Michael, nothing has changed only the officials, the developers still run this town now with the help of the town attorney. Nothing will ever change until someone hires a good attorney to review the rulings and if determined to be improper take them to court and let a judge rule on it. The critical impact law is a joke just to keep the residents quiet so that they think the town really cares about future developments. No one can site one instance in this town where a builder has had to go back and correct one problem that was created by a development. Same old BS that we've been putting up with for years.

Quoted Text

Quoted from bumblethru:
So are you saying that it is Mr. Masullo's property and he is clearing the land for further development? Or am I missing something here?

Bumble,

I'm with you ... lost in the details.

If, as you ask, the owner is clearing his land, for whatever reason, how is that a violation of law?  Property owners have rights of ownership.  So long as the use of the property doesn't violate ordinances, covenants, deed restrictions, zoning, etc., where is the violation?

Hey, man, it's ALL about the details.  It's the details that keep a bridge from collapsing.  It's the details that allow you tell a shark from a dolphin.  It's the details that separate Michelango's masterpieces from Raphael's.  It's the details that make the Town Board members' eyes roll back into their head.  The details are where the hard work gets done.  The details are the most important.

I'm sorry I've lost you and others in trying to paint with broad strokes here but the alternative was to bore you to death.  My shortcoming, not yours.

I'll try again broadly.  The "violation" is the clearing is taking place on land that a determination said required more environmental study was needed before a project could proceed.  That's LAW.  The "violation" is the numerous fires that occurred while this clearing takes place.  That's also LAW.  All of this activity is occurring outside the process at the very least.  Throw in the fact that the work is compromising the integrity of some storm drains and the Town doesn't care...that's just priceless.  This is not about ownership or associated ownership rights.  

I'm losing the battle royally but I'll fight it until they bury me...or I move to Guilderland.  

Although I usually agree with you Michael, I disagree with you on this one. Ownership and associated ownership rights is majorly important. If it is Masullo or anyone else for that matter, get it out in the open. They did it with Marotta in the jct. GET THE NAME OUT THERE! You go to a town board meeting, with pictures and dates in hand, go up to the microphone and you state the properties address, the owner and show the pictures, for the record. There is media at all of these town meetings and it would hit the paper....just like Marotta's did. Ownership is not only everything...it is key.

I know that's how I would be doing it!!

Believe me when I tell you we have identified the parties, presented pictures, etc. ...all with media in the room.  Town Board still has done nothing that I am aware of and the press didn't make mention either.

I'll let others determine what that means.  I know what laws I believe are being ignored.

The rest of you ought to care too.  The Town has previously hauled giant piles of trees away that were left at the curb.  That's at our expense and is supposed to be forbidden.  Fire and police are routinely dispatched to address the fires in the woods.  That's at our expense too.  The storm drains that will require town attention will also be at our expense.  This whole matter sets a precedent we all should care about.

Michael, I guess to make this clearer, we want to know who the offending party is. That truly makes ALL of the difference in the world in this situation! I know that you will say that 'who' is not the issue. And you will say that the issue is that the town is doing nothing about it. But I would like to know WHO the town is not doing anything about. That is a major part of this issue! So who is the offender?

Both are actually part of the issue.  First of all, I agree with you, Michael, that the town should be stepping up and enforcing the law.  Without that, we end up in anarchy, and quite quickly.  At the same time, the lawbreaker has to be brought out of the woodwork to be held accountable.  If the town / code enforcers / police / media won't bring it out to let people know who is doing these things, maybe someone else with a wooded property will sell to these same people and have the same thing go on right in their neighborhood (assuming they sell part of an area).

Quoted from bumblethru

And you will say that the issue is that the town is doing nothing about it.

And since this is the issue, I will stick to it.  The Gazette printed an article today, found elsewhere on this forum, that got into the who.  (Wrongly attributing identification of parties to me...I rarely make mention of specific individuals when I speak...but accurate enough anyway.)

Here's something funny...the town said tonight the individuals in question couldn't proceed with any kind of development because there isn't a curb cut.  That's hilarious to those of us who witnessed the multiple vehicles entering and exiting the "woods" for the entire day.  It's literally been an unsupervised construction site for the past few weeks.

My path is becoming clearer.

Michael, someone should ask the town if the individual doing all this work has a permit to do it.

The Town contends a permit isn't needed.   Gee...that's what they said about the open fires initially.

Again,,,,,let's see who gets a new roof, new car, new addition to their home etc etc......although we dont have access to folks bank accounts or stuffed mattressess-----it sure as hell matters who owns the property,,,,,let's consider the little league field 'given to us' by our county officials with the super duper fast study by the army corps of engineers.......hhhmmmm

The pay raise mechanics for town board members looks to be the next hot button item with regard to Accountability.  I really want to see the two new members weigh in on this matter.

I hate the prospect that a petition needs to be started to stop them from pulling a fast one.  I know I don't have time to run around town gathering petition signatures to counter every improper move the town board makes...and it shouldn't be that way.  As I mentioned, we were presented with a non binding postcard survey for sewers that evolved into them taking our right to vote on a sewer bond away from us.  They did it surreptitiosly.  We were forced to gather petition signatures to get our vote restored.

I don't like it when the burden is reversed back on to the residents to prevent things that shouldn't be occurring to begin with.  It's a despicable way to govern and it's plain wrong.

Quoted from Michael

I don't like it when the burden is reversed back on to the residents to prevent things that shouldn't be occurring to begin with.  It's a despicable way to govern and it's plain wrong.

Michael, I am in total agreement with you on this one.  Media attention may nip this in the bud. I will say it again, that it is not about the WHY, it is about the HOW this is being done.

Our wonderful group of legislatures is going to vote for a raise for the judges and imagine this that there will be a raise for them in there too. Our whole system of government local, state and federal are broke and should be thrown out and totally rebuilt and there should be term limits placed on every office of every elected official.

Perhaps they should re-read the constitution again!