The RUPCO project argues that it belongs in the hamlet sewer district because of the following section of town law:
Properties divided by District boundary.
Those properties which are now divided by the District boundary line shall be considered to be wholly served by the District
Fair enough on the citation, however the map appears to show that no section of the property in question is in the district.
Either way, there is a separate town law for water. Where exactly in the water law does it say that if a property is divided by the water district boundary, it is wholly served by the water district?
I can't find that section. Can you? Please help me out.
In a letter to the Department of Environmental Conservation, RUPCO's attorney, Michael Moriello argues that according to "the plain
meaning of Town of Woodstock Local
Law #3 of 2005."
What plain meaning is that?
Here is a paragraph that says that anybody can apply to be a water customer, and the Town Board may decide yes or no:
Regulations and requirements.
A.
Any person or corporation located within the Town of Woodstock may make application to the Town Board for hookup to the municipal water supply. The application shall be accompanied by a bond in such sum as shall be fixed by the Town Board in consultation with the Highway Superintendent and the Water/Sewer Superintendent, with one or more sureties acceptable to the Board, on the condition that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of this chapter; shall pay to the District all fees, penalties or other charges required hereby in consequence of the work undertaken; shall restore openings made in streets, roads, lanes and other public places and pavement thereon and therein to the same standard of condition as before the work commenced; and shall keep and maintain the same in such condition for a period of one year after the work has been completed and, in case of failure so to do, shall pay to the District the cost of putting the same in such condition. The Town Board may, at its discretion, grant or deny such application. The Town Board may, at any time, revoke such permission so given.
Here is another paragraph saying that all uses must be applied for. It is interesting to note that in RUPCO's application for Woodstock Commons, NO outdoor water use is estimated. The maintenance building water demand is only 15 gallons per day. I don't quite believe that. Do you?
Applications for introduction of water to any premises or for the use of water shall be made upon a form furnished by the District for such purpose and shall be signed by the owner of the premises or said owner's duly authorized agent. Such application shall contain a statement of all uses for which water is desired. If usage beyond that stated in the application occurs or, in the opinion of the Town Board in consultation with the Water/Sewer Superintendent, exceeds the supply available, water service may be discontinued. Application for additional uses may be made at any time and a permit may be granted therefor subject to the best interests of the District as a whole.
The above section clearly puts the interests of the water district as a whole above the unapplied for (hence unapproved) water uses of the new customer.
More broadly, here is the water law's
Statutory authority.
This chapter is enacted in accordance with Articles 9 and 12 of the Town Law of the State of New York, the Municipal Home Rule Law, § 10 of the New York Statute of Local Governments, and other legislative authority of the State of New York, which grant the Town Board of the Town of Woodstock the authority to enact local laws for the purpose of promoting the health, safety and welfare of the people of the Town.
Looks like the water laws were enacted to promote the health, safety and welfare of the people of the Town.
RUPCO has forgotten that "the people of the town" do not include their buildings' residents. Their buildings are not here yet, and neither are their people. They have forgotten that there are a lot of people of the town right NOW who did not have enough water last summer, who probably do not have enough water pressure to fight fires now, and that it is entirely within the Town Board's authority to limit the NUMBER of "the people of the town" so that there is enough water and enough water pressure to go around.
Of course Mr Moriello argues that, because it is the job of Attorneys to advocate for
ReplyDeleteand misread laws to help whoever is paying them. RUPCO is so out of line with
this whole Woodstock Commons thing that Mr Moriello is getting into Johnnie L.
Cochran Jr. of OJ fame, space when he famously said “if the glove does not fit you must acquit”. Let us hope that our state and local officials do better than the OJ
criminal jury did.