|
|
|
Regular Meeting September 9, 2002 Charlton Town Board Saratoga County New York After the pledge to the flag the invocation was given by Town Clerk Gail Hanchar. At the regular meeting of the Town Board of Charlton, Saratoga County, New York held at 7:35 P.M. at the Charlton Town Hall, called to order by Supervisor Acunto, there were present:
. . . . . Councilman Grattidge
Motion made by Councilman Schroeder, seconded by Councilman Grattidge that the minutes of the August 13, 2002 Town Board Meeting and the August 26, 2002 Agenda Meeting be accepted as received. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ABSTRACT OF CLAIMS:
General Fund: Abstract of Claims totaling $21,386.21. Motion made by Councilman Schroeder, seconded by Councilman Grattidge.
Highway Fund: Abstract of Claims totaling $4,214.31. Motion made by
Water Fund: Abstract of Claims totaling $1,096.12. Motion made by
TOWN CLERK'S REPORT:
Gail Hanchar read the Town Clerk's Report. She reported taking in $242.50. Motion made by Councilman Schroeder, seconded by Councilman Grattidge. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR (Agenda Items):
No comments.
SUPERVISOR'S REPORT AND ANNOUNCEMENTS:
August review of revenue and expenditures:
Major expenditures:
Major revenue:
Wednesday is 911 Remembrance Day. There will be a ceremony at the county offices beginning at 8:00 A.M. American flags should be flown at half-staff on 911.
The Hazardous Waste Collection Day will be September 28 at the Saratoga County Fairgrounds.
Road Runner Internet service will be installed for the Assessors Office. It does not include any networking to other computers in the building. We will include the Town Clerks and Zoning Administrator's computers.
Supervisor Acunto received a flyer that was distributed in the area of Elmer Smith Park citing acts of vandalism in the area of the park and within the park. The Charlton Police have been notified.
We received a notice from the NYS Public Service Commission notifying us that a public statement hearing is being set for Tuesday, September 24 at 1:00 P.M. and at 7:00 P.M. at the First Reformed Church on North Ballston Avenue in Scotia regarding the gas line proposal and pump station.
COMMUNICATIONS:
We have received a letter of resignation from Stacy Clark from the Park Committee.
We received a package of information from Mr. Zee, representing Bordeau Builders, containing the map, plan and report for Capital Real Estate regarding the proposed extension to the water district. Councilman Lippiello reported that: (1) The maps need to be updated with Jim Mitchell. The tax map needs to be coordinated with the property map and corrections made. (2) Mr. Tabner contacted Mr. Zee to have Mr. Zee check with neighbors on Crooked Street to verify that each of them had been contacted about their desire to become or not become a member of that water district if it should come to be. Mr. Zee sent us copies of certified letters that were sent to property owners. They have a choice of returning the letter or coming to the town hall to indicate their preference. (3) It needs to be determined if the application will be broken into two parts. There may be one application for all of the former outside users and one for the subdivision by Capital Real Estate.
Joe Marchesiello - Crooked Street - Stated that he had questions about the Capital Real Estate subdivision and the lack of information that he felt was coming out regarding this. It was decided to follow our normal procedures and wait and have all the discussion at the final privilege of the floor.
A letter was received by Peter Van Keuren of Crooked Street regarding concerns over road conditions and the possibility of the subdivision. Supervisor Acunto has referred the letter to Mr. VanVranken and Mr. Keniry. They will respond because most of his concerns relate to Planning Board issues.
We received a letter from Mr. Pentkowski offering Mr. Heflin's services if the Water Study Committee wishes any input from someone with his background.
Time Warner has sent two letters. One letter was regarding programming information. The second letter was to notify us that they are again merging with several other companies. The services will be the same.
We received an application from the Kominoskis and Hortsmans for the extension of the water line along Vines Road.
We received a letter of resignation from Leslie Tasse as Assistant Zoning Administrator. Leslie is now the Zoning Administrator.
HIGHWAY:
Have been putting shoulders on the roads that were paved. Have been chipping brush. Cutting brush back. There may be a cutback on CHIPS money from the state. We will go out to bid for sand at the next meeting.
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION:
Dot and Doris attended a meeting of the Capital District Transportation Committee. There will be a meeting in Charlton with the people that have been chosen to do the proposal. It will be in the schoolhouse. Two county planners, the highway superintendent and residents in an advisory capacity will also attend to hear the presentation. The grant money will be coming the end of September or early October.
HISTORIAN:
For the Day of Remembrance sponsored by the County Board of Supervisors, each historian has been asked to put two items into the time capsule that will be dedicated on September 11th. Items from our town include the story of Founder's Day Weekend for 2002 and our Town Directory from 2000-2001.
PARK COMMITTEE:
George Eggleston stated that the letter received regarding vandalism in the area of the park was a letter to the residents to warn them of what was going on and that it was being done by kids. Ron will take care of the water fountain in the park that we are having problems with. The tennis courts will be done this year. Another vendor is coming on Wednesday to give us an estimate on resurfacing the courts. Thanked Stacy Clark for her work for the Park Committee.
PLANNING BOARD:
There will be a meeting on September 16 at 7:30 P.M.
RECORDS ADVISORY BOARD:
Archives Week will be extended this year and will run from October 6 - 19. There will be a program at the town hall on October 16 at 7:30 P.M. Everyone is invited to come and share their memories, stories, photos, etc. regarding 911. There will be a slide show regarding Charlton's response to 911. Our preserved historical documents will be on display.
LIBRARY:
The library has seen a huge increase in circulation over the past year. There has been a bit of a problem with the Town of Ballston putting a hiring freeze on all new personnel. They would like to see another hour added on Saturday. They are requesting a 4% increase in Charlton's donation to the library.
WATER:
Councilman Lippiello has received another request for an extension of a water line from Mr. and Mrs. Stone on Charlton Road. They had requested an extension last fall and were excluded in the moratorium. Supervisor Acunto said there was also a problem because they will be part of District #2 which is bonded. They will have to pay back a portion of that bond from the time it started. The other exclusion is also proceeding. They are waiting for reports from engineers.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Bill Ryan has resigned as Zoning Administrator and Building Inspector. Leslie Tasse is now our Zoning Administrator. We are looking for an Assistant Zoning Administrator. Richard Moon is now our Building Inspector.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS:
They will be meeting tomorrow night at 7:30 P.M. at Scotch Church because of primary elections at the Town Hall. They have one case for next month's meeting.
VOTING MACHINE CUSTODIAN:
Several machines required extensive maintenance and repairs. They should be ready for primary day.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION COMMISSION:
Midge Dube reported on the Hazardous Waste Collection. It will be held September 28 at the Saratoga County Fairgrounds from 9:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M. There are slots for 400 people. She has received 35 responses from Charlton, 67 from Milton and 48 from Ballston. There was an article in The Gazette and The Glenville Weekly. The deadline is supposed to be September 13.
RESOLUTIONS:
Supervisor Acunto read a proposed resolution adopting an ADA Policy, Hire/Fire Policy and Employee Dispute Procedure. Councilman Schroeder has some questions and requested that this be discussed in executive session.
Supervisor Acunto read a proposed resolution to appoint a Water District Study Committee. Councilman Schroeder has some questions regarding this also and would like to discuss this in executive session.
Motion made by Councilman Schroeder, seconded by Councilman Grattidge that Resolution #89, A RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS, be approved:
Approved:
COUNCILMAN REPORTS:
Councilman Schroeder - A big thank you to Stacy Clark for being on the Park Committee for several years. She was a hard working lady. It is a great loss. There are remembrance services everywhere for 911. Please attend one.
Councilman Grattidge - No report at this time.
Councilman Mitchell - Thanked Stacy Clark for all her efforts on the Park Committee. The newsletter should be out the end of the month or early October.
Councilman Lippiello - No additional report at this time.
PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR:
Doris Stauffer stated that she shared Laura's concerns about the work being done at St. Paul's Church. Workers were there putting plastic on the ground, rolling it up against the foundation and filling it in with dirt. She was told this was done to deflect the water coming off the roof. She believes that according to building codes there is a certain amount of foundation that needs to be exposed. She feels the placement of the dirt will cause a great deal of rotting. A porch was built on the back. Dirt was placed over stringers on the bottom. The stone was pulled out and it is a mess. Doris called the man doing the work and he stated he was doing what he was told to do. Doris called the Department of Historic Preservation, John Mesick, Pete Schrader and Walt Schmidt. They all told her it was the wrong thing to do. No permits were approved for this project. Doris feels this is a weakness in the Historic District zoning and needs to be addressed. Doris is going to talk with the Historical Society Board. Doris feels the whole thing needs to be done over.
Sandy Verola - Redwood Drive - What are the legal requirements for the Town Board to notify the public when you change the date of a normally scheduled meeting?
Gail Hanchar - We have to post it outside and notify the paper. I don't believe there has to be any advance notice.
Sandy Verola - I think when you change the normal meeting date and you are going to talk about something controversial, there needs to be a better way of informing the public that the meeting date has been changed.
Joe Marchesiello - Crooked Street - I have some questions about the water extension. I live right across the street from the proposed subdivision. I received the certified letter saying come up here at 6:00 P.M. on Thursday and see what the plan is. Before the 16th I have to decide whether I want to be part of this water district. Is that the only time I can make that decision? If I do sign that, does that say that I then have to agree with everything they are saying or can I oppose some of it?
Supervisor Acunto - When we received the map, plan and review from Bordeau, in his cover letter he stated that he had contacted "x" number of people along Crooked Street and no one wanted to be part of this extension. The Board was not comfortable with that. Bob contacted Mr. Tabner who contacted Mr. Zee and said we want documentation that these people have been contacted. Bob received photocopies of the certified receipts and a copy of the letter. How the dates were arrived at, I don't have a clue. That was a date he picked.
Joe Marchesiello - I want to voice my opinion against a couple of things. I don't want to be put in a position that if I sign right then and there I will be giving up my right to speak against anything that is proposed there. Things have been proposed and things have been discussed with the town. I am told that what they are proposing now is different than the approved plot plan. I am wondering what type of legal process is being gone through if you are discussing a water district that now has a tank on a piece of property and a change in the road locations that aren't on the filed map? No one can show me anything. Ten or twelve years ago I came and argued against the road being where I hear it is proposed again. It is supposedly on the map where the Planning Board said "No" ten or twelve years ago. I am confused. Who and where does the authority lie in going forward on the water district and changes being made to this 49 house development?
Supervisor Acunto - Twelve years ago that Planning Board approved something. They signed the mylars. You mentioned to me that the access road into the subdivision was to be moved to the east. In the signed mylar, it is a straight shot right of the development. That TOTALLY lies within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board. They have total jurisdiction over design and plans. Regarding the signatures and what happened, I don't have an answer for you.
Joe Marchesiello - I think that road now is east of where I thought it was in that signed mylar.
Councilman Schroeder - The mylar has to match the new plan or it is not legal.
Joe Marchesiello - I asked Connie Wood this question. She showed me a sketch and that sketch showed the road different than the mylar.
Supervisor Acunto - The one I gave you a copy of is a copy of the mylar on file with the county.
Joe Marchesiello - I went home and studied that. There is a telephone pole up from my house. It is the only one there. That road is east of that telephone pole.
Supervisor Acunto - After we spoke I suggested that you go back and bring this up to the entire Planning Board.
Joe Marchesiello - Their meeting is the 16th. They are going to have the meeting to sign this petition prior to the Planning Board Meeting.
Councilman Lippiello - Who told you that if you were to sign you would loose your right to voice an opinion? How does that take your right to do any other talking away from you?
Joe Marchesiello - I am asking you as a Town Board if there are any Town Board laws or anything like that dealing with a water district that if a person signs a petition for a water district you are giving up your right to oppose anything?
Councilman Grattidge - You are just saying that if the water district comes to be, you want to be included because if you are not included when the district is set up, then you are into the outside user mess that we have had all along, which you don't want to be. You are not endorsing the plan. By signing, you are saying that if the water district does come to pass, you're property would be included and it would be their expense of setting up the water district.
Joe Marchesiello - Will the Town Board ensure, by notifying whoever issues building permits, that no building permits will be issued unless it conforms with the filed map at the county?
Supervisor Acunto - Before they can get a building permit they have to put the roads in and the water.
Joe Marchesiello - That is my point. I want the road put in according to the filed map.
Supervisor Acunto - I agree with you. It has to be according to the filed map but now, from what I think I heard you say, what I gave you, which I assume is the filed map because it shows the signatures on it, is different from some other map you have seen. Is that right?
Joe Marchesiello - Different than a sketch I have seen.
Supervisor Acunto - Whose sketch is this?
Joe Marchesiello - It is a sketch of where the water tank and road will be.
Councilman Lippiello - We have had discussions with the town engineer as to where the placement of that tank would best serve the town if it became town property or when it becomes town property. It has moved. Originally the engineer thought that it best be on the highest point of land in that property. As they developed the mechanics of pumping and moving this water, it was found that the storage did not have to be on the highest piece of land. In the process of discussing this, its location has moved. That was not included as part of the Planning Board map agreement. The roads should be where they were.
Joe Marchesiello - You're right. It's not part of the Planning Board map. If you read the subdivision laws of this town, if there is a substantial change to the final approved filed map, it has to go before the board again.
Supervisor Acunto - It is my understanding that they did go to the Planning Board only a couple of months ago with SEQR review on the location of that storage facility.
Joe Marchesiello - Subdivision law says that you now have to petition the Planning Board again and present the new plan. They have to have a public hearing and it has to be re-reviewed and signed again and filed with the county. It says that for major changes. I would think that changing the road and putting a water tank on that property would be a major change.
Councilman Grattidge - I am not aware of any road changes. The only difference would be was the tank going to be further down the road with the placement of the water storage. That was determined by where our town engineer and our town water superintendent felt would be the best location for that storage. It was going to be on common land anyway which would be deeded over to the town. Whether it was being re-subdivided or not really wasn't an issue. It was where the placement of that tank was going to be.
Joe Marchesiello - It is an issue in this sense (Could not understand). There is a legal process to be followed. That legal process says if you have major change to that property, and you are now putting in a water tank not just to serve that subdivision but also to serve another part of the town, it has to go before the Planning Board for a public hearing. I think you are moving forward on something here that may have to come before the Planning Board. You said earlier that you have a map of what they are proposing. I want to see it to be able to see where the road is.
Supervisor Acunto - Several months ago or longer, Dot was with me and we were talking with Connie Wood and I voiced my concern of the same thing and said if we are talking about changing the location of the water tower, it should be brought up to the Planning Board. I suggested to Connie, this was a small group discussion, that when they do meet with Mr. Zee or whoever might call, that they should re-visit the issue of the relocation. To my knowledge nothing ever came out of that. I do not know why the Planning Board didn't do it.
Joe Marchesiello - I am now saying, forget about the Planning Board. The Planning Board doesn't issue permits or administer what has been approved, the town departments do, which are controlled by the Town Board. I am asking that the Town Board ensure, by notifying the department's involved, that nothing starts on that property until they ensure that it follows the filed plot plan.
Supervisor Acunto - I don't have a problem with that. I thought that after you and I met that you would come to the next Planning Board meeting which will be the one on September 16th. I think you have a viable concern. The date in Mr. Zee's letter does not bother me. He has picked the 16th. That is his pick. If the 16th isn't enough, he will have to extend the time. We have never given him a deadline. They have arbitrarily picked this deadline.
Jim Leupold - Why would an individual firm send out petitions and give people a time frame as to when they have to buy in or buy out. It is almost like they are dictating to us, or at least the people who live on Crooked Street, whether or not they will be able to get access to the water district. This guy has been waiting patiently for years for water. What gives this independent company the right to start a process that I feel should be driven by the board? The Board, whether it be the Water Study Committee or whatever, should have a master plan as to what is going to happen with the water be it with the development, be it with the existing town residents and then they dictate what surveys are going to be decided, what questionnaires are going to be submitted to the residents. What makes me nervous hearing about this registered letter forcing people to make a decision on something that has nothing to do with what they legally have a right to, they haven't even applied for the water district. Where is this coming from?
Supervisor Acunto - They have applied. They presented to the Board a map, plan and report. When we looked at that with the cover letter dated August 20, the cover letter said that they had contacted the residents along Crooked Street to see if they wanted to be in the water district extension and that to date no owner wanted to be part of that extension. As a result, only the lands owned by Capital Realty would be included. That did not set well with the Town Board and generated the letter that was received by residents of Crooked Street. Our water district attorney contacted Mr. Zee and told him that we wanted registered letters sent to the people.
Dimmy Miner - Vines Road - Why are they allowed to meet in the Town Hall?
Supervisor Acunto - I don't know.
Gail stated that no one has asked to use the Town Hall.
Dimmy Miner - I would suggest that you send this whole thing back to the Planning Board. That was at least 10 years ago that we signed this stuff. I think the changes that have taken place over that period of time require that this go back to the Planning Board.
Supervisor Acunto - If I have said that once..........The whole board has said it. The Planning Board has not asked to reopen it. They have the sole authority to approve subdivisions and review them.
Dimmy Miner - Let's go back to this committee and who you are appointing. Alan, Mr. Lippiello, Lupe, Caine and Morgan. I really think there are conflicts here. I think Alan may have a conflict of interest due to the business of the Grattidge firm. Mr. Lupi is fine. Mr. Caine is on the Planning Board. It strikes me that you have some different people that should be on this committee other than the ones that have been appointed.
Sandy Verola - No one on this committee is representing an opposite point of view. They are all like-minded people.
Supervisor Acunto - This is a study committee. This committee is not going to develop any laws.
Dimmy Miner - But they are going to make recommendations. What are they going to recommend? We don't know that either.
Supervisor Acunto - We don't know what they are going to recommend.
Dimmy Miner - What are they supposed to be studying?
Supervisor Acunto - They will have to go through the guidelines that were written in the original water district. They are out of date and have created the mass problem of outside users vs. district users and spaghetti lines, etc. That has to be taken care of. The next portion of it is to work with the engineers and the attorney to redraw a map of the water district that includes everybody. We hope to do away with outside users. Everybody will be incorporated in the water district. That is as far as I see this committee going.
Councilman Lippiello - I do think there is a necessity to look at what our current capacity and usage is. We know what our capacity is. We need to look at what has been happening over the years with our usage. We had indications from the Town Engineer in 1998 or 1999 that we had usage in excess of 150,000 gallons a day. NYS Department of Health laws indicate that you need to hold a day's use in your storage capacity. If we are exceed that currently, we have a problem which may generate a different direction to look at. If we are pushing 157,000 gallons a day, I think that one of the things that this committee should look at is how do we resolve that problem. It needs to be resolved. That study may generate other areas where we may have to look.
Councilman Schroeder - I think what you are asking for is a black and white mission statement. We can do that.
Dimmy Miner - I would think you would have to do that. They would have to know what they are doing.
Nick Verola - How can the Town Board make a decision when you don't even know these figures? How can you extend without knowing positively where you stand with the water district? You don't know that. That is what you are telling us.
Councilman Lippiello - That would be one aspect of the study.
Nick Verola - Redwood Drive - That is a pretty major aspect in my estimation. Like Dimmy said, this was voted upon ten years ago. What action has been taken by the people that applied for it to develop that land since that was approved? Has anything been done there? How many years has it been since anything has been done? You've got to go back.
Chuck McLoughlin - Edwin Drive - I agree with what Dimmy said. I think this thing should have gone back to the Planning Board a long time ago. This has been the tail wagging the dog for a long time. I was involved in it early on. I was told when I first came on the town board that this water thing was a done deal. Paul St. John was the chairman of the Planning Board at the time. I was looking for paper. What's going on? Where is it? Nobody ever had it. There were games being played by somebody. I don't know who. We are in a situation now where the tail is still wagging the dog. We still don't know what we are doing and we are still going ahead with a project that the people in the water district don't want to see go ahead. I think that pretty much was evident at the last meeting when the moratorium was put out. Everybody was against it. I think the Town Board really went against the will of the people on that one. It looks like they are pushing to get the people down there to vote on something. If the main goes in front of their house they are in the water district whether they want it or not. Why do they have to sign up ahead of time?
Supervisor Acunto - That is not true, Chuck. Go back to District #2. There was one family that did not want into the district and they drew the map around them and the main is in front of his house. He is paying nothing. He is not involved in it at all.
Chuck McLoughlin - There was a three-year moratorium put on. If nothing was built in three years---This had stood still for how many years?
Supervisor Acunto - You and I have had that same discussion and how many times have I said the Planning Board should reopen it and they choose not to reopen it.
Sandy Verola - Couldn't you tell the applicant you have got to take this back to the Planning Board. It is not a Town Board issue.
Supervisor Acunto - The Planning Board jurisdiction is subdivisions, not the Town Board.
Sandy Verola - Why don't you tell the applicant you've got to go back to the Planning Board? We don't have the jurisdiction.
Councilman Grattidge - These are legal questions.
Sandy Verola - Could you answer me this? You have done a moratorium on water. Why, then, are the people on Crooked Street being asked to sign a petition to hook up to water?
Supervisor Acunto - The subdivision is exempt from the moratorium. We, as a board, feel that if they are going to get water they will have to put a line down Crooked Street. We want this to be made also available to the people along Crooked Street. We don't want to see a subdivision with a collection of houses and a long transmission line that goes in front of a lot of houses and these people are not going to be part of it? That doesn't make sense.
Sandy Verola - I would like to read to you a paragraph from the Town Law Manual that would make someone think that if they signed the petition they could not later speak. What this is talking about is water extensions. There are two different ways that this can be approached. One is the petition method. "In deciding which method to proceed under, a Town Board should consider the size of the district or extension, the number of property owners and of residents therein. If these numbers are small, the petition method (Article 12) might be quicker and more convenient. If there is possible controversy as to the desirability of creating the district or extension the petition method might be better because the persons concerned would have signed on the dotted line and should not be heard later to complain."
Supervisor Acunto - I don't have an answer for you.
Sandy Verola - Well, you are the supervisor. I think this needs to be investigated before anyone on Crooked Street signs that petition. Bernie have you seen the letter that went out to the residents?
Councilman Schroeder - I have not seen the letter.
Sandy Verola - I think you need to read it. Sandy read a portion of the letter, "The Town of Charlton has requested that we contact you and your neighbor to see whether you would agree to sign a petition to be included in the extension of the water district".
Supervisor Acunto - Correct, based on their saying there was no one interested. That's what generated that letter.
Sandy Verola - Badly written.
Supervisor Acunto - I didn't write it. We had nothing to do with it.
Councilman Lippiello - We did not request THIS letter.
Sandy Verola - How do we go about notifying the residents of Crooked Street that received this letter that maybe they should not be so quick to sign it. There might be another way to get them on. That is important, Fred, because they have been given until the 16th of September.
Supervisor Acunto - That 16th date doesn't bother me because............
Sandy Verola - But they are going to sign this petition thinking that that is what they have to do.
Joe Marchesiello - You told me earlier that I'm not signing my right away but this lady just read something where it sounds like I am.
Councilman Lippiello - Who were the quotes from?
Sandy Verola - The Town Law. I read directly from this book. It is in quotes.
Councilman Lippiello - The part that you read to us and you said "quotes"......
Sandy Verola - I took it right out of the book.
Councilman Lippiello - It is in quotes?
Sandy Verola - It's in quotes.
Councilman Lippiello - Who are they quoting with the quotes?
Sandy Verola - (Could not understand)
Councilman Lippiello - But she implied that it was put in quotes in there.
Sandy Verola - No, I'm sorry.
Dimmy Miner - Especially if they have to have their picture.
Supervisor Acunto - That is not a Town generated letter.
Sandy Verola - They are having it here.
Councilman Schroeder - They can't have it here. They can't come to Town Hall and have a meeting in here. They haven't asked.
Gail Hanchar - Someone from the Town Board should be here Thursday night to explain this to people.
Mary Gallup - Crooked Street - We got a letter. We are already in District #1. We have been in it since day one. This doesn't make sense to us. Why would we get the letter? No one ever approached us before. No one came to our house. No one called us. We didn't hear from anybody.
Supervisor Acunto - We felt the same way that it couldn't be that 17 people never responded. You are also correct that you are in District #1.
Mary Gallup - If that goes by us, which it will, what does that mean to us? We don't have to pay any fees. Do we have to pay $500.00?
Supervisor Acunto - Pay $500.00?
(Changed tape)
Supervisor Acunto - What are the requirements when they do a petition for the extension of a water district? This is from counsel and I might not be saying it exactly the way it is stated. They, in their petition for a water extension, have to state what they feel would be the cost to people in the extension. They are only talking about their subdivision. They aren't talking about the people along Crooked Street. That $500.00 is only for information purposes that says to this Board when this would be discussed during the public hearing that we estimate the cost to those people in the proposed subdivision to be approximately $500.00. Obviously, the cost to anyone along Crooked Street is only going to be the cost of attaching to the main. The main will be put in totally by the developer, paid for by him.
Mary Gallup - Then we shouldn't be charged for hooking up. We are already hooked up to District #1.
Supervisor Acunto - John Morgan and I had this discussion this morning because of the way your hook up is set up right now. We don't know how it happened that there wasn't a main in front of your house but yet you are in the district. I asked Gail to pull any of the outside users along Crooked Street. There are two presently. You aren't one of them. John and I discussed your particular situation and I said if that main comes to fruition, that's going to be an expense that the water district will have to incur to reattach your house to the main because you are already within the district. That is my interpretation.
Bill Gallup - Crooked Street - The Town has to pay for that, not the contractor? How about across the street? The Town has to pay for them, too?
Supervisor Acunto - No. Eldeen and Balance have to pay their own because they signed an outside user contract that says they pay out of their own pocket.
Bill Gallup - I don't care how small it is, why should the Town have to pay for us?
Councilman Schroeder - Not the whole town, just the people in the water district.
Bill Gallup - (Could not understand)
Supervisor Acunto - That is a good question to come out at the public hearing.
Bill Gallup - It shows the ignorance on the part of these people in what they are doing and the smarts that they have. You look at the letter and what does it say? It says a percent of the assessed evaluation of District #4. Where is District #4?
Councilman Lippiello - It is the proposed district.
Bill Gallup - Where is it? Is Dean Durst included in that?
Supervisor Acunto - No.
Bill Gallup - Going back to what you have, the mylar should have shown water supply of some sort otherwise it couldn't be approved legally. It does show a tower, now. It is a major change.
Mary Gallup - You have got to go back to square one.
Supervisor Acunto - You have got to go back to the Planning Board where it started.
Mary Gallup - I would think the Town Board would refer it back.
Sandy Verola - (could not understand) take your application back to the Planning Board. Clarify that so I have it clear. I do not understand why the applicant is not being told by the Town Board, this is not our jurisdiction. You need to take your application back to the Planning Board because ten years have gone by. There is a question about the position of a road. There was no water ever approved for this development. It was never done and now you have a 28-foot water storage tank that came from where? Nobody has heard about that before. Why is the applicant not being told you got to go back to the Planning Board?
Councilman Lippiello - The Planning Board refused.
Sandy Verola - (Could not understand.)
Councilman Grattidge - The subdivision was already approved.
Sandy Verola - But it wasn't approved. It was approved contingent on water. They were never given water. The water district has changed from ten years ago. Ten years ago you didn't have the hamlet in the water district and you weren't 7,000 gallons in the hole with the water district. Now you are. Everything is different. It's got to go back to the Planning Board. How can you not see it? You are not representing the people well by not sending this back to the Planning Board. I don't know what the agenda is but it is not the best interest of the people.
Tom McGovern - Redwood Drive - I have been listening to this and it is confusing to say the least. I think you have to realize that, legally, after three years went by when that was approved, and it was approved originally, it was approved contingent upon getting water for 28 or 29 houses. The builder never applied for water. No, it was never turned down. They just never applied for it. After three years, if you don't break ground, it is null and void. The
Jim Leupold - Is Mr. VanVranken the lawyer for our town?
Supervisor Acunto - Correct.
Jim Leupold - Why isn't he seeing what he just said? Is that true that there is a time frame that if you don't do something in three years that causes it to be null and void and you have to go through the process again?
Councilman Grattidge - If an application is in front of the Planning Board and there is no action for three years....
Jim Leupold - So why didn't he see that?
Tom McGovern - (Could not understand)
Councilman Grattidge - Once a subdivision is made, Tom, it is in the books. Look at the roll.
Jim Leupold - If the never applied for water in 12 years, then that makes it null and void. If that didn't happen, then what makes that legal? What makes the subdivision legal if they never filed the application for water?
Councilman Grattidge - We will be happy to bring in Mr. VanVranken and ask him these questions.
Jim Leupold - I can't believe he didn't pick that up at that meeting when we spun our heads here talking about this stuff and he never mentioned that's the law.
Tom McGovern - Mr. VanVranken knew about this because I discussed it with him but his learned interpretation was that it was not really legal because it hadn't been filed with the state.
Jim Leupold - Why didn't he mention that at the meeting?
Tom McGovern - I don't know. All I know is, it was filed with the state on February 13, 1995. It was filed with the Secretary of State. It was approved. Three years (could not understand).
Councilman Schroeder - We need to get a real read on this from the Town Attorney.
Robert Killeen, Jr. - I have two items. First of all, the Town Board has the option of when I project like this comes before the Town Board to decide whether a development and a proposed water district are in the best interest of the town. By last month's meeting, I would say that the Town Board, some of the members, decided that this was in the best interest of the town. Take away the water district that may be attached to this development. All you have is 50 houses. Would a 50-house development on two-acre lots on wells be in the best interest of the town and the town residents? Without the water district. Just the houses on private wells. Is that in the best interest of the town and the town residents?
Supervisor Acunto - Some members have been on the Planning Board when this was first discussed. As I understand it, and Dimmy, I think you might have been on the Planning Board, the builder, which was Capital Realty, came with a 49-lot subdivision on two acres. The Planning Board in their discussions, somebody brought up the issue of a cluster development, which would give them 49 houses on smaller lots.
Dimmy Miner - I don't know if it was 49 houses, Fred. Let's say 25 houses.
Supervisor Acunto - Whatever number it was. The Planning Board with the developer discussed the issue of cluster development which brought them smaller lots and would create a barrier. Subdivision, under the law, says that if you have a cluster development, it requires public water. The Planning Board went to the Town Board and said we are considering a cluster development but we cannot go forward unless the Board approves the idea of cluster development. The Board passed a resolution and voted unanimously to waive the subdivision ordinance and permit the Planning Board to continue the discussion of cluster development and at that point had to know it required water. That is how it ended up the way it is.
Jim Leupold - What year was that?
Councilman Grattidge - 1989. In 1989 there was a resolution in front of the Town Board to waive the current zoning and to look at cluster development. That was passed........
Councilman Schroeder - To let them put in a plan for cluster. They said OK. Go ahead. You can put an alternative plan in and we will let them look at it.
Councilman Grattidge - Supervisor Simoni requested the Town of Glenville to provide water for the additional houses and he was granted permission.
Tom McGovern - No he didn't.
Councilman Grattidge - There is a letter in the file.
Tom McGovern - You can get that letter because all he did was ask, "Was it available." They said yes it was. It was never requested. It was never approved.
Supervisor Acunto - There is a resolution from Glenville that says they approved his request.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - Glenville is eager to sell the water. A lot of other towns have put in cluster developments and they haven't turned out to be quite the shining star that many people claim. They haven't panned out. That was many years ago. What I am asking is, would just the housing development alone be in the best interest of the town's people and why, without the water? What is your train of thought on this with just the housing development, not the water being attached as a proverbial free-be or a gift or whatever you choose to call it?
Councilman Grattidge - Bob, those are all the issues that come before the district.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - All the water district is doing is sweetening up the deal. That's basically what it is. You get the houses along with the water district. Is that the way the Town Board is looking at it?
Supervisor Acunto - I wouldn't personally say it that way. I'm saying this Town Board inherited a subdivision, a literal mess of a mylar signed off by the Chairman of the Planning Board. There wasn't any water approval. As things have gone on over the years, now we are dealing with the issue of a water extension to a subdivision that has been approved. Has this Board decided? No. We haven't had a public hearing on it yet.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - It should all go back to the Planning Board. This has been in the works 15 years. I think like many other people in this room tonight.
Supervisor Acunto - I have said this personally to Connie Wood that they should reopen it. In all honesty, what is going on right now should be taking place on the 16th in front of the Planning Board.
Joe Marchesiello - It is in your jurisdiction right now. The water district is not part of the Planning Board. You have an application for the water district. That is a Town Board function. I think what everybody here is saying is, once that comes to you, you recognize that fact that that's not included in what the Planning Board already approved and tell the application you have to go back to the Planning Board. That is what everybody is saying. That is within your jurisdiction.
Supervisor Acunto - My understanding is that Bordeau's attorney and all those attorneys over the last several months have been in front of the Planning Board on the issue of this storage facility and never once raised the issue of reopening the whole thing.
Joe Marchesiello - And quess what, this is Connie Wood telling you this that, yes they came before us but they haven't formally presented anything to us. There has not been a formal presentation and a request for approval.
Supervisor Acunto - Approval for what?
Joe Marchesiello - Approval for the change in the use of that property. They have not come to that decision. We want to (could not understand) what was approved and we want you to sign off on a major change.
Tom McGovern - Fred is using the term and you are using the term that this is an extension of a water district or a previously approved subdivision. There is no subdivision. You are putting the horse before the cart. I resent sitting here when I was involved in this for about 13 years and hearing people say, "It was approved". It was never approved because it was contingent upon water. It was never requested. You look at the subdivision regulations. After three years, if ground isn't broken for one lot, it is nullified. They have got to go back and start over.
Joe Marchesiello - But the Board is taking a different approach.
Councilman Lippiello - We are taking an approach, too, that Bob VanVranken in discussions with them and Mr. Tabner, our water legal advisor, believe that the actions that have occurred over the years of 1995-2002 (those are the years when that application was signed) indicate that things had preceded within three years. There had been action on it. There had been things done. There had been intercommunications and, in his opinion, that has left this development alive. If we were to, at this point, exclude that from the moratorium, we would very likely face a significant lawsuit that in both of their opinions, we would not come out on the winning end.
Joe Marchesiello - Let's say you go with that approach. Let's say it is a conservative approach. If you go with that approach that is now before you, this does not comply with what has been approved and signed. You should be able to know that by what you have in front of you and what was filed with the county. By looking at that you should as a Board, take a look at it and vote that this should go back to the Planning Board because what this developer has in front of you does not comply with previous approval.
Councilman Lippiello - And what do you think is the difference between what we now have and what they had when it was initially approved?
Joe Marchesiello - You now have a 50,000 gallon water tank on this which is not on the approved map anywhere. It is not that it has been relocated, it is not on there anywhere. I believe, based on what I heard, and when I saw the sketch, the road is in a different position. Just the road alone being in a different position nullifies what was approved. I heard it two or three weeks ago. I am hearing it again tonight and all I really keep hearing from the Town Board is that it is not our problem but it is. We are asking that you notify the contractor the he go before the Planning Board and after it is presented, to get in writing from the Planning Board either "yes" it (could not understand) been approved or "no" we have to go through and redo it again before you proceed on any of this water extension.
Councilman Lippiello - They won't be their lines.
Supervisor Acunto - They will be our lines.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - The pumps at the Charlton Heights pumping station, are those going to be used to fill their tanks? They are using the pumps that the water district residents have already bought and paid for. They aren't pumping the water initially from Glenville. They will put in their lines and we will fill a 50,000 gallon non-pressurized tank. Am I correct?
Councilman Lippiello - I believe it's not pressurized.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - (Could not understand) The reason why the water tower is on the highest point of ground in the water district at 125 feet in the air is to generate pressure that charges your water system. They are going to then go from that tank with their pump to recharge our tank, a 30-year old tank that holds one day's supply of water, not two days, not three days. One day. The tank is going to be filling and emptying quicker serving 50 new houses. Correct? It will cycle more often off of this 50,000 gallon storage tank. It does have to maintain pressure. Take a worse case scenario that happened about four years ago in Plattsburg during the ice storm. They were out of power for a week or two weeks at a shot. The electric pump no longer works. The pump down by the school no longer works. Yet people, at a reduced rate, still use water for sanitary purposes, drinking purposes, whatever. Our tower will now empty quicker supplying 50 new houses with water. It will empty much quicker. Correct? It will empty instead of 24 hours, that's a 10% increase on draw, it will empty in about 22 hours.
Councilman Lippiello - I'm not sure. I can't agree with you on those numbers.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - An approximate figure. The water will be reduced some because you won't be using hot water appliances or electric appliances. Water will still get used. There's not enough water in that tower to supply a three-day power outage. If there's a fire, an emergency call, you get a fire truck down there three days later and the power lines are down and trees are down and the roads are bad and you can't get through, just like up north. The house burns down because they pumped their 1,000 gallons out of that one truck that does make it to the scene. They hook up to a hydrant in the water district. No water. Is that really in the best interest of the town residents? I say not. What the developer should be required to do, and I urge the town would by referendum, is install a new water tower with a pressure generating form of construction, not a stationary tank on the ground. That does the people no good. It may be what the state requires but if you also read a lot of what the state requires, they require bare minimum. Do you want to settle for bare minimum? I don't. That's how I see it.
Jim Leupold - I submitted a letter through Gail Hanchar requesting to be considered for being part of the Water Study Committee. I was wondering if every one of the board's members and yourself got a copy of that.
Supervisor Acunto - We all have copies of it. There is an executive session following this meeting that we will be discussing not only your letter but another letter as well.
Dick Carros - Division Street - Mr. Carros stated that he lives in the residential/agricultural district of Town that allows open burning. He said that Supervisor Acunto called a resident of this area and since that call this resident has been burning construction debris with flames going 6-8' high and an in ground stump was lit on fire and has burned for several days. This burning has been going on for over five years in the months of July and August. Mr. Carros said that he pays taxes and feels he should not have to tolerate this. The Zoning Administrator is a subordinate to the person who is doing the burning. Councilman Schroeder said that in the residential/agricultural district they can open burn. Mr. Carros said he does not object to open burning but he objects to them burning two or three times a week. He objects to the smoke. Councilman Schroeder stated that in the residential area you need a Burning Permit because the houses are so close together but you can burn. Councilman Schroeder said that he feels this is a neighbor dispute and the Town Board has no authority.
Joe Marchesiello - Will the Town Board vote to throw this back to the Planning Board before this proceeds? Can you get us a legal interpretation for the 17 or 18 of us who have gotten this letter? If we sign this petition, do we waive our rights?
Supervisor Acunto - Bob can call John Tabner tomorrow and get an answer to that question. As far as the Board's jurisdiction to be able to tell the Planning Board what to do, we need to sit down and talk to counsel and go from there.
Joe Marchesiello - I am not asking you to tell the Planning Board what to do. Will you vote on telling the contractor you want him to go back and formally resubmit this to the Planning Board?
Councilman Schroeder - You want to get a formal response back from the Town Board?
Joe Marchesiello - Yes, a formal response that addresses whether you are going to ask the contractor to go to the Planning Board.
Councilman Schroeder - That's reasonable.
Jim Leupold - Could you go a step further, if it addresses that if, in fact, there is a three-year statute of limitations on that proposal? If that is the case, it's a no brainer.
Councilman Schroeder - We could have him clarify that also. He can put it in black and white.
Jim Leupold - Especially in reference to the major change, the water tower that was proposed in the plan and wasn't part of the original. Somehow that should be addressed, too. Is that considered a major structural change?
Supervisor Acunto - I suggest that we have an executive session with both counsels before we go any further.
Councilman Schroeder - Before we move any further on water issues, period, that we should have that executive session.
Sandy Verola - Why is this going to be in executive session?
Supervisor Acunto - I am also asking in this request that we have the attorney for the Planning Board here as well and the whole Planning Board if they want to be here.
Dimmy Miner - An executive session or an agenda session?
Supervisor Acunto - An executive session.
Dimmy Miner - Isn't an executive session usually for just personnel matters?
Supervisor Acunto - No. Legal and personnel.
Councilman Schroeder - This is a legal matter and we can go to executive session.
Nick Verola - Why don't we have it in an open session?
Supervisor Acunto - Because it has some legal ramifications.
Nick Verola - So what. We are taxpayers. We want to know what is going on.
Supervisor Acunto - Under the law, to protect the town, from a legal aspect, we are going to hold an executive session with attorneys to discuss legal matters and that is the way it has to be.
Nick Verola - But it seems to me that the legal advice that you have already gotten is contrary to what we have been hearing all night.
Supervisor Acunto - Whenever we hold a public hearing we need to get answers to questions and that is the way we are going to do it.
Joe Marchesiello - Should I contact Bob as far as the answer regarding the petition or is there something you can get us in writing?
Councilman Lippiello - If I can get Mr. Tabner, I will get someone from his office to respond to this letter to find out where you folks who received it stand. I have your names. I can probably make some phone calls back to you.
Bill Gallup - Regarding communication, is there a possibility we could get a monthly newsletter out to see what is going on in the town?
Supervisor Acunto - It is cost prohibitive. We do what we can do. We did a mailing on the reval. which we thought would fill this room and there were 18 people in the room so mailings don't always work either. The cost of a town-wide mailing is about $3,000.00.
Dimmy Miner - It wouldn't have to be town-wide because it is only the water district.
Supervisor Acunto - How do you sort out those addresses and how do we get it done in a turn around time? To me it does not seem feasible to do a monthly mailing.
Sandy Verola - I think I have a list of everyone in the water district.
Councilman Lippiello - I don't think it is fair to mail it to everyone in the water district because it is a town question.
Sandy Verola - If it's something that concerns the water district, it's not a town concern.
Dimmy Miner - Most of us here are concerned about the water district.
Sandy Verola - The water district is a concern of the whole town?
Supervisor Acunto - Why not?
Councilman Lippiello - What happens in this town is the concern of all the people. It's not a quickie to send out a letter.
Supervisor Acunto - It doesn't work when you have to type it and get it printed and sorted and into the mail. It doesn't happen overnight.
Bob Killeen, Jr. - I think the water committee investigating the future of the water district needs some diversity. I would like to see some people that are residents, taxpayers and property owners. You have two members on the board already that seem to share like views. I think you need more diversity. I know you need more diversity.
Supervisor Acunto - We will be in executive session shortly.
The next Agenda Meeting is September 30 at 7:30 P.M. Mr. Mesick is coming in at 7:00 P.M.
The next Town Board Meeting is October 15 at 7:30 P.M. which is a Tuesday because of the holiday on Monday.
Motion made by Councilman Grattidge, seconded by Councilman Schroeder, A motion to adjourn to an executive session to discuss personnel and legal matters, be approved:
Approved:
After everyone had to opportunity to speak who wished, the meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M.
Respectfully submitted, |
|
|