From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

C.I.D. Landfill v. N.Y. St. Dept. of Envtl

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1990
167 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

November 16, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Ricotta, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed petitioner's CPLR article 78 petition seeking to annul the imposition of a special permit condition requiring petitioner to pay a portion of the costs of an on-site environmental monitor. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has authority to impose any permit condition that is rationally related to protecting the environment (see, ECL 1-0101, 3-0301; 6 NYCRR 360-4.1 [a]; Flacke v. Onondaga Landfill Sys., 69 N.Y.2d 355, 362). The DEC determination that an environmental monitor is required to mitigate petitioner's potential risk of environmental harm was rational and based on the nondiscriminatory application of established criteria. The imposition upon petitioner of a portion of the costs of an environmental monitor does not constitute an illegal tax because the condition has not been imposed to generate revenue or to offset the cost of governmental functions generally. The cost was assessed as a fee against petitioner to cover the specific costs of services rendered to petitioner (see, Suffolk County Bldrs. Assn. v. County of Suffolk, 46 N.Y.2d 613, 618-619; Jewish Reconstructionist Synagogue v. Incorporated Vil. of Roslyn Harbor, 40 N.Y.2d 158, 162).


Summaries of

C.I.D. Landfill v. N.Y. St. Dept. of Envtl

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1990
167 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

C.I.D. Landfill v. N.Y. St. Dept. of Envtl

Case Details

Full title:C.I.D. LANDFILL, INC., Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 16, 1990

Citations

167 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
561 N.Y.S.2d 936

Citing Cases

Matter of Salvador v. State

Also unpersuasive is petitioners' contention, advanced in their fifth cause of action, that Laws of 1987 (ch…

Kessler v. Hevesi

In Salvador v. State, the court found that fees charged for operation of commercial docks on Lake George were…