The recent decision by the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division has put the fate of the proposed mall on Syosset's famed Cerro Wire site back in the hands of the Town of Oyster Bay.

Although the Cerro Wire Coalition, which represents more than 40,000 Town of Oyster Bay homeowners and 6,000 small business owners, is touting the recent decision as a victory, the group realizes that the property will be, and should be, developed. They state firmly that they are not opposed to development - they are opposed to a mall.

According to the group's website and recent mailing, "Since the beginning, [the] No Mall Here campaign has emphasized that the community was open to alternate development of the property. The time has now come to seriously consider development of the site that's compatible with the community, not development that will ruin it."

Although the Taubman Company still owns the Cerro property, and, according to them, it is not for sale, a new committee was formed, known as the Alternate Development Sub-Committee, which is being chaired by Warren Church and is comprised of people living in the surrounding area, to start to investigate other viable uses for the Cerro site. The group held its first official meeting this week to start discussions on viable development alternatives on the 39-acre Cerro site in Syosset.

"We are looking at many alternatives including residential, industrial, senior housing and mixed-use," said Todd Fabricant, chairman of the Cerro Wire Coalition. "We have been accused of being NIMBYs, but that is not true - we are not against all development."

Fabricant also stressed that whatever is built on that site, it will be done by union workers. "We are looking out for our families and our residents and the alternative uses that we are discussing would all be built by union labor," he said.

According to Fabricant and Church, they have had discussions with developers who are interested in buying the land. "We have already been approached by several interested developers who have requested meetings with us to discuss their concepts," according to the website.

Although the group can discuss other options, it does not change the fact that the 39-acre property is owned by the Taubman Company.

"I have not heard any overtures about the purchase of the property," said Gary Lewi, spokesperson for the Taubman Company. "Frankly, Taubman is committed to moving forward with an upscale retail mall on the site. What I am hearing is speculation about possibilities and potentials."

According to Fabricant, there has been a lack of communication between the coalition and Taubman. "Over the 10-year experience, The Taubman Company's arrogance was expressed through their vice president of development. He said that it took them 12 years to build in Colorado and that the years that they have spent in Syosset are nothing," said Fabricant.

"Companies like the Taubman Company feel that they can buy their way into communities," said Warren Church, chairman of the Alternate Development Sub-Committee. "Well, not ours."

According to Lewi, Taubman has made attempts to establish communication with the coalition. "The subcommittee should be called the 'subcommittee to engage in dialog with the owners of the property,' which is something we have been attempting to do for quite some time, but have been prevented by those whose best economical interests are saying no new malls in Nassau County," said Lewi. "It is stunning to suggest that we have not attempted to have dialog with those who have basically shut down and prevented any communication after corporate money got into this process and spent a lot of money in billboards, signs and ads that said no mall. It is not true that we have not attempted dialog."

According to a press release dated Oct. 24 on the Taubman Company's website, "Nordstrom will join Neiman Marcus, completing the anchor lineup. The demolition of the site is finished, and the company is working with the community to resolve all issues remaining prior to special use permit approval and the issuance of building permits. The company continues to target a fall 2007 opening for this center."

When asked if the projected opening date was still on target, Lewi said he would stand by the 2007 estimate. "We fully anticipate being able to build on that site, because in fact when you read through the recent court decision that is where it takes you. At some point, the recent decision takes you to construction. The question is not if, it is when."

For more information on the Cerro Wire Coalition, please visit www.nomallhere.com, which was recently updated. For more information on the Mall at Oyster Bay from the Taubman Company, please visit www.mallatoysterbay.com.

The appellate division announced in September that they overturned a decision handed down by Judge James Catterson of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated November 25, 2003, which granted the Taubman Company the right to build an 860,000-square-foot shopping mall on the Cerro Wire property in Syosset, overturning the Town of Oyster Bay boards' original decision denying the application for a special use permit to build the mall.

The decision states that the town must now consider a 750,000 square-foot proposal for the Mall at Oyster Bay. According to Lewi, the square footage includes the entire footprint of the mall, including office space and corridors. Lawyers are still reviewing the decision to determine what the next steps will be.

"The Appellate Division reviewed all of the actions of the Supreme Court and, once and for all, we have a definitive statement saying that it has been remanded to the town to consider the application for a 750,000-square-foot shopping mall," said Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor John Venditto. "A number of questions arise about procedures. Since the decision came down, we have had a number of lawyers look at this, both within the town and outside of the town. This is new ground for the town of Oyster Bay and there are a number of open questions and a lot of room for interpretation, according to the lawyers."

According to the supervisor, the Deputy Supervisor has reached out to counsel for both sides, the applicant and the coalition, and asked them to submit any materials they would want the town to consider on the issue and whether or not there should be additional public environmental review and additional public meetings. Over the course of the next month or two, the town will resolve those issues and take the next appropriate action.