What United Monroe isn't telling you

Dear Nieces and Nephews:
   

Regarding the annexation agreement and the upcoming referendum vote of the OC Legislature (should they or shouldn't they) John Allegro, one of United Monroe's leaders, had the following info in his open letter. (Auntie's comments are in red:) (Please note that none of the UM leaders are identifying themselves initially as UM Leaders, they identify themselves as "citizens" of Monroe. WHY?)

http://www.thephoto-news.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20170728/OPINION03/170729953/-1/OPINION/On-open-letter-from-United-Monroe-to-the-Orange--County-Legislature

excerpt from John's letter:
"To separate from Monroe with just 56 additional acres, Kiryas Joel made legal commitments to:

• "Keep its school district boundaries the same as the new town boundaries." This was and is illegal. School district boundaries should not be coterminous with municipal boundaries, especially if the municipality is in violation of the law.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/512/687/case.html

• "Withdraw their appeal of a possible 507-acre annexation from Monroe." For now. The annexation bid can and may be re-introduced at a later time. But if this goes to a general population vote and the Town of Palm Tree is established, the Town may have MORE success in achieving the 507 annexation according to case law in NYS.

• "Refrain from approving annexations from neighboring communities into Kiryas Joel for 10 years."
 

What was that again, John?...communities? Don't you mean community?

What else aren't they telling us? Where is the signed agreement? Why won't they let us see it?