During last Thursday's board meeting, trustees moved forward with the village's parking issue when they adopted a bond resolution for projects at 115 Tenth Street, also known as the Kanner property, and 116 Eleventh Street, a vacant lot the Albanese Organization now owns.

According to Village Auditor James Olivo, the Kanner property will be financed, through a 90/10 percent benefit assessment, for a 10-year period. The current bond resolution estimate, according to Olivo, is $1.75 million. This figure, based upon an estimate the village received from a general contractor, includes moving the Kanner home to the adjacent lot, along with the construction of a parking lot. Regarding the second project to take place at 116 Eleventh Street, the resolution totals $900,000 and includes redeveloping the property into a parking lot. This will also be funded over 10 years with a 90/10 percent benefit assessment, Olivo said.

Trustee Peter Bee, who has consistently opposed the project at 115 Tenth Street, said, Úquot;Should the board go forward, as currently it appears it will, I believe the best way to move forward is through a bond resolution and I will vote in favor of the bond resolution.Úquot;

Speaking in a similar vein, Trustee Peter Negri, who opposes going forward with the project at 116 Eleventh Street, added, Úquot;It would be financially irresponsible of me not to vote on that bond resolution.Úquot;

The board unanimously voted in favor of the bond resolution. Mayor Robert Lewis said, Úquot;I'm delighted to see we're moving forward with the bond resolution to resolve this matter.Úquot;

Nick Episcopia, Eastern Property Owners Association president, said, Úquot;Hopefully this is a settlement of one of the most controversial issues we've had around here for at least the last four to five years. However, I'd like to comment on the method of presentation.

Úquot;If someone were to come to a board of trustees meeting and take a look at this, they wouldn't know what it was about, they wouldn't know the amount of the bondings and they wouldn't know if it was bonded through benefit assessment or otherwise. I think when something as important as this comes up on the consent calendar there ought to be more to it. There's not a real difference between this and an employee from the Department of Public Works on sick leave. I think it ought to be described in more detail.Úquot;