Last year at the close of the year we posted an end of year 2013 summary of the status of the Patrick Farm lawsuits which were well received. Here it is a year later and the beat is still going on.

2014 was all about appeals. ROSA is using Susan Shapiro, Esq. to represent the community in our efforts before the Appellate Course Second Department. We have three appeals underway among a total of 12 appeals.

This is a summary of where in the process the various (numerous!) lawsuits against the Patrick Farm decision are at this point. While the project has been stalled and there will be new applications in reaction to the new wetland delineations (see ROSA End of 2014 News for more details) many of the merits of  arguments against the planning board’s decisions from the Supreme Court need to be considered otherwise the Planning Board can use the same excuses to keep on approving applications from the same developer in 2015.

The following updates are an update the the 2013 End of Year Laws Suits Update.

2010 Zoning Cases

• On January 25, 2010 the Town Board accepted the SEQR findings, approved the change to the comprehensive plan with respect to the Patrick Farm, and approved the two MR-8 zones on the property.
• Shapiro, Pomona and Youngwirth (represented by Bruce Levine) submitted Article 78’s in 2010 which were thrown out for lack of standing in 2010.
• In 2011 the cases went to the appellate court.
• In 2012 all three parties won their appeal and the appellate court issued decision mandating that the cases be heard.
• In March of 2013 the cases were submitted to Judge Walsh who already had heard and made decisions on the 2011 and 2012 cases.
• In June of 2013, Judge Walsh decided against the plaintiffs for the most part based on the prior decisions he had already made. (Based on circuitous and improper logic.)
• In 2014 Terry Rice has tried to get the cases dismissed for various minor technical reasons and his motion was denied by the court. Susan Shapiro (for the Shapiro’s), Doris Ulman (for Pomona) and Bruce Levine (for Youngwirth) are all perfecting the cases by January 2015 and are requesting that these cases be heard before the sets of appeals on the 2011 and 2012 Planning Board decisions.
• ROSA volunteers continue to provide research and strategic support for the parties involved. At this time the goal is to get the cases grouped and ordered so that they are presented to the court in the correct chronological order to avoid confusing the court.
• We expect the first half of 2015 will be involved in waiting for replies from the developer and the town and replying to them.
• The best outcome of the cases is for the appellate court to see the logic of the situation that the community has been fighting for. The appellate overturned Jamison’s decision on  standing and we hope they will ultimately overturn Walsh’s decision on the approvals.

2011 Preliminary Subdivision Approval

• On January 6, 2011 the Town of Ramapo Planning Board approved a preliminary subdivision plan for the Patrick Farm property. After litigation was initiated they updated the approval in March of 2011.
• ROSA, Pomona and Shapiro filed Article 78 lawsuits which were heard at the end of August, 2011.
• Judge Walsh found for the defendants in October 2011.
• In 2014 ROSA, Pomona and Shapiro perfected the appeals for the 2011 Preliminary Subdivision approvals in the appellate court. This included the production of exorbitantly expensive Records (dozens of copies of multiple think bound books of all the papers related to the cases).
• The Town of Ramapo replied.
• Terry Rice replied for the developer.
• We have been working with Susan Shapiro on our rebutting but this week we are submitting motions asking the court for an enlargement (an extension of time) so that our reply on this case won’t be done before the Shapiro case as there are many overlapping arguments along with motions for the cases to be heard in chronological order. (Ie. We want the court to hear the 2010 appeals first.)

2012 Final Subdivision, Final Condo Site Plan, and Final Vol. Housing Site Plan Approval

• On December 27, 2011 the Town of Ramapo Planning Board approved the Final Subdivision Plan, the Final Site Plan for Condominiums, and the Final Site Plan for the Volunteer Housing.
• In 2012 ROSA, Pomona and Shapiro filed Articles 78’s – hence these are referred to as the “2012 Cases”.
• In September 2012, Judge Walsh found for ROSA and the other plaintiffs and sent the cases back to the planning board to do the architectural review.
• Unfortunately on certain merits the Judge found for the defendants and this led to the necessity to appeal those aspects of the decision in the appellate courts.
• The appeals for the 2011 cases and the appeals for the 2012 cases have been following an overall pattern/schedule as the 2011 case above. (So comments above apply here as well.)

2012 Final Subdivision Amendment

• This is where things get even more complicated. In Sept 2012, the Planning board approved a “minor” change to the Final Subdivision Plan to keep an easement where the driveway to the Sheriff’s horse farm currently exists.  They tried to sneak it in without notice to the neighbors under the Miscellaneous section of the planning board agenda.
• ROSA filed an Article 78 for the 9/11/12 approval.
• Because there was no specific plan for the use of the easement Judge Walsh found for the defendants on 3/21/2013.
• ROSA decided that while the decision was wrong we could not afford to appeal this decision and it is no longer being pursued.

2013 Final Subdivision, Final Condo Site Plan, and Final Vol. Housing Site Plan Approval

• On December 12, 2013 the town CDRC board held an architectural review of the development. Despite all the language and requirements of the town law to review the development in comparison to the surrounding area, extremely little was reviewed other than the choice of siding.
• There were public hearing in January and on March 21, 2013.
• The Town Board approved the original Site Plans and a new (but similar) Subdivision Plan on March 21, 2013.
• In 2014 Judge Walsh heard the ROSA, Pomona and Shapiro Article 78 cases on the March 2013 decisions. His decisions on May 21, 2014 were mixed. He upheld the Town Decisions based on the information in front of them in 2013 but also stayed the decisions and remanded them back to the Planning Board because the evidence regarding the ACOE JD was so strong. So nothing could be implemented based on the decisions.
• The 2013 cases are in the middle of the appeals process and ROSA will need to perfect this case in 2015 which includes the production again of a very expensive Record.

At this time, the developer cannot get a permit from the county sewer district without an ACOE Jurisdictional Determination. They just received the ACOE JD last Thursday December 5th and will need to revise their plans based on the new maps

The developer has admitted to the court in 2013 that they will submit new applications that will moot out the existing applications. ROSA will work to be prepared for upcoming public hearings and to persuade the agencies to force them to do complete submissions when the time comes.