Thomas O'Rourke, Estates POA president, thought it "disgraceful" that the board didn't know what it voted on Dec. 16 - when trustees officially designated the 48 acres of what is St. Paul's "parkland" - and has to now rely on an opinion of counsel. Bruce Torino, former village trustee, believes the designation, although largely symbolic, changes very little. "The day before the resolution passed, soccer balls were kicked, lacrosse sticks were on the field, baseball bats were shining, Cluett Hall had dance, basketball was played and recreation abounded," he said. "The day after the resolution passed, the same occurred. There has been no change. The sky has not fallen. The options for the Main Building remain the same as the first day that the village took ownership."

Eastern Property Owners' Association (EPOA) President James Carney publicly stated that the EPOA board regrets the action that trustees took Dec. 16. "Most of all, we don't agree with the process. There was no prior discussion with the POAs [property owners associations], which has historically taken place in this village; there was no legal opinion that we are aware of," he said. "It struck us odd that the board would take an action, effectively changing an asset that everyone in this village has a piece of and cares very deeply about, without understanding, from village counsel, what the legal implications are..."

John Pittoni, a local attorney and village resident, presented the board with a petition signed by over 300 residents. In part, it read, "We, the residents and taxpayers of Garden City, hereby petition the board of trustees to rescind the resolution approved at the village board meeting Dec. 16 which designated the entirety of the St. Paul's property as parkland.

"We request this action because we believe trustees were unaware of the full legal and economic implications of this designation at the time of their action and because the significant effects of this decision on the village were not revealed to residents or publicly discussed prior to the resolution's adoption. The surprise resolution was introduced on motion of Mayor Barbara Miller, and hastily adopted by a vote of Trustees Segerdahl, Negri and Watras and the mayor, who caste an extra vote to gain approval over objection from the other four trustees."

The petition further asked the board to answer several questions, such as did and does the board fully understand the legal, economic and environmental impacts of this action? Why was this surprise resolution introduced and adopted without any opportunity for public comment? Why didn't the board consult with the POAs prior to voting on such an important matter? Why did the board, through this action, abruptly break the compromise unanimously reached at its meeting one month earlier, which, for the first time, offered a balanced approach to resolve the St. Paul's issue?

Pittoni assured the petition was not "slapped together" as some might have insinuated. "The last thing you want to do is designate this property parkland. It is the biggest mistake you could ever make," he added. Nick Episcopia, immediate past president of the Eastern Property Owners' Association (EPOA), admitted he was "quite shocked" when Mayor Miller's resolution passed Dec. 16. "How could such a huge zoning change be passed when four trustees were unaware of it until that evening?" he asked. "There was no public hearing, no input from the POAs, no environmental impact study, no economic analysis and no detailed legal opinion on the ramifications of passing such a motion ... However, after some thought, it was readily apparent that the motion passed Dec. 16 by the mayor voting twice and Trustees Negri, Watras and Segerdahl was completely consistent with their actions and tactics over the past 12 to 14 months."

Torino added, "Commercialization would still require the act of the legislature. If a use exists that is sufficiently attractive to the village, its residents and a developer, their combined efforts would certainly be persuasive in obtaining the law to permit development. As of yet, there has been no white knight; there has been no development ... This designation is very important. It's a reaffirmation in no uncertain terms that the village desires to maintain its heritage for future generations. By designating the property parkland, we have in resolution form made our heritage safer."

Ed Keating of Euston Road, who believes the petition Pittoni spoke of is flawed, suggested the board recognize the reality Torino brought forth if they truly intend on compromising.