SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, ORANGE COUNTY NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS PART. in the Matter of PRESERVE HUDSON VALLEY, JOHN ALLEGRO, EMILY CONVERS, and LOUIS M. CERQUA, Petitioners/Plaintifts, v ‘TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MONROE, TOWN OF VERIFIED ANSWER and MONROE SUPERVISOR HARLEY DOLES, VILLAGE BOARD OF QpyK ‘THE VILLAGE OF KIRYAS JOEL, ACTING COMMISSIONER al BCTIONS INPOINT MARC GERSTMAN as Successor to JOSEPH MARTENS of the NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, EMANUEL LEONOROVITZ, BASYA SABOY, MENDE FREUER, ELLA. Hon. Francesca E. Connolly BREUER, CONG BETH ARYEH, ESTHER STESSEL, 257 Index No. 8118/2015 MOUNTAINVIEW TRUST/ERWIN LANDAU, DAVID RIINo. GOLDBERGER, 483 105 CORP., 481 COUN. CORP., PORT ORANGE HOLDINGS, ISIDOR LANDAU, PROVIDER-HAMASPIC OC, JOEL BRACH, HENRY WEINSTOCK, BETH FREUND, JOSEPH STRULOVITCH 1, LLC, LILLIAN STRULOVITCH, PINCUS J, STRULOVITCH, HERBST FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC, HASHGUCHA PRUTIUS LLC, BE & YO REALTY, INC., BENNY WERCBERGER, RACHEL WERCBERGER, ISRAEL WEBER, SIGMOND BRACH, FOREST EDGE CEVELOPMENT, LLC, BRUCHA PROPERTIES LTD., FOREST ROAD, NAFTALI AUSCH, KENT NEIGHBORHOOD, LLC, RAFOEL A. KRAUSZ, ELYAHU POLATESECK, ROSA POLATSECK, MOISHE OPPENHEIM, WOLF WERCBERGER, ZALMEN STERN, RIVKA OPPENHEIM, LIPA OPPENHEIM, YEHUDA BERGER, SEVEN SPRINGS CORP., MENDEL OPPENHEIM, RAIZEL EVA FREUND, ISAAC GLANZER, JUDY GLANZER, MOSES GOLDBERGER, SIMON GELB, SAMUEL KAHAN, 7 SPRINGS VILLAS LLC, CHAIM LANDAU, JOSEF FRIEDMAN, FRIDA FREIDMAN, SILAH ROSENBERG FAM, LLC, DEBORAH ROSENBERG, ABRAHAM ROSENBERG, ISAAC ROSENBERG, FOREST ROAD CAPITAL, LLC, COMMANDEER REALTY ASSOC. INC., ATKINS BROS INC,, DER BLATT, INC,, BAIS YISSROEL CONG, BERSH STERN, ALEX NEUSTADT, CHAIM FRIEDMAN, GOLDY FRIEDMAN, SEVEN SPRINGS RLTY INC., SARA GELB, ERNO, BODEK, RACHEL BODEK, ARTHUR MEISELS, AM SEVEN SPRINGS LLC, JACOBS HICKORY LLC, 282 MOUNTAINVIEW CRIVE, LLC, JOEL REISMAN, PAULA RESIMAN, VISTA PEARL LLC, KNOITZ ESTATES, JACOB WIEDER, CHAYA WEIDER, 1MARSHA WAGSCHAL, CONG LANZUT OF 0 C, ELIAZER GLANZER, ESTHER GLANZER, 72 SEVEN SPRINGS RD LLC, 131 ACRES RD LLC, BAKERTOWN ESTATES LLC, 12 BAKERTOWN HOLDING, HARRY ARNSTEIN, ESTHER ARNSTEIN, SHRAGA GREEBAUM, RELY GREEBAUM, JACOB SCHWARTZ, RENEE SCHWARTZ, YEHOSUA WEINER, DEVORAH WEINER, ALFRED WEINGARTEN, SOLOMON ELLENBOGEN, HANA PERLSTEIN, SIMON KATZ, RAIZY ELLENBOGEN, BUILDING 54 LLC, MORDECHAI GOLDBERGER, MOUNTAINVIEW NY ESTATES, INC., ISRAEL WEZBERGER, YITTELE WERZBERGER, JOSSI LEIG WERZBERGER, NDS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC., BENJAMIN GREEN, CHAYA GREEN, CHAIM PARNES, MIRIAN PARNES, TOBIAS SCHREIBER, FEIGE SCHREIBER, MARTIN TERKELTAUB, ZIGMUND KLEIN, ORANGE NY HOMES, INC. VINTAGE APARTMENTS LLC, UPSCALE 4 HOMES CORP., JOSEPH STRULOVITCH 1, LLC, AES 11-07 TRUST, BAKERSTOWN REALTY EQUITIES, and JACOB BANDUA TRUST, Respondents/Defendants. Respondents New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and Mare Gerstman, as Acting Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (collectively, DEC or the Department), by their attomney, Eric T. Schneiderman, ‘Attomey General of the State of New York, respond to the Verified Amended Petition and Complaint by petitioners/plaintiffs Preserve Hudson Valley, John Allegro, Emily Convers, and Louis M. Cerqua as follows: Objections in Point of Law: a. The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because petitioners lack standing to contest DEC’s lead agency decision; b. Because the Town of Monroe disapproved the proposed 507-acre annexation, petitioners’ challenge to DEC’s lead agency decision is moot and should be dismissed; and©. DEC specifically answers only so much of the Verified Amended Petition/Complaint as relates to petitioners’ third cause of action, which seeks reversal, nullification, and vacatur of DEC’s lead agency decision; the Department lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any allegations that do not specifically allege that DEC wrongfully acted or failed to act related to its lead agency determination. Without waiving the foregoing objections in point of law, DEC answers the Verified ‘Amended Petition/Complaint as follows: 1. Refers to the Petition/Complaint as the best evidence of its contents and denies the truth of the allegations in 1 insofar as they relate to DEC’s designation of lead agency and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remainder of the allegations in 4 1. 2. Denies the allegations in 2 as they relate to petitioners’ third cause of action and affirmatively state that C.P.L.R. article 78 is the proper vehicle by which petitioners’ challenges to DEC’s lead agency decision may be heard; as to the truth of the allegations in § 2 as they relate to the remaining causes of action, DEC lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 3. Refers to the annexation petitions referred to in § 3 as the best evidence of their contents. 4, The allegations in § 4 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary; to the extent a response is required, denies the allegations and refers to 6 N.Y.CRR. § 617.6(b)(5)(v) and the pleadings submitted in Matter of Preserve Hudson Valley, Inc. etal. v.N.Y.S.D.E.C, et al, Index. No, 2015-001707 for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effects. 5. Insofar as the allegations in 5 apply to DEC’s lead agency decision, denies the allegations and, as to the remainder of the allegations in] 5, denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 6. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in] 6. 7. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 7. 8. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in {| 8. 9. The allegations in] 9 contain legal conclusions to which no response is, necessary; to the extent a response is required, denies the allegations in 4 9. 10. The allegations in J 10 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary; to the extent a response is required, denies the allegations in 10. 11, Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in $9 11 through 25. 12, Admits the allegations in 26 insofar as Mare Gerstman was the Acting Commissioner of DEC until on or about December 30, 2015 and affirmatively states that Mr. Gerstman has retired from State service. 13, Admits the allegations in § 27 and affirmatively states that Basil Seggos currently serves as Acting Commissioner of DEC until the Legislature may confirm his appointment by the Governor to become Commissioner of DEC.14, Admits the allegations in § 28. 15. Admits the allegations in | 29. 16. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in $f] 30 through 141. 17, Theallegations in { 142 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary and affirmatively states that, because petitioners lack standing to challenge the Department's lead agency decision and any challenge to the lead agency decision is now moot, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this portion of the proceeding, 18, The allegations in ¥ 143 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary. 19. Denies the allegations in 144, affirmatively states that, on March 10, 2015, a similar group of petitioners commenced a proceeding pursuant to C.P.L.R. article 78 challenging DEC’s lead agency decision for the 507-acre annexation petition (507 Petition), and refers to fn. 1 at page 5 of the Amended Verified Petition/Complaint, which acknowledges the pending challenge to the lead agency decision. 20. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in {145 through 154. 21, Asto the truth of the allegations in the fourth bulleted point of 155, refers to DEC's December 23, 2013 Notice of Violation to the Village Board for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effect and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remainder of the allegations in 155. 22. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in $f 156 through 158.23, Asto the truth of the allegations in 4 159, refers to the DEC Commissioner's Record of Compliance Policy DEE-16, available at www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/25244.html, for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect, and affirmatively states that the regulatory criteria for selecting a lead agency does not include an involved agency’s past compliance record, and refers to 6 N.Y.C.RR. § 617.6(b)(5)(v) for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect 24. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 4 160. 25. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in § 161. 26. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in § 162. 27. Ato the truth of the allegations in J 163, refers to the April 4, 2014 Letter from United Monroe to DEC, the attachments thereto, and DEC’s December 23, 2013 Notice of Violation to the Village Board for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effects; and affirmatively states that the regulatory criteria for selecting a lead agency does not include an involved agency's past compliance record, and refers to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. § 617.6(b)(5)(w) for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect. 28. _Asto the truth of the allegations in § 164, refers to the letter from Daniel Richmond, Esq, to the Honorable Vincent L. Briccetti, the letter from Krista Yacovone, Esq, to Robert L.. Ewing, the letter from Krista Yacovone, Esq., to Patrick Ferracane and Jennifer Zunino-Smith, and DEC’s December 23, 2013 Notice of Violation to the Village Board for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effect; and affirmatively states that the regulatorycriteria for selecting a lead agency does not include an involved agency's past compliance record, and refers to 6 N.Y.C.RR, § 617.6(b)(5)(v) for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect. 29. The allegations in {165 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary; to the extent a response is required, denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in § 165. 30. The allegations in 166 contain legal conclusions to which no response is, necessary; to the extent a response is required, denies knowledge of information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 4 166. 31. The allegations in] 167 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary; to the extent a response is required, denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in { 167. 32. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in {168 and refers to the December 27, 2013 annexation petition for the 507 Petition for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect. 33, The allegations in § 169 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary and refers to the 507 petition for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect. 34. Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in § 170. 35. Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in ff 171 through 199. 36, Admits the allegations in § 200. 37. Admits the allegations in § 201.38. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in § 202. 39. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in § 203. 40. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in $9 204 through 244. 41. Denies the allegations in 245. 42, Denies the allegations in 246. 43. Admits the allegations in 4 247 and refers to the pleadings submitted in Matter of Preserve Hudson Valley, Inc., et al. v. N.¥.S.D.E.C., Index No. 2015-01707 for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effects. 44. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 248. 45. Denies the allegations in § 249, affirmatively states that the regulatory criteria for selecting a lead agency does not include an involved agency's past compliance record, and refers to 6N.Y.C.R.R. § 617.6(b)(5)(v) for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect. 46. Denies the allegations in J 250, affirmatively states that the regulatory criteria for selecting a lead agency does not include an involved agency's past compliance record, and refers t0 6N.Y.CRR, § 617.6(b)(5)(w) for its complete text, context, meaning, and legal effect. 47. Denies knowledge or information sufficient form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in $9 251 through 312. 48. As to the allegations in 313, DEC repeats its responses to petitioners’ allegations in § I through 297 as if fully set forth herein; refers to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. § 617.6(b)(5)(v) for itscomplete text, context, meaning, and legal effect; affirmatively states that the allegations in 313 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary; and, to the extent that a response is required, denies the allegations in 313. 49, The allegations in] 314 contain legal conclusions to which no response is necessary; to the extent that a response is required, denies the allegations in 314. 50. As to the truth of the allegations in § 315, refers to the Town Board’s SEQRA Findings as the best evidence of their contents. 51. Admits the allegations in 316 and refers to the pleadings filed in Matter of Preserve Hudson Valley, Inc. et al. v. N.Y.S.D.E.C,, et al., Index. No. 2015-01707 for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effects. 52. Admits the allegations in 317 and refers to the pleadings filed in Matter of Preserve Hudson Valley, Inc.,e¢ al. v. N.Y.S.D.E.C, et al., Index. No. 2015-01707 for their complete texts, contexts, meanings, and legal effects. 53. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 318. 54. Denies the allegations in § 319 and affirmatively states that DEC's lead agency decision was rational and amply supported by the record, 55. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in $¥ 320 through 541 56. Denies any allegations not specifically addressed. WHEREFORE, DEC respectfully requests an order and judgment: A. _ Dismissing the proceeding in its entirety as against DEC; andB. Granting DEC such further relief as the Court deems just and equitable, together with costs and disbursements. Dated: January 12, 2016 Albany, New York ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General of the State of New York Assistant Attorney General ‘Attorney for Respondents New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ‘and Mare Gerstman, as Acting DEC Commissioner New York State Office of the Attomey General The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 (618) 776-2401VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF ALBANY } * Lawrence H. Weintraub, being duly sworn, deposes and says: Tam an Assistant Counsel in the Office of General Counsel at the respondent New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“Department”), located in Albany, New York, and I am fully familiar with the facts of this proceeding. The source of my information is the records and documents contained in the files of the Department and my discussions with Department staff and others with knowledge and information regarding this matter. Thave read the foregoing Verified Answer, Objections in Point of Law, and Certified Return and know the contents to be true to the best of my knowledge except as to matters stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. ‘This verification and certification is made pursuant to the provisions of CPLR 7804(4) and 3020(4)(2). ‘Sworn to before me this day ([/# ay of January, 2016 Notary Public SIOBHAN ©. BLANK Notary Public, State of New York No. 0i8L810° 210 Qualied in Albany County Commission Exptes December 14,201 9