Town Board Meeting November 6th, 2023
OFFICIALS PRESENT: Highway Supt. Hassenmayer, Dep. Chief Maresca, Dep. Chief Hahne, & Attorney David Bavoso.
Following the Pledge of Allegiance, Supervisor Howell called the public hearing to order at 7:30pm.
7:30pm – 2024 PRELIMINARY BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice on table.
Supervisor Howell opened the public hearing to public comments.
Paul Rickard: this public hearing is improper. You had a legal notice in the paper last week that said this budget was reviewable from 8-4 – this budget was not released to the public until at least 7:10 tonight when the door was unlocked. I don’t see how you can proceed with this public hearing. There’s no notice. It’s clearly not balanced the budget just looking in the couple minutes quickly that we could look at it. I’m asking you or having your attorney advise that this should not proceed. You violated your legal notice. Besides for being a complete lack of transparency, it’s not fair to everybody here that wants to go through the budget. The only way you would find out about this budget is if you read the interview that you gave to the Epoch Times. Nobody could possibly comment on this unless they are a speed reader when they picked it up at 7:10pm tonight. Thank you.
Brian Bonilla: he came to my house for a vote and I gave him my vote. Lived here for 18 years. I like the police department and I worked in Deer Park. I helped translate. It came to my attention that they’re gonna build a warehouse where old Lucy’s farmhouse used to be for UPS or something like that. It was brought to my attention and I want to know if it’s true or not. If it’s true then my stay in this town is very short lived. Building a warehouse brings tractor trailers at all times of the night, noise, pollution everything else. Councilmember Davis: currently, this is a public hearing for the preliminary budget. You can make that comment when we open it to public comment. Mr. Bonilla: not a problem, but that’s what I wanted to hear about it. I didn’t know if the people knew that’s what they came here for. Davis: you’re perfectly welcome to bring that up during….H’way Supt.: I was gonna stop you too. I don’t know why the Supervisor didn’t stop you. This is a public hearing on the budget. Bonilla: I didn’t get a copy of the budget so I wouldn’t know.
Keri Lee Carey: I have a question about the budget more so the article in the newspaper. It said that $270,000 was taken out of reserve – in this budget as well. Supervisor Howell: no that’s not correct. It’s about $67,000 approx. Mrs. Carey: do you know if there was any taken out of reserve from the 2023 budget? Supervisor: yes, there was one expense when the fuel oil tanks that use the heat for the fuel for the building had developed a defect and needed emergency repair? Dean? H’way Supt: yes, that was the replacement of the tanks. Supervisor: that was an unexpected occurrence when that happened. H’way Supt.: we took it out of reserves. Supervisor: yes. Do you have an estimate of what that could have possibly cost from over a year ago? H’way Supt.: I think it was under $30,000 with the labor and everything. Supervisor: Mrs. Carey, the amount would be $67,750. With the change, are you staying under the tax cap? Supervisor: yes.
Diane Loeven: I assume you are still moving forward with the hearing. I have to say I did have a copy of the budget prior to. I came down to view it. It wasn’t available. I was told I had to fill out a FOIL request in order to get a copy. I did receive that from Angie yesterday. She sent it to me electronically. On the 1st page, the amount to be raised by taxes is listed under general. Wouldn’t that be under general outside the village? Supervisor: reading from left to right, the 1st item on the left being general and then? Loeven: and then all the way on the right – the amount to be raised by taxes. Supervisor: that’s general A. That’s our town outside of the village budget. Loeven: no, “A” is including the village. Supervisor: yes, that’s townwide. Loeven: but you’re not collecting taxes in the village. I’m just saying, it looks like that should be on the 2nd line. It doesn’t make any difference in the amount of money, its’ just a technical. Page 8. Supervisor: Diane, that follows suit with the highway outside of the village. So, highway townwide is “DA” which is the $2,000 amount in the furthest most right column. And, general A townwide is the 1st under fund title. Loeven: my point being, what you’re raising from taxes is only outside the village. Supervisor: people that live in the village also pay tax in January, correct? I’m not a village resident so I don’t know how the tax bill (inaudible). Loven: ok so that’s why it’s there. Page 8, the line for fines and forfeitures, I have never noticed it before. What I did notice is over the past couple years that anticipated revenue was $79,000 and now it’s dropping to $15,000.
79
Supervisor: so that is money collected by the town court system. As far as I can remember, before current, that number is only been $79,000 or thereabouts. That is a gross overestimation for what the court collects. Loeven: it says here in the actual amount in 2022 was $79,000. Supervisor: That’s what was adopted in the budget not that what was fiscally collected. H’way Supt.: the actual is never listed as actual – they never have been. Supervisor: those values that are printed are what was adopted in those budgets no the actual dollar value collected. Loeven: so, the heading on the column is incorrect? Supervisor: yes. Loeven: page 9, under youth programs, it lists joint rec projects. Curious what kinds of things fall into that? Supervisor: that is the summer concert series. Loeven: under youth programs? Supervisor: that is a title – so all of the account codes and corresponding descriptions are issued from the comptroller’s office. For example, that 7310 just under youth programs contractual joint rec projects – that’s something – that title we can’t change what that is from the comptroller’s office. Loeven: of course, but what you use the money for isn’t youth necessarily, that’s an adult function. Supervisor: kids can go to the concert – I’ve seen kids there. Loeven: I know that when you’re looking at the personal services line for each department – it’s not just one person. Yours, for example, under supervisor is you and Angie and I don’t know if other people…. For the clerks it’s Kathleen, it’s also Liz – the courts I assume is the justices and all of the clerical. Supervisor: all of the staff in the department. Loeven: pooling all of those people together, under the justices personal services, if I’m calculating correctly, a little bit more than 11% raise – that’s a pretty big raise. Under the clerks, there’s a little bit more than 11%. The assessor’s office, it’s more than 21% raise. Supt. of highways which I know is not just Dean, is 9 ½%. That’s less than the others. Those 1st 3 were really – I was curious as to what was causing such an inflated amount Supervisor: two parts to that – could be answered – the assessor has requested for an additional employee to work in the department. That would account for…Loeven: ok, that makes sense. Supervisor: I can tell you what his request was. I have to find his sheet that breaks it down. In the meantime, while I’m getting that, the other departments you mentioned, the employees of the town – we’ve done some salary adjustments to increase salaries based on lengths of service that employees have been with the town. We used a 5-year service increment – their raises were adjusted based on their term of service that they’ve worked here. Loeven: so, this is the 1st of 5 years – is that what you’re saying? Supervisor: no, the raise was based on increments of five years. 5 – 10 – 15 – 20 – 25 years of service resulted in the increase to their salary based on the time they’ve worked for the town – is why the large number of percentage you mentioned for the respective departments. Loeven: that would primarily be the clerical and support staff. Supervisor: that’s correct. To the assessor request to hire an employee with an annual salary based on hours worked AT $7,500. Loeven: what would that employee be doing? Supervisor: NYS certified data collector. That would be to update the records per parcel of the township. Loeven: was that the same position that was eliminated a few years ago? Supervisor: 2014. Yes. Loeven: for the last 9 years he hasn’t had that and now he feels he needs it back? Supervisor: yes. He’s requested it in the past and at this point we feel we’re ready to make that expense to hire another employee for the assessor department. He called for ant other questions from the public.
Paul Rickard: Since you’re going to proceed with this illegal public hearing, my only question is that I looked really quick – on revenue “A” you have $6,000 for Comm day. What is that? Community Day? Supervisor: is that page 8? Rickard: it doesn’t have a page # on it so revenues general “A”. Supervisor: yes, community day. Any type of function that the town holds and benefit for the community. Rickard: how much revenue has been generated this year for that? Supervisor: this year – I don’t have a report with that information available right now. Rickard: but it’s going to equal $6,000? Supervisor: that’s the estimation for 2024. Rickard: what was last years actual? You put this budget together in a very non-transparent way. This is typical of what goes on with you. I’m trying to figure out how you arrived at these numbers. We have to live with these numbers next year. You do not – the rest of us here on this board will. If they’re just thrown up against the wall and we hope that they’re right – that’s really a problem. Supervisor: the 2023 projection for those revenues was $7,000 and it was just under $6,000. I want to say between $5,700-$6,000. Rickard: maybe? Do you have numbers? Supervisor: I don’t have a report here to give you that information. That’s an estimation based on recollection from that report. Rickard: and that’s why the legal notice says that this should have been available 7 days / last Monday for us to review so we could have had these conversations previous to this so you could actually have numbers for us. I reiterate my objection to this entire public hearing.
Supervisor Howell: any other public comment for the budget? Does town board have any comments?
Councilmember Furman: David, can we extend this out? Attorney: yes, you can certainly. You’re going to adjourn the public hearing. Supervisor: to allow it to continue until our next scheduled board meeting on 11/20. Furman: will that work? Attorney: absolutely. Furman: I want everybody (inaudible). Supervisor: this provides an additional 2 weeks past today from the 6th through the 20th our next scheduled meeting to have a continuation of the public hearing. Attorney: you just need a motion for that.
MOTION TO ADJOURN PUBLIC HEARING:
MOTION offered Councilmember Furman 2nd Councilmember Davis to adjourn public hearing for 2024 Preliminary Budget at 7:48pm and continue it at our next board meeting on November 20, 2023 at 7:30pm here at the town hall. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
80
CORRESPONDENCE:
1. Letter from Jason Pitingaro re: bond reduction request for Winnetaska subdivision
2. OC mortgage tax receipts October 2023
3. Building department monthly report September 2023
4. Request from Chris Lagarde to use youth center for indoor soccer practice
5. Letter from Jeannie Zoll re: 24 lot subdivision adjacent to Hidden Valley
6. Flyer: Christmas Celebration 12/2 tree lighting 6:30pm
7. Flyer: Patriot tree lighting 12/7 at 6pm corner of Main & Highland
8. Flyer: Veterans Day ceremony 11/11 at 11AM at Otisville Veteran’s Park
9. Mobile DMV at village hall on 11/21 from 10-3:30 (lunch closed 12-1)
MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PRIOR MEETING MINUTES:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilmember Jennings that the minutes of the 10-16-2023 meetings are approved as presented. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
HIGHWAY DEPT.:
Supt. Hassenmayer reported we are still waiting for the siding for the town hall addition. The roof has been repaired. The insulation has been done. Next step is to award a bid on sheetrock. Supervisor: the sheetrock contractor the engineer was working with – hopefully the 3rd contractor to get those proposals to us. The 3rd contractor didn’t have a finalized # for him so hopefully at our 11/20 meeting we’ll have that for the drywall contracting. I’ll get back to you on the siding delivery. We’ll get back with the supply house on that. They were running about a week behind – they were expected Friday.
POLICE DEPARTMENT:
Chief Maresca reported that Chang (John) Zhu here. I’m recommending him for hire. He’s currently attending phase one and is graduating next week. We’ll be sponsoring him, if approved, for phase 2. He noted the resignation from Aaron Welch effective 10/31. Chief thanked him for his service. Chief and the Deputy Chief are observing NO SHAVE NOVEMBER. Officers will forego shaving for the month of November to raise awareness to cancer and to also raise money. For an officer to participate, they have to donate a specific amount of money which in our case is $50. This year the money will go to Aubrey’s Army. There’s a fundraiser on 11/17 at Aspire Brewing in Middletown hosted by the Crawford PBA.
VILLAGE OF OTISVILLE:
Mayor Carey: You forgot your council people. I want to thank the Mount Hope police for an incident that happened down at Veteran’s Park on the 28th. I thank the deputy chief for his quick response. I thank the town board for the $100 which we used towards prizes for the Halloween trunk or treat. He thanked everyone who participated. Village Christmas tree lighting is 12/2 at Veteran’s Park. Patriot tree lighting is 12/7 at 6pm. We had a prostate cancer walk that Trustee Davoren put together on Saturday. I thank him for that. Mobile DMV will be at Village Hall on 11/21 from 10-3:30. Defensive driving class will be 11/18 for $32. If interested, call village hall. Veteran’s ceremony will be at village park on 11/11 at 11AM.
BOARD REPORTS:
Councilmember Davis: She noted the veteran’s ceremony. The Howells FD is hosting a holiday fair on 11/19 from 9-4. This is held at 26 Elm Street. Otisville FD is hosting a penny social on 11/18 at 5pm. Town Planning board meeting on 11/15 at 7pm.
Councilmember Furman: MVYFB D1 & D2 won the 1st round. They go to the 2nd round on Saturday. Hidden Valley sewer district meeting on 11/14 at 7pm at the senior center. This is for any HV resident with questions. The town tree lighting is going to be December 16 here at town hall due to rentals at both rental facilities that weekend. The Trunk or Treat – he thanked Kathleen, Liz and the police department. He thanked Julie and the building department. It was a huge success.
Councilmember Jennings: next village meeting is 11/16 at 7pm. I am still trying to get together with Angie to get the phones switched over to the new company. It’s hard when she’s out.
Supervisor Howell AT THIS TIME, Supervisor Howell noted that the Assessor, Dennis Ketcham received the Robert Osias Professionalism Award from the NYS Assessor’s Association. He congratulated him on this achievement. He noted the date for the town tree lighting is 12/16. He noted the Veteran’s Day proclamation.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE VETERAN’S DAY PROCLAMATION:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilmember Furman to approve the proclamation as read by Supervisor Howell – see end of minutes. All in favor: Davis, Howell, Jennings, Furman; carried.
81
MOTION TO HIRE CHANG ZHU AS PART TIME NON-COMPETITIVE POLICE OFFICER:
MOTION offered Councilmember Furman 2nd Councilmember Jennings to offer a conditional offer of employment to Chang Zhu as a part time non-competitive police officer pending all pre-employment screenings. All in favor: Davis, Howell, Jennings, Furman; carried.
MOTION TO ACCEPT RESIGNATION FROM POLICE OFFICER AARON WELCH:
MOTION offered Councilmember Jennings 2nd Councilmember Davis to accept the resignation from police officer Aaron Welch effective October 31, 2023. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
MOTION TO CREATE NEW BUDGET LINES:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilmember Furman to adopt the addition of 2 new revenue codes: A511 Use of Capital Reserve Funds & DB 511 Use of Capital Reserve Funds to be used in the upcoming 2023 budget. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
INDOOR SOCCER CLUB REQUEST:
Supervisor Howell spoke re: indoor soccer club (Chris Lagarde) to use the youth center for soccer games/practices during the winter season. He thinks with the TV equipment and windows this request would be a potential issue. Councilmember Jennings had expressed concerns to the Supervisor. Councilmember Furman doesn’t think it would be a good idea. Councilmember Davis is not in favor of this. Supervisor will let him know that the facility is not designed for type of activity.
WINNETASKA ROAD BOND REDUCTION REQUEST:
Supervisor Howell noted the bond reduction request for Winnetaska. We’d been waiting on a report. Since we received that, there’s been a potential for a change to that project specific to the road. I spoke with Jason from P&D and spoke with David & Glenn for their opinion on the bond reduction or partial release back to the contracting applicant. Based on Jason’s report which we have from the engineer’s office, they feel that the amount of work that’s been done is appropriate with the new addition to us information-wise of a potential change to the road as it is described as minor would have to be reviewed by the planning board as well as the county. This project comes on to a county road. He asked the attorney for his recommendation. Attorney: recommendation is that the bond be held in place until completion. For any particularly residential subdivisions the bond is held in place because the road to be dedicated isn’t actually constructed until after all the individual lots are built out. The idea being that why build out the road if you’re gonna be bringing in construction equipment, tearing it up and then have to rebuild it again. Typically speaking, you wouldn’t be able to get the permit to actually build the road until such time is permits on all the individual lots have been closed out. That’s generally the process for a subdivision of that sort so keeping the bond in place – the bond is also largely there in the event the project gets built out and then the developer abandons the project following constructing each of those homes. It allows the town the resources to be able to construct that road up to code. It’s a protection for the town which is why that is usually required to stay in place. Any changes to that road could potentially change the dynamics of the lots that had already been approved as well as access to a county road. That would need planning board approval as well. There were no comments/questions from the board.
MOTION TO AUDIT THE CLAIMS:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilmember Furman to approve Abstract #42 & #43:
Abstract #42:
GENERAL A: #503-508 $ 4,238.00
GENERAL B: #127 $ 1,212.50
HIGHWAY: #97-98 $ 429.77
ARPA: #11 $ 8,960.00
AND
Abstract #43:
GENERAL A: #509-519 $ 28,265.35
GENERAL B: #128-131 $ 1,940.63
HIGHWAY: #182-186 $ 44,506.12
All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Furman, Davis; carried.
PROPOSED LOCAL LAW #3-2023 ENTITLED: AMENDING THE PERMITTED USES IN THE B-1 ZONING DISTRICT:
Supervisor Howell asked for board comments. The 30-day waiting period has been fulfilled with OC planning. Councilmember Furman asked the attorney to explain this.
Attorney: basically, the proposed local law changes the permitted square footage for proposed warehouses in the zone. Warehouses are already permitted in that zoning district. This changes the potential square footage for those as well as any applicant having to meet the rest of the bulk requirements of that zone.
82
Even if this law is passed, any potential applicant wanting to construct a warehouse in the area still has to go through a full planning board process which would include public hearings, environmental studies, traffic studies, visual studies – things like that.
Supervisor: the current zoning allows for 50,000 sq ft – the proposal is 250,000 sq ft. Does the board want to table this until next meeting?
Attorney: the public hearing was closed.
Supervisor: the public hearing was advertised in the town’s designated newspaper and 2 public meetings prior to that was discussed in order to set up in preparation for the public hearing. October 16th the public hearing was held. The meeting previous to that was 10/2. At this point we can open to public comment.
Anthony Danielewski: in the past there was an issue on White Bridge Road about a subdivision property that was looking to be subdivided. I can speak for myself; we received a letter in the mail. The property in question was less than a ¼ mile from our residence & we received something in the mail stating that this was going around, a discussion to be had in the near future and if I was interested here’s the date/time which – what is the threshold or parameters set for that because I live on White Bridge and that’s within a ¼ mile from where this new warehouse…there was nothing in the mail.
Dean Hassenmayer: I think they should explain. It would probably answer a lot of questions. Explain the process. This builder has not gone through to the planning board yet but what caused you guys to want to change this law? The planning board requested it?
Supervisor: the potential applicant/land owner approached the planning board and myself with a proposal to build 8 separate warehouses within a parcel.
Hassenmayer: can he still go through the planning board process without you guys changing this law? Supervisor: yes. Hassenmayer: let him do that. Then these people will be notified by the mail that there’s gonna be a planning board meeting discussing the warehouses. They all see all over facebook today that you guys are gonna approve warehouses to night. That’s why you have a full room here. Supervisor: in 2019, when the zoning update was done, that allowed for warehouses to be built in the zoning district of B-1 which runs along the Route 211 corridor.
Attorney: what’s proposed this evening is a local law. The requirements for a local law is advertisement in the paper as well as a posting in the town hall. If an applicant chooses to bring an application before the planning board for a warehouse, they still have to go through the entire planning board process. That public hearing process does require mailings to properties located within 500 feet of the property on which it’s going to be placed. The public hearing at that level would include the mailings. The local law aspect – that just requires the publication and the posting at town hall.
Bernie Rivers: going back to what Dean just said, why are we jumping the gun? Wait and change the local law after it goes through the process that we’re notified by? Why are we taking this step earlier? Is this something we’ve done in the past for other projects? Attorney: in general, the law is intended to permit anyone within that zone to be able to propose a warehouse of that size. Projects could potentially be disqualified without being able to apply simply based upon the fact that they don’t meet the bulk table requirements that presently exist. The change is anticipating different types of projects being proposed before the planning board. Rivers: I understand but I think everybody’s concern is had the builder not come to you, would you be changing the law? If you’re telling me the town had a vision that hey, we want to get big warehouses here, let’s change the local law, that was your decision, then I think everybody’s ok with that. It sounds like the builder came to you & he’s taking a step out of the process that should be coming down the road if he came with his proposal. Supervisor: to answer that with the vision, in 2019 when the zoning updates were proposed and done over the course of well over the year, that was one of the items having some type of commercial aspect and warehouse being the title/category to allow business or ratable development structure to come to the town. That happened in the 4-5 year previous to where we are today. To your question on process & procedure being as now there’s a request or demand for the proposal that was worked on over 4 years ago that’s why the town board entertained the request at this point.
Anastasia Bonilla: 5 times – you’re going up to 250. You want to change the law now. You’re giving implicit approval in advance. It’s a foregone conclusion – you go through this planning board process – it’s not gonna matter because you’ve already…he has the approval to do that square footage there. It’s not gonna matter what we think or what we want. Quality of life here is going to change drastically. It’s just not okay in the manner that you’re doing it. Supervisor: it does allow for the larger building but the planning board process still has to be upheld for any applicant.
Chris Ruckdeschel: I’m wondering if the board looked at how this change would affect property values in the area. Do you have a sense of how other projects and other municipalities or towns that have had such a project? What the affect has been? Supervisor: for the individual property owner – no. In terms of what the revenue increase would be from a commercial project is where the benefit would be for the town as a whole. Ruckdeschel: so that people in the local area right near it we, have no idea what the effect would be.
Lisa Walsh: you were considering this based on revenue that the project would generate, are you talking about the project as in the construction itself or the presence of this warehouse long-term? Supervisor: long term presence. Walsh: what do you anticipate that being? Supervisor: the ratable revenue for a commercial project is much larger than a comparable residential project in that footprint. Walsh: how much larger? Supervisor: assessor would give that answer. That would depend on each application jus as each home has it’s own value.
83
Walsh: wasn’t there a mention of 8 – 50,000? Supervisor: yes. Walsh: it went from 50 to 250 but it was going to be multiple warehouses at 50,000 sq ft. You do have an idea? Supervisor: but the specific building valuation could be different in terms of what they’re – just like the difference from a one-bedroom home to a 10-bedroom home. There could be a difference of calculation between 50,000 times 8 buildings versus one at 250,000. Walsh: what is the person who is requesting the law change proposing? One big or multiple small? Supervisor: the original request to the planning board was 8 – 50,000 sq ft buildings. Walsh: you know what they’re getting. It’s not depending on a one-bedroom vs 3 bedroom. It’s 8 – 50,000’s. Supervisor: we were not provided with cost of the construction and the building itself to get a valuation on what that would be worth.
Eric Fellenzer: maybe I’m wrong, but your statement as comparison to residential for a B1 district is currently the principal use – residential? Supervisor: no, that’s a commercial zone district. Fellenzer: you were comparing houses being there to warehouses when you addressed her question? Of cost, of taxation. That property currently is not a residential district, correct? And that took you many years when you revised your zoning at the time. So conditional use would be 50,000 – conditional use? Supervisor: that’s correct. Fellenzer: my point is the principal uses of that property are offices, banks, restaurants, retail stores etc. Conditional uses are machine repair, non-nuisance industry, public utility plan structure etc. I think that’s important for the people to know here what the existing principal uses are and what the conditional uses are and what the accessory uses are. Then maybe they could understand it a little better. After many years of deciding what the zoning was going to be that it’s done rather quickly. I wasn’t aware of it. What is the approved local newspaper? Supervisor: Times Herald Record.
Paul Rickard: Thanked Chris, Amanda and the board for doing that resolution on keeping the public hearing open. I think it goes towards the transparency. This whole issue is about transparency as well and I know what the legal requirement is and I think we’ve met it on it’s face. The legal requirement for the public hearing for the budget wasn’t done right. We shouldn’t do the bare minimum. We are all concerned about this – the transparency of it. If we do a fire work show in this town, we have the police put a notice in everyone’s mailbox. If we’re gonna have a local law that changes the zoning next to people’s houses – we should make that a local that everyone gets notified. We need an open transparent government. That’s just lacking. This to me brings up a shortcoming in the law. Do even 10 people in this room even get the Times Herald Record? In fairness to everybody we should pass a local law to make ourselves more stringent for notifications especially when it deals with zoning changes.
Diane Loeven: with the proposed amendment, it’s taking it from 50,000 to 250,000 – is there anything in there that states it has to be each individual building no more than 50,000? Supervisor: the current description is a warehouse not to exceed 50,000 sq ft. Loeven: I’m asking about the proposed amendment. Supervisor: would also read a warehouse not to exceed 250,000 sq ft. It’s the # that’s changing. Loeven: even though this interested individual proposed that they were looking at multiple buildings of 50,000, they don’t have an application in yet? So, they could walk through the door and put in an application for a single building that’s 250,000 sq ft. Supervisor: potentially. Loeven: something to think about – if what you’re trying to do is keep the buildings 2 – 50,000 sq ft but if the property is big enough to allow more than one maybe that needs to be drawn out a little bit better. As David mentioned, with the planning process that once an applicant gets before the planning board then the traffic studies and all of those things would need to be done. As a board, before you make any kind of major change, I think you need to consider some factors such as what impact it’s going to have on traffic. If there are to be a lot of tractor trailers in/out, you have to plan for and legislate for the potential of that. You have tractor trailers coming of Rte. 84 coming from PA side, they’ll come down Mountain Road, they’re going to go through the village to White Bridge Road and across White Bridge because that’s the only way they can do it. The board has to consider these things. Do you have the infrastructure to support what you’re proposing?
Mary Carver: you mentioned there’s going to be a meeting next week for the sewer plant for Hidden Valley on the 14th. Are you going to put out a letter to every resident because not everybody looks at facebook? Councilmember Furman: yup, I’ll get that out probably tomorrow. Carver: Kathleen mentioned in the correspondence that there’s a letter about the development that the board members got. Is that for Hidden Valley? Town Clerk: a letter from a planning board member with regard to a 24-lot subdivision property adjacent to Hidden Valley. Carver: going a little bit with the transparency, I know we are going to talk about this next week, the residents would like to see a lot more transparency. I have a petition here signed from a # of people from HV who would like to see exactly that. We’d like to say this vote whether that sewer district gets expanded but we also would like to see more information like those letters that are coming through with what’s happening with our district. (she gave the petition to Supervisor Howell) We’d like more information like transparency for sure. This is just a portion of some of the residents here that are interested in that information. Is there an updated sewer district map? Next week I’d like to see one if we have one. A previous board approved another subdivision quite some time ago and I’d like to know if that still has some viability. Are they still allowed to go in even though it never happened? A previous board did approve that so I’d like to know if that’s part of that updated sewer district. Supervisor: could you give a little detail even if it’s after this meeting on this project? Carver: sure. Who is the town engineer in the planning board? Supervisor: Jason Pitingaro. Carver: As a resident who has been paying these bills – we took out the bond several years ago and we’re still paying for it so it’s in our interest to know exactly if someone else is going to come in to that district and where the money is going to go and how you’re gonna help the people who have been paying it. I’ve been paying $1700 for quite some time. There was a lot of problems with that other development that was going to come in and help us and that never transpired.
84
Which, I get. In the meantime, we got a promise of somebody else who’s going to come in. Is it really gonna happen?
That they’re gonna help the residents here. That is a bog thing you need to think about. We should have some answers for that next week’s meeting about how you’re going to help those residents who have been paying that money for a long time and we’re still not done. I hope that no decisions about expanding that sewer plant would be made especially since we are on the eve of an election that no decisions are going to be made about expanding that until elections are over and we got new people and maybe until then. Supervisor: just a piece on the district boundary expansion you mentioned, there was a request from the applicant that’s at the planning board currently to start the process of district expansion. As the town engineer had told me, this is months away from any type of even a formal proposal coming from the applicants at the planning board and town board. Carver: you need to have a lot more explanations and guarantees for these people for what’s going to happen. That’s exactly what was said the last time. This is a different developer that was going to come in and then the market fell out and we were left. They expanded the sewer plan – we tacked down a $1.6 million dollars and we’ve been paying for it ever since. Furman: when was that? Carver: 2009-2010. I get that. Before you go make an extension, you should be talking to the residents 1st to see what they’re thinking. Where’s this money going to go? Talk to the residents. Furman: that’s why we are having the meeting to be open. Carver: we only heard about it through a facebook. Not from anybody here who’s giving us information. We get reports from the water company. I haven’t seen a letter from the board regarding the sewer plant since Chad sent out a letter regarding extra water through the sewer system and was it related to pumps.
Alison Miller: thanked Dean and the highway department for getting the lines done on Robbins and ledge roads. I felt like it was a huge safety issue so I feel safer now. She echoed her congratulations to the town assessor. I’ve worked with Dennis for the last 5 years on the BAR. Any accolades he receives are absolutely deserved. He is so knowledgeable and very talented. I feel fortunate to work with him. What is the name of the indoor soccer club that approached you to use the center. Town Clerk: Eastern Pike soccer club, Chris Lagarde. Miller: usually these meetings have about 5 people or so here so I’m thrilled to see so many people here that are interested, active & concerned.
Kara Welsh: (to Mr. Furman): you said we’re going to have the meeting about the expansion, is there going to be anything at that meeting about the water for HV? Furman: no, we don’t control the water. That’s owned by somebody separate. The water is separate from the sewer.
Bernie Rivers: re: HV. The water is separate, how does the water company get the contract? Supervisor: it’s a private firm – a private utility. Rivers: if the residents wanted to change water companies, what would be the process? Supervisor: I don’t know that there’s an option for that. Julie Musial (building Inspector): I have information on that. I did speak with the water company because there were a couple homes that went in that decided they wanted to put in their own wells. There is nothing specific on any – not on all of the deeds. I think when some people moved in to the development, they signed a sort of agreement with the water company that tied you with them. However, some people didn’t sign. Those people can get their own wells if they want or they can continue to use the water company. The homes going in have asked to be part of the water district. It is private. I believe at the last planning board meeting, the applicant’s engineer said he was going to be having a meeting with the water companies representatives. There may be additional information provided at the next planning board meeting as far as what the applicants engineer has found out from the water company. That’s where they are in that process. Councilmember Davis: they are not on the agenda this month.
Marjorie Fellenzer: re: warehouses: is it a current owner or is it a proposed developer that’s going to be coming before the board? Is it public knowledge? Supervisor: not it wasn’t. It’s between the 2 – the current property owner has a potential purchaser. Fellenzer: so, they were coming to you as a potential buyer? Supervisor: the only contact has been with the original land owner. There is a potential for a possibility of a sale. Fellenzer: is the potential buyer public knowledge? Supervisor: it wasn’t given to us.
Anthony Danielewski: asked the board their stance on the proposed amendment to the zoning. Supervisor: my position is I am in favor of the change.
Chris Day: is there a possibility that none of this with the development passes through or is this a guaranteed done deal? Supervisor: nothing has been adopted at this time. Day: there’s a possibility that when it goes to the planning board, they can shut it down? Supervisor: correct.
Councilmember Davis: I’m in favor of the 2 larger facilities as opposed to the 8 smaller ones.
Councilmember Furman: I’m on the fence. My original thought was like Amanda’s but this is what I like to see – people coming out to tell us what you think. I thought it would be good for taxes. We all live here. I live down the street. I don’t know. I want to thank you all for coming out and speaking.
Councilmember Jennings: I live down the road from it too. We have no say – it’s the planning board. It’s either we vote for 2 buildings or they make it 8 buildings. It’s up to them. They have to go through the planning board. I have concerns about the noise and traffic. I have brought my concerns to the supervisor. It’s zoned for that. If they want to build it, they can. But it has to go through the planning board.
Councilmember Davis: Public comment is when you address the board – not each other.
Brian Carey: the current board decided in 2017 to videotape all of these meetings. That’s important for everyone to know. If you’re not a facebook person, you can go to YouTube. The ZBA and planning board were offered to record their meetings. They declined.
85
Mary Maurizzio: who is the current owner of the property? Supervisor: Middletown Carting LLC. Maurizzio: what is the acreage? Supervisor: 73 acres. Maurizzio: what’s going to be stored there? Councilmember Davis: that information was not provided. We do not know who is going to build it, purchase it or what is going to be done there. Supervisor: those items would be addressed at the planning board. Maurizzio: I feel that this has…you stated earlier that the benefit to the town for this project would be tax monies. Right? Supervisor: correct. Maurizzio: I think if it were a restaurant and other businesses on that property, that would be more lucrative to the residents. I think it is a negative impact on the community.
Bernie Rivers: just so I am clear, it wasn’t the builder who came and asked, it was the property owner? Because the property owner is in negotiation with the builder? Is it safe to assume that the sales going to fall through if this local law doesn’t get passed? Supervisor: it’s a possibility.
Moniysha Maldonado: who on the town board goes to the planning board meetings? Councilmember Davis: I do. Maldonado: how do you feel like you have sent information out to the residents? Davis: this is proposed to the planning board. Nothing has gone through.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS:
Supervisor Howell reminded everyone of the Veteran’s Day ceremony.
MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilman Furman to adjourn the meeting at 9:06pm. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
MOTION TO RE-OPEN TOWN BOARD MEETING:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilmember Furman to re-open the town board meeting at 9:07pm. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
MOTION TO ALLOW WRITTEN COMMENTS FOR 2024 PRELIMINARY BUDGET:
MOTION offered Councilmember Jennings 2nd Councilmember Davis to close the public hearing and allow written comments for the 2024 preliminary budget no later than November 13, 2023. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION offered Councilmember Davis 2nd Councilman Furman to adjourn the meeting at 9:11pm. All in favor: Howell, Jennings, Davis, Furman; carried.
The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 20, 2023 at 7:30pm in the town hall meeting room.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathleen A. Myers, RMC
Town Clerk
86
Proclamation
Whereas, November 11th is a federal holiday to honor the men and women whom served in the United States Armed Forces.
Whereas, The Town of Mount Hope recognizes the dedication and sacrifice our Veterans have made to serve and protect our Country.
Whereas, Through the service of our veterans our freedom and liberties are preserved.
Whereas, The Town of Mount Hope expresses its most sincere thanks and gratitude for your service to our country.
Therefore, be it resolved, The Town of Mount Hope proclaims November 11th 2023 as
Veteran’s Appreciation Day
In the Town of Mount Hope.
_________________________
Supervisor Matthew Howell
87