The Village of Kings Point offered to withdraw a controversial request to alienate more than two acres of Kings Point Park on Oct. 23.
The offer was intended to resolve the “pending dispute” between the village and a handful of residents who filed a lawsuit over the proposed alienation, which would turn more than two acres of the park into a private parking lot for the United Mashadi Jewish Community of America’s private Community Center.
“This Offer of Judgment is made solely for the purpose of resolving the pending dispute efficiently and without further litigation, and the Offer of Judgment shall not be deemed an admission to any alleged fact nor an admission to any alleged fault by any party,” the Offer of Judgment said.
The lawsuit, Capruso v. Village of Kings Point, accuses the village and other local authorities of failing to conduct the proper environmental impact review required by the state. It was filed by the Pace Environmental Litigation Clinic on behalf of residents on Sept. 29.
If the offer is accepted, the village would resolve the issue by agreeing to a court judgment that includes annulling their finding that the proposed parkland alienation would not result in significant environmental impact, withdrawing their request to officials Senator Jack Martins and Assembly Member Daniel Norber to advance parkland alienation legislation and agreeing to a declaration that they must comply with the State Environmental Quality Review Act if they want to pursue the alienation.
Concerned Citizens of NY-03, a “good government” group that applauded the legal action by the residents when it was filed, is optimistic but skeptical of the offer.
“We think this is a really good start, but we have to make sure that we’re not going to end up in the same place in three months or three years,” said Jody Kass Finkel, founder and coordinator of Concerned Citizens of NY-03. “That’s the bottom line, the community doesn’t want to have to go through this again – and we think there’s a way to build that into the settlement.”
Kass Finkel also emphasized the importance of transparency and involving the community in these decisions.
“The most important thing is that the settlement must ensure robust community engagement. We can’t let them push out and ignore the community again,” she said. “What’s to stop them from conducting another bogus environmental review and hiding it from the community? The settlement must have a stipulation that ensures sunlight. The community can’t be put in that position again.”
If not accepted by the court or objected to by the petitioners, the offer will be withdrawn within 20 days with the village respondents reserving the right to contest the claims.
