New York Senate Bill S07834

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/9/25
• Refer: 5/9/25

Caption

Authorizes the town of Ithaca, county of Tompkins, to discontinue as parklands and alienate certain lands for the purpose of maintaining and operating such lands for agricultural purposes.

Summary

This bill authorizes the Town of Ithaca in Tompkins County to discontinue and alienate approximately 8.33 acres of designated parkland so the land can be maintained and operated for agricultural purposes. The measure identifies the parcel to be removed from park status and requires the town to act through its governing body and on terms it determines appropriate. In exchange, the bill requires the town to dedicate a different 8.33-acre parcel as parkland, provided that the replacement land has not previously been used for public open space or park purposes. The replacement parcel is described by metes and bounds and is intended to serve as substitute parkland under state law. The bill also includes a safeguard requiring the town to make up any difference in fair market value between the land being alienated and the land being dedicated, either through additional parkland acquisition or capital improvements to existing parks and recreational facilities. If any federal funding was involved in the original parkland, the town must also satisfy any applicable federal conversion requirements before the alienation can occur.

Impact

The bill creates a local exception to New York’s general parkland alienation rules by specifically authorizing the Town of Ithaca to remove a designated parcel from park use and repurpose it for agriculture. It also conditions that authorization on the dedication of replacement parkland and, if necessary, the payment of the value difference for park acquisition or improvements, thereby preserving the overall parkland inventory and value. The measure affects the town’s land-use authority and the status of the identified parcels, but it does not broadly amend statewide parkland law beyond this specific authorization.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text, the proposal appears procedural and locally focused, with built-in replacement and valuation protections that are typical of parkland alienation legislation. The absence of recorded votes or discussion suggests no documented controversy in the supplied record.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the conversion of protected parkland to agricultural use, which can raise concerns about loss of public open space and recreational access. Any opposition would likely come from residents, park advocates, or local stakeholders concerned about preserving parkland, while support would likely come from town officials or land-use planners seeking to use the land for agriculture. The bill addresses these concerns by requiring replacement parkland and, if needed, compensation for any value shortfall, and by conditioning the change on compliance with any federal parkland conversion requirements.