Loading...
2001-12-17 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 17TH, 2001 7:05 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER COUNCILMAN JAMES MARTIN COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER TOWN COUNSEL Mark Schachner TOWN OFFICIALS Henry Hess, Comptroller Chris Round, Executive Director of Community Development Marilyn Ryba, Senior Planner David Hatin, Director of Building & Codes Ralph VanDusen, Superintendent of Water and Wastewater Mike Shaw, Deputy Superintendent of Wastewater Bruce Ostrander, Deputy Superintendent of Water Rick Missita, Superintendent of Highways Bill Lavery, Supervisor's Executive Assistant PRESS: Glens Falls Post Star Supervisor Brower called meeting to order. . . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN JAMES MARTIN Supervisor Brower recognized Mr. Robert Goodson, Queensbury Highway Employee and read the following into the record: COMMENDATION WHEREAS, Robert 1. Goodson has been an employee of the Town of Queensbury's Highway department since January 2nd, 1985, and WHEREAS, Robert 1. Goodson, on September 28th, 2001, was working as a roadside mower in the area of VanDusen Road and Pitcher Roads, and noticed a black object just off the roadway where he was mowing, and WHEREAS, Robert 1. Goodson, upon closer investigation, determined that he had found a wallet belonging to Mr. Ronald Morehouse, which contained the sum of $550.00, and reported same to his Foreman, Thomas VanNess, and together they were able to contact Mr. Morehouse and return the wallet and all contents, before Mr. Morehouse was aware that he had lost it, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury greatly appreciates Robert 1. Goodson's effort and honesty in locating and ensuring return of the wallet and all contents to Mr. Morehouse, and furthermore, recognizes and appreciates Robert 1. Goodson's action which reflects positively on all Town of Queensbury employees, and THEREFORE, the Town of Queensbury hereby officially commends Robert 1. Goodson for service above and beyond the call of duty. Given this 17th day of December, 2001. Dennis R. Brower, Supervisor, Town of Queensbury Supervisor Brower-Thank you Bob, thanks for your honesty, you give the Town of Queensbury a great name, thank you. And thank Rick Missita and Mike Travis for reporting the incident and of course, Tommy VanNess, the foreman. Matter of fact, it probably would be appropriate for us to do one for Tom, too and make sure he gets a copy in his file. A copy of that will go in your file as well, your employment file. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Local Law, Amending Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136, Article XXIV Entitled "Establishment of Sewer Rents" to Increase Annual Charges for Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Notice Shown 7: 10 P.M. MR. MIKE SHAW, Deputy Superintendent of Wastewater-The public hearing is for sewer user rates for Technical Park Sanitary Sewer District. The current rate is two dollars and twenty cents ($2.20) per one thousand gallons of water usage. We're looking to adjust that for 2002 to three dollars ($3.00) per thousand of usage. Generally, the reason for the adjustment is that we're, signed a MOU and we're moving ahead to sign a contract with the City of Glens Falls for sewer usage and we're combining all of the town's contracts into one user contract. It's kind of funny, we're raising the rates here to, by eighty cents ($.80) per thousand but yet we're, actually saving the users in that district some money because there is a clause in the current contract that calls for a portion of the sales tax within that district. The city has never exercised that, this year they had asked to exercise that and bill us and if we did have to retain the contract and use that current formula, we'd be paying probably about six dollars ($6.00) per thousand of gallons of usage. So, in a way, you're looking at a savings of approximately three dollars ($3.00) per thousand. SUPERVISOR BROWER-It's a good way to look at it. MR. SHAW, Deputy Wastewater Superintendent-A raise but a savings. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you, Mike. Any questions of Mike by board members? Thank you very much. At this time, I'll ask any members of the public that are here to comment on this public hearing either for or against to come forward and just state your name and address for the record. Seeing none, I will at this time close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:11 P.M. RESOLUTION ENACTING LOCAL LAW NO.6 OF 2001 TO AMEND QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE CHAPTER 136, ARTICLE XXIV ENTITLED "ESTABLISHMENT OF SEWER RENTS" TO INCREASE ANNUAL CHARGES FOR QUEENSBURY TECHNICAL PARK SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 462,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: 6 of 2001 to amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136, Article XXIV entitled "Establishment of Sewer Rents," which Local Law would modify the annual sewer rent rate in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District by raising the rate for occupied properties from $2.20 per thousand gallons to $3.00 per thousand gallons, and WHEREAS, this legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law ~1O and Town Law Article 16, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly held a public hearing on December 17th, 2001 and heard all interested persons, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting and is in form approved by Town Counsel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board of hereby enacts Local Law No.: 60f2001 to amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136, Article XXIV entitled "Establishment of Sewer Rents" to modify the annual sewer rent rate in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District by raising the rate for occupied properties from $2.20 per thousand gallons to $3.00 per thousand gallons as presented at this meeting, 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 acknowledges that the Local Law will take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: None LOCAL LAW NO.: 6 OF 2001 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 136, ARTICLE XXIV OF QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE ENTITLED "ESTABLISHMENT OF SEWER RENTS" BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. amended as follows: Section 136-137(B) of Article XXIV of the Queensbury Town Code is hereby B. District: Annual charges pursuant to ~136-135 hereoffor the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer (1) For all occupied properties: $3.00 per thousand gallons of (average) water consumption, as indicated by the current water meter readings, billed on a quarterly basis. SECTION 2. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph or provision of this Local Law shall not invalidate any other clause, sentence, paragraph or part thereof. SECTION 3. All Local Laws or ordinances or parts of Local Laws or ordinances in conflict with any part of this Local Law are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing in the Office of the New York Secretary of State. HEARING - AVIATION MALL, UNSAFE STRUCTURE 7:11 P.M. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Dennis, as a note, I'm going to recluse, as they are an active client. (Councilman Martin removed himself to the back of the room) SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you. Good evening. COUNSEL JON LAPPER - We're here to address, on behalf of Pyramid Companies of Glens Falls, the notice that we received from the Town Board following your last meeting. For the record, Jon Lapper and Bob Orlando, the mall manager. We'd like to explain the history of how the property got to be in it's present unfortunate situation and talk about what the options are. Certainly, some serious attention needs to be spent on this building, on this property at this time. To begin with, just to address, not really what the notice that we got from the town but reports that have been in the newspaper that some how Pyramid made a misrepresentation about it's intentions for the property and the record is pretty clear that Pyramid purchased the property in 1998 with the hope and intention of redeveloping the whole site rather quickly for a commercial use. They're in the business, primarily of, a commercial landlord and not running a hotel. In hindsight, they might well have been better served to have rented it out as a hotel because they expected that it would have been quicker to lease this prominent property right at the Northway, right at the entrance of town and that didn't happen. As part of the planning process and the zoning process with the Town Board, over the course of this year, when we were here to have a new anchor approved for the mall property itself, the Town Board members made it clear that one of the issues was that this property was vacant and that that was not a positive thing for the town. It didn't show the strong economy that the town has and it was not a good front door for the town as a result of that, Bob was able to negotiate a lease with a sporting goods retailer and I hope you will agree, that the property looks considerably better from the road because there's now a clean operating retail store and that is an improvement. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That's a major improvement. COUNSEL LAPPER -Thank you. The hotel, however because it had fallen into disrepair, is not something that could be quickly leased out. The reason that the hotel hasn't been leased out is because it would, in order to put that back in service would require a fairly substantial investment and I think because of the location, they could find somebody that would want to make that investment or they would make it themselves but because their intention is to redevelop the entire site for retail uses, it would be a case where, in a short period of time, sixty, ninety, a hundred and twenty days notice, they would want to tell the tenant that the lease would end and that, you're just not going to get somebody to go in, sign a franchise agreement and employ a bunch of people if they know that your intention is really to redevelop the site. With that said, the building has value, the building has value as a hotel and to knock it down, for one thing, they're paying just on the hotel property, seventy-six thousand dollars ($76,000.00) in taxes to the town and that's not to say that a lot of attention doesn't need to be spent. But, if the remedy that the town and the town building inspector are talking about, is to demolish the property, that's very strong medicine because the building has a lot of value even though admittedly, it would need a lot of renovation. The fire casualty that was suffered was something that you can't charge Pyramid with. This was a case of arson, criminal activity. It is certainly an attractive nuisance as the vacant property but it's only an attractive nuisance for criminals that would want to destroy it. We walked through the property last week with Dave Hatin and he's taken some digital photos and we have no qualms with the facts that certainly the property is in disrepair and the fire was substantial, at least, in so far as it relates to the Blacksmith Shop and it's going to take substantial money to secure the property and to repair it so that it's structurally sound so that it can bear the snow loads this winter. What we're proposing is to have a little bit of time to be able to determine exactly what needs to be done to secure it, to secure it temporarily, to come back with a proposal to better maintain and improve the landscaping and the look of the property so it won't be the visual hindrance which is really, I think a lot of the issue for the town. But just to have the remedy available to repair the property rather then to remove it because it just, if at some point, it just seems that they're not going to be successful in finding a commercial tenant and we expect that they will be successful cause that's the business that Pyramid is in and they're good at it. But, if at some point they can't, the possibility exists to renovate this into a hotel and they would like to keep that option open. Looking at the town law that addresses this situation that gives the town the right to ask that the property be improved when there are unsafe buildings and collapsed structures, town law Section 130 sub 16, just to read from the beginning, unsafe buildings and collapsed structures, providing for the removal or repair of buildings in businesses, industrial, residential sections, that from any cause may now be or shall hereafter become dangerous or unsafe to the public. And, what I just read, this section provides for the removal or repair. So, they would like to look to the repair section rather then the removal section. Their insurance adjusters have just been there over the last week and a half, they still haven't heard back from them on a final number but certainly this casualty loss is covered by insurance and they are asking for the right to repair the structure so that it's safe and at the same time, come back to talk about improving the look of the structure so it won't be something that hurts the town. But they've shown good faith by leasing the front property, this was something that is unfortunate but again, it's criminal activity and to address, in terms of future criminal activity, previously their on-sight security force had been there once an hour, they've doubled that to twice an hour now. I've met with their security chief. We've been notified by the sheriffs that they're, because of problems in Coles Woods where apparently the kids are hanging out that are causing this that they're increasing patrols there. So, I think that there's a comprehensive approach in terms of making it not as, just making sure that if there are vandals, that people know that they are there. But they understand that they need to secure the property and they need to improve it. Bob, is there anything that you would like to add at this time? MR. BOB OLRANDO-Jon really covered the majority of the issues. You know, at this point, it's really too early in the process for us to know and we really haven't heard back from the insurance adjusters exactly what the plan is and really, you know, tonight's, one of tonight's purposes is to give us that ability and that time to be able to do that. From where I sit, almost four years ago, when we purchased that property we certainly had quite a plan and that plan didn't come to fruition. As Jon mentioned, we've been in, over the last six months or so working towards putting that new anchor store on there and developing that property and we're getting closer but we certainly need some time to be able to address this situation as opposed to the time that was set forth in the resolution from your last meeting. COUNCILMAN BREWER-How much time do you think you would need, Jon? COUNSEL LAPPER-We'd like to be able to come back in thirty days and let you know specifically what the plan is to repair the building and at that point we can talk about some visual improvements as well, which probably would have to be implemented in the spring after the winter. COUNCILMAN BREWER-So, then that takes us another three months away. In my mind, you've had over three years to do something, you haven't done anything. COUNSEL LAPPER -We would expect that they would immediately come in and repair the building after thirty days and the three months would be to do some plantings and better maintain the landscaping to just make it look more attractive. They looked at this as a short term situation at first and that's really why the building has fallen into disrepair and obviously it's now long term situation because they haven't been successful in finding a tenant but they're out there vigorously marketing it and they hope that that will turn around quickly. But regardless, we know that we have to deal with this. COUNCILMAN STEC-Jon, what I find frustrating is that, these things you're talking about now, we talked about when we rezoned that parcel. I mean, this is well covered ground. COUNSEL LAPPER-But if there wasn't a fire, if there weren't vandals, criminals it would have just sat there, it could have used some better landscaping but it just would have sat there and it wouldn't have been a problem, it's just that kids broke in and set it on fire and that's, its' hard to protect against criminal activity. MR. ORLANDO-And Dan, as well, we were able to get the Sports Player into the corner piece. You know, a lot more complicated to attempt to put some kind of a business into that particular building based upon, you know, the condition of the building and you know the perceived use or value to, you know, even a retailer for that matter, to attempt to put them in there and the investment to be able to put them in there, very hard to do. COUNCILMAN STEC-I understand. The, just so that I understand, the plan that you're proposing is that you want to make an investment into this structure to retain the option that if you can't use it, that you can sell it, or you know, that it can become a hotel again, but the hope and the long term plan is to make this investment and then demolish the building to put in a big box store or you know, whatever the expansion, appropriate commercial expansion would be? MR. ORLANDO-It's the best case scenario. COUNCILMAN STEC- That could be a lot of money. SUPERVISOR BROWER-But you're not really telling us that you're going to refurbish the building so that it is inhabitable as a working hotel. MR. ORLANDO-You're correct about that. We're going to refurbish the building to make sure that it's safe. COUNSEL LAPPER-And I guess I would just say that people have the right to own vacant buildings, criminals don't have the right to set them on fire but people have the right to own vacant buildings. Pyramid does not want to own a vacant building, they want to redevelop the site. They spent a lot of money, as it's been reported in the papers on the property and it makes no sense for them to be paying for that without having a big tenant in really a large parcel of property. This is not the goal, this is a short term situation but the law gives them the right to either repair or remove and at this point, there's just too much of an investment in there to remove it and that's why we're asking to repair it, to take that option instead of removing it. COUNCILMAN STEC-Are we looking at or willing to set some sort of time line and I know we talked about time lines back when we rezoned the property but a time line where X will happen in so many months if you don't find a tenant, six months go by and you're not using that property, you will demolish the building? I mean, there's got to be an end strategy here. COUNSEL LAPPER-I guess, since sitting here right now, we don't know exactly what the future will bring. What we would propose instead would be, that we come back with a plan to do the immediate repairs and also a plan, as soon as spring hits to do cosmetic improvements so that it wouldn't be such an eyesore for members, residents, members of the Town Board, etcetera and that would be the way to address it in the short term. At some point, they're going to have to make a decision about commercial development or reusing it as a hotel but we don't know exactly when that is going to be. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Since you got this letter from Dave Hatin, have you and corporate talked about any plans that you could do? You must have talked about something that you could do to secure the building and I mean, they didn't tell you to come here tonight and see if you can get time to, I mean, certainly they told you to come and see if you can get time to rectify the problem but you must have had some conversation as to what could we do to satisfy our problem. MR. ORLANDO-Well, certainly, we've had conversation, once again, we aren't finished with the insurance people yet. It's hard to make any moves in any direction until we're finished with that piece of it. You know, as far as securing the building, the building is secure. I mean, if vandals go there and you know, want to break in at some point in between our shifts of our security people going up there, I mean, that obviously is a possibility. Once again, we've doubled those patrols so that we've got somebody there twice an hour. The building has been secured but what we're talking about is once we are able to hear from the insurance people then, you know, immediately move forward with the plan to make the repairs so that the building is safe. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you for that. I think, we've got the picture, I'd like to ask Dave Hatin to come forward and Dave was good enough, I drove up to the property today and drove around it and I talked to Dave about going in and he suggested that I look at the photos instead which he brought up to my office. So, he did a nice job documenting the condition of the building. Dave, do you want to discuss your thoughts on this? MR. DAVID HATIN, Director of Building & Code-I've heard a lot of talk about what they want to do or propose to do but I haven't heard anything about what they will do tonight. We've had two serious fires in this building. We've had this building damaged by vandals. Mr. Orlando, with all due respect, just admitted that they can't, don't think they can stop vandals from getting in the building. At what point do we say enough is enough? Pyramid has had, since 1998 to do something with this property, it's sat vacant. In the last two years, we've had two fires, we've, they've had numerous break-ins. The pictures speak for themselves. Now, we have health hazards in the building, mold and mildew starting to grow from leaking roofs because the building hasn't been maintained. Obviously, the fire has damaged some structural components of the building making the structure soundness of it, questionable and here we're approaching winter and we still don't have a resolution to anything. My concern is that, if somebody gets injured in this building, whose going to hold the cards? Okay, who is going to foot the bill for the claim? We've identified it as unsafe structure. If you read the unsafe structure definition, this building meets it to a T. This law was designed for exactly this type of building. You know, I have the greatest respect for Mr. Lapper and Mr. Orlando but I still disagree with what they're proposing. We haven't solved the problem, we're just prolonging the problem. It's very obvious, this will never be renovated into a hotel. If you were to walk through the building, every room has been damaged, every bathroom has been damaged. It would take a substantial amount of money to renovate this building and I would dare guess over five hundred to a million dollars, somewhere in that range, just from what I've seen. I don't see that type of investment being put into this building to renovate it for a hotel by anybody. The bottom line, Pyramid wants to develop this property for a big box retailer, that building will be slated for demolition in the future, I think we all know that, I don't think that's a big secret. The target project has nothing to do with this property. It doesn't get affected by this property. Alright, we need to bring this to a resolution. I asked you to start the time clock for a reason because at the end of sixty days, this board has to make a decision what you're going to do. Without that time frame, there's no incentive to do anything. I've worked with insurance companies, day in and day out, during fires, I've never seen it take that long for an insurance company to make a decision. Alright, if ... be secured, because they run secured, the insurance company would authorize that money yesterday. We haven't seen that and my concern is, this just keeps getting prolonged and prolonged and no resolution. Nothing to say we can't have a fire there tomorrow. This building is full of combustibles, it can burn again, it can put firefighters at risk who enter that building and as a fellow firefighter, I'm concerned about that. It's unnecessary and all the patrols in the world are not going to stop the vandalism from happening unless you physically put somebody in that building twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week which then it becomes a hazard for the person in the building. You've got the mold and mildew, we got an open pool in the building. What happens if one of these vandals falls and gets hurt? Okay, now we put people at risk that have to go in and get them. At what point does it end? The buildings need to come down, that's the bottom line and I think the board has an obligation to make sure that happens to the community as well as Pyramid and I won't accept anything less. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you Dave. At this time, I'd like to open up the public hearing to any members of the public that would like to come forward and just state your name and address for the record. Mr. Strough. MR. JOHN STROUGH-John Strough, Queensbury. You know the mall was, at one time going to expand three times it's current size and that didn't happen. Then there was going to be, I think it was a Champion Restaurant, two story, twelve inch TV screen, that kind of stuff, that didn't happen. And then there was a big push to, you know, get this new expansion program which we gladly did and even had special meetings to move it along but that hasn't happened. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see all that stuff happened. I'd like to see the mall do great but I don't know what's going on but I do remember in the process that they were going to do something with that northwest corner and I think I talked about it last time. Now, I don't know what the wording to that was and I don't know if Chris has looked that up or anything but I think the intent was to landscape it and make it more attractive. From what I'm reading tonight, the rehabbing is, sounds to me like it's, you know, nailing up some more four by eight sheets of plywood over the windows and doors. Again, some attractive nuisance that's not very attractive. When we were going through the planning process on the Planning Board, we were talking about the size of the building that could locate here and we were talking about traffic flow, we're talking about setbacks and you know, certainly, I got the opinion that the type of building that's going to go in there would be, maybe a department store, maybe a large restaurant, something of that nature. In any event, never was it discussed of keeping the current buildings up and so it seemed likely to me that they were going to be bulldozed anyways. So, you know, like I said, I don't think they're going to go to any great extent rehabbing it and I do wish the mall well, I wish the department store would go in there, something like Champion would go in there. I mean, you know, I'd like to see this place thrive and get going but I don't know what the holdup is, it just seems to be spinning it's wheels. Okay, thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Mr. Boor. MR. ROGER BOOR, 83 Sunnyside East-Roger Boor, 83 Sunnyside East. I think Dave Hatin summed it up quite well. I might add a little bit to that and that is, I have serious concerns of whose responsible if you allow them to do anything with that building other then tear it down and somebody gets hurt. Your Code Enforcement Officer has clearly stated that it's a health hazard. I think people that have been there know that and I'm wondering who the lawsuit falls on if somebody does get killed in there or seriously injured when you have been told point blank, this isn't safe. Okay, then we regress, let's say that you allow them to plywood the windows up or whatever, they're obviously not going to replace all the sinks and the carpet and get rid of all the mildew and turn this into a building that somebody could lease as a motel. They're essentially just maintaining an exterior structure. So, I don't see that as viable or useful. I don't know where, what this board would be looking for in that. That's, I don't see that as a solution and I would hate to see the board get involved in private enterprise. I think that the mall, I want them to be successful, I think they've made some poor decisions. I think they should have leased back right from the get go, maintain great sales tax base and if, you know, that would have worked out good for everybody. The place would have been maintained all along but that's not what happened, they chose not to do that, we lost a lot of sales tax, we let it go. We were told that there was going to be several expansions of different sizes, none of them have happened. The last one, I don't know what store was supposed to go in, I mean, nothing has happened on that. I mean, it sounds good and they come here and you grant them the rezoning, which makes their property worth more if somebody wants to buy it. You approve expansions, which makes the property worth more if somebody wants to buy it but they don't ever do anything. So, you keep giving them this value but they don't use it, they're only using it to market the property, I assume. Because of their corporate status, we're not going to know what their financial situation is and that's fine but I do not want to see the Town Board getting involved in private enterprise and feeling bad when they've made mistakes and I think Extreme Sports is great but I've got to tell you, I'm worried if they're going to last. I don't see a lot of cars there and although it's an incredible improvement, I don't see that that business may last there. So, lets not look at it and say, look at what they've done, isn't this great because it may not be there two months from now. The landscaping we talked about. Where was that? That's still not in, I mean, these endless promises and we're still here. Nothing has changed from day one on this. I mean, how much longer do you want to do this and is it really, I'm concerned about the liability issues here. Not only is it look bad, but I'm, as David pointed out, we've got a serious liability issue here now, he's told you it's unsafe. Now, which one of you is going to go in there and say, yes, this plywood is adequate to keep these guys out? I mean, we're at a point where a hard decision has to be made and I want the mall to succeed, I'd love to see them expand, I'd love to see lots of people go there but it's not your responsibility. It's their responsibility, it's their business and unless they want to open up their books to you and tell you why they can't afford to tear this down, you shouldn't worry about it, it's not you're problem. You've got an unsafe situation there, you need to take care of it. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Anyone else care to address the board? Mrs. Salvador. MR. CHRIS ROUND, Executive Director-If! might, Dennis, the previous two speakers spoke about a landscaping plan or what was going to occur at the site and what they're both referring to is when the board approved a rezoning, the most recent rezoning for the property, the board asked for some, in their SEQRA findings statement they included a term that asked for a tenant, and the specific language, I apologize, I don't have it in front of me, I should but it asked for a tenant for the Blacksmith Shop and that has been COUNSEL LAPPER-For the Seven Steers, MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Excuse me, for the Seven Steers, I confused the two names of the restaurants, for the Seven Steers, a tenant has been so they satisfied the term, the condition of that agreement and it said, in the event that a tenant was not signed within sixty days, they would come to the Planning Board and submit a landscaping plan for that front of the property, that property that faces Aviation Road. So, they have satisfied it and it may not have satisfied the intent of what some members of the board or what the public thought was going to be done but it did satisfy the provisions of the SEQRA Findings Statement. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Chris. Mrs. Salvador. KATHLEEN SALVADOR-Kathleen Salvador, thank you. I believe that Mr. Hatin and Mr. Boor really covered the subject quite thoroughly and I have to agree with what they said. As a former resort owner in the area for twenty-eight years, I can tell you that when Pyramid bought those buildings and in particular the motel, not hotel, back in 1998 whenever it was, that building was functionally obsolescent at that time. To try to bring that building anywhere close to what the standards of the traveling public would be looking for today, would be an impossibility. It would cost them just too much. I'm sure the rooms are not the size that the people are looking for today. I'm sure the bathrooms do not have Jacuzzis and the amenities that people are looking for. So, to even think that they're going to do that at some future point, I myself, can not think it. I would think that that building should be torn down, demolished and then lets go from square one if we're going to do a hotel, a motel, a resort, whatever because it would just be too costly. I'm sure they don't have Jacuzzis in the rooms, they probably don't have car key locks. There's probably, the ceiling tiles are probably asbestos. All those things would have to be removed. Dave talked about mildew, I'm sure the carpeting would all have to come out. So, it would just be a tremendous expense and I can't see them doing it. I do think you need to have them do something. That whole area has been an eyesore for many, many years. That is one of the main entrances to the Town of Queensbury and it is sad. We have to do something. Mr. Boor mentioned about the liability and all, I agree there also. I don't think any of you want to have that on your heads either. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Would anyone else care to address the board on this issue? Mr. Lapper. COUNSEL LAPPER-I think the real issue for most people and not Dave Hatin but for most people who spoke, the real issue is that it has become an eyesore and we understand that and whether or not, there's a legal obligation to deal with that, Pyramid wants to deal with that and understands that they need to deal with that. As Chris Round said, they certainly met their obligations under the SEQRA review by finding a tenant which served to clean up the front of the property. Nobody envisioned that there would be a fire casualty although, certainly any time you have a vacant building it's a possibility, that's why insurance rates are higher on vacant buildings but that was not something that should have happened. But I believe it's clear that they have the legal right under town law and under the town ordinance to repair or remove. Your resolution that was passed last time and what's proposed for tonight is just to remove it and the law gives them the right to repair or remove. When somebody suffers a fire casualty, it's not unusual and that happened, probably three weeks ago, it's not unusual that it takes a little bit of time to deal with it and this is going to require structural engineers to take a look at the roof in the Blacksmith Shop which was really damaged and certainly, we'll see Dave Hatin to make sure that the renovation plans are acceptable to him. But they have the right to repair it and that's all we're asking for and at the same time, Bob has promised to come back with a plan to deal with the visual issues, to do some landscape improvements to buffer it in the short term until they can do something else with it. There's no question that this is not their ultimate goal with the property but it's not their fault that somebody has come in and set it on fire and I guess that I just ask you to run that by your counsel before deciding to do the opposite because the law is pretty clear that they have the right to repair it and we're sorry that we're in this situation. COUNCILMAN BREWER-So, what you're saying is, if we order the building to be torn down, they have a right to repair it? Is that what you're saying, Jon? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Either or. COUNCILMAN STEC-Mark? COUNCILMAN BREWER-No, I'm asking Jon, he's the one who said it. COUNSEL LAPPER-Yes, what I quoted from, sorry, I thought you were looking at Mark, from Town Law Section 130-16, that it's to repair or remove. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I appreciate that comment, but I'd like to ask our attorney a question at this time. Mark, if we order the demolition of this structure and that it be done by February 20th, 2002, I would assume that the mall would have the obligation to accomplish that or we could take action. Is that correct? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I agree with that. COUNCILMAN STEC-What about Mr. Lapper's remarks? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Well, I guess there's a couple of thoughts or points. The statute that Pyramid's counsel is referring to is a state law, a New York State Law, part of the New York State Town Law. The code provisions that Mr. Hatin is referring to, are part of the Queensbury Town Code. The Queensbury Town, these things are not unrelated, the Queensbury Town Code provisions that Mr. Hatin is referring to have been passed under, pursuant to and accordance with the state statute that Mr. Lapper is referring to. It is correct that both the state statute and the town code allow for the possibility of a property to made safe, if you will, repair, renovate, whatever it takes to make it safe so that it is no longer an unsafe structure. It is also true, however, that you have some discretion as the Town Board to decide whether a property owner's intent is manifested enough, concrete, I don't mean to be cute about concrete, you know, real plans to make the property safe or you feel that that's not happening and that, in which case if you feel the building constitutes an unsafe structure, you have the discretion to require it's removal. I don't think as your counsel, that I've heard anyone really suggest that currently the building does not qualify as an unsafe structure under the legal provisions. I think Mr. Hatin feels quite strongly about that, I don't have any basis to disagree with his assertion as Town Counsel. As Mr. Hatin said, there are criteria in the town code, those criteria in my opinion are lawful criteria. Mr. Hatin expressed, I think a pretty strong opinion that the criteria are met and that the building currently constitutes an unsafe structure and as Town Counsel, I'm very comfortable with that opinion. Then the question becomes what do we do about it. You're not unfamiliar with these situations, we've had a number of unsafe structure type proceedings in the past although, they've generally involved smaller properties with property owners of less means, to be frank. You know that from time to time you've had pleas made by property owners to allow them the opportunity to repair property in order to make it safe, you've often granted certain amounts of time in which to do that and those action sometimes have occurred and often have not occurred. We have not, from my standpoint as Town Counsel, I don't think we've really heard a specific, again concrete plan that says how this property owner intends to make this property safe or no longer unsafe in an immediate fashion. I think what we've heard is, we'd like time, we'd like to come back and things like that. You certainly have the discretion to give more time, if you wish but I know, in other situations, you've had specific plans where applicants or property owners have said, by date such and such, we'll do X, Y and Z to make this structure safe. As counsel, our concern is advising you that the property should be made safe. There are two ways to make the property safe. One is, take whatever steps are necessary to make it safe. The other is, demolish the structures. COUNCILMAN STEC-Now Mark, Mr. Lapper mentioned, I think what he, if I could put words in his mouth, he's going to say, they're asking for exactly that, they're asking for thirty days to come up with a plan. Now, to which I say, there's nothing that says that we can't start the clock ticking tonight and if on day fifty-two, they come in with a plan, we turn off the doomsday device and we can let them execute the plan. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-And in fact, that's a path that you all have followed on a regular basis with other property owners. COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, I think that addresses a lot of Mr. Hatin's concerns is that he's saying, look, you know we need to move this along and we need to set a concrete timeline and perhaps TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-And again, I'll reiterate, that's a path that you have, this board has taken on many prior occasions with other property owners and with different results. Sometimes the property owner has come back and said, okay, here's our concrete plan to make the property safe, sometimes they haven't. COUNCILMAN STEC-So, we can pass this resolution tonight, they could still come back before the sixty days and if they can persuade us that they've got a plan, then we could say okay, we're going to revoke or we won't take action to demolish the building ourselves, will allow you to execute your plan. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-You certainly have that discretion, no question about it. COUNCILMAN BREWER-But in the meantime, how does it get secured immediately? I'm looking at pictures with open windows. I'll tell you, it bothers me in that, the money part doesn't bother me at all. I mean, it's not our responsibility, like Roger said, whether it costs them money or doesn't cost them money. I would hope, I would hate to think that because they don't want to have somebody at that building all the time to make sure that it's secure, that if a fire starts and a, some man goes in there or a woman goes in there to check to see if anybody is in there and gets hurt or dies, I don't want that on my shoulders and that's the way I'm looking at it. You know, I don't care if it costs Pyramid two million dollars to tear that building down, you can't put a price on a life and to me, that's what this is about. It's not about you guys having thirty days or sixty days to come up with a plan. In my mind, you've had three years to come up with a plan and if that isn't plenty of time, then thirty days isn't going to get you any more. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I'd like to continue the public hearing portion of this and see if anyone else from the public would like to comment on this. I'll give you another opportunity, Mr. Lapper, if you desire before we close the public hearing. COUNSEL LAPPER- Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone else from the public care to address this issue? Mr. Salvador. MR. JOHN SALVADOR-My name is John Salvador. Just to reiterate what's already been said, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that anything can be done with this structure by way of rejuvenating it and bringing it back to what it originally was, that is a transient motel. You recall, about a year ago, there was an effort put forth to locate a motel facility across the, across Aviation Road from this facility and these people that were putting forth this plan, obviously knew there was standing there a structure that could be renovated and give them the same thing they were looking for, that is a plain pipe racks motel, if you will. And they didn't, they were going start from ground zero and build. They turned their back on this structure for whatever it was, size, height, location, it's a bowling alley type structure and it just doesn't lend itself to what's looked upon today as a place where the traveling public would want to stay. As my wife said, this structure is functionally obsolescent. There's nothing you can do with it. It's not reasonable to assume that they can achieve what they're talking about, that is, finding someone to bring this structure back to life. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, sir. Anyone else care to address the board on this issue? Mr. Strough, one more time. MR. STROUGH-Just to go along with what Chris was saying earlier, I think he's partially right but I think there was more then that and I wish you had the wording for that. With this site, it would make a great site for a conference center that many other cities that I've traveled to seem to have. It's just a good location, it has a lot of amenities nearby. I just wish something would go. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. One last opportunity for the public to comment. Anyone from the public care to address this issue? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing portion of the meeting and ask the applicant if they have further comment. HEARING CLOSED 7:50 P.M. COUNSEL LAPPER-What concerns me about your proposed resolution is, just that it says, that it has to be removed and it doesn't say, remove or repair. Nobody has said or could say that the building is irreparable. The Salvadors, as people involved in the industry are saying that it's functionably obsolescence and that's their opinion but the building can be repaired. I was in the building with Dave, two parts of it certainly have some serious damage that's going to take some serious money to secure them but Pyramid has the resources to do that. This is insured and all we're asking, we know what the law is and all we're asking is to be able to secure the building so that it's safe for the time being, increase patrols as they already have to make sure that people aren't there doing any more damage and in the spring, do some cosmetic improvements to the grounds and landscaping that will make it less of an eyesore for the community. There's no proposal, as I heard that all the windows would be boarded up, that wouldn't be visually attractive and they would want to avoid that. But the law is clear that they have the right to repair or demolish it and I would ask that any resolution that you pass, give them both of those options. We will be here, we can be here at your next meeting on the seventh rather then thirty days, if that would be preferable and give you details of exactly what is proposed but they're still waiting to hear from the insurance adjusters. They've had construction people look at it in the last week and we'll know in a few days what the plan is to secure it but it is capable of being secured, even though, everyone would rather that there's a conference center or something more attractive. Certainly I would, certainly Bob would, we're both residents of the town but for the time being, they need to secure the building to keep the possibility that it would be put back in service and I believe that they have a legal right to do that and I'm just asking you to carefully consider that and to include that in the resolution. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, you just stated that, so it could be put back into service and yet, earlier, when I asked you if you had any intention of making this into a motel that's usable, you said, no. We don't have the intention. COUNSEL LAPPER-I may not have been answering the right question but in the, their goal is still to redevelop it for, commercially but if, at some point, if that doesn't happen, the obvious thing to do would be to turn it back into a hotel, it's a good location for a hotel. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. COUNSEL LAPPER- Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, my, I have to be candid, I've had discussions with Pyramid Company in the past about the demolition of this particular property prior to the last couple arson cases that have occurred on the property and their biggest, their only objection was the cost of the demolition process and the fact that, obviously, the property was, you know, they have financing apparently against the property or it's being used as collateral. Both of which, were understandable at the time, also the property, we were hoping we could get the property, the looks of the property from the road, the streetscape to be improved. And it was taxable, it was fully taxable as a structure that was empty but it had water lines connected to it, it had sewer lines connected to it. So, it was fully taxable as if it were an ongoing operation. For those reasons and for the fact that it had had no break-ins that we knew of, or fire, certainly arson at that time, we didn't have a, although we might have liked to see the structure removed, we didn't have a compelling reason to do so and I think we've been very, as a board, we've been very understanding, shall we put it, of Pyramid's situation. But, quite frankly, my own personal view is that now it's a different situation. We have a situation where we've had several break-ins, we don't know how many over a period of time. The property is not easily secured and it is an unsafe structure in my view and the ability to guard against future arson without having somebody actually on the property fulltime, seems to be difficult at best. So, I guess my recommendation would be to follow through with the order to demolish and remove the structure and I don't know how the rest of the board feels. COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, Dennis, I agree with you. I think we've been very, the word I would have used was, would be patient. I think we've been very patient with Pyramid. We've demonstrated in the past a willingness to work to their time line, a tremendous amount of flexibility. But, I agree, this situation today is different. I mean, our paid professional is telling us it's an unsafe structure and I don't think the town, by that, by those statements on the public record, now I think we're, to some extent, we're on the hook for some level of liability. And, as I stated before and I know that Tim and probably some others that, they're hesitant but you know, it doesn't preclude you from coming to the board on the seventh and saying, look, we've got a great idea and a great plan. But I want to start the clock ticking, we're going to work on our time line now. So, I'll move it. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Further discussion? COUNCILMAN TURNER-I agree wholeheartedly that we need to do something with this property and this property has been hanging out there and we've heard all kinds of rhetoric from Pyramid Mall as to what they're going to do and they haven't shared any action at all on this piece of property and that's why it's where it is today and tonight. So, we need to provide some action tonight to clean this up and not listen to the rhetoric any more. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'll second it. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, motion made by Councilman Stec and seconded by Councilman Brewer. Further discussion by board members? Being none, let's vote. RESOLUTION ORDERING DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ON PROPERTY OWNED BY PYRAMID COMPANY OF GLENS FALLS RESOLUTION NO.: 463, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Director of Building and Codes Enforcement previously advised the Town Board that the old Howard Johnson's Motel and Blacksmith Shop Restaurant buildings owned by the Pyramid Company of Glens Falls located at 524 Aviation Road in the Town of Queensbury (Tax Map No.: 302.05-1-96.1) have been vandalized, sustained structural damage as a result of fire, are unsafe to the general public and requested the Town Board take action if the property owner failed to demolish and remove the structures, and WHEREAS, on December 3rd, 2001, the Town Board declared the structures on the property to be dangerous and unsafe to the public, and WHEREAS, the Town Board held a hearing concerning this property on December 17th, 2001 and notice of this hearing was served in accordance with the provisions of New York State Town Law ~130(16) and Queensbury Town Code Chapter 60, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby orders the Pyramid Company of Glens Falls to immediately begin demolishing and removing the structures located at 524 Aviation Road in the Town of Queensbury and complete the demolition and removal process by February 20th, 2002, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if the structures are not demolished and removed by February 20th, 2002, the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Director of Building and Codes Enforcement to make the necessary arrangements to demolish and remove the structures, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that in accordance with New York State Town Law ~ 130(16) and Queensbury Town Code Chapter 60, demolition and removal expenses may be assessed against the real property and the Town Board may authorize and direct Town Counsel to institute an action to collect the cost of the demolition and removal, including legal expenses, if necessary. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Martin COUNSEL LAFPER - I would just ask you now to put us on the agenda for the seventh, if you will and we'll be back with a concrete plan. But I just want to say finally, that any structure that suffered a casualty loss like this, by definition would be an unsafe structure temporarily but that it can be fixed and we'd like to be back on the seventh to continue to discuss it with you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. COUNSEL LAFPER- Thank you. (Councilman Martin resumed his place with the Town Board) CORRESPONDENCE 7:55 P.M. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER noted the following has been received and filed in the Town Clerk's Office: Town Clerk November Monthly Report, Monthly Financial Report dated November 30,2001 and Town of Queensbury Building & Codes Supervisor's Report for November, 2001. COUNCILMAN MARTIN referred to the Building & Codes report and noted, we have to date, one hundred and seven new single family homes for the Month of November and we have a value of construction added onto the assessed value of the town in excess of thirty-five and a half million dollars. Town Board held discussion regarding the agenda format and more specifically the 'Introduction of Resolutions from the Floor' ... Councilman Brewer noted that he had a resolution regarding changing the comptroller's position and requested, because it is a personnel issue that he would like to go into Executive Session. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO.: 465, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and enter Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT: None (Town Board adjourned to Executive Session in the Supervisor's Conference Room 8:08 p.rn.) (Town Board returned to Meeting Room - 8:27 p.rn.) RESOLUTION TO RECONVENE RESOLUTION NO.: 465, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Executive Session and enters Regular Session. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES: None ABSENT: None Supervisor Brower noted, no action taken in Executive Session.... Councilman Brewer noted that there are two resolutions from the floor to be introduced, a resolution to eliminate the Comptroller's position and a resolution to create a new position. OPEN FORUM 8:27 P.M. MR. RICHARD MERRILL, 6 Sunset Trail, Queensbury referred to the agenda and noted that he doesn't feel it is right to bring up action items, unless it's a case of emergency without prior notification to the public. .. The issue here tonight is the comptroller, the town is dealing with a twenty million dollar budget and complexity of state finance that very few people understand and we as citizens do not expect the board to understand all the ins and outs and details and intricacies of the state financial laws but you do need to seek the counsel of the best that you can find and I think we have that in Mr. Hess. I think he's done an outstanding job in his tenure with the town and he has realized significant savings to the taxpayers of this town through careful cash management and investments. And in addition, I think he provides a much needed check and balance which we need and he achieves this through sound business systems, analysis and control and by fostering and enforcing sound business practices. And again, I think we're very fortunate to have somebody of his caliber on the town staff... I'd like to think Queensbury is progressive in it's government but I see the move to move to a treasure as being regressive and I hope that we would continue to be a progressive town. .. If there is a problem, I would suggest that the root of it lies with you the board for lack of leadership and establishing a line of communication with Mr. Hess and taking time to understand his professional perspective on the complex financial issues that face this town. I encourage you to leave the position as it is, to continue as a progressive town... I'm not sure what this is all about but I think it's your responsibility as a board to resolve it, it sounds like a personnel matter and again, I encourage you to think about what's best for the town. MRS. SALVADOR noted her full agreement with the previous statement by Mr. Merrill... Again, as Dick said you are not supposed to know all the ins and outs of the financial problems. Mr. Hess does, he does an excellent job and I just don't see the need for a change in anything. MR. PLINEY TUCKER questioned why the change? COUNCILMAN STEC-We welcome the checks and balances and in fact we welcome the current individual, the only thing we're talking about doing is making some adjustments to how the position is structured. The same person with the same skills set is going to be doing almost the same job at the same pay. MR. TUCKER questioned whether the new structure would allow the board to get rid of him in two to three months? COUNCILMAN STEC- Yes, it will be different, it will be like most other department heads. MR. TUCKER questioned the reasoning behind that? COUNCILMAN BREWER-The reason we want the different position... What's the magic in the word comptroller? A lot of people have said, leave the position the same but I bet you if I asked everybody out here, nobody could really, truly describe exactly what a comptroller does. Everybody says he does a wonderful job and I'll be the first to say that Henry does do a good job with finances. There's a perception that Henry tells us not, we can't spend money, that's not the case. Henry has never told us that we can't spend money. He has certainly suggested different ways of doing things and I applaud him for that, that's his job, that's what he was hired for. I see Henry as an asset to the town but I think the things that we discussed in Executive Session were done there for a reason and that's why it's called Executive Session and I won't share those reasons with anybody. I don't think it's fair to Henry, I don't think it's fair to me and I don't think it's fair to the rest of the board... I don't know what everybody has this big fear about that we're trying to fire Henry because that's not what we're trying to do... We want to restructure the job. Nobody had a bring problem when we interviewed attorneys two years ago, or a year ago, whenever it was. .. We're looking out for the best interest of the town, not just for one person, for the whole town. MR. TUCKER-Henry deserves at least two years protection because of the kind of job he has to do and that was the reason the position was created. We had a budget officer when I came on the board with Mike Brandt, the Highway Department had made eighteen thousand dollars overpayment and the vouchers were all signed and everything else. COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, we don't want to talk about Highway Department vouchers, we haven't had very good experience with those. COUNCILMAN BREWER-We had underpayment for them for almost a year. COUNCILMAN STEC- That wasn't in the comptroller's office. MR. TUCKER-Are you talking about the sidewalks? COUNCILMAN STEC-Yea. MR. TUCKER-Yea, well, I don't think he should have got paid either but that's irrelevant. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's New York State Law. MR. TUCKER-Well, I'm trying to find out if it is or not, I'm working on it. But the man needs the protection, security of two years in the job so he can do the job he's got to do. COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, what about the rest of the department heads, they don't? What about me and my job at work, I don't? I'd like to have somebody say, Dan, you're all set for two years. MR. TUCKER-You're all set right here where you're sitting Dan, right now, for two years. COUNCILMAN STEC-I'm talking about my fulltime job. MR. TUCKER-Well, I don't much care about your fulltime you've got.... You've got the security here. I just think what you're doing is wrong. COUNCILMAN STEC-Six months from now, if the next board feels that way, I welcome the resolution six months after everyone's had a chance to give this an opportunity to work. In fact, I may move it in six months, myself, you're right, Pliney, it didn't work, let's reestablish the comptroller's position. But you never know until you try. MR. TUCKER-But I can't see a reason to change anything. The guy has done his job. COUNCILMAN BREWER-As he continues to do his job the same way he's been doing it, he'll still be here. That's our point. MR. TUCKER-I don't know where you can believe what's in the paper or not Dan, but they've claimed you've made the comment several times that he's carrying our supervisor. COUNCILMAN STEC- That's a separate issue but I did say those words. The restructuring of the comptroller's position isn't a direct result of any shortcomings that I see. MR. TUCKER-It doesn't have any part of how you feel about it? COUNCILMAN STEC-No. Pliney, I'll look you in the eye, I'll look anyone in the eye and say I'm a hundred percent comfortable with my motivations. MR. TUCKER-Why can't you share it with the public? COUNCILMAN STEC-Because, we talked about this, it's not appropriate to share that with the public. COUNCILMAN BREWER-It's a personnel matter. COUNCILMAN STEC-It's a personnel matter, Pliney, you know that. MR. JOHN SALVADOR questioned the appropriateness of the Executive Session... Referred to the proposal regarding the comptroller's position and suggested, that if it ain't broke, don't fix it... I don't know what you're trying to accomplish and suggest that you repeal that resolution. MR. STROUGH-I think sound positions need to be appointed on a certain basis, this being a two year basis, just so that politics doesn't enter into the position. MR. MERRILL-The real issue here is to protect the comptroller's position from political pressures and right tonight, you're putting political pressure into it, politics are playing a role in that job. But as an independent check and balance, I think he should be free from political pressure and the two year term is set up to do that so he doesn't have to play politics in order to retain his position... I urge you to leave the position as it is. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I just have brief comment. Mr. Hess, I believe does a very fine job for the Town of Queensbury. We're dealing with approximately twenty million dollar budget here at the town with a great deal of responsibility. I think he does an outstanding job in finances for the Town of Queensbury in trying to save the town money whenever he's able to... In my view, he's never failed to inform the board of any issue that they've asked them about and many times informed us of options that we have without being asked, going above and beyond the call of duty. .. I don't see a problem with the way the comptroller's position is set up currently. It's set up for a two year term, I don't think that's a great deal of protection... It's been stated that some of our department heads don't have that luxury but this is a department head position that is specifically delineated in state law. It's a department head that requires a great deal of state reporting, that is accountable for state reporting. Now, I'm the budget officer of the Town of Queensbury but I'm not the comptroller of the Town of Queensbury and I don't want those responsibilities nor do I believe I could handle those responsibilities. In any business, I've ever been involved with, we've had a comptroller and that comptroller has handled the finances of our corporations and done a very good job. It's a key position, I view it as vital to this organization and it disturbs me that we've even gone through the effort and time that's been put behind this effort. I think it's been a waste of time on, certainly my part and it certainly had to be stressful for Mr. Hess to say the least. I have to agree that because he's done an outstanding job, I don't see the need to make any changes in the position whatsoever. Matter of fact, I would probably support his increase in length of time from two to three years or more but that's not the question, that's not the issue, I'm not going to propose that now but I can tell you, I think he's done an outstanding job. I'm proud and pleased that he's a member of the team of the Town of Queensbury. I certainly want him on my team, I think taxpayers want them on their team and if they don't, something is wrong. And my greatest concern has been that all this havoc that has surrounded this position, some of which I admittedly have created out of self, out of concern for the taxpayers of the Town of Queensbury, I have brought this to the light of the press.. . Yes, I'm pleased, I'm comfortable and I'm secure in knowing that Henry Hess is Comptroller of the Town of Queensbury. To remove protections, the protection of a two year term and make it so that he could be fired at whim, the whim of three board members scares me a little bit. If it doesn't scare you, it ought to. .. I just hope that we do the right thing here... OPEN FORUM CLOSED 8:52 P.M. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF SHELTER PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. TO PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION ASSISTANCE WITH TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FY 2001 SMALL CITIES GRANT - WARD 4 REVITALIZATION PROGRAM RESOLUTION NO.: 466,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has received $400,000 in grant assistance through the New York State Governor's Office for Small Cities which administers the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) in New York State, and WHEREAS, the grant assistance is for the purpose of carrying out a neighborhood housing rehabilitation program in the Town's Fourth Ward, and WHEREAS, the Town's Community Development Department solicited proposals for consulting services to render the Department technical advice and assistance in the implementation and administration of the Small Cities Program, and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to engage the consulting services of Shelter Planning & Development, Inc. for the amounts set forth in the proposed Agreement between the Town and Shelter Planning presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the engagement of Shelter Planning & Development, Inc., to provide grant implementation and administration assistance in connection with the grant monies received by the Town as referenced in the preambles of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the costs for Shelter Planning's services shall be as outlined in the Agreement between the Town and Shelter Planning & Development, Inc. presented at this meeting and as follows: GENERAL ADMINISTRATION * Shelter Planning & Development, Inc. * Town of Queensbury 5,000 $29,500 Total General Administration $34,500 PROGRAM DELIVERY * Shelter Planning & Development, Inc. * $1,250 per project completed @23 * Lead based paint assessment $28,750 11,250 $40,000 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that payment for these expenses shall be paid from CDBG Fund #16, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the Agreement between the Town and Shelter Planning substantially in the form presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes the Town Supervisor and/or Community Development Department to take any other action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN BREWER-I know we've talked about this briefly but the program delivery on page two of the resolution, it's about the lead base, eleven thousand two hundred and fifty dollars ($11,250.00). Now, if that number drops, they still don't get that money, right, it just goes back into our fund? MS. MARILYN RYBA, Senior Planner-That would be something that we would look at, at that time. COUNCILMAN BREWER-In other words, if all twenty-three homes don't have lead base paint, say there's twelve, then they get five hundred dollars per house. MS. RYBA, Senior Planner-Right, then we would probably also need to restructure the grant agreement, if it were that amount of money, then I would think that money would be utilized towards doing an additional home. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Okay, that was my only question. I mean, that's not a guarantee, eleven thousand for shelter. MS. RYBA, Senior Planner-No, and who knows, it might be more. It's very difficult because this is the first year that the state's requiring that, that assessment. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That was my only question. Just that it wasn't a guarantee the eleven thousand, suppose there's only ten homes instead of the twenty-three that have the lead base, I guess was my concern. MS. RYBA, Senior Planner-Right, we don't expect all twenty-three will have the, any hazards. COUNCILMAN BREWER-The other thing, a comment for your work, we appreciate it very much and hopefully, the people in the 4th ward are going to appreciate it. MS. RYBA, Senior Planner-Good, thank you. I did want to let you know, we are going to be getting some letters out and I sent a memo to you and Supervisor Brower today, right after the first of the year so we're moving forward. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Thank you very much. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Marilyn. (vote taken) RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO.: 398,2001 CONCERNING AWARD OF BID FOR LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION SERVICES FOR BEAUTIFICATION OF LAND OWNED BY TOWN OF QUEENSBURY LOCATED AT BAY AND QUAKER ROADS RESOLUTION NO.: 467, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 273,2000, the Queensbury Town Board authorized submission of an application for Adirondack North Country Community Enhancement Program funds through the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal and the Town was awarded a $24,400 grant through the program, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 352,2001, the Town Board authorized the advertisement for bids for landscaping installation and purchase of boulders for beautification of land owned by the Town located at Bay and Quaker Roads and three bids were received, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 398,2001, the Town Board awarded the bid for the landscaping installation services to Mandy's Nursery, the lowest responsible bidder, and WHEREAS, the Town's Purchasing Agent and Senior Planner have advised that between the time the bids were advertised and awarded, the scope and nature of the Project changed significantly and therefore notified Mandy's Nursery that the Town would be re-bidding the Project, and WHEREAS, Mandy's Nursery signed a letter stating that it understood that the scope and nature of the Project had changed and that the Town was going to re-bid the Project, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent and Senior Planner have requested that the Town Board rescind Resolution No. 398,2001, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby rescinds Resolution No.: 398,2001, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Purchasing Agent, Senior Planner and/or Town Supervisor to take any and all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN MARTIN-This is going to happen, we've been working with Marilyn. It's another one of her projects she's been working diligently on. Things just didn't time up right, we'll be bring this back in the spring. I think that's what you see here, the subsequent resolutions dealing with the capital reserve in that regard. This will happen, what I would characterize as a temporary delay. (vote taken) RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING NEW CAPITAL PROJECT FUND # 130 - BAY ROAD CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 468,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 273,2000, the Queensbury Town Board authorized submission of an application for Adirondack North Country Community Enhancement Program funds through the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, and WHEREAS, the grant application was submitted and the Town was awarded a $24,400 grant from the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 29,2001, the Town Board established appropriations and estimated revenues in the amount of $24,400 for the grant funds, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to establish a Capital Project Fund to fund landscaping installation services for the beautification of land owned by the Town of Queensbury located at Bay and Quaker Roads, and WHEREAS, during the course of this Project, the Town has expanded the scope of the Project to include various amenities such as boulders and plaques so that the new estimated Project cost is $47,990, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the establishment of a Capital Project Fund to be known as the "Bay Road Corridor Enhancement Project Fund #130," which Fund will establish funding for expenses associated with the landscaping installation services and beautification of Town-owned land located at Bay and Quaker Roads, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that funding for this Project shall be as set forth in Town Board Resolution No.: 29,2001 and by a budget adjustment from Account No.: 001-1990-1002 in the amount of $10,000 and by a budget adjustment from Account No.: 001-1990- 4400 in the amount of $12,390 to Account No.: 001-8510-2899 and the amount of $1,200 from the Community Beautification Misc. Contractual Account No.: 01-8510- 4400 to Account No. 001-9950- 9000 Transfer To Capital Projects for a total Project cost of $47,990, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that the Project include purchase of boulders from Peckham's Material Corp. for an amount not to exceed $1,200 including delivery and placement, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby establishes initial appropriations and estimated revenues for Capital Project Fund #130 in the amount of $47,990, the source of funding to be from the $24,400 in Adirondack North Country Community Enhancement Program grant funds received by the Town through the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal and an interfund transfer from the General Fund in the amount of $23,590, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to amend the 2001 Town Budget, make any adjustments, budget amendments, transfers or prepare any documentation necessary to establish such appropriations and estimated revenues and effectuate all terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.: 427,2001 REGARDING INCREASE IN COSTS OF ENGINEERING SERVICES PROVIDED BY JARRETT-MARTIN ENGINEERS CONCERNING PROPOSED SOUTH QUEENSBURY-QUEENSBURY A VENUE SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 469,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 427,2001 the Queensbury Town Board authorized the additional services and fees charged by Jarrett-Martin Engineers, PLLC in connection with the proposed creation of the South Queensbury-Queensbury Avenue Sewer for an amount not to exceed $1,670 for a new total amount not to exceed $8,670, and WHEREAS, the Deputy Wastewater Director has advised the Town Board that the additional amount should have been $1,990, rather than $1,670, bringing the total amount to not to exceed $8,990, rather than $8,670, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to therefore amend Resolution No.: 427,2001 accordingly, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby amends Resolution No.: 427,2001 such that the additional services and fees charged by Jarrett-Martin Engineers, PLLC in connection with the proposed creation of the South Queensbury-Queensbury Avenue Sewer is authorized for an amount not to exceed $1,990 for a new total amount not to exceed $8,990, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to make any necessary transfers, take any necessary action and/or amend the 2001 Town Budget accordingly, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby affirms and ratifies Resolution No.: 427,2001 in all other respects. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CHANGE ORDER NO.1 TO CONTRACT FOR LOW LIFT PUMP REPLACEMENTS FOR TOWN WATER DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 470, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 430,2000, the Queensbury Town Board approved the construction of low lift pump replacements at the Town's Water Treatment Plant, authorized funding for the project and awarded the bid for the general contract to UW. Marx, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $358,000, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 466,2000, the Town Board: 1. authorized establishment of the Low Lift Pump Replacements Capital Project Fund #124 to establish funding for all expenses associated with the construction of the low lift pump replacements; 2. established initial appropriations for the Capital Project Fund #124 in the amount of $358,000; and 3. amended Resolution No. 430,2000 to award the bid for the General Contract to UW. Marx, Inc., for the specific contract amount of $324,950; and WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has advised the Town Board that more work was entailed in the Project than was originally estimated and therefore has recommended that the Town Board approve Change Order #1 in the amount of $30,000 bringing the total contract amount to $354,950, and WHEREAS, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., the Town's Engineer on this Project, has advised and recommended approval of the Change Order as presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves Change Order NO.1 as described in the preambles of this Resolution and presented at this meeting in the amount of $30,000, bringing the total contract amount awarded to UW. Marx, Inc. for the Project to $354,950, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to adjust the Project's appropriations as necessary, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Water Superintendent to execute Change Order NO.1 and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR YEARS 2002 AND 2003 RESOLUTION NO.: 471,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Law ~ 184, the Queensbury Town Board may contract with ambulance services certified or registered in accordance with Public Health Law Article 30 for general emergency ambulance service within the Town, and WHEREAS, the agreements currently in effect with the Town's three emergency squads, Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc., North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc., and West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., expire on December 31, 2001, and WHEREAS, the Town and its three emergency squads have negotiated terms for new two year Agreements for general emergency ambulance services, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Law ~184 and General Municipal Law ~209(b), the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning the proposed agreements for emergency ambulance servIce, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall conduct a public hearing concerning the proposed new emergency ambulance service Agreements between the Town of Queensbury and its three emergency squads, Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc., North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc., and West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., on January 7th, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish a Notice of Public Hearing in the Post-Star Newspaper once at least ten (10) days prior to the Public Hearing. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN BREWER-Henry, did you get a letter off to North Q? MR. HENRY HESS, Comptroller-They all got the inquiries. You're talking about, the use for the other money, I've got a phone call out, I'm waiting for COUNCILMAN STEC-Henry, on the subject of correspondence of the fire companies, have you heard back from any of them yet about the electric rate opportunity? Not yet. I saw that memo that went out, alright. (vote taken) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CAPITAL LLC TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH TOWN'S PROPOSED REFUNDING OF 1990B BONDS RESOLUTION NO.: 472, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to engage the services of Environmental Capital LLC to provide financial advisory services in connection with the Town's proposed refunding with the Environmental Facilities Corporation of the Town's 1990B Bonds issued in connection with the sanitary sewer system constructed in the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District, and WHEREAS, Environmental Capital LLC has offered to render these services for the amount of $7,500 contingent upon the successful completion of the financing, plus customary reimbursable expenses, and WHEREAS, the Town Comptroller recommends engagement of Environmental Capital LLC to provide these services, and WHEREAS, a copy of Environmental Capital LLC's proposal dated November 28,2001 has been presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes engagement of Environmental Capital LLC to provide financial advisory services in connection with the Town's proposed refunding with the Environmental Facilities Corporation of the Town's 1990B Bonds issued in connection with the sanitary sewer system constructed in the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District for an amount not to exceed $7,500, plus reimbursement for its reasonably incurred expenses to be approved in advance by the Town Comptroller, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the proposal presented at this meeting and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the payment for the financial advisory services shall be paid at or after the loan closing and shall be charged to the appropriate account as a cost of debt issuance. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR VIBRATORY TANDEM ROLLER FOR TOWN HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 473, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Highway Superintendent wishes to advertise for bids for the purchase of one (1) 1998 or newer Vibratory Tandem Roller as specified in specifications prepared by the Highway Superintendent and presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, General Municipal Law ~ 103 requires that the Town advertise for bids and award the bids to the lowest responsible bidder(s) meeting New York State statutory requirements and the requirements set forth in the Town's bidding documents, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for one (1) 1998 or newer Vibratory Tandem Roller for the Town Highway Department in the official newspaper for the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Purchasing Agent to open all bids received, read the same aloud and record the bids as is customarily done and present the bids to the next regular or special meeting of the Town Board. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION RE-APPOINTING CHARLES Y ASKO TO BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW RESOLUTION NO.: 474, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously established the Town's Board of Assessment Review in accordance with applicable New York State law, and WHEREAS, the term of member Charles Yasko recently expired and Mr. Yasko has expressed interest in re-appointment to the Board for a new five year term, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby re-appoints Charles Yasko to serve as member of the Queensbury Board of Assessment Review with a term to expire September 30th, 2006. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION AFTER VOTE: SUPERVISOR BROWER-I'd just want to add that Mr. Yasko served on the Board of Assessment Review for some years and we appreciate is service, thank you. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ELECTRIC POWER SALE SUPPLY AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND NYSEG SOLUTIONS, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 475, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury currently receives electrical supply service from Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, and WHEREAS, the Adirondack Regional Chambers of Commerce (ARCC) has advised the Town that it is participating in the Chamber Energy Alliance, which Alliance has designated NYSEG Solutions, Inc. (NYSEG) as its preferred supplier for electric supply sales to participants in Niagara Mohawk's territory, and WHEREAS, ARCC has advised the Town that by obtaining such electric supply from NYSEG, the Town will save money and has offered the Town the opportunity to participate in a cooperative agreement for the purchase of electricity from NYSEG, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has met with the Town Comptroller and Town Counsel and has received a recommendation from an independent consultant and feels it will realize a cost savings by entering into the agreement with NYSEG for electric supply service, and WHEREAS, the proposed agreement between the Town and NYSEG has been presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the agreement between the Town and NYSEG Solutions, Inc., for the supply of electricity substantially in the form presented at this meeting, provided that NYSEG strike the portion of the agreement that authorizes the use of the Town's name in NYSEG's advertising and on mailing lists or marketing materials, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the agreement with NYSEG and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Purchasing Agent and/or Town Comptroller to take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION AFTER VOTE: COUNCILMAN BREWER-Mark, in the contract we talked about, last week or whenever it was that we talked about this, about your authorization to use our name, is that out of there? I see it still in the copy I have. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-But I believe the resolution in the second to last resolved, includes a condition that says provided that NYSEG strike the portion of the agreement that authorizes the use of the town's name in NYSEG's advertising and on mailing lists or marketing materials, and although, I've not been directly involved in this discussion, it's my understanding that NYSEG has no problem with that. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Okay, I just wanted to make sure that's covered. RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR LIQUID ALUM FOR USE AT TOWN WATER TREATMENT PLANT RESOLUTION NO.: 476, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Purchasing Agent duly advertised for bids for liquid alum in accordance with Water Department Bid Specification No.: 01-14, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent and Deputy Water Superintendent have reviewed the bids and have recommended that the Town award the bid for liquid alum to Holland Company, the lowest bidder meeting all requirements specified in Bid Specification No.: 01-14, for the amount of $192 per ton for approximately 125 dry tons, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby awards the bid for liquid alum to Holland Company for the amount of $192 per ton delivered, with payment to be from the appropriate Water Department Account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Purchasing Agent and/or Deputy Water Superintendent to take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION REJECTING BID FOR LIGHT SODA ASH AND AUTHORIZING READVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS RESOLUTION NO.: 477, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town Purchasing Agent previously advertised for bids for light soda ash in accordance with Water Department Bid Specification No.: 01-15, and WHEREAS, only one bid for the light soda ash was received and it does not meet the criteria set forth in the Town's bidding specifications, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent and Deputy Water Superintendent have therefore recommended that the Town Board reject the bid received and readvertise for bids for the light soda ash, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby rejects the one bid received by the Town Purchasing Agent for light soda ash opened on December 12th, 2001 and authorizes and directs the Purchasing Agent to readvertise for bids for the light soda ash in accordance with Water Department Bid Specification No.: 01-15, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Purchasing Agent to open all bids, read them aloud and record the bids as is customarily done and present the bids to the next regular or special meeting of the Town Board. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. OF 2002 TO AMEND QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE BY REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 179 "ZONING" AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW CHAPTER 179 "ZONING" RESOLUTION NO.: 478, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 289, 1999, the Queensbury Town Board authorized engagement of Chazen Companies to assist the Town in preparing an updated Town Zoning Ordinance and Map, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 329, 1999, the Town Board created a Steering Committee concerning the development of the new Zoning Ordinance and Map and appointed its members, and WHEREAS, Chazen Companies, working closely with the Steering Committee and Planning Department Staff, prepared a draft Zoning Ordinance and Map and presented it to the public on September 6th, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Planning Staff prepared further revisions to the Draft Ordinance and the Steering Committee reviewed the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Map and agreed to submit it for public review and comment, and WHEREAS, the Town Planning Department held a public informational session in September, 2000 and held four additional public informational sessions in 2001 concerning the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Map and published an outline of the proposed Zoning Ordinance changes in the Town Report sent to Town residents, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 394, 2001, the Town Board authorized and directed that copies of the proposed new Zoning Ordinance be sent to the Adirondack Park Agency and Warren County Planning Board for their review, approval and/or recommendation, indicated its wish to be Lead Agency for SEQRA review of the proposed new Zoning Ordinance and authorized and directed that a copy of the Long Environmental Assessment Form and the Town Board's intention to be declared Lead Agency be sent to the Warren County Board of Supervisors, Warren County Planning Board, Adirondack Park Agency and other communities or agencies necessary to give written notice to, and WHEREAS, on or about October 10th, 2001, the Warren County Planning Board considered the proposed new Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and recommended its approval, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: _ of 2002 to repeal current Queensbury Town Code Chapter 179 entitled "Zoning," and replace it with a new Chapter 179 "Zoning," and WHEREAS, this legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law ~1O and Town Law Article 16, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of this Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury at 7:00 p.rn. on January 24th, 2002 to hear all interested persons and take any necessary action provided by law concerning proposed Local Law No.: _ of 2002 to repeal current Town Code Chapter 179 "Zoning" and replace it with a new Chapter 179 "Zoning," which Local Law provides for comprehensive Town-wide changes to the Town of Queensbury's Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk's Office to provide atleast 10 days notice of the public hearing by publishing the Notice of Public Hearing and Proposed Summary of Comprehensive Revision of the Zoning Ordinance and Map presented at this meeting in the Town's official newspaper and posting the Notice on the Town's bulletin board and forwarding it to the necessary municipalities as designated on the Distribution List presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board intends to conduct SEQRA review of the proposed Local Law after the public hearing at its January 24th, 2002 meeting. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2001 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 479,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer 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 Comptroller, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to take all action necessary to transfer funds and amend the 2001 Town Budget as follows: BUILDING AND GROUNDS: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-1620-4300-0027 (Electricity) 01-5132-4300 (Electricity) 1,000. 01-3310-4300 (Electricity) 01-5132-4300 (Electricity) 700. 01-1620-4060-0022 (Bldg. Repair Services) 01-1620-4060-0024 (Bldg. Repair Services) 200. 01-3310-1002 (Misc. Payroll) 01-3310-2002 (Traffic Equipment) 1,500. 01-3310-4170 (Traffic Light Repairs) 01-3310-2002 1,453. (Traffic Equipment) BUILDING AND GROUNDS: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-5132-4070 (Repair Supplies) 01-3310-2002 (Traffic Equipment) 200. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-8010-4090 (Conf. Expense Zoning Office) 01-3620-4010 350. (Office Supplies - Bldg. & Codes) 01-8010-4220 (Training & Education-Zoning) 01-3510-4410 200. (Gasoline/Animal Control) 01-8010-4090 (Conf. Expense-Zoning Office) 01-3410-4410 300. (Gasoline/Fire Marshal) 01-8010-4090 (Conf. Expense-Zoning Office) 01-3620-4050 200. (Books, Sub. Pub. Bldg & Codes) 01-8020-4050 (Books, Pub., Sub. Planning) 01-3620-4050 150. (Books, Sub. Pub. Bldg & Codes) ENGINEERING: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-9060-8060 01-1440-4400 3,000. (Health Ins. Premiums) (Engineering-Misc. Contr.) HIGHWAY: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-1910-4720 01-5010-4110 1,086. (Ins. Consultants) (Veh. Repairs) 04-9060-8060 04-5130-2040 37,000. (Health Insurance) (Heavy Equipment) 04-9060-8060 04-5130-4110 11,000. (Health Insurance) (Vehicle Repairs & Maint.) HIGHWAY: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 04-5110-1450-0002 04-5130-4490 500. (MEO OT) (Batteries) 04-5110-1002 04-5130-4110 300. (Misc. Payroll) (Vehicle Repair) 04-5110-1470 04-5130-4110 3)00. (Working Foreman) (Vehicle Repair) 04-5110-1440-0002 04-5130-4110 800. (HEO OT) (Vehicle Repair) 04-5130-1460-0002 04-5130-4110 1,500. (Mechanic OT) (Vehicle Repair) 04-5110-1400-0002 04-5130-4110 300. (Lab OT) (Vehicle Repair) 04-5110-1440 04-5130-4110 200. (HEO) (Vehicle Repair) PARKS & RECREATION: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-7110-1400 01-7110-4271 1,000. (Laborer A) (Chemicals) 01-7020-4446 01-7110-4110 400. (Staff Training Materials) (Veh. Rep. & Maint.) 01-7110-1400-0002 01-7110-2070 150. (Laborer A-Proj. OT) (Park Equipment) 01-7110-1460-0002 01-7110-2070 990. (Mechanic-Proj.OT) (Park Equipment) 01-7110-1470-0002 01-7110-2070 700. (Working Foreman -Proj OT) (Park Equipment) 01-7110-1400 01-7110-2070 700. (Laborer A) (Park Equipment) PARKS & RECREATION: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-7110-1400 01-7020-1340 5,000. (Laborer A) (Rec. Specialist PT) SUPERVISOR: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-10 10-4090 01-7550-4400 800. (Conf.-Registration & Attend.) (Celebrations) 01-1640-4410 01-1920-4040 380. (Vehicle Fuel) (Dues) WATER: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 40-8330-4270 40-8330-4400 500. (Chern. & Glassware) (Misc. Contr.) Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPROVING CREATION OF SOUTH QUEENSBURY - QUEENSBURY AVENUE SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 480, 2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury, Town of Kingsbury, Warren County and Washington County have entered into an Intermunicipal Agreement (the IMA) to jointly construct sewer facilities connecting the existing Washington County Sewer District #1 (WCSD#I) Wastewater Treatment Plant to the City of Glens Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant (GFWWTP), and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury (the Town) is acting as the coordinator of the project and will issue its municipal bonds and/or bond anticipation notes to finance a portion of the project, and WHEREAS, under the IMA, the other three municipalities will be contractually bound to make certain payments to the Town to pay for their share of the Project, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury wishes to create a new sewer district to be known as the South Queensbury-Queensbury Avenue Sewer District (the Sewer District), and WHEREAS, a District Formation Report dated July, 2000 and revised September, 2000, together with Addendum NO.1 and Addendum No.2, (the original Map, Plan and Report) was prepared by Jarrett- Martin, LLP, professional engineers, concerning the proposed sewer district formation and the construction of sewer facilities involving four sewer districts and connecting the existing WCSD# 1 to the GFWWTP along a route following Queensbury Avenue and the Niagara Mohawk Power corporation right- of-way, which area would also include 30 lots in the Warren- Washington Counties Airport Industrial Park, the Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport and several parcels along the proposed force main route to the City of Glens Falls, as more specifically set forth and described in the original Map, Plan and Report (the Project), and WHEREAS, the sewer district improvements in the Town of Kingsbury were discussed generally in the original Map, Plan and Report as they will be included as a part of the entire Project, but subsequent to the filing of the original Map, Plan and Report the Town of Kingsbury decided to create its own district to undertake such improvements, and WHEREAS, Jarrett-Martin, LLP filed a district formation report for the Kingsbury Sewer District (the "Supplemental Map, Plan and Report"; the original Map, Plan and Report as supplemented and modified by the Supplemental Map, Plan and Report is hereinafter referred to as the "Map, Plan and Report") in May, 2001, and WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report has been filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office and is available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report delineates the boundaries of the proposed sewer district, a general plan of the proposed sewer system, a report of the proposed sewer system and method of operation, and WHEREAS, the Supplemental Map, Plan and Report included a revised Part I of a Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) which considered both the South Queensbury-Queensbury Avenue Sewer District improvements and the Kingsbury Sewer District improvements, and WHEREAS, the Town sent a copy of such Part I of the Environmental Assessment Form and a copy of the Map, Plan to all potentially involved agencies and to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and New York State Department of Health, together with all required documentation and a letter indicating that the Queensbury Town Board (Town Board) would consider the Project identified in this Resolution, that the Town Board desired coordinated SEQRA review with the Town Board as lead agency and that a lead agency must be agreed upon within 30 days, and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2001 subsequent to the filing of the Map, Plan and Report with the Town Clerk, the Town Board adopted an Order (the "Public Hearing Order") reciting (a) the boundaries of the proposed Sewer District; (b) the proposed improvements; (c) the maximum amount proposed to be expended for the improvements; (d) the estimated cost of hook-up fees (if any) and the cost of the Sewer District to the typical property and the typical one or two family home (if not the typical property); (e) the proposed method of financing to be employed; (f) the fact that a Map, Plan and Report describing the improvements is on file in the Town Clerk's Office; and (g) the time and place of a public hearing on the proposed Sewer District, and WHEREAS, copies of the Public Hearing Order were duly published and posted and were filed with the Office of the State Comptroller, all as required by law; and WHEREAS, prior to publication of the Public Hearing Order, a detailed explanation of how the estimated cost of hook-up fees (if any) and the cost of the Sewer District to the typical property and typical one or two family home (if not the typical property) were computed was filed with the Town Clerk for public inspection, and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed Sewer District was duly held on August 20, 2001 and the Town Board has considered the evidence given together with other information, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to establish the proposed Sewer District as detailed in the Map, Plan and Report in accordance with Town Law, Article 12A, and WHEREAS, the Town Board previously considered the establishment of the Sewer District in accordance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act and on August 20th, 2001 adopted a Negative Declaration concerning environmental impacts, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 428,2001, the Town Board authorized an Intermunicipal Agreement on behalf of itself and the proposed Sewer District, the Town of Kingsbury on behalf of itself and the proposed Kingsbury Sewer District, Warren County, on behalf of itself and the Warren County Industrial Park Sewer District and Washington County on behalf of itself and the Washington County Sewer District # 1 concerning creation of the new Sewer District, the construction of sewer infrastructure and appurtenances and operation and maintenance of the sewage disposal system, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby determines that: 1. Notice of Public Hearing was published and posted as required by law and is otherwise sufficient; 2. All property and property owners within the Sewer District are thereby benefited; 3. All property and property owners benefited are included within the limits of the Sewer District; 4. It is in the public interest to establish, authorize, and approve the creation of the South Queensbury - Queensbury Avenue Sewer District as described in the Map, Plan and Report on file with the Queensbury Town Clerk with the boundaries and benefited areas of the Sewer District to be as follows: TAX MAP NUMBER PROPERTY OWNER as of 6/2000 109-3-6.1 North Country Imports TAX MAP NUMBER PROPERTY OWNER as of 6/2000 109-5-1 Chartrand Property 109-5-2 Warren County 109-5-3 Warren County 109-5-4 Warren County 109-5-13.21 Warren County Properties 55-2-21.1 Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport [Partial] 109-3-3 109-4-7 110-1-2.61 110.1-2.62 110-1-2.64 110-1-2.65 110-1-2.66 Earltown Properties Earltown Properties Earltown Properties Earltown Properties Earltown Properties Earltown Properties Earltown Properties 110-1-2.67 110-1-2.68 Earltown Properties Earltown Properties and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby approves, authorizes and establishes the South Queensbury - Queensbury Avenue Sewer District in accordance with the boundaries and descriptions set forth herein and in the previously described Map, Plan and Report and construction of the improvements may proceed and service provided subject to the following; 1. The obtaining of any necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department of Health; 2. The obtaining of any necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; 3. The obtaining of any required approval(s) of the New York State Comptroller's Office; 4. Permissive referendum in the manner provided in New York State Town Law Article 7; and 5. The adoption of a Final Order by the Queensbury Town Board; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that this Resolution is subject to permissive referendum pursuant to the provisions of New York State Town Law Articles 7 and 12-A and shall not take effect until such time as provided therein; and the Town Board authorizes and directs the Queensbury T own Clerk to file, post and publish such notice of this Resolution as may be required by law and to cause to be prepared and have available for distribution proper forms for the petition and shall distribute a supply to any person requesting such petition and if no such petition is filed within 30 days to file a certificate to that effect in the Office of the County Clerk and with the State Department of Audit and Control. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: SUPERVISOR BROWER-I want to commend both Ralph VanDusen and Mike Shaw for their efforts in continuing to move this forward. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I think a better word would be perseverance. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes, thank you for your efforts. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I am pleased to report and I wanted to let you know before your vote that I have in my possession, four copies, four original inter-municipal agreements, all of which have been executed by Supervisor Bill Thomas on behalf of Warren County, by Supervisor Don Cummings on behalf of Washington County, by Supervisor Terry (Gould???) on behalf of the Town of Kingsbury and upon, you are already authorized by previous resolution to size these but it was our advice, you may recall, not to go forward with the propose resolutions until and unless these agreements are executed. They are executed, I will deliver them to you for your signing. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you and I want to commend Bob Hafner for his efforts in moving that forward. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Yea, he worked hard, I saw that... SUPERVISOR BROWER-He was under some tight time constraints and he's done a great job, so thank you. (vote taken) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO STATE COMPTROLLER FOR PERMISSION TO ESTABLISH SOUTH QUEENSBURY - QUEENSBURY AVENUE SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 481,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury wishes to establish a new sewer district to be known as the South Queensbury-Queensbury Avenue Sewer District in accordance with Town Law Article 12-A, and WHEREAS, a District Formation Report dated July, 2000, revised September, 2000 and amended and supplemented by Addendum No.1, Addendum NO.2 and a Supplemental Map, Plan and Report dated May, 2001 (collectively, the "Map, Plan and Report") has been prepared by Jarrett-Martin, LLP, professional engineers, filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office and made available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has taken all actions required in accordance with Town Law Article 12-A precedent to approval of the establishment of a sewer district and has adopted a Resolution approving the establishment of the South Queensbury/Queensbury Avenue Sewer District and making the determinations required by Town Law ~209-e, and WHEREAS, Town Law ~209-f provides that permission of the State Comptroller shall be required for the establishment of a sewer district if the cost of the District is to be financed by the issuance of bonds and/or notes of the Town and the cost of the District is above the average estimated cost for properties or homes for the establishment or extension of similar types of districts as computed by the State Comptroller; and WHEREAS, an Application for such permission of the State Comptroller has been prepared and presented for consideration by the Town Board, and the Town Board has reviewed and discussed the Application; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the attached Application was prepared at the direction of the Town Board; 2. That the Board believes the contents of the Application to be accurate; 3. That the Board has determined that the District for which permission is sought is in the public interest and will not constitute an undue burden on the property which will bear the cost; 4. That the cost of the proposed improvements is to be assessed in whole or in part against a benefited area, and all real property to be so assessed will be benefited by the proposed improvements and no benefited property has been excluded; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, 1. That the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Supervisor to execute the Application in substantially the form presented to the Town Board, with such additions, omissions and revisions as the Town Supervisor and Town Counsel deem necessary and appropriate; and 2 That the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Counsel to submit the executed Application to the Office of the State Comptroller and to provide such other and additional information to the State Comptroller as may be requested. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-My only comment with that is I have the application here for you. (vote taken) DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER read the following resolution, a resolution introduced from the floor into the record: RESOLUTION ABOLISHING POSITION OF TOWN COMPTROLLER RESOLUTION NO.: 482, 2001 DEFEATED INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 623,94, the Queensbury Town Board established the position of Town Comptroller, and WHEREAS, the powers and duties of the Town Comptroller are set forth in Town Law ~34 as modified by such Resolution and other subsequent Resolutions of the Town Board relating to the Town Comptroller position, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to abolish the position of Town Comptroller, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby abolishes the position of Town Comptroller effective December 31, 2001, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Before I cast my vote, I want to make a statement, I heard Dennis before. I'm going to cast a vote I'm going to cast and it's going to be no and the reason why that is, is several. I think this has been a divisive issue, it's time to move on, there's other more important business that is before the town, that will be coming before the town, we need to move on with that and in fairness to Henry, he needs to be out of this center of this whirlwind and let him get back to his job and his work. I think he knows how I feel, we had a rather frank discussion a couple of weeks ago and I hope that didn't fall on deaf ears and I'm, you know, I'm leaving but none the less, I hope it didn't fall on deaf ears. And I say it in the interest, I cast that vote in the interest of allowing the business to move on and hopefully getting some unification behind the new board coming in and getting a little momentum moving forward. But I will say, Dennis, man you got to lead, you've got to start showing people where you're going to take this town. You know, where at a crossroads where the optimum time in the history of this community to do some really great things. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, Mr. Martin, I think we have done some great things the last two years. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Dennis, you had your time, let me SUPERVISOR BROWER-And I'm just going to tell you that I take offense to that. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Well, I hope you do. I hope it provides you with some motivation to do something. SUPERVISOR BROWER-This town has moved forward in many, many ways for the future of the region in a positive manner. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Dennis, I've been in this government since 1991 actively. I've been a Planning Board Member, Planning Board Chairman, Director of Community Development and I'm telling you, it's a ship without a rudder right now and it's got to change and it's got to be coming from the top and this is an A political comment by some, you know, I have no interest in this at all, you know, I'm out of this position in two weeks and I'm just telling you as a comment. A lot of this, a lot of this fire storm around this, you know, I think revolves around the lack of leadership out of the Supervisor's Office and I'm must telling you, that's how I feel and that's my observation and I've seen a lot of supervisors from Borgos, Fran Walters, Mike Brandt, Champagne. So, I'mjust telling you how I feel. Now, you know, don't take that personally but I'm just telling you that's how I feel. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Mr. Martin, I appreciate that. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-And my vote is no. TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS SUPERVISOR BROWER announced a Special Town Board Meeting scheduled for seven o'clock on Thursday, December 27th, 2001 to consider 2002 salaries and possible action regarding bid for Vibratory Tandem Roller for the Highway Department and there may be other issues to come before the board. COUNCILMAN STEC questioned the status of the speed wagon in regards to placing it on West Mountain? SUPERVISOR BROWER noted that he spoke with the sheriff and he would take care of it... We have a meeting Wednesday, the sheriffs committee meeting at the county so I will ask hirn. COUNCILMAN BREWER questioned the status of the ten thousand dollar ($10,000.00) check? SUPERVISOR BROWER noted the check was signed today and will be mailed to the Mayor of the City of New York. MR. HESS, COMPTROLLER recommended to the board to review the salary schedule for any further comments or changes and if so, get back to him before the meeting of the 27th. RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN MEETING RESOLUTION NO.: 483,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns it's Regular Town Board Meeting. Duly adopted this 17th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brower, Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES: None ABSENT: None No further action taken. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK TOWN OF QUEENSBURY