State’s effort to pre-empt local zoning must be stopped

Legislation pending in the State Legislature would strip local municipalities of their right to govern in a way that, if enacted, will fundamentally change the fabric and character of local communities.

The bill would prohibit towns from establishing minimum lot sizes of more than 5,000 square feet — roughly one-eighth of an acre — if a lot has access to sewer and water infrastructure and more than 20,000 square feet — roughly half an acre — in any area.

This wrongheaded legislation would destroy the rural character of Riverhead that we treasure and transform this place into the congested suburban landscape that prevails west of here.

It would also further burden our roads with more cars and our crowded schools with more children. 

It would be a devastating blow to farmland preservation through the transfer of development rights program. Local zoning codes that allow one house per two acres would, under this state scheme, allow four houses per two acres. In Riverhead, more than 6,300 acres of farmland are unprotected from development, according to the town’s comprehensive plan update. That could produce more than 12,000 new homes with the state’s half-acre zoning — instead of roughly 3,000, under the town’s two-acre zoning.

It would probably spell the end of our tourism-oriented local economy. It’s not too often you hear about people vacationing in the overdeveloped hamlets to our west. 

The justification for this measure, according to the memorandum accompanying the bill, is to promote “land use reform” to address the housing shortage in the state. It aims to end exclusionary zoning, which the memo says means “fewer homes, higher rents, higher levels of segregation, higher carbon emissions, and a slower economy.”

Areas with high density development don’t have higher rents? Really? Have the proponents of this measure never been to New York City? Just this week there was an article in the New York Times about working people with incomes of $50,000 or more having to live in homeless shelters because they cannot afford a place to live in the five boroughs. And anyone who’s looked for rental housing in the densely developed hamlets to our west knows how expensive it is, regardless of development density.

Surely state legislators must realize that 5,000-square-foot lots don’t magically produce the public transportation required to reduce carbon emissions.  Nor do smaller lot sizes magically reduce segregation. Again, all you have to do is open your eyes and look around at areas to our west to see the fallacy of these premises.

But this is all worse than another unfunded state mandate — and it clearly is an unfunded state mandate. It’s an unconstitutional usurpation of local power.

New York is a “home rule state.” Under the New York State Constitution, zoning is a local function grounded in the home-rule framework of Article IX of the constitution. “Additionally, the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Statute of Local Governments provide independent power to adopt, amend and repeal zoning regulations via the adoption of local laws,” as discussed in a N.Y. Department of State publication explaining the zoning power. 

The state cannot pre-empt home rule powers except under very limited, very specific circumstances. 

If New York State attempts to pre-empt home rule by enacting this bill, it can expect a legal battle royale.

The Riverhead Town Board has already expressed its “strong and unwavering opposition” to this bill, with the adoption of a resolution last week condemning it.

Do we need more housing — more affordable housing — for young people, including (yes) young families? Absolutely yes. But we need state assistance to make that happen — assistance that will help young people buy homes with reasonable mortgage terms. 

And we need the state to shoulder a greater share of the cost of public education to bring property taxes down to a manageable level so that our zoning decisions are not so focused on housing that “won’t add children to our schools.” This is a woefully short-sighted strategy that produces an aging, lopsided demographic. It doesn’t make for a healthy community.

While the state is contemplating how to make housing more affordable and reduce carbon emissions, we think it should think about making a serious investment in public transportation. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority does next to nothing for this region, especially the North Fork. The rail service, which is part of the MTA, is practically useless for getting working people to their jobs.  And the bus service, which is not part of the MTA, is nearly just as useless out here. 

Versions of this bill were introduced in the two previous sessions of the State Legislature and they went nowhere. We certainly hope this one meets the same fate. We know we can count on our local state lawmakers to strongly oppose this measure. But we also know that, the way things work in Albany, bills find their way into “omnibus” budget bills that are pushed through in deals between the governor and legislative leaders, bypassing the normal legislative process. Or similarly forced through at the end of the legislative session. And that’s worrisome.