Vetoed

By Bob Quinn
MONROE — For the second year in a row, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has vetoed an annexation oversight bill that would have allow county planners to review any proposal to annex land from one community into another.
And for the second year in a row, Cuomo said the bill violated the New York State Constitution’s home rule provisions.
Assemblyman James Skoufis, D-Woodbury, authored both bills, and worked with state Sen. William J. Larkin Jr., R-C-Cornwall-on-Hudson, to passed the legislation in both houses.

Revisions

Skoufis and others said the revised legislation had been amended to eliminate any home rule issue. This law did not give the county the right of approval over any annexation bid. What it do, however, was to make annexation just one more land issue, like a subdivision or a site plan, that county planners review as a matter of course.
County planners would make recommendations, not approvals. If the lead agency disagrees with more than one of the county’s findings, that municipality would need to approve annexation with a super-majority (4-1 votes), rather than a simple majority (3-2).
The legislation would not have affected the proposed annexation of land from the Town of Monroe into Kiryas Joel.
Political, not unconstitutional
Two weeks ago, Skoufis was joined by more than a dozen local mayors, supervisors, municipal attorneys, the Sierra Club, Preserve Hudson Valley and Dr. Gerald Benjamin, one of New York State’s preeminent political scientists, at a press conference urging the governor to act.
The legislation, he said, would give voice to the county in annexation matters when there are regional concerns, such as water and sewer.
Cuomo’s veto last year “was political,” Benjamin said at the press conference. “It was not constitutional. We are looking for equity in the interpretation.
The revised legislation, he added, would give voice to the county in annexation matters when there are regional concerns, such as water and sewer.

Reaction

Skoufis this week called the governor’s latest veto leaves communities vulnerable to harmful annexations.
“The Governor’s repeated veto of my annexation oversight bill reflects a politically-driven disregard on this critical issue,” Skoufis said. “Likewise, his continued argument that the bill is unconstitutional flies in the face of reality.
“Residents in Orange County have seen for themselves what can happen with over-reaching annexation petitions. My legislation is the right thing to do and would inject much-needed oversight into what happens in our own backyards.
“I will not rest until this bill becomes law.”
Larkin, too, said he would press on.
“I am disappointed Governor Cuomo again decided to veto my annexation oversight bill,” the state senator said in a statement. “I will never stop working to ensure the annexation proposals that have a profound impact on our localities have appropriate oversight.”
Assemblyman Karl Brabenec (R-C-I-Deerpark), whose district includes the Town of Monroe, including Kiryas Joel, also weighed in.
“This is a perfect example of how out-of-touch our government really is,” Brabenec said in a statement. “This was a statewide bill that would provide oversight and allow local governments more control over all future annexations throughout the state, not just here in Orange County.
“Promoting smart growth and allowing local government to have a voice in annexations that directly affect their communities just makes sense,” he added. “This will not stop here, I will keep advocating for this bill and continue to promote an annexation process that has more oversight and allows local communities a greater influence in what is taking place in their neighborhoods.”
Meanwhile, Colin Schmitt, the Republican and Conservative candidate facing Skoufis for the 99th Assembly District seat in November, released his own statement:
“I am mad as hell,” said Schmitt. “The governor vetoing the annexation legislation is another example of Albany government failing our communities. This veto, on top of four years of unmitigated corruption, skyrocketing taxes, pages of regulations and relentless attempts to give free college tuition to illegal aliens begs the question, ‘are we better off now than we were four years ago?’ Without a doubt the answer is No.”