The latest and certainly one of the more dramatic installments of the St. Paul's saga came last Thursday at the Village Board of Trustees' first May meeting when James M. Kenny of the infamous Kenny v. Incorporated Village of Garden City arose and delivered a speech on the merits of the suit and promised that this was the beginning of a publicity campagin about to be launched by the plaintiffs. Kenny's comments were delivered during the first citizens' comments portion of the meeting immediately following an Executive Session of the Board, during which, according to the mayor's comments upon their return, centered around the announcement by the appellate court that the case would have to go to trial.

Kenny stated that the Appellate Court's decision to deny the cross-motions for summary judgment in the case was really a victory for the opponents of the lease to CareMatrix and a blow to the Village trustees. He argued that by finding that there were questions of fact, they had found that the law suit had merit. "We intend to prove at trial that the property was acquired for public use and that the lease would be illegal," Kenny said.

He also said that it is his hope and the hope of the three other plaintiffs and "35 silent partners" financially backing the suit, that "when December rolls around the Village will walk away from its agreement with CareMatrix." While he stated his desire to see the Village walk away from the lease of the historic St. Paul's building to CareMatrix, an assisted living facility, he said that the main goal is to prevent the Village from allowing the proposed new construction behind the main building more than anything. In fact, he stated, "The 10 acres of land is the real issue. Let them take the building, but we should keep the land."

Zoning, while not a question of fact in the law suit, is an issue driving the plaintiffs in this case, according to Kenny's comments. "The downzoning of the Village to let them add on to the main building will mean they have to rezone for multiple dwelling and in doing that, we're talking perpetuity for this Village. If the Episcopal Diocese sells more of their property and Adelphi should go under we could have apartment buildings go up here," he argued. He acknowledged that the Village's counsel, Gary Fishberg has argued that this is not the case, but he said his own "zoning experts" found otherwise.

"What is being undertaken is a disavowal of the Master Plan," Kenny exclaimed. "I don't expect you to admit it, but CareMatrix is asking for more people to go in there!" He added, "This project is ill-conceived."

While he noted that the Mayor's Committee consisting of volunteers from the community who investigated the issue of St. Paul's and eventually recommended the lease to an assisted living company was a "blue ribbon committee," Kenny argued that not enough time and energy was spent investigating other avenues.

Kenny argued that despite much public opinion, their case "is not frivolous" and argued, "we do not deal in misinformation."

When asked by the trustees how he proposed the Village should fund the plaintiff's recommendation to transform the St. Paul's building into a community center like the Herricks Community Center, an example Kenny used in his speech, Kenny offered no solution to the financial challenges facing the Village, but added that they will have a "professional" looking at the building this week. He also said that college campuses of New England that preserve their old architecture will also serve as a model for them in their plans for St. Paul's.

When further questioned on the subject of finances, as the trustees attempted to explain that the building requires tremendous renovations which would be too costly for the Village to fund, Kenny concluded his comments with the admonition, "Don't heckle me!"

Mayor Hecken had stated at the beginning of the meeting, upon their return from Executive Session, that the Village was hoping for a speedy resolution and that they were concerned about the state of the building. "I don't know how long the building can stay without major maintenance," Hecken noted and added that one of the Village's engineering firms, Thomas Pollissi, will be providing the Village with a figure for how much it will cost to provide an estimate for work on the building.

In response to questions from EPOA President Eileen Murphy at the conclusion of the meeting, it was explained that Ellis Hall will most likely be demolished, as was depicted in CareMatrix's plans shown in the Village Facts mailed to residents by the Village last year. Ellis Hall, according to the trustees, is "filled with asbestos" and has many serious structural defects, one of which is a faulty roof. It may be more cost effective for the Village to demolish the structure than to attempt to save it.

Michael Ciaffa, a Village resident and attorney with Meyer Suozzi English & Klein PC, who was quoted at a Feb. 26, 1997 public meeting on the St. Paul's issue as expressing his opposition to an assisted living residence at St. Paul's and felt that it would set a bad precedent because it's not a public use of the property, which he felt is a matter of "dubious legality" because it's a "public trust property" is now the attorney for the plaintiffs. He also argued in 1997 that maintaining the building would be "a drop in the bucket for the Village."

Ciaffa, who was not present at the Village Board meeting when his client delivered his speech, spoke to Garden City Life on Friday, May 7. He argued that despite the statements by the Village and their attorney, Peter Mastaglio, the denial by the Appellate Court to both parties was in fact a victory for the plaintiffs. "The Village is trying to avoid a trial," he said. By deciding to send the case to trial, Ciaffa argued, this proves that "the lawsuit has merit."

Ciaffa reiterated his client's argument that "This case is more about the lands than the building. About 8 to 10 acres, including a soccer field and a playground, would go to proposed development of a brand new addition that is as large as the main building." He said their main goal in this case is to preserve green space and keep the land as a public park. When asked how the Village could afford not to lease the land to CareMatrix and fund the plaintiffs' suggestions, he stated, "The dollar issue is not for the courts to decide. We are certainly not in a position to tell the Village what money should be spent how."

He explained the zoning points raised by Kenny, "Zoning is not an issue in the lawsuit, but residents have seen what happened with the Wyndham and have concerns about the zoning issue." He argued thate the addition by CareMatrix to the back of the main building would be "a huge new apartment-like structure, which could set the tone for the area, which is of concern to residents."

Mayor Hecken had stated that the case would most likely not be heard by a jury, but Ciaffa argues that he would be asking for a jury and would most likely be granted a jury trial. He also stated that the questions of fact that would go before the jury, or the "questions of credibility and inferences" are two main issues. The first is the question of whether or not the property was acquired for public use, which they argue the public was told it was initially. The second issue is whether or not there was a promise by the Village to preserve the green space as a park, which Ciaffa argues there was.

If the jury decides in favor of the plaintiffs, according to Ciaffa, this means that the judge will declare that as a matter of law the lease with CareMatrix has been found to be illegal. The lease can still happen, Ciaffa acknowledges, if State Senator Kemp Hannon should propose and then get passed legislation to legalize it. Ciaffa argued that not enough public support exists and he feels it unlikely that Hannon would do so. With a petition given to Hannon with 700 signatures opposing the lease, Ciaffa argues that he will see the opposition is strong.

Should the jury rule in favor of the defendants, an appeal may be made by the plaintiffs, but Ciaffa says, "I feel that it's preliminary to discuss such things and I feel the facts are on our side."

Ciaffa offered a tentative timeline for the case, saying that they will begin taking depositions of those involved in the initial transaction, such as the Village Administrator, the Parks Administrator, trustees at the time of the lease, the Mayor's Committee, and all involved in negotiating the lease and drafting the parks plans when the property was first purchased by the Village, in June. The trial will probably begin in the fall, according to Ciaffa and could last several days.

The attorney for the defense, Peter Mastaglio of Cullen and Dykman, stated, "both parties appealed arguing that the Appellate Court could decide the case based on the papers presented without a trial and the judge turned both appeals down." Mayor Hecken said to Kenny at a break in his comments, "As I said at the beginning, I did not want to try this suit here. The court denied both appeals. I would be open to hearing suggestions from your group as to how we could fund your recommendation to use the building as a community center. The Herricks Community Center mentioned is a 50 year-old building and St. Paul's is 100 years old. The Herricks building was built as a classroom building, whereas St. Paul's was a dormitory with only a few classrooms in it. Maintaining the building costs money. Do you have a way of coming up with it?"

The next Village Board meeting is scheduled for May 20 at 8 p.m. in Village Hall.