Authorizes the town of Greenburgh to alienate and discontinue the use of certain parkland
This bill authorizes the Town of Greenburgh in Westchester County to discontinue the use of a specified 3.9104-acre parcel of parkland and lease it, at fair market value for up to 25 years, to HESP Solar LLC. The stated purpose of the lease is to allow construction and operation of a solar facility and electric vehicle charging stations on the site.
The bill requires that all proceeds from the alienation and lease be dedicated to acquiring new parkland and/or making capital improvements to existing parks and recreational facilities. It also includes a reversion provision: if the property stops being used for the authorized solar and charging-station purpose, the lease terminates, the land reverts to town park and recreation use, and the solar and charging infrastructure must be removed and the site restored. The bill further conditions the alienation on compliance with any applicable federal parkland conversion requirements if federal funds were involved in the property’s purchase or improvement.
If enacted, the bill would create a specific statutory exception allowing the Town of Greenburgh to alienate designated parkland, which is ordinarily protected under New York’s parkland alienation doctrine and often requires legislative authorization. It would permit a long-term lease of the parcel for renewable energy and EV infrastructure, while directing replacement value back into the local park system through land acquisition or capital improvements. The bill also preserves a reversionary safeguard and recognizes potential federal restrictions tied to prior funding.
The available record suggests generally favorable treatment of the bill, as it was introduced by the Committee on Rules at the request of an Assembly member and advanced to the Assembly Floor Calendar without any recorded committee transcript opposition or recorded votes in the provided materials. The bill’s framing around solar energy, electric vehicle charging, and reinvestment in parks indicates a policy rationale likely intended to balance environmental and public-recreation goals.
The main point of potential contention is the conversion of public parkland to a non-park use, even though the bill attempts to mitigate that concern by limiting the lease term, requiring fair market value, and dedicating proceeds to park purposes. Another possible issue is whether the proposed solar facility and charging stations are an appropriate use of parkland and whether the parcel can be adequately replaced in value and usefulness. If federal funding was involved, compliance with federal conversion rules could also be a practical hurdle.