A state Supreme Court justice has tossed a lawsuit opposing the town’s sale of an old  quarry in Suffern, in part dismissing the argument that the town needed to get state Legislature approval to sell open space. (See story here.) State approval wasn’t needed because the property wasn’t formally dedicated as parkland. (At right, that’s file photo of the old Tilcon quarry in Suffern.)

That’s, of course, not the main issue of the town’s sale to a developer of the old Tilcon quarry that was gifted to the town, but it underscores a ound-and-round argument in Ramapo that took up a lot of debate during the last Ramapo town supervisor’s race. Preserve Ramapo had said that the town’s purchases of property for open space and recreation lacked that state-recognized designation, so they said the town, more specifically, the leadership of Ramapo Supervisor Christopher St. Lawrence, could sell land. The so-called “Quarry Ridge” property has always had a little different status than other sites because it was given to the town. And the deal to sell the land included an agreement that the developer would undertake a flood-mitigation project that would help fix a decades-long flooding problem in parts of the village of Suffern.

But the suit does point out the issue of open space dedication that caused a lot of hoopla in the last Town Board election, in which Preserve Ramapo pushed for formal dedication, and St. Lawrence said it wasn’t necessary in most cases, by virtue of the bonding agreements.

This editorial board advocated for the “belts-and-suspenders” approach and encouraged formal dedication, starting with the August 2008 purchase of Liberty Rock in Sloatsburg. We noted that:

“Maybe not all the spaces should be given the parkland designation. But even that decision – which will be dedicated and which will not – gives residents important information. Let residents know, from Day 1, whether the intent of the land is parkland forever, or holding onto the property for another future use.”

In our 2008 editorial, we noted that St. Lawrence had pledged to begin the process of dedicating open space. And, that began to happen. The town has dedicated Liberty Rock and myriad other properties.

Here is the complete editorial from Aug. 22, 2008:

Dedicating Liberty Rock

Ramapo’s decision to purchase 55 acres in Sloatsburg, including what’s known as Liberty Rock, has the elements of smart decision-making. The property is historic and controversial – the property owners once brought a federal lawsuit against the village. Moreover, the town earned favorable borrowing terms for the $2.75 million purchase. Now, though, one more step needs to be taken: Ramapo Supervisor Christopher St. Lawrence must set forth in formal documents that the purchase will be dedicated as parkland.

It’s an issue that has caused St. Lawrence much consternation. Preserve Ramapo had pointed out the lack of official “open space” resolutions from the town on 23 properties. It became a hot-button election issue last year in a town where future growth and land use top the list of many residents’ concerns. St. Lawrence at first balked at formal parkland designation on many town open-space purchases made over the last several years. Not necessary, he said. After last November’s election, in which St. Lawrence handily beat back a challenge by Preserve Ramapo’s candidate, the supervisor talked about going ahead and formally dedicating the lands, saying it wouldn’t hurt, even if he saw it as unnecessary, if people wanted it. That hasn’t happened yet.

Town Attorney Michael Klein yesterday told the Editorial Board that the Town Board is considering a number of dedications over the next year or so. The move, he said, was for people’s comfort level: “It’s really not legally required, but we will do it if it results in more public confidence.” Great. Now, let’s get that in writing. Maybe not all the spaces should be given the parkland designation. But even that decision – which will be dedicated and which will not – gives residents important information. Let residents know, from Day 1, whether the intent of the land is parkland forever, or holding onto the property for another future use.

Case in point: a former quarry site in Suffern, gifted by Tilcon New York to the town several years ago. St. Lawrence recently announced a deal to sell the property to a developer who wants to put a large condominium complex there, as long as the builder also installs a flood-mediation project. Many balked at a plan for what would be called “Quarry Ridge” on land once listed by the town, along with other land acquisitions, under the heading “Open Space, Parkland & Historic Preservation.”

A parkland designation may not ever have been right for the old quarry site. A proposed condo-for-drainage project may be determined to be beneficial for residents in flood-prone areas of Suffern, and seen as a worthwhile endeavor for the village to allow. That decision sits with the Suffern village board. Yet, if parkland dedication becomes the norm in Ramapo, residents will know what to expect – by virtue of what is dedicated and what is not.

Does formal parkland dedication really matter? By virtue of bonding, we have been told, the land is protected. The bond itself had been designated for purchase of land for open space and recreation – so that’s how the land must be used. But bonds are paid off. Memories fade. Ramapo residents 50, 100 years from now deserve the protection of open space and greenery that town residents are investing in today. They deserve to get those assurances in writing.

A Journal News editorial