Having attended the monthly Board of Trustees meetings over the past year while closely following the St. Paul's issue, I am amazed at how many residents continue to believe that a better solution than AvalonBay exists for the overall benefit of all taxpayers of the village, now and in the future. Further, the fact that these same residents and their respective trustees continue to spew misinformation to them and the public on this same issue is disheartening to say the least. The village has looked for a solution for 15 years, no one has come forward until now and this is the best proposal we are going to get.

As far as I know, there is no other proposed means to generate millions of dollars in tax revenue to the village and school district that will be needed during the upcoming years. Aside from the few new homes being built and added to the tax rolls in the village, this is the only opportunity on the horizon and unless our residents take the time to realize it, this small group will be controlling the issue and we will continue to pay two hundred thousand dollars a year to keep this building standing. Yes, we pay that much for a building that provides no use to any of us!

Instead of considering the true facts as to their beloved treasure, the St. Paul's building, they have chosen to misinform the public with regard to the current available proposal from AvalonBay that would not only restore the building to its glory but at the same time create a much-needed tax revenue stream to the village and school district over the next many years. While it is true that the Pilot payments as currently proposed are low, the fact is that anything is better than nothing, which is what we are getting now. And we can still negotiate those pilots. I challenge AvalonBay to immediately consider increasing them to cover operating costs during the first 10 years as this seems to be a major hurdle that some residents have yet to get past.

The disappointing offshoot of all of this is that many residents, when asked for an opinion on the St. Paul's issue are now of the mindset of "just tear it down already" because this small group of residents has delayed the process for years and everybody is sick and tired of hearing about it and wants finality. Tearing it down would be disappointing considering what we would be giving up from the AvalonBay proposal.

If all residents would take the time to review the facts as presented to them in the report of the Mayors Committee on St Paul's, as well as the responses to questions I posed to the Mayor's Committee, for which a response was printed in the Aug. 29 edition of the Garden City News, you would have the basis for forming a fact based opinion.

The facts based on the current proposal and information provided from the Mayors Committee are:

• The village did purchase the St. Paul's site for use by its residents.

Currently 41 of the 48 acres are used daily by all of us. We never intended to use the main St. Paul's Building.

• Only 7 acres comprise the area that would be leased to AvalonBay. We would not be losing the use of the athletic fields, The Field House Gymnasium, Cluett Hall, the cottages or any currently legal available parking.

• We would not be losing any public space. In fact we would gain access to the 2,400 square foot Chapel that most of us have never seen. This can be used one day a week for meetings or relaxation.

• It currently costs the village approximately $200,000 per year to maintain the building. In future years millions will need to be spent on the roof to keep the structure sound. The building does not conform to any building or fire codes and is uninhabitable.

• Since purchasing the property, the village has not received any tax dollars to support the upkeep of the building.

• The AvalonBay proposal is for 108 apartment units. This is not considered a dense housing plan. In fact, at 15 units per acre it would be second to the Cherry Valley apartments at 14 units per acre, the least dense in the village.

• AvalonBay will not be mandated to set aside 10 percent of the apartments for affordable housing. In lieu of this, the developer can contribute an agreed-upon amount to a fund for other affordable housing projects. We can insist that Avalon Bay do this.

• For anyone to say we would be losing millions if we accept the AvalonBay proposal is totally untrue. We cannot lose what we are not currently getting or that is proposed by another developer. Acceptance of the AvalonBay proposal should be considered an investment today for tax revenue in the future.

• During the first 35 years of the lease period it is estimated based on current tax rates that we would receive the following tax revenue: First 7 years of occupancy - $198,839; Years 10-20 - $3,381,257; Years 21-35 - $53,073,812; This amounts to total tax revenue to the village of $56,653,908 vs $0 today.

• Per Trustee Lamberti, chairman of the Mayors' Committee on St Paul's, the village does not anticipate the need to increase taxes to provide village services to the AvalonBay site as existing staffing levels as well as equipment would accommodate the services required under the AvalonBay proposal. There would however be an increase to the village for disposal cost at the incinerator for rubbish that is generated by the residents at the site. Also, AvalonBay residents would pay the standard water consumption charges.

• Per Trustee Lamberti, chairman of the Mayor's Committee on St. Paul's, using the analysis performed by AvalonBay and Cameron Engineering, which utilized data from the Garden City School District as well as current multi family units in Garden City, they summarized that "Based on data from both Garden City and AvalonBay properties, AvalonBay estimates a total of eight new students from the AvalonBay property and based on the current year per pupil costs from the Garden City school budget, estimate a total cost of $170,240 per year for these additional students.

• Traffic: While no study was prepared, we should look to the Wyndham project as an example. It has 315 apartments, three times the size of the Avalon proposal. I urge all to take the time to look at the impact that project had on traffic and you will see it was minimal.

So our choices are to continue funding an uninhabitable building at the cost of approximately $200,000 per year of taxpayer money with guaranteed future costs in the millions while waiting for another solution to preserve the building, that history has shown will not materialize. Or face reality and live with a development company, the only one in 15 years willing to spend in excess of 53 million of its own funds to restore and renovate the St. Paul's building so that it can remain as the icon many feel it is at a cost similar to what we are already paying with the guarantee of huge future tax revenues. And as a side note, the proposed site plan looks to be a very appealing plan that when completed would be a complement to the village.

I only hope that when and if residents are provided with the opportunity to voice our opinion on this proposal, that each resident and trustee takes the time to review the facts versus fiction prior to casting their vote either way and does not simply vote no to AvalonBay, thinking the problem will go away because it will not. After the proposal is defeated, we will begin the process all over again and then the only options should be to either demolish the building ($5.5 million) or mothball it ($15 million, plus the $200,000 annual maintenance), both, as you can see, a tremendous cost to the residents of the village.

Walter McKenna

(Editor's Note: Walter McKenna is a director with the Eastern Property Owners' Association.)