Jacob H. Zoghlin

New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) ensures that any state or local governmental decisions which may impact the environment are given due consideration. It’s a law that touches on various aspects of community life, from new construction to the adoption of land use plans. But what exactly triggers a Type I action under SEQRA? Let’s delve into this topic to uncover the significance of these actions and how they could affect you and your community.

What is… Show more

New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) ensures that any state or local governmental decisions which may impact the environment are given due consideration. It’s a law that touches on various aspects of community life, from new construction to the adoption of land use plans. But what exactly triggers a Type I action under SEQRA? Let’s delve into this topic to uncover the significance of these actions and how they could affect you and your community.

What is SEQRA?

SEQRA requires governmental bodies to consider environmental impacts equally with social and economic factors during discretionary decision-making processes. This law applies when a New York state or local agency has the authority to issue a discretionary permit or approval for an action, directly undertakes a project, or adopts a policy that affects the environment​.

Triggering a Type I Action

Type I actions – listed in 6 NYCRR 617.4 and in involved agencies’ procedures—are those which are more likely to require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Type I Actions thus require a more rigorous review process. By contrast, the SEQRA review ends if a project is classified as Type II action​​. Projects are categorized as Type I actions because they meet or exceed certain thresholds listed in the official regulations, (see 6 NYCRR 617.4), or are included in an agency’s locally adopted Type I list​.

For instance, some of the actions deemed Type I include:

• The adoption of comprehensive zoning regulations by a municipality.
• Construction of large numbers of new residential units.
• Acquisition or transfer of large parcels of land by agencies.
• Large-scale nonresidential construction projects.
• Construction of certain structures exceeding a set height.
• Unlisted actions that meet or exceed certain thresholds, and/or are within or contiguous to certain land types, historic districts, or agricultural districts. Show less

In a progressive move towards streamlining the civil litigation process, New York State Governor Hochul recently signed into law bills that amend the New York Civil Practice Law & Rules (CPLR) Section 2106, marking a pivotal shift in the procedural dynamics of civil litigation. Effective from January 1, 2024, the amendments apply to both ongoing and future actions, aiming to remove bureaucratic hurdles that have traditionally impeded the swift progression of legal processes.

The crux of… Show more

In a progressive move towards streamlining the civil litigation process, New York State Governor Hochul recently signed into law bills that amend the New York Civil Practice Law & Rules (CPLR) Section 2106, marking a pivotal shift in the procedural dynamics of civil litigation. Effective from January 1, 2024, the amendments apply to both ongoing and future actions, aiming to remove bureaucratic hurdles that have traditionally impeded the swift progression of legal processes.

The crux of these amendments lies in the expansion of individuals authorized to submit affirmations under penalty of perjury in lieu of affidavits under CPLR §2106. Previously, this privilege was reserved for attorneys, physicians, osteopaths, dentists, and persons residing outside the jurisdiction of the US. However, the new law now extends this right to all individuals involved in a case. This is a substantial step towards alleviating the often-burdensome requirement of procuring affidavits, a change that resonates with the federal practice and aligns New York with over 20 other states.

A noteworthy point of this amendment is the introduction of a standard affirmation form:

“I affirm this _day of ______ ,___ , under the penalties of perjury under the laws of New York, which may include a fine or imprisonment, that the foregoing is true, and I understand that this document may be filed in an action or proceeding in a court of law.”

By easing this process, this change to CPLR 2106 is expected to save precious time and resources for litigants, non-party witnesses, and attorneys. Especially in rural communities, where notary services may be scarce, far away, or financially burdensome, this amendment could significantly enhance access to legal recourse. The bills’ sponsors highlighted the potential of these laws in relieving unnecessary burdens on litigants, non-party witnesses, county clerks, and courts, paving the way for a more accessible and efficient judicial system.

... Show less

Major changes have come to the New York State Cannabis market. On September 12, 2023, the New York State Cannabis Control Board — which is the State body responsible for regulating the adult-use, medical, and cannabinoid hemp industries in New York — met to consider Revised Adult-Use Cannabis Regulations, the Adult-Use Cannabis Application, the Cannabis Research License Application, the Cannabis Laboratory Testing Permits, among other things. This blog will highlight some of the most… Show more

Major changes have come to the New York State Cannabis market. On September 12, 2023, the New York State Cannabis Control Board — which is the State body responsible for regulating the adult-use, medical, and cannabinoid hemp industries in New York — met to consider Revised Adult-Use Cannabis Regulations, the Adult-Use Cannabis Application, the Cannabis Research License Application, the Cannabis Laboratory Testing Permits, among other things. This blog will highlight some of the most significant developments from the meeting.

In a move that has drawn considerable attention, the State announced plans to allow multi-state operators (MSOs) to enter the adult-use cannabis market.

In what is likely the most consequential regulatory development for legal New York cannabis in months, the Cannabis Control Board adopted a resolution approving certain application forms for adult-use cannabis licenses. The Board also directed that a new applications period for certain adult-use license types open on October 4, 2023 at 8:00 AM Eastern Time and close on December 4, 2023 at 5:00 PM Eastern Time. This will apply to applications for Cultivator, Processor, Distributor, Microbusiness, and Retail Dispensary Licenses. The Office of Cannabis Management will also make available forms to allow Registered Organizations to transition into the adult-use market. Applications for additional licenses types will follow.

Adult Use Conditional Cultivators (AUCC) and Adult Use Conditional Processor (AUCP) licenses in good standing with the Office of Cannabis Management will be able to apply to transition to a non-conditional licenses.

The first application window for the adult-use applications will be open for 60 days. For a subset of retail dispensary licenses who are applying with a location already secured, OCM will review submissions that apply after 30 days, but the general retail dispensary applications will remain open for 60 days.

Read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

The Zoghlin Group PLLC is pleased to congratulate Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq., on his receipt of the “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America” award in 2023.

Jacob H. Zoghlin was recently selected by his peers for inclusion in the 4th Edition of “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America” for his work in the fields of “Environmental Law” and “Land Use and Zoning Law”.

Recognition by Best Lawyers is based on peer-reviewed evaluations, and is designed to capture the consensus opinion… Show more

The Zoghlin Group PLLC is pleased to congratulate Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq., on his receipt of the “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America” award in 2023.

Jacob H. Zoghlin was recently selected by his peers for inclusion in the 4th Edition of “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America” for his work in the fields of “Environmental Law” and “Land Use and Zoning Law”.

Recognition by Best Lawyers is based on peer-reviewed evaluations, and is designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same region and legal practice area. Best Lawyers employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of the quality of legal services. For the 2023 edition of The Best Lawyers in America, more than 12.2 million votes were analyzed. And because lawyers are not required nor allowed to pay a fee to be listed, inclusion in Best Lawyers is considered a singular honor. Please join us in congratulating Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq. on this recognition.

DISCLAIMER: This blog is made available by the lawyer/law firm for educational purposes only. Except as expressly provided to the contrary in a signed writing, all materials provided on this website, including these blogs, are provided on an “as-is” basis without warranties of any kind, either express or implied. It provides only general information and commentary on the law and/or legal issues in the news. Nothing herein provides specific legal advice. These contents may further constitute Attorney Advertising. By using this website you understand, acknowledge, and agree that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the blog, lawyer, or law firm. The blog posts should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state. Show less

The Zoghlin Group PLLC is pleased to congratulate Senior Partner Mindy L. Zoghlin for her inclusion on Super Lawyer’s list of Top Attorneys for 2023. The Zoghlin Group is also happy to congratulate Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin for his inclusion on Super Lawyers’ list of Rising Stars for 2023.

Mindy L. Zoghlin has been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Top Rated “Land Use & Zoning Attorney” in Rochester, New York for the seventh year in a row (2017-2023).

Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq., has… Show more

The Zoghlin Group PLLC is pleased to congratulate Senior Partner Mindy L. Zoghlin for her inclusion on Super Lawyer’s list of Top Attorneys for 2023. The Zoghlin Group is also happy to congratulate Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin for his inclusion on Super Lawyers’ list of Rising Stars for 2023.

Mindy L. Zoghlin has been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Top Rated “Land Use & Zoning Attorney” in Rochester, New York for the seventh year in a row (2017-2023).

Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq., has been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Rising Star and Top Rated “State, Local & Municipal Attorney” in Rochester, New York in 2023. Jacob was also previously honored on the Super Lawyer’s list of Rising Stars in the areas of “Cannabis Law” (2022), “Environmental Litigation” (2021), and “Zoning and Land Use Law” (2020).

Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The selection process includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations.

DISCLAIMER: This blog is made available by the lawyer/law firm for educational purposes only. Except as expressly provided to the contrary in a signed writing, all materials provided on this website, including these blogs, are provided on an “as-is” basis without warranties of any kind, either express or implied. It provides only general information and commentary on the law and/or legal issues in the news. Nothing herein provides specific legal advice. These contents may further constitute Attorney Advertising. By using this website you understand, acknowledge, and agree that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the blog, lawyer, or law firm. The blog posts should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state. Show less

The landscape of short-term rentals in New York City is ever-changing, with a recent court decision adding another chapter to its evolving story. The New York State Supreme Court, in its landmark decision in “Airbnb Inc. v. New York City Mayor’s Office of Special Enforcement, New York County Index Number 154865/2023”, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Airbnb and short-term rental hosts against the city’s regulations on such accommodations.

For many travelers, Airbnb and similar platforms… Show more

The landscape of short-term rentals in New York City is ever-changing, with a recent court decision adding another chapter to its evolving story. The New York State Supreme Court, in its landmark decision in “Airbnb Inc. v. New York City Mayor’s Office of Special Enforcement, New York County Index Number 154865/2023”, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Airbnb and short-term rental hosts against the city’s regulations on such accommodations.

For many travelers, Airbnb and similar platforms have transformed the way they experience destinations. However, as the popularity of these platforms grew, cities worldwide, including New York City, began to scrutinize and regulate them. The primary concern? The potential impacts on housing availability, affordability, and neighborhood character. Neighbors of short-term rental properties have also started to scrutinize such uses because of their alleged impacts on adjacent properties, community character, traffic, noise, etc.

In response to these concerns, New York City established stringent rules concerning short-term rentals. Airbnb and three hosts took offense to these restrictions, contending they were unjust and mounted a legal challenge.

Before diving into the court’s decision, it’s essential to grasp the core restrictions established by NYC:

Primary Residence Requirement: Rentals must be the host’s primary residence. This ensures that hosts genuinely share their homes and do not buy multiple properties solely for short-term rental purposes, potentially exacerbating housing shortages.

Limit on “Whole Apartment” Rentals: If hosts are away and rent out the entire apartment, the rental duration cannot exceed 30 days.

Presence Requirement: For stays less than 30 days, the host must be present during the renter’s stay. This restriction intends to maintain the residential feel of neighborhoods.

To learn more about the short-term rental law, the litigation, & its implications, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

Constitutional rights form the backbone of our legal system. When these rights intersect with environmental concerns, the legal landscape becomes particularly intriguing. One such instance recently played out in Montana, offering insights and raising questions about similar provisions in state constitutions across the country, including New York State.

In Montana, a recent lawsuit caught national attention due to its reliance on a part of the state’s Constitution. This provision… Show more

Constitutional rights form the backbone of our legal system. When these rights intersect with environmental concerns, the legal landscape becomes particularly intriguing. One such instance recently played out in Montana, offering insights and raising questions about similar provisions in state constitutions across the country, including New York State.

In Montana, a recent lawsuit caught national attention due to its reliance on a part of the state’s Constitution. This provision guarantees every citizen the right to a clean and “healthful environment”. The plaintiffs, consisting mainly of young activists, utilized this clause to challenge specific state decisions that, in their view, posed threats to the environment.

The court’s ruling confirmed that the state has an obligation to ensure that its decisions align with this constitutional mandate. Regardless of one’s stance on the outcome, the case draws attention to the role state constitutions can play in shaping environmental outcomes.

So, you might be wondering, since this was a state court decision interpreting a specific provision of Montana’s state constitution, how does this affect the rest of the United States? While the Montana decision is rooted in its own state’s constitution, the broader implications of the ruling could resonate in other states. Many states in the U.S., including New York, have similar environmental rights provisions in their constitutions that guarantee all people the right to clean air, clean water, and a healthful environment. These provisions articulate varying degrees of commitment to environmental principles.

The significance of the Montana decision lies in its potential as a reference point. It may inform how courts in other states interpret and apply their own constitutional guarantees concerning environmental rights.

To learn more, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

Effective January 1, 2022, New York State enacted a new constitutional amendment, known as the Green Amendment, or the Environmental Rights Amendment. Embedded within the New York State Constitution at Article I, Section 19, the Amendment assures each individual’s right to clean air, clean water, and a healthful environment. This significant constitutional change has drawn much attention, and it’s critical for residents, businesses, and government actors alike to understand what this amendment… Show more

Effective January 1, 2022, New York State enacted a new constitutional amendment, known as the Green Amendment, or the Environmental Rights Amendment. Embedded within the New York State Constitution at Article I, Section 19, the Amendment assures each individual’s right to clean air, clean water, and a healthful environment. This significant constitutional change has drawn much attention, and it’s critical for residents, businesses, and government actors alike to understand what this amendment entails and how it might affect their interactions with the environment.

The Green Amendment asserts a person’s fundamental right to a clean and healthful environment. Unlike other environmental regulations that primarily exist as statutory laws and can be modified, replaced, or withdrawn by the legislature, the Green Amendment elevates environmental rights to the constitutional level. This means these rights are considered fundamental, similar to rights such as freedom of speech and religion.

With the enactment of the Green Amendment, individuals now have a stronger legal framework to safeguard their environmental rights. Should they perceive a governmental action, project, or approval as potentially infringing upon these rights, they can challenge it in court.

For example, consider a scenario where a community believes a new development or government approval may contribute to local air or water pollution. The Green Amendment could provide the community with additional legal grounds to oppose the development or challenge the government approval in court. The specifics of such a legal contest will be determined by case law over time. It is important to work with an experience attorney when asserting such rights or challenging an action, project, or approval based on the Green Amendment.

The Green Amendment holds implications for private citizens, government bodies, and businesses.

To learn more about the Green Amendment, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

Every community faces a multitude of challenges. Some are more visible than others. But few issues have the capacity to create as much concern and contention as the proposed expansion of a landfill in your neighborhood. In this regard, Seneca County, New York, is no different. The ongoing controversy over the proposed expansion of the Seneca Meadows Landfill has ignited a passionate debate that extends beyond the county borders.

The Seneca Meadows Landfill is no small operation; it is… Show more

Every community faces a multitude of challenges. Some are more visible than others. But few issues have the capacity to create as much concern and contention as the proposed expansion of a landfill in your neighborhood. In this regard, Seneca County, New York, is no different. The ongoing controversy over the proposed expansion of the Seneca Meadows Landfill has ignited a passionate debate that extends beyond the county borders.

The Seneca Meadows Landfill is no small operation; it is the largest non-hazardous waste management facility in the state, with waste brought in from across New York and other states. However, as the landfill approaches its current capacity, its operators have sought permission to expand. This proposal has caused a furor among many residents and environmental advocates. They point to concerns over potential health risks, the impact on the local environment, and an array of other issues.

What exactly is the controversy about?

The operation of a landfill involves a delicate balance between managing human waste and preserving environmental integrity. The expansion of Seneca Meadows Landfill involves the proposal to increase the landfill’s size, allowing it to take in more waste over a longer time frame.

Critics of the landfill expansion raise significant concerns about the environmental impact. Landfills, especially those of substantial size like Seneca Meadows, have been known to produce harmful emissions, such as methane, a potent greenhouse gas. There are also concerns about potential leakage of toxins into groundwater, air pollution, odors, & the effects on local wildlife. Further, the noise, odors, & increased traffic from garbage trucks disturb the peace of the community.

Some have pointed to possible links between landfill proximity & health issues. Residents in close vicinity to Seneca Meadows have expressed fears about the potential increase in health risks if the landfill expansion goes ahead.

Read the full blog on our website. Show less

Governor Kathy Hochul recently signed legislation aimed at curbing the illicit cannabis market in New York State. The new law, part of the FY 2024 Budget, provides increased enforcement power to the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) and the Department of Taxation and Finance (DTF) to crack down on unlicensed dispensaries. This blog will explain what the new law entails, why it was necessary, who has been given new powers, what those powers are, and how they will contribute to a more regulated… Show more

Governor Kathy Hochul recently signed legislation aimed at curbing the illicit cannabis market in New York State. The new law, part of the FY 2024 Budget, provides increased enforcement power to the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) and the Department of Taxation and Finance (DTF) to crack down on unlicensed dispensaries. This blog will explain what the new law entails, why it was necessary, who has been given new powers, what those powers are, and how they will contribute to a more regulated cannabis industry in the state.

From a policy perspective, the legalization of cannabis in New York State brings numerous benefits, such as safer products, reinvestment in communities, significant tax revenues, and increased opportunities for New Yorkers. But, from the State’s perspective, the presence of unlicensed dispensaries undermines these efforts, violates laws, reduces the tax benefits, and poses risks to public health. The new law described herein aims to address these concerns by establishing stricter enforcement measures.

Included in the approval of the FY 2024 Budget, the Office of Cannabis Management and the Department of Taxation and Finance are the two agencies given additional powers to enforce the regulatory requirements and shut down illegal cannabis businesses. The law creates new civil and criminal penalties related to illegal operations.

From the civil side, the law allows the Office of Cannabis Management to impose civil penalties on unlicensed cannabis businesses. The most serious offenders may face fines of up to $20,000 per day, discouraging unlicensed operators from undercutting the legal market. From the criminal side, the law
makes it a crime to sell cannabis and cannabis products without a license, further deterring illegal activities.

To learn more, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

When it comes to zoning and land use matters, understanding the intricacies of regulations and requirements is essential. One vital tool for seeking relief from zoning restrictions in New York State is an “area variance.” This blog post discusses the definition of an Area Variance, the requirements set forth in New York State Town Law Section 267-b(3), and the importance of legal representation before the local zoning board of appeals (ZBA).

An area variance is a discretionary approval… Show more

When it comes to zoning and land use matters, understanding the intricacies of regulations and requirements is essential. One vital tool for seeking relief from zoning restrictions in New York State is an “area variance.” This blog post discusses the definition of an Area Variance, the requirements set forth in New York State Town Law Section 267-b(3), and the importance of legal representation before the local zoning board of appeals (ZBA).

An area variance is a discretionary approval granted by the local ZBA that provides relief from specific zoning regulations pertaining to “area” factors such as lot size, setbacks, building height, density, or other physical requirements. It allows property owners to deviate from standard zoning requirements applicable to their property while maintaining the underlying zoning classification.

To obtain an area variance, applicants must meet the specific requirements outlined in New York State Town Law Section 267-b(3). A local zoning board of appeals may grant an area variance pursuant to this section where substantial evidence in the record supports the ZBA’s conclusion that the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted outweighs any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In applying this balancing test, the ZBA must consider 5 statutory factors:

To learn about Area Variances in New York State, and the 5 statutory factors that ZBAs must consider in evaluating such applications, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

If you find yourself in a dispute with a state or local administrative board, agency, or officer in New York State, you may need to take legal action to challenge their determinations. In such cases, Article 78 proceedings under the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (the “CPLR”) come into play. In this blog, we’ll explain what an Article 78 proceeding is, why you might need one, and what must be established to prevail in such a proceeding. We’ll also discuss the importance of having an… Show more

If you find yourself in a dispute with a state or local administrative board, agency, or officer in New York State, you may need to take legal action to challenge their determinations. In such cases, Article 78 proceedings under the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (the “CPLR”) come into play. In this blog, we’ll explain what an Article 78 proceeding is, why you might need one, and what must be established to prevail in such a proceeding. We’ll also discuss the importance of having an attorney represent you throughout the administrative process and during the Article 78 proceeding.

An Article 78 proceeding is a legal mechanism in New York State that allows people to challenge the final decisions or actions of state or local administrative body, agency, or officer. We most often see these proceedings used to challenge local administrative actions or zoning and land use decisions. Importantly, such proceedings may only be brought after the person adversely impacted by the decision exhausts all administrative remedies.

These proceedings are named after Article 78 of the New York State Civil Practice Laws and Rules (the “CPLR”), which governs them. Article 78 proceedings were created by statute to replace the traditional, common law writs of certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition. Relief previously sought through such common law writs are now sought through Article 78 proceedings in New York State.

There are several situations where an Article 78 proceeding may be necessary. For instance:

Reviewing Final Determinations: If an administrative board, agency, or officer has made a final decision that adversely affects someone’s rights, interests, or privileges, an Article 78 proceeding can provide a way to seek a review of that determination.

Challenging Jurisdictional Issues: If the body or officer proceeded without or in excess of their jurisdiction, an Article 78 proceeding can be used to address this matter.

To learn more, read the full blog on our website. Show less

Zoning and land use law can be a complicated, niche area of law, and so understanding the intricacies of regulations and requirements is vitally important. One crucial tool for seeking relief from zoning restrictions in New York State is a “use variance.” This blog post explains what a Use Variance is, discusses the requirements set forth in New York State Town Law Section 267-b(2), and the importance of legal representation before a local zoning board of appeals (ZBA).

A Use Variance is… Show more

Zoning and land use law can be a complicated, niche area of law, and so understanding the intricacies of regulations and requirements is vitally important. One crucial tool for seeking relief from zoning restrictions in New York State is a “use variance.” This blog post explains what a Use Variance is, discusses the requirements set forth in New York State Town Law Section 267-b(2), and the importance of legal representation before a local zoning board of appeals (ZBA).

A Use Variance is a discretionary action granted by the local zoning board of appeals that allows property owners to use their land for purposes not permitted by the existing zoning regulations. It provides relief from the specified permitted uses and enables property owners to pursue an alternative use that may be deemed necessary or desirable for their property.

To obtain a use variance, applicants must meet the specific requirements outlined in New York State Town Law Section 267-b(2). A local zoning board of appeals may grant a use variance pursuant to this section where substantial evidence in the record supports the ZBA’s conclusion “applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship.”  In order to prove such unnecessary hardship, the applicant must demonstrate to the ZBA that “for each and every
permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located,

the applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence;

that the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood;

that the requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and

that the alleged hardship has not been self-created.”

To learn more about Use Variances in New York State, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

In this panel discussion, Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq., joins local cannabis practitioners, The Rochester Business Journal, and The Daily Record, to discuss how the legalization of adult-use cannabis is progressing and how it is affecting the overall cannabis industry in New York State. The webinar provides an overview of New York State’s Cannabis Law (the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act), a summary of the regulatory and tax structure, a sample of the proposed marketing and advertising… Show more

In this panel discussion, Partner Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq., joins local cannabis practitioners, The Rochester Business Journal, and The Daily Record, to discuss how the legalization of adult-use cannabis is progressing and how it is affecting the overall cannabis industry in New York State. The webinar provides an overview of New York State’s Cannabis Law (the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act), a summary of the regulatory and tax structure, a sample of the proposed marketing and advertising regulations, and a discussion of the various license types available for cannabis businesses under New York State Law. Check out the recorded webinar on the “Business of Cannabis” to learn more.

If you have questions about cannabis law in New York State, how you can comply with it, or what your business or local government can do under the law, contact an experienced attorney for help. The Zoghlin Group offers a range of legal services relevant to the legal cannabis industry in New York State.

For inquiries related to Cannabis/Marijuana Law, and other Municipal Law issues, please contact Jacob H. Zoghlin, Esq . at The Zoghlin Group, PLLC.

DISCLAIMER: This blog is made available by the lawyer/law firm for educational purposes only. Except as expressly provided to the contrary in a signed writing, all materials provided on this website, including these blogs, are provided on an “as-is” basis without warranties of any kind, either express or implied. It provides only general information and commentary on the law and/or legal issues in the news. Nothing herein provides specific legal advice. These contents may further constitute Attorney Advertising. By using this website you understand, acknowledge, and agree that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the blog, lawyer, or law firm. The blog posts should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state. Show less

Under the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act, a new entity was created to license certain cannabis activities in NYS. Each commercial activity involving adult-use cannabis will require a license. Because the law generally limits (1) vertical integration & (2) the number and type of licenses that a person may hold, businesses will have to seriously consider which license type best serves their goals, interests, & abilities.

Cultivator License: The licensee may cultivate &sell cannabis… Show more

Under the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act, a new entity was created to license certain cannabis activities in NYS. Each commercial activity involving adult-use cannabis will require a license. Because the law generally limits (1) vertical integration & (2) the number and type of licenses that a person may hold, businesses will have to seriously consider which license type best serves their goals, interests, & abilities.

Cultivator License: The licensee may cultivate &sell cannabis to a licensed processor. “Cultivation” includes each step of the agricultural process, from planting, growing, &cloning cannabis to harvesting, drying, grading, &trimming it.

Processor License: A licensee may buy cannabis from licensed cultivators, process it, and sell cannabis products to licensed distributors. “Processing” includes blending, extracting, infusing, packaging, labeling, and branding cannabis products. Processing essentially involves making or preparing cannabis products.

Distributor License: A licensee may purchase cannabis & cannabis products from authorized licensees & may sell cannabis & cannabis products to licensed retail dispensaries & on-site consumption sites.

Retail Dispensary License: A licensee may sell & deliver cannabis & cannabis products from a licensed premise.

Microbusiness License: A microbusiness licensee may, to a degree, engage in cultivation, processing, distribution, delivery, & sale of the microbusiness’ own cannabis & cannabis products.

Delivery License: A delivery licensee may deliver cannabis & cannabis products independent of another adult-use cannabis license. A licensee may not have more than 25 individuals providing fulltime paid delivery services per week.

On-Site Consumption Licenses: An on-site consumption licensee may (1) sell cannabis & cannabis products & (2) allow the consumption (including smoking &vaping) of cannabis & cannabis products, within the licensed premises.

Read the full blog on our website to learn more. Show less

New York State just legalized cannabis for adults 21 and over, making it the 15th state to legalize adult-use marijuana despite the fact that the substance remains illegal under federal law. The law, which supporters tied to a move to promote racial equity, also expunges marijuana convictions for actions that would be legal under the new legislation.

The New York State Senate and General Assembly passed the “Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act” on March 30, and Governor Cuomo signed… Show more

New York State just legalized cannabis for adults 21 and over, making it the 15th state to legalize adult-use marijuana despite the fact that the substance remains illegal under federal law. The law, which supporters tied to a move to promote racial equity, also expunges marijuana convictions for actions that would be legal under the new legislation.

The New York State Senate and General Assembly passed the “Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act” on March 30, and Governor Cuomo signed the bill on March 31. Although certain parts of the law went into effect immediately, others will be rolled out over time through regulations.

The law now allows individuals in New York to possess up to three ounces of cannabis for recreational purposes or 24 grams of the drug’s concentrated forms. It also allows individuals to smoke cannabis in public wherever smoking tobacco is allowed. Smoking cannabis remains prohibited in schools, workplaces and inside a car.

Eventually, the regulatory framework for the adult use market is expected to permit individuals in New York to have cannabis delivered to their homes, use cannabis products at lounge-like “consumption sites,” and cultivate up to six plants at home for personal use. The Cannabis Control Board will craft those regulations, and the Office of Cannabis Management will implement them. Because of the time required to develop and promulgate those regulations, and to issue related licenses, most experts believe it will be about 10-14 months before individuals in New York will be able to legally purchase cannabis products.

As the legal adult-use cannabis market develops in New York State, it is increasingly important for entrepreneurs, residents, and local municipalities to educate themselves regarding the scope and details of the new law.

Businesses looking to enter the legal cannabis market would be wise to seek the counsel of trained professionals to stay up to date and in compliance.

Read the full blog on our website. Show less

After determining that a $66-million-dollar chateau was illegally constructed, a French court ordered the owner to tear it down. The owner had apparently failed to obtain the required planning permissions before constructing the 32,000 square foot palace. Accordingly, the Court ordered the owner to take down the chateau and restore the countryside to its original condition, which included only a 2,000 square foot farmhouse.

While this outcome may seem severe, it is actually not that… Show more

After determining that a $66-million-dollar chateau was illegally constructed, a French court ordered the owner to tear it down. The owner had apparently failed to obtain the required planning permissions before constructing the 32,000 square foot palace. Accordingly, the Court ordered the owner to take down the chateau and restore the countryside to its original condition, which included only a 2,000 square foot farmhouse.

While this outcome may seem severe, it is actually not that uncommon. Even here in New York State, Judges often order owners to remove some or all of a building when the Court determines that it was built without permission or that the approvals for the building were illegally granted. Such orders are used to ensure that zoning laws are followed and to prevent illegal approvals from being used as an excuse to build non-conforming structures.

These cases demonstrate how complicated it can be to obtain the correct permits and planning approvals for fresh construction, new uses, or other land development projects. That’s why it’s so important for everyone — residents, municipalities, and businesses — to retain experienced zoning and land use attorneys whenever a new construction, change in use, or zoning amendment is proposed. The cost, time, and energy involved in fixing a problem after it arises can be significant, which is why it’s so important to get these things right the first time.

The Zoghlin Group offers a range of services for clients dealing with zoning issues, municipal law questions, or land use problems. We can assist with applying for — or challenging — permits and local approvals on behalf of municipalities, developers, builders, citizen groups, or individuals. For local governments and Boards, we can also act as Special Counsel or General Counsel, by advising municipal clients on how to best address their local zoning needs, & by defending them in litigation when the need arises.

Read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website Show less

In January of 2021, New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo called for the legalization of adult-use cannabis in his annual “State of the State” address. This proposal comes after a multi-year effort to regionally coordinate state cannabis policy with the governors of New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania. The goal of this coordination was to set out core principles for how best to regulate the cannabis and vaping industries to facilities stable, safe, and fair markets throughout the… Show more

In January of 2021, New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo called for the legalization of adult-use cannabis in his annual “State of the State” address. This proposal comes after a multi-year effort to regionally coordinate state cannabis policy with the governors of New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania. The goal of this coordination was to set out core principles for how best to regulate the cannabis and vaping industries to facilities stable, safe, and fair markets throughout the northeastern United States.​

If enacted, the Governor’s proposal would create a new “Office of Cannabis Management” to oversee both the new adult-use program in New York State as well the existing medical and cannabinoid hemp programs. The aim is to have the new Office be informed by the State’s current medical and industrial hemp programs, and to use the lessons learned from existing adult-use programs that have been implemented in other states.​

The proposed legislation also aims to ensure that communities that were disproportionally impacted by cannabis prohibition can benefit from the new legal markets. To achieve this goal, the Legislature is likely to consider ways to provide capital resources and technical assistance — i.e., financing options and “know-how” — to minority cannabis entrepreneurs. If such measures are adopted, they could help smaller businesses enter and compete in this emerging industry.​

If the legalization proposal is ultimately passed, businesses would be wise to consult with experienced attorneys regarding the state resources available to new cannabis entrepreneurs. Professional guidance will be especially important given the Governor’s stated interest in establishing stringent quality and safety controls, and strictly regulate packaging, advertising, and testing of all cannabis products.​

To learn more, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

On Friday, June 12, 2020, New York State passed a package of police reform bills in response to weeks of widespread demonstrations. The reform measures (1) ban the use of chokeholds by law enforcement officers, (2) give the state attorney general power as a special prosecutor in cases of police-involved deaths, (3) ban false race-based 911 calls, and (4) repeal a controversial provision of state law — known as “Section 50-A” — which kept law enforcement officers’ disciplinary records… Show more

On Friday, June 12, 2020, New York State passed a package of police reform bills in response to weeks of widespread demonstrations. The reform measures (1) ban the use of chokeholds by law enforcement officers, (2) give the state attorney general power as a special prosecutor in cases of police-involved deaths, (3) ban false race-based 911 calls, and (4) repeal a controversial provision of state law — known as “Section 50-A” — which kept law enforcement officers’ disciplinary records confidential.

Section 50-A, which dates back to 1976, allowed police, fire, and corrections departments to keep disciplinary and personnel records secret. This effectively prevented the public from obtaining copies of such records under New York’s Freedom of Information Law. Thus, when assessing an instance of alleged police misconduct, Section 50-A made it more difficult to obtain copies of the involved officers’ disciplinary files, which made it more difficult to determine if that officer had been involved in other incidents in the past or had been the subject of prior investigations or disciplinary actions.

However, the repeal of Section 50-A makes those disciplinary records subject to Freedom of Information Law requests from journalists and the public, and therefore publicly available. Previously, such records were exempt from disclosure under Section 50-A because the Freedom of Information Law does not require state or local agencies to make records available if they are “specifically exempted from disclosure by state or federal statute.” Public Officers Law §87(2). The repeal of Section 50-A means that police disciplinary records can now be made public, including complaints that have not yet been substantiated.

To learn more, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

A timely opinion article published by The Hill on June 10, 2020 reminds us of the ways that environmental justice issues are intertwined with the institutionalized disadvantages of certain groups, typically along racial and socioeconomic lines. These inequalities are not just economic, nor are they limited to issues involving our criminal justice system; rather, they intersect and affect a variety of public health and environmental issues, thereby perpetuating other inequalities and adversely… Show more

A timely opinion article published by The Hill on June 10, 2020 reminds us of the ways that environmental justice issues are intertwined with the institutionalized disadvantages of certain groups, typically along racial and socioeconomic lines. These inequalities are not just economic, nor are they limited to issues involving our criminal justice system; rather, they intersect and affect a variety of public health and environmental issues, thereby perpetuating other inequalities and adversely affecting individual and group outcomes.

As a result of these existing inequalities, less affluent communities and communities of color tend to be disproportionately affected by certain environmental trends and tend to bear a disproportionate burden with respect to efforts to mitigate environmental damage or respond to environmental concerns.

The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated these issues and, together with the recent demonstrations around the world, have brought them to the forefront of our collective attention once again.

But this problem is not insurmountable. We can and should address environmental justice issues earlier and more frequently.

In some ways, though, the law already allows us to consider “environmental justice” issues. For example, when new major energy projects are being sited, parties typically raise concerns about environmental justice, and contribute evidence regarding the impacts of the proposed projects on environmental justice communities.

Local zoning laws can also be used to help separate industrial uses that pose a risk to human health from residential communities.

And environmental reviews can help identify potentially significant adverse impacts and help mitigate them to avoid causing or perpetuating harms.

To learn more, read the full blog on The Zoghlin Group's website. Show less

On March 7, 2020, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo issued Executive Order 202 (the “Order”)1. The Order found that “a disaster is impending in New York State, for which the affected local governments are unable to respond adequately” and, as a result, the Governor exercised his executive authority and declared “a Disaster Emergency in the State of New York.” Accordingly, the Governor invoked Section 29-a of Article 2-B of the Executive Law to temporarily suspend or modify Article 7 of the Public… Show more

On March 7, 2020, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo issued Executive Order 202 (the “Order”)1. The Order found that “a disaster is impending in New York State, for which the affected local governments are unable to respond adequately” and, as a result, the Governor exercised his executive authority and declared “a Disaster Emergency in the State of New York.” Accordingly, the Governor invoked Section 29-a of Article 2-B of the Executive Law to temporarily suspend or modify Article 7 of the Public Officers Law, section 41 of the General Construction Law, and section 3002 of the Public Health Law “to the extent necessary to permit the Public Health and Health Planning Council and the State Emergency Medical Services Council to meet and take such actions as authorized by law, as may be necessary to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak, without meeting quorum requirements or permitting the public in-person access to meetings, provided that any such meetings must be webcast and means for effective public comment must be made available.”

In other words, the Order purports to suspend the “in-person” and quorum requirements of the Open Meetings Law for certain public health entities only, and only as may be necessary to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak. The Order was intended to ensure that such entities could continue to conduct necessary business during this period of public health concern. The Executive Order states that the suspension of those requirements is contingent on (1) such meetings being webcasted and (2) effective means being taken to facilitate public comment.

Although, at first, open government advocates may be concerned about this purported suspension of the “in-person” and “quorum” requirements of the Open Meetings Law, the scope of the Order appears to be limited.
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

By the end of 2020, more than 40 states could allow some form of legal marijuana / cannabis, including in more conservative jurisdictions, like North Dakota and Mississippi1. However, because possession of marijuana / cannabis remains illegal under Federal Law, these state-law developments could further increase confusion across the country about what is, and is not, legal.

Interestingly, states have approached legalization measures differently. Some jurisdictions — such as Washington… Show more

By the end of 2020, more than 40 states could allow some form of legal marijuana / cannabis, including in more conservative jurisdictions, like North Dakota and Mississippi1. However, because possession of marijuana / cannabis remains illegal under Federal Law, these state-law developments could further increase confusion across the country about what is, and is not, legal.

Interestingly, states have approached legalization measures differently. Some jurisdictions — such as Washington, Colorado, Oregon, Alaska, California, Nevada, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, and the District of Columbia, to name a few — legalized recreational / adult-use marijuana / cannabis through citizen initiatives. By contrast, in 2018, Vermont became the first state to legalize recreational / adult-use marijuana /cannabis through legislative action (as opposed to through a citizen initiative). Many expect that New York State will soon legalize recreational / adult-use marijuana / cannabis through the legislative process in 2020, although a similar effort failed in 2019.

This growing trend towards legalization across the country begs the question: What are local governments doing to prepare?

In Maine – where state law requires municipalities to opt-in to allowing nonmedical marijuana businesses to operate – municipalities have been hesitant to fully embrace legalization due to concerns about regulatory and enforcement issues2. The experiences of local governments in states when marijuana is already legal can provide helpful lessons for municipalities in states considering legalization measures this year.

Some jurisdictions are already considering local laws to regulate the emerging industry, while others are preparing for legalization by amending their local zoning codes. On the other hand, many municipalities have held off on preparing for legalization altogether due to uncertainty about their options and what to expect.
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

On November 18, 2019, the New York State Bar Association’s Committee on Professional Ethics (the “CPE”) issued an opinion that “lawyers may assist clients in complying with New York’s medical marijuana laws,” even though marijuana/cannabis remains illegal under federal law.1

The CPE reasoned that, although Rule 1.2(d) of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct (the “Rules”) states that “A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows… Show more

On November 18, 2019, the New York State Bar Association’s Committee on Professional Ethics (the “CPE”) issued an opinion that “lawyers may assist clients in complying with New York’s medical marijuana laws,” even though marijuana/cannabis remains illegal under federal law.1

The CPE reasoned that, although Rule 1.2(d) of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct (the “Rules”) states that “A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is illegal,” a lawyer may generally advise a client about the reach of the law, and therefore “may give advice about whether undertaking to manufacture, transport, sell, prescribe or use marijuana in accordance with” New York’s regulatory scheme would violate federal narcotics law.

The CPE further explained that, although manufacturing, transporting, selling, and using marijuana/cannabis remains illegal under federal law, Rule 1.2(d) should not be interpreted as prohibiting attorneys from advising clients on how to comply with the state marijuana/cannabis law. The CPE explained that “the situation is different where the state executive branch determines to implement the state legislation by authorizing and regulating medical marijuana, consistent with current, published federal executive-branch enforcement policy, and the federal government does not take effective measures to prevent the implementation of the state law.”

Under those circumstances, the CPE framed the question as: “whether a lawyer may assist in conduct under the state medical marijuana law that the lawyer knows would violate federal narcotics law that is on the books but deliberately unenforced as a matter of federal executive discretion.”
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

According to a 2019 report, the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s (“MTA”) Traffic Mobility Review Board (“TMRB”) will meet behind closed doors to consider how best to institute “congestion pricing.”1 According to the MTA, the TMRB — which is tasked with recommending toll prices for drivers entering Manhattan’s central business district — is not subject to New York State’s Open Meetings Law.

A spokeswoman for the MTA argued that TMRB’s meetings do not need to be open to the public because… Show more

According to a 2019 report, the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s (“MTA”) Traffic Mobility Review Board (“TMRB”) will meet behind closed doors to consider how best to institute “congestion pricing.”1 According to the MTA, the TMRB — which is tasked with recommending toll prices for drivers entering Manhattan’s central business district — is not subject to New York State’s Open Meetings Law.

A spokeswoman for the MTA argued that TMRB’s meetings do not need to be open to the public because the TMRB won’t be performing “governmental action subject to the Open Meetings law.” The MTA’s position that the TMRB may conduct business behind closed doors, coupled with the fact that the TMRB’s recommendation won’t be released until after the 2020 state legislative elections, have led to criticism that the TMRB’s recommendation and process will lack transparency. It also highlights an interesting issue regarding what entities are subject to New York’s Open Meetings Law.

With limited exceptions for “executive sessions,” the Open Meetings Law provides that “every meeting of a public body shall be open to the general public.”2 Accordingly, the question of whether the TMRB is subject to the Open Meetings Law turns, at least in part, on whether the TMRB qualifies as a “public body.” If the TMRB is not a “public body,” or if its gatherings do not constitute “meetings,” then it is not subject to the Open Meetings Law.

Under the Open Meetings Law, a public body is defined as “any entity, for which a quorum is required in order to conduct business and which consists of two or more members, performing a government function for the state or for an agency or department thereof, or for a public corporation as defined in section sixty-six of the general construction law, or committee or subcommittee or other similar body of such public body.”3
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

Even in states where Cannabis has not yet been legalized for recreational or adult use, many municipalities are starting to consider what they need to do to prepare themselves for legalization. For example, according to recent news reports, local health and criminal justice officials in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania have started to prepare for Cannabis Legalization. “Philadelphia experts in psychiatry, public health and law enforcement — including District Attorney Larry Krasner — are taking a… Show more

Even in states where Cannabis has not yet been legalized for recreational or adult use, many municipalities are starting to consider what they need to do to prepare themselves for legalization. For example, according to recent news reports, local health and criminal justice officials in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania have started to prepare for Cannabis Legalization. “Philadelphia experts in psychiatry, public health and law enforcement — including District Attorney Larry Krasner — are taking a ‘not if, but when’ approach.”

Philadelphia has already started examining cannabis legalization efforts in other states and municipalities, and is looking at new research regarding the impacts of legalization, in order to learn from those experiences. For instance, many jurisdictions have explored social justice reforms to correct the disproportionate impacts that cannabis criminalization has historically had on minority populations, and are looking at what can be done at the local level to protect against cannabis use by youths. Other jurisdictions, such as the City of Los Angeles, California have adopted Social Equity Programs “to promote equitable ownership and employment opportunities in the cannabis industry in order to decrease disparities in life outcomes for marginalized communities, and to address the disproportionate impacts that cannabis criminalization has had in those communities.”

The preparation for cannabis legalization in Philadelphia is particularly interesting given the conventional wisdom that New York and New Jersey will adopt such legalization legislation before Pennsylvania. This begs the question, why haven’t more municipalities in New York State started to prepare for state-wide legalization / cannabis reform?
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

As our earlier blog post explained, New York State seems to be on the verge of passing comprehensive cannabis/marijuana reform legislation. This presents several new legal issues for municipalities, including questions about how to regulate the emerging industry. Local governments will likely be interested in regulating a variety of different areas of this emerging industry, including cultivation, sale, and use:

Cultivation: Where should cultivation be allowed and who should be allowed… Show more

As our earlier blog post explained, New York State seems to be on the verge of passing comprehensive cannabis/marijuana reform legislation. This presents several new legal issues for municipalities, including questions about how to regulate the emerging industry. Local governments will likely be interested in regulating a variety of different areas of this emerging industry, including cultivation, sale, and use:

Cultivation: Where should cultivation be allowed and who should be allowed to grow cannabis/marijuana? Should growers be required to obtain a permit? Should it be confined to indoor facilities, or should outdoor cultivation be allowed? Should plant or flower-based cultivation be treated differently from edible, tincture, wax, and oil products?

Sale: Where should the sale of cannabis/marijuana be allowed? Should there be a limit on how much can be purchased at given time? Should the sale it be permitted everywhere or only in certain zoning districts? Should vendors be required to obtain a permit? If so, will the number of such permits be limited? What will the procedure be for obtaining such a permit? Who will decide if a permit should be issued? Will permits be granted “as of right,” or will the issuance of such permits be discretionary? Will there be a right to appeal an initial denial of such a permit? Can the denial of an administrative appeal be challenged in court?

Use: Should municipalities impose higher restrictions on use than those imposed by state or federal law (e.g., restricting use to those over the age of 21 or 25 rather than 18, etc.)? Should public use be limited (like alcohol)? Should use be permitted only on private property? Should smoking be treated differently than vaping? Should use of tinctures and edibles be treated differently? Should only dispensaries be permitted, or should social lounges or marijuana bars also be permitted?
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

Across the United States, more and more states have enacted (either through the legislature or through ballot initiatives) cannabis/marijuana decriminalization laws, medical marijuana laws, and even adult use (sometimes known as “recreational”) marijuana laws. The national trend suggests that we may see wide-scale legalization sooner than many expect, even at the federal level. However, until the federal government takes action, cannabis/marijuana remains a Schedule I narcotic under the… Show more

Across the United States, more and more states have enacted (either through the legislature or through ballot initiatives) cannabis/marijuana decriminalization laws, medical marijuana laws, and even adult use (sometimes known as “recreational”) marijuana laws. The national trend suggests that we may see wide-scale legalization sooner than many expect, even at the federal level. However, until the federal government takes action, cannabis/marijuana remains a Schedule I narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, and is therefore illegal to cultivate, sell, and possess.

Here in New York, though, leaders at the highest level of political office have expressed varying degrees of support for such measures. Together, these factors suggest that municipalities, businesses, vendors, and farmers will soon be faced with a myriad of legal issues that they’ve never dealt with before. That’s why The Zoghlin Group is rolling out a series of blogs identifying and discussing some of the legal issues related to cannabis/marijuana here in New York.

Although cannabis/marijuana reform legislation has not yet passed in New York State, many local governments have already started to think about how legalization could affect them. For municipalities, the question will be how to regulate this new industry. The scope and content of such regulations will depend on what laws and regulatory systems New York State adopts, and whether state laws pre-empt local laws and regulations. Nonetheless, it’s likely that municipalities will retain authority to regulate specific areas of this emerging industry, such as through zoning and land use laws.

If your municipality has not yet prepared for state-wide legalization, it should consult with an experienced attorney for help, particularly with respect to zoning, land use, and municipal law issues. Show less

Many people have heard of New York’s Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”) and its federal counterpart, the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), but few understand how it works in practice or how to enforce the rights that those laws grant. At its core, FOIL gives the public the right to access agency records and requires agencies to “make available for public inspection and copying all records” unless specifically excepted from disclosure.

FOIL applies to every New York State and… Show more

Many people have heard of New York’s Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”) and its federal counterpart, the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), but few understand how it works in practice or how to enforce the rights that those laws grant. At its core, FOIL gives the public the right to access agency records and requires agencies to “make available for public inspection and copying all records” unless specifically excepted from disclosure.

FOIL applies to every New York State and municipal department, board, bureau, division, commission, committee, public authority, public corporation, council, office or other governmental entity performing a governmental or proprietary function. All agencies must accept written FOIL requests, and most also accept FOIL requests submitted via email or online.

When possible, FOIL requests should be directed to the agency’s “records access officer.” A FOIL request should clearly identify the documents sought, and state at the beginning that the request is made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law. When the request is made by email, the subject line should indicate that the email contains a “FOIL Request.” This ensures that the request is seen by the proper agency personnel and is evaluated in accordance with the agency’s established FOIL procedures. This type of explicit language can also be useful in proving that the request was made pursuant to FOIL, which may come up if the requester needs to administratively appeal a FOIL denial or needs to commence an Article 78 Proceeding to compel disclosure of the requested record(s).
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) recently proposed changes to its regulations governing enforcement hearing procedures under 6 NYCRR Part 622.

The proposed rule change to Part 622 would “clarify the hearing process for administrative enforcement proceedings by: 1) making the regulations clearer and more accessible; 2) conforming the regulations to agency and judicial precedent; 3) correcting minor grammatical and typographical errors; 4) updating… Show more

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) recently proposed changes to its regulations governing enforcement hearing procedures under 6 NYCRR Part 622.

The proposed rule change to Part 622 would “clarify the hearing process for administrative enforcement proceedings by: 1) making the regulations clearer and more accessible; 2) conforming the regulations to agency and judicial precedent; 3) correcting minor grammatical and typographical errors; 4) updating the regulations to reflect current use of electronic communications and discovery of electronically stored information; 5) correcting the regulations to reflect the current designation of the Office of Hearings and Mediation Service; 6) adding a section addressing mediation practice after an enforcement proceeding has been commenced; 7) extending the applicability of Part 622 to expedited proceedings commenced pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 613 regarding petroleum product delivery prohibitions; 8) clarifying the contents of papers for commencing a proceeding; and 9) adding requirements for adjudicating defaults.”

The changes would also amend the definitions sections of 6 NYCRR Part 620 (Procedures for Issuance of Summary Abatement Orders) and Part 624 (Permit Hearing Procedures) to make the definitions consistent throughout Parts 620, 622, and 624.

The changes would also require that a copy of a written request for a hearing — made pursuant to 6 NYRR 621.10(a), 621.11(g), and 621.13(d) — be provided to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

Were you affected by the 2019 flooding along Lake Ontario or the St. Lawrence River? A new government program may be able to help.

New York State recently launched the 2019 Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Flood Relief and Recovery Program to help homeowners affected by the “historic flooding along the shores of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River.” The State hopes that this $20 million program, combined with other regionally significant rebuilding and resiliency efforts, will provide… Show more

Were you affected by the 2019 flooding along Lake Ontario or the St. Lawrence River? A new government program may be able to help.

New York State recently launched the 2019 Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Flood Relief and Recovery Program to help homeowners affected by the “historic flooding along the shores of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River.” The State hopes that this $20 million program, combined with other regionally significant rebuilding and resiliency efforts, will provide financial relief to families recovering from the devastating floods.

The program allows homeowners who reside in Cayuga, Jefferson, Monroe, Niagara, Orleans, St. Lawrence, and Wayne Counties to apply for up to $50,000 in state funding to help offset damages to their primary residences. If funds are still available after primary residences have been addressed, then the State will evaluate whether any remaining funding can be made available for secondary residences.

The application process for primary residences for this program opened on October 1, 2019 and will run through October 30, 2019. Homeowners of primary residences affected by flooding between January 1, 2019 and September 30, 2019 are eligible to apply.

Those who believe they may be eligible for this program should act quickly because application criteria require the application to be received by October 31, 2019. The application must specifically address damage to a primary residence that sustained direct physical flooding-related damage that threatens the safety of the home. Those who are unsure whether they qualify, or who want guidance regarding the program, should seek help from professionals who have experience with flooding-related legal issues. Show less

In June, a New York State appellate court — the Appellate Division, Fourth Department — struck down a town’s attempt to acquire certain private property rights (an easement) by eminent domain.

The Court’s decision didn’t address policy questions (like whether the Town’s reason for taking the easement outweighed the property owner’s interests), nor did the court’s decision involve a complex constitutional analysis of “Due Process” or the “Takings” clause. Instead, the Court found that the… Show more

In June, a New York State appellate court — the Appellate Division, Fourth Department — struck down a town’s attempt to acquire certain private property rights (an easement) by eminent domain.

The Court’s decision didn’t address policy questions (like whether the Town’s reason for taking the easement outweighed the property owner’s interests), nor did the court’s decision involve a complex constitutional analysis of “Due Process” or the “Takings” clause. Instead, the Court found that the Town’s actions in acquiring the property failed to comply with New York’s Eminent Domain Procedures Law (the “EDPL”).

Under EDPL §207(C)(3), courts may review such condemnation decisions to determine whether “the condemnor’s determination and findings were made in accordance with procedures set fourth in this article and with article eight of the environmental conservation law.” In other words, a Town’s decision to use eminent domain must comply with the EDPL and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”).

SEQRA imposes substantive and procedural requirements on agencies and municipalities considering certain types of actions in order to ensure that environmental impacts are taken into account in their decision making process. Substantively, it requires them to (1) identify the relevant areas of environmental concern; (2) take a “hard look” at areas of environmental concern; and (3) make a “reasoned elaboration” of the basis for its determination.
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

In a May 19, 2019 blog post, I wrote about the environmental contamination at the old Tonawanda Coke Facility in Western New York. Earlier this month, the Buffalo News reported that a developer purchased the former Tonawanda Coke site, intends to redevelop the property as a computer data center, and is seeking a state Brownfields designation as part of his remediation plans.

However, a local community group with a history of monitoring the facility, has come out in opposition to a State… Show more

In a May 19, 2019 blog post, I wrote about the environmental contamination at the old Tonawanda Coke Facility in Western New York. Earlier this month, the Buffalo News reported that a developer purchased the former Tonawanda Coke site, intends to redevelop the property as a computer data center, and is seeking a state Brownfields designation as part of his remediation plans.

However, a local community group with a history of monitoring the facility, has come out in opposition to a State brownfield designation, and is instead advocating for a Federal Superfund remediation. The community group, which has earned the support of Rep. Brian M. Higgins, claims that a state brownfield cleanup would allow a company that is responsible for some of the contaminants at the site, and that has a large mortgage on the property, to obtain financial relief through state tax credits.

A lawyer for Tonawanda Coke said that the purchase agreement calls for the developer to pay the overdue property taxes for the site and assume liability for the cleanup, but does not otherwise involve any exchange of cash.

The Buffalo News reported that, after being convicted in federal court of criminal wrongdoing associated with the former Tonawanda Coke Facility, the company that formerly owned the site shut down last year, is engaged in bankruptcy proceedings, and is in the process of liquidating its asserts.

Stories of environmentally contaminated properties — like this one — are all too common. Unfortunately, many of these problems could have been avoided by fully complying with environmental laws and regulations. The cost of responding, investigating, and cleaning up contamination can be significant, especially when combined with fines, civil litigation, and, in some cases, the potential for criminal prosecution.
...
**Follow link to read rest of blog post** Show less

In March of 2019, a Rochester resident sued the City of Rochester (the “City”) seeking to compel the City to provide footage from police body cameras under New York’s Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”). The City resident specifically sought footage of body cameras worn by police officers who allegedly shot his dog — which was in his fenced-in back yard — on October 19, 2018. The resident claimed that the officers entered his property without a warrant and without his permission.

The… Show more

In March of 2019, a Rochester resident sued the City of Rochester (the “City”) seeking to compel the City to provide footage from police body cameras under New York’s Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”). The City resident specifically sought footage of body cameras worn by police officers who allegedly shot his dog — which was in his fenced-in back yard — on October 19, 2018. The resident claimed that the officers entered his property without a warrant and without his permission.

The resident asked the City for the footage, but was told in an email that the City “did not possess any body-worn camera recording of (the officer) shooting and killing” the dog. However, after the resident’s attorney submitted a FOIL request to the City seeking the footage, City officials acknowledged that the incident had been recorded, but nonetheless refused to provide the recording.

Accordingly, the resident sued the City this year, asking the New York State Supreme Court to force the City to release the video, pursuant to FOIL. In an April 25, 2019 decision, the Court granted the resident’s petition, and ordered the City to provide video, which it did.

But the case didn’t end there. Under FOIL, a successful petitioner can obtain attorneys’ fees and costs from the agency that illegally denied access to the requested record, especially where “the agency had no reasonable basis for denying access”. Accordingly, the Court held that the City was required to pay the resident’s attorneys fees from the lawsuit, and ordered the City to pay the resident $10,000.00.

This case highlights the importance of the Freedom Of Information Law. FOIL offers an important tool for individuals, groups, and businesses to gain access to government records, promote transparency, and provide a check on local power. Likewise, the federal Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) grants public access to federal government records, subject to specific exceptions.
...
**Follow the link to read the rest of the blog** Show less

Earlier this year, an individual and two businesses (“Plaintiffs”) brought suit to challenge the Town of Canandaigua’s local sign ordinance. The complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York on June 28, claims that the Town’s local sign law violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and seeks an injunction, damages, and attorneys fees.

The dispute arose in May, when Town officials sent letters to property… Show more

Earlier this year, an individual and two businesses (“Plaintiffs”) brought suit to challenge the Town of Canandaigua’s local sign ordinance. The complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York on June 28, claims that the Town’s local sign law violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and seeks an injunction, damages, and attorneys fees.

The dispute arose in May, when Town officials sent letters to property owners threatening to impose penalties, fines, and other punishments if they did not remove outdoor advertising signs from their properties. The Town claimed that the Lamar advertising signs on the local business’s property violated the Town’s sign ordinance, which (with limited exceptions) only permitted signs that advertise a business or service that is available on the premises where the sign is located rather than off-premises.

Sign laws can raise tricky issues because they must balance community concerns and zoning goals against protections for freedom of speech. Cases like these can be so complicated that entire seminars are sometimes dedicated to discussing these issues.

In January of 2018, Mindy L. Zoghlin, Esq. (the Principal Attorney at The Zoghlin Group) presented a Continuing Legal Education seminar (a “CLE”) on the subject of sign laws at the New York State Bar Association’s Annual Meeting. In her presentation, Mindy Zoghlin discussed a significant United States Supreme Court case — Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S.Ct. 2218 (2015) (“Reed”) — which addressed a municipality’s authority to regulate signs.
...
**Follow the link to read the rest of the blog post** Show less

On June 5, 2019, the Observer published an article on a potential Open Meetings Law violation by the Chautauqua County Planning Board. The article alleges that, at a June meeting, the Board was considering an application involving the acquisition of land for soccer fields for Jamestown Community College. Before presenting on the plan, the College’s president allegedly asked if members of the media were present.

When the Board learned that a reporter from the Observer was present, it… Show more

On June 5, 2019, the Observer published an article on a potential Open Meetings Law violation by the Chautauqua County Planning Board. The article alleges that, at a June meeting, the Board was considering an application involving the acquisition of land for soccer fields for Jamestown Community College. Before presenting on the plan, the College’s president allegedly asked if members of the media were present.

When the Board learned that a reporter from the Observer was present, it voted to go into executive session to discuss “privileged information.” However, the Board’s description of the topic that it sought to discuss in private — “privileged information” — was probably not specific enough to comply with state law.

Pursuant to New York’s Open Meetings Law, all meetings of public bodies must be open to attendance by the general public. The law only allows public bodies to exclude the public from portions of its meetings (known as “executive sessions”) to discuss eights categories of topics. The law further establishes that, to enter an executive session, a public body must: (1) vote to do so during a properly noticed and open meeting; and (2) identify the general subjects to be considered.
...
**Follow the link to read the rest of the blog post** Show less

Nine years ago, for $1,200, a Dunkirk native bought a piece of land from the City of Lockport that contained a three-story, 16,000 square-foot building. His plan was to demolish the building and convert the property, which used to be an industrial power plant, into a gas station. But that never happened.

Within days of purchasing the property, New York State halted the purchaser’s plan to demolish the building because he had disturbed asbestos from the old power plant without (1)… Show more

Nine years ago, for $1,200, a Dunkirk native bought a piece of land from the City of Lockport that contained a three-story, 16,000 square-foot building. His plan was to demolish the building and convert the property, which used to be an industrial power plant, into a gas station. But that never happened.

Within days of purchasing the property, New York State halted the purchaser’s plan to demolish the building because he had disturbed asbestos from the old power plant without (1) conducting an asbestos survey or (2) hiring a licensed contractor to remove it. His problems didn’t end there, either. More and more environmental issues associated with the property began to pile up that could be extremely expensive for the Dunkirk native.

In 2012, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) added the property to the federal Superfund list, and then demolished most of the building a couple of years later. And because the Superfund law allows the government to recover cleanup costs, the Dunkirk native could end up being responsible for the $2.3 million that the EPA spent on demolition and cleanup.

In 2013, he was fined $40,000 for violations of the City building code (allegedly failing to remove a dumpster containing asbestos from the property, leaving the dumpster open, and allowing the wind to blow the asbestos around the neighborhood).

After the EPA discovered an underground fuel storage tank at the property, in 2016, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) spent $68,000 to remove it, and recommended a $17,000 fine.

To make matters worse, the Dunkirk native also racked up $6,000 each year in unpaid property taxes. However, the environmental issues with the Property were so bad that the City didn’t seek to foreclose on it.
...
**Follow the link to view the rest of the blog post** Show less

Last week, the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) announced that a Niagara County man had been sentenced for an attack on an Environmental Conservation Police Officer. The attack allegedly occurred in 2018 when the defendant was driving an off-road Utility Vehicle (a “UTV”). DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos explained, “the defendant in this case purposely injured our officer in an attempt to evade charges, and I thank the Niagara County… Show more

Last week, the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) announced that a Niagara County man had been sentenced for an attack on an Environmental Conservation Police Officer. The attack allegedly occurred in 2018 when the defendant was driving an off-road Utility Vehicle (a “UTV”). DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos explained, “the defendant in this case purposely injured our officer in an attempt to evade charges, and I thank the Niagara County Sheriff’s Department and District Attorney ... for their help in bringing this case to justice.”

According to a DEC Press release, the Environmental Conservation Police Officer (the “ECPO”) responded to a report of trespassing on private property, and found the defendant and another man at the scene operating a UTV and an All-Terrain Vehicle (an “ATV”). Both men refused the ECPO’s order to stop. When the officer attempted to place the defendant under arrest, the defendant again refused to stop the UTV, and ended up dragging the ECPO while fleeing the scene. After being dragged for an estimated 400 yards, the officer reportedly sustained injuries to his forehead, as well as cuts and bruises to his arms and legs.

The DEC Bureau of Environmental Crimes Investigation led the search for the two men, with assistance from the Niagara County Sheriff’s Office and the New York State Police. The case was prosecuted by the Niagara County District Attorney’s Office. The defendant (the UTV driver) eventually pled guilty to assault in the third degree (a Class A misdemeanor), was sentenced by a Town Justice to one year in jail, and was ordered to pay $2,237 in restitution to the State for equipment that was destroyed during the assault.

The driver of the ATV, who had previously plead guilty to attempted reckless endangerment (a Class B misdemeanor) and ATV trespassing (a violation), paid $1,030 in fines and surcharges.
...
**Follow the link to read the full blog post** Show less

Last week, the Town of Westerlo Planning Board determined that the Costanza Solar Project will not have a significant adverse environmental impact provided specific conditions are met, including (1) updating the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (“SWPPP”) and (2) doubling the quantity of evergreen plantings in the c-100 area.

Because projects like this must be disclosed in New York State’s Environmental Notice Bulletin (the “ENB”), we now know that the proposal involves the amendment… Show more

Last week, the Town of Westerlo Planning Board determined that the Costanza Solar Project will not have a significant adverse environmental impact provided specific conditions are met, including (1) updating the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (“SWPPP”) and (2) doubling the quantity of evergreen plantings in the c-100 area.

Because projects like this must be disclosed in New York State’s Environmental Notice Bulletin (the “ENB”), we now know that the proposal involves the amendment of a previously approved Site Plan. The new site plan would reduce the footprint at the northern most portion of the project due to the selection of more efficient panels. As in the original application, the proposed facility will produce 2Mw. The project is located at 198 County Route 405 in the Town of Westerlo, New York.

Interested businesses, groups, and individuals have thirty days from May 22, 2019 (the date of publication of the notice on the ENB) to submit comments related to this action. In our experience, many people do not fully appreciate the impact that their comments can have. Well-crafted comments can highlight community concerns, raise unforeseen issues that require further attention, demonstrate substantive or procedural impediments to approval, and otherwise prove persuasive to local agencies. We have found that those who participate in the process have a better chance of having their concerns heard and addressed.

Reference 1: See “Conditioned Negative Declaration — Albany County,” New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Notice Bulletin, May 22, 2019, available at https://www.dec.ny.gov/enb/20190522_not4.html. Show less

After the Tonawanda Coke plant closed, government officials and local researchers expressed concerns about the environmental impacts that chemical contamination could cause to nearby neighborhoods and the Niagara River. Those concerns were justified by the discovery of about 900,000 gallons of ammonia waste, leaking tanks, and soils contaminated with “heavy metals like lead, mercury, cyanide and arsenic, PCBs and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a class of chemicals linked to increased rates… Show more

After the Tonawanda Coke plant closed, government officials and local researchers expressed concerns about the environmental impacts that chemical contamination could cause to nearby neighborhoods and the Niagara River. Those concerns were justified by the discovery of about 900,000 gallons of ammonia waste, leaking tanks, and soils contaminated with “heavy metals like lead, mercury, cyanide and arsenic, PCBs and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a class of chemicals linked to increased rates of cancer.”

Researchers have been conducting additional soil sampling from the surrounding communities of Green Island and the City and Town of Tonawanda to determine how far off-site the chemicals may have travelled, and therefore how extensive of a remediation is required.

After an initial tour of the surrounding area, Basil Seggos, the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”), estimated that “cleaning up Tonawanda Coke could take years.”

Based in part on those discoveries, the Erie County Legislature adopted a resolution in January 2019 asking the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) to designate the Tonawanda Coke facility a Superfund Site.

But the Town of Tonawanda apparently has other plans for the Site. In a letter to the DEC, the Town Supervisor for Tonawanda requested that the DEC take the site off the Superfund list and re-assign it to the DEC’s Brownfield Cleanup Program (the “BPC”), which was established “to encourage private-sector cleanups of brownfields and to promote their redevelopment as a means to revitalize economically blighted communities.” According to local officials, the BPC could help facilitate a faster, safer, and more cost-effective cleanup and redevelopment of the site.
...
**Follow the link to view the rest of the blog** Show less

The United States Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) recently opened a criminal inquiry into another automobile manufacturer’s emissions-certification process.

In the last several years, as emissions and fuel efficiency standards have tightened, automobile companies have faced accusations of violating those standards and falsifying tests or technical data. Some have questioned the accuracy of the companies’ computer-modeling methods, while other companies have been accused of installing… Show more

The United States Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) recently opened a criminal inquiry into another automobile manufacturer’s emissions-certification process.

In the last several years, as emissions and fuel efficiency standards have tightened, automobile companies have faced accusations of violating those standards and falsifying tests or technical data. Some have questioned the accuracy of the companies’ computer-modeling methods, while other companies have been accused of installing “defeat” devices to help their vehicles cheat on the emissions tests.

In January, one automobile company paid the DOJ nearly $800 million dollars to settle claims that it had allegedly equipped vehicles with illegal emissions-management software. Likewise, other automobile companies have incurred billions of dollars in fines and legal settlements tied to alleged attempts to circumvent emissions requirements and cheat on emissions tests. As the automobile industry is seeing, taking shortcuts — or intentionally cheating to avoid compliance — can lead to substantial legal problems, including criminal investigations.

Although environmental laws and regulations can be complex and technical, ensuring strict compliance is extremely important. Whether you’re a Fortune 500 company, a statewide operation, or a small business, it’s better to incur the costs of compliance up-front than to cut-corners and risk large fines, legal liability, and criminal prosecution. Often that means engaging professionals to help you understand the legal constraints (such as on discharges), whether you are required to register or report to administrative agencies, or how to obtain and renew any required permits. Show less

Earlier this year, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) presented the results of a comprehensive environmental investigation of the Niagara Sanitation Landfill near North Tonawanda, New York. The Landfill had accepted a variety of waste from the surrounding community over the course of its operation from 1955-1968, including soils contaminated from construction of the LaSalle Expressway and from Love Canal waste.

When the DEC and the New York State… Show more

Earlier this year, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the “DEC”) presented the results of a comprehensive environmental investigation of the Niagara Sanitation Landfill near North Tonawanda, New York. The Landfill had accepted a variety of waste from the surrounding community over the course of its operation from 1955-1968, including soils contaminated from construction of the LaSalle Expressway and from Love Canal waste.

When the DEC and the New York State Department of Health investigated the Landfill in the 1980s and 1990s, they initially determined that it did not pose a significant threat to public health or the environment. However, DEC re-evaluated the area in 2013, and discovered that on-site areas of exposed waste and elevated contamination levels were present. This caused the Landfill to be reclassified as a Class 2 Superfund site in December 2015.

As a result of the reclassification, a full comprehensive remedial investigation was required. Occidental (previously Hooker Chemical) then entered into a consent order with the DEC, voluntarily removed the Love Canal-related waste in 2014 and 2015 and disposed of it at an approved facility.

Despite these findings, the DEC assured nearby residents that “there is no migration of contamination from the landfill adversely impacting surrounding properties.”

However, after some nearby residents’ homes tested positive for hazardous chemical materials, a group of citizens sued the Town of Wheatfield. Their lawsuit alleges that contaminated water from the site — containing arsenic, barium, lead, and mercury — migrated onto adjacent properties and into the sewer system, causing health issues for the residents.

Stories such as these demonstrate the importance of ensuring that hazardous materials are disposed of properly, and the significant problems that can result if proper steps are not taken. Show less

A plan in Greene County to construct a new jail made the news recently because it requires over 63,000 SF of floor space, will cause permanent impacts to wetlands, and could negatively impact endangered & threatened wildlife. As a result, the project sponsor was required to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to identify potential negative impacts that may result. An EIS can be long, complicated, and feel overwhelming (both to prepare and to review). To learn more about the Greene… Show more

A plan in Greene County to construct a new jail made the news recently because it requires over 63,000 SF of floor space, will cause permanent impacts to wetlands, and could negatively impact endangered & threatened wildlife. As a result, the project sponsor was required to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to identify potential negative impacts that may result. An EIS can be long, complicated, and feel overwhelming (both to prepare and to review). To learn more about the Greene County Jail project, check out my recent blog. Show less

A cleanup is underway along the New York shoreline after a fifteen-inch hole was discovered in a containership's fuel tank. The Coast Guard and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation responded after tar balls and oil sheen washed ashore at Coney Island and Long Island beaches in March 2019. Oil spills can be costly and time-consuming to cleanup, and can have far-reaching and unexpected consequences. Check out my blog post to learn more!

Hunters were charged in Mount Morris when a stray bullet struck a nearby house. Although the residents were inside, nobody was injured. However, the hunters' troubles didn’t end there. They were charged with multiple counts for alleged interference with the investigation. Instead of just being charged with failing to carry tags afield while hunting, they now also face charges for tampering with physical evidence & providing a false written statement. The lesson here may seem obvious — don’t lie… Show more

Hunters were charged in Mount Morris when a stray bullet struck a nearby house. Although the residents were inside, nobody was injured. However, the hunters' troubles didn’t end there. They were charged with multiple counts for alleged interference with the investigation. Instead of just being charged with failing to carry tags afield while hunting, they now also face charges for tampering with physical evidence & providing a false written statement. The lesson here may seem obvious — don’t lie or attempt to cover up an accident — but it’s a mistake made all too often. Show less

A landfill & sand mine operation was assessed a $100,000 penalty in 2018 for violations of its state mining permit. The penalty, which was part of an Order on Consent with the Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC"), was the culmination of an investigation that began in January of 2018, when persistent dust clouds were coming from the facility. Our experience with the DEC indicates that an operator’s noncompliance with environmental laws or permit conditions can become a significant… Show more

A landfill & sand mine operation was assessed a $100,000 penalty in 2018 for violations of its state mining permit. The penalty, which was part of an Order on Consent with the Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC"), was the culmination of an investigation that began in January of 2018, when persistent dust clouds were coming from the facility. Our experience with the DEC indicates that an operator’s noncompliance with environmental laws or permit conditions can become a significant liability. To avoid these risks, operators should ensure that their facilities are in strict compliance. Show less

The Town of Carmel's decision to dump asphalt millings near the shore of Lake Mahopac has sparked an investigation by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC") that may lead to expansive remediation, fines, or even litigation. That’s because a January 2019 DEC ruling prohibited the use of asphalt milling as fill in NYS. Individuals, businesses, and municipalities need to be very careful when disposing of waste to ensure that they're complying with the law. The risks of… Show more

The Town of Carmel's decision to dump asphalt millings near the shore of Lake Mahopac has sparked an investigation by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC") that may lead to expansive remediation, fines, or even litigation. That’s because a January 2019 DEC ruling prohibited the use of asphalt milling as fill in NYS. Individuals, businesses, and municipalities need to be very careful when disposing of waste to ensure that they're complying with the law. The risks of improper disposal can be significant, costly, and time consuming. Check out my blog post to learn more! Show less

This article discusses the legal problems associated with the overuse and under-regulation of solitary confinement.

Cite as Jacob H. Zoghlin, Punishments In Penal Institutions: (Dis)-Proportionality In Isolation, 21 No. 1 Hmn. Rts. Brief 24 (Winter 2014).

This article discusses Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and addresses cases involving political gerrymandering in the United States.