Popular Searches
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Cascino testifies in Supreme Court
Farm owner says he has brought up to 250,000 yards of clean fill to his property
By Jamie Larson
HUDSON — Businessman Salvatore Cascino spent Wednesday on the witness stand in Columbia County Supreme Court in Hudson, testifying in the case brought against him by the town of Copake. Cascino tried to show the judge he runs a legitimate business and that the charges against him are unfounded.
Copake’s lawyer, Victor Meyers, alleges Cascino has been illegally dumping potentially hazardous construction debris at Copake Valley Farm LLC, which he owns on Route 22, and that he has continually ignored town law by building or modifying a number of features on his property without attaining proper permits.
Meyers asked Cascino why he had obtained a permit for CVF vehicles to haul waste if he wasn’t bringing debris into the town from his other business, Bronx County Recycling LLC, in the Bronx, which breaks down large-scale construction and demolition debris. Cascino said the permit was needed to haul leaves and yard trimmings from Westchester County, where he lives, to Copake for composting, which the town permitted him to do when he first bought the property in 1997.
“I never hauled garbage, ever,” Cascino said.
In previous testimony a representative from the Department of Environmental Conservation, who has surveyed CVF more than 20 times, and Copake residents testified that they often saw trash at the site, and that trash bags full of leaves were left near — or on — federally protected wetlands that abut CVF. Cascino explained that Westchester residents will often leave garbage in with the leaves and what his accusers saw was trash his workers had picked out before the mulching process. He testified that the piles were only there temporarily, before they were taken to a proper dump.
Meyers asked: Where, then, did the small bits of plastic and glass in a pile of fill on the property — photographed by a DEC worker — come from?
“I have no idea,” Cascino responded.
Cascino testified that CVF workers use the large grinding machine on the farm to mulch the leaves before they are mixed with “dead soil” brought in from BCR devoid of nutrients, and fertilizer, and spread it to enrich the soil.
Cascino also confirmed that they ground “unadulterated wood” in the grinder as well, which included industrial wooden pallets. Unadulterated wood, by Cascino’s understanding, means unpainted. Meyers asked if he or any official ever tested the pallets for harmful oils. Cascino said they had not.
Tensions between Meyers and Cascino elevated in the courtroom while discussing the grinder. The tone of Cascino’s answers and Meyers’ questions lead Cascino’s lawyer, Dennis Schlenker, to objected that the questioning had become argumentative. Meyers pointed out that Cascino’s composting permit authorized the mulching of grass, leaves and clippings, not wood or pallets.
“Grass, leaves and clippings are wood,” Cascino responded forcefully. “What do you think leaves are? They’re wood.”
Cascino also testified that he did bring clean fill in from BRC to fill out geographical imperfections on his land, but that the pulverized debris and dead soil was safe and used to better his farm, which he said was not in good shape when he bought it.
He said to date he has brought 150,000 to 250,000 yards of fill to his property and roughly 10,000 yards of Item 4 — a road material — for the widening of an access road and the construction of a 30-foot-wide stream bridge, all of which he constructed without obtaining the necessary permits and are potentially damaging a protected natural area.
He also brought in material to begin construction of a 45,000-square-foot cattle barn. He was denied building permits for the large job and will soon be taking the town and county planning boards to court for not allowing him the right to grow his farming business.
Cascino’s workers poured four large concrete and rebar footings at CVF without a permit as well. Two have already been removed by order of the DEC for encroaching on wetlands. While the town seems to believe Cascino was planning to build a structure illegally using the footings, the land owner testified that he was merely building a three-sided retaining wall, for which a permit would not be required. The walls would be used to contain a large pile of leaves waiting to be mulched. This, he said, would have alleviated the issue residents have with the piles in other areas of the farm.
Schlenker cross-examined his client and attempted to show that much of the work done to the Cascino property was improvement to existing structures so he was not required to get permits. He also tried to argue that since Cascino has already complied with all the stop-work orders and penalties incurred against him by Copake and the DEC, the current injunction was actually unnecessary. Judge Jonathan Nichols, who is presiding over the bench trial, indicated that he did not share the attorney’s conclusion.
The trial is covering many other issues of building and dumping on the property as well, from the unpermitted renovation of the farm stand to depositing fill on the property after the issuance of a stop-work order. Because of the long and complicated nature of the document-based case, the proceedings have run longer than initially anticipated. The trial will resume at the County Courthouse March 25.
To reach reporter Jamie Larson, call 518-828-1616, ext. 2269, or e-mail jlarson@registerstar.com.
By Jamie Larson
HUDSON — Businessman Salvatore Cascino spent Wednesday on the witness stand in Columbia County Supreme Court in Hudson, testifying in the case brought against him by the town of Copake. Cascino tried to show the judge he runs a legitimate business and that the charges against him are unfounded.
Copake’s lawyer, Victor Meyers, alleges Cascino has been illegally dumping potentially hazardous construction debris at Copake Valley Farm LLC, which he owns on Route 22, and that he has continually ignored town law by building or modifying a number of features on his property without attaining proper permits.
Meyers asked Cascino why he had obtained a permit for CVF vehicles to haul waste if he wasn’t bringing debris into the town from his other business, Bronx County Recycling LLC, in the Bronx, which breaks down large-scale construction and demolition debris. Cascino said the permit was needed to haul leaves and yard trimmings from Westchester County, where he lives, to Copake for composting, which the town permitted him to do when he first bought the property in 1997.
“I never hauled garbage, ever,” Cascino said.
In previous testimony a representative from the Department of Environmental Conservation, who has surveyed CVF more than 20 times, and Copake residents testified that they often saw trash at the site, and that trash bags full of leaves were left near — or on — federally protected wetlands that abut CVF. Cascino explained that Westchester residents will often leave garbage in with the leaves and what his accusers saw was trash his workers had picked out before the mulching process. He testified that the piles were only there temporarily, before they were taken to a proper dump.
Meyers asked: Where, then, did the small bits of plastic and glass in a pile of fill on the property — photographed by a DEC worker — come from?
“I have no idea,” Cascino responded.
Cascino testified that CVF workers use the large grinding machine on the farm to mulch the leaves before they are mixed with “dead soil” brought in from BCR devoid of nutrients, and fertilizer, and spread it to enrich the soil.
Cascino also confirmed that they ground “unadulterated wood” in the grinder as well, which included industrial wooden pallets. Unadulterated wood, by Cascino’s understanding, means unpainted. Meyers asked if he or any official ever tested the pallets for harmful oils. Cascino said they had not.
Tensions between Meyers and Cascino elevated in the courtroom while discussing the grinder. The tone of Cascino’s answers and Meyers’ questions lead Cascino’s lawyer, Dennis Schlenker, to objected that the questioning had become argumentative. Meyers pointed out that Cascino’s composting permit authorized the mulching of grass, leaves and clippings, not wood or pallets.
“Grass, leaves and clippings are wood,” Cascino responded forcefully. “What do you think leaves are? They’re wood.”
Cascino also testified that he did bring clean fill in from BRC to fill out geographical imperfections on his land, but that the pulverized debris and dead soil was safe and used to better his farm, which he said was not in good shape when he bought it.
He said to date he has brought 150,000 to 250,000 yards of fill to his property and roughly 10,000 yards of Item 4 — a road material — for the widening of an access road and the construction of a 30-foot-wide stream bridge, all of which he constructed without obtaining the necessary permits and are potentially damaging a protected natural area.
He also brought in material to begin construction of a 45,000-square-foot cattle barn. He was denied building permits for the large job and will soon be taking the town and county planning boards to court for not allowing him the right to grow his farming business.
Cascino’s workers poured four large concrete and rebar footings at CVF without a permit as well. Two have already been removed by order of the DEC for encroaching on wetlands. While the town seems to believe Cascino was planning to build a structure illegally using the footings, the land owner testified that he was merely building a three-sided retaining wall, for which a permit would not be required. The walls would be used to contain a large pile of leaves waiting to be mulched. This, he said, would have alleviated the issue residents have with the piles in other areas of the farm.
Schlenker cross-examined his client and attempted to show that much of the work done to the Cascino property was improvement to existing structures so he was not required to get permits. He also tried to argue that since Cascino has already complied with all the stop-work orders and penalties incurred against him by Copake and the DEC, the current injunction was actually unnecessary. Judge Jonathan Nichols, who is presiding over the bench trial, indicated that he did not share the attorney’s conclusion.
The trial is covering many other issues of building and dumping on the property as well, from the unpermitted renovation of the farm stand to depositing fill on the property after the issuance of a stop-work order. Because of the long and complicated nature of the document-based case, the proceedings have run longer than initially anticipated. The trial will resume at the County Courthouse March 25.
To reach reporter Jamie Larson, call 518-828-1616, ext. 2269, or e-mail jlarson@registerstar.com.
Share this Article
 |
 |
|
| Gillibrand burglar pleads guilty | Men allegedly got cocaine from Hudson |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of registerstar.com.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
