Last Tuesday, a New York State appellate court issued a complicated decision on various parties’ rights to bring suit to challenge an enactment by the Town of Ramapo that permitted the construction in residential areas of adult married-student housing for students attending Orthodox Jewish educational institutions in the town. Four villages located within the Town, as well as two residents of the Town, challenged the ordinance on various grounds.—including the procedures used in enacting the law, its compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and constitutional challenges based on alleged discrimination against unmarried students, on favoritism of one religious group and on alleged improper exercise of the Town’s police powers.
In In re Village of Chestnut Ridge v. Town of Ramapo, (App. Div., 2d Dept., Aug. 14, 2007), the court concluded that the Villages have standing to assert the environmental claims and claims regarding required reviews of the proposed zoning law. The individuals have standing to assert these, plus claims that the law was inconsistent with provisions on municipal home rule, that it was inconsistent with the Town’s comprehensive plan, and that its enactment exceeded the Town’s police powers. None of the parties have standing to raise the other constitutional claims being asserted.
Covering the decision, today’s Lower Hudson Journal News quoted Dennis Lynch, attorney for one of the developers involved, who said the appeals court decision "is a lawyer's delight because everyone can sue everybody."
