Letter from Adrian Kuzminski
Home Rule Being Seriously Eroded
Your September 3, 2026 article on whether the Town of Springfield or the Town of Otsego should be the lead agency for the proposed Manocherian subdivision raises some important questions (“Springfield Asks the State for ‘Lead Agency’ Authority Over the Manocherian Project” by Debra Moffitt).
You note that New York State requires “a coordinated environmental review and only one entity can serve as lead agency.” NYS policy in this case effectively deprives one town or the other of its home rule right to review a project within its own district. It privileges the developer by making the proposed project bigger than the towns involved. Yet there is no obvious reason to do so, except the administrative convenience of the DEC and the interests of the developers in minimizing review. There is nothing uniting this proposed project except the developers choosing to call it one project. Why is that their call?
No lot lines cross the town boundaries. The parcels proposed for subdivision lie entirely within one town or the other. They only accidently border one another. If the developers had proposed the subdivision only in one town or the other, it would have been evaluated normally without any reference to the other town. Why should one town be deprived of its rights because of a subdivision in a neighboring town?
This proposed development and its local implications can easily be addressed by each town separately according to its own laws and procedures, which differ between the towns and reflect the unique needs and values of each town.
This NYS policy is yet another blow against home rule. NYS has already seriously eroded home rule by exempting larger renewable energy projects from local review. In this case, it’s taking away subdivision review as well.
This writer hopes that there will be a legal challenge, if necessary, to undo what seems to be another anti-local NYS policy. It’s time to step up, not roll over.
Adrian Kuzminski
Fly Creek
Springfield’s application, (which was evidently paid for by the developer), to be the lead agency expressly stated that they should do so, “because this is a local, not a regional matter.” They assert that they should be the “lead local” because 2% more of the proposed development is in Springfield, which ignores the 49% of the property in the other local entity, the Town of Otsego. The fact is that, since the property is almost entirely in the Otsego Lake watershed, it is indeed a regional environmental matter, which involves all the municipalities around the lake.