Illegal Notice - 27 East


Southampton Press / Opinion / Letters / 1795313

Illegal Notice

Our new Southampton Village government should stop another flagrantly illegal notice of a Board of Historic Preservation and Architectural Review public hearing scheduled next Monday, one to which it is not entitled.

The notice of the ARB public hearing for 54 Leo’s Lane once again violates New York State law, and logic. Dr. Elaine Fox at 25 Leo’s Lane, Mitch Mayer of 47 Leo’s Lane, Bob Penna across Leo’s Lane from 37 Leo’s Lane, and I were notified of the 37 Leo’s Lane 2006 application for a McMansion, to which we objected. We were the only four of the remaining 63 property owners in our legal and certified Rosko Place subdivision to be notified by mail about the public hearing coming before the ARB in August 2006, just 10 days later.

Not one of our foursome was notified of the ARB public hearing scheduled in 2007 for Tufo’s 81 Leo’s Lane McMansion, but that extraordinary mailing list provided by the Building Department also included owners of property outside the Rosko subdivision, in the neighborhood east of our Leo’s Lane demarcation. An equally illegal and unfair mailing list was provided, just six or seven months ago, for 31 Rosko Drive, which included owners of property on Hill Street (but not me!), who do not share the same interests, nor the same restrictive covenants that run with the land, nor the same deeds protecting our rights to enforce our deeds by state law.

The result: There is not a single legal house in the Rosko Place subdivision built after 2005. How long will this corrupt notice procedure, invented by the Southampton Village Building Department, be allowed to violate our rights, while making us subject to the punitive property taxes levied by Southampton Town and based on the land values inflated by all those illegal McMansions?

Of course, I am protesting 54 Leo’s Lane, since I, unlike Dr. Fox and Mitch Mayer (both on the mailing list), have not been notified of the ARB public hearing for 54 Leo’s Lane, which will affect both my village and town taxes.

How long will you allow this willful ignorance continue about notification of public hearings and, of course, about the restrictive covenants that run with the land in the Rosko Place subdivsion, and which the McMansion owners and applicants are responsible for knowing, and, because they all needed to have title searches, are fully aware of?

Let’s profit from the election mandate and immediately support the end to illegal use of a local law to steamroll over the rights of legal Rosko Place property owners.

No public hearing for 54 Leo’s Lane at the ARB on Monday, when it is mistakenly and lawlessly scheduled.

Evelyn Konrad