FALLSBURG — More than a year after the Town of Fallsburg settled a code violation lawsuit against the owners of 63 and 73 Rose Road, community members say the court order is being openly defied—and accuse local officials of looking the other way.

At a packed Town Board meeting on August 5, residents voiced frustration over what they describe as a total breakdown of zoning enforcement. Despite a New York State Supreme Court order barring any occupancy or construction at the site without proper permits, neighbors say the property remains active— with families living on-site, new structures built without approvals, and no visible consequences.

In a prepared statement, Town Supervisor Michael Bensimon confirmed that the court order remains in effect and enforceable, and that it binds the current owner. He said the Building Department had inspected the site and issued violations but declined to share details, citing the ongoing legal review. “Everyone has due process,” he said, “and there’s a process we have to follow.” The property, formerly a horse farm, is now owned by Mosdos Machlas Tzvi Krula, a Hasidic Jewish organization. It was previously owned by YNHK LLC, which was sued by the town in 2023 for illegal construction and occupancy. That case was resolved in May 2024 through a court-ordered stipulation in which the owner admitted wrongdoing and agreed to:

• Immediately vacate the property

• Cease all use and construction

• Obtain all required permits and approvals

• Allow a building inspection by July 6, 2024

• Pay a $48,500 fine The order remains binding on the new owner.

“Over a year later, almost none of this has happened,” said Pam Wagner, a resident who lives near the site. “There is no record of final approvals. The inspection wasn’t done on time. The property is still occupied.”

Wagner said the only inspection on record occurred on July 25, 2025, more than a year later and only after a FOIL request and sustained public pressure. That inspection, she said, confirmed that multiple violations were ongoing—including the illegal occupancy of buildings without certificates of occupancy. Despite a compliance deadline of August 8, the property is not on the agenda for the next Planning Board meeting on August 14, leaving residents skeptical that enforcement will follow. Wagner’s husband, Stan Wagner, accused the Town Board of failing to uphold its legal responsibilities. “This was not a handshake deal. It was a binding court order,” he said. “You knew the deadlines. You knew the obligations. And yet you stood by. This is not just bad governance—it’s a collapse of public accountability.”

Gerald Skoda, a farmer whose land borders the Rose Road site, called the situation “contempt of court—and maybe contempt by the town itself.”

Skoda noted that work at the site has continued throughout the summer—including new decks, interior construction, and utility hookups—all without public approvals. He described seeing multiple families, children, and vehicles on the property.

“They are completely open for business,” Skoda said. “No permits, no certificates of occupancy, and no action from the town for months.”

Skoda pointed to the April 7 Planning Board minutes, where the property’s attorney, Steve Barshav, acknowledged that the site was being used illegally and said, “they can absolutely not operate” until approvals were obtained. According to Skoda, no permits have been filed since.

Alex Portugal, speaking on behalf of the owners, told the board they were seeking peace but said that the town’s enforcement efforts were influenced by hate. His comments were met with pushback from the public.

Sandra Oxford, a longtime Hurleyville resident, responded firmly. “This has nothing to do with a person’s religion or ethnicity,” she said, “It’s about following the law. We all have to follow it.”

Multiple residents raised concerns about child safety, citing the site’s ongoing use as what appears to be a summer camp or religious school, without zoning or code approvals.

The property lies in an agricultural zone, which does not allow for educational facilities, dormitories, or high-density residential development. According to Skoda, the owners have previously proposed using the site for a religious education facility with multiple buildings, roadways, and utilities—a project that would require Zoning Board of Appeals approval and detailed business plans under town law.

Rabbi Elozer Stein, speaking at the meeting, said the site is intended for religious and agricultural education, where children are taught to raise animals and learn Jewish agricultural practices.

But residents noted that no applications for agricultural structures or agri-schools have been submitted—and building permits are still required, even for farm facilities.

Bensimon acknowledged residents’ frustration. “The Board understands the public is angry and that the owner flouted local laws by building prior to obtaining approvals,” he said.

He noted that the previous owner was issued the maximum fine of nearly $50,000 in Justice Court, and emphasized that the Supreme Court stipulation remains in effect and enforceable, binding the current owner.

Bensimon added that the Building Department has inspected the premises, issued new violations, and is now reviewing reports to determine next steps in the ongoing litigation.

“The Board is pursuing enforcement of the stipulation and order,” he said, “and is focused on the health and safety issues raised by members of the public.”