2006-03-06 MTG8
588
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING MTG. #8
MARCH 6, 2006 RES. 139-152
7:00 p.m.
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC
COUNCILMAN ROGER BOOR
COUNCILMAN RICHARD SANFORD
COUNCILMAN JOHN STROUGH
COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER
TOWN OFFICIALS
BUDGET OFFICER JENNIFER SWITZER
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MARILYN RYBA
DIRECTOR OF WASTEWATER MIKE SHAW
IT DIRECTOR BOB KEENAN
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC
1.0PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.1Public Hearing – Bay Ridge Rescue Squad – Budget Amendment
Chevrolet Trail Blazer
Notice Shown
Supervisor Stec-I will open the public hearing and I did not see anyone from Bay Ridge
here tonight to discuss this. The Bay Ridge Volunteer Rescue Squad is looking to
purchase a new medic vehicle for a cost not to exceed $30,000 it is a 2005 Chevrolet
Trail Blazer and they have proposed financing it with a loan over five years. We have
advertised this for public hearing a couple of weeks ago, with that the public hearing is
open if there is anyone that would like to comment or ask any questions about this
particular public hearing we would just ask that you raise hand. I will call people and
have you come to the microphone introduce yourself and answer questions or make your
comments. So, the public hearing is open if there is anyone that would like to comment
on the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad purchase of a 2005 Chev Trail Blazer in an amount not
to exceed $30,000. Yes, Chief
Chief Joe Duprey-Ward II Queensbury The financing, where is the financing going to
be coming from are they going to finance the total figure?
Supervisor Stec-It says a rate to be determined, but they are looking for a five year loan.
Do you have the details, Jen?
Budget Officer Switzer-They are looking for a five year loan I believe it is a little under
about four and a half to five percent. They are trading in a vehicle so it will be part of a
trade in towards a purchase of a vehicle.
Chief Duprey-So, that company does not have a vehicle fund?
Budget Officer Switzer-Yes, they do.
Chief Duprey-They do. Ok, and we are not going to use that?
Budget Officer Switzer-No, not that I am aware of toward this purchase.
Chief Duprey-Thank you.
589
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Supervisor Stec-Any other public comment on this public hearing? Any Town Board
discussion before we close this public hearing?
Councilman Brewer-I do Dan. Joe, you bring up a good point and I asked this question
when Bay Ridge Rescue came to us in the beginning about this. The reason that they do
not want to use their truck fund or what ever you want to call it is they have money
apparently in a CD and it has not matured yet. I agree with what you are pushing at, we
set these truck funds up so when we make purchases we pay for the purchases. That was
the whole reason behind these truck funds and now the people that suffer when we don’t
do that are the constituents here. I feel that we should table this and let them come back
and talk to them and let them use their truck fund. If down the road they are going to buy
another car, another ambulance or whatever then negotiate a loan if you need to. What
happens in my mind is their budget never, ever goes down. The reason we had these
truck funds was to keep the budgets down. We cut our budget here at the town and I
think it is counter productive not to cut budgets where we can as long as anybody doesn’t
suffer. I think by using that truck fund they can cut their budget $30,000 I think is the
best investment that we could make.
Supervisor Stec-Any other Town Board discussion? Any other public discussion?
Hearing none unless there is any major objections from the Town Board I will close the
public hearing. The public hearing is closed, further Town Board discussion.
I will take a different avenue from certainly I know Tim’s is pushing at. I agree with his
point I have a concern here that this is not consistent with language that we included in a
public hearing and the contract that we approved last week for Queensbury Central which
is I think where the point was trying to be made and politely made by the Chief. I sent an
e-mail out to the Board and certainly I think where Tim might still part ways is that he
would say well I do not want to change Central’s Contract in order to make it consistent
with what we are going to do tonight. I am hung up on the consistency I would rather see
us do one, either do it one way or the other. Either let them use the truck fund or make
them use the truck fund or let them opt not to use the truck fund. So, that is my main
concern with what we are doing. I do not have a huge problem with the medic truck for
Bay Ridge, but the financing I think the timing I guess is unfortunate in some ways
maybe fortunate in others depending on how you look at it. What we are proposing for
financing this purchase is not consistent with the language that we added to Central’s.
They have indicated to me that if we made that one sentence which is not included in any
other fire companies contact go away that they believe, they have not had their vote yet
but it has been communicated to me that they thought that their company would support
their contact. So, I am not sure what the pleasure of the Board is but certainly this as
written is exactly 180 degrees out of phase with what we required of Central. That is my
only comment, other than that I do not have a problem with the purchase itself. If the
Board informally wants to say ok, lets make the change, I am just looking for direction if
we are going to make is consistent or not.
Councilman Boor-Lets stay on this one and then we will deal with Central when we get
there.
Supervisor Stec-I will feel better about voting yes on this one if I get an indication that
we might try to be consistent with, I am just looking for some feed back.
Councilman Strough-I agree with you Dan.
Supervisor Stec-Thank you. I do not think it is huge lift.
Councilman Strough-They are very frugal they do not ask for too much and they don’t
complain much and I think their…
Supervisor Stec-Roger your point is a good one too, I do not like commingling some
other companies business but because these issues are so related I am not, normally I
would never do it but they are very related and they are within a week of each other. I do
not know how either one of you feel?
590
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Councilman Sanford-I agree with you Dan on this as well, I think that I would like to get
by these negotiations with all the fire departments for this year and then I would like to as
I said last meeting very early start addressing not just their operating budgets but also
their capital budgets, this summer and I would be agreeable to be consistent, approve this
particular request and also agree with the proposal that you outlined in an e-mail which I
understand Central agreed with.
Supervisor Stec-It is my understanding that they did, they proposed it actually.
Councilman Sanford-I will be supportive of that.
Supervisor Stec-I want to give everybody an opportunity to be on record one way or the
other if you don’t want to, I make three, but.
Councilman Boor-I am going to approve this, so.
Supervisor Stec-I am talking about the change to Central’s contract.
Councilman Boor-As long as they use it toward trucks I do not have a problem if they do
not want to use it. The truck fund is used for trucks that has always been my issue, Dan.
That is fine.
Councilman Sanford-The issue I have is Central is not on the agenda tonight.
Supervisor Stec-No, they are not again my e-mail I hope that we made the point clear that
I checked with Bob and Bob said this is just to canvas the Board, very publicly I am, as
soon as I hear one way or the other from Tim, I will ask Darleen to just make sure that
the record indicates that we had this discussion and then because it is not a substantive
change that we can just drop it, and we talked about this.
Councilman Brewer-Yes, we did.
Supervisor Stec-You would like to be consistent the other way and I did not want to put a
vote in your mouth. Darleen if you wouldn’t mine let the record show that the Town
Board did discuss and we did agree four to one Tim, disagreed, to remove that one
sentence from the Queensbury Central Fire Contract that requires them to use their
vehicle fund the remaining balance on their vehicle fund towards the tower. We will let
them keep that for a future vehicle use. So, with that said, I close the public hearing on
this and I apologize, Bay Ridge is not here but certainly we kind of did hi jack the public
hearing. Bay Ridges Rescue Squad that public hearing on the medic truck is closed. Is
there any other Town Board discussion? Hearing none I will entertain a motion.
RESOLUTION APPROVING BAY RIDGE RESCUE SQUAD, INC.’S
PROPOSAL TO PURCHASE A 2005 CHEVROLET TRAIL BLAZER
AND AMEND EMERGENCY SERVICES AGREEMENT & 2006
BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO.: 139, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc.
(Squad) have entered into an Agreement for emergency protection services, which
591
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Agreement sets forth a number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Squad
will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus,
equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any improvements that would require the Squad
to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a “vehicles fund” without prior
approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and
WHEREAS, the Squad wishes to purchase a 2005 Chevrolet Trail Blazer (Blazer)
for a sum not to exceed $30,000 (including costs of lettering the vehicle and changing its
lights and radios) such purchase already included in the scheduled Squad’s five (5) year
capital plan that forecasts future capital needs and expenditures, including anticipated
vehicles, equipment, tools, other apparatus, facilities or improvements to facilities to be used
for emergency protection services purposes, and
WHEREAS, the Squad plans on paying for the Blazer by financing it with a loan
over five (5) years at a rate to be determined, and
th
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2006, the Town Board held a public hearing concerning
the Squad’s proposed purchase and amendment to its 2006 budget and Agreement and heard
all interested persons, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board feels that this new Blazer will provide additional,
improved emergency medical services for the Town,
N OW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Bay Ridge
Rescue Squad Inc.’s proposal to purchase one (1) new Chevrolet Trail Blazer for a sum not
to exceed $30,000 and approves an increase for annual principal and interest payments in
the Squad’s 2006 Budget, and authorizes and amends the Squad’s 2006 Agreement for
emergency protection services and budget with the Town to provide for such purchase, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Supervisor to sign any necessary documentation, including an amended Agreement between
the Town and the Squad to provide for the purchase in form to be approved by the Budget
Officer, Town Supervisor and/or Town Counsel, and
BE IT FURTHER,
592
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Supervisor and/or Budget Officer to take any action necessary to effectuate all terms of this
Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006 by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Stec
NOES : Mr. Brewer
ABSENT: None
1.2Continuation of Public Hearing – No Parking Sherman Avenue/Northway
Lane
Supervisor Stec-This is a public hearing that had actually started I believe, Darleen,
th
December 19 it was in December and we had tabled it at that time just so that,
Town Clerk Dougher-Left open
Supervisor Stec-We did not table it, that is right it was lift open, the public hearing is open
again but we were looking to make a no parking on Sherman Avenue on both sides of
Sherman Avenue from Seward Street to it intersection of Arbutus Drive or 4570 feet plus or
minus and also a section on both sides of Northway Lane for it intersection of Sherman
Avenue to its dead end of 750 feet plus or minus. Now, to summarize the jest of the
discussion that the Town Board had and has followed up with briefly since then. There was
concern I think the Board was on the same page that we saw that parking in the Morse Field
area, which I think is the main thing that drove this to come to the Board certainly presented
an unsafe situation, however there was a flip side to that coin or related problem that perhaps
parking inside the Morse Field complex was not adequate for the volume. So, the Board
was hesitant to act then because while we had one unsafe situation we did not want to make
it worse, or we did not want to pile a problem and make the parking issue inside Morse Field
worse. Last week Tim Brewer who pushed this, it is in his Ward, he was contacted about it
originally and I and Marilyn Ryba met with Tom McGowan the Superintendent of Schools
from Glens Falls, and their business manager and another member from Glens Falls and I
think Tom Nace was there. We had a half hour long discussion to discuss we did not want
to create a bigger problem for Morse Field or the Glens Falls School District. They were
very point blank on the record at the end that they had absolutely no problem with us
making both sides of Sherman Avenue as we described no parking. They felt that there was
about four or five times a year that, that parking gets a little dicey there and they say it is
usually the rivalry games where Queensbury and Glens Falls are playing an event there at
the same time that creates the issue. They said that they also think that some people are
parking on Sherman Avenue just because it is not convenient to pull into the parking area at
Morse Field. They also said that separate from this they will go out and try to seek a little
bit of additional parking but we said, well look, we are here because we do not want to make
our problem your problem, and they said no, we do not think our problem is that bad but we
will look to make it a little better. But, they, point blank I said look my Board is going to
want to know how you are feeling about this and they said that they had no problem making
this, supporting us making it a no parking. So, I wanted to bring that back and report that
for the public and to the board. So, with that the public hearing is still open if there is
anyone that wants to comment one way or the other on the no parking as I described in the
area of Morse Field along both sides of Sherman Avenue, the public hearing is still open.
Mr. ..
Mr. Jeff Jacobs- My name is Jeff Jacobs I live on West Mountain Road, I am an advocate
for bicycle and pedestrian accommodations and just as a matter of record I would like to say
when ever possible we can control cars parked on these road which tends to interfere with
passing with a bicycle or to walk is beneficial. At the same time I am very sensitive to the
fact that those occasions when we do have big events in those areas that there be a friendly
593
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
atmosphere for people that are coming to your Town to when they live here and want to
watch their kid play soccer that sort of thing. So, anyway my comment is simply I am glad
that you could resolve it with the school district and hopefully with also the other athletic
facility I do not know if they have been talked to if there, if they envision occasions in the
future where they have large tournaments where they are going to have the same problems if
we could work out solutions with them that would be a great thing. Thank you.
Supervisor Stec-Is there anyone else that would like to be heard on this public hearing this
evening? Any Town Board comments before we close the public hearing? All right I will
close the public hearing. Is there any Town Board discussion on this?
Councilman Strough-The only thing that I had I wished we had at some point in time sat
down with the City of Glens Falls and worked out this parking issue. I mean there are
places and I have driven them many times along that road where there could be pocket
parking, not necessarily on the side but what they call pocket parking.
Councilman Brewer-Absolutely, and we did talk about ..and we are going to pursue that.
Supervisor Stec-They are going to contact the City, they were going to pursue that with our
support but yea, they said that they would contact the City.
Councilman Strough-Lets not forget about, ok.
Councilman Brewer-Absolutely not, right up on Veterans, maybe we talked about clearing a
small spot out.
Councilman Strough-Lets not forget about doing that.
Councilman Brewer-They said that they would take measurers as far as making sure that the
students were aware of to walk from the school over to there which reduces parking from
the students to allow more parking parents and visitors and whatever.
Councilman Strough-Ok.
Supervisor Stec-Any other discussion amongst the Board? All right I will entertain a
motion.
RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING
ON
SECTION OF SHERMAN AVENUE AND SECTION OF NORTHWAY
LANE IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
RESOLUTION NO.: 140, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of a Local
Law which would prohibit parking on:
1)a section of the north and south sides of Sherman Avenue from its
intersection with Seward Street, west to its intersection with Arbutus Drive,
for a distance of 4,570’±;
594
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
2)a section of both sides of Northway Lane from its intersection with Sherman
Avenue to a dead end, for a distance of 750’±, and
WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized in accordance with Town Law, Vehicle
§
and Traffic Law 1660(18) and the Municipal Home Rule Law, and
WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting
and was previously reviewed by the Town Board, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted public hearings concerning the proposed
thth
Local Law on December 19, 2005 and March 6, 2006,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby adopts and enacts the Local
Law Prohibiting Parking on a Section of Sherman Avenue and a Section of Northway Lane
in the Town of Queensbury, to be known as Local Law No.: 2 of 2006, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury
Town Clerk to file the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance
with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Local Law will take effect
immediately and as soon as allowable under law, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Highway
Superintendent to post no parking signs on the appropriate sections of Sherman Avenue and
Northway Lane and take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of
this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006 by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
LOCAL LAW NO.: 2 OF 2006
595
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
A LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON A SECTION OF
SHERMAN AVENUE AND A SECTION OF NORTHWAY LANE IN
THE
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF
QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS:
1. Purpose:
The purpose of this Local Law is to prohibit, under penalty of fine for violation, the
parking of any vehicle on:
A)a section of the north and south sides of Sherman Avenue in the Town of
Queensbury from its intersection with Seward Street, west to its intersection with
Arbutus Drive, for a distance of 4,570’±;
B)a section of both sides of Northway Lane in the Town of Queensbury from its
intersection with Sherman Avenue to a dead end, for a distance of 750’±.
2. Definitions:
For the purpose of this Local Law, the words "Motor Vehicle," "Vehicle," "Person,"
and "Park" shall have the same meanings as set forth for the definitions of such words in the
Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York.
3. No Parking on a Section of the North and South Sides of Sherman
Avenue in the Town of Queensbury:
No motor vehicle or other vehicle of any kind shall be allowed or permitted to park
and no person(s) shall park a motor vehicle or other vehicle for any period of time on, in or
along the right-of-way on the north and south sides of a section of Sherman Avenue in the
Town of Queensbury, such section beginning at the intersection of Sherman Avenue and
Seward Street continuing in a westerly direction to the intersection of Sherman Avenue and
Arbutus Drive, for a distance of 4,570’±.
4. No Parking on a Section of Both Sides of Northway Lane in the Town of
Queensbury:
No motor vehicle or other vehicle of any kind shall be allowed or permitted to park
596
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
and no person(s) shall park a motor vehicle or other vehicle for any period of time on, in or
along the right-of-way on both sides of a section of Northway Lane in the Town of
Queensbury, such section beginning at the intersection of Northway Lane and Sherman
Avenue continuing to a dead end, for a distance of 750’±.
5. Responsibility of Motor Vehicle Owner:
Should any vehicle be found parked in violation of this Local Law, it shall be
presumed that the owner of the motor vehicle is the person responsible for parking the motor
vehicle in violation and this presumption shall only be rebutted upon a showing by the
vehicle owner that another person clearly identified had custody and control of the motor
vehicle at the time of such violation.
6. Penalty:
Any person violating any provision or paragraph of Sections 3 or 4 of this Local
Law shall, upon conviction, be punishable for a first offense by a fine not to exceed $25, and
for a second offense by a fine not to exceed $50. In addition to the aforesaid penalties, the
Queensbury Town Board may institute any proper action, suit, or proceeding to prevent,
restrain, correct, or abate any violation of this Local Law.
7. Effective Date:
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon its filing in the Office of the
Secretary of State.
2.0CORRESPONDENCE
3.0INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
4.0PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
Mr. John Kasselbaum – President of Queensbury Central In regard to the proposal that
went out today what is our next step? Just so we know exactly where we stand with this.
Supervisor Stec-By the Town Board authorizing this minor change tomorrow I will ask Pam
Hunsinger the legal secretary to print a new contract that removes that one sentence I will
sign it, it will be notarized and it will sit in Jennifers Office for you or your designated
representative to come in and sign two copies and at that time fill out a voucher.
Mr. Kasselbaum-I will still have to bring this back to the Company they will have to ratify
it. If the contract is available I will bring it back to my company and go from there.
Supervisor Stec-It will be available by lunch time tomorrow. Anyone else this evening?
597
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Mr. Joseph Duprey-Sweet Road Chief of Queensbury Central Noted he had seen the last
Town Board Meeting and heard a lot of that a boys to the fire service during the wind storm
and rightfully so there is no question they did a good job. Along those same lines even
though Supervisor Stec was out of town he kept in contact with myself as well as other
Chief’s in town in his absence, Tim was acting and he had made some phone calls to, to see
what was going on as well as Roger. So, I guess my point is that a boy to the Town Board as
well as the emergency services in the Town of Queensbury. I know you do not have the
opportunity to hear that, that often it is well deserved. That a Boy to Ward I through III for
the I am only kidding, rightfully deserving so the Town Board did its fair share as well.
Supervisor Stec-Thank you but none of us I am not sure but I doubt that all of us were out as
much in the cold as you and the couple of hundred volunteers that were running around
Queensbury and certainly the other towns either, you had the worst end of the deal.
Mr. Duprey-It certainly does ease the pain a little bid when we have a Supervisor that is
calling to make sure that everything is going appropriate and asking if there is anything that
he can do.
Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Anyone else this evening? Yes, Sir, Mr. Brothers?
Mr. Peter Brothers-Re: Fire Fighters Training Center – We should have the Fire Fighters
Training Center presentation before public comment so that we are given an opportunity to
offer our opinions. Re: The Authority No matter how much one or group of officials from
a community try to put on a rosy picture that the authority is going to be done in an ethical
manner with no lapses in judgment whatever the case may be, clearly the authority gives the
opportunity for self dealing and other incompetence. I think the proposed authority is
wrong I think it is a bad move and I do not think it should move forward.
Supervisor Stec-Anyone else wish to comment this evening, Ms. Sonnabend.
Ms Kathleen Sonnabend- 55 Cedar Court Agreed with Mr. Brothers that we need to have
an opportunity for public comment on the Fire Training Center. The earlier that we
express our concerns the more likely we will be able to influence that project. In regard to
the map, plan that your resolution is asking for Cedar Apartments to go to legal review, I
would like to make sure that this map, plan is accurate that it is not the old map, plan that
had been tabled earlier because now that we have clarified the zoning code and stated for the
record a 1000’ is the requirement we need to make sure that this project is not within the
1000’. We should also make sure that the previous proposal for a hundred and seventy four
apartment units at Blind Rock and Bay Road is not part of that map, plan anymore because
that could be a back doorway for Mr. O’Connor at some point in the future to get approval
for that facility. We need to make sure that things are as clear as possible so that our
Planning Board and Zoning Board don’t get in a bad spot.
Councilman Sanford-Earlier today I check with our Counsel who is not here tonight,
because we did not think they would be needed, but, I knew this was a concern and he sent
us a memo suggesting just what you are stating. Prior to their legal review the report, in the
map, plan and report needs to be revised to make sure it is compliant with the new change in
zone and so that I anticipate will be a conditioned approval in moving forward with the legal
review.
Ms Sonnabend-I am also concerned with the last minute addition to the agenda, this seems
to happen a lot, I realize that this apartment the Cedars Apartments project may have a dead
line, but it is a deadline that they should have known about for a long time. So, I think there
is some responsibility on the part of the applicant to submit it on a timely basis to the Town
we should not be jumping through hoops all the time to try to make special arrangements for
people when it might not end up giving us the result that we really want to see. I am also
concerned about the costs associated with this because I know it can be presented as having
no cost to the Town but I have been told with engineers that were involved with an earlier
extension on Bay Road that there is a significant flow capacity problem at Cronin and Bay
and if we continue to allow projects that are more dense than what was originally anticipated
for Bay Road we are going to have a problem. I know that Surrey Fields needs to have their
septic problems straighten out but I would like to see the Town do the map, plan for the
598
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Hiland connection also so we can figure out which is the lowest cost method of solving their
problem rather than rushing thorough with a Bay Road extension. Thank you.
Councilman Brewer-Wouldn’t you think that at somebody elses expense paying for all of it
is cheaper than the Town paying for any of it?
Ms Sonnabend-It would be if you didn’t have the problem at Cronin and Bay Road I agree.
It maybe that they will pay for that part of it, but if it creates a significant problem for the
Town, even if it is not immediate in the near future there is going to be a significant expense
we need to know that and we need to look at alternatives too.
Councilman Brewer-I agree with that but I think we should let that move forward in a timely
fashion and make sure everything is accommodated. We did a study ourselves a couple of
years ago that showed the capacities at that time, certainly the changes and I agree with Rich
they should make the changes that are appropriate but let private developers that want to do
this and offer to do this at no cost to the Town up to the corner let them go thorough the
hoops do what they need to do. I am not saying we do not want to help Surrey Fields but I
just don’t see the benefit of the Town spending taxpayers dollars, we cannot legally spend
taxpayers dollars to do a map, plan and report for them.
Ms Sonnabend-My understanding was that when that study was done it was not anticipating
such big projects going in along Bay Road, that the study was done with the idea that the
sewer could come up to the Town Center and even up to Cedar Court and perhaps Surrey
Fields and accommodate them, based upon the rest of the empty land being developed as
envisioned by the existing code. That existing code was envisioning professional offices in
a residential like look which is not the same thing that these guys have been proposing
increasingly. They are talking about very big projects, either apartments or huge office
buildings which is a lot more dense than what was anticipated. Maybe they can bring it up
and satisfy their needs but they are going to leave potentially the town and other land or
current developments that are already there without the ability to hook into Bay Road.
Councilman Brewer-I can assure you that this Board or Mike Shaw or our Attorney will not
let that happen.
Councilman Sanford-I appreciate your thoughts on this please be aware that resolution 6.8 is
likely to be passed as well tonight which addresses requesting proposals on a map, plan and
report for a proposed Hiland Park Sewer District Extension. Whether we act on that down
the road or not will depend in a large part as to the feasibility of the Bay Road Extension.
As a precaution based on what you said we are probably going to move forward with that so
that we are ready to move in that direction should we find that some of your concerns are
realized.
Ms Sonnabend-I would just like the Town to know what the two options are and which is
the best for the Town not just what is best for a particular developer.
Councilman Boor-One correction with regard to the possibility of going to Hiland should
the Bay Road project not come through, it would not necessarily as Mr. Brewer has
characterized it be taxpayer money for Surrey Fields because it would be an extension of
that district and it would include the Town, so the Town is the one, this building that we are
in the Highway Department they would be part of it that is what is going to benefit.
Ms Sonnabend-I understand that the Town has a temporary fix on its own septic system, so
they need this sewer extension for themselves and the best place for the town appears to be
from Hiland. I want to make sure everybody is focused on the fact that we have two options
here and we should not be rushing just because one particular developer.
Supervisor Stec-Anyone else this evening? Mr. Tucker
Mr. Pliney Tucker-41 Division Road West Glens Falls, Queensbury How long has the
Surrey Fields Development been there?
Supervisor Stec-Seven years.
599
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Mr. Tucker-Anybody know the reason that the septic system isn’t working?
Councilman Brewer-I cannot honestly tell you.
Mr. Tucker-What is the responsibility of the developer to straighten that out?
Councilman Boor-Quite a bit and he has stepped up to the plate and he is putting
Mr. Tucker-What is quite a bit?
Councilman Boor-Hundreds of thousands of dollars a lot of money.
Mr. Tucker-Is it enough?
Councilman Boor-That is up to them, that is not a town issue, Pliney, that was the point I
was trying to make when I referred to the extension of the Hiland District coming here, the
Town would accept that because we would be improving. Its Surrey Fields and John
Michaels responsibility to get whatever they are going to do to this location or to the Bay
Road/Haviland location that is not the Towns responsibility. We will not be putting dime
one into their getting the sewer to here or over there.
Mr. Tucker-But we are going to put dime one to get it to here.
Councilman Boor-It depends.
Supervisor Stec-It depends on which route we go, that is the discussion we have a route that
has been proposed by a private developer to bring it up Bay Road which I will add is
consistent with what our wastewater superintendent has been saying for months and a report
we have but there is another option to run over Town property.
Councilman Brewer-Dan, that is where I have a problem with that is where is the burning
need for the Town to do this extension? We got letters from the Building and Grounds
saying that we do not have a severe problem right at this moment.
Supervisor Stec-We have been working on this for awhile to try to solve their problem and
work with them. Everything that I have heard from both Roger and Tim to my knowledge
is accurate in the last ten minutes on the subject, everything that both of them said is true.
Mr. Tucker-I am a builder, I do not build subdivisions, I am responsible for the operation of
the whole thing for seven years.
Councilman Sanford-I for one think your question is a good one Pliney, I think your
question is a good question I think it talks in terms of the planning process that takes place
in other words this project was a rather large project went thorough all the planning
processes and how come seven years later you have failed septic system is a good question.
Mr. Tucker-I think the money question is a good question too.
Supervisor Stec-Anyone else this evening? Yes, Sir.
Mr. Jerry Argay-Surrey Fields It is very disappointing to have moved into this area and to
endure this wastewater problem at Surrey Fields. This problem has been with Surrey Fields
right from the beginning and I worked along with Frank Kelly and before Frank Kelly when
I was President of that association to try to rectify this problem so I know the details and
what went into this project. In a meeting of February 5, 2004 with Dan Stec and Chris
Round it was stated that the Town had no responsibility for our problem it was up to the
builder John Michaels to correct the situation. Also at the meeting it was stated that the
Town is short of inspectors and probably only cursory inspections were done. After
reviewing all the paper work applications for permits etcetera which I have done personally
with other Board Members I can see why there are problems. Not only technically but
legally. The Surrey Field community has spent a lot of time and money in order to get
600
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
resolution of this. Even though the builder is picking up some of the costs there are still an
overwhelming financial burden on each home owner. A lot of money. I have had
homeowners come to me personally and I am not on the board any more saying I have to
take out a loan to come up with X amount of dollars for this situation. As a homeowner in
Surrey Fields I am very dissatisfied and feel the Town has a legal and moral obligation in
coming forth and assisting financially with this project. I also feel that if a Board Member
had stated that it is Surrey Fields problem let them deal with it is certainly very
unprofessional and insensitive of an elected public officials. Thank you.
Supervisor Stec-Is there anyone else that would like to comment this evening, anybody?
Yes, Sir.
Mr. Stewart Brown-Resident of Glens Falls Also a DEC Forester but I am not here
representing DEC tonight. Re: Access site at Glen Lake the fact that it has been barricaded
all winter long. I have been in contact with a number of DEC people throughout the north
country, Northern New York we know of no access site like this that is barricaded against
people ice fishing, skiing, cross country skiing or ice skating, I just wanted to ask the Town
why they perceive there is a liability problem here.
Supervisor Stec-I will try to answer this again, I do not mean to speak for the Recreation
Commission or the Recreation Director however I will in my six years of experience on the
Town Board the difference that people are seeing at Glen Lake now, Glen Lake has always
been a seasonal access. It has always been closed in the winter, the reason why people are
perceiving a difference now is because a year or so ago we made an improvement to the site
that included a dry hydrant. That dry hydrant needs to be accessed by the Bay Ridge
Volunteer Fire Company in the case of emergency. So, we do plow that now because there
is a dry hydrant there. So, the plowing of that driveway area gives the perception that
somehow it might be open for winter but has always been seasonal use only and it is largely
as you stated a liability concern that the Town has had for many years before I have been on
the Town Board. It is not a new change, it isn’t that somehow for the last several years we
were allowing access and now all of a sudden we aren’t. It just used to be that it wouldn’t
get plowed as a matter of fact as the Town Highway truck would plow by it would plow up
the entrance so it was not accessible. But, because there is a dry hydrant there now the
Town has a legal obligation to keep it open so that the Fire Company can access it in an
emergency. That is why they put the wooden saw horses up across there. If somebody
wants the Town to consider not making that seasonal access and I have checked and it has
been a seasonal access, Pliney throw a stone if I am wrong, but going back a good twenty
years those issues need to be directed first to the Recreation Commission as is their preview,
their policy.
Councilman Boor-Just to add one more thing in different years, I am not sure about this year
because I have not really checked there have been adjoining properties that use ice eaters
and that increases the risk obviously. I think that is problematic as far as allowing public
access when you know that there is a potential for thin ice when the rest of the lake might
look really good.
Mr. Brown-Definitely last year there was a problem but this year the bubbler seems to have
been turned in a different direction maybe outward. It has been safe ice for a couple of
months now. Thank you.
Supervisor Stec-Anybody else this evening? Yes, Mrs. Salvador
Mrs. Kathleen Salvador-Re: Res. 6.10 I have listened you gentlemen and other persons this
evening discussing possible solutions to several wastewater problems in the vicinity of the
Town Hall. I am thoroughly confused. It appears that this map, plan and report is being
prepared address onsite septic system failures. Before jumping into this mess, has it been
determined whether or not the present design was flawed. Are the actual flows more than
expected? Was the property pre-design pre-construction soils investigation undertaken?
Has the assumed level of BOD been maintained? Are the systems being maintained and
operated as required by the Code and permit conditions. That is, the number of bedrooms
per dwelling, has that been altered, excessive use of household chemical and greases, quick
fix chemicals such as draino, drain stay etc. are not allowed to be used. Are those
601
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
demonstrated failures symptomatic or might occur in other units at any time. Have the
owners of the failured system been sited by Mr. Hatin for the operation of an unsafe
structure as others in this town have? If not, why not? Have the owners of the failed system
been forced to stop polluting the environment by converting their septic tank to a holding
tank per Town Code as others in this Town have been forced to do by Mr. Hatin. The
holding tank has been proven to be a lot more costly to operate but it is not the end of the
world. Have feasible alternatives been considered or is that the subject of the map, plan and
report? If the concept of municipal water in the front door and wastewater out the back door
contributing to these failures as in other areas of Town. All in all a difficult problem well
defined, is half solved. This problem is not even close to being defined. Thank you.
Supervisor Stec-Anybody else this evening? Mr. Sipp?
Mr. Donald Sipp-Courthouse Drive Re: Fire Training Presentation would like to have had
a comment period after the presentation. There has been a lot of rumors and probably a lot
of mis-information about this project and maybe we can straighten out some of these by
determining the precise location of this tower. Have other locations been looked at? A
location in a less urban or residential area? The PORC has identified parts of Bay Road and
Ridge Road as areas to preserve the vistas on. Will this tower conflict with these vitas
looking to the East to Vermont and to the West to West Mountain and North to French
Mountain. What is the type of construction that will be going into this type of tower? What
is the height? Will a variance be needed in order to erect this tower? What are the visual
impacts of this type of structure, will there be smoke, will there be fire seen? When will this
take place? I am sure that our Town Supervisor and the Supervisor’s at large will take these
concerns to the County Board and vote appropriately when the time comes. Thank you.
Supervisor Stec-Thank you, Mr. Sipp. Is there anyone else that would like to address the
Board this evening? Mr. Salvador?
Mr. John Salvador-Re: Public Authority Noted there are about six hundred authorities in the
State, they think, because Public Authorities have been known to create Public Authorities
and they have uncontrolled powers to issue debt. That is what we have to fear most. Re:
Res. 6.8 Has this activity been budgeted?
Councilman Boor-We have not gone out to bid, we have not pick out an engineer.
Mr. Salvador-I would recommend with regard to Surrey Fields issue that this resolution
supporting the map, plan and report be pulled, tabled it is ill conceived. One of the sewer
districts here is extension no. 10, how many patches can you put on a tire and still call it a
tire? I would recommend that we adhere to the State law regarding the composition of a
Comprehensive Plan which we are doing at the present time. Noted that Section 272A
defines the content, sub-paragraph g the comprehensive plan shall include the existing and
proposed general location of public and private utilities and infrastructure. That should have
been included in our previous Comprehensive Plan. In the mean time these people can go
on a holding tank it beats polluting. The Comprehensive Plan should reflect all or part of a
plan of another public agency like the Glens Falls Sewage Treatment Plant. All the public
and private wastewater facilities put in since 1995 have been done without any planning
they have been done at political whim. It is time to step back and define the problem. If
you have any questions in regard to 6.11 I would be glad to answer them.
Supervisor Stec-Anybody else this evening.
Mr. George Drellos-I am George Drellos, 27 Fox Hollow Lane Thanked John for having
holding tanks that would sure help my business quite a bit, if I could pump out the forty or
fifty or sixty tanks every other day that sure would be nice. Thanks John, lets go for that.
Re: Planning Board and the Great Escape I do not know what the deal was with the
Planning Board it is being built, I do not know what the haste was about taking away their
CO or their temporary CO. Does the Planning Board have the authority of them to do that
or do they have to go to a higher up or to Dave Hatin or to Craig Brown?
Supervisor Stec-The short answer is that what they were talking about is part of the
discussion and part of the condition in their initial site plan review. So, that ground work
602
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
was laid, as far as are they in the right ball park to be asking these kinds of questions and
having that kind of discussion it was part of the site plan.
Mr. Drellos-Do they actually enforce it or who enforces it?
Councilman Boor-This is the temporary occupancy permit ok, I think the long and the short
of it, yes, it is their responsibility and I think probably the Great Escape is going to be in
good shape. It was a half a year ago that we had the Ethan Allen sink and you know when
you have a tragedy like that people come out of the woodwork you got the lawyers the
lawsuits and I think the Planning Board is essentially making sure that the twelve items on
this are taken care of, I am not sure that they are supposed to be allowing people to stay in
there now I do not have an answer to that, I am not going to speculate. The question, the
thing is we have a responsibility to make sure that we provide safe buildings when we are
the authority that inspects them. When we have site plan review it is part of the process.
So, I think it was essentially a courtesy and the problem I have is the courtesy that was
extended and the heads up that was given to the Great Escape saying hey look we just want
you guys to know here is what you agreed to we just want to let you know that the clock is
ticking. We hope that you can get everything done on time instead it’s a condemnation. It
was really a courtesy is what they offered.
Mr. Drellos-I am not disputing those twelve, what I am saying is do they physically have the
authority to shut them down or do they have to come to you first, that is what I want to
know.
Supervisor Stec-In this instance that site plan is linked to, not the temporary CO but the
permanent CO that is linked to the completion of the pedestrian bridge. That pedestrian
bridge is not one of the twelve items on that punch list, that is a routine punch list, but
Roger’s point is still valid that the regular CO in the site plan review was linked by
agreement of all the parties to the timely completion of the pedestrian bridge. I think what
the Town Planning Board was trying to communicate to the Great Escape was they want to
make sure that they are going to have this bridge in place before Memorial Day Weekend
when the park is open.
Mr. Drellos-Who would enforce it though? Dave Hatin?
Councilman Sanford-The Planning Board makes the decision whether or not they operated
and made good faith effort to complete the bridge. Perhaps a little history might be
appropriate. I was on the Planning Board when this project was reviewed and some of us on
the Board wanted to keep it nice and clean and simple. What we said was, because of the
safety issues involved we wanted to condition the certificate of occupancy upon the
completion of a pedestrian bridge. The agents, the attorneys for the Great Escape argued
very strongly against that, arguing that the bridge will be built take our word for it and it was
their language which stated that they have to use best efforts to get this bridge completed.
All the Planning Board is doing at this particular point in time is following through as they
are required to do to ascertain where or not they have used good faith efforts to get the
bridge completed. This was a compromise, if you will, that the Planning Board made at the
request of the attorneys and the agents for the Great Escape. If some of the members of the
Planning Board had their way we would not be in this quagmire and it would have been
very binary, it would have been either the bridge is built or it is not built. But, now it is into
this grey area of whether or not they made a good faith effort. That is really the history of it.
Mr. Drellos-Where does it go if they do not follow the rules?
Supervisor Stec-If the Planning Board is not satisfied they have the authority to tell Dave
Hatin not to issue the CO, in this instance because it is part of the site plan approval. I
think we are all hopeful that it will not come to that.
Mr. Drellos-I wanted to know who physically has the authority to dish out the paper.
Supervisor Stec-I have been told point blank because I ask these question too, because I do
not want to get beat up by somebody saying hey where is that pedestrian bridge. The steel I
was told is suppose to get here mid April to install it the design of the bridge is such that
603
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
there is concrete that gets poured and a two week curing time on the concrete so they say it
will be finished in May and they are hopeful and so are we and hopefully it will be done
before they open the park on Memorial Day.
Mr. Drellos-The way Roger was saying see the bridge has nothing to do with it and the way
the paper says it, it was pretty much everything to do with it.
Supervisor Stec-The letter was about the bridge. Thank you. Is there anyone else this
evening? Ok.
5.0TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS
5.1Proposed Fire Training Center Presentation by Warren County Fire
Coordinator’s Office
Presentation made by Brian LaFlure Deputy Warren County Fire Coordinator
Present County Fire Committee Chaired by Warren County Supervisor Bill VanNess
Present Warren County Budget Officer Nick Caimano
Deputy Brian LaFlure-34 Year Veteran of the Fire Service This is the presentation
given to the Board of Trustees of ACC, we have been working with them since 2002
this was to get conceptual approval for a piece of land on their campus so we could
move ahead, to write a proposal to hire an engineer to design this facility. Noted this has
not been designed. Our only goal is to be fiscally responsible we need to make sure we
had a proposed piece of property that we felt was the best piece that we could go and
expend taxpayer dollars to hire and engineer to design the project for us, bring it back to
the college, then we will have a comment period, then we will be able to say this is a
good idea this is a bad idea, what about this, what about that. The faculty association the
Board of Trustees, their maintenance staff, their architect have been involved in this
process. Don’t expect to see a picture of what we want to build we are not at that point
yet. We are at a point to expend some dollars that both Boards of Supervisors for
Warren and Washington County have already allocated. We want to get a design that is
where we are at.
Power Point Presentation highlights
Listed Members of the Committee
?
Chip Mellon-Co-Chair
Butch Chase-Co-Chair from Washington County
Marv Lemery – our Coordinator
Al Macauley- Washington County
Bill Thomas-Chairman of the Board
Bill VanNess-Warren Co. Fire Committee Chair
JoAnn Trinkle– Chairwoman of the Washington Co. Bd. Of Supv.
Brian LaFlure-Deputy Warren Co. Fire Coordinator
?
Inter-municipal Agreement has been signed between the
Counties
Saying we will work together on the proposal
?
History
1970’s first discussed to build training center in the Co. of Warren
on the old County Home Property (location of the Warren County
Fair-Schroon River Road)
Cost for infrastructure, water etc. also in APA and along Schroon
River bad spot
604
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Ten years ago started again – then fell apart again
Five years ago need became critical, used to use acquire structures
for burns for training, fire fighters safety, environmental concerns,
building with asbestos, we were making things worse
Live training needs to be in a controlled scenario
State will not allow use or acquired structure anymore for training
?
Where do we go from here?
Formed a search committee to determine what we need
Out lined search criteria for location of training center
Who will participate, Fire, EMS, Law enforcement, homeland
Security, Civil Defense
How to fund it
Inter County facility- neither County felt that they had the
ability to fund this on their own – Inter-municipal cooperation
helps for grants that are being sought
?
Criteria of location
Proximity to the City of Glens Falls, (paid fire men) they have to
meet training requirements, it has to be within the radius of the City
of Glens Falls that would allow them to respond or have a short
distance to travel, need to be able to respond to calls in the city.
Proximity to the largest number of trainees
The availability of necessary infrastructure - need water, natural gas,
access to sewer system
Willingness of the trainees to travel
Environmental Concerns
Preexisting structures and facilities – to keep costs down
Presently owned public properties – goal to have a place where the
County already owns the property
?
Locations looked at
Original property in Warrensburg
Land behind the Glens Falls Sewage Treatment Plant-
Did not work out too close to the Hudson River
Property behind the South Queensbury Fire House-
existing infrastructure would have had to do a lot of building
and it would have been in the flight path of the airport
ACC Campus
?
ACC Campus -Why
605
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Centralized location to both Counties
Acceptable distance from Glens Falls
Existing property with access roads, infrastructure
Parking, class rooms, utilities and maintenance staff
Need of local fire science program
Desire to move toward a vocational curriculum
Advantages to added enrollment
Existing administration and funding mechanism already paid for
by both budgets.
They have administration, they have registrars, they have people
to answer phones and people to schedule classes these already
exists and we would not have to hire people to do this.
?
ACC OFFICIALS
Met with Dr. Harmon and Lew Buck the Vice President or facilities
Mr. Bob Joy the College Architect he was in the process of creating
a five year Master Plan…until this facility is listed on the Master
Plan nothing can be done - he met with the Board of Trustees, the
Administrators, the Faculty Assembly they voiced concerns such as
what is it going to look like, where is the smoke going to go, where
are you going to put it, is there going to sirens, are they going to
blow the air horn, are they going drive through the campus with
their lights on, we went thorough all of that, that was all taken into
consideration and it wasn’t until all those questions were answered
and those things were hammered out that they then put it into their
Master Plan
Master Plan submitted to State Ed.
Dr. Bishop-President – Reviewed project
Master Plan was approved by the State and the Trustees
?
Needs Assessment
Who were the guys that said we needed a training center-
State Fire Instructors
A wish list of items for a training center
?
Location on Campus
Master Plan listed possible site for training center
Along Haviland Road along the corner where the access road is.
Noted project will have buffers around it and laid out in a complex
(showed pictures of training facilities inside and outside)
606
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Height of building – five story simulator noted Scoville and Dearlove
are only twelve feet shorter than that
Noted decision as to the height of the building has not been made as
Of yet.
Clean burn facility
?
Other uses of the facility
Criminal Justice Program
Emergency Driving Course
Emergency Medical
Vocational and Local Companies
?
Where are we now
Each County has appropriated $70,000 each totaling $140,000
We have spent $4,000 to apply for an inter-municipal grant
those applications are being reviewed, goal is for $ 400,000
?
Up Front Construction Costs
To be provided by the Counties through appropriations, grants
and private sources
By listing this as facility as both EMS and Fire and Homeland
Security it allows us to access other grant streams
Also seeking grants and foundations and private sources such as
industry
No capital or construction costs to be provided by ACC
Trying to obtain additional funding from Senator Little,
Assemblywoman Sayward, and Congressman Sweeney
Looking for in kind services from the DPW’s
?
Continuing Costs Cost of running facility
Staff, maintenance, utilities, training materials
replacement prop materials and outside faculty
Outside faculty would be paid for by whoever was taking
the class
Maintenance and utilities – existing infrastructure
Maintenance staff
Snow plowing
Scheduling
Cleaning staff
Staffed when training center is in use
New line item in the College Budget funded by the two
Counties
607
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
?
Liabilities
Emergency Services Personnel have their own liability and they
would provide proof before they could use the facility.
Student of the College would be covered by them
We will come back when more information is available on the proposal.
Supervisor Stec-Recognized two gentlemen from Washington County, Fire Coordinators
Office Ray Rathbun and Butch Chase, thank you for coming. Noted there will be another
presentation in the near future at the County and will put that information out to the public.
Questions from Town Board Members
Councilman Boor-Asked for a paper copy of the presentation.
Supervisor Stec-Asked that it be given to the Supervisor’s office and it will be distributed to
the Town Board and the Town Clerk.
Warren Co. Supervisor Bill VanNess-Chairman of the Fire Prevention Committee – Noted
that we have a lot of questions asked that we cannot at this time answer. We are in the
infancy stages of this project. I do not think that the Committee will have a problem in
putting something together to answer some of the questions that the Town residents have.
Deputy LaFlure-Noted he gave a copy of the power point to the College
Supervisor Stec-Darleen can we make that a part of the minutes?
Town Clerk Dougher-Yes.
Deputy LaFlure-The information that I gave you is purely speculation.
Councilman Sanford-It doesn’t sound like the location is speculation. What concerned me
with your presentation you stated that you talked to everyone and you gave a list and you
went through it very quickly there had to be fifteen to twenty organizations or entities that
you spoke with but you did not speak with the public. I can’t help to think that you got
ahead of yourself here you made decisions and now you are telling us you are at the infant
stage and you will be very involved with the public but in all due respect to the public I
think it would have been nice for them to have been consulted before you made some of
these very key critical decisions. I saw this presentation and I was told I think it came about
in large part because of some of the concerns raised by Waverly. It wasn’t originally
scheduled to be done until there was a little bit of a community concern. I still have
concerns. Admittedly it is not your grandfathers or your father’s fire training center but still
it is problematic I think in terms of the vision that at least I have for the center of Town of
the Town of Queensbury. I am looking forward to receiving the feed back. I have been
getting a lot of e-mails, I am the Ward II Councilperson from people in Waverly and
elsewhere and I will be interested to see what they have to say following this presentation. I
am wondering what was the thinking process to get, I believe you have a commitment in
your own mind to do it at this location, I am wondering why you did it ahead of time before
disclosing it, before talking to the people and having said that I hope you consider that
perhaps the ACC could be involved for all good reasons that you stated but maybe at a
different location. The College could still be involved in the administration.
Deputy LaFlure-I am not quite sure what you didn’t see in the presentation. I specifically
listed quite frankly the existing infrastructure, parking, classrooms, bathrooms, labs, the
stuff that we need that we do not want to build and buy again. The whole goal of this
scenario number one was to be fiscally responsible. I could build you a ten million dollar
608
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
facility over in the industrial park if you would like but somebody is going to pay the ten
million dollars. We were trying to be fiscally responsible, so if I have a hundred acres in the
middle of no where, where no one would ever see it and we could blow the horns and make
smoke and do whatever we want and still have a hydrant water system, natural gas, sewer
and the stuff we need that would be great. But that site does not exist.
Councilman Sanford-I think you just said it blow horns, let off smoke and all those types of
things is what the people are concerned about this.
Deputy LaFlure-I just told you during this presentation that is not what we are going to do.
Warren County Supervisor VanNess-I think Mr. Sanford, I think what you are saying here
you have got a County Board of Supervisors of twenty men and believe me out of the
twenty I think I can stand here and speak for the majority of them they are one hundred
percent in favor of this fire training center. Most of them having a fire training background
of some sort most of them wanting to make sure that these guys and these women in the
back of the room go home to their family after they fight a fire or after they cut someone out
of a car with the jaws of life. I think the important thing is that we understand that as Brian
said it would cost us ten million dollars to put this type of training center, and I think we all
have our town residents in mind. I can tell you fifty years old I was born and raised in West
Glens Falls and very proud of it, and I can tell you another thing I care about what this
community is and where it is going and so do the majority of those County Supervisors up
there. So, I think you have to give us a little credit and understand that we are taking an
approach at this system and at this building with the citizens in mind.
Deputy LaFlure-One thing I have a real problem with, one thing you said Mr. Sanford and
don’t take me the wrong way, but, correct me if I am wrong Mr. Wood, but I talked to you
about this the day after it was in the paper right? I suggested that I meet with the Waverly
Association and do this presentation. I was just asking for conformation. I offered any fire
station in the town I even threw you in Dan and offered this room, I will put this
presentation on for who ever wants to see it. I offered to the Waverly place people the day
after we did it for the Board of Trustees when it was in the paper.
Councilman Sanford-My questions are not meant to beg an argument, what I am trying to
do here is merely state that it would perhaps have been preferable if prior to making your
decision and it sounds as if you have made a decision that you would have involved the
public for comment before the twenty men made their decision at the County. I believe in
public input on things like this and so do the people who have been sending me e-mails and
they did not have that benefit. Now, direct question, have you made the decision to locate it
on the ACC campus.
Deputy LaFlure-Yes.
Councilman Sanford-Ok. That is my point.
Councilman Brewer-How long has Waverly Place been there?
Unknown-Four years.
Councilman Brewer-Four, this process started ten years ago. So, Waverly Place wasn’t
even there yet when they started this process.
Warren County Supervisor Nick Caimano-Warren County Budget Officer - I, as Mr.
VanNess have had very pleasant conversations with people in my neighborhood and our
neighborhood who are concerned, everybody is concerned anytime anything like this is
done. Obviously, the Councilman is concern, I think if we have learned nothing more,
transparency, transparency, transparency. Lets just keep the communications open. We
realize why you cannot do this and let it out, that is understandable but we have to we at the
County and hopefully, because I just asked the guys in the back the fire guys, they are for it
but they have seen it this time for the first time too, as I have.
609
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Deputy LaFlure-There has been absolutely no purpose, attempt of any kind to make this
secrete to hid anything to keep anything from anybody. I seriously doubt there is anybody
that lives at Waverly Place with the exception of Jim Canavan, who would have been
interested in what we build in the training center. Would they be interested in where it is
and how it looks? Absolutely. We are not at that point yet. This is the point I have tried to
make from day one. If I could come to you and show you a picture of what it was going to
look like the we could go there, I do not have that to give you yet. We have the cart in front
of the horse here. I will be glad to come back to anyone that wants to see it when we have a
conceptual plan.
Supervisor Stec-I am sure that as soon as you do we will take you up on that offer and have
you come back.
Mr. Edward Schoemaker-63 Waverly Place The fact of the matter is if they go on with the
plans and they have an idea of what it is going to look like and they have already decided
exactly where it is going to go it is kind of a fait accompli. Now nobody, Waverly Place of
anyplace else has any objection to the idea and matter of fact I think we all support the idea
of a firemen’s training center, but the question is, I love cats and I have a litter box but I do
not put it in the middle of my living room. I think this is exactly what we are getting at.
Now, if the Board were to say yea, build your center but nothing over three stories high they
would not want to build the center there. They have to have a large structure and repelling
ropes and all this kind of stuff and I have seen a couple of these and yes, they are more than
five years old. They are unattractive. Once they are used they get more and more
unattractive. In terms of putting the cart before the horse that happened ten years ago.
5.2Green Mountain Development Discussion re: Bay Road Sewer For Cedars
Phase 2 Project
Presenters – John Geibank and Charlie Brush Owners of the Cedars Senior Living
Community
Mr. John Geibank -We are here to request that the Board forward as expeditiously as
possible with your resolution 6.10 in terms of the sewer line. We have submitted the
original map, plan and report for the sewer extension up Bay Road back in early December.
At that time we had pointed out and followed with letters that we have a very narrow time
window here to be able to get this sewer line an actual reality this summer. We have
funding in place for phase II of our Cedars Senior Living project through the Division of
Housing, New York State and other funding sources that would allow us to get that
underway immediately. But, obviously we need the Town approval relative to the map,
plan and report. The reason it is needed so quickly is because to finish the sewer plans we
want to know it can be approved, we need to finish the sewer plans, they need to go to the
Division New York State DEC for their final approval of the actual sewer construction
plans. That takes time as you all know getting through the State process on that. We are
looking to try to get this thing and unfortunately we have lost some time here in the last
couple of months by not having this map, plan and report pushed forward. We still believe
that we can get this under construction in early summer and be complete by early fall and in
st
operation basically no later than October 1. with that sewer line.
Supervisor Stec-You are correct it is 6.10 that would authorize our Town Counsel to review
what you have done. I know a question was asked earlier today and I think that whole
Board certainly understands and supports what needs to be done.
Councilman Sanford-When I was looking at the map, plan and report in anticipation of
tonight’s meeting the report section of it is no longer applicable at this point in time. When I
heard that our attorney wasn’t going to be present I took it upon myself to call him up today
and ask him a few questions. Is there a way in which we can move forward with this in a
way that would accommodate your time line but provides a more accurate complete report.
He sent me this memo, I am going to read it quickly it is only a couple of paragraphs it is
addressed to me and it reads as follows; “ Today we discussed the revised map, plan and
report proposing a sewer district extension along Bay Road which includes the Cedars
Properties and the property at the corner of Bay Road and Blind Rock Road. You brought
up a good point that this map, plan and report was based on the prior definition of the PO
610
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Zone which has since been amended by Local law. We agree with your concern that prior
to our final review, (that would be the review of our attorney), the map, plan and report
should be reviewed and updated by the engineer, to determine if the current definition of the
PO Zone results in any changes to the map, plan and report. If it does then the map, plan
and report should be modified, if not, then the engineer should state so and explain why the
revised map, plan and report is not affected by this change. You also mentioned that the
Town Board may wish to have the map, plan and report discuss the possible tie in of this
extension to the Surrey Fields development. As we discussed while it appears that the map,
plan and report should be updated to make sure that it corresponds to the current PO zone
definition the Town Board can still if it wishes to expedite consideration, authorize us to
review the revised map, plan and report when it is received by the Town.” So, what I am
asking you during this discussion period prior to addressing resolution 6.10 later on in this
meeting is are you agreeable to update the report to reflect the current conditions and
specifically I would think that would call for a major modification on the corner of Blind
Rock and Bay and possibly would affect your future proposed Phase III and IV which has
not been approved by the Planning Board although Phase II has, simply because Phase III
and IV I have not measured it out because I do not have the drawings, but it is likely would
be in the thousand foot set back. So, what I am looking for you to do is review your report,
update it, clean it up give it back to the Town, our Attorneys will then review it and will then
take it to the next level. But, I am not interested in having them review what I know right
now is an inaccurate report.
Mr. John Geibank-I have no problem with that. But, what we are looking for here is an
indication from this Board as to trying to move this thing along. We are more than happy to
make the call to our engineer tomorrow morning and get him working on it, it can probably
get done in a very, very short period of time but what we are looking for is to get this on
thrd
your agenda for the 20 and for the public hearing on the 3. for this thing can move
forward. Otherwise there is no sense in proceeding with this because it will not meet our
time frame to be able to get the funding.
Councilman Boor-We wouldn’t make you go thorough this if we …
Councilman Sanford-With your commitment you will receive my support.
Councilman Boor-Mine too.
Supervisor Stec-We certainly appreciate you indulging us and we are trying to do the right
thing here I believe. We are part of the cause of your delay and that is the cost of doing
business with government. Asked for further comments?
Councilman Brewer-I would just recommend that as soon as your engineer gets it done, get
it back to us and we can move forward.
thrd
Mr. John Geibank -Noted that the March 20 and April 3 are very critical dates.
5.3OTHER TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS
Councilman Brewer- No further comment
Councilman Strough-
?
Attended Mayor Akins, Vision for the Future - how to bring
blighted parts of a community and make them attractive, people
oriented and economically successful, emphasis of thinking out of
the box, being proactive, creatively… our motto in Queensbury is
Queensbury is a Good Place to Live and I think it should be we want
to make Queensbury a Better Place to Live. We should be looking at
the Towns growth twenty and thirty years for now, we should be
proactive as well as the City. I think we are trying to with the
Comprehensive land Use Plan which addresses that. The Town
611
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Code is not written clear enough, the direction is not clear enough.
The problems that result is what we have today, we have to make it
clear. We are in the process of rewriting, our Zoning and taking a
fresh look at out Comprehensive Land Use Plan with the intent to
update it. You cannot separate your vision for your community and
the zoning for your community they go together. No matter how
much we study community planning if we do not share that thought
process with the community they are never going to be on board.
?
Town Historian Marilyn VanDyke has come up with some
conceptual ideals for Oneida Corners, she would like a workshop
with the Town Board.
?
Proclamation regarding the safety of our children during proms and
Graduation Season…also have a copy for the Warren County Board
of Supervisors
Councilman Sanford-I would encourage anyone that saw the presentation tonight or have
concerns to feel free to send me an e-mail and carbon the rest of the Town Board so that
they are also aware of your concerns if you have any.
Councilman Boor-I would like to encourage a couple of workshops, we have a lot coming
up.
Supervisor Stec-Noted he did not have a problem with setting another date, asked the Town
Board e-mail dates that they have free and a workshop can be set up and also a list of items
they would like to have covered. Towns web site www.queensbury.net variety of
information is available on this site. Thanked TV8 and Glens Falls National Bank for
televising our meetings. Thanked Supervisors Caimano and VanNess for coming this
evening, Brian LaFlure and Marv Lemery… Noted that the Warren County Grand Jury
Report on So. Qsby. Fire Co. is available in the Town Clerk’s Office … Noted a public
statement was made that Authorities are not subject to foil, I have spoken to the Warren
County Attorney as has Warren Co. Supv. Nick Caimano and I have a note from the Co.
Attorney which states, “Public Authorities are covered by FOIL and the Open Meetings law
plus now they have to do this” there is a paragraph circled “Authorities to the extent
practical each local authority shall make accessible to the public via its official internet
website documentation pertain to its mission, current activities most recent annual financial
reports, current years budget and its most recent independent audit report, unless
information is covered by subdivision 2 of section 87 of the public officers law.”
6.0RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION SETTING HEARING ON CUMBERLAND FARMS,
INC.’S APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE/WAIVER REQUEST FROM
SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION REQUIREMENT CONCERNING
THE CUMBERLAND FARMS CONVENIENCE STORE PROPERTY
LOCATED ON KENDRICK ROAD/STATE ROUTE 9
RESOLUTION NO.: 141, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
612
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board is authorized by Town Code Chapter 136
§
to issue variances from 136-44 “Connection to sewers required” which requires Town
property owners situated within a sewer district and located within 250’ of a public sanitary
sewer of the sewer district to connect to the public sewer facilities within one (1) year from
the date of notice, and
WHEREAS, Cumberland Farms, Inc., (Applicant) has applied to the Town Board
§
for a variance/waiver from Town Code 136-44 for a two year extension of the Town’s
connection requirements to connect the Cumberland Farms Convenience Store property to
the Town of Queensbury’s Route 9 Sewer District, as the Applicant states that it will likely
remodel the building in the next one to two years and therefore would prefer to spend
money once and the property’s current septic system is functioning, as more fully set forth
in the Applicant’s application presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
th
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board will hold a hearing on March 20,
2006 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, to
consider Cumberland Farms, Inc.’s sewer connection variance/waiver application
concerning the Cumberland Farms Convenience Store property located at Kendrick Road
and State Route 9, Queensbury (Tax Map No.: 296.13-1-69), and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town
Clerk to send the Notice of Hearing presented at this meeting to the Applicant required by
law.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION SETTING HEARING ON JOSEPH PATERSON’S
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE/WAIVER REQUEST FROM
613
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION REQUIREMENT CONCERNING
PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1 QUEENS WAY
RESOLUTION NO.: 142, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board is authorized by Town Code Chapter 136
§
to issue variances from 136-44 “Connection to sewers required” which requires Town
property owners situated within a sewer district and located within 250’ of a public sanitary
sewer of the sewer district to connect to the public sewer facilities within one (1) year from
the date of notice, and
WHEREAS, Joseph Paterson has applied to the Town Board for a variance/waiver
§
from Town Code 136-44 for a one year extension of the Town’s connection requirements
to connect his 1 Queens Way property to the Town of Queensbury’s Route 9 Sewer District
due to the cost of connection and the property’s current septic tank with leech field is
functioning, as more fully set forth in the Applicant’s application presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
th
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board will hold a hearing on March 20,
2006 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, to
consider Joseph Paterson’s sewer connection variance/waiver application concerning his
property located at 1 Queens Way, Queensbury (Tax Map No.: 296.69-1-5), and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town
Clerk to send the Notice of Hearing presented at this meeting to the Applicant required by
law.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
614
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Discussion held before vote: Board agreed from now on only a one year extension will be
considered.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF DIGITAL COPIERS
RESOLUTION NO.: 143, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously adopted purchasing
procedures which require that the Town Board approve any purchase in an amount of
$5,000 or greater up to New York State bidding limits, and
WHEREAS, the Town’s Director of Information Technology has requested Town
Board approval to purchase two (2) Canon iR3570 Digital Copiers for use by the Town’s
Recreation and Community Development Departments, and
WHEREAS, New York State Bidding is not required as the purchase price for the
copiers is in accordance with New York State Contract No.: PC59459 pricing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Town’s
Director of Information Technology’s purchase of two(2) Canon iR3570 Digital Copiers
software from IKON in accordance with New York State Contract No.: PC59459 pricing
for a total amount not to exceed $18,797 to be paid for from Account No.: 01-1680-2031,
and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Director of
Information Technology, Budget Officer and/or Town Supervisor to take such other and
further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Brewer
NOES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough
ABSENT: None
615
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Discussion held before vote: Councilman Sanford-Looking to purchase two copiers, one for
Community Development and one for Recreation Department, total cost $18,797. I would
like to suggest at this particular point in time approve the purchase of one copier and that the
two departments share the copier and get back to us in ninety days and let us know if it is
working out. I have concerns especially following the discussion that we had with the fire
companies when there was a big brouhaha made regarding the color copier. My question is
why the double standard. The town wants digital colored copiers they get them the fire
department wants them and they get ridiculed in the paper. My feeling is there is probably a
need but they ought to be able to share they are both located in the same building and I
would like to give that a try and then if for some reason this does not work out come revisit
the board and we will deal with possibly the purchase of the second machine at that time.
Supervisor Stec-Number one both of these copiers were, neither one is color, they are printer
copiers so it is a different kind of animal that the fire company was questioned. Certainly
our mission is very different than the fire company, both of these were in the adopted 2006
budget. Councilman Sanford-I think it is a large expense though and again in a weird way I
can almost have an appreciation of the amount of paper work that the community
development generates. In the Rec. Dept. there is probably considerable as well but
probably not as much. Supervisor Stec-That might be a misnomer. Director of IT Bob
Keenan-The Rec. Dept. volume is probably at least 80% of what the Community
Development office does. Their volume is very high because they are producing brochures
and flyers that they send to all the schools that get distributed in class rooms. Budget
Officer Switzer-Noted that one day last week an employee of Recreation Dept. spent an
hour and a half in the Accounting Office just copying and that was for one flyer for one
program. Councilman Boor-In regard to speed on a digital copier how much faster?
Director Keenan-These are thirty five pages per minute. Executive Director Ryba-The
existing copier, printer from our computers and is also used as a fax, one question we had
difficulty with is how we can get all of the structure thorough IT and I am sure Mr. Keenan
has more on that but the second thing is the current copier we have has about a million and a
half copies that have been made on it and the people have said it has gone where no copier
has gone before, and the concern is what happens if that breaks down. When we are making
copies of minutes it can go on for quite some time and it does not allow us to do other
things. Councilman Boor-The one that we have now does how many per minute? Director
Keenan-The one in Marilyn’s Office is thirty two pages per minute. The new one is an
upgraded version. The current copier in the Community Development Office would get
moved to the Planning Area so they could still be using that copier/printer in that area.
Executive Director Ryba-We often get jammed up with people from Building and Codes
looking for information, they need a copy of something while they are waiting and if we are
printing off minutes and then also trying to get other notes out it, we have people lined up
waiting to use it. We have been known to go to other areas when we can but if there is a
line someplace else, it gets…Councilman Brewer-What is the life expectancy Bob?
Director Keenan-Typically five years, that is where their copier is at now. Councilman
Strough-My thinking too is for years we had eighty five teachers, five classes using one
machine and the volume is tremendous, was it used by some of the other teachers, all the
time, you had to come back later or come back after school. You go down and check it and
sometimes you had to wait in line. The new machines that we have do about ninety copies,
so it would be cost effective to put an extra two or three thousand into a copier to get a faster
one and have all the departments use it? Director Keenan-It is not going to be two or three
thousand you are going to see a tremendous increase in the cost by getting a much larger
volume copier. We tend to distribute the volume because what tends to happen, people do
not like walk to go get their print offs and what some of the departments were doing is
buying the smaller printers sitting at each desk with the larger volume printers you are not
spending the money on toners and supplies for these smaller printers that are more expense
per page wise then some of the higher volume ones. Councilman Strough-You have
probably done the research Bob, I go down to Stapes and I see these copiers they will rattle
off forty or fifty copies a minutes they are like four hundred bucks. Now, maybe they do
not have the durability? They are coming down in price all the time. It just seems like a lot
of money to me, and I am just kind of going out with what Mr. Sanford was suggesting.
Supervisor Stec-I see from Mr. Keenan’s memo that you sent to the Town Board on
th
February 27 that the existing Cannon was purchased in 2001 for $11,000. somehow we
have come down a couple thousand each. A million images on one copier I am guessing
Cannon might want that one for the museum. As far as double standards go, the town has
616
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
cut its operations over the last couple of years we have not had double increases in our
operations. I trust my Department Heads I grilled this one personally when I went though
the budget last year and they convinced me and I am still convinced. I am going to back the
Department Heads on their request. Councilman Sanford-I am not trying to be
argumentative I think I would like to do what I suggested which is to get the one machine
and see if it works out in a sharing capacity, you are still going to have the old one as a back
up. Vote taken
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN OF QUEENSBURY’S
CONTRIBUTION TO NEW YORK STATE “LAKE GEORGE – PLAN
FOR THE FUTURE” GRANT PROGRAM FOR 2006
RESOLUTION NO.: 144, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Town Board believes that the environmental health and overall
quality of life in the Lake George Watershed area is critical to the social and economic well-
being of the Town of Queensbury and the Warren County region in general, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board believes that the protection, preservation and proper
management of water quality within the Lake George Watershed Basin is an essential
ingredient to maintaining this revered natural resource as a key to the social and economic
vitality of this region, and
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has been an active participant in developing
the critically important water quality management plan, and
WHEREAS, the adopted document entitled, “Lake George – Plan for the Future”
identifies numerous recommendations and actions as being critical to pursuing the
objectives of preserving, protecting and enhancing the water quality throughout the Basin,
several of which will require the engagement of contract services to execute these
recommendations, and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 207,2005, the Town Board expressed its support of
the “Lake George – Plan for the Future” grant program and by Resolution No.: 314,2005,
the Town Board authorized submission of the Grant Application for funding in response to
New York State’s solicitation for grant applications and agreed to serve as custodian for
grant funds, if awarded, and
617
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
WHEREAS, New York State recently awarded a grant in the amount of $250,000 to
the Town of Bolton, on behalf of all participating municipalities in the Lake George
Watershed Basin, that carries with it the requirement of a local match which will take the
form of services in kind, as well as matching funds, and
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury wishes to contribute its fair share, along with
other municipalities throughout the Basin, to this critically important program so as to be
able to take advantage of the aforementioned State funding,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves, authorizes and
confirms that it will provide $7,000 to the endeavor referenced in the preambles of this
Resolution, such funds to be forwarded to the Town of Bolton, administrator for the Grant
program, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Budget
Officer to take any such actions to provide for the forwarding of such funds, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes the Town Supervisor and/or
Town Budget Officer to execute any associated documentation and take any other action
necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES : None
ABSENT : None
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RETIREMENT OF MARILYN
HAMMOND, PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT CLERK, AND AUTHORIZING
MS. HAMMOND’S APPOINTMENT AS PART-TIME EMPLOYEE
RESOLUTION NO.: 145, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford
618
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
WHEREAS, Town of Queensbury Principal Account Clerk Marilyn Hammond has
worked for the Town of Queensbury for 15 years and has consistently performed in such
capacity in a professional and exemplary manner that has reflected positively on the Town,
and
WHEREAS, Ms. Hammond has submitted her resignation from the full-time,
st
Principal Account Clerk position effective March 31, 2006, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to acknowledge Ms. Hammond’s dedicated
years of service to the Town of Queensbury and accept her retirement, and
WHEREAS, the Town Budget Officer has requested that upon Ms. Hammond’s
retirement, he Town Board hire Ms. Hammond as a part-time employee in the Accounting
Department, assuming most of her current duties, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve Ms. Hammond’s employment in
this position,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts with regret the
st
retirement of Principal Account Clerk Marilyn Hammond effective March 31, 2006, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the hiring of
Marilyn Hammond as a part-time employee in the Accounting Department Clerk effective
rd
April 3, 2006, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that Ms. Hammond shall work approximately 28 hours per week and
shall accrue leave benefits (sick, vacation and personal days) on a pro-rated basis and will be
covered under retiree status for her health insurance coverage and contribution, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that Ms. Hammond shall be paid at the rate of $18.85 per hour, and
BE IT FURTHER,
619
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town
Supervisor and/or Budget Officer to complete any forms and take any action necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor
NOES : Mr. Sanford
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Councilman Sanford-What I am wondering why is an
employee retiring and then coming back to work twenty eight hours, is this a way in
which an employee can receive a retirement pension and also continue to work? Is that
kind of what is happening here? Budget Officer Switzer-This is something that is
happening, that is not the reason she is retiring. She is retiring for a couple of reasons,
one of them is to have more time as she is reaching on in her years and the second is one
of the things that happened when I came to the Board and requested purchase of new
software, was that this would help out and this would help to decrease some of the work
load in the accounting office. So, Marilyn had approached me earlier and her initial
request was for a December retirement, knowing that we had only completed part of the
implementation of the new software and had not completed the payroll had agreed to stay
on through March. Councilman Sanford-How long is she going to stay on as a part time
employee? Budget Officer Switzer-She has indicated that she may stay on for the next
couple of years. Councilman Sanford-We are a government agency and we have a
situation where an employee is retiring collecting New York State Retirement System
benefit and then continuing to work nearly a full time job. My question to this Board,
and they I thought perhaps be more appropriate to discuss it, because it is a personnel
issue in an executive session. Is this an appropriate policy direction that we want to go in
as the Town because I understand how the system works and it is a rather generous
system and I am wondering if we want to see this as a repeated thing, where people put in
their X number of years, take their retirement thing and then say well I am going to stay
on for another few years at almost a full time capacity. In addition based on the
resolution you state in the resolution what she would be paid at the part time rate but I
have no basis of understanding how that compares or lines up with what her current
compensation is, I would think to make an intelligent decision on this it would be
th
appropriate for me to know. Budget Office Switzer-I sent a memo on February 27 and
in the memo I outlined what her current rate is and what my suggested part time hourly
rate would be and it is less. Her current rate is $19.74 an hour, my suggested part time
hourly rate would $18.85 per hour, basically because she will not be performing all the
duties that she would be but there is a lot of institutional knowledge that she has and it
would not be as if I would have to have someone and retain them. Councilman Sanford-
Do you agree with me that it is somewhat concerning or problematic to have people
retire, collect a pension and then continue to work. One could almost interpret that as
gaming the system. Budget Officer Switzer-I think that is something that needs to cross
your mind, but I think it is something too that you need to visit on an individual basis.
This is not someone that is making fifty or sixty thousand dollars a year this is someone
who has worked for the Town for fifteen years and is making somewhere in the high mid
thirty thousand dollars for her job duties. Councilman Sanford-I would rather not deal
with it in anything other than the general policy sense because I do not know this woman
and I am certainly not singling her out for this discussion. Budget Officer Switzer-That
is where the Department Head you need to rely on some of our, that we deal with these
people on a daily basis and we know best how to run our departments and whether you
agree with that or not. Councilman Sanford-She could stay on as an active employee not
as a retired employee. I guess my point is the bigger issue is that is this the policy of the
town, that retired employees can continue to work for something slightly less than full
620
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
time and receive the New York State Retirement Program, if the majority of the Board
feels comfortable with that, then they do, but I do not think it has ever been discussed in
that context and that is my only point. Budget Officer Switzer-I just want to bring up to
you that there are currently employees of the Town who are in that situation. Supervisor
Stec-I will add for the record that Jennifers memo to the Town Board was dated a week
th
ago, February 27 and it did have the current and the proposed hourly rate. Vote Taken.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH WARREN
COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW
YORK STATE ELECTION LAW §3-226 REGARDING CARE,
CUSTODY AND CONTROL OF VOTING MACHINES AND
APPLIANCES AND EQUIPMENT RELATING TO OR USED IN THE
CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 146, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHEREAS, recently enacted New York State Election Law §3-226 provides that all
voting machines and appliances and equipment relating to or used in the conduct or
elections shall be in the care, custody and control of the Warren County Board of Elections,
and
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury currently possesses certain voting machines
and acknowledges its obligations under the Election Law to turn over the care, custody and
control of the machines to the Warren County Board of Elections, and
WHEREAS, the Warren County Board of Elections has asked the Town for
temporary assistance with regard to the voting machines, the securing and administration of
polling places in consideration of the size of the voting machines, the knowledge of the
officers and employees of the Town concerning securing polling locations and the
maintenance of as much consistency and past practice as possible, and
WHEREAS, the Town recognizes the importance of continuity in the arranging for
polling locations and otherwise administrating such locations and also recognizes the large
size of the voting machines and therefore wishes to assist the Warren County Board of
Elections and enter into an agreement regarding such assistance, and
WHEREAS, Warren County has presented the Town Board with a proposed Voting
Machine and Polling Location Agreement,
621
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the
Voting Machine and Polling Location Agreement (Agreement) with the Warren County
Board of Elections concerning the storage and safekeeping of voting machines and keys, the
right of access of the Board of Elections to such machines and keys at any time, the
provision of certain services by Town of Queensbury officers and employees in securing
polling locations, the development of Election Day material needs list, the setting up of
signage and temporary disability/ADA parking, the delivery of voting machines and tables,
the reimbursement to the municipality for truck rental and drivers, if necessary, the
transportation of machines and the performance of accessibility/ADA compliance checks, as
has been done with previous elections, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Supervisor to execute the Agreement substantially in the form presented at this meeting,
such form acceptable to Town Counsel, and consistent with the terms and provisions of this
Resolution, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor
and/or Town Clerk to execute and deliver such other documents and take such other and
further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption
and all prior Resolutions or parts thereof inconsistent are herewith repealed.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Councilman Strough-It is updated in the sense that we are
going to be re-imbursed for our trucks but I understood that it was the trucks and the drivers,
that was how it was explained to me. I think we should add, and drivers in the resolution
and the agreement. Agreed to by the Board
622
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2006 BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO.: 147, 2005
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHEREAS, the attached Budget Amendment Requests have been duly initiated and
justified and are deemed compliant with Town operating procedures and accounting
practices by the Town Budget Officer,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the
Town Budget Officer’s Office to take all action necessary to transfer funds and amend
the 2006 Town Budget as follows:
CEMETERY/CREMATORY:
FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT:
001-1990-4400 001-4901-9002 3,500
(Contingency) (Transfer to Cemetery)
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WASTEWATER DIRECTOR TO
RECEIVE PROPOSALS FOR PREPARATION OF MAP, PLAN AND
REPORT FOR PROPOSED HILAND PARK SEWER DISTRICT
EXTENSION TO SERVE QUEENSBURY TOWN OFFICES
PROPERTY AND APPROPRIATING MONIES FOR SUCH PURPOSE
RESOLUTION NO.: 148, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
623
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to engage the services of a
professional engineering firm to prepare a Map, Plan and Report for the consideration of an
extension to the Hiland Park Sewer District to serve the Queensbury Town Offices property
located in the vicinity of Haviland and Bay Roads, Queensbury, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board estimates that the costs of obtaining such Map, Plan
and Report shall not exceed the amount of $ 15,000.00,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town’s
Director of Wastewater to receive proposals in accordance with the Town’s Purchasing
Policy forthe preparation of a Map, Plan and Report for the consideration of an extension to
the Hiland Park Sewer District to serve the Queensbury Town Offices property located in
the vicinity of Haviland and Bay Roads, Queensbury, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby appropriates the specified amount of $
15,000.00 to pay the costs of such Map, Plan and Report, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that this Resolution is subject to a permissive referendum in
accordance with the provisions of Town Law Article 7 and the Town Board hereby
authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to publish and post such notices and take such other
actions as may be required by law, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Supervisor, Wastewater Director and/or Budget Officer to take all such actions necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough
NOES : Mr. Brewer
624
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
ABSENT : None
Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Stec-Requested that the amount be
set at $15,000. Councilman Brewer-When will this money be spent?
Councilman Boor-This is a contingency it is not going to be spent if the Bay
Road Corridor, we are going to know relatively quickly, with the revised map,
plan and report if that is going to happen. This is so thirty days from now if it
falls apart we do not have to wait another thirty days to do this. Supervisor
Stec-This does not spend any money but it starts a thirty day clock and then
after thirty days if its apparent that the preferred method, Mike’s preferred
method I think the towns historic preferred method, do we need to undue it by
another resolution? Councilman Sanford-This is just getting bids not awarding
bids. Supervisor Stec-Thirty days from now you would be authorized to spend
up to fifteen thousand dollars. Director of Wastewater Mike Shaw-What I
understand, they want to authorize me to go out and get quotes on a map, plan
and report, if when I get that I can hand that over to the Board and if they want
to act on it the Board can have another resolution acting on hiring a service to
have it done. Councilman Brewer-So, are you going to spend any money?
Director Shaw-I am not spending a nickel. Councilman Brewer-Why are we
doing this? What is prompting the Town of Queensbury to pay for a map, plan
and report for sewer that we have in this building that is right now currently
working is my question. Councilman Sanford-First of all about a month or so
ago, on the night when Charlie Brush was giving his first presentation I
received an e-mail from Building and Grounds stating it has not been a good
year and that the septic system failed. Supervisor Stec-He followed that up
yet. Councilman Brewer-It is working. Councilman Boor-Tim, there is also
correspondence giving a time frame on how long they think that system will
last. Supervisor Stec-It is a couple more years or whatever. Councilman
Brewer-The point is if we are going to fix the system for four or five years for
a couple thousand dollars why are we spending eighteen thousand on a map,
plan and report? Councilman Boor-We do not know what we are spending on
map, plan and report, we did not authorize spending dime one. Supervisor
Stec-Let me summarize, I think you are all of the opinion that bring it up Bay
Road as Mike has been telling us for awhile now is the way to go. I think
everyone is on board with that and I will be shocked if number 10.0 does not
pass five o, but the issue is that Roger and maybe we do not share Roger’s
concern, but Roger’s concern is that if the Bay Road Sewer portion doesn’t
happen for whatever reason, this is the backup insurance plan that we hope
will not be necessary that we hope that we will not spend a nickel on but in the
mean time if we find out in the next thirty days that it is going to be necessary
and we should know in thirty days then we have at least started the clock so
that we can jump on this. All your points, about Mike telling us over and over
and over again despite comments from some residents in the audience that
don’t live in Surrey Fields but are somehow experts in map, plans and reports
that Mike has been saying for a long time this is the way to go, I think we are
all on board with that, but we do not control what a developer does and if it
falls apart Roger is trying to say then lets make sure that we have at least
started the clock going on plan B. I am comfortable with it for the sole reason
that it does not obligate us to spend any money. If someone said Dan spend
fifteen thousand dollars now on a what if that thirty days from now will need I
probably would be voting no, but my understanding is that we are going to
know within a month and then if it looks like we are all set to go Bay Road
which I think we all hope then Mike will not be spending a nickel.
625
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
Councilman Sanford-It is a contingency. Councilman Strough-Chuck Rice
has a memo in reference to 6.8 that we just got in the mail boxes and Chuck is
suggesting, I would therefore seek permission to approach qualified
engineering firms and create a plan for the installation of a force main system
that would accommodate all sewage generated from this property, the Town
property that will tie into the proposed force main from Surrey Fields. Vote
taken.
RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS –
TH
WARRANT OF MARCH 6, 2006
RESOLUTION NO.:149, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to approve the audit of bills
nd
presented as the Warrant with a run date of March 2, 2006 and a payment due date of
th
March 7, 2006,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Warrant with a
ndth
run date of March 2, 2006 and payment due date of March 7, 2006 and totaling
$108,270.12, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Budget Officer
and/or Town Supervisor to take such other and further action as may be necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
626
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN COUNSEL TO PERFORM
LEGAL REVIEW OF MAP, PLAN & REPORT FOR PROPOSED
CENTRAL QUEENSBURY QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT
EXT. #10 – BAY ROAD
RESOLUTION NO.: 150, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has received a Map, Plan and Report for a
proposed Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Extension #10 – Bay Road from
C. T. Male Associates, P.C., engineers licensed by the State of New York, dated September
29, 2005 and Revised December 16, 2005, Prepared for Little and O’Connor, Attorneys at
Law 19 W. Notre Dame Street Glens Falls, NY 12801, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to authorize Town Counsel to perform a legal
review of such Map, Plan and Report,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes Town Counsel to
perform a legal review of the Map, Plan and Report for the proposed Central Queensbury
Quaker Road Sewer District Extension #10 – Bay Road from C. T. Male Associates, P.C.,
engineers licensed by the State of New York, dated September 29, 2005 and Revised
December 16, 2005, Prepared for Little and O’Connor, Attorneys at Law 19 W. Notre
Dame Street Glens Falls, NY 12801 and Town Counsel shall report back to the Town
Board and Wastewater Director concerning such legal review.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Councilman Boor-Mike, I want to make sure that it is clear, I
think Mr. Brush and John Geibank understood it but it obviously brings to the furthest
section of as we pass a resolution in 2005 it requires that extensions of sewer districts go to
the furtherest portion of that property, I want to make sure that is in the map, plan and report
627
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
when it is revised and that the apartments are not shown in that. Director Shaw-I believe if I
am not mistaken I think the current version shows that but we will make sure that it is.
RESOLUTION GRANTING APPEAL WITH LIMITATIONS AND
AUTHORIZING DISCLOSURE OF SIX (6)
COMPARABLE ASSESSMENTS
RESOLUTION NO.: 151, 2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board is considering an appeal by John
Salvador to the correct decision by the Queensbury Town Clerk to deny his Freedom of
Information Law (FOIL) request for the disclosure of six (6) comparable assessments dated
rd
January 3, 2006, and
WHEREAS, it has been established by Town Counsel with the unambiguous
concurrence of Mr. Robert Freeman, Executive Director of the New York State Committee
for Open Government, that the Assessor’s “comparable sheets” are not subject to FOIL, and
WHEREAS, Queensbury Town Code §130-9, explicitly prohibits release of non-
FOIL able information but provides that following a written appeal made to the Town
Board, the Town Board may grant such appeal, and
th
WHEREAS, by letter dated January 17, 2006, Mr. Salvador appealed to the Town
Board the Town Records Officer’s refusal of a FOIL request, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to grant the appeal and authorize the disclosure
of the requested six (6) comparable assessments, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the
Town Assessor to release the six (6) comparable assessment sheets that are in the Assessor’s
th
records for those properties listed on Mr. Salvador’s appeal letter dated January 17, 2006
th
and received by the Town Clerk on January 17, 2006, and
BE IT FURTHER,
628
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 3-06-2006 MTG. 8
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Supervisor, Town Assessor and/or Town Clerk to take any other action necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford
NOES : Mr. Stec
ABSENT : None
Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Stec-This is the second one that Mr. Salvador that
he has filed seeking the disclosure of six comparable assessments, the Town Attorney but
more importantly Mr. Freeman from Open Government has stated clearly that these are not
subject to F.O.I.L. and that is why when they are not subject to F.O.I.L. they need to come
to the Town Board if someone wants to appeal that. This is an appeal that has been made
and I know that I said when we started this fiasco last fall that I was not going to let this turn
into a game, Mr. Salvador was not paying attention. I will be voting no.
RESOLUTION ADJOURNING TOWN BOARD MEETING
RESOLUTION NO. 152.2006
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
RESOLVED,
that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Town
Board Meeting.
th
Duly adopted this 6 day of March, 2006 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7.0ACTION OF RESOLUTIONS PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED BROM THE
FLOOR
NONE
8.0EXECUTIVE SESSION
NONE
Respectfully submitted,
Miss Darleen M. Dougher
Town Clerk-Queensbury