At its meeting on June 18, the Village of Garden City Board of trustees voted to approve the repurchase of the Franklin Court property for $150,000. The village had previously sold the parcel in December 2013 to a limited liability company (Franklin Mews LLC), which has been formed by approximately 29 residents of the Franklin Court Mews.
The price paid by the village was the product of considerable negotiation between the village and Franklin Mews LLC.
The unanimous decision of the board to repurchase the property for the agreed upon price reflected the judgment of the board, based on the advice of counsel, that doing so represented the most expeditious and certain way to return the property to public ownership and public use. Doing so not only avoided the potentially considerable costs and delay of litigation, but it also eliminated the risk of an adverse ruling, including the risk that a court could determine that the value that would have to be paid would be higher than the agreed upon price. These considerations are not unique to this dispute, or to the village alone, as anyone who has faced or considered potential litigation in their personal or business lives can appreciate.
As a condition to selling the property back to the village, the purchaser was seeking to recover all of the costs that it incurred to purchase and own the property, including the cost of installing the fence. In agreeing to a price, the village considered the cost, delay and uncertainty that would be entailed in trying to reacquire the property through alternative methods, including the attempt to enforce deed restrictions and/or through the power of eminent domain. The board was also sensitive to the fact that the purchasers were also fellow residents of the village and it sought an approach that would achieve peace between warring neighborhood residents in the Franklin Court area with the least impact possible to all sides.
One of the conditions insisted upon by the Franklin Mews LLC was that the fence remain up through the end of the year (originally, they had sought to assure that the fence would remain in perpetuity). This was based in part on the experience and conviction of many of the residents of the Mews that the fence provides important benefits, including among others, that it serves as a barrier that prevents young children from running out into the road. It also prevents the open space from being used at night as a gathering place for teenagers and others.
The village was unwilling to agree to allow the fence to remain forever. However, it did agree to allow the fence for a limited period of time both to break an impasse that threatened to prevent a deal and because the village’s own experience is that fences on open public space can be beneficial. As the owner of the land, the village is entitled to erect a fence as it deems necessary or desirable. The concession that the village made in allowing the fence to remain up through year-end was intended to allow for a reasonable trial to see if other residents, including some who have opposed the fence, do find that it is beneficial.
Residents need to understand one important fact related to the fence issue. The land is intended to remain, and the agreement with the Mews group requires, that the land remain open space. The fence will not impede use of the open space by the local residents who use the space any more than our other village spaces with fences. The gate will be open substantially all of the day and will close at times consistent with other village properties, like many parks, that have gates.
The board intends to monitor the fence situation and to schedule a date and time prior to the end of the year to hear resident comments as to whether the fence should remain after Dec. 31. Because it believes that the trial period provides both an appropriate test of the benefits of the fence as well as a “cooling-off” opportunity that we hope will allow relations among neighbors to normalize, it does not intend to make a decision on the fence prior to that time.
—Submitted by the Village of Garden City Board of Trustees
