Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Urbanization & Agriculture

Challenge to Town's Conveyance of Conservation Easement

Walt McCarter
National AgLaw Center Research Associate

Summary of Decision

In LaBarbera v. Town of Woodstock, 865 N.Y.S.2d 758 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008), the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court held that a town had complied with notice and other requirements necessary to pass a resolution to convey a conservation easement to a non-profit conservation corporation.

Background

Board members of the Town of Woodstock voted to convey a conservation easement to the Woodstock Land Trust, Inc., a not-for-profit corporation, for the purpose of preserving a portion of the parcel for recreational purposes. Id. at 759. After the resolution passed, petitioners brought this action alleging irregularities in the voter referendum process. Id.

Arguments

Petitioners argued that the respondents did not adequately define the subject matter of the referendum because a survey or metes and bounds description should have been included. Id. at 760.

Analysis and Holdings

A town may convey an interest in its real property, including an easement, upon adoption of a resolution and a permissive referendum that must comply with procedures designed to afford ample notice. See id. at 759. The respondents had provided proof that notice of the referendum was timely published in the local newspaper, posted at the town hall and clerk's office, and posted on the signboard in front of the town hall; therefore, they had established compliance with the applicable statutes. Id. The court found the petitioners' contention that a survey was necessary to be without merit because the property at issue was a well-known parcel; nearly 30 public meetings had been conducted regarding the easement, a description was provided using the town's tax map, and an aerial photograph with clear markings showing the area covered by the conservation easement had also been provided. Id. at 760. The court therefore granted the respondents' motion for summary judgment. Id.

The case was decided on October 23, 2008.