Opinion
10-27-2015
In the Matter of Paul GRUSKOFF, appellant, v. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, et al., respondents-respondents; Greens at Half Hollow Home Owners Association, Inc., et al., intervenors-respondents.
Opinion In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law §§ 4–108 and 16–104, inter alia, to invalidate a referendum regarding the establishment of Suffolk County Sewer District No. 26, which is to appear on the ballot in a general election to be held on November 3, 2015, in Suffolk County, the petitioner appeals from a final order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mayer, J.), dated October 14, 2015, which denied the petition and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the final order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner seeks, among other things, to invalidate a referendum regarding the establishment of Suffolk County Sewer District No. 26, which is to appear on the ballot in a general election to be held on November 3, 2015, in Suffolk County.
Election Law § 4–108(2) provides, in relevant part, that “[t]he form in which [a] proposed ... proposition ... is to be submitted shall consist of only an abbreviated title indicating ... in a clear and coherent manner using words with common and every-day meanings, the subject matter of the ... proposition.” Section 4–108(2) therefore authorizes a challenge to a ballot proposal or abstract that is “misleading, ambiguous, illegal, or inconsistent with existing law” (Matter of Gaughan v. Mohr, 77 A.D.3d 1475, 1476–1477, 909 N.Y.S.2d 408 ). Here, contrary to the petitioner's contention, the referendum question is not misleading, ambiguous, illegal, or inconsistent with existing law (see Matter of Gaughan v. Mohr, 77 A.D.3d at 1476–1477, 909 N.Y.S.2d 408 ; cf. Matter of Mavromatis v. Town of W. Seneca, 55 A.D.3d 1455, 1456, 869 N.Y.S.2d 709 ; Matter of Marcoccia v. Suffolk County Bd. of Elections, 309 A.D.2d 958, 959, 766 N.Y.S.2d 567 ; Matter of Association for Better Long Is. v. County of Suffolk, 243 A.D.2d 560, 561, 663 N.Y.S.2d 226 ; Matter of Sinawski v. Cuevas, 123 A.D.2d 548, 548, 506 N.Y.S.2d 711 ).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.
DILLON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CHAMBERS and HALL, JJ., concur.