Annexation Angst but it doesn't have to be so

Dear Nieces and Nephews

JUSTIN SAID: (quite DAINly) “What would really be helpful are better state laws to stop these annexation efforts.” He noted the annexation matters and environmental reviews are “regulated by state law.”

Wah, wah, wah!!! Justin, read the following and say this again with a straight face.

Regarding the county funding of the annexation appeal and what county leaders said in the article in the THR on March 2, 2017, why wouldn’t anyone doubt the commitment of the county government?

There was quite a reaction from the populace expressing their dismay.

“They were also told that the county and its municipal partners in the lawsuit have about $110,000 available to continue the litigation, not including $40,000 of the funding county lawmakers approved that has not yet been put in the coalition's escrow account.”

“Brescia had voiced misgivings about continuing the case a day earlier, citing the cost and the possibility that development of the annexation area would render the appeal moot. "I'm not crazy on spending taxpayers' dollars on a lawsuit if we're not going to win it," he said.”

“Brescia had voiced misgivings about continuing the case a day earlier, citing the cost and the possibility that development of the annexation area would render the appeal moot.”

http://www.recordonline.com/news/20170302/county-lawmakers-debate-kiryas-joel-annexation-suit

There is $40,000 from the county already designated to the cause that has not been handed over yet.

And the County Legislative Leader, L. Steve Brescia, does not believe that the annexation will be stopped because of the idea that the Village will just go ahead and build in the way that they like to do, so why fight it? What a defeatist attitude or is it a “compromise”?

And then, we consider the coexisting issue, the formation of the Town of North Monroe:

“If approved by a two-thirds supermajority of the Legislature, or at least 14 of 21 lawmakers, the proposal to create a new town would be submitted to Monroe voters for approval.”

“The Legislature would have to endorse the plan by August for the referendum to be placed on the election ballot this November.”

http://www.recordonline.com/news/20170319/county-lawmakers-will-discuss-kj-proposal-to-create-new-town

Now, even the leaders in KJ admit that they hold sway over Monroe elections, so if it does go to the Monroe voters in November, of course the annexation will pass!!!! and the Village of KJ will be in their own town of North Monroe!!!

We need to cut this option out.  

The OC legislature must vote NO to an action that is inherently hostile and not a solution to the problem. Any action on the part of a municipality (and here, an illegally established, religious village) that has a detrimental effect on the environment-water, sewer, air and quality of life of the surrounding communities MUST BE STOPPED! If the actions are created out of a self-imposed hardship, then the municipality must not be allowed to annex land from a neighbor but must attempt to mitigate their actions or the results of their actions. *

IF ONE single legislator says “Oh, let the voters of Monroe decide this issue” or “Let it go out to the people” then Auntie, the Team and all the Nieces and Nephews will know who the RATS are. (Since Michael Amo represents the Village of KJ in the OC legislature; we know what he will say.) And every single one of the RATS will face a VERY interesting re-election campaign. Because we know this is not just an issue for one part of the county but for the entire county and beyond.

And (excuse the language) We are pissed off!!!

  

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/all-the-young-jews-in-the-village-of-kiryas-joel-new-york-the-median-age-is-13-6675452 
 

  

And please refer to:

http://orangecountyoutlook.blogspot.com/2017/03/when-is-compromise-not-compromise.html

The law in NY speaks to the goals of the “general area” in planning and zoning matters:

 

General Municipal Law § 239-NN

§ 239-nn. Rights and duties of neighboring municipalities in planning

  and zoning matters. 1. Legislative intent and purpose. It is the intent

  and purpose of this section to encourage the coordination of land use

  development and regulation among adjacent municipalities in order that

  each adjacent municipality may recognize the goals and objectives of

  neighboring municipalities, and as a result development occurs in a

  manner which is supportive of the goals and objectives of the general

  area.

NYS State law also speaks of “unique hardships” and “self-imposed hardships”, which is something that we have in this situation.  Yes, this is the fact that everyone has been dancing around. The Village of Kiryas Joel is suffering from a self-imposed hardship. *

We do not propose legislation about the activity here (“Hey-cut that out! Stop what you are doing”!) although there are some blue laws  from our Puritian roots that actually do that, What we propose is something to stop the detrimental effects of the activity on neighboring municipalities, such as  enforcing the laws already on the books AND creating legislation to supplement those laws  in existence that did not anticipate today’s needs: the annexation laws proposed by NYS Assemblyman, Mr. Skoufis, and more. It then becomes incumbent upon the Village of Kiryas Joel to mitigate their actions.

But what is truly needed, is a group of politicians/elected officials on the Local State AND Federal who will not curry favor for the block vote and do what the laws says. And decide fairly.

The ULTIMATE law of the land, the US Constitution is being ignored here. 

As our federal representative, we hope you are listening, Congressman Maloney. You have been very silent on this issue.