Form Based Code training at Pace rescheduled to November

FBC 301
Formulating, Adopting and Administering a Code
FBC 301 focuses on formulating, adopting, and administering a form-based code. The course will offer an in-depth look at the relationship between the comprehensive plan and a form-based code, the mechanics of code adoption, the advantages and disadvantages of mandatory, parallel and floating-zone codes, and ways to avoid common pitfalls in the drafting and administration of form-based codes.
Instructors will explain how to structure the process, including what must happen before, during, and after the code is drafted, what to keep and what to discard from an existing conventional code, how to relate the form-based code to the existing regulatory framework in a specific municipality, how to insulate a FBC against potential legal challenges, and issues of post-adoption implementation and project review. The course will examine specific examples and lessons learned from experience working with form-based codes and will include a hands-on exercise in code implementation.
NOTE: The one-day intro class ABCs of Form-Based Codes (or FBC 101e on-line) is prerequisite for taking FBC 301.
FBC 301 is part of FBCI’s 3-course series. It combines with FBC 101 (ABCs of Form-Based Codes) and FBC 201 (Urban Design), to complete a thorough instruction in the discipline of form-based coding. FBCI awards a certificate to all those completing the 3-course series.
WhenWednesday, November 4 and Thursday, November 5, 2015 — 8:30am -5:00pm
Where: NYS Judicial Institute at Pace Law School, White Plains, NY
To register for the course, go to

Touro Law Center’s “Bagels with the Boards” CLE series kicks off with: Avoiding and Defending Against RLUIPA Claims

Join local officials, planners, attorneys, legal scholars and law students on Friday, Feb. 27, 8:30 – 10 am, for RLUIPA Defense: Avoiding and Defending Against RLUIPA Claims, presented by Ted Carey, the lead trial lawyer in a complex RLUIPA case in Old Westbury, Evan J. Seeman and Karla Chaffee, RLUIPA attorneys at Robinson + Cole and regular contributors to the RLUIPA Defense blog. 1 Professional Practice credit. Planning and zoning board credits TBD.

“Absolutely essential to avoiding and defending against RLUIPA claims is proper training of local officials before they begin to review a religious use application.”  — Evan J. Seeman, RLUIPA Defense Tactics: How to Avoid & Defend Against RLUIPA Claims, 37 Zoning & Planning L. Rpt. 1 (Dec. 2014).

Space is limited. Register now by emailing

All Bagels with the Boards events begin with a half hour continental breakfast (including bagels, of course), followed by a one-hour CLE. The cost for each program is $15 per person, including materials, and continental breakfast.

Special thanks to Bagels with the Boards co-sponsors: Farrell Fritz PC, the Municipal Law Section of the NY State Bar Association, the New York Conference of Mayors (NYCOM), and the Association of Towns of the State of New York.

Email to pre-register for future Bagels with the Boards, including:

Friday, Mar. 27, , 8:30 – 10 am

Planning and Zoning for Accessible Communities, presented by Robin Malloy, the E. I. White Chair and Distinguished Professor of Law, and Kauffman Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Syracuse University. Professor Malloy’s book Land Use Law and Disability: Planning and Zoning for Accessible Communities was published in October 2014 by Cambridge University Press.

Learn more about this CLE, other CLEs in the Bagels with the Boards series, and Touro’s Land Use & Sustainable Development Law Institute first annual conference the “Long Island Coastal Resiliency Summit,” by visiting

Don’t miss future events. Join the Institute’s mailing list by emailing

10th Circuit Disallows Conservation Easement Deduction Where Mortgage Not Subordinated at Time of Donation

Earlier this week, the Tenth Circuit issued its opinion in Mitchell v. CIR, 2015 WL 64927 (10th Cir. 2015), affirming the Tax Court’s denial of the taxpayers’ (Charles and Ramona Mitchell) charitable contribution deduction for their donation of a conservation easement on real property that was, at the time of the donation, subject to an unsubordinated mortgage (held by Mr. Sheek). The court explained:

In sum, we conclude the regulations do not permit a charitable contribution deduction unless any existing mortgage on the donated property has been subordinated, irrespective of the likelihood of foreclosure. Therefore, the Tax Court correctly held the Commissioner was entitled to disallow the Mitchells’ charitable contribution deduction because Mr. Sheek’s mortgage encumbering the Lone Canyon Ranch was not timely subordinated.

Check out Jessica Owley’s post on the Land Use Law Prof blog for further discussion of the opinion.