MAMARONECK UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT

Appellate Division Affirms School District ’s Position in the Kemper Case

(Press release, January 29, 2006) The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York unanimously ruled that the Mamaroneck Union Free School District Board of Education’s proposed reconfiguration of the Kemper Memorial and surrounding property is consistent with the terms of the deeds that granted the property to the school district, reversing the lower court decision. In a decision dated January 24, 2006, the four justices declared that “the proposed use and reconfiguration of the [Kemper-donated] property does not violate the restrictive covenant” of the deed under which the property was transferred to the school district. They further stated that “the proposed use and reconfiguration of the subject property is consistent with the restrictive covenant’s requirement that the subject property be ‘held and maintained in perpetuity for public and school uses as a memorial….’” The justices accepted the Attorney General’s position that the proposed reconfiguration of the property “respected the expressed intent of the donors.”

The Appellate Division also unanimously determined that Richard Cantor, who had brought the action requesting that the lower court enjoin the school district from reconfiguring the land, did not have standing to enforce the terms of the covenant in the deed. The court stated that the Attorney General of the State of New York has the power and responsibility to ensure that charitable gifts, such as the donation of the subject property, are utilized in a manner consistent with the terms of the gift.

The Board of Education is pleased with the outcome of this ruling. The decision clearly confirms the Board’s position over the last several years that the proposed creation of the critically needed additional playing field and the reconfiguration of the memorial area as presented to the community is consistent with the terms of the gift. It has always been the Board’s objective that the proposed reconfiguration appropriately honor the sacrifice of the Mamaroneck students and other community members who gave their lives in the service of the United States of America in World War II.

The Board will now review its options, including potential funding, with respect to moving forward. The Board will reach out to all segments of the community to involve the community in this process.

The Appellate Court’s decision was very disturbing on two fronts. First of all, it is an outrage that Eliot Spitzer “concurred” with the Mamaroneck School Board that the proposed plan “respected the expressed intent of the donors”. Nothing could be further from the truth. One of the donors of the Memorial Park, Jean Kemper Hoffman, is still alive and has attested to the intent of the donors. They did not want a roadway to cut right through their carefully designed contemplative enclave--at the exact spot where the granite monument was so deliberately located, at the exact spot where families and friends have gathered for sixty years to remember their loved ones, at the exact spot where students were supposed to learn about the cost of war and the price of freedom. With his stand, Spitzer has effectively put all donations at risk.

Secondly, the Appellate Court denied Richard Cantor, the grandson of the donor, legal standing to enforce the intent of the donor. If he doesn’t have legal standing, who then takes the side of the donor? Apparently, noone. Eliot Spitzer didn’t. These judges didn’t.

In the court of public opinion, this decision certainly does not mean that the Kemper Memorial Park Preservation Fund will give up on its fight to preserve this valuable community asset. We are as committed as ever (if not more so) to protect this World War II Memorial Park from encroachment and to preserve the integrity of this wonderful donation.