New York Assembly Bill A05851

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/24/25
• Refer: 2/24/25
• Report Pass: 6/16/25
• Refer: 6/16/25

Caption

Authorizes the town of Union Vale, county of Dutchess, to alienate and discontinue the use of certain parklands and to lease the lands to Homeland Towers, LLC for the placement and operation of a wireless communications tower.

Summary

A05851 authorizes the Town of Union Vale in Dutchess County to discontinue a small portion of parkland and lease it to Homeland Towers, LLC for up to 30 years for the placement and operation of a wireless communications tower. The bill covers a lease area of about 0.120 acres and an access/utility easement of about 0.129 acres, both described by metes and bounds in the text. It is a local parkland alienation bill, meaning the town is being given specific statutory permission to repurpose publicly held parkland for a private telecommunications use. The bill conditions that authorization on the town dedicating an amount equal to or greater than the fair market value of the parkland toward acquiring new parkland and/or improving existing park and recreational facilities. It also requires that if the land stops being used for the authorized purpose, the lease terminates, the land reverts to the town for park and recreational use, and the wireless tower must be removed and the site restored. If any federal funds were involved in the original parkland, the town must also satisfy applicable federal conversion requirements before the alienation can occur.

Impact

This bill would amend the legal status of the identified parkland in Union Vale by removing it from protected park use for the limited purpose of a telecommunications lease. It creates a narrow, site-specific exception to parkland protections and imposes replacement-value mitigation and reversion requirements, while also preserving any applicable federal parkland conversion obligations. The practical effect is to allow a wireless communications tower and related access/utilities on land that would otherwise remain dedicated to public park and recreation purposes.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill was generally well received in committee, with favorable action in both the Assembly Ways and Means Committee and the Assembly Rules Committee. The votes were largely supportive, indicating little formal resistance at the committee stage. Because there are no committee transcripts provided, the record does not show detailed debate, but the committee outcomes point to a broadly favorable view of the proposal.

Contention

The main substantive issue is the conversion of parkland to a private telecommunications use, which can raise concerns about loss of public open space, precedent for parkland alienation, and the adequacy of replacement parkland or recreational improvements. Supporters are likely to emphasize the limited footprint, the public benefit of improved wireless infrastructure, and the bill’s safeguards requiring fair-market-value mitigation and restoration if the use ends. Any opposition would most likely come from park advocates or residents concerned about preserving parkland and minimizing non-recreational development on public land.