The board of directors of the Eastern Property Owners Association (EPOA) met Nov. 12 to discuss the future of the St. Paul's building. The following represents the consensus opinion of the board and has been submitted as such to the board of trustees.

"In summary, we strongly urge this board to aggressively pursue the sale or lease of the St. Paul's building to a private developer for high-end residential use. At the outset, let it be clear that we acknowledge St. Paul's to be a treasured part of the Garden City heritage. It is the very embodiment of the historical and aesthetic attributes of our village that distinguishes it from all the other communities of Nassau County. Its preservation must be our top priority. We must confront the unpleasant fact that our options are dwindling and time is now of the essence as the elements conspire to work the continuous deterioration of the building.

In our discussion, we reviewed the four options the village is presently considering. The first option is the proposal to convert the building to municipal use. We have concluded that this proposal has three things to recommend it.

- It provides the village with a beautiful space in which to conduct our public life.

- It would be a source of pride to this community.

- It would not require legislative sanction.

We applaud the board for its hard work in trying to clearly identify the real cost of such use. However, it is obvious to us that the cost of moving village hall and other offices to St. Paul's would be prohibitively expensive. There are members of our board who have a great deal of experience and expertise in the field of development and construction, including municipal construction and Wicks Law. They tell us that the cost that the village's consultant, Einhorn Yaffee, has given grossly underestimates the true cost associated with this proposal. Village Facts, published by village trustees in July and mailed to all residents, told us that Einhorn Yaffee's 'refined cost and fit' analysis of locating village hall functions at St. Paul's would cost $23 million. That figure was challenged by one of the trustees and is now widely accepted that the cost would probably exceed $40 million. Even this increased figure fails to take into account the host of associated expenses that municipal use would entail.

- No allowance is made for the expenses of moving village hall, the court and the police and fire departments or the costs of any needed equipment or furniture.

- No allowance is made for the disruption of civic life as these facilities undergo the wrenching experience of relocation.

- No allowance is made for the increased operating and utility costs that would forever attach to the renovated building.

- No thought is given to the drain on our resources this would cause. The services we enjoy in Garden City are second to none. They would inevitably suffer erosion of quality as more and more of our money is spent to feed the needs of a municipal St. Paul's.

- No allowance is made for the deleterious impact such expenditure would have on the fiscal health of the village. We currently enjoy a municipal credit rating second only to the Treasury Bills issued by the US government. That could suffer in the process of obtaining the necessary funding to complete this project.

- There are no inherent efficiencies associated with the move of the library and the school administration to St. Paul's, to a space that was never designed for such use.

- Due to the structural requirements for a library to deal with high-density storage, the St. Paul's building would require very expensive structural renovation.

- The mayor and a village trustee have stated that the renovation costs in this option could only be bonded for 15 years. This shortened repayment schedule would substantially increase the tax burden.

- Finally, there was no plan laid out for the disposition of the existing village hall site.

For the above reasons, we urge the board of trustees to declare that the municipal use of St. Paul's no longer be an option.

The second option is referred to as "stabilization." The process of stabilization would merely secure the building. The roof would be repaired and the exterior walls and windows would be made secure. No one could use the building. After nine years of unsuccessfully trying to find a use, we would be "mothballing" it while we waited for some future use to magically emerge. Einhorn Yaffee advised the village that stabilization would cost approximately $4.5 million.

- Our board believes that this is optimistic and the costs would probably exceed $6.5 million.

- Moreover, this estimate fails to recognize that these outlays are only the initial expense of a process that would continue until a suitable use is found.

The third option, the so-called "threshold use," would require a partial renovation of the lower floor of the main building in order to provide meeting rooms for various village organizations. Einhorn Yaffee advised the village that this would cost $9 million.

- Again our board believes that this is also a significant underestimate of the cost and the real renovation costs could be close to 50 percent higher.

- The proposal fails to address the need for such meeting space. We fail to see a clamoring by village organizations for additional meeting space in the village.

- No allowance is made for future operating expenses of the usable space, which would be in addition to maintaining the current village hall.

- No allowance is made for the expense of maintaining the remaining vacant portions of the main building.

The fourth option is demolition at a cost in excess of $4 million and a loss to our community of one of its greatest architectural gems. This is an option that the board of directors of the Eastern Property Owners Association does not want to see implemented. We believe that a majority of the residents of this village do not want the building to be demolished.

We would have been most supportive if a municipal or community use could have been found at a reasonable cost. For many residents this would have been their preference. Some in the community would have liked to see the building become the high school. The NYS Department of Education prohibits school districts to renovate deteriorating historic buildings when a new building can be constructed at a lower cost. In addition to an unacceptably high cost, the law would most likely render this option almost impossible.

Finally, we want to see the building saved and so, we propose a fifth option - the sale or lease of the building to a private developer for construction of market priced apartments. We believe that this plan is economically feasible. It would of course require legislative action, which the village could obtain after showing our legislators that their plan has the approval of a majority of residents.

Such a sale or lease of the building has a five-fold advantage over all the other options:

- It would remove the financial burden that the St. Paul's building currently represents.

- It would provide a boost to our tax base.

- It would save us the cost of demolishing the building.

- Residential apartments would not increase the need for expanded village or school district services. The potential market would be couples looking to simplify their living arrangements once their children have grown.

- Finally, it would enable us to save the St. Paul's building, or at least its façade, and allow it to continue its role as a community heirloom and link to our cherished history.

For the foregoing reasons the EPOA recommends that the mayor immediately appoint a select committee comprised of residents who have real estate expertise and charge that committee with procuring a buyer or lessee for St. Paul's. The committee should also be given the power to retain, as it sees fit, a top tier real estate consulting firm. Their joint task would be to develop a plan acceptable to the board of trustees for the St. Paul's site, establish a sale price or a land rent, and then assemble a Request for Proposal (RFP) and Request for Qualification (RFQ). After their acceptance of the plan, the board of trustees would then be responsible for obtaining residential approval. The EPOA board also urges the board of trustees to send a special issue of Village Facts to the residents with a clear description and realistic cost of the four options presently open to the village. This communication should include the financial impact of each option on individual residents. It should also include the approximate cost of renovating village hall in place. We believe it is imperative to communicate this information to all residents as soon as possible. On Oct. 17, the board of trustees and members of the Mayor's Committee on St. Paul's, who have diligently worked for nine years to find a use for the building, met in joint session. Two trustees and several members of the committee said publicly that they have concluded that only a private sector use can save the building. We urge the remaining members of the board to support this position. The longer we delay, the more our decision will be made for us by the elements as a valuable piece of Garden City continues to deteriorate. Let us not delay to the point where we are in danger of losing the St. Paul's building. The overall process is difficult and will take a substantial period of time. The planned roof repairs will only protect it for a short period of time. The time is now and the choice is obvious. The only way to save the historic St. Paul's building is to turn it back to the private sector."