Despite assurances from the Garden City Board of Trustees that there will be ample opportunity provided for public input on the St. Paul's issue, a handful of weary and distrustful residents once again expressed concern with the process being followed to decide the future of the Historic Main Building at St. Paul's.

The Board was once again called upon at its November 16th meeting to repeat that once the Trustees' Committee has completed the information-gathering process and made its recommendation to the full Board of Trustees, residents will be provided with more details.

Since the Village is currently involved in a "competitive process" to come up with a proposal that's in its best interest, the Board also re-emphasized that revealing names of those who responded to the RFP might cause the Village to lose leverage during negotiations. Even though he couldn't say when and how public input will be solicited, Trustee John Mauk, second deputy mayor and chairman of the mayor-appointed Trustees' Committee focusing on the St. Paul's issue, assured residents that their opinions will be heard.

After a handful of residents expressed their distrust when the Board refused to provide information in the RFPs, Trustees Donald Brudie and Thomas Lamberti spoke in support of the Board and its committee. Brudie said that the full Board will review what the committee has done when they make their recommendation and like he did at the last Board meeting, Lamberti once again reiterated that the process will be fair and asked residents to reserve judgment until they get all of the facts.

Trustee Mauk spoke about his frustration after the meeting. "The trustees made a conscientious effort the other night to provide more details about the process for interviewing and evaluating the RFP responders and getting back to the public," he said in an e-mail to The Garden City News. "Most of the speakers at the meeting, however, some of the same ones who have been demanding more information, clearly weren't interested in anything we had to say. They either ignored what was said and went right on with their prepared statements, even when an issue had been addressed, or they tried to take whatever was said and use it to attack the trustees. The Mayor had to admonish several of them to stop interrupting even while their questions were being answered.

"It's one thing to feel strongly about your position," he continued. "It's quite another to try to prevent consideration of other alternatives with which you personally disagree. Most of the public speakers the other evening demonstrated that they aren't interested in any options for the future of St. Paul's, let alone the costs involved, except the one they personally advocate. I left the meeting feeling completely frustrated. I second Trustee Lamberti's request for people to stop rushing to judgment until they know more of the facts."

In response to a resident concerned that the committee evaluating the RFP responses was comprised solely of trustees, Mauk explained that even though it is named the Trustees' Committee and Trustees Peter Bee and Thomas Lamberti are on it, the committee is also comprised of the consultant and four residents: Bob Davis, Cosmo Veneziale, Charles Koester and Jim Kearney. Trustees Mauk and Lamberti, as well as Koester, Veneziale and Kearney, also worked on the controversial school bond issue several years ago.

In June, following the recommendation of Karen Backus, the Village's consultant and principal of the real estate consulting firm K. Backus & Associates, Inc., the Village issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to be due last month. The Village required that respondents submit proposals for development of the Historic Main Building at St. Paul's within the existing building envelope, but provide for a flexible framework to allow for developer creativity and other options.

Trustee Mauk announced that interviews were conducted on November 8th and emphasized that all six proposals being considered include a combination of public and private uses. "The Committee expected to be able to provide more information to the public about the proposals and the proposers once that process was concluded," he said.

However, one of the interviewees, the Committee to Save St. Paul's (CSSP), was not ready to make its presentation and requested a postponement so they could try and work out an arrangement with a developer. Trustee Mauk told The Garden City News after the meeting that they are still trying to set an interview date with CSSP.

"Although the [Trustees'] Committee wants to move this process along quickly, we also want to do whatever is reasonably necessary to identify the proposal and entity that has the greatest potential for a successful redevelopment," said Mauk.

Mauk outlined three hurdles that interviewees must overcome: a responder must demonstrate that its proposal holds the most promise for achieving Village redevelopment objectives; it has to demonstrate that it and its team members have the experience and capability to assume the many risks involved, and to commence a successful project despite those risks; and it has to be clear that the entity's principals understand the significant project costs, and have the ability and willingness to finance the project without burdening Village taxpayers.

He revealed that some of the people who showed initial interest in the project ultimately decided not to submit a RFP response because of the high risk involved, the chance of being sued and the fact that it has become a locally politically-charged issue. Once a proposal is ultimately chosen by the Board of Trustees, the next step would be to obtain the necessary Home Rule legislation and relief from Parkland designation from state legislators. Senator Kemp Hannon has said that he will only seek the legislation once he sees community support for one plan.

In response to a resident who asked if any of the proposals called for construction outside the footprint, Mauk revealed that some of them did call for more construction. He also said that the proposals that include more public/community space also call for a higher cost for taxpayers. He would not give percentages of public and private space provided for in the proposals. Trustee Bee said the Committee wants to meet with the CSSP before revealing proposal details.