A Petition Calling For A Referendum On The New Lebanon Sidewalk Project Is Ignored

by Thaddeus Flint
Back in May the Town of New Lebanon held a second public hearing on the proposed sidewalk project that would build a 1.5 mile walking route through the Town’s business district at a cost of either maybe $1.5 million or maybe $3 million depending on whom one consults, nobody knows for certain.
At that meeting some residents wondered if the project would be put to referendum.  Some felt it could be rather expensive; some felt it could be rather invasive, and many felt it will probably be both.
[private]“We haven’t made that determination [to hold a referendum] yet,” said Town Supervisor Mike Benson in the May meeting.
A few residents didn’t want to wait and see what the Town Board’s determination would be.  They wanted to force the issue, and they wanted to know how to go about forcing the issue.
“Consult Town Law,” Councilman Bruce Baldwin advised at the time. “If the community wants a referendum they need to present it.”
Resident Darcy Poppey decided to do just that.
Poppey is no stranger to the law.  She is a paralegal and was a New Lebanon Town Justice from 2008 until the 2011 elections.  Even so, when she decided to draft a petition to force a referendum on the sidewalk project, she got some  help to make sure it could not be invalidated on some technicality.
“I consulted with Virginia Martin at the Board of Elections with respect to my petition contents and the time frame,” said Poppey. “Everything is up to par.”
The petition states, “We, the undersigned electors and legal voters of the Town of New Lebanon – respectfully petition that there be submitted to the electors of the Town of New Lebanon, for their approval or rejection at a referendum held for that purpose, a proposal for the New Lebanon Sidewalks Project.”
According to Poppey, “A petition for referendum must be signed by a minimum of 5% of the population that voted in the last gubernatorial election. By our calculations, we would have needed 59 registered voters from New Lebanon.”
Getting 59 signatures proved to be rather effortless.  In the end 136 signatures were collected of which 119 were found valid.
“I had a lot of residents step up and assist me in obtaining signatures,” said Poppey, “definitely a team effort.”
The petition needed to be filed within 30 days of a determination and at least 45 days prior to the next election. “May 21 was the determination,” said Poppey. A copy of the petition shows a time stamp from the Town of New Lebanon of June 19.
“This petition isn’t for the support of or objection to the sidewalk project. It is simply to allow the residents, the taxpayers, to have a voice in a major expense,” said Poppey.
A copy of the petition was forwarded to Benson for his comments.  On July 7 he wrote, “As of Friday, the Town Attorney and I are still reviewing the situation in its entirety and procedurally. I am hoping that we will have some answers by [the Board meeting] Tuesday night.”
At the Board meeting on July 9 there was no mention of the petition.  It was also not on the agenda. Poppey wrote to Town Attorney Andy Howard on July 10 to see what was going on.
Howard responded, “The proper and sole legal mechanism to challenge the aforesaid May 21, 2013 Finding and Determination would have been an action in the NYS Appellate Division.  Please be referred to NYS Eminent Domain Procedure Law.  If you had contacted me following the May 21, 2013, meeting and inquired as to the proper steps to be taken in challenging the Finding and Determination, I would have been happy to point you in the right direction.”
“What he is trying to say,” Poppey said, is that “there was no resolution made. It was a verbal determination to move ahead. [Councilman] Matt Larabee confirmed this.”
Strangely, Larabee also seems to confirm the validity of the petition. “We did receive the petition at a special meeting last month,” he wrote in an email July 10. “When we act on it is of no concern because the petition was filed in a timely [manner] and met all the requirements. I for one was hoping it was on agenda last night, but after seeing sparse turnout I am happy it was not. There is no way the Board can ignore this request from the voters; as you know I want the public to have a say on this.”
“It’s so simple it’s ridiculous. Consult the Town Law,”  Baldwin had said back in May.
“I did consult Town Law, General Municipal Law and the Board of Elections,” is Poppey’s response to Baldwin. “It is not simple, even for someone that has a legal background; at least not when the Board is using smokescreens and mirrors. Perhaps if the Board and Mr. Benson were actually being transparent, the process to challenge the moving forward with this project, would, in fact, be simple.”
Even the Town Clerk is now confused.  Colleen Teal wrote to Association of Towns of the State of New York attorney Lori Mithen-Demasi on July 10 asking for guidance. “The town attorney advised me that I do not need to verify the signatures, nor provide the Board with a certification of the petition but this is different than what the Board of Elections is advising me and the filer of the petition. The town attorney further advised me that I do not have any responsibilities to fulfil, and I want to be sure that I am fulfilling my responsibilities,” Teal wrote in an email.
Poppey, for one, has no intention of giving up. “I am simply stunned by the level of arrogance with these Town officials,” she said. “The Town Board has spoken loud and clear that the residents’ opinion with respect to major financial (and useless) decisions do not matter.”[/private]