THE PAUL PLANTE STORY

[thelivyjr]

THE ADVERTISER April 8, 2021

Why can’t Keith Hammond be honest?

In the March 25, 2021 Advertiser, Poestenkill Supervisor Keith Hammond stated that by writing a letter to the editor of the Advertiser concerning matters of public importance in Poestenkill, that I was “looking for attention,” and in a threatening tone promising further retaliation by the town, he stated “I now have it,” that before accusing me of being dishonest about absentee ballots, when it was Mr. Hammond himself who was being dishonest with all of us, which dishonesty is nothing new for Mr. Hammond who has a long history of being dishonest.

This is the same Poestenkill Town Councilperson Keith Hammond who in 2005 was calling me a “RETARD”, a malicious lie, which was on the record in an official Poestenkill Town Board meeting.

And the same Keith Hammond who as a councilman on 11 December 1995 published a series of malicious libels wherein he falsely stated that I am “mentally disturbed,” a condition he states as an alleged psychiatric expert causes my “inability to effectively function in society.”

From there he went on to falsely state that I am “forced to live on public assistance,” and since he was on a roll and the lies were pouring forth, he went on to further falsely state that I have a “criminal record,” which is pure invention on his part, as is so much of what he says, and not to be outdone by himself, he concluded his string of libels by stating that the next time I felt the urge to pick up a pen, which I actually just did, three times, to attack a Poestenkill public official like Keith Hammond for having some issues with honesty, why don’t I instead dial the number of a local hospital with a psychiatric ward, because as the psychiatric expert Keith Hammond says, “It is obvious to all around that you are in desperate need of help.”

Except it is not at all obvious to anyone other than Keith Hammond, because none of that is true.

So why does Keith Hammond do it, then?

What motivates him to tell these outrageous lies?

Why, Keith?

Paul Plante, Averill Park

https://advertisercrw.com/letters-to-th ... -04-08-21/

[thelivyjr]

15 April 2021

To Poestenkill Town Clerk:

RE: Continuing Harassing Light Trespass, KKK/Nazi intimidation tactics, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Creation of hateful living environment

For the Town Records:

This is to confirm for the Town record that at 5:05 A.M. this morning, 14 April 2021, the spotlights of Dave Gittins in the brick house compound to the west of my dwelling were shining in my bedroom window, and at the time I went out my front door, the full panoply of the concentration camp floodlights, spotlights and searchlights on the brick house compound of Dave Gittins on the west end of Liberty Lane came on as if triggered by my front door opening turned on to illuminate my property and my home to induce fear in me and to again make it patently clear that I know that I am not safe in the Town of Poestenkill and that I am totally helpless to stop him from slowly murdering me and torturing me and intimidating me and stealing my health and well-being, which is crippling me, and destroying my health so that being in Poestenkill makes me nauseous and gives me chest pains.

And let us be patently clear here that these are not some innocent "patio lights" I am talking about.

This is an industrial/commercial lighting arrangement that outside of the Averill Park football field when the lights are on, or the Rensselaer County jail at night, are some of the brightest and most powerful lights in Rensselaer County, and certainly in the town of Poestenkill, and they are designed for one purpose and one purpose only - to invade my property as a high-tech way of burning a cross on my lawn to let me know I am not welcome in Poestenkill and will never know a minute's peace while here.

Powerful bright white commercial/industrial lighting systems scientifically designed and installed to light up several acres of my property to a depth of several hundred yards as if it were a prison yard or a concentration camp do not belong in a residential district in the town of Poestenkill.

Which takes us back to this farce being played out by the so-called Town code enforcer officer Tracy Church where he recently informed me on Thursday, April 1, 2021, 02:34:47 PM EDT that "(A)s promised I have looked into this and am attaching the response from the Department of State Division of Building Standards and Codes about the light trespassing" and "(T)his complaint is now considered closed," which is hardly the case, I would first note that pursuant to § 92-3.A of the Code of the Town of Poestenkill, "(T)he Code Enforcement Officer shall administer and enforce all the provisions of the Uniform Code, the Energy Code and this chapter."

It continues by stating, "(S)uch responsibility shall be in addition to the powers and duties conferred upon the Code Enforcement Officer pursuant to Article XII of the Land Use Regulations of the Town of Poestenkill as set forth in Chapter 150 of the Code of the Town of Poestenkill and is also in addition to all other authority conferred upon him by law."

§ 150-3 of the Poestenkill Town Code, under the heading "Purpose," states that "(T)his chapter is enacted pursuant to the Town Law of the State of New York, Article 16, to protect and promote public health, safety, comfort, convenience, economy, aesthetics and general welfare and for the following additional purposes:

H. To assure privacy for residences and freedom from nuisances and things harmful to the senses.

I. To protect the community against unsightly, obtrusive and noisome land uses and operations.

end quotes

Thus, it is quite obvious that my complaints about this light trespass and the intentional creation of a hostile environment for me in the Town of Poestenkill in retaliation for my having exposed corruption in town government falls squarely within the ambit of that section of the Town Code, especially with respect to protecting and promoting public health, as opposed to intentionally working to degrade it, in my case, as well as assuring privacy for residences and freedom from nuisances and things harmful to the senses, such as intentional light trespass.

As the Code Enforcement Officer, Mr. Church would be well aware of his duties to me as a disabled resident of the Town of Poestenkill, which takes us to the farce Mr. Church is playing out here for the apparent benefit of the New York State Police, to wit:

From: Tracy Church <tchurch@poestenkillny.com>

Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2021 11:47 AM

To: dos.sm.Codes.techsupport <Codes@dos.ny.gov>

Subject: Light Trespass Investigation

Good morning, I am a Code Enforcement Official NY0154406 Cert. 1020-0156.

I am attempting to accommodate a complaint regarding Light Trespass, are there any resources available to assist with this very evasive issue.

Thank you

Tracy Church
Town of Poestenkill
Code Enforcement Officer/ Building Inspector
(518) 283-5100 EXT 102

end quotes

First of all, the light trespass, which is clearly visible from Rt. 66, and can be seen over a quarter mile away where I grew up, is hardly "evasive," which is defined as "directed toward avoidance or escape."

The lights clearly exist.

Secondly, the proper answer to the query of Mr. Church is that the "resources" he needs are incorporated by reference into the State Energy Code, as well as the State Building Code, and those are the recommended levels for outdoor lighting set by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA), the same standards in place all over New York, except obviously Poestenkill in this special case of retaliation.

Thus, the response he sent to myself and the New York State Police is simply bizarre, to wit:

Tracy,

Thank you for contacting the Department of State Division of Building Standards and Codes (DBSC).

Light trespassing is not something that is covered by the NYS Uniform Code.

The Town with their attorney could look at adopting zoning regulations that addresses this issue.

Regards,

Dan Carroll

end quotes

But as we clearly see by review of the Code of the Town of Poestenkill, that issue has already been addressed by the Town of Poestenkill.

So the only viable conclusion to be drawn here is that the Town of Poestenkill through Mr. Church is giving this Gittins the green light to continue this harassment to either totally destroy my health and end my life, or in the alternative, drive me from the Town of Poestenkill.

Paul R. Plante, NYSPE
Poestenkill, N.Y.

[thelivyjr]

DATE: 15 April 2021

TO: Trooper Sheehan, New York State Police

RE: April 1, 2021 Communication from Poestenkill Code Enforcer Officer Tracy Church

Dear Trooper Sheehan:

I am communicating with you because your name and agency appeared on a list of copies on an April 1, 2021 communication to myself from Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer Tracy Church concerning an on-going matter of political retaliation against myself in the Town of Poestenkill.

Why Mr. Church chose to copy you and the New York State Police concerning this matter as of yet remains a mystery to me but suffice to say, I am concerned for my personal safety because on 6 February 2021, a Saturday, Mr. Church took it upon himself as the Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer to dispatch two troopers to a place and at a time when Mr. Church knew I would be undergoing my daily relaxation therapy session, which event caused me great emotional distress out of fear for my life, seeing two troopers in a tactical deployment outside.

Thankfully, I was able to contact my son, an Albany Police Detective Lieutenant, and he was able to intervene and defuse the situation before further harm came to me as a result of Mr. Church's actions on that day.

So when I saw your name listed on that list of addressees, my concerns for my well-being have resurfaced, which is very detrimental to my health, given that in 1969, I was wounded in the back of the head and neck my an exploding RPG-7 warhead, and as a result, today, at age 75, I am in extreme discomfort and chronic pain 24/7/365, and the only means I have of dealing with that pain is through relaxation therapy, along with diet and exercise.

Because of fragments near my cervical spine, when I am under stress, I have great difficulty breathing, something the Town of Poestenkill is well aware of and see as a weakness to exploit with this on-going campaign of retaliation that Mr. Church has put the Poestenkill Seal of Approval on.

So I want to make absolutely certain that my side of this issue is presented without distortion by Mr. Church, and with regard to this retaliation, the most concise summary I can provide you as to the background is a sworn affidavit on file with both the Town of Poestenkill and the New York State Attorney General in connection with 229 AD2d 650, Supreme Court - Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department 75470, In the Matter of the TOWN OF POESTENKILL v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION/In the Matter of SUSAN LASCARI et al. v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION et al., as follows:

REPLY AFFIDAVIT

Paul R. Plante, N.Y.S.P.E., being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I am one of the pro se petitioner/respondents in the above captioned matter, and as such, I am fully familiar with the facts in the matter and the prior proceedings had herein.

2. I make this affidavit in reply to certain averments made under oath in paragraphs 15, 16 and 17 of the April 22, 1996 Answering Affidavit of Poestenkill Town Supervisor John E. Zweig in connection with the above matter (hereinafter "Zweig Affidavit"), a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit A and made a part of for the Court's convenience, and in response to certain unsworn and scurrilous allegations made in an April 22, 1996 letter of Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick J. Tomaselli, Esq. annexed to the Zweig Affidavit as Exhibit D.

A copy of the April 22, 1996 Tomaselli letter relied upon by Supervisor Zweig in his April 22, 1996 affidavit is annexed hereto as Exhibit B and made a part hereof for the Court's convenience.

3. At the very outset, I would ask the Court to note that in paragraph 5 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit, Mr. Zweig and the Town of Poestenkill take no position with respect to the relief requested in the April 15, 1996 motion of petitioner/respondent Lorraine Kaskoun, that relief being dismissal of Appeal No. 75470 on the grounds that an appeal from denial of a motion to reargue in the instant matter is improperly taken, since an order denying a motion to reargue cannot be appealed from.

4. That, it is respectfully submitted is where this matter should have begun and ended.

5. If the Town of Poestenkill had no problem with petitioner Kaskoun's request for relief, or if it had nothing of substance to add to the proceedings vis-a-vis the propriety of petitioner Kaskoun's request for relief, the Town of Poestenkill should have simply stated as such and concluded the matter with brevity and clarity as to its position in that regard.

6. Instead, Mr. Zweig chose to first burden this Court with a discussion of matters not in the record before the Court in the instant appeal, and then, in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit, Mr. Zweig chose to label me as a "liar."

7. As a result, I am now forced by that circumstance to have to defend my integrity before this Court, and I beg this Court's indulgence for an opportunity to do so, albeit very briefly.

end quote

For the record, in 1996, at the time Poestenkill Town Supervisor was falsely denouncing me as "liar" in a failed bid to poison the Appellate Court judges against me in that appeal, which I prevailed in despite the poison spread by Supervisor Zweig, Keith Hammond, the present town supervisor who is also copied on the April 1, 2021 communication to myself from Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer Tracy Church concerning an on-going matter of political retaliation against myself in the Town of Poestenkill, was then a town councilman, as was Thomas Slavin, now the Chief Justice of Poestenkill who holds my life in his hands.

Upon information and belief, in 1996, both Hammond and Slavin gave their approval as town councilmen for Zweig to make that incredible libel against me with the Appellate Court, an both bear me enmity to this day as a result of my efforts to challenge and eradicate endemic public corruption in Postenkill hat extends all the way back to the 1970's, which takes us back to that sworn affidavit, to wit:

8. Since the sole "evidentiary" basis and support for Mr. Zweig's averment that I am a "liar" appears to be an April 22, 1996 letter to this Court from Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick J. Tomaselli, Esq., which is annexed to Mr. Zweig's affidavit as Exhibit D and which is annexed hereto as Exhibit B, I will deal directly with the statements of Mr. Tomaselli therein, and by so doing, demonstrate to this Court that Mr. Zweig's statement in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit that I am a "liar" is both unsupported and false, and is made for no other apparent purpose but to deflect this Court's attention away from the real and sole issue before the Court in petitioner Kaskoun's motion, to wit, that Appeal No. 75470 should be dismissed outright in the sound exercise of this Court's discretion.

9. In getting to the facts of the matter to debunk the false and extremely malicious assertions of Mr. Tomaselli's April 22, 1996 letter to this Court annexed hereto as Exhibit B, and thereby demonstrate the falsity of Mr. Zweig's averments in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit, it is necessary to go no further than the second paragraph on page one of Mr. Tomaselli's diatribe where he states as follows, and I quote: "Indeed, Mr. Plante's very style of 'advocacy' seems to be predicated upon ignoring or distorting the facts and/or law pertaining to the actual issues in dispute and concentrating instead on personal insults and name-calling against all involved participants."

(Exhibit B, page one)

end quotes

Here I am reminded of this following from the "Cincinnatus II: To James Wilson, Esquire" political essay by Cincinnatus on November 8, 1787, to wit:

I come now to the consideration of the trial by jury in civil cases.

And here you have, indeed, made use of your professional knowledge.

But you did not tell the people that your profession was always to advocate one side of a question — to place it in the most favorable, though false, light — to rail where you could not reason — to pervert where you could not refute - and to practice every fallacy on your hearers — to mislead the understanding and pervert judgment.

end quotes

That very much describes what Patrick Tomaselli, the Poestenkill town attorney who now has a marble shrine erected to his memory outside of Poestenkill Town Hall on town property, was doing in his April 22, 1996 letter to the Appellate Court - advocating one side of a question by placing it in a false light while railing where he could not reason, and perverting where he could not refute, practicing every fallacy on his hearers to mislead the understanding and pervert judgment.

Except he failed miserably, and this on-going retaliation is the result, which takes us back to that affidavit as follows:

10. Based upon a review of the facts in connection with the litigation I have been involved in as a pro se litigant, which upon information and belief Mr. Tomaselli is well aware of in his capacity as attorney for the Town of Poestenkill, it can be readily demonstrated to this Court that the above statement of Mr. Tomaselli which Mr. Zweig relies on in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit is patently false.

11. Annexed hereto as Exhibit C and made a part hereof is a twenty (20) page decision of Honorable Robert C. Williams, J.S.C. in Matter of Lascari, Kaskoun, Mouawad, Plante, Valentine and Powley v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation et al., Albany Co. Index No. 3943/92, dated May 18, 1993.

12. As the Court will note from a review of the appearances at page two of that decision, I was one of the pro se petitioners therein.

13. At page three, the Court will note that the petitioners in that petition were asking the Court to determine that the DEC's decision to proceed in issuing a mined land reclamation permit to Mr. Tomaselli's client R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc. without requiring preparation of an environmental impact statement was unlawful.

end quotes

In fact, the issuance of that permit was a class "E" felony in violation of New York Penal Law § 175.40, Issuing a false certificate, as follows:

A person is guilty of issuing a false certificate when, being a public servant authorized by law to make or issue official certificates or other official written instruments, and with intent to defraud, deceive or injure another person, he issues such an instrument, or makes the same with intent that it be issued, knowing that it contains a false statement or false information.

end quote

Getting back to the affidavit and the underlying causes of this on-going retaliation by the Town of Poestenkill, we have:

14. "Having reviewed the record" says the Court therein, it agreed with the petitioners and accordingly, the permit was annulled.

15. That decision was never appealed from by the State of New York.

16. In that decision at pages 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 18, the Court relied upon factual statements made by this petitioner in sworn affidavits to that Court in annulling the permit at issue in that proceeding.

17. Nowhere in that decision is there any reference to distortion of fact or name-calling or personal insults by this petitioner.

18. Annexed hereto as Exhibit D and made a part hereof is a February 15, 1994 decision of Honorable Edward O. Spain, J.S.C. in Matter of Paul R. Plante v. Planning Board of Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County Index No. 177914.

19. In that decision which was based upon my pro se petition in that proceeding, Hon. Justice Spain annulled a special use permit which the Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill had improperly issued to R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc. of Troy, New York, Mr. Tomaselli's client, on June 17, 1992.

end quotes

Poestenkill was acting as a "laundry," laundering through false certificates issued by DEC in violation of New York Penal Law § 175.40, and I blew the whistle on that "laundering," which has earned me the eternal enmity of the town of Poestenkill, hence this retaliation, which again takes us back to that sworn affidavit, a follows:

20. Now, according to Mr. Tomaselli's operative theory at page one of his April 22, 1996 letter annexed to Mr. Zweig's affidavit as Exhibit D, and according to the averments at paragraph 17 of Mr. Zweig's April 22, 1996 sworn affidavit, I am supposed to have allegedly "targeted" the Poestenkill Planning Board with "untruthful, unwarranted, and downright vicious personal invectives" allegedly "launched" like so many Scud missiles to serve some particular agenda or cause of mine, which in reality is First Amendment redress of grievance, and I am further alleged by Messrs. Zweig and Tomaselli to have ignored or distorted facts and/or law, concentrating instead on "personal insults and name-calling" against the members of the Poestenkill Planning Board in order to induce Judge Spain, a very respected jurist who now sits on this Court, to annul the permit in question and award me costs in that matter, and according to that operative theory, Judge Spain is supposed to have fallen like a ton of bricks for such bunkum and twaddle in annulling the permit.

21. Such a theory by Messrs. Zweig and Tomaselli of course requires this Court to assume that Judge Spain is a fool, and I personally will have no part in such gratuitous "judge-bashing," which conduct I extremely revolting and repugnant.

22. In applying the Tomaselli/Zweig "theory" of how the law allegedly works in the County of Rensselaer, where according to Mr. Tomaselli, respected Judges like Justice Spain allegedly annul Town of Poestenkill special permits based on nothing more than distorted facts and/or law and personal insults, I would ask this Court to take note of the fact that costs against planning boards in the State of New York are awarded only when the Court has before it evidence that the planning board acted with gross negligence, or in bad faith or with malice in making the decision appealed from, as was the case in that matter.

23. Apparently, according to the Tomaselli/Zweig theory, my alleged distortions of fact and/or law and personal insults and name-calling in that matter before Judge Spain would have "buffaloed" this Court, and so an appeal would not have succeeded, so "silver a tongue" am I alleged to have.

24. Based upon these two decisions alone, it becomes readily apparent that there is no merit whatsoever to the averments of Mr. Zweig based upon the assertions of Mr. Tomaselli that I am a "liar," and based upon these two decisions alone, the contempt that these two gentlemen have for the judges who serve the public in the County of Rensselaer becomes readily apparent.

25. It does not end there, however, unfortunately.

26. Annexed hereto as Exhibit E and made a part of is a transcript decision of Judge Spain dated March 28, 1994, in Matter of Paul R. Plante v. Poestenkill Town Board, Jay F. Nish, Paul Sieloff, Nelson Armlin, Mark Dunlea and Kristine Legenbauer, Rensselaer County Index No. 179138, wherein Judge Spain annulled a resolution of the Poestenkill Town Board made on November 10, 1992 based upon facts stated under oath by myself in my pro se petition in that matter.

27. It is respectfully submitted that nowhere in that decision is there any mention made of distortion of fact, and/or law by myself, nor is there mention made by the Court of alleged personal insults or name-calling by myself, as Messrs. Zweig and Tomaselli would have this Court believe is my "style," nor was Plante v. Town Board ever appealed from.

28. I would also ask the Court to note that defendant Kristine Legenbauer in that action remains on the Poestenkill Town Board to this date.

29. As above, if what Messrs. Tomaselli and Zweig say is true in their respective submissions to this Court, they would require that this Court treat Judge Spain as nothing more than a "fool" who is easily duped by someone like myself who according to Mr. Tomaselli, allegedly engages in deception and outright lies to the courts of Rensselaer and Albany Counties to further some alleged "agenda" or "cause" I am alleged by Mr. Tomaselli to have.

30. As before, I refuse to countenance such assertions by these two gentlemen, and I ask this Court to find such assertions to be both unprofessional and unwarranted, especially by an attorney like Mr. Tomaselli who himself is allegedly in charge of the ethics of other attorneys in Rensselaer County.

* * * * *

And here we come to yet another felony, to wit:

40. Annexed hereto as Exhibit G and made a part of is an affirmation of Assistant New York State Attorney General Kathleen Liston Morrison dated October 14, 1993, in Matter of the Application of Paul R. Plante v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany County Index No. 4840-93.

41. In that particular matter, Assistant Attorney General Morrison conceded to Judge Robert C. Williams, J.S.C., based upon the averments in my petition alone that in fact, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation was in error when it issued the permit in question.

42. Specifically, in paragraph 2 of Exhibit G, Assistant Attorney General Morrison can be seen stating that based on the averments in my petition in that matter, DEC was in error in part because it had not complied with the New York State Uniform Procedures Act, the New York State Solid Waste Management Act, and SEQRA.

43. Thereafter, in a November 19, 1993 decision annexed hereto as Exhibit H and made a part hereof, Justice Williams annulled that permit, based on nothing more than the averments in my petition in that matter.

44. Matter of Plante v. DEC, Albany County Index No. 4840-93 was never appealed from.

end quotes

That was another DEC permit that an attempt was made to launder it through the Town of Poestenkill, which attempt was made to fail by my lawsuit, which again takes us back to that affidavit:

45. According the Messrs. Tomaselli and Zweig, of course, Assistant Attorney General Morrison must also be a fool who is easily duped by distortions of law and fact and mere name-calling, because in that action, she conceded that the State of New York was wrong without any other proof than my word alone.

46. At this point, based upon the evidence which I have annexed hereto, I believe that it is readily apparent that Mr. Tomaselli and Mr. Zweig never really had anything of substance to say to this Court concerning my conduct as a licensed professional engineer in the State of New York, and so I will end my demonstration of that fact at this juncture.

47. Based upon Exhibits C through H, I submit that I am not a "liar" as Mr. Zweig alleges in his April 22, 1996 affidavit, and I do not engage in such deceitful and deceptive tactics as Mr. Tomaselli alleges in his April 22, 1996 letter.

48. To the contrary, as a New York State licensed professional engineer and qualified associate public health engineer, I have a great deal of real assistance to offer the Courts of this state, and I take that responsibility to the citizens of this State very seriously.

49. Accordingly, Mr. Tomaselli's statements to the contrary in his April 22, 1996 letter must be dismissed out of hand by this Court as being nothing more than pure unsupported and unsubstantiated bunkum and twaddle, and being based upon nothing more than pure bunkum and twaddle, the averments of Mr. John E. Zweig in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit that I am a "liar" can be seen to be both unsupported and false.

DATED: Poestenkill, New York
April 25, 1996

end quotes

I would ask you to make sure that that sworn affidavit is made a part of the record in this matter to counteract any poison that Tracy Church, the Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer, might have previously spread among uniformed members of the New York State Police.

Respectfully,

Paul R. Plante, P.E.

[thelivyjr]

DATE: 17 April 2021

TO: Trooper Sheehan, New York State Police

RE: Political retaliation in Poestenkill

Dear Trooper Sheehan:

While we are on this subject of the town of Poestenkill asserting a "right" to retaliate against myself for having exposed endemic corruption in Poestenkill to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the courts of the State of New York, I would like the record to show that Poestenkill's so-called code enforcer officer Tracy Church has filed an oath of office as provided by Article XIII, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution, which oath of office states that Tracy Church as Poestenkill town code enforcer officer will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of New York, which oath in turn implicates §14 of Article I of the New York State Constitution, the Bill of Rights, along with §11 and §18 of Article I.

With respect to how the Code of the Town of Poestenkill views the office Mr. Church holds in Poestenkill, we have as follows:

§ 92-3.A of the Code of the Town of Poestenkill: "(T)he Code Enforcement Officer shall administer and enforce all the provisions of the Uniform Code, the Energy Code and this chapter."

It continues by stating, "(S)uch responsibility shall be in addition to the powers and duties conferred upon the Code Enforcement Officer pursuant to Article XII of the Land Use Regulations of the Town of Poestenkill as set forth in Chapter 150 of the Code of the Town of Poestenkill and is also in addition to all other authority conferred upon him by law."

§ 150-3 of the Poestenkill Town Code, under the heading "Purpose," states that "(T)his chapter is enacted pursuant to the Town Law of the State of New York, Article 16, to protect and promote public health, safety, comfort, convenience, economy, aesthetics and general welfare and for the following additional purposes:

H. To assure privacy for residences and freedom from nuisances and things harmful to the senses.

I. To protect the community against unsightly, obtrusive and noisome land uses and operations.

end quotes

With those duties of Mr. Church's firmly established in the record, §14 of Article I of the New York State Constitution Mr. Church swore an oath to support states as follows:

"Such parts of the common law, and of the acts of the legislature of the colony of New York, as together did form the law of the said colony, on the nineteenth day of April, one thousand seven hundred seventy-five, and the resolutions of the congress of the said colony, and of the convention of the State of New York, in force on the twentieth day of April, one thousand seven hundred seventy-seven, which have not since expired, or been repealed or altered; and such acts of the legislature of this state as are now in force, shall be and continue the law of this state, subject to such alterations as the legislature shall make concerning the same." (Formerly §16. Renumbered and amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938.)

With respect to Mr. Church and these concentration camp spotlights and searchlights at issue in this matter with regard to this retaliatory intimidation and light trespass, which is a tort, the boundaries of tort law are defined by common law, and having sworn an oath to support the New York State Constitution, Mr. Church is not free to turn his back on intentional torts being committed for the purpose of causing harm to a town resident, which brings us to New York Town Law § 2, "Definition of town," to wit:

A town is a municipal corporation comprising the inhabitants within its boundaries, and formed for the purpose of exercising such powers and discharging such duties of local government and administration of public affairs as have been, or, may be conferred or imposed upon it by law.

end quotes

In other words, the Town of Poestenkill is comprised of all the inhabitants within its boundaries, not just some, with others being excluded from equal protection of law because of local politics which brings us to §11 of Article I of the New York State Constitution, "Equal protection of laws; discrimination in civil rights prohibited," which section of our Constitution Mr. Church swore an oath to support states as follows:

§11. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof.

end quotes

Accordingly despite its assertions to the contrary, the Town of Poestenkill and Mr. Church specifically have no authority, jurisdiction or discretion to deny me equal protection of law in Poestenkill which brings us §18 of Article I of the New York State Constitution, Workers' compensation, as follows:

§18. Nothing contained in this constitution shall be construed to limit the power of the legislature to enact laws for the protection of the lives, health, or safety of employees;

And that in turn takes us to this following, which the Town of Poestenkill is very well aware of, to wit:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT - NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

EXAMINATION OF REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO, BY ORDER, HELD AT THE CONFERENCE ROOM A, RENSSELAER COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING, TROY, NEW YORK

SEPTEMBER 27, 1994

Q: Did there come a time in May 1993 when you were consulted about a Worker's Compensation proceeding that Paul Plante had initiated?

BUONO: Yes.

Q: Are you aware that on or about July 18, 1993 that the County had entered into a stipulation that Plaintiff (myself) had suffered a partial disability as a result of a work-related illness that was generated during the time he was employed as the engineer for the Health Department?

BUONO: I'm aware of that, yes!

Q: And ultimately, prior to the time that the stipulation was entered into, did you consent to it?

BUONO: Yes.

end quotes

For the record, my duties with the Health Department before I became disabled and unable to continue my duties for the reasons stated in the following, included enforcement of the New York State Public Health Law, violations of which are Class "A" misdemeanors, to wit:

TO: John L. Buono, County Executive

FROM: Kenneth Van Praag, Public Health Director

RE: Director of Environmental Health Paul Plante

DATE: October 12, 1988

As you are aware, the Rensselaer County Department of Health has been endeavoring to do what it is required to do in terms of regulating and enforcing the wide range of state and county sanitary codes designed to protect the public's health and safety.

Among the codes being enforced are those having to do with realty subdivisions and individual sewage systems.

It should be noted that the New York State Health Department has commended and upheld the judgments exercised by the Director while dealing with the difficult regulatory functions relating to this program.

end quotes

I would like you to pay special attention to that statement about the New York State Health Commissioner, Dr. David Axelrod commending and upholding the judgments exercised by myself as Director of Environmental Health while dealing with the difficult regulatory functions relating to this program, which commendations in large part serve as the basis for the continuing and on-going retaliatory actions by the Town of Poestenkill, as those judgments of mine that were commended and upheld involved endemic corruption in Poestenkill involving violations of the Public Health Law and the New York State Education Law with respect to professional practice going back to the mid-1970s.

Getting back to that document, which pursuant to N.Y. Public Health Law § 10(2), Legal presumptions; evidence, shall be presumptive evidence of the facts so stated therein, and shall be received as such in all courts and places, it continued as follows:

The stress, however, on this department and upon its director, Paul Plante, has reached a point where I believe that the orderly administration of the division is seriously impacted given the highly charged atmosphere which exists today.

Of greater concern, however, is the effect of this atmosphere on Paul Plante personally.

I am concerned for Paul Plante's health, both physically and emotionally, and I cannot help but feel that there has to be some effect on his everyday activities as they relate to his family and his personal life.

There are several situations which have contributed to this perception:

1. The recently concluded legislative hearings which appeared to be conducted in a highly charged atmosphere and carefully orchestrated so as not to allow input from the Director of Environmental Health.

2. Charges by Mrs. Douglas characterizing health department personnel in conducting their responsibilities reminiscent of that which took place in "Nazi"-like Germany.

3, The "HANGING IN EFFIGY" of Paul Plante, which appeared on the front pages of the Times Record, and which occurred outside the East Greenbush Town Hall at a time when the Legislature held its hearing at that location.

It is my understanding that there were no comments from any of the elected officials decrying that type behavior.

4. Similar actions at the hearing in Hoosick Falls.

Again, absent any comment by the Legislature, one cannot help but feel that they condone that type of activity.

5. The undue pressure placed upon Paul Plante by a selected group of developers.

6. Physical threats of bodily harm to Paul Plante personally.

end quotes

And right there, we have the roots of this present conflict in Poestenkill made incandescently clear as to who is "attacking" whom, which takes us New York State Worker’s Compensation Court on May 4, 1992 where I testified as follows with respect to what has become for me a long night of terror, to wit:

THE JUDGE: What exactly happened then?

PLANTE: I was called in off sick leave and I was told that I would be sick when the County wanted me to be sick and not — at 4:45 p.m. on October 12th (1988), Ken Van Praag called me down to his office.

He told me, Paul, you have upset some of the most powerful men in Rensselaer County.

I can no longer protect you.

You can’t work here any longer.

You had better go home, get your family and just go away for awhile because you are going to find Rensselaer County is going to be a very uncomfortable place for you to stay.

end quotes

And so it was to be, and so it remains to this very day; hence this communication to the New York State Police and yourself.

This is the official record; anything that Tracy Church might say to the New York State Police that is not in accord with these facts is a false statement for which I would ask that he be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Respectfully,

Paul R. Plante, P.E.

[thelivyjr]

DATE: 1 May 2021

TO: Trooper Sheehan, New York State Police

RE: Political retaliation in Poestenkill, continued ...

Dear Trooper Sheehan:

Following up with respect to acts of intimidation and acts of political violence against myself in the town of Poestenkill in retaliation for having exposed endemic public corruption in that town and going back to the physical threats of bodily harm to "Paul Plante personally" made mention of in an October 12, 1988 correspondence from Kenneth Van Praag, Rensselaer County Public Health Director to John L. Buono, Rensselaer County County Executive and the subsequent political retaliation in the Town of Poestenkill which continues to the present, on June 30, 1989, in a report related to a Hobbs Act investigation of corruption in Rensselaer county, the Federal Bureau of Investigation records contain the following notation:

Plante stated that he was told by Rensselaer County Public Health Director Kenneth Van Praag on October 12, 1988 that he, (Plante) had "upset some of the most powerful men in Rensselaer County" and that Van Praag could no longer "protect" Plante.

end quotes

In a March 27, 1989 Report of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) concerning that same federal Hobbs Act investigation of corruption in the Rensselaer County Department of Health, it was stated as follows about the RCHD:

"According to (Dr. Axelrod), the results of the State's investigation were that New York State laws were not being followed by the Rensselaer County Health Department, Rensselaer County laws were not being followed by the Rensselaer County Health Department, and there was very little 'enforcement activity' even in the face of illegal sales."

"(Dr. Axelrod) advised that the Rensselaer County Health Department's oversight of realty subdivisions in that county is 'unsatisfactory'!"

"(Dr. Axelrod) also faulted the State of New York Health Department for not auditing Rensselaer County's program."

"(Dr. Axelrod) advised that he would not expect to find a worse county in the region (the Capital District region which comprises 17 counties)!"

"According to (Dr. Axelrod), the object of any county health department is to protect the public and not to facilitate development."

"In the case of Rensselaer County, it appears that the Rensselaer County Health Department was in business to facilitate developers and development rather than to protect the public."

end quotes

That is the on-going corruption in the Rensselaer County Department of Health that I was detailed to investigate and expose as a New York State licensed professional engineer by then-New York State Health Commissioner Dr. David Axelrod which leads to the political retaliation in Poestenkill on-going to this day.

Thereafter, on August 14, 1991, in a Memorandum of Decision, the New York State Workers’ Compensation Board ruled based on prima facie evidence as follows:

Claimant, an engineer, claimed that he suffered a deterioration of his health due to undue pressure at his employment, including threats of bodily harm, causing him to stop work on October 12, 1988.

Claimant cited one specific incident of July 29, 1988, when he twisted his neck to avoid getting struck by a swinging back-hoe bucket, an incident which he also claimed exacerbated a prior neck wound sustained in 1969 while serving in the Army in Viet Nam.

Dr. Kolb reported on April 20, 1990 that in addition to the combat wound he received a history from claimant in October 1988 of a series of harassing events connected with his employment.

In an affidavit dated September 27, 1990, Dr. Kolb stated that claimant was also suffering from severe headaches, neck pain and numbness in his right arm and hand, caused in part by the aggravation previously stated in his report of April 20, 1990, and that a Dr. Loudon had confirmed that claimant had been subjected to an escalating series of harassing incidents beginning in late 1987 during his course of employment.

****

In C-4/C-48 dated December 3, 1990, Dr. Sheremeta indicated that he has been treating claimant since August 13, 1990 for a cervical dorsal strain causally related to an injury of July 26, 1988, when claimant twisted his upper back getting out of the way of a back-hoe.

Upon review of the entire record, the Board panel finds that the reports of Dr. Kolb and Dr. Sheremeta, when considered together with claimant’s C-3’s, do constitute prima facie medical evidence.

end quote

There is the first overt act of retaliation against myself and the only reason I was not decapitated, as was intended, was because I moved when I saw the backhoe operator's hand move, and even so, the backhoe bucket came within an inch of my face and caught the brim of my hat which violently jerked my head around, tearing scar tissue in the back of my head from a wound caused by an exploding RPG-7 behind me as I was manning a machine-gun position in ground combat in Viet Nam.

I remain in great pain and physical distress to this day, as a result, and I wish the files of the New York State Police to reflect that fact.

That backhoe assault was on a site off Rt. 150 in the town of Sand Lake that was being developed by one Christian Momrow, a powerful political figure in Poestenkill who served as chairman of the Poestenkill Planning Board.

Meanwhile, according to the official record, on 7 February 1990, I met with a Lt. Parmlee and Zone Sergeant McGreevy at the Schodack State Police Barracks, at which time I presented them with a sworn Supporting Deposition Pursuant to CPL §100.20 wherein I detailed at length a vehicular hit-and-run assault against myself by one Gary James Horton on Beagle Run Way in Poestenkill, who happens to be an adjoiner who under threats of violence has appropriated several acres of my property as his.

Acting to protect Horton, who has political protection in Poestenkill, when presented with that supporting deposition by the State Police, Poestenkill Town Court refused to accept it, and instead allowed Horton to criminally prosecute me for causing damage to his vehicle when he struck me on Liberty Lane at about 8:00 A.M on the morning of Friday, December 29, 1989, a criminal prosecution based on false charges and perjured testimony by both Gary and Dianne Horton that robbed me of some two years of my life, until November 30, 1992, when the following exchange took place between then-Rensselaer County Court Judge M. Andrew Dwyer and the Office of the Rensselaer County District Attorney concerning those false charges, to wit:

ADA: I have no position, other than to say, the Court, in its previous position, left me without any recourse other than to not oppose a Motion to Dismiss, in my opinion!

JUDGE: That is your position?

ADA: That is my position!

JUDGE: Then you consent to the dismissal?

ADA: I do, Judge, based upon the fact that the Court, in its previous Decision, left me with an untenable position at trial!

JUDGE: How closely did you read the decision?

ADA: Very!

JUDGE: The District Attorney consented?

ADA: It was the Court's opinion at trial that there was other evidence out there, and I can affirm that there is not other evidence on which to base a prosecution and the court ruled the evidence that was presented insufficient.

JUDGE: And you take the position that you have no further evidence, at all?

ADA: No further evidence, Judge!

JUDGE: Then it is dismissed!

end quote

While that should have been the end of what was for me a living nightmare, on 11 December 1995, Poestenkill Town Councilman Keith Hammond, now the Poestenkill Town Supervisor and the controller of Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer Tracey Church, took pains to post the following malicious libels in the Sand Lake Advertiser at p.17, to wit:

Unfortunately, not everyone who reads your articles realizes, as I do, that you are mentally disturbed, a condition that causes your inability to effectively function in society.

That is why you are forced to live on public assistance.

Mr. Plante, I do not have a criminal record and I have never been arrested for harassment or fired from a job because I could not get along with my fellow workers.

These are things that have forced you to live in the manor in which you do.

The next time you feel the urge to pick up a pen and attack one of your neighbors, why don't you instead pick up a job application or at the very least, dial the number of a local hospital with a psychiatric ward.

It is obvious to all around that you are in desperate need of help.

end quotes

The "criminal record" he refers to does not exist, based on what transpired in Rensselaer County Court on November 30, 1992, but nonetheless, on 11 December 1995, then-Councilman Hammond made that false charge that I do have a criminal record, and that is the poison that I am concerned is still floating around with respect to the State Police.

As is clear from the August 14, 1991 Memorandum of Decision of the New York State Workers’ Compensation Board above here, I was not "fired" from my job, which would constitute a violation of New York State Worker's Compensation Law §120 which provides in relevant part as follows:

“It shall be unlawful for any employer or his or her duly authorized agent to discharge or in any other  manner discriminate against an employee as to his or her employment because such employee has claimed or attempted to claim compensation from such employer․"

end quotes

And I am not "mentally disturbed" as Councilman Hammond stated in his malicious libels posted in the Sand Lake Advertiser on 11 December 1995 at p.17, and that is more poison spread by Councilman Hammond that leads to the on-going intimidation and harassment in the town of Poestenkill today, and I am greatly concerned that that poison has permeated the records of the State Police in the Sand Lake sub-station, which would serve to put my life in grave danger should a Trooper be unwittingly acting on the assumption that I am a dangerous mental case based on nothing more than the word of Poestenkill Town Supervisor Keith Hammond or Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer Tracy Church, and I would thank you for making that point clear to the New York State Police in the Sand Lake sub-station.

Thanking you in advance for your prompt attention to this serious matter, I remain

Respectfully,

Paul R. Plante, P.E.

[thelivyjr]

DATE: 3 May 2021

TO: Trooper Sheehan, New York State Police

RE: Political retaliation in Poestenkill, continued ...

Dear Trooper Sheehan:

With respect to this political retaliation in the Town of Poestenkill intended to punish me and make my life a living hell for not only not accepting corruption in Poestenkill town government, but further for committing the unforgiveable "political crime" of taking the town of Poestenkill to state Supreme Court to prove that corruption, so that you can fully understand not only my concerns about why Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Officer Tracey Church has chosen to include yourself, and your agency, the New York State Police, in what on the surface, from his e-mail, would appear to be a routine matter of whether something was included in the provisions of the New York State Building Code, hardly the province of the New York State Police, which is akin to Code Enforcer Officer Church informing you that there are at present no active volcanos in Poestenkill, but my fears, as well, given the past involvement of members of the New York State Police in covering over the hit-and-run vehicular assault on myself by Gary James Horton on 29 December 1989, I would like to take you back to 26 January 1990 to a document at page A-190 of Volume II of a four volume document of 480 pages entitled Petitioner's Appendix, Rensselaer County Court, The People Of The State Of New York against Paul R. Plante, which document is addressed to Thomas A. Constantine, Superintendent, New York State Police, Building 22, The State Campus, Albany, New York 12226, and has as its heading "Hit and Run Investigation," to wit:

Dear Mr. Superintendent:

I am writing your office in the hopes of getting some clarification as to why no investigation of a vehicle-pedestrian accident was conducted by the State Police, despite the barracks commander of the East Greenbush sub-station being notified directly.

The failure to investigate effectively grants immunity to the individual driving the hit-and-run vehicle.

In a rural area such as Poestenkill is, word of an incident like this travels swiftly, and when an organization with the reputation of the Troopers appears to be involved in the cover-up of a crime, there is a chilling aspect, indeed, to the matter.

I am writing you because sufficient time has elapsed to determine that no truth will be forthcoming from any of the principals involved, and a matter like this can tear a small community apart.

end quotes

I would ask you to focus on those last words about how the cover-up of a crime by the New York State Police can tear a small community apart, because that is exactly what happened here, and my life has been made into a living hell, as a result.

Hence, these efforts by myself to firmly establish on the record my true identity in the case of another physical assault against myself in the town of Poestenkill that would involve the New York State Police.

That there was a cover-up was firmly proven in the four volume document of 480 pages entitled Petitioner's Appendix, Rensselaer County Court, The People Of The State Of New York against Paul R. Plante, which is why on November 30, 1992, the Office of the Rensselaer County District Attorney was finally forced to have to drop the false criminal charges filed against me in Poestenkill Town Court by the assailant, Gary James Horton, in January of 1990 with the complicity of Poestenkill Town Court, which issued Orders of Protection against myself to Gary and Dianne Horton, who proffered false testimony in the matter, which Orders of Protection have served to strip me of the enjoyment of several acres of the 11-acres I have every right to be on.

With the mystery of why Poestenkill Town Code Enforcer Church has chosen to involve you and the New York State Police in this matter still hanging over my head, I am greatly concerned for my well-being, especially after Code Enforcer Officer Church had Troopers hunting me down on a Saturday afternoon, which has instilled a great amount of fear in myself that is having an adverse impact on my health, given the history of this matter and the cover-up of that hit-and-run, which cannot be denied.

Hence this series of communications so that I can rest easier knowing that I am not going to be another statistic of somebody shot to death by a police officer because they were told he was mentally ill and dangerous by a corrupt town official in the town of Poestenkill, New York.

Respectfully,

Paul R. Plante, P.E.

[thelivyjr]

Discrimination.

Unless someone is totally shut away from the world in a cave or cloistered convent, it is a word we hear being bandied about day after day, sometimes several times a day, as we hear of this person or that group being discriminated against for a host of reasons today.

So what about Paul Plante, then?

Clearly, based on evidence that cannot now be refuted, that evidence having been garnered in court proceedings, he was the victim of a politically-motivated hit-and-run vehicular assault in the corrupt town of Poestenkill, New York, a small town in upstate New York to the east of the state capital of Albany, New York, which vehicular assault was covered over with assistance from uniformed members of the New York State Police acting in the capacity of political enforcers in the town of Poestenkill.

So was that then a form of discrimination?

And that answer is both yes, and no, as we see by going to FindLaw, as follows:

What is Discrimination?

Created by FindLaw's team of legal writers and editors | Last updated November 18, 2019

In plain English, to "discriminate" means to distinguish, single out, or make a distinction.

end quotes

In that sense, yes, Plante was discriminated against.

But as we shall see by going further, so what?:

But in the context of civil rights law, unlawful discrimination refers to unfair or unequal treatment of an individual (or group) based on certain characteristics, including:

Age
Disability
Ethnicity
Gender
Marital status
National origin
Race,
Religion, and
Sexual orientation.

end quotes

And based on that, Plante was not discriminated against, because he does not meet any of those special classifications, as we see from the following:

Lawful vs. Unlawful Discrimination

Not all types of discrimination will violate federal and/or state laws that prohibit discrimination.

Where Can Discrimination Occur?

Federal and state laws prohibit discrimination against members of protected groups (identified above) in a number of settings, including:

Education
Employment
Housing
Government benefits and services
Health care services
Land use/zoning
Lending and credit
Public accommodations (Access to buildings and businesses)
Transportation
Voting

end quotes

But Plante is not a member of a "protected group," so in his case, it was perfectly legal for him to be discriminated against by having his protection of law stripped from him for "disloyalty" to the town of Poestenkill.

And yes, this is all a very true American story.

All of this actually did happen, and is backed up now by literally several thousand pages of evidence and sworn testimony, how an American citizen can be stripped of his citizenship protections for exposing public corruption in the state of New York.

Stay tuned.

[thelivyjr]

Discrimination.

Unless someone is totally shut away from the world in a cave or cloistered convent, it is a word we hear being bandied about day after day, sometimes several times a day, as we hear of this person or that group being discriminated against for a host of reasons today.

So what about Paul Plante, then?

Clearly, based on evidence that cannot now be refuted, that evidence having been garnered in court proceedings, he was the victim of a politically-motivated hit-and-run vehicular assault in the corrupt town of Poestenkill, New York, a small town in upstate New York to the east of the state capital of Albany, New York, which vehicular assault was covered over with assistance from uniformed members of the New York State Police acting in the capacity of political enforcers in the town of Poestenkill.

So was that then a form of discrimination?

No, it was not, despite appearances to the contrary.

It was not a form of actionable discrimination because there is no law in New York state, or the United States that I am aware of, that says it is unlawful for a local government like the Town of Poestenkill to retaliate against a citizen who is not an employee of the town for challenging and exposing public corruption as Plante was doing, as we can see in this following from another lawsuit Plante filed against the Town of Poestenkill in state Supreme Court in New York state, to wit:

October 3, 2002 decision of Rensselaer County Supreme Court Justice James B. Canfield in Matter of Plante v. Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill et al., Rensselaer County Index No. 204938:

Petitioner Pro Se, Paul R. Plante (Plante) commenced this Article 78 proceeding challenging and seeking to annul the respondent Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill's (Poestenkill) April 3, 2002 resolution approving respondent Showers Enterprises, Inc.'s (Showers) application to subdivide property that is subject to a series of prior judicial determinations and determining that subdivision would have no environmental impact.

Plante further seeks to enjoin the respondent NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) from issuing any Mined Land Reclamation Permits in the property to respondent R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc. (Valente).

******

Turning To Poestenkill's challenged determination approving Shower's subdivision, the Court is not authorized simply to substitute its judgment for the respondent's.

The scope of judicial review of administrative determinations is limited to analyzing whether the respondent agency was arbitrary or capricious, that is whether it took the action without a sound basis in reason or without regard for the facts; acted in excess of its jurisdiction; in violation of lawful procedure, positive statutory or constitutional requirements; or in abuse of its discretionary power.

Barring such wrongs, the Court must confirm the determination (Matter of Pell v. Board of Education of Union Free School, 34 NY2d 222, 231).

Upon reviewing the administrative record presented here, it is clear that Showers and Valente presented materially erroneous information to Poestenkill and that the erroneous information served as the basis for the challenged determinations.

Showers and Valente misinformed Poestenkill that they had an existing DEC mining permit, when they now concede that they had withdrawn their latest permit application six months before and their prior permits had all been eliminated by the prior court orders, which Showers and Valente failed to mention to Poestenkill.

Showers and Valente failed to inform Poestenkill that they still had not complied with the requirements of prior mining permits on the property, but instead had over-mined the land making it unusable for residential purposes and had not restored the land as they had promised.

Instead, Showers and Valente misinformed Poestenkill that they were attempting to comply with DEC's engineering and design requirements, when they were not.

Showers and Valente materially mischaracterized the present zoning of the area they sought to divide into three parts as a nonconforming 19.18 acre Natural Products area which they needed to reduce to less than ten acres in order to conform to the town's law, when Poestenkill now concedes that it was actually a 101.73 acre Residential area which would require one of the subdivisions to be rezoned into a Natural Products zone after subdivision.

Given the misinformation no reasonable determination of whether the proposed subdivision would have an environmental impact could be made by Poestenkill.

Under the circumstances, it is clear that the challenged determinations granting the subdivision and determining that doing so would have no environmental impact was made by Poestenkill in complete ignorance of the actual facts and its determination must be annulled on that ground alone.

Poestenkill's extremely casual approach to determining environmental impact also bears notice.

Judicial review of administrative State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) determinations is limited to considering "whether a determination was made in violation of lawful procedure, was affected by an error of law or was arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion" (CPLR 7803[3]; Chinese Staff and Workers Association v. City of New York, 68 NY2d 359, 363).

When addressing these considerations, it is not the Court's role to weigh the desirability of any action or choose between discretionary alternatives, but to determine whether the respondent administrative agency itself has satisfied SEQRA, procedurally and substantively by among other things identifying the relevant areas of environmental concern, taking a "hard look" at them, and making a "reasoned elaboration" of the basis for their determination (Matter of Jackson v. New York State Urban Development Corp., 67 NY2d 400, 417; Chinese Staff and Workers Association v. City of New York, 68 NY2d 359, 363; Matter of Sabad v. Houle, 283 AD2d 851).

When determining whether a lead agency has complied with SEQRA prior to issuing a negative declaration, the Court must initially verify that the agency considered the factors listed in Environmental Conservation Law 8-0109 and 6 NYCRR 617.11 and reasonably identified the environmental factor upon which the proposed action might have a significant effect (Matter of Save the Pine Bush v. Albany, 70 NY2d 193; Matter of Jackson v. New York State Urban Development Corp., 67 NY2d 400, 416-417).

The administrative record here reflects Poestenkill's complicity with Showers and Valente in using the proposed subdivision as a means of avoiding SEQRA review by reducing the impact of the immediate proposal without inquiring into the possibility of further development at a later date.

Regardless of Showers and Valente's misinformation, Poestenkill's determination of no environmental impact would have to be rejected based on Poestenkill's failure to even give the appearance of complying with SEQRA.

Having annulled the offending determinations, it is unnecessary for the Court to determine whether the repondents' actions are in part barred by the principals of res judicata and collateral estoppel.

While the Court does not reach the merits of the argument, it should be pointed out that Valente's interest in the property and in being permitted to mine gravel on it is in fact subject to prior determinations that were binding on Showers.

Accordingly, the petition is granted with costs to the extent of annulling Poestenkill's April 3, 2002 determination.

Turning to DEC's and Valente's motions to dismiss the application to enjoin DEC from considering Valente's application for a mining permit as moot, the Court warily concludes that the mining permit issue is moot at this time in light of Valente's withdrawal.

Inasmuch as Showers and Valente have a long history of reviving their efforts to mine this property, that part of the petition is dismissed without costs and without prejudice to Plante recommencing this proceeding at such time as the old permit application is activated or a new application is made to DEC by Showers and/or Valente.

This Memorandum constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

DATED: October 3, 2002

James B. Canfield, JSC
Rensselaer County Supreme Court

[thelivyjr]

So, if this political retaliation against Paul Plante in the town of Poestenkill in the state of New York was not a case of discrimination, because there is no law that says it would be discrimination against Paul Plante for the town of Poestenkill and the New York State Police to cover over a vehicular assault against him by allowing the hit-and-run driver, a "protected person" in Poestenkill, to file false criminal charges against Plante, instead, was it a case of injustice, somehow, where "injustice" is defined as follows:

1: absence of justice; violation of what is considered right and just or of the rights of another

2 : an unjust act

end quotes

Where there are no laws that specifically make it unlawful or a crime to retaliate against a citizen for exposing endemic public corruption in a corrupt town, can the retaliation really be considered as an "unjust" act?

And if retaliation against Plante is not specifically unlawful, did the cover-up of the hit-and-run actually violate any of Plante's rights?

Questions for our times, indeed.

[thelivyjr]

DATE: October 11, 1988

TO: John Buono, Rensselaer County Executive

FROM: Paul R, Plante, P.E., Associate Public Health Engineer, Rensselaer County Health District

SUBJECT: Integrity of Environmental Health Programs

As the Director of the Environmental Health Division, it is my responsibility to certify on behalf of Rensselaer County the integrity of the Code Enforcement Programs to the State of New York for the purpose of payment of our State operating funds.

I have reached a juncture where such certification by myself is no longer feasible.

My certification of our operations is as a licensed professional.

My conduct is governed in large part by Part 29 of the Codes of the Education Department which sets forth the actions deemed to constitute unprofessional conduct on the part of licensed individuals.

Section 29.1(b)(6) defines unprofessional conduct as "willfully making or filing a false report, or failing to file a report required by law or by the Education Department, or willfully impeding or obstructing such filing, or inducing another person to do so."

I can no longer vouch for the integrity of our programs and will not place my professional standing in jeopardy.

It is my professional opinion stated in writing to yourself that the programs I am responsible for have been very seriously undermined and compromised.

As my internal investigation proceeds, the probability of actions for damages against the Department increases, due to errors of omission and commission of former engineers and the Public Health Director.

As the Public Health Law requires me to conduct investigations into incidents involving public health nuisance or hazard, I find myself in the course of such investigation returning to our own files with consistent violation of code on the part of County staff.