Islip residents press board on overdevelopment, taxes, airport plans and ICE training

Residents filled the town’s public‑comment period with complaints about large apartment projects, rising taxes and public safety, while some speakers defended a renewed agreement that allows federal law‑enforcement agencies to train at the town shooting range.

The town’s public portion began after two hearings were closed. Kyle Cronin warned that automated surveillance systems such as 'Flock AI' raise Fourth Amendment concerns and argued that the town could resist unconstitutional deployments. He framed the issue as a broader threat of bureaucratic overreach to civil liberties.

Other speakers focused on local quality‑of‑life issues. Donna Ritchie urged the board to 'stop the developers' and singled out large apartment buildings near the Bayshore train station as out of scale, saying traffic is 'dangerously overcrowded.' Christine Larkin described rising homelessness and crime near Brentwood Road and Main Street and asked for more policing on foot and better supports for working‑class residents. Anne Monkwitz, a long‑time resident, opposed proposals to move Long Island MacArthur Airport infrastructure closer to rail, noting the project would be privately financed and expressing concern about losing convenient access to the terminal.

Several speakers raised fiscal and transparency concerns. Andy Cross said a line on his property tax bill rose sharply in recent years—citing increases of '41%' and later describing even larger percentage jumps—and asked what the board would do to control taxes. A commenter identified as Pat said she had file‑stamped FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) requests that were not answered and argued town officials must have surety bonds under New York law; she said she had stamped records as evidence.

The session included a sharp political exchange from JP Lopez, who thanked the board for renewing a contract allowing Department of Homeland Security personnel (including ICE) to use the town shooting range and criticized those who oppose the agreement. Lopez singled out one council member for voting no and said that opponents were driven by a 'radical far left' agenda.

Supervisor and staff responses were limited in the public portion: after several speakers criticized homelessness and county‑level services, the Supervisor suggested those concerns also be brought to the Suffolk County Legislature. After public comments concluded, the board closed the public portion and moved to the formal agenda.

The meeting record shows a wide range of community concerns—development scale and traffic, homelessness and public safety, tax increases, open‑records disputes, civil‑liberties questions about surveillance, and polarized views on law‑enforcement contracts—none of which produced an immediate change in policy during this session. The board proceeded to the agenda for votes and agency items.