It’s worrisome that the Ramapo Town Board is purposely misusing the “blighted” tag to move ahead with their plans to build a $25 million “minor-league” stadium for a yet identified team in the dubious Can-Am independent league.
Without even something as simple as a business plan or a building permit, the Town has already bulldozed a notable section of the 61 acre drainage basin on Route 45, cutting down trees and paving it over. However, neither the Board nor Town Supervisor Christopher St. Lawrence has been able to provide any hard evidence that the wooded site is in fact blighted and worthy of being classified as an urban renewal zone. But by declaring it one, the Town can easily move ahead on development and construction without going through typical bureaucratic processes.
But has St. Lawrence and the Ramapo Board played fast and loose with the legal definition of blighted to skirt State law?
New York’s Constitution (Article XVIII, Section 3) uses the precedent established by Yonkers v. Morris to define blight as follows:
* Factors to be considered in determining if area is “blighted” and thus subject to urban renewal condemnation include such diverse matters as irregularity of the plots, inadequacy of the streets, diversity of land ownership making assemblage of property difficult, incompatibility of existing mixture of residential and industrial property, overcrowding, incidence of crime, lack of sanitation, drain areas makes on municipal services, fire hazards, traffic congestion and pollution.
* For an area to be termed “blighted” and thus subject to urban renewal condemnation, degree of deterioration or precise percentage of obsolescence or mathematical measurement of other factors do not have to be arrived at with precision, since combination and effects of such things are highly variable.
Further, the New York Development Corporation Act defines a “substandard or insanitary area” as:
[I]nterchangeable with a slum, blighted, deteriorated or deteriorating area, or an area which has a blighting influence on the surrounding area, whether residential, non-residential, commercial, industrial, vacant or land in highways, waterways, railway and subway tracks and yards, bridge and tunnel approaches and entrances, or other similar facilities, over which air rights and easements or other rights of user necessary for the use and development of such air rights, to be developed as air rights sites for the elimination of the blighting influence, or any combination thereof and may include land, buildings or improvements, or air rights and concomitant easements or other rights of user necessary for the use and development of such air rights not in themselves substandard or insanitary.
I think an interested party stands a good chance of challenging this development and stopping its progress in court. After all, wouldn’t the Town of Ramapo have to prove that the area has the potential to degrade the quality of nearby property or is itself in the process of deterioration? And what proof would they present?
Aerial photographs of the site show the property to be a healthy, attractive wooded area with a stream running through it. Only the area that was bulldozed and paved over by the Town of Ramapo seems to mar it. However, the Town claims the site is polluted and filled with trash, such as abandoned cars. But those that have visited the area, including Preserve Ramapo‘s Michael Castelluccio have found the site to be “pristine” and devoid of trash. The Town has even admitted that the levels of mercury, DDT, and arsenic on the site are not highly toxic.
By insisting this wooded area is blighted and by designating the site an urban renewal zone, the town allows the Ramapo Local Development Corporation, a quasi-governmental agency chaired by St. Lawrence, to forego numerous protocols typically used in the development and construction stages. It also assists the corporation in seeking state and federal grants, including real property tax abatements. After the stadium is built, it would be owned by St. Lawrence’s corporation, which would lease the stadium to tenants.
Even after it’s built, Ramapo residents would continue to be taxed diffusely for this new stadium, picking up the slack for the tax abatements that the Ramapo Development Corporation will enjoy. While the developers could have 10 years of real property tax abatements through New York’s Empire Zone program, Ramapo residents will be footing the bill for the additional police, public works, and sewage resources this stadium will demand. In addition, the rest of taxpayers in Rockland can expect to pay for the the Development Corporation’s share of county taxes into the next decade. In short, residents of other towns will end up paying for a project that they didn’t approve. And that’s taxation without representation.
Further, it has been pointed out by local newspapers, bloggers, and activists that the surrounding roads, especially the two-lane Route 45, will be inadequate in handling the traffic to the area, possibly causing back-ups and gridlock that would extend outside of Ramapo and into Clarkstown and beyond. The Orangetown newspaper Our Town said in a recent editorial that:
The downside of Ramapo’s headlong rush to get into the sports business is the traffic impact and the investment in road improvements necessary to support a minor league baseball team and stadium. That could be spread around a much larger number of people who have no say in the matter whatsoever. All towns that could be affected should have an opportunity to review and comment during the planning process.
I couldn’t agree more. I’m calling on the Rockland County Executive’s office to take the lead in this matter, considering that this stadium could have a potential negative impact throughout all five towns.
The Town of Ramapo is playing the entire County as suckers and taxpayers need an advocate. It is the County Executive’s duty to use the bully pulpit of his office to review land use, public works, and taxation issues that can have a dire consequences on the welfare of the County. We need Scott Vanderoef to lead the County a public forum, or if need be, a suit filed by the on behalf of Rockland’s residents to stop the Town of Ramapo from moving forward with this subterfuge.
I would like to add one additional concern. The proposed stadium will share the roads used to access Rockland’s emergency services coordination center co-located with the fire trainig center–routes 45 and New Hempstead.
What would happen, for example if unexpected tornadoes hit Rockland while a game or other gathering was in progress and all of our expert coordinators were rushing to the center. At the same time there might be a need to evacuate the stadium. Who would get priority?
What impact would this traffic jam have upon the countiy’s capacity to deal with a real civil emergency?
Does anybody remember that the city of New York located its key communications services in the World Trade Center after it was clear from a previous terrorist attack that this was not a smart idea?