Some South Blooming Grove Residents Are Looking To Pull a Fast One
During last night's Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, a number of misleading statements were made by Haredi in attendance concerning the 1 Roanoke Drive project, spearheaded by Isaac Ekstein.
Above: Video from last night’s South Blooming Grove Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, taken by Preserve Blooming Grove on July 11th, 2024. The bulk of the discussion at this meeting centered around 1 Roanoke Drive, which The Monroe Gazette has already covered in detail here.
For that reason, I encourage you to read the original article before proceeding.
I want to do something different today, if you don't mind.
Since we’ve already covered 1 Roanoke Drive in great detail (here and here), I will skip right by that and get to some of my fellow Hebrew Tribesman's comments at last night’s meeting.
Here’s what you need to know about the meeting itself:
At the July 11th, 2024, ZBA meeting, the Board met to discuss two properties. The first was concerning the Mintleaf Property. Mintleaf is a discussion for another time—this project’s discussion before the Board was tabled until the next regularly scheduled meeting of the ZBA on August 8th at 8 p.m.
-At the request of the Haredi community members in attendance, who are concerned that the delay in the ZBA’s decision on 1 Roanoke will somehow impact their practice of the High Holy Days that begin on October 2nd, a special meeting will be held.
The special ZBA meeting will be held on July 25th at 8 pm in Village Hall and focus specifically on applying 1 Roanoke Drive, proving yet again that the Village of South Blooming Grove actively and willfully violates the Establishment Clause of both the federal and NYS constitution to accommodate specific members of one religious group over the others.
How the permit for a parking lot would impact celebrating Rosh Hashanna is anyone’s guess, given that the Haredi community members last night all said 1 Roanoke Drive has plenty of parking currently available to its congregants.
Anyway …
I want to be clear about why this is so important to discuss:
Here you have a Village government, that represents non-Haredi and Haredi alike, acting in such a way that explicitly benefits both a religious group (Satmar Haredi) and a village employee (Isaac Ekstein.)
That village employee, Ekstein, ALSO happens to be one of two de facto mayors for the Village and president of the congregation being discussed below at 1 Roanoke Drive.
Finally, the entirety of this action by the Village of South Blooming Grove is to the specific benefit of Rebbe Aaron Teitelbaum and David Ekstein, who operates the Kiryas Joel division of the congregation discussed below.
Make sense?
The specific religious group is not relevant. What’s relevant is that any religious group is doing this in the United States of America, in 2024.
Let’s address these comments in the order they were made. I will have more coverage involving this specific meeting soon, since I’ve invited Senator Skoufis, and his challengers, to attend the July 25th meeting.
The first person who spoke was Mayer Gross. It was a little tricky to follow everything he said because of the acoustics in the room, so I ran the video through Otter.ai to create a transcript. This isn’t perfect, but it captures 95% of what was said reasonably well.
I saw some comments that came in that have been under construction for a long time, so they recently got together, and they want to get it done once and for all the synagogue, and would like to stand basically, the big part is ready done, and there's been a lot of parking on the spot on the premises, and additional parking is across.
And since we made the major parking in the back, there's been no issues with parking on the streets even basically also having a big commercial and based on the Jewish law that the congregants are following woman are driving so we don't need any cars there. [Emphasis Added]
And it's been just a little I saw on the applicant, a lot of, lot of things that being asked permission for. And I think it was not necessarily back. Set backs are being met, the height might be just a little high, and there's been a lot of houses being built. Schul, spoke in the 1960s it's been very important. It should be as nice as the other houses. So it also should be built fast, and approval should be given. Should be able to finish it once and for all. Thank you.
Mr. Gross mentioned that parking at 1 Roanoke Drive is not currently an issue, so I have to ask:
Why is there a need for an additional parking lot?
More specifically, since I suspect we’ll be hearing about RULIPA (the Religious Land Use And Institutionalized Persons Act) real soon, what is prohibiting the congregation from adding additional parking in other areas they own?
Should you hear this argument again (which you will), one question to ask is that the Orange County Department of Health has informed the Village of South Blooming Grove that it does not have enough water to support its current residents.
So, someone may say, “We need this new parking lot because of growth in the community,” to which you can factually say, “There is not enough water to support the growth of this community, nor is there sewage capacity at this time. So any growth in South Blooming Grove should be on hold until these issues are resolved.”
One final question is: South Blooming Grove has a Director of Transportation, Dov Guttman, who receives more money than any other government employee at $92,000 annually.
Why can’t the Village, via Mr. Guttman, work together with the congregation to provide mass transportation to and from this school and other high-traffic areas to help prevent traffic and the need for more parking?
Remember: We are living in a climate emergency. We need less cars on the road, not more.
Next from my tribe was Mr. Nathan Margulies. Here’s what he said:
My name is Nathan Margulies, and I live at [Redacted]. Now this gentleman [gesturing to Chris Maderia], I respect him, and I understand his concerns. He's afraid we will not have parking.
Note: That’s not what Mr. Maderia said at all.
So first of all, I would like to correct this building at 1 Roanoke belongs for congregation Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar.
Fact Check: Mr. Eckstein’s 1 Roanoke Drive LLC owned 1 Roanoke until April 15th of 2019 when the ownership was transferred to Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar of Kiryas Joel. Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar of Kiryas Joel transferred ownership of 1 Roanoke Drive to Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar (the parent organization) on September 8th, 2021, right after Local Law 1 of 2021 passed. As a reminder, Local Law 1 of 2021 violates the state and federal constitution’s Establishment Clause.
After the property was transferred, Mr. Eckstein publicly stated that he was president of this congregation despite the change of ownership documented by Orange County. Since this slip up in 2021, Mr. Eckstein has ducked questions about his ownership and role with the congregation, including when I asked him about it last month during a Village Board meeting.
The construction of 1 Roanoke was also anything but smooth and without controversy.
We all here. We we want to have a place where we can pray, and we don't want to be busy every day with traffic issues on the way to our shul to our synagogue. [Emphasis Added]
So therefore, we will make sure. And we did before we even applied for building the house, we applied and we built up a parking lot in the back of our building, which have more than enough parking every day, and even if we have the biggest guest, the biggest hope for growing in our community, we don't see you should need more parking, as Mr. Gross told before, Ladies are now driving, we definitely have enough parking, and you maybe relax that we all we same. Don't want to stay in traffic, and we will make sure not to stay in traffic.
As of now, I'm an immigrant from Austria, and I came here because the beauty of the United States of America, which allows everyone to practice his religion. One of this is the point of so easy approve and help people with synagogues to give them the ability to pray and not to try to find from under the wall and from under the floor problems and restrictions. [Emphasis Added]
So I would appreciate if we go out tonight with a real honest permit and not allow looking here and there just to find trouble for something we by ourselves, want to have a nice, big and easy way to arrive, and we will make sure to have it as the fact is, we have enough and more than enough parking so everyone could be relaxed and just give us the permit and Help Us practice our freedom. Thank you.
Oy vey.
So, first off, and again, If you have plenty of parking, why are we here at this meeting asking for an additional parking lot to fit 70 more vehicles?
“We don't want to be busy every day with traffic issues on the way to our shul to our synagogue.”
That sounds more like an inconvenience than a religious impediment. Under RULIPA, you need to show that the state created a specific religious impediment.
This inconvenience could easily be solved via mass transit, carpooling, or other alternatives.
Sounds like a job for the Village’s Director of Transportation and his $92,000 salary to figure out, don’t you think?
More importantly …
Nobody is “finding” issues with 1 Roanoke Drive. There are issues. So much so that the Village of South Blooming Grove previously went to court against Mr. Eckstein over the property.
The fact is:
- that Mr. Joel Stern intentionally made false comments concerning 1 Roanoke Drive.
- Mr. Isaac Eckstein routinely failed to recuse himself or otherwise clarify for the public his role as president of the congregation and former owner of the property.
-the land that Mr. Eckstein and Stern want to build this parking lot on was given to the Town of Blooming Grove, and later the Village, with the promise that it would be permanent green space.
-The DEC informed the Village and Town that the green space in this area will specifically help manage stormwater and flooding, which is an increasing problem in the Hudson Valley.
These are facts. Not opinion.
But I gotta tell you, if we’re being honest, I’m exhausted by the constant and intentional misinterpretation of the United States (and New York State’s) Establishment Clause.
Both are designed to prohibit restrictions on the part of the government to practice your religion.
But they ALSO ensure that the government plays NO role in benefitting one religion or group of people over another.
If Mr. Margulies studied history as much as he studies the Torah, he would know that government-sponsored religion, including in Austria, was the leading cause of discrimination against our shared Tribe throughout much of European History.
The Constitution’s separation of Church and State, which the Satmar, specifically in Southern Orange County, continues to try to erode, is meant for our protection as Jews.
We remove that separation at our own peril.
Our Haredi friends are also quick to cite the First Amendment but routinely fail to acknowledge the 14th Amendment, the most crucial amendment made to the federal constitution since the original Bill of Rights.
The 14th Amendment means that every American is entitled to equal protection under the law.
So, while you are free to practice your religion, however you choose, you also cannot use the government to aid in that specific practice without violating the rights of the rest of the community.
If anything, since we’re citing the Constitution and all, the Village of South Blooming Grove (and the Village of Kiryas Joel, if we’re honest here) violates the Constitution’s Guarantee Clause.
The Guarantee Clause empowers Congress to ensure that each state provides for a Republican (meaning, representative) form of government.
That does not exist right now in South Blooming Grove.
That does not exist right now in Kiryas Joel / Palm Tree.
Using the government to specifically benefit members of a religious group, appointing members all of the same religious group to planning and zoning boards, for example, and placing the Rebbes in charge of all operations violates the Guarantee Clause of the Constitution.
So, if we’re going to bring up the Constitution, I encourage people to read the damn thing and understand what it says.
Last But Not Least
Chaim Diamant spoke, stating that 1 Roanoke belongs to Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar. “This organization is from way before Isaac Eckstein, 20 years before. So this nothing to have with it. Make sense?”
This is a flat-out lie.
As stated, Mr. Eckstein’s 1 Roanoke Drive LLC owned 1 Roanoke until April 15th of 2019 when the ownership was transferred to Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar of Kiryas Joel.
Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar transferred ownership of 1 Roanoke Drive to Cong Yetev Lev D' Satmar on September 8th, 2021, right after Local Law 1 of 2021 passed.
After the transfer, Mr. Eckstein publicly stated during a Village meeting that he was president of the congregation at 1 Roanoke Drive. Since then, he has been silent on his role with the congregation.
So, saying he has nothing to do with 1 Roanoke Drive and this application is not true.
Saying Mr. Eckstein did not own the property is also absolutely not true.
What is true is that the current property ownership is undefined as far as the general public is concerned.
I’ll remind my Haredi friends that the Talmud prohibits us from lying.
”The Holy One, Blessed be He, hates three people: One who says one statement with his mouth and means another in his heart, i.e., a hypocrite; one who knows testimony about another person and does not testify on his behalf; and one who observes a licentious matter performed by another person and testifies against him alone."
Maybe while we’re offering history lessons on the Constitution, some of our friends in the community can also brush up on their Talmud and Torah studies as well.