After the special meeting of the Board of Trustees with the four Property Owners' Associations held on May 20, residents of Garden City have been questioning what State Senator Kemp Hannon, also a resident of Garden City, will have to say on the subject of legislation to authorize the 65-year lease of the property between the Village and CareMatrix. The mayor and Village counsel endeavored to publicly explain at this special meeting, in subsequent public discussions both during and after Board of Trustees' meetings as well as with the members and officers of the POAs their position on the subject. They have repeatedly stated that they believe that the property can be leased to CareMatrix as it was not officially designated parkland, despite the charge in the "Kenny lawsuit" that argues that the property cannot lease the building for non-municipal use without a special act of the legislature.

The Village has officially and repeatedly stated that a request for legislation was not formally made, rather the discussions were informally held during a visit by Mayor Tauches, Counsel Fishberg, and Village Administrator Schoelle. Mayor Tauches has said openly at meetings that the Village can prove that it spent a considerable amount of time seeking ways to use the property that qualified as "municipal use," but were unable to do so. He cites the five years spent by the mayor's committee examining the St. Paul's issue and has argued in the past that the special legislation is not necessary. They did not make the formal request for legislation, known as the Home Rule Request, but did entertain the idea in light of the lawsuit. During the discussions with State Senator Hannon, he requested more information, which was then sent to his office. Once the request became public knowledge, the parties that have filed "the Kenny lawsuit" against the Village protesting the lease then sent their own packet of information to Hannon.

Garden City Life spoke with State Senator Hannon to help answer the residents' questions about his position on the issue. When asked to comment on the possibility of proposing State legislation on the St. Paul's issue, Hannon said, "I don't have anything that I could introduce. Concepts were presented, which were incomplete. Frankly, after the story broke in the papers about the Executive Session held by the trustees after midnight, I thought they had abandoned the idea." He stated that he had sent correspondence to the municipal attorneys and has not received any replies. He also commented that he, "got a stack of papers last week from the plaintiffs in the lawsuit; it was an enormous amount of information, and frankly I haven't had an opportunity to read all of it." He said that the Village gave him the CareMatrix proposal when they met in person and have also sent him a tremendous amount of information on the subject as well.

He added that in the matter of investigating all of the details of St. Paul's and examining uses for it, "This is why we have local government. I was aware for a number of years that there was a committee working on this. I, personally, was not up on the details, options, and what may have been needed or not needed." He also said, "What in essence I am being asked to do is ratify what the Village has done. My name goes on the bill and there are a lot of questions that need to be answered. Absolute scrutiny goes into any piece of legislation proposed. Opinions are written by the Attorney General, the Comptroller, and the Governor's people. We have huge municipal associations up here. Before any piece of legislation is passed it goes through an exhaustive process of examination. I don't have a bill to introduce at this point." He noted, "I need to determine what the new thrust of this is. I need to determine if a public trust was created if I'm going to extend the use of power of the Village. There is a clear distinction between a municipal purpose and a proprietary purpose; the municipal purpose is inherent and the proprietary purpose is not. Before I could decide whether or not to ratify a 65-year lease, I need to look into all of this. There are still many unanswered questions. I am taking a balanced approach in this matter."

Hannon concluded his comments by stating that he will be working hard to review all of the information presented to him by those who have filed the lawsuit as well as the Village. Hannon says he wants to address the concerns of the residents of Garden City and evaluate what his role ought to be based on all of the circumstances involved, which remain unclear at this time.