SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF ORANGE

NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS PART

VILLAGE OF SOUTH BLOOMING GROVE et al.,

Petitioners,

Index No. 7410/2015

Proceeding No. 1

For a Judgment Pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil

Practice Law and Rules
- against -

VILLAGE OF KIRYAS JOEL BOARD OF TRUSTEES et al.,

Hon. Francesca E. Connolly

Respondents,

EMANUEL LEONOROVITZ et al.,

Additional Respondents.

PRESERVE HUDSON VALLEY et al.,

Petitioners/Plaintiffs,

Index No.: 8118/2015

Proceeding No. 2

- against -

TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MONROE et al.,

Respondents/Defendants.

VERIFIED ANSWER TO AMENDED VERIFIED PETITION

OF PETITIONERS IN PROCEEDING NO. 1

Respondents-Defendants Village of Kiryas Joel Board of Trustees and the Village of

Kiryas Joel (collectively the "Village" or "Kiryas Joel"), by and through their attorneys,
Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP, respectfully submit the foregoing Verified Answer to the
Amended Verified Petition filed by Petitioners Village of South Blooming Grove et al. in
Proceeding No. 1 (the "Petition"):

1.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 of the Petition, the Village

admits that Petitioners seek the relief specified therein, but denies that Petitioners are entitled
thereto.

2.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 2 of the Petition.

3.

With respect to the allegations contained in the first sentence in Paragraph 3 of the

Petition, the Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of
the allegations set forth. With respect to allegations in the second sentence in Paragraph 3, the
Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
4.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 4 of the Petition, the Village

denies that the GEIS failed to take a hard look at the potential environmental impacts of the
annexation, and otherwise refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination
of their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
5.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 5 of the Petition, the Village

refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning
and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
6.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 6 of the Petition, the Village

refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning
and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
7.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 7 of the Petition, the Village

refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning
and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

8.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 8 of the Petition, the Village

refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning
and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof, and with respect to specific
subparagraphs therein states as follows:

a.

With respect to the allegations set forth in the first sentence of Paragraph 8
(a) of the Petition, the Village refers the Court to the documents
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect
and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

With respect to the

allegations in the second sentence, the Village states that such allegations
set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required,
but to the extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the
statutes and/or regulations referenced therein for determination of their
content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners' characterizations
thereof.

b.

With respect to the allegations set forth in the first sentence of Paragraph 8
(b) of the Petition, the Village refers the Court to the documents
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect
and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

With respect to the

allegations related to the dynamics of the Satmar Hasidim population

outside of Kiryas Joel, the Village lacks knowledge or information

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations, and denies
Petitioners' characterization of the Village's environmental review.

c.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 8 (c) of the Petition,
the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for
determination of their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.

9.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 9 of the Petition, the Village

refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning
and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
10.

With respect to the allegations set forth in the first sentence of Paragraph 10 of the

Petition, the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of
their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof. With respect
to allegations referring to the Town of Monroe Zoning Code, the Village states that such
allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations

referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and otherwise lacks
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.

11.

With respect to the allegations in Paragraph 1 1 of the Petition, the Village admits

that it has proactively planned for provision of municipal water and sewer services for its
residents, admits that CGR and Chazen provided a report, but otherwise refers the Court to the
documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect and denies
Petitioners' characterization thereof.

With respect to the final sentence in Paragraph 11, the

Village states that such allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading

is required, but to the extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or

regulations referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies
Petitioners' characterizations thereof.
12.

With respect to the allegations in Paragraph 12 of the Petition, the Village denies

that environmental review for the annexations was flawed, admits that the Village has obtained a
water withdrawal permit from NYSDEC for a groundwater well in the Town of Cornwall, and
otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.
13.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 13 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
14.

With respect to allegations set forth in Paragraph 14 of the Petition, the Village

denies that it failed to take a hard look at the potential environmental impacts of the annexation
petitions, and otherwise states that such allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no
responsive pleading is required, but to the extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court
to the statutes and/or regulations referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning
and effect, and otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations set forth.
15.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 15 of the Petition, the

Village admits that Petitioners seek the relief specified therein, but denies that Petitioners are
entitled thereto.
16.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 16 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Village of South Blooming Grove is an incorporated Village, admits that
South Blooming Grove adjoins limited portions of the land proposed to be annexed in the 507

Petition, denies that South Blooming Grove adjoins land proposed to be annexed in the 164
Petition, and otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations set forth.

17.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 17 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Town of Blooming Grove is Town in Orange County, admits that the
Town adjoins limited portions of the land proposed to be annexed in the 507 Petition, denies that
the Town adjoins land proposed to be annexed in the 164 Petition, and otherwise lacks

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.
18.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 18 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Village of Monroe is an incorporated Village in Orange County, and

otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.
19.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 19 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Village of Woodbury is a Village in Orange County, admits that the
Village of Woodbury adjoins limited portions of the land proposed to be annexed in both the 507
Petition and 164 Petition, and otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.

20.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 20 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Town of Woodbury is a Town in Orange County, admits that the Town of
Woodbury adjoins limited portions of the land proposed to be annexed in both the 507 Petition

and 164 Petition, and otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations set forth.

21.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 21 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Village of Harriman is a Village in Orange County, and otherwise lacks
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.
22.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 22 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Village of Cornwall-on-Hudson is a Village in Orange County, admits
that the Village has obtained a water withdrawal permit from the NYSDEC for a well in
Mountainville and that it is legally entitled to connect to the New York City Aqueduct, and
otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.
23.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 23 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Town of Cornwall is a Town in Orange County, admits that the Village
has obtained a water withdrawal permit from the NYSDEC for a well in Mountainville and that it
is legally entitled to connect to the New York City Aqueduct, and otherwise lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.
24.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 24 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the County of Orange is a County in New York State, admits that the
proposed annexation territories are located in Orange County, denies that the Village seeks to
annex territories, and otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth of the allegations set forth.
25.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 25 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Town of Chester is a Town in Orange County, and otherwise lacks
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.

26.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 26 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Monroe Joint Fire District exists, except lacks knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth regarding its status under
New York law or its organizational history, admits that the MJFD's service area presently
includes land proposed to be annexed, admits that the MJFD has in the past responded to fires
within the Village pursuant to requests for mutual aid, and otherwise lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.
27.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 27 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth, except with respect to allegations concerning the GEIS, refers the Court to
the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect and

denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

28.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 28 of the Petition.

29.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 29 of the Petition.

30.

With respect to the allegations set forth in the first sentence of Paragraph 30 of the

Petition, the Village admits the allegations.

third sentences, the Village refers the

With respect to the allegations in the second and

Court to

the

documents referenced therein for

determination of their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization
thereof. With respect to the final sentence, the Village admits that the Town Board approved the
164 Petition but not the 507 Petition.
31.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 3 1 of the Petition.

32.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 32 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
33.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 33 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
34.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 34 of the Petition, the

Village admits that its principal offices are in Orange County, and otherwise states that the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'

characterization thereof.
35.

With respect to the allegations in Paragraph 35 of the Petition, the Village lacks

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.
36.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 36 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
37.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 37 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,

meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

38.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 38 of the Petition as they

relate to the 507-acre annexation.

39.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 39 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
40.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 40 of the Petition, the

Village admits that comments were submitted on the DGEIS, and otherwise refers the Court to

the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect and
denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
41.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 41 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Town of Monroe's consultant JMC submitted comments on the DGEIS,
and otherwise refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their
content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
42.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 42 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
43.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 43 of the Petition, the

Village admits that the Town of Monroe's consultant JMC submitted comments on the FGEIS,
and otherwise refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their
content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
44.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 44 of the Petition.

10

45.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 45 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

46.

With respect to the allegations incorporated by reference in Paragraph 46 of the

Petition, the Village refers to its responses to those allegations set forth above.
47.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 47 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the

extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
48.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 48 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'

characterization thereof.
49.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 49 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
50.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 50 of the Petition, including

subparagraphs (a) through (d), the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein

11

for determination of their content, meaning and effect and otherwise lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth.
51.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 51 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,

meaning and effect and otherwise lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as
to the truth of the allegations set forth.
52.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 52 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.
53.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 53 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
54.

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 54 of the Petition.

55.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 55 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.
56.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 56 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
57.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 57 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

12

58.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 58 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

59.

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 59 of the Petition.

60.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 60 of the Petition, including

Footnote 9 thereto, the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for
determination of their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization
thereof.
61.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 61 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
62.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 62 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,

meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

63.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 63 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
64.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 64 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,

meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

65.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 65 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

13

66.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 66 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

67.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 67 of the Petition, including

the subparagraphs thereto, the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for
determination of their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization

thereof.
68.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 68 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof and further states the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'

characterization thereof.
69.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 69 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
70.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 70 of the Petition, including

the subparagraphs thereto, the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for
determination of their content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization
thereof.
71.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 71 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the

14

extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
72.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 72 of the Petition, the

Village denies that the environmental review failed to take a hard look as required under SEQRA

and otherwise refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their
content, meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
73.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 73 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
74.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 74 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
75.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 75 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
76.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 76 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

77.

With respect to the allegations incorporated by reference in Paragraph 77 of the

Petition, the Village refers to its responses to those allegations set forth above.

15

78.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 78 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
79.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 79 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
80.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 80 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.
81.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 81 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations set forth.

82.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 82 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
83.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 83 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations

16

referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
84.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 84 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

85.

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 85 of the Petition.

86.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 86 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations set forth.

87.

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 87 of the Petition.

88.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 88 of the Petition, the

Village admits the allegations in the first and second sentences, but denies the allegations in the
third sentence that these documents are materially inconsistent. With respect to the allegations

set forth in subparagraphs (a) through (c) of Paragraph 88 of the Petition, the Village refers the
Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect
and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
89.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 89 of the Petition, including

subparagraphs (a) through (c) thereto, the Village refers the Court to the documents referenced

therein

for determination of their

content,

meaning

and

effect

and

denies Petitioners'

characterization thereof.
90.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 90 of the Petition, the

Village lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations set forth.

17

91.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 91 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
92.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 92 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
93.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 93 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.
94.

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 94 of the Petition.
AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE THTRT) CLAIM FOR RFI.IFF

95.

With respect to the allegations incorporated by reference in Paragraph 95 of the

Petition, the Village refers to its responses to those allegations set forth above.
96.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 96 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
97.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 97 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations

18

referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
98.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 98 of the Petition, the

Village refers the Court to the documents referenced therein for determination of their content,
meaning and effect and denies Petitioners' characterization thereof.

99.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 99 of the Petition.

100.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 100 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations

referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
101 .

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 101 of the Petition.

AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

102.

With respect to the allegations incorporated by reference in Paragraph 102 of the

Petition, the Village refers to its responses to those allegations set forth above.

103.

The Village admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 103 of the Petition.

104.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 104 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
105.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 105 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the

19

extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
106.

With respect to the allegations set forth in Paragraph 106 of the Petition, the

allegations set forth conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required, but to the
extent an answer is made, the Village refers the Court to the statutes and/or regulations
referenced therein for determination of their content, meaning and effect, and denies Petitioners'
characterization thereof.
107.

The Village denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 107 of the Petition.

108.

The Village denies all other allegations of the Petition not specifically admitted

herein.
AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW
109.

Petitioners lack standing to assert the claims set forth in the Amended Verified

Petition.
AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW
110.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, by Petitioners' failure to

exhaust their administrative remedies.

AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

111.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrines of res judicata,

collateral estoppel, and/or law of the case.

20

AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW
112.

Petitioners lack capacity to assert the claims set forth in the verified petition and

complaint.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

113.

Upon information and belief, Petitioners failed to obtain legislative authorization

by properly adopted resolution to commence this proceeding and the proceeding should,
therefore, be dismissed.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW
114.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, by mootness, laches, estoppel

and/or waiver.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

115.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, by this Court's lack of subject

matter jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW
116.

Petitioners' claims fail to state a claim or cause of action upon which relief can be

granted.
AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

1 17.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, by documentary evidence.

21

AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

118.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, because they are not aggrieved

by the disapproval of the 507-acre annexation petition.

AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

119.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of ripeness.

AS AND FOR AN TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

AND OBJECTION IN POINT OF LAW

120.

Petitioners' claims are barred, in whole or in part, because of failure to comply

with CPLR 9802.

WHEREFORE, Respondents Village of Kiryas Joel Board of Trustees and Village og

Kiryas Joel respectfully request that this Court enter a judgment dismissing the Amended

Verified Petition in its entirety, awarding it the costs, disbursements and attorneys' fees incurred
in this proceeding, and awarding it such other relief as this Court shall deem just, proper or
equitable.

Dated: Albany, New York

WHITEMAN OSTERMAN & HANNA LLP

January 22, 2016

By:

ArlJJM-Ui
John J. Henry, Esq.
Michael G. Sterthous, Esq.
Robert S. Rosborough IV, Esq.
Attorneys for Respondent Village Board of the
Village of Kiryas Joel
One Commerce Plaza

Albany, New York 12260

(518) 487-7600

22

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK

)
:

COUNTY OF ALBANY

ss.

MICHAEL G. STERTHOUS, ESQ., being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:

1.

I am a member of Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP, attorneys for Respondents

Village of Kiryas Joel Board of Trustees and Village of Kiryas Joel in this matter.
I have read the foregoing Verified Answer and the same is true to my own

2.

knowledge, except those matters stated to be upon information and belief, and as to those
matters, I believe them to be true.

The source of my belief is my review of the pertinent

documents and information provided by my client.

The reason why this verification is made by me and not Respondents is that

3.

Respondent does not have a principal place of business within the County of Albany.

X*J) A
MICHAEL G. STERTHOUS, ESQ.

Sworn to before me this

22nd day of January, 2016
r.

Notary Public

CLAIBORNE E. WALTHALL

Notary Public, State of New York

Qualified in Albany County

^
No. 02WA6330597
/ ?
Commission Expires September 21, 20 ' /

23