Community Divided on Schools' Proposal for Park

by Judy Silberstein

(February 26, 2004) At the Mamaroneck School Board’s February 24 open meeting on plans for the Kemper Memorial Park, there were World War II veterans, students and their parents, teachers, members of local historical societies, sports coaches, a captain of the varsity football team, and a soccer player. First the School Board presented its case for moving and reconfiguring the park named in honor of Lt. Richard Kemper who died in military service during World War II. Then Richard Cantor, nephew of Richard Kemper, presented his case for keeping the park where it has been since 1947.

The speakers that followed demonstrated how contentious this issue has become, with some strongly supporting the maintenance of the current park “to honor the war dead,” while others urged the Board to proceed with a plan they believed would “honor the fallen even better than what is there now.”

Board to Decide by March 30 on Initial Steps

School Board President Bob Martin indicated that the board members will make a decision by March 30 when they will either include or remove the needed capital funds from the preliminary 2004-2005 budget. At this point, a budget is being prepared that includes $500,000 for the new sports fields, site work, and park reconfiguration, but that sum is less than half of the projected cost of $1.3 million. Therefore, even if the Board approves that expenditure for this year, and even if the community approves the budget in May with that item included, no work would commence until the remaining funds have been approved in the 2005-2006 budget.

School Board Apologizes for Missteps & Explains Its Plan

Proposal for New Park

Presenting the case for the schools, board member Alan Parter first apologized to the Kemper family for not involving them in the board’s initial deliberations in 2001. He then went on to present the crushing numbers of athletes in school-related sports and in community leagues and to explain that there were no alternative sites available that would meet the district's needs.

Parter explained that the board’s plan is to turn the current football field to make room for an additional soccer field. Part of the new field and a new driveway would be placed on one of the three parcels of deeded land that now make up the Richard M. Kemper Memorial Park. The district would redevelop the park on land equivalent in size to the original park by using the two remaining parcels plus district-owned land. (For more details, see: Board's Position)

On the question of whether the district has the legal right to implement its plans, Mr. Parter focused on the word “uses“ in the original deed by which the Kemper family donated land to the schools for a memorial. He indicated three sets of legal experts in the specialties of education, land-use, and donation law have given the board confidence that it is legally acceptable to use the deeded land for the proposed changes.

The Kemper Family Opposes the Plan as a Desecration

Monument on Current Park

In his presentation, Mr. Cantor, speaking for the Kemper family, stressed the moral aspects of the board’s proposed actions, which he views as the ethical equivalent “to desecrating a cemetery.” He asked: if the board “dishonors its own commitments” how can students be expected “to listen to us adults about values, and drugs, and alcohol, and smoking, and sex, and respect?”

On the question of alternative field locations, Mr. Cantor argued that there were better choices elsewhere, but that time did not permit going into detail. Architectural plans for alternate fields appeared on easels outside the auditorium. (For more details, see: Kemper Position)

On the legal issue, Mr. Cantor focused on the language “as a memorial,” which in his view calls for keeping the three deeded parcels of land intact “not as an athletic field, but as a memorial.”

Public Feedback

Speaking in support of the board proposal were a number of parents of current students or recent graduates; soccer and Little League officials; student athletes who testified to the need for both fields and respecting the monument; students and adults who had never noticed the park or monument until the controversy arose; and others who were dismayed at the tone of the discussion and just wanted to express appreciation for the board members as volunteers.

Speaking in support of Mr. Cantor were a number of veterans, some wearing their caps. Post Commander Bill Rodriguez called out, “Post 90 is 100% behind you, Richard.” Also in support were the parents and two sons of the Northrop family, including MHS sophomore Stephen who seconded Mr. Cantor’s distrust of a new legal instrument. Three MHS teachers appeared to support the Kemper family, and to voice concern with both the process and the proposal that they believe would send the wrong message to students. “It might be legal, but it would not be moral,” was the reaction of one of her students, recounted American History teacher Kathy Donnison.

Board member Celia Felsher took strenuous issue with the various commentaries on the morality of the move. “I want to put a human face on this,” she said as she told of discussions she had had with her 88 year old mother, a WWII Navy WAVE, who does not oppose the park move.

Members of the School Board have only a few more weeks before they announce a decision. In the interim, they will be continuing to meet with community groups and continuing to try to reach an accommodation with the Kemper family. Clearly, their task won’t be easy.

Print This Article--For best results, highlight text, print selection
Email this article