Opinion
November 13, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Brown, J.).
Ordered that the order dated June 14, 1991, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the orders dated August 14, 1991, and September 4, 1991, are affirmed; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondents on each appeal are awarded separate bills of costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court's conclusion that the resolution adopted on November 15, 1988, was ineffective to amend the Zoning Code of the Town of Brookhaven, which was enacted by Local Laws, 1987, No. 7 of the Town of Brookhaven. The doctrine of legislative equivalency requires that existing legislation be amended or repealed by the same procedures as were used to enact it (see, Matter of Gallagher v Regan, 42 N.Y.2d 230, 234; see also, Matter of Torre v County of Nassau, 86 N.Y.2d 421; Noghrey v Town of Brookhaven, 214 A.D.2d 659; Matter of Rockland Props. Corp. v Town of Brookhaven, 205 A.D.2d 518, 519). We find no merit to the Town of Brookhaven's (hereinafter the Town) contention that the procedure followed for the passage of the resolution in question substantially complied with the requirements for the passage of a local law (see, Municipal Home Rule Law §§ 20, 27; Noghrey v Town of Brookhaven, supra; Rockland Props. Corp. v Town of Brookhaven, supra, at 519; cf., Alscot Investing Corp. v Laibach, 65 N.Y.2d 1042, 1044; Matter of Schilling v Dunne, 119 A.D.2d 179, 184).
The Town's argument that Local Laws, 1987, No. 7 of the Town of Brookhaven, provided by its terms that it could be amended by ordinance is improperly raised for the first time on appeal (see, Matter of Rockland Props. Corp. v Town of Brookhaven, supra, at 519; Mastronardi v Mitchell, 109 A.D.2d 825, 827, 828). In any event, the argument is without merit, since such a provision would be inconsistent with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and beyond the supersession powers granted to local governments (see, Municipal Home Rule Law § 10 [ii] [d] [3]).
In addition, we agree with the Supreme Court's conclusion that the allegations in the complaint in Action No. 3 stated a valid cause of action on the ground, inter alia, that the April 3, 1990, enactment of Local Laws, 1990, No. 15 of the Town of Brookhaven, to allegedly remedy the defects of the November 15, 1988, resolution, did not comply with the notice requirements of Town Law § 264 (see, Matter of Gardiner v Lo Grande, 92 A.D.2d 611, 612, affd 60 N.Y.2d 673; Matter of Rockland Props. Corp. v Town of Brookhaven, 205 A.D.2d 518, 520, supra).
We have considered the appellants' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit Sullivan, J.P., Altman, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.