical aspects of situations that required great effort. Citizens learned about their churches, their schools, and the executives, teachers and personalities behind them. White Plains residents met their Commissioners, the people who made the city work. Ms. Chang was devoted to uncovering and interviewing personalities who worked to make a difference in the city. Every issue of the White Plains Watch had an article that you just had to read that told you something you did not know.

The paper was not afraid to take stands on issues, was fearless editorially, and took an advocacy stance, earning it the ire of city hall on certain issues such as the City Center and New York Presbyterian Hospital, but by doing so, it served a purpose by forcing developers, city planners and councilpersons to consider issues carefully and take up crusades that otherwise might not have come to pass. Would the city have paid as much attention to acquisition of open space had the White Plains Watch not given voice to organizations that promoted it?

The White Plains Watch celebrated what White Plains is: Little League, Soccer, diversity, great education, achieving kids, dedicated schools, committed public servants, government by people who love White Plains, business owners trying to make a  buck, restaurants with a new taste and take, arts and White Plains artists who perform them. Every month. Reading the Watch, you read about your neighbors, your friends, people you know, and you always felt closer to situations you did not know about and understood them better, which is what any real newspaper or medium should be committed to delivering: understanding, truth, justice, and the American way.

Ms. Chang was an idealist and she gave a great effort delivering a paper that was interesting, different and worth reading. Her publication aroused more citizens to pay attention to the way their city was going, and though decisions might not have gone the way the paper wanted, the paper presented the issues.

Ms. Chang was so respected for her efforts in publishing The Watch, and the service The Watch provided to the community, she was named Citizen Extraordinaire by the White Plains Historical Society in 2002, at its annual fundraising dinner. The Watch was also named as a paper of Excellence by The National Association of Newspaper Publishers in the year 2002.

In the last year, Ms. Chang made the decision to go to a paid circulation basis, because even with her strong roster of local advertisers she announced the paper was costing too much for her to continue without having a paid subscription base. The paper was previously circulated to we believe 20,000 to 25,000 residences in White Plains without charge.

The subscription drive did not achieve enough paid subscribers apparently, and Ms. Chang has made the decision to discontinue the paper. This lack of support came despite personal efforts by Ms. Chang and personal appearances at many community groups to appeal for their support and subscriptions.

After six years and one month, the White Plains Watch is dead.

Its epitaph in the graveyard of newspapers that include The White Plains Argus, The Reporter Dispatch:

More Local Than Local News Was

 

 

 

WPCNR Common Council Chronicle. By John F. Bailey. January 6, 2003: The long running classic “221 Main” continued its long run playing at “Common Council Theatre” Monday evening, bringing forth a series of new revelations from a dramatic cast.

 

 

Mr. Stackpole of the Planning Board recounted the history of how elimination of the Bar Building developed as part of the plan. He said the Planning Board became convinced that the bulk, parking needs, and space needed to extend Court Street required the Bar Building to go. He also pointed out how the Bar Building was not the work of a major architect, did not represent a distinctive style, and had no significant history.

Jack Harrington, shown, with back to camera on the WPGA-TV telecast of Monday evening’s Public Hearing,former President of the White Plains Historical Society, indignantly denied that the Historical Society was being “used,” by Anthony Longhitano, owner of the Bar Building, saying the Society was continuing their mission to preserve buildings of significance in the city. Harrington revealed that Mr. Longhitano had sat down with Mr. Harrington to fill out an application to have the Bar Building designated an historical landmark in New York State on September 18, the first time this has been publicly stated. A letter to Michael Seymour from the New York preservation agency confirmed that it could be “considered” for historical preservation in Mid-October.

Mr. Longhitano, as you recall, in his appearance at the Common Council December 1 did not reveal he had either applied for preservation status or had been notified of his building being “considered.”

Harrington added that the Bar Building was a piece of a block of seven historic buildings in the city, including, The Kennedy, 2 William Street, The North Court Building, The Bar Building, Grace Church, The Lawyers Title Building and City Hall. Harrington was magestically indignant and earnest as only Jack Harrington can be, turning to the gallery, looking at developer Louis Cappelli, and referred to his (Harrington’s) long history on the Conservation Board, and characterized the mission of the Conservation Board as being a group of citizens who defined “what they expect in their city and what they expect from developers who come into the city.”

Allowed with respect by Council Clerk to continue well past his five minute time limit, Harrington refuted early statements by Robert Stackpole,  that the Bar Building did not fit the criteria for historic preservation or landmark status. Harrington, reading from what is believed to be Longhitano’s application, said the Bar Building qualified on the basis that it played an ongoing role “in the broad patterns of our local history,” and that it “embodies distinct character of a type, or period.”

The Levine Planning Course

Robert Levine, the architect intimately involved in persuading the Common Council with Mr. Stackpole and William Rose, that one big building was too much and to bring in Frederick Bland to design the City Center project, in 2001, said 221 Main was “A rare planning opportunity not to be repeated for a long time.” He cited “4 Major Planning Courses”  for the Council to proceed with the project.

1.) The Court Street extension was a key objective the city needed to secure.

2.) The inclusion of the entire Bar Building into the site “is essential”. 

3.) The Council had to prevail on the developers, Mr. Cappelli and Mr. Longhitano to come to the table and negotiate a sale of the Bar Building.

4.) “Then and only then can we take up the issues of density, parking below ground, designs of buildings.”

Two speakers warned the council of violating the constitutional amendment prohibiting seizure of private property, referring to the possibility that the Council could choose to use eminent domain to seize the Bar Building property to develop the full scale of the Cappelli Hotel-Office complex.

Duelling Barristers.

Anthony Longhitano’s attorney, Carl Finger,  reiterated his comment that other alternative building designs were not being considered by the Cappelli organization, saying he felt the Council should encourage alternatives that would allow both projects, Longhitano’s and Cappelli’s to be constructed on the same site in consort.

 

Mark Weingarten, (shown above on White Plains Government Access Television Monday night), the attorney for Louis Cappelli, with the Super Developer looking on, rejected Mr. Longhitano’s olive branch, pointing out that Mr. Longhitano’s plan for redeveloping the Bar Building takes the entire back of the Bar Building, meaning the tenants there “would have to move anyway.”

Weingarten pressed the attack on another front, warning the Common Council not to confuse the difference between exercising the discretion of using eminent domain and the power to do so. Weingarten told them, “you have that power,” saying the right of using eminent domain for the public benefit has been upheld up to the Supreme Court: “You have the legal authority to do so, you may want to use it (eminent domain) on the next one (project)”.

Weingarten laid on some harsh reality, saying that “without the Cappelli project, Court Street doesn’t happen.” He asked rhetorically who would pay for the extension of Court Street (about $3-4 Million) if Mr. Cappelli doesn’t do it?

Bar Building Red Herring

Ken Worden, CoPresident of the Highlands Civic Association, said he’d been asked by his association to speak. He said the Council is focusing to much on the Bar Building, instead of considering the bulk, impact, and infrastructure effects of the Cappelli Hotel project. “The only Council concern (should be) is the basic project itself.” Worden said the Environmental Impact Statement was “chockful of problems,” that “Mr. Adler’s (traffic) solutions boggle the mind, and fly in the face of common logic.” He said the problems of the Bar Building would be decided between Mr. Cappelli and Mr. Longhitano, but the problems of “bulk, infrastructure, impact have to be decided by you.(The council).”

An attorney noted that the Bar Building future extension and expansion pictured in the New York Times Westchester Section over the weekend, appeared to him not to involve removing tenants from the back of the building as Mr. Weingarten had noted. Mayor Delfino refuted this to the attorney, saying “one of the troubles here is people state things that aren’t true. I’m not here to argue. When presented to me, it did take the back of the building.” 

Another person worried about businesses already closing and moving out along the Main Street corridor. However, later in the Council meeting, permits were renewed for Paparazzi and Coughlin’s two restaurants who are staying and liking what is happening in White Plains. Decision was tabled on a matter involving the number of parking spaces for a doctor’s office, at 170 Maple Avenue pending a discussion with the business.