NY Appellate Court Holds Trial Court Erred in Dismissing Alleged Violations of the Public Trust Doctrine

This post was authored by Matthew Loeser, Esq.

 
Petitioner-plaintiff commenced a hybrid CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action to annul the determination of respondent-defendant Town of Brighton Town Board. The determination at issue was the approval of an incentive zoning application by respondents-defendants M & F, LLC, Daniele SPC, LLC, Mucca Mucca, LLC, Mardanth Enterprises, Inc., and Daniele Management, LLC – collectively doing business as Daniele Family Companies – in connection with a proposed Whole Foods store in respondent-defendant Town of Brighton. In this case, petitioner appealed from an granting the motions of respondents-defendants to dismiss.

 
On appeal, the court first found that the Supreme Court of New York properly dismissed the cause of action alleging a violation of Brighton Town Code chapter 113, because there was no private right of action to enforce that provision. Next, even assuming that petitioner’s 12th and 13th causes of action challenging the validity of the Town’s incentive zoning law were timely commenced, the court found that those causes of action were also properly dismissed on the merits, as the provisions of the challenged incentive zoning law were consistent with its authorizing legislation. The court further noted that section 261–b did not require an incentive zoning law to specifically adopt a prospective formula for weighing the costs and benefits of awarding any particular incentive under the law.

 
Contrary to petitioner’s remaining contentions, the court held that petitioner’s claims under the Open Meetings Law were properly dismissed. Specifically, petitioner’s claim alleging that one or more secret meetings took place, as indicated by a specific press conference, was speculative and conclusory. The court nevertheless found that the trial court erred by granting a declaration in favor of respondents on petitioner’s 9th and 10th causes of action – alleging violations of the public trust doctrine – as there are unresolved factual issues relating to the impact of the Whole Foods development on a recreational trail known as the Auburn Trail. These concerns included whether the development would require the constructive abandonment of the existing public use easements for that trail. As such, this portion of the Supreme Court’s holding was reversed.

 
Matter of Brighton Grassroots, LLC v Town of Brighton, 2020 WL 501545 (NYAD 4 Dept. 1/31/2020)