The Judge handed down her decision in the Annexation
lawsuit in favor of the 164 acre annexation, the Village Board in Kiryas Joel has voted to
commence the annexation process and it looks like the group of municipalities
that sought to halt the annexation have decided to appeal.
Auntie and the Team thought it was worth at least a
cursory glance towards Justice Gretchen Walsh’s background to understand why
anyone would decide that the EIS submitted by Kiryas Joel was “adequate”. We
all know that the water and sewer calculations, along with any population
projections were Inadequate.
The current area of KJ is 1.1 Square miles, which is
about 705 acres. 164 acres is only 0.25 square mile. When you project out to twenty
years you see plainly the 164 acres is not enough to address the needs of KJ and their real growth rate. Even with the larger annexation bid (504 acres or 0.78 sq miles), there would be over 40,000 people
in less than 2 square miles, an even more dense population than today. (BTW, “The
Town of North Monroe” will add about 325 Acres or approximately 0,50 square mile.)
The point is that the 164 acres is inadequate, the 325 is inadequate and the
507 is inadequate for the Village’s purposes. So what’s next? To live in Orange
County you must live like sardines in a can?
Judge Walsh did not properly consider the growth rate and
its effect on resources (properly done with a 20 yr horizon) such as sewer capacity;
water availability; sensitive water basins; air pollution: water pollution; noise pollution and traffic. More traffic will impact a road system already overburdened by
high volume and will be even more so when the casino in Sullivan County, Legoland, and water parks are built. Judge Walsh apparently did not
consider that this annexation is a SEGMENT of an overall annexation
land grab and contrary to SEQRA.
We also wonder how anyone could determine that it is in the “Overall Public Interest”, not just the interests of one community. How is this annexation in the interests of Monroe, Blooming Grove, Woodbury and Orange County?
We also wonder how anyone could determine that it is in the “Overall Public Interest”, not just the interests of one community. How is this annexation in the interests of Monroe, Blooming Grove, Woodbury and Orange County?
STEVE SAID: that he still
believes Kiryas Joel's annexation "is
not in the overall public interest" - the legal standard for approving
such border changes. And he is correct. Let’s hope he has stated this
with conviction, but don’t be surprised if the county decides not to be
included in the appeal.
Judge Walsh did not really consider the “overall public
interest” in our opinion. It appears that she interpreted “public interest” as “KJ’s
interest.”
After reviewing Walsh’s background, we begin to understand
her decision.
Judge Walsh’s resume:
highlights her administrative experience (clerk to the Honorable Alan Schenkman);
Surrogates court; her background in mediation/ADR; probation; youth matters Judge Walsh was on a judicial panel with Judge
Schenkman and she was also involved in panels on judicial diversity and a Task
Force on Probation.
Judge Walsh does have a few years’ experience as a member of the planning commission in the village of Pleasantville, where It appears she addressed routine projects and approvals, http://www.pleasantville-ny.gov/Pages/PleasantvilleNY_PCagendas/?Lower=201-220&Upper=1-200
But nothing in her background, while admirable in some respects, screams “environmental law experience” or
“great knowledge of SEQRA”
And just for fun, here is another Walsh ruling, about Carmen Dubaldi's campaign tactics:
“Walsh wrote that,
due to the question mark, the average reader of The Sentinel ads wouldn’t
assume the subject had a criminal record. She dismissed that portion of the
claim.”
What would they
assume? The implication was there that the plaintiff was a criminal . Most people probably focused on the “mug shot” not the question mark.
And people voted for her. Yes that's right, these judicial positions are elected.and most people do not even know what a Supreme Court Justice does. When campaigning for the spot, she opined as
follows.
WALSH SAID: “I
believe that my experience, qualifications, character, and dedication to the
pursuit of the administration of justice make me the best candidate for Supreme
Court Justice.” Walsh cites her experience in the private sector as a litigator
at Kelley Drye & Warren, LLP, and in the public sector with the court
system.”
“Having worked on
both sides of the bench, I understand the different perspectives in a
litigation and what it takes to balance the needs of the parties, attorneys and
the court so that cases are resolved fairly and efficiently as justice delayed
is oftentimes justice denied.” http://www.gretchenwalsh2015.com/
Auntie and the Team do not think you demonstrated “balance”
and “fairness” in these matters. Let’s hope that the next level in the
NYS Court system demonstrates more of those qualities.
(FYI In NYS: the 'Supreme' Court, unlike other states is NOT the highest court in NY)
(FYI In NYS: the 'Supreme' Court, unlike other states is NOT the highest court in NY)
Dear Nieces and Nephews, you must excuse your Auntie for not writing sooner. You see, in this very important election year, Auntie and the Team have been involved in a few political campaigns which have taken up a great deal of time. And with a week and a day until the elections Auntie strongly encourages you to VOTE on Tuesday Nov. 8th! Yes, one voice can make a difference. And never fear, your Auntie is still with you!
ReplyDeleteHopefully Judge Walsh's two decisions mentioned here are appealed and reversed. She has errored and justices must be righted. Thanks for all that you do Auntie!
ReplyDelete