A motion put forth by Nassau County and the Village of Garden City to dismiss litigation filed by New York ACORN (The New York Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) and residents of Nassau County alleging County Executive Tom Suozzi's plan to redevelop a 25-acre parcel of Nassau County-owned property in the Village of Garden City (101 County Seat Drive) constituted exclusionary zoning that prevented the construction of affordable housing in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act, the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment was rejected late last month.

ACORN members and the county residents filed the suit against Nassau County and Garden City on May 12, 2005, stating that the county's and municipality's plan to redevelop the land without affordable housing was, "perpetuating racial and ethnic housing segregation."

Judge Joseph F. Bianco of the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, ordered the parties to immediately proceed to scheduling discovery under the auspices of a US magistrate judge.

"This is a clear victory for the plaintiffs and should send a signal to the Nassau County executive and the trustees of Garden City that they will have to account for their discriminatory and exclusionary housing policies in Garden City before the court," Bertha Lewis, executive director of NY ACORN, said.

Back in May, advocates camped out on the Social Services site at the corner of Eleventh Street and County Seat Drive to spotlight what they call an affordable housing crisis. They did it to prove a point: the only way they can live in Garden City is in a tent.

The overnight protest, which Nassau County provided the permit for, even included a tent for County Executive Tom Suozzi, who said this of the 25-acre site at a Feb. 5, 2004 Garden City Village Board meeting: "I have zero interest in putting anything but upscale housing in that area."

Frederick Brewington, a civil rights attorney from Hempstead, told Garden City Life in May the 17 1/2 hour encampment intended to drive their point home. "We are here to raise the issue of affordable housing to a level that would require people to not stick their head in the sand," he said, adding, "We are here ... to show this ground is ours. Rain or shine, we won't change our mind."

Participants chanted, "It's a shame. It's a pity. We can't live in Garden City." Among those who attended, ACORN members, who, in June 2004 pled with Garden City village trustees to grant zoning changes that would include multi-family affordable housing on the site. Despite their comments, and after at least two years of deliberation, the then-board unanimously passed Local Law 2-2004, which rezoned the property for residential use - allowing up to 90 single-family homes or 150 townhouses or a mix of both. In that same month, Suozzi officially put the 25-acre parcel up for sale.

Garden City officials however emphatically deny they acted discriminatorily. "The Village of Garden City does not discriminate. Period. This will be amply demonstrated when we have an opportunity to present the facts in this case," according to village spokesperson Brad O'Hearn.

County Attorney Lorna Goodman added the motion was a technical one. "It was dismissed on technical grounds and the case will now go forward on the merits. Absolutely nothing was decided about the merits. A motion to dismiss is where you say the complaint says 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 ... We agree that 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 is true and it adds up to zero. What the judge said was that if 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 is true it might add up to something, now go and prove it. That's all that happened."