Loading...
2001-08-27 SP SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING AUGUST 27, 2002 MTG. #35 RES. #3 7:00 p.m. TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER COUNCILMAN JAMES MARTIN COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER SUPERVISOR BROWER OPENED THE MEETING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN 1.0 RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION APPOINTING DANIEL HALL AS PERMANENT SCHOOL TRAFFIC OFFICER (CROSSING GUARD) RESOLUTION NO. 342.2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, a permanent Town of Queensbury School Traffic Officer (Crossing Guard) position is currently vacant and so the Town Board wishes to appoint Daniel Hall, the current substitute Crossing Guard, to the position, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Daniel Hall as permanent School Traffic Officer (Crossing Guard) effective August 28th, 2001 at the current rate of pay for the position to be paid from the appropriate payroll account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Comptroller's Office to complete any forms necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 27th day of August, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Mr. Brewer 2.0 DISCUSSION 2.1 JUNK VEHICLE ISSUE Supervisor Brower-Noted that last week the Environmental Committee presented to the Board a proposal for a new Junk Vehicle Ordinance, the Board is present tonight to listen to the opposing view point... Mr. Brad Neron-ll East Drive, Queensbury This is a Junk Yard Code, this code that says it is a Junk Yard it is a business that stores junk for resale and none of us are reselling it therefore it doesn't apply to us it is business get it out of residential we do not want it. I am objecting to putting business laws on residential areas. Supervisor Brower-Questioned if there has been anyone in the area that has been accused of having a junk yard? Mr,. Neron- There has been plenty of people in the area accused of having a junk yard. Supervisor Brower-They had multiple vehicles I assume? Mr. Neron- Yes, those vehicles are not junk and I am sure not only I but other people are offended by it saying that their things are junk. It is their happiness it is what they like to do and what they should be able to do. It is our property and are under one freedom in the Constitution and that is the way it should be. Mr. LaBombard-Glens Falls - Queensbury Town Code Section 102 3 reads no person shall operate, establish or maintain a junk yard upon property having fewer than five acres of land, no person shall operate, establish or maintain a junk yard until he has obtain a certificate of approval for the location of such junk yard and has obtained a license to operate a junk yard business, that is your code. However, in the Code you have misinterpretation of what is considered a junk yard is the one grievance, number two the methods of enforcement of the alleged junk yard properties the way it is being enforced are very suspect and at times illegal. Number three what is the purpose for having a junk yard law in residential neighborhoods? Someone else's possessions you may think is junk to them it could be gold, number one, number two there is no proof that possessions on property means they are selling the possessions it is their right to accumulate possessions, where is the injury. Under common law in order to adress things like that in court someone must be injured. No one is being injured having three, four unregistered vehicles in their yard. However you even have an exception to that, even if they are registered now they are no longer junk, whether it has plates on it and it is a registered vehicle or it doesn't have plates on it, it is not a registered motor vehicle ok, having a registration with the State doesn't separate it from being junk vs a vehicle that somebody else is gold. So, there is three issues right there. Summarize, Number one; the misinterpretation of the law and misuse. Number two, the enforcement of such law an Three applicability of it, it does not make sense it does not apply to residential people who are not in business to sell junk. Supervisor Brower-Junk is not always sold, sometimes it is stored. Mr. John Salvador-Doesn't it refer to sale? Anyone who is in the retail sale of anything needs a vendors license from the State of New York, if that is the requirement of these people that they have to have a sales tax vendors license then they are in the retail sale of something. Supervisor Brower-Noted that they will consider that issue. Mr. LaBombard-Spoke to the Board regarding the definition of a junk yard. Councilman Brewer-My interpretation of what you are trying to say to us, you are saying that we should allow people to have three, four, five, eight, ten cars in their yard Mr. LaBombard-It is none of your business, Mr. Brewer. Unknown-Noted that a registered vehicle means it is on a legal list now every vehicle has a title is on a legal list that is what the state says. Abolition of my property I do not feel that you have a right to do it, private property does not mean just land, it means my television inside my house and the vehicles in my driveway. If my vehicle were leaking antifreeze, oil or gasoline on the land and it was harming my next door neighbor, my next door neighbor has every right to take me to court. But, if it is not harming anything or I am not harming anything I do not see any reason why somebody is going to drive by my house and say you cannot have that property there, because those cars are my property. You are abolishing my right to have my property, at least that is how I feel. Councilman Martin-Requested that Mr. Huntz a member of the Environmental Committee speak to this Issue. Mr. Huntz-Noted the Committee wrote up a sample ordinance for junk vehicles because I totally agree with the point all of these gentlemen have made that the current regulations talk about junk yards which the point was made it is a business. It is a business and should come under some different kind of regulations. We are talking here solely about private property, not about a business property so I think there is a distinction there. It points up that there needs to be a new regulation we limit the junk vehicles on private property. This article has as its purpose is the prevention of private and public nuisances created by the location and storage of junk vehicles on private property within the Town of Queensbury. Said vehicles are an attractive nuisance to children, constitute a health, safety and environmental concern for all and are a source of .. . and annoyance. They depreciate the value of neighboring property and are a potential source of fire and explosions. The preservation of public health, potection of property and elimination of public peril make location legislation to terminate such practice a necessity. One point I would like to make to you is you want a definition of what is a junk vehicle. One persons property is important to them and somebody else may not see it that way, so you have to define what you mean by a junk vehicle. The definition that we have in here that it is present on private property not duly licensed as a garage or vehicle repair shop or other facility operating in accordance with the Zoning Laws of the Town of Queensbury whether said vehicle is owned by the owner of said lands or is there with the knowledge or consent of said land, the vehicle is not currently registered to be operated on a public highways of the State of New York provided that registration is required is inoperable or has been dismantled or has been permitted to deteriorate and has been permitted to continue within that state for a period of time long enough to raise the presumption that there is no ntent to make it usable. A period of thirty days shall be deemed such a period, as being dismantled to purpose of using it parts in the repair of other vehicles or otherwise disposing of the same. Then it says anyone or all the foregoing constitutes a violation of this article. Nothing herein contained is intended to prevent storing of any such vehicle in a whole enclosed area completely hidden from view from any street or public place or from adjoining or other private property provided that the vehicle is otherwise lawfully on the premises. Councilman Brewer-I do not think that this is intended for any body to not be able to have a car or two cars to be able to work on antiques or the such it is for residential neighborhoods the guy doesn't have six cars sitting his front yard that offends me and devalues my property, that is the intent of it. It is not to say that somebody can not have a car in their yard or two cars or whatever. Unknown-The fact of the matter is we have people who continually being harassed as far as I am concerned over things that are frankly .. . noted he had problem finding parts for a vehicles, questioned the thirty day issue. Where do you think you have a right as a government to take my right to property away. I have private land. Mr. Salvador-Questioned if the Board has considered Boat storage and Boat Yards in your Junk Yard Ordinance. Mr. Huntz-No. Mr. Dan Kay-2297 Ridge Road- What is residential? Where is there a cut off from where you live on 23 acres is that considered residential? Councilman Brewer-There is a zoning map. Unknown-Show me where you have the right to take my rights away because I did not give them to you. That property is my property. Mr. Salvador Two issues here, Junk yard which is the operation of a commercial activity.. .you have to have the proper permits and licenses. If it is residential property and you want to get into determining what a person can and can't have on their property because it impacts the health, safety and welfare of the community then you have got one hell of a job in this community to do that uniformly. Mr. Keith Russell-54 Michigan Avenue -I think what one does in their home on their own property is their own ..1 think as long as someone is a property owner and they do something on their property that is not endangering the welfare of someone else it should be no ones business but that person. He is not breaking any laws or violating anybody else rights. I feel that if someone comes on my property without being invited and they get hurt it is their fault, if I invite someone on my property and they get hurt as a homeowner I am liable through my homeowners insurance to take care of the problem. I do not think anyone should come in and tell me what I can drive, what I can have in my yard, when I should mow my lawn, I should clean up my junk as long as it is not bothering the people next to me and my neighbors and not complaining to me directly I think it is one body else's business. I pay taxes and it is my home. Unknown-Stated that the Code Compliance Officer is going on the property when residents are not home, which is trespassing and making up excuses to write citations and appearance ticket on unaminious tips, when the citizens are asking who are complaining he says he does not have to say. We have a right to face our accusers, this has got to stop... Councilman Martin-It is our duty as legislatures to try to balance out and do what is fair and right for everybody. There is an opposing view in this town that don't agree with you. Councilman Brewer-Noted a statement was made that nobody should be able to tell you what you can have on your property unless it jeopardizes somebody else now who is to make that judgment call you or my neighbor? Supervisor Brower-Noted that the Town Board wants to hear all sides of the story... Councilman Brewer-The intent of this law was to protect residential neighborhoods from people accumulating a half dozen or dozen cars and starting a junk yard and selling cars and trading them that is what the intent of this was. Mr. Ed Brown-69 Birch Road, Glen Lake - Spoke to the Board regarding selective enforcement in the Building Dept. - Councilman Brewer-It is not about the junk cars it is about the enforcement... Mr. Huntz-Suggested that the town support a junk car day similar to the hazardous wasteday... Supervisor Brower-Questioned what made the Environmental Committee started this proposal? Mr. Huntz-I think we were talking about the beauty of the Town of Queensbury, we talked about architectural types of things, talked about certain streets should be focused in a certain way, this was one thing that we thought was relatively easy to take care of that would improve the livability in the Town of Queensbury. Mr. George Stec-Noted the public health and safety is very important. Unknown -Where do you get the right to tell me what property I can own and can't own? Unknown-Questioned why they could not get the foil information on tickets how come they are illegally denying me that? I would like a copy of every ticket he gave out in one particular month. Unknown-Noted that Glens Falls gave me what I asked for which was all the code violations there were seven hundred of them, I got four hundred, three hundred are still subject to disposition. Unknown-Noted it does not make any difference if it is a new car or if it is a car with holes in the floor boards sitting in the yard, you as the home owner are responsible for it ...if something happens to your kids that is what the courts are for. Mr. Joe Neron-Noted he reviewed his deed and it does not say the Town of Queensbury owns it...anything that happens on our property as they say violations it always says there is a violation on your property, if it is my property and the Town does not pay my liability the Town does not pay my taxes, the Town does not pay my mortgage, then they have not rights to tell me what to do on my property it belongs to me...1 am not giving up my rights for anything when it comes to my property. Supervisor Brower-Spoke about the use of zoning laws and those communities that do not have any. Unknown-Noted that the Court Building is not handicapped accessible... Supervisor Brower-Thanked those that attended. Spoke to the Board regarding the State report on Vehicles, the report will be completed in a month or so... Rick Missita and Ralph VanDusen are working toward developing a new policy on vehicles. Unknown-Three concerns- The book is too big, there is a problem with enforcing the regulations and present regulation about junk cars is not appropriate because it speaks to a business it does not speak to private property. I think that in itself requires some kind of change be made in the regulations. Sewer Negotiations Supervisor Brower-We had a negotiating session with the City last Wednesday, they had a version of the MOU that we had never seen, they had ours for a month and they came back with a significantly revised MOU and when I first looked it over my reaction was we have really stepped back here away. I viewed it as we kind of went backwards. It appeared to me and I could be wrong but the Mayor kind of acted like he did not have a chance to really read all the data in there and was kind of surprised at some of the language. He indicated that he would modify that language somewhat. Any of your sewer negotiating members that would like to correct anything you feel might be miss stated let me know. We made some progress, we seem to be hung up on the huge hang up is on the whole issue of annexation and the issues related to annexation. The four hundred thousand dollars that the City would have to pay Queensbury for traffic improvements the Mayor felt it was only two hundred thousand and we said no it was four hunded thousand and we had quite a little debate about that and how he was going to pay for it he could not afford that and I felt that they should have to pay it when the deal is done. He could not afford it. We had the issue of the land that was contiguous on the back side on the west side of the annex property that is Queensbury's but we have no way of getting to it and we wanted the City to take it over, I think it is actually part of the landfill. They indicated a desire to do borings and I said do borings we do not want you to do any borings just take it over. They seemed to think there might be environmental hazard and they would not want to take a piece of land with environmental hazard, and I said well, just take it. There is a cost to annexation and this is part of the cost is the traffic mitigation, so we were not able to reach agreement and the fire tax district and who is going to respond in case of fire was an issue. How they were going to compensate Queensbury for any changes in that ...so he bottom line is we got hung up a little bit, Henry had requested to address you this evening, this goldenrod sheet is Henry's product. Comptroller Hess-The intention of the golden rod sheet is really not to deal with the specifics of each negotiating point because I think that will work out. It is really to focus attention on the three important issues that comprise this deal. One is the sewer deal itself the second is the sale tax subsidy and the third is the annexation. I just I see that what I want to back to what Dennis said, I think you are right I think the Mayor did have some language drafted that you did not have time to read. I think some of that language is drafted once he brought his Common Council into negotiations they had never been in there before. I think they had a meeting and when they became involved they did not realize all the work and the negotiations had taken place and they sort of threw some things out and sort of ended up in the MOU so I do not think that the Mayor saw it and even if he had seen it we were stuck with some of those for a couple sessions because I think we have to get past that again. Aside fromthe specific points the danger I see here is the Mayor's insistence that not only annexation takes place, and I am not speaking in favor or against annexation it is the terms under which it takes place and the increased costs and increased risks to the Town of Queens bury. We keep building on the risk and the cost to Queensbury with the annexation. The Mayor keeps asking that not talk about the sales tax subsidy and I guess that is a fair request to make. We had talked early on in negotiations some months ago that the offer from the County even thou Queensbury will absorb about thirty six percent of that cost that is a deal made by the County not necessarily although it is tied and will not be executed unless there is a sewer deal it is really tied to other motives to help the City thorough an economic down turn. So, the committee had talked to the Mayor about we will not negotiate the sales tax subsidy as part of the compensation for sewer. Now we will not substitute a fair return to you on what we pay yo for sewer on the other hand we do consider that to be the premium in this deal and when you start asking for other premiums which is far and above the other costs that there will probably be some resistance. I think the annexation has become a large premium factor in this negotiation. So, the intent of the golden rod sheet is just sort of focus your attention on the generalities that exist around this, not necessarily the specifics. We are supposed to meet again Wednesday, several of us had assignments to get some additional data regarding some of the specifics, none of my specifics had to do with annexation, it had to deal with other issues. We have got some things to bring back. But annexation is the crux here we are paying a fair price the price if we were to close the deal today on the term on the table the price we would be paying for the same exact sewer capacity next year or treatment next year would be two hundred and forty thousand for what we paid two fifteen for this year. That is a known cot, the Town has indicated a willingness to do that, primarily a good portion of that additional costs goes toward a previously under funded reconstruction program to make sure that plant lasts its intended life or will be rebuilt. So, that is a fair cost to the Town it is higher than we have been paying we also have figured in a full proportional share of O&M and admin. and over head cost that fully compensates a City in the first year in fact over compensates the city but over a period of time will result in a fair rate of return to the City over the life of the contract. So, I think that when we go back in Wednesday, the Mayor has dug his heals in on the annexation and on making sure not just that it take place but it takes place on his terms without any exception to that. To exactly what he wants it to take I think you have to give some indication as to whether that is what you are willing to do. I am not arguing against annexation I am arguing against annexation at all costs because it is going to be ostly to the town. I think you have to decide what limit those costs are going to take. Councilman Stec-I have not been directly involved in the negotiation teams efforts as a direct participant, I have been listening to what our team of negotiators have come back to us several times. But, I would like to remind the board and everyone present that on two separate occasions I and I believe the majority of the Board both times, I have agreed twice to two separate deals once in January, once in July that included annexation. I want to remind everyone here that the first week in January part of that included a couple of stipulations that we were, Tim and I were told, the Board was told by some of the go between guys from the WCEDC that were agreed to by the City and Tim and I were personally told in the Warren County Municipal Building that Friday it was announced that first week in January and one of the ones was the fire district issue and the other one was the protect the quality of life insure if annexation takes place that we have as much grantees as possible to make sure that it continues t look and feel and taste and smell like Queensbury. I think we have gone a long way I do not think it is a water tight case I still have got my concerns I suppose at some point we have to make some sort of leap of faith. I still have a lot of concerns as to are some of the provisions that we have asked for and we were told that we would get in January are going to be enough. I think that the City is always characterized this desire for annexation as a desire to get to the property tax money. I do not begrudge them that I have told many people that over the last seven and a half months that I have no issue with the City collecting more property tax money because we are eighteen and a half cents per thousand and going down and they are two and an half dollars a thousand or whatever it is. If it about the tax collection I have no issue with that. My concern has always been to protect the character of that part of Queensbury, setting precedents for the future which I believe that we have addressed, but it as never been about the money. But, we had an agreement in January and two of the critical issues that came out of that was the fire districts and this idea of protecting the flavor of that part of Queensbury. Every step of the way since then after many weeks of never hearing anything it seems every time we hear something it has been characterized exactly the way that Henry has and I know Tim has and several other people on the negotiating team has that it is always give, give, give. It has been largely one way. I know we are going to get to a sewer agreement but I want to refresh everyone's memory of what was agreed to in January and that is what bothers me. We have drifting away from it and what we are doing we are negotiating to get back to where we were in January. That is my hard spot with this, I have agreed to two deals already. Councilman Martin-In response to that, I think a suggestion I would like to make I do not think and I am not pointing fingers at anybody, I think everybody has tried real hard and especially on this side of the fence with the negotiating team here everybody has taken a very rational, logical approach to this but for whatever reason the existing procedure this doesn't seem to be working. Supervisor Brower-What procedure. Councilman Martin-In terms of how this negotiation is being approached and hammered out. Supervisor Brower-Actually, it has been working quite well. Councilman Martin-Ted and I were down in Chris Round's Office Thursday morning and got a briefing on the negotiations he had some notes on itemized things because he was there Wednesday night and he briefed us on it. It just seems to me like we should be there was six or seven items, it seems like there should be a follow up memo jointly distributed to both sides of the negotiating team to the full legislative bodies of both sides and work that list and say who is responsible for what and what is the next step and what are the issues and how are we going to resolve those what are the actions to resolve it and take a very methodical organized approach to this. Right now as somebody that has been sitting on this side of the fence here on the Town Board I do not know if I could tell you firmly what all the issues are and what action should be taken what my stand would be on it. I do not feel like I am and I am not faulting anybody I am just saying every body is trying real hard and there is a lot of knowledgeble people around the table but I think we have to get into a mechanical procedure from this point on. I am not so sure Dan that we are going to get a sewer agreement. Councilman Stec-I would like to agree with what you are saying right now... Councilman Martin-I think we should have real approach and mechanics to this that are agreed upon by both sides, I think part of the problem is, the fault of the City is they had a very limited negotiating team with only one elected official on it. Councilman Stec-I was just going to say Councilman Martin-Maybe we should I am just saying we should get a procedure laid out that both sides agreed to and everybody feels informed and then you can move forward. Because that is resulting in I think, in a lot of these discrepancies. Supervisor Brower-I think part of the problem is the way, I have briefed you guys at Town Board Meetings about these, what transpired and where we got hung up and we have had negotiating members have briefed you, but I think the Mayor hasn't may not have done the same thing at the City level, I do not know if he has or hasn't. Councilman Brewer-Tina Weber told me the other night Dennis this document that was given to us the other night the first time she saw it was three weeks ago. Councilman Stec-I think what you are saying is exactly the case, I think the Mayor made a mistake in waiting until ...to involve the Common Council. Councilman Martin-I am not saying that to blame the guy or to say he is a bad administrator I am saying from this point forward you know we should have an agreed upon, this is a very important matter. Supervisor Brower-Last Wednesday was an important session too Jim, frankly I thought it was productive because even though when I first looked at it, it looked like it was night and day, when we went issue by issue and Ralph and Mike and Henry and I participated and basically told them the things that we were concerned about and why, and why we felt these issues were a certain way. Many of the Common Council seemed, I do not know I just had the feeling, but it was my own gut feeling that they seemed to be satisfied with our ... Councilman Martin-They are all playing catch up... the beauty of this is we are, both sides are taking hits about the format of the meeting are they open or , lets get that procedure laid out and address that issue as well, I do not have any problems. Councilman Stec-September 17th is our next regularity scheduled quarterly joint, City and Town meeting and maybe rather than trying to come up with some other agenda and tip toe around this issue, we just say you know what it is September and we thought we had a deal in January and maybe this is a good time to use that quarterly meeting so we have all the players in the room at the same time. It is open to the public I am a little concerned about how we got to a second illegal meeting but that was not our issue. Here you do it, it is already scheduled and set up and say that is it. Councilman Martin-I think you know the first allegation the first illegal meeting was you that called the meeting at 6:00, I do not think that you had in your heart well I am going to slip one in here, you responded to the situation. Supervisor Brower-We should have notified the press, but that was an error. Councilman Martin- It was an error but it was not done in malice. Supervisor Brower-I thought the Mayor was bring two Common Council Members with them and when.. Councilman Martin-And correspondingly I understand the Council had a quorum there the other night I honestly do not think that they intended to try and have a secrete forum. This type of approach I think would serve to address those issues as well as get this thing on a path to a successful or it is not. Right now I just feel like, I heard from Chris the other day you know that we just heard a brief summary, Chris said the other day that the CIP was a thing the inflationary rate and I did not hear that tonight. It might has slipped through the cracks, but Chris had it on his list. That is the type of thing where and I am not saying anybody is wrong or anybody is not, I just think we should have a procedure that is agreed upon by are negotiating team and the five members of this elected body and their negotiating team and what is it seven members over there for their elected body. Then we have got something and we can itemize list boom, boom, boom and get it done.