The Ledyard Avenue neighborhood opposition and anger against the village’s recently passed Western Gateway rezoning law is about to turn into a lawsuit against the village of Cazenovia.

At least two Ledyard Avenue residents this week received letters from local attorney Barry Schreibman stating that he was about to initiate legal proceedings against the village to overturn the Western Gateway law and warning them against seeking to apply for any special permits under the new law to undertake any site work as allowed by the law because such permits would be overturned if his clients’ litigation was successful.

Schreibman sent his letter, dated Sept. 22, to Warner and Priscilla Arthur, who live at 8 Ledyard Ave., and to Richard Hubbard, owner of The Brewster Inn, located at 6 Ledyard Ave.

Schreibman’s letter reads in full:

“I represent several of your neighbors in connection with litigation to overturn a certain local law recently enacted by the Village of Cazenovia. This local law amended Chapter 180 of the Village Code to add a new section to 180-68A: Western Gateway District (the “Western Gateway rezoning”). To prosecute their claims, I will shortly commence an action against the village and the members of the village board in New York State Supreme Court at the Wampsville courthouse.

“Please take notice: Should you apply for any permit based on the Western Gateway rezoning, you do so at risk that any permit so granted will be rendered null and void by the above-mentioned litigation.”

The Western Gateway rezoning law established a new “Western Gateway” zoning district and changed the zoning of certain land parcels on both sides of Ledyard Avenue from Route 13/Lakeland Park to the western village boundary by the Trush property. The intention was to emphasize new and more potential uses for the large old homes on Ledyard Avenue as a way to prevent deterioration of those properties, to maximize land use by allowing more commercial development and to help beautify the village entranceway area overall, according to the legislation.

Nearly every resident in the Ledyard Avenue neighborhood opposed the legislation during its four-month public hearing process, stating that it was an ill-conceived and under-developed plan that would turn the spacious residential corridor into a soulless commercial strip. Many opponents also claimed that the law was proposed mainly to benefit Hubbard and his previously existing plans to purchase the houses at 8 and 10 Ledyard Ave. — one of which is owned by the Arthurs — and turn them into wedding and overnight expansions for The Brewster Inn.

The law went through multiple public hearings and was revised four times before the village board unanimously passed it on Sept. 2.

“I certainly don’t appreciate being threatened,” said Priscilla Arthur about Schreibman’s letter.

Hubbard’s reaction to Schreibman’s letter was more one of incredulity, knowing that Schreibman previously represented the Loftus family — one of the main and most vocal opponents of the Western Gateway rezoning law — in the early-to-mid 2000s when they wanted to undertake a major renovation on their barn and build a fence around their property at 12 Ledyard Ave.

According to village records and contemporary news reports, when the village planning board approved the barn application in 2002, the Arthurs sued the village to overturn the law. A state supreme court judge annulled the planning’s board decision and referred it back to the board for further consideration. The Loftuses won their case in 2002 and were granted site plan approval for the barn in 2004. The Arthurs, as well as neighbor Ellen Jacobsen, filed an Article 78 proceeding challenging the approval, which was dismissed by a state judge four months later.

The Loftuses, represented still by Barry Schreibman, then filed suit against the Arthurs and Jacobsens in 2005 for alleged malicious prosecution. The Loftuses lost that case in 2007 and were made to pay the “costs and disbursements” of the action.

“Having been privy to all of the lawsuits that Barry Schreibman brought against the Arthurs and Jacobsens, his reasons in that suit for allowing the Loftuses to put up their barn are the same reasons for my wanting to expand. It seems hypocritical to want to sue now based on the opposite viewpoint,” Hubbard said.

As of press time, the village had not received any correspondence regarding Schreibman’s intended lawsuit, said Village Clerk Kathy Burns.

Mayor Kurt Wheeler said since the village has received no notice of a lawsuit yet, there was not much to say.

“This is their right, but our process was rigorous and sound and the law was thoughtfully written and passed to serve the public interest,” Wheeler said. “I am confident that any court will concur with that assessment.”

Schreibman said he has not yet filed the paperwork with the court.

While not listing them by name, Schreibman indicated that his clients live in the rezoned district, are adversely affected by the rezoning and have legal standing to sue to overturn it. He said that to name his clients prior to filing the lawsuit would be improper.

He said the pending lawsuit will be against the village only, but if any of the Ledyard Avenue residents are granted permits based on the rezoning “there may be additional litigation seeking to nullify the permits.”

“The [Sept. 22] letter is intended to cut off a possible legal argument down the road that it was unfair for the plaintiffs to stay silent about their intention to file suit when they knew that some people would spend time and money to make permit applications on the basis of the rezoning. The letter, properly, informs the likely permit applicant that he or she does so in the context of a lawsuit that could nullify the permit. That’s fair notice — not a threat or an interference with an owner’s ability to improve the property,” Schreibman stated.

During an August public hearing on the proposed rezoning law, Schreibman informed the village board that he had been consulted by some of the Ledyard Avenue neighbors, and it was his opinion that the law was “vulnerable” to a legal challenge because it benefitted only two parties — Hubbard and the Arthurs — and was therefore nothing more than spot zoning.

Jason Emerson is editor of the Cazenovia Republican. He can be reached at [email protected].