A change in the use of municipal parking spaces on parkland must be authorized by 

special legislation. 

December 13, 2017 

Beth Ann Reilly Informal Opinion 

Deputy Town Attorney No. 2017-1 

Town of Brookhaven 

One Independence Hill 

Farmingville, NY 11738 

Dear Ms. Reilly: 

 You have requested an opinion asking whether specific legislative authority is 

required for a village within the Town to convert certain parking spaces in a parking 

lot owned by the Town from eight spaces for boat trailers to 30 spaces for passenger 

vehicles, in accord with an inter-municipal agreement between the village and the 

Town. You have explained that at present the eastern portion of the parking lot is 

used for general municipal parking, and the western portion of the lot, closest to the 

boat ramp of a marina, is used for parking both cars and boat trailers for the Town’s 

marina. The village intends to reconfigure the existing eight boat-trailer spaces in 

the western portion to make 30 spaces for passenger vehicles. These reconfigured 

spaces will not be reserved for those using the marina but instead will be available to 

members of the public for municipal parking generally. Under the terms of the 

agreement, the village will maintain and control the parking spaces for at least 50 

years, with an option to renew the agreement for up to another 50 years. 

 You have stated that the eight boat-trailer spaces are located on parkland. 

Parkland is imbued with a public trust and cannot be alienated or diverted to nonpark purposes without specific authority from the Legislature. Friends of Van 

Cortlandt Park v. City of New York, 95 N.Y.2d 623, 630 (2001). Because the current 

use of the spaces in question—parking of boat trailers incidental to the use of the 

marina—is distinctly different from the proposed use—parking for general municipal 

purposes, including but by no means limited to parking for use of the marina—we 

believe that legislative authority for the proposed change is required. 

 Your letter suggests that no legislative action is required because there would 

be no transfer of title to the land in question, and because the land would remain a 

parking lot, changing only the specific vehicles that will be permitted to park there 

from boat trailers to automobiles. We note that although title will not be transferred, 

the proposed inter-municipal agreement will transfer control over the parking spaces 

from the Town to the village, and thus that transfer alone might well require special 
Page 2 

legislation. See Miller v. City of New York, 15 N.Y.2d 34, 37 (1964) (park cannot be 

alienated or subjected to anything beyond revocable permit without legislative 

sanction). Setting aside that question, we are of the opinion that because land 

currently dedicated to park purposes—parking for the marina—would be made 

available for parking for other than park purposes, that is, general municipal 

parking, the change would constitute a diversion of park property that must be 

authorized by the Legislature before it can occur. Specific legislation is required even 

when the diversion of parkland serves another public purpose. Friends of Van 

Cortlandt Park, 95 N.Y.2d 623, 631-32 (water treatment plant); Williams v. Gallatin, 

229 N.Y.248, 253 (1920) (courts or schools); Matter of Central Parkway, 140 Misc. 727 

(Sup. Ct. Sch'dy Co. 1931) (highway). 

 The Attorney General issues formal opinions only to officers and departments 

of state government. Thus, this is an informal opinion rendered to assist you in 

advising the municipality you represent. 

Very truly yours, 

KATHRYN SHEINGOLD 

Assistant Solicitor General 

in Charge of Opinions