When is an oath not an oath?

The Town of Amherst's Comprehensive Plan was adopted unanimously in 2007. Once it was adopted, it became subject to town law regulations. Town law is a set of state mandates that town municipalities in New York govern themselves by.

It deals with everything from zoning issues to establishing town newspapers. The town law is not an optional set of guidelines. They are as much an enforceable mandate as are the vehicle and traffic law or the penal law. As the community plan stands now, with its clear and precise wording and instruction regarding the protection of Maple Road from further development, the rezoning application for Maple Road must not be approved. It is not an option to ignore the law without violating it.

Our town officials took an oath to uphold the law. They are all aware of section 272-a(11) of town law, which provides that where a town has adopted a formal comprehensive plan, the town's zoning decisions must be consistent with that plan. It clearly states "must be." It does not say "may be" or "should be."

The bigger issue here is about obeying the law, not about rezoning Maple Road. If the residents of Amherst can't have the basic trust in our elected officials to obey and uphold our laws, then what do we have? As a town resident, can I trust them to be fiscally responsible? Can I trust them to be ethically and morally responsible? Ignoring these points will call into question the character and integrity of our elected officials. It is a point that must not be compromised.

An oath is a solemn, usually formal calling upon God to witness the truth of what one says. I hope our elected officials understand that.
Bill Fleming
The Fairways Group

(Editor's note: Following the adoption of the Comprehensive Master Plan, the Amherst Town Board approved a set of guidelines addressing proposed amendments.)