The Mount Kisco Village Board voted to continue with the eminent domain process last week for a 25-acre parcel that would serve as open space and replacement parkland if a proposed cell tower is relocated to Leonard Park.

By a 4-1 vote, the board accepted the findings statement and to potentially pursue the purchase of 180 S. Bedford Road, although it remains unclear whether officials will ultimately move in that direction.

“Accepting findings and voting affirmatively to move forward does not commit us to making this acquisition through eminent domain if at any point in time we choose not to,” Mayor Gina Picinich said after the Aug. 29 vote.

Complicating the process is that there are two applicants, Homeland Towers and SCS Sarles Street, LLC, that are looking to site a cell tower and an array of solar panels, respectively, at 180 S. Bedford Rd. The village also remains in negotiation with Homeland Towers regarding a possible lease for the cell tower that the village must eventually site, Picinich said.

The board has received intense criticism from some residents adamantly opposed to using a piece of Leonard Park, in the general vicinity of holes 6 and 7 of the disc golf course, to site a cell tower. Other residents in the village and in Bedford, which the property borders, have been in favor of the move to save the South Bedford Road property from being used for a solar array and cell tower and to be possibly part of a network of walking trails.

Picinich said the village has requested to view the leases that have been signed by Homeland Towers and SCS Sarles Street with 180 S. Bedford Rd. property owner Skull Island Partners. The mayor, who acknowledged that the land owner is under no obligation to furnish the leases, said officials want to have as much information as possible since the village is considering buying the property without invoking eminent domain.

The land was last bought about eight years ago for $1.5 million and has almost certainly increased in value.

Last week, Picinich said she was against using eminent domain unless it’s absolutely necessary.

“I am, generally speaking, opposed to the government taking property from a private property owner unless there’s an important public need,” she said. “If the village wanted to acquire the property for open space, active and passive recreation, I would prefer to purchase the property outright.”

The property is in the Conservation Development zone, which places a 35 percent…