Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

What I think is ridiculous is how members of the tour group are playing the victim and trying to bring in the Muslim/discrimination jabber. Get over yourselves. There are park rules that everyone has to follow, including you. You're not special. You don't like it, leave. Better yet, try using some common sense by doing some research before you go to avoid situations like this. End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to know about America in general, DO NOT ASSAULT THE COPS, you WILL get arrested.

#2: Follow park rules as if they are another country, you break the rules, you get in trouble.


Now, if she just cooperated with the park and understood that there is a no headgear policy she could have asked for a re-fund, and if that wasn't allowed, now she knows that there is a no headgear policy and to not tickets again or remove the headgear(Impossible in public according to Muslim religion).


The reality: she resisted authority and got arrested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^The park is in Rye, New York. I guess we'll see what comes out of it. Rules are rules.


duh, brain fart. been playing to CO2 all day, for some reason I was thinking PNE Playland...still, same points hold true minue maybe the lawsuits would be in the opposite form

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case, knowing the possibility of having to remove headwear when riding an amusement ride, why would they even bother going? Me, I would have done some research as to what the rides policies are and what my culture's policies are (as I did with Six Flags and their locking compartment policy when deciding what to take/leave behind when hitting up SFDK...was debating on bringing a hat or leave it behind). If I saw the rules stating that headwear of any kind is not allowed on an intense ride, I would follow it, enough said. I wouldn't try skirting around it then make everyone else look like the bad guy.


I mean, these rules are made for a reason, and it's made just to anger or discriminate people like many feel. But who are we to say this to the GP anyway, they don't care!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't wait to see the aftermath of this one.


Missed this earlier. Probably will go this way...


1. Some law firm will help them get a lawsuit on discrimination.

2. Some dumb judge will rule in their favor.

3. Playland will need to spend millions to pay them and go bankrupt.

4. The Islam League of New York (or whatever the hell they are called) will use new funds to buy Playland.

5. Now all women are required to wear Muslim headwear in the park.

6. Anyone who sues because of this will loss because it goes against their freedom of religion and are now consider a minority establishment.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

There definitely was miscommunication between the different parties involved and it could of been handled a lot better.


First of all, the riders involved should have followed park rules, either take off the head wear or get off the ride. If they wanted a refund, they should have politely stated their case and asked for one. It looks like the park ended up giving some refunds after the incident occurred.


Second of all, the Muslim American Society of New York were warned that headscarves were not allowed on the rides there and should have warned their members as it would most likely be an issue for some of them. They should have looked into other parks in the area without head wear/gear restrictions (maybe Coney Island?) and possibly have their event there instead.


Third of all, the park should have better prepared itself for a group of over 3000 Muslim American Society of New York members and had their staff warn members of MASNY (or those dressed in headscarfs) at the ticket booth or front gate that "head gear of any kind including what your wearing will not be permitted on the rides". At least then, those opposed to this rules could have the option of not buying a ticket and turning away. Its not like there were a few Muslims attending, there were over 3000 attending, so there was bound to be an issue with the headscarf.


Finally, it seems like the police were very vigilant. Was 100 police officers necessary for a few park guests arguing? Or closing the park for two hours? If the police officers were less vigilant this probably would have been a lot less of a scene, but sometimes they are "shoot first, ask questions later", not just in this country but many countries (especially the Middle East). I wonder if so many police officers would have been sent out if there wasn't a group of 3000 Muslims there (even though only a few were involved). To be fair, the park guests shouldn't have raised their voices at the police officers or seemed aggressive/threatening - I mean come on, don't mess with the police!


I'm just trying to see this from all points of view. It was sad for the park guests not involved just trying to have a good time to see this incident occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yikes: www.smh.com.au/nsw/family-sees-mother-strangled-by-hijab-in-freak-gokarting-accident-20100408-rvci.html


Based on the above story, it could be a safety issue. Although at parks in the middle-east, women routinely ride large rides while wearing hijab. And I've even seen someone wearing hijab on Kingda Ka!


I agree with the above post that in order for it to devolve into what happened, there were mistakes made by the patrons, the police, and the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...



The future of Rye Playland is all wet.


Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino announced today that a water park will be added to the amusement park. A new operator, Sustainable Playland Inc., will run the park.


In addition to the water park, the new operator will add a “Great Lawn” facing the Long Island sound. The space will be suitable for hosting events like graduations and concerts. They will also add ball fields and a field house.


The new operator will also make $34 million in capital improvements to the existing park.


“The county is going to get a $4 million upfront payment from Sustainable, a minimum base fee of $1.2 million each year which will rise as they get more revenue here,” Astorino told CBS 2′s Lou Young. “The good news is the county taxpayers over the next 12 years are going to be able to retire all the debt here and save $18 million in the process, so it’s a big win. The park stays open no matter what.”


Astorino has complained that Playland is losing more money than taxpayers should have to cover. He said last year that closing the park could save $2 million a year.


Playland is a National Historic Landmark and opened in 1928. It was featured in the 1988 Tom Hanks film “Big.” Among its famous old rides are the wooden “Dragon” roller coaster and a high-speedcarousel, which will remain at the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Agreed, although it would realistically only bring in $1,000


"Among its famous old rides are the wooden “Dragon” roller coaster and a high-speedcarousel, which will remain at the park."


I have to it this line concerns me. It can be construed that much of the existing park will be gutted to accomodate the changes in adding a water park and Great Lawn. I thought much of the surrounding land was protected wetlands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a website detailing proposed changes.

NewsplusNotes has images of the plan that apparently come from this website, but I can't seem to find them to directly link them here, so here they are from NPN:


It would appear that almost all of the park to the left of the central midway is being preserved, minus the Zombie Castle which unfortunately looks like it will be demolished to allow the Yo-Yo and Kite Flyer to be moved from the right side.

All other rides on the right side, minus the Grand Carousel, look like they will be removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a local, I'm glad the park isn't going away but I'm not sure I love the changes. If they get rid of most of the rides I think attendance will drop like a rock (though the water park idea may help a lot).


Also if you have such a limited amount of space for rides, why on earth is Superflight one of those rides? It's horrible. I'd suggest they give that the axe and move some rides into it's spot (Maybe take your pick of the Gravitron, Skyflyer, Wipeout and/or if possible the S&S tower). They can charge just as much for those as they do for Superflight and make a lot more money.


Also... I really hope they find a way to keep the flume. It's the best ride in the park in my opinion (with the Old Mill being a close second). Since they're planning on having a water park, I wonder if they'll find a way to keep that and/or playland plunge which are both extremely popular rides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ *We* know superflight is horrible, but the GP eat it up because it looks like a unique and interesting ride and they can charge a higher ticket amount for it.


And you have to look at it from a ROI standpoint. It needs to stay at least a few more years to make some of the investment back before it can be upgraded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...



A company interested in running Rye Playland presented its proposal to the Westchester County Board of Legislators on Thursday, a month after County Executive Robert Astorino chose another company to run the county-owned amusement park.


An executive from Standard Amusements said it would invest $25 million into the beloved but aging park, including a $6 million upfront payment to the county, said a statement issued by the board.


“Their ideas for reinventing Playland were certainly impressive, and this goes to show that a completely transparent process for deciding this iconic park’s future is in the best interests of the county’s taxpayers,” said Legis. Catherine Borgia (D-Ossining).


Democrats who control the board have been critical of Republican Astorino’s choice of Sustainable Playland, a nonprofit organization that would invest $34 million into the park and give the county a $4 million upfront payment.


In the statement, Board of Legislators Chairman Ken Jenkins (D-Yonkers) said he and his colleagues wanted to hear from New York City-based Standard Amusements as well as New Jersey-based Central Amusements because ultimately the board needs to approve any private operator that would run the park on behalf of the county.


Astorino claims he has the authority to sign an agreement that would allow a private group to run the park.




An executive team from Standard Amusements presented their plan to revitalize Playland to the Government Operations Committee (GO) of the Westchester County Board of Legislators (BOL) today, showing in detail how their proposal would maintain the historical amusement park and recreation facility’s attraction and charm while upgrading elements and operations to increase financial viability—and decrease costs for county taxpayers.


Last month County Executive Robert P. Astorino announced that he’d chosen a proposal from Sustainable Playland, Inc. (SPI), a Rye-based not-for-profit, to operate Playland beginning next year. But a number of questions were raised by the proposal, and the SPI management team subsequently met with the BOL GO as part of the BOL’s due diligence to review all of the proposals, as the BOL must approve any agreements regarding Playland. The GO plans to hear from the other groups who had submitted proposals to operate Playland as well.


“I am pleased that the Standard Amusements team was able to share its proposal with us today,” said Legislator Catherine Borgia (D-Ossining), chair of the GO. “Their ideas for reinventing Playland were certainly impressive, and this goes to show that a completely transparent process for deciding this iconic park’s future is in the best interests of the county’s taxpayers.” The Standard Amusements team had sought to present its proposal to the BOL in March 2012 but was told by the Administration that doing so could potentially disqualify them from the RFP process.


As described by Nicholas Singer, a Harrison, NY native and co-founding partner of Standard General, the investment firm behind Standard Amusements, the proposal would include a $25 million investment (all of it now “on-hand”) into Playland—a $6 million upfront payment to the County and the remaining going toward interest on County debt and capital expenditures. Singer stressed that the Standard Amusement plan would greatly improve Playland without altering its mission, footprint or historical integrity. The park’s employees would also be retained.


Standard Amusements CEO is a renowned amusement park operator with over forty years of experience in the industry who led the successful turnaround of a number of amusement parks, including Great America in Santa Clara, California and King’s Dominion in Richmond, Virginia.


The Standard Amusements plan calls for a comprehensive facelift for Playland, improved food operations, more games that cultivate inter-generational experiences, increased use of the park for live entertainment and seasonally-themed shows, plus better marketing of the park.


“It is obvious that both of the proposals presented to us look toward boosting the future success of Playland and erasing the County’s financial obligations there as well,” said Legislator Judy Myers (D-Larchmont).


“The Board of Legislators looks forward to working with the Administration to ensure that the future of Playland is right for all of Westchester,” said BOL Chairman Ken Jenkins (D-Yonkers). “Having the opportunity to hear from Standard Amusements and all of the groups who submitted proposals is a good first step in this regard.”


So it appears that Rye Playland's future is not yet set...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/