Master Plan validity challenged

Article 78 defined

by Joshua Maloni
Lewiston Porter Sentinel, December 4, 2004

The Village of Lewiston Master Plan, adopted by the Board of Trustees on Oct. 18, has been temporarily thrown into flux. Residents Brian and Kathleen Harold, staunch foes to the new plan, have filed a lawsuit in New York Supreme Court claiming the Master Plan is, amongst other things, environmentally incomplete. The board was served with papers the weekend prior to Thanksgiving, and court action is pending - thus delaying village plans to move forward with design initiatives.

Determining Factors for Lawsuit

The Harolds, who are represented by Robert S. Roberson of the Lockport-based firm Andrews, Pusateri, Brandt, Shoemaker and Roberson, P.C., decided to file suit based on three factors: First, they are of the opinion the trustees approved an environmentally faulty master plan; second, they were motivated by residents, including outspoken plan adversary Gretchen Morgan, as well as occupants of homes on streets that stand to be rezoned, to file suit; and because they are tired of what they describe as “harassment” from village officials, which has allegedly included zoning citations.

Of the first factor, Kathleen said, “Everything they’ve done (the plan committee/board) is illegal.”

“There is no reason for these massive changes,” she said of the proposed zoning action.

Of the residents’ prompting, Kathleen said “People need to know.

“They’re making people file suit for stuff they shouldn’t have to file suit for.”

Village officials, according to Kathleen, are also pressuring her and her husband, Brian, to give up their home on 125 N. Fourth St., partly through zoning pressures.

“ ‘We’ve had nothing but harassment,’ ” Kathleen quoted Brian as saying. “They just won’t leave us alone,” she said. “From the time we moved in there, there’s always been something.”

Kathleen said her property is a necessary link in extending the business district down to the waterfront. As such, village officials want the Harolds to give it up.

“The village is harassing us to get off this land,” she said.

Kathleen told the trustees on Oct. 18 that she and Brian were seriously considering moving.

Village Officials Respond

Village of Lewiston Mayor Richard Soluri denied the validity of the Harolds’ claims.

“It’s a little early to comment; we just received the paperwork,” Soluri said. “I have a difficult time understanding why people are so opposed to orderly progress. And why some of the same people are opposed to any change.”

The Harolds claim the Master Plan was approved despite having an Environmental Assessment Form “full of holes.”

“We had that reviewed by R&D (Engineering) and by our attorneys,” Soluri said. “What does that have to do with the overall process? That, to me, is just a way to delay things. That’s been one of the problems with the EAFs all across the state. The people that want to delay ... a master plan ... they can look for things, and possibly find some small item. As far as I’m concerned, I think we handled everything properly.”

That sentiment was echoed by Village Trustee Bill Geiben, who served as chair of the Master Plan Committee.

“We took the advice of R&D,” he said.

Engineer Mike Marino declined to comment on the matter.

On the harassment charge, Soluri said it’s incorrect.

“That’s the wrong term,” he said. “It’s that we don’t have the same views as she does.”

Nor, the mayor said, does he or the board target people for violations based on disagreements.

“Never, ever do we say to our zoning officer ‘Oh yeah, I think they’re in violation, send them a notice.’ The zoning office follows what the regulations are ... it’s not harassment.”

Calls to Zoning Officer Bill Brodie were not returned.

Article 78

The type of lawsuit the Harolds filed is an Article 78. Attorney Steven De Castro, Esq., describes what an Article 78 means on his Web site, www.article78.com.

“An Article 78 is a proceeding used to challenge action (or inaction) by agencies and officers of state and local government,” he writes. “If you feel that an agency has screwed up your administrative case, filing an Article 78 will bring your case into a New York Supreme Court. There, a judge will review your administrative case, scrutinize the agency's actions and decisions, and if necessary reverse an agency's decision. If you are concerned that you will be harmed by the agency's action while you are waiting for the judge to complete his review of the case, the judge can prevent the agency from taking any further action until the Article 78 has been resolved.”

Soluri said any delays in progress are detrimental.

“It hurts the entire village when people have that kind of attitude that they’re the only ones who are right, and the board members are wrong,” he said. “The majority of the public thinks it’s a great plan.

“All we did was try to make areas closer to Center Street and along Center Street more viable by being a little more flexible.

“This is one of the few communities that’s progressing.”

The Master Plan Committee was in the process of juxtaposing current and proposed zoning regulations prior to the lawsuit.

The trustees have a scheduled work session on Monday at 6:30 p.m. in the Red Brick Municipal Building.