## Facts

- Ecogen, LLC planned large wind-energy projects in the Towns of Prattsburgh and Italy, New York, and obtained property interests and easements to develop the projects.
- Ecogen asserted it needed to construct an electrical substation in the Town of Italy to interconnect and complete its advancing Prattsburgh project and to secure time-sensitive tax benefits.
- The Town of Italy enacted a moratorium prohibiting construction of wind turbine towers, relay stations, and other support facilities, initially for six months but repeatedly renewed to roughly two years.
- The Town stated the moratorium’s purpose was to maintain the status quo while developing zoning controls for wind-related structures to protect the Town’s scenic and aesthetic attributes.
- The moratorium included a hardship exception allowing applicants to seek relief in particular circumstances.
- Ecogen did not apply for a hardship exception and instead sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the moratorium.

## Issues

1. Whether the moratorium was facially invalid under substantive due process because it lacked a rational relationship to legitimate governmental objectives.
2. Whether Ecogen’s as-applied constitutional claims were ripe absent a final local decision, where Ecogen did not pursue the moratorium’s hardship exception or show futility.
3. Whether Ecogen satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the moratorium.

## Decision

- The court held the moratorium was not facially invalid because it was rationally related to legitimate governmental purposes, including land-use planning and aesthetic preservation.
- The court dismissed Ecogen’s as-applied claims as unripe because Ecogen did not seek a hardship exception and did not demonstrate that pursuing local relief would have been futile.
- The court denied Ecogen’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
- The complaint was dismissed without prejudice, permitting refiling if later events produced a ripe dispute, including if the moratorium persisted beyond a reasonable duration without action toward zoning.

## Legal Principles

- A temporary zoning moratorium adopted to allow study and development of land-use controls may be a valid exercise of municipal police power if rationally related to legitimate governmental objectives.
- Substantive due process challenges to land-use regulation are reviewed under a deferential rational-basis standard; only exceptionally arbitrary government action will support federal substantive due process relief in this context.
- As-applied federal constitutional challenges to land-use restrictions generally require a final, definitive local decision; where an available hardship or similar administrative mechanism exists, failure to pursue it defeats ripeness absent a showing of futility.
- A preliminary injunction requires, among other things, a showing of likelihood of success on the merits; unripe claims and rational land-use regulation defeat that showing.
- A moratorium may become constitutionally problematic if extended for an unreasonable duration without progress toward the stated planning objectives.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the Town’s wind-development moratorium as a rational planning measure and dismissed Ecogen’s as-applied due process claims as unripe because Ecogen bypassed the hardship process, denying injunctive relief while leaving open the possibility of a later challenge if the moratorium became unreasonably prolonged or a final local decision occurred.


Ecogen, LLC v. Town of Italy, 438 F. Supp. 2d 149 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)