RAY BROOK — The start date of the Adirondack Park Agency’s adjudicatory hearing for a proposed howitzer testing range in the town of Lewis has been delayed again, from Feb. 25 to April 22.

The APA had yet to issue a public statement on this as of press time Wednesday, although attorneys on both sides of the case confirmed this date change, which was issued by Administrative Law Judge David Greenwood, who is presiding over the hearing.

This delay comes as dueling legal challenges play out, some before Greenwood, another before the APA’s board as an appeal of another one of Greenwood’s rulings and another before state Supreme Court Justice Allison McGahay.

Of these challenges, the one before McGahay is the most overarching, as it seeks to nullify the entire proceeding. That was made by attorney Matthew Norfolk, who represents the howitzer applicant, Michael Hopmeier, through his company Unconventional Concepts, Inc.

Norfolk alleged that one of the APA’s 11 board members, Rush Holt, had a duty to recuse himself from the vote and the board’s deliberation over the matter, and failed to do so. Holt was an Adirondack Council board member from 2022 to 2025. Adirondack Council is an environmental advocacy group that opposes the howitzer proposal and is one of the adjudicatory hearing parties.

Norfolk’s petition included a letter from the Adirondack Council opposing the project, where Holt’s name appears on the letterhead as a board member.

Norfolk said this is a conflict of interest, and created a duty for Holt “to abstain from participating … deliberating and voting in matters related to the application.” He said that Holt’s participation resulted in the process “being tainted with bias and corruptive influence of the interests of Adirondack Council.”

Norfolk’s petition also alleges that the APA, presumably through its counsel and staff, had an obligation to advise or otherwise require Holt not to participate in the matters related to the adjudicatory hearing, and erred in failing to do so. His petition also appeals APA Executive Director Barbara Rice’s denial of Norfolk’s challenge to disqualify the administrative law judge overseeing the hearing, David Greenwood.

For more information on that, as well as the Adirondack Council’s petition against Norfolk that’s currently before Greenwood, visit tinyurl.com/v4nwhmyz.

Adirondack Council’s motion alleges a potential conflict of interest in Norfolk and his firm representing Hopmeier, and requests that Norfolk be removed from the case, absent “demonstrated compliance” that he and his firm, Norfolk Beier, had remedied the matter.

Greenwood has not yet ruled on a motion seeking to remove Norfolk Beier from the case because of an alleged conflict of interest, absent “demonstrated compliance” that the firm had remedied the matter.

The alleged potential conflict stems from Norfolk Beier hiring attorney Sarah Reynolds in mid-May. Reynolds had previously worked as an associate counsel for the APA and had been involved with the agency’s handling of the project sponsor’s application. Reynolds left Norfolk’s firm in mid-December, citing personal reasons unrelated to the howitzer case, according to Norfolk.

Adirondack Council did not allege that Reynolds was “involved” in the case while working for Norfolk Beier, but stated that there was potential for that, and furthermore that the firm’s apparent failure to seek the required waivers was enough to warrant its disqualification, even if Reynolds had subsequently left.

Adirondack Council said it gave Norfolk a chance to provide that before making its motion, but had not seen it. Norfolk called the motion “bogus” and submitted a seven-point objection to Greenwood for him to consider in his ruling.

Originally, Greenwood said he would rule on that by Feb. 10. Although McGahay did not order the hearing proceedings to pause in advance of her Feb. 20 court date — leaving the door open for Greenwood to rule on Adirondack Council’s motion — Greenwood has not yet done so. It’s unclear if he will until McGahay issues a ruling on Norfolk’s petition, given that Norfolk has asked the court to nullify the entire proceeding, including everything that’s transpired after the board’s vote.

McGahay said that after hearing from the APA, which will presumably respond to and argue against Norfolk’s petition, she will rule on what, if any, relief the court will issue regarding his petition. APA spokesman Keith McKeever said on Feb. 5 that the agency does not comment on pending litigation.

The losing party could appeal McGahay’s ruling to the state’s intermediate appellate court, which would likely cause further delay in the proceeding. If McGahay or an appeals court nullifies the adjudicatory hearing, it’s further unclear if the APA board could or would revote on whether to hold an adjudicatory hearing, and what that timeline would be.

McKeever added that the APA board still intends to decide on the appeal on its docket at its Feb. 19 regular meeting. In that matter, Norfolk is seeking to remove Adirondack Wild, another environmental advocacy group and hearing party that is opposed to the proposed howitzer range. Norfolk’s appeal claims Adirondack Wild submitted an insufficient petition for party status, and Greenwood erred in granting it admission. The appeal will come before the full agency board, according to McKeever.

For more information from the APA on the howitzer proposal and the various exchanges between the parties that comprise the hearing record so far, visit tinyurl.com/mpdramry.