CSSP Member: America and Saint Paul’s
Robert Vassalotti, lifelong Garden City resident and Committee to Save St. Paul's member, submitted the follow letters to the editor.
I would appreciate it if you could publish the attached letter from the chief of the National Register of Historic Places, J. Paul Loether. I recently contacted him about the status of Saint Paul’s School on Stewart Avenue and received this reply….(see attached).
I believe it is important for all who debate the future of this building to know about the status of this building as an American historic structure. I know that many within the Village of Garden City already know that this building is registered on the National Register of Historic Places, yet it is easy to ignore the significance of what this means.
It is important, right now, for people to consider having a wider “American view” of this historic structure and to not just think of this as a building that is located in Garden City and simply a part of Garden City. Saint Paul’s is part of a much larger part of history that also belongs to the rest of Long Island, New York State and America. We have a civic responsibility, as Americans, not just as residents of Garden City, to restore and protect this building as one of America’s great historic structures. See details from Loether’s letter below.
It is also important for all residents to reconsider the numerous local, state and federal agencies that can and are willing to help us to fund the needed renovations; the board of trustees just have to be open to doing so. Of course, minimal tax dollars and private funds can also generate needed funds. It is evident that the people of Garden City want to preserve this structure, especially after they voted 3 to 1 against demolition on April 27, 2011. The turnout of 3,290 that voted “no” to the “demolition-bond” referendum was a significant message towards preservation and reuse and yet the will of the residents continues to be ignored by the board of trustees, who of late, continue to speak about demolition and have refused to invest in emergency repairs.
I urge residents to think like an American and preserve this grand historic treasure for future generations of Americans. Let the board of trustees know your position.
The following is J. Paul Loether's letter:
Thank you for the e-mail expressing your concerns regarding the Saint Paul's School in Garden City, New York. Saint Paul's School was listed on the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) on November 14, 1978 as part of the A.T. Stewart Era Buildings nomination with the areas of significance of architecture, community planning and development, and social history for the contributions of A.T. Stewart to suburb development. Stewart purchased a 500-acre parcel of land to create a model planned city. Mr. Stewart is highlighted in the National Register Bulletin on Historic Residential Suburbs (Copy Enclosed).
The National Register of Historic Places, administered by the National Park Service, is the official list of the Nation's historic properties worthy of preservation and includes districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects that are significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering and culture.
The NPS strongly encourages the preservation of properties listed in the NR in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. A copy of these standards can be found at: http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/. However, under Federal Law, listing in National Register does not prevent a property owner from doing whatever they want with their property as long as there are no Federal monies, licenses or permits associated with the proposed undertaking. You can find more information on our website at: http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/national_register_fundamentals.htm. However, before this occurs, you can, or the property owner should contact the State historic preservation office (SHPO). The SHPO is the state agency that oversees historic preservation efforts in their state. The New York State Historic Preservation office (NYSHPO) cotact is Kath LaFrank and she can be reached at 518-237-8643 ext. 3261. There may be state or local preservation laws that they should be aware of before they undertake a project with a historic property.
If you have any questions please contact the National Register reviewer for New York State, Alexis Abernathy at 202-354-2236 or alexis_abernathy@nps.gov.
Thank you for your interest in Historic Preservation programs of the National Park Service.
Sincerely,
J. Paul Loether
Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic landmarks
Bill Sweeney
9:07 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
I assume people have looked into the grants, etc., right? How much can we get? I assume from all of the sources, it could reach in the millions. Does anyone know?
GCRes1
10:00 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
For sure, the Committee to Save St. Paul's knows what grants are out there. And, based on their research, they have asked THE TAXPAYERS to pay $10 million for their awful 8% restoration scheme.
The idea that there is some preservation society out there willing to give the CSSP $50 million-- or $5 million-- to restore St. Paul's is pure fantasy.
Time for the CSSP to take a real leadership role and bring in a PRIVATE partner willing to make a PRIVATE investment in St. Paul's and develop it PRIVATELY, while paying the Village revenues, leaving the Village all the fields and reserving some rooms in the building for public use. Sound familiar? That is what Avalon Bay offered before the CSSP destroyed them with a smear campaign.
A true private/public partnership would give CSSP some much-needed credibility, and bring an end to the stalemate.
LI Lawyer
9:24 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Preservation of St. Paul's for public use can be achieved incrementally, one step at a time, without saddling residents with burdensome new taxes. No one wants the Village to waste taxpayer money, and the Committee to Save St Paul's has never favored anything except fiscally prudent restoration.
With foresight and planning, the Village can begin the process today, making investments in the Main Building as finances permit, aided by grants and donations. If you look closely at the Village's balance sheet, it shows an extremely strong financial picture in terms of its assets and liabilities.
Village taxes are a small fraction of what homeowners pay in taxes overall. Careful use of municipal bonds, available now at very low rates, would allow the Village to borrow money for the initial restoration work and to repay it gradually over a lengthy period of time. The yearly cost, per home, would be small. The long term benefit, to the Village's public image and to its homeowner values, will be real but incalculable.
In short, saving St Paul's is not only about preserving our Village history, but also preserving for the future the Village's unique identity as a place where history is an integral part of the community. St Paul's can become a source of community pride, if we want it to become one.
Joe Perry
9:46 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012
2) 'LI Lawyer argues that "If you look closely at the Village's balance sheet, it shows an extremely strong financial picture in terms of its assets and liabilities."
Anyone attending the school budget workshops will immediately know that this argument is NOT true. On the contrary, the Village is committed to pay unknown and skyrocketing costs to meet retirement and health care costs of the Village and school union employees. These costs will continue to escalate for DECADES.
Indeed, the Union Representative smile with publication of each article about saving St Paul's. If the CSSP is successful in convincing us that the Village's future financial position is sufficiently strong for an additional multi-decade commitment as necessary to save St Paul's, then certainly there is no need for the Unions to reconsider their demands for increased payments from the Village.
In case anyone forgot, the Village faces a tax cap and we are in a general recession.
It is not un-American to get our financial house in order BEFORE committing to save St Paul's. Much of America was built with private investment. Saving St Paul's a comprehensive plan with a private partner.
Thank you.
long time resident
8:59 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Perserve it for what? Why piece meal the thing if there is no real use for the building? Anything we use that building for, the facilities all ready exist in or near the village already. Why spend more money for a building that has no real purpose?
Public image? When St. Paul's was open it wanted nothing to do with the village and it's residents... unless you were giving money to them.
Joe Perry
9:46 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Thank you Mr. Vassalotti for your view that we have a "civic responsibility, as Americans" to save St Paul's. However, careful consideration reveals that Mr. Vassalotti’s "good American" argument is devoid of any substance and amounts to misguided flag-waiving.
If the Committee to Save St. Paul's has real plan, let's have it. More borrowing and gradual repayment over a lengthy period of time is a cop-out that will sabotage our future Village finances.
The arguments provided by 'LI Lawyer' in support Mr. Vassalotti and apparently on behalf of the Committee to Save St Paul's are priceless. Let's deconstruct the comments of the LI Lawyer:
1) LI Lawyer argues that St Paul's can be saved "without saddling residents with burdensome new taxes" by making "careful use of municipal bonds, available now at very low rates, [to] allow the Village to borrow money for the initial restoration work and to repay it gradually over a lengthy period of time."
LI Lawyer is either talking out of both sides of his/her mouth or is simply financially illiterate. Let's be real. Any money that is borrowed--even at today's low rates--must be paid back. Therefore, such borrowing will raise taxes. Regardless of whether 'Village taxes are a small fraction of what homeowners pay in taxes overall,' as 'LI Lawyer' contends, no one wants higher taxes, particularly to save a structure that is not needed, particularly in view of the Village’s other commitments, as discussed below.
(continued)
Jack O'Niel
10:57 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Patch must need more hits because nothing gets people here like St. Paul's.
Luis
3:52 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012
I kept asking folks that were commenting all last week about "Addendum M" since it was referenced a few times. I finally went to the gcestates.com web page and found it. While the beginning of the document reads with some vague references to incremental costs and unavoidable costs, the page that has the line by line description of work is amazingly clear. It shows each item with the CSSP proposed costs versus the 3rd party contractors estimated costs. The discrepancy is remarkable. I was at a board of trustees meeting when the CSSP was supposed to present their proposal. I heard that they decided not to present it because their own contractor (Turner Contracting) had very similar concerns with validity of the CSSP proposal. They did not think CSSP could deliver the 10k sf as described for the $11.5M. They came up with much higher amount and that would not deliver as much. Then there is the issue everyone mentions "can we really section off the remaining 115k sf behind it". What do we really want to use this building for? Can't we salvage some parts of it, demolish it, and then build a new structure that would look like the original and use the salvaged parts in commemoration? What does the contractor who donated his service to fix the roof & clock tower think about the building? How much does he think it would cost to salvage some, demo, and rebuild new using some of the salvage. He does that kind of work on homes doesn't he?