1992-01-24
SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING
JANUARY 24, 1992
7:00 A. M.
MTG.#9
RES. 68-70
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Supervisor Michel Brandt
Councilman Betty Monahan
Councilman Susan Goetz
Councilman Nick Caimano
Councilman Pliney Tucker
Attorney Dusek
Supervisor Brandt -Called the meeting to order, requested motion to enter Executive Session.
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION
RESOLUTION NO. 68, 1992, Introduced Mr. Nick Caimano who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Mrs. Susan Goetz.
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enters Executive Session to discuss
professional services.
Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 1992, by the following vote:
All in favor: AYES
Anyone Opposed: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
(Councilman Monahan entered meeting)
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR REGULAR SESSION
RESOLUTION NO. 69, 1992, Introduced by Mr. Nick Caimano who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Mrs. Susan Goetz.
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Executive Session to
enter Regular Session of the Town Board.
Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 1992, by the following vote:
All in favor: AYES
Anyone Opposed: None
Absent: None
Councilman Caimano questioned the Board whether he was to contact insurance agencies today.
Supervisor Brandt, yes.
Councilman Goetz questioned whether the Town has responded to Hiland Park's letter of January 14th,
outlining a payment schedule.
Attorney Dusek- To my knowledge, the Town has not.
Councilman Goetz- Noted Hiland's proposal, the first payment with this new proposed agreement was for
$5,000 to be paid by January 31st and that the Board should really respond to his letter.
Councilman Monahan- Questioned the terms of the existing agreement compared to the proposed
agreement.
Attorney Dusek-Noted that there was an amount due of $30,000 or $35,000 by the end of December.
Councilman Goetz-Noted that the payment is $30,000 dollars short of what it should have been, he is
proposing to pay $5,000 on January 31st, $5,000 on February 28th, $5,000 on March 31st and $15,000,
April 30th at 9 percent interest.
Councilman Tucker-Questioned the remaining balance.
Attorney Dusek-Noted that there is a lot of money owed but that this proposal is to make his payments that
were due on the 31st of December, he's proposing to make those payments over the next 3 months and then
presumably be timely with his 92 payments.
Councilman Goetz-Agreed that that's how she interrupts the proposal.
Councilman Monahan-Noted, the basic question, fairness to everybody that comes into this Town to do
business. Can we be the banker for businesses coming into this Town?
Supervisor Brandt-Noted it's the sewer district that's the banker in this case ... I'm not comfortable
extending this loan at all.
Councilman Tucker-Noted that he had brought this before the previous Town Board, commenting that the
figure he had was $185,000...at the point that we took over everything, is going to be done up front, we are
not going to have any contracts where people are going to be owing the Town money for stuff that they are
going to be doing, putting their development together...asked the Attorney's opinion...
Town Attorney Dusek-There are two issues here, one, legally can the Town do what it wants to do, can it
wait for its payments, sure it can, can it force the issue on the payments, sure it can, is there anything
inconsistent in terms of saying I want my money right now with what you have done in the past, I do not
think so because the agreement has always been that the money will be paid when the agreement says. I do
not think that you are going contrary to any policy if you were to demand money now but you have to
stress that the bottom line here is this is a judgement call for the Board to make there is really no legal issue
to it. It is if you were owed money out of somebody would you say wait and take payment? Or would you
say lets get into a tussle and fight for thern.
Supervisor Brandt-I would say it is a contract, you are violating a contract and if you don't get within the
realm of the contract we will cancel the contract and start over in negotiations.
Councilman Caimano-I think there is a sense, that we are probably going to demand payment, that being
the case if I think the scenario through, he is not going to pay it anyway, what's?
Attorney Dusek-You would start a lawsuit.
Councilman Tucker-Asked Councilman Goetz's opinion...
Councilman Goetz-It has been a very complicated issue and I have tried to under all the payment structures
which has not been easy to do, not fully sure that I have it down at this point. Yesterday I tried to get more
information as to, my basic thought is will the people that are paying sewer bills be penalized because we
do not have the $30,000 that the contract stated in bills that they are going to get? I have had a little
difficulty in getting the answer. I talked to Steve Borgos, he said that it was not put in the budget on the
revenue side it is like an excess for future breakdowns or maintenance that has to be done in the system so
that the $50,000 in his estimation was like an asset. I also talked with Mike Shaw and he said in the sewer
district surplus that is where it goes...
Attorney Dusek-From what you are telling me it sounds, when you develop a budget you develop your
expense side you develop what you anticipate as revenues and what he is telling you is that he did not put
in the revenues because he probably did not feel comfortable in doing that so when he did his expenses and
revenues and figured out what the district had to raise the figure is not in there anywhere, when it comes in,
this is what Mike Shaw is saying to you is that it goes in what is called unappropriated fund balance which
means that it is in limbo...
Supervisor Brandt-In the overall picture the facilities were built for that developer and they were bonded by
the district and the payments on the bonds are being met now by people who are paying their payments.
So, in effect they are financing his work and the fact that he did not put it in the revenue side does not
change that.
Attorney Dusek-Right, if you had the money obviously you would apply it, it would show up and it would
lesson the amount...the real question is at this point, if we did agree to this would we change or increase the
taxes over what they already have been presented and the question is no, if we got it could we lower them,
you could somewhat.
Councilman Goetz-I am looking at it from the view point from accounts receivable, and I try to negotiate
payments with people, I would rather have something than nothing.
Supervisor Brandt-If you get rid of that contract if he violates the contract you wipe it out, you probably
could put it against his taxes...! am asking.
Attorney Dusek-That was something that we have taken a look at the only trouble is the private houses that
exist in the district now, to try and impose it against the taxes I am afraid they may be ...
Supervisor Brandt -But in effect you have a set of people that are making these payments for those private
homes and for that developer and I do not care who's name is on the mortgage and who we are dealing with
as a person there are a bunch of people in that district that are subsidizing other people in the district, I do
not think that is right I do not think that is fair, I would go for killing that contract in a minute and impose it
as a tax and then the community will get it.
Councilman Goetz-The contact that was brought up in September was lacking, in that it did not have the
proper penalties written into it.
Councilman Caimano- There are two things that have to be taken into consideration, the first, this is not a
private business it is public funds and I think we have a right morally to negotiate payments and keep
negotiating payments, secondly there was already a negotiation which has broken down, so what good is it
logically to carry on negotiations, aren't we better off just cutting our losses and saying the contract is dead
lets go from here...in my opinion it is a ploy, and I am not denigrating Mr. Bowen or anybody else but we
have a situation where the man can't pay, and when you can't pay you keep negotiating further and further
away so you do not have to pay until you finally get some cash we are then gambling with the public's
money and with the sewer districts money, I do not think that we have a right to do that.
Councilman Goetz-Questioned what would happen next if the contract is broken?
Attorney Dusek-Technically you do not want to break the contract, if broken, then you want to hold the
company in default, and then you are going to take whatever action you think is appropriate on the basis of
that...
Councilman Tucker-If he breaks the contract and we add it to the taxes..
Attorney Dusek-That is a point I will have to check...
Councilman Tucker-If he breaks the contract and we are able to put it on taxes even though these people
own homes over here are private, it is going to show and the lending institution involved in these homes
over there, they have got the mortgages on there, is going to be all kinds of pressure put on people to get
this paid and I do not know if you people know it or not but that outfit over there is in trouble with a big T
as far as finances...we have got to get our money out of there before anybody else does and whatever it
takes to get it done.
Councilman Caimano-Asked Mrs. Goetz opinion...
Councilman Goetz-I would be for making another payment schedule, with some tough penalties.
RESOLUTION REGARDING HILAND CORPORATION PAYMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 70, 1992
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
I will put the motion on the floor that we notify the Hiland Corporation that they make their payment
immediately and if they don't we will take whatever the strongest possible action that we can to collect this
money and that we will consider his contract breached and examine what options that gives us.
Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 1992 by the following vote:
A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote in regard to notifying Mr. Bowen, it was noted that the Attorney will prepare a
letter with a certified copy of the resolution and this will be forwarded today to Mr. Bowen... payment to be
made immediately...Mrs. Goetz noted that she will also call Mr. Bowen to notify him of the Board's
decision.. .
On motion the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Miss Darleen M. Dougher
Town Clerk-Queensbury