Loading...
1993-03-29 TOWN BOARD MEETING MARCH 29, 1993 7:01 p.m. MTG. #24 RES. 210-216 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Michel Brandt Councilman Betty Monahan Councilman Susan Goetz Councilman Pliney Tucker Attorney Paul Dusek TOWN BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Councilman Nick Caimano Pledge of Allegiance led by Supervisor Brandt RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION APPROVING TOWN BOARD MINUTES RESOLUTION NO. 210, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the Town Board Minutes of February 8th, 1993. Duly adopted this 29th day of March, 1993 by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: AYES ALL THOSE OPPOSED: NONE ABSENT: MR. CAIMANO RESOLUTION SETTING DATE FOR HEARING ON VARIANCE REQUEST RESOLUTION NO.: 211, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 136-44.1 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized to consider and authorize variances or waivers of the requirement of the Code that connection be made to Town sanitary sewer lines, and WHEREAS, the following individuals have requested additional time in which to hook into the sewer system: Carol Vannier Thomas Russell Rita Frasier 1 Meadowbrook Road 65 Meadowbrook Road 692 Glen Street 059-6-11 059-3-3 102-1-22 , and WHEREAS, the following individuals or companies have previously made application, which applications have either been granted for a short period of time or denied: Queensbury Factory Outlet Center Robert Blake Merrill Automotive Glen Street 335 Ridge Road 620 Glen Street 13-1-1.2 109-3-21.3 102-2-8 , and the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, now recognizing the weather conditions, hereby feels that it would be appropriate to consider granting these companies or individuals an extension of time, until June 30, 1993, to complete sanitary sewer hook-ups, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall meet to hear all of the above applications and/or previously considered applications for purposes of considering a final hook-up date to the sewer facilities, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the date upon which the Town Board shall hear this matter and consider the application shall be April 12, 1993, at 7:00, at the Queensbury Activities Center, at which time the Town Board shall consider final extensions for the time in which to hook to the sewer system for each of the above referenced individuals or companies, and the Director of Wastewater is also hereby authorized to provide such notice to the individuals or companies affected. Duly adopted this 29th day of March, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 204,93 CONCERNING AUTHORIZED PLANNING STUDY OF ROUTE 9/ROUTE 254 INTERSECTION AND SURROUNDING AREA RESOLUTION NO.: 212,93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury adopted resolution no. 204,93, approving the providing of funding for a Planning Study of Route 9/254 Intersection and surrounding area, with the understanding that the Town of Queensbury's commitment for funding would be contingent upon the availability and commitment of funds for reimbursement from the New York State Department of Transportation, and WHEREAS, the Town Board made certain provisions for the funding of the study, which it desires to revise as set forth herein, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby revises the funding provisions of resolution no. 204, 93, to read as follows: that the expenses for the study will be charged to a new account: #001-8030-4400 (Home & Community Services - Research), and that the appropriation will be a 1993 budget amendment for a total of $50,000.00 in said account #001- 8030-4400, and that the source of funds (also a 1993 budget amendment) will be an increase in the estimated revenues in the Revenue Account #001-001-3989 (Other Home & Community State Aid) in the amount of $50,000.00, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that resolution no. 204, 93 is amended as set forth herein, with the remaining terms and provisions of said resolution to remain in full force and effect, including the contingency that the funding shall not take effect unless and until there is available and a commitment made for funds to reimburse the Town from the New York State Department of Transportation. Duly adopted this 29th day of March, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held-Supervisor Brandt, attended a meeting of the G.F. Transportation Council, in that meeting this study was discussed it appears that it can be 100% Federally Funded, Federal Funds coming through the State, so we probably will not spend a dime...Mr. James Martin-The $50,000 was approved by the Transportation Council, what the action taken this morning was the County has an existing Contract with Transportation Concepts who did the corridor study, that contract would be modified and increased up to $50,000 like was done this morning and Transportation Concepts will take up the next piece of the Study which would be our look at this intersection. Supervisor Brandt-Those resolutions will go through the County Board. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RETENTION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONDUCT AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY RESOLUTION NO.: 213, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury previously adopted resolution no.: 204, 93 regarding the undertaking of a planning study of the Route 9/Route 254 intersection and surrounding area, and in said resolution, authorized funding up to an amount of $50,000.00, and WHEREAS, the Executive Director has advised that proper mapping for said planning study requires up-to-date aerial photography of the study area, and WHEREAS, the Executive Director has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to three (3) qualified aerial photography firms, and WHEREAS, Lafave, White & McGivern, L.S., P.c., has offered to supply the aforesaid photography (and mapping work) for the lowest submitted total bid of $13,320.00, and WHEREAS, the aerial photography portion of the proposed bid is $1,700.00, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the retention of Lafave, White & McGivern, L.S., P.C., to perform the aerial photography services regarding the authorized planning study of the Route 9/Route 254 intersection and surrounding area, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized to sign any and all documentation for the retention of the aerial photography services only, as hereinbefore mentioned, and forward for processing any and all bills for services rendered, upon the receipt of properly completed vouchers, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the expenditures shall be paid for from Account No.: 001-8030-4400 (Home & Community Services - Research). Duly adopted this 29th day of March, 1993, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES : None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE RESOLUTION NO. 214, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is presently considering an amendment, supplement, change and/or modification to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, and, more specifically, considering a petition for change of zone by Ronald L. Newell and Garfield P. Raymond, whereby their parcel ofland, known as Tax Map Nos. 61-1-41.1 and 44, would be changed from UR-IA to MR-5, and WHEREAS, in order to so amend, supplement, change, modify or repeal the Ordinance, it is necessary to hold a public hearing prior to adopting said proposed amendment, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall hold a public hearing, at which time all parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard upon and in reference to a proposed amendment, supplement, change and/or modification to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, as follows: To rezone from UR-IA (Urban Residential- 1 Acre Zone) to MR-5 (Multi-family Residential- 1 Dwelling Unit for Every 5,000 Square Feet of Land Within the Zone) that portion of property consisting of approximately 30 +\- acres situated within the boundaries of that property having tax map numbers set forth in the Town of Queensbury Zoning Map Book as 61-1-41.1 and 61-1-44, the same property being located between Bay and Country Club Roads, in the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the said public hearing shall be held on the 3rd day of May, 1993, at 7:00 p.m., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to give at least 10 days notice of said public hearing by publishing the notice presented at this meeting for purposes of publication in an official newspaper of the Town and by posting on the Town Bulletin Board outside the Clerk's Office said notice, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to give notification to all property owners within 500' of the area to be rezoned by forwarding a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing to said property owners a minimum of 10 days prior to the scheduled date of the public hearing, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Zoning Administrator's Office of the Town of Queensbury is also hereby authorized and directed to give written notice of the proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Queensbury in accordance with the written notice presented at this meeting, to be delivered at least ten days prior to the public hearing, to the following: Warren County, by service upon the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, and such other communities or agencies that it is necessary to give written notice to pursuant to Section 264 or 265 of the Town Law of the State of New York and the Zoning Regulations of the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Zoning Administrator's Office of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of said proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance and refer said proposed Amendment to the Warren County Planning Board, with copies of the Ordinance, this Resolution, and copies of the Notices approved at this meeting, unless said agency has already considered this application, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Zoning Administrator's Office of the Town of Queensbury is hereby also directed to give notice and refer this matter to the Adirondack Park Agency, if necessary, in accordance with the laws, rules and regulations of the State of New York and the Adirondack Park Agency, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board acknowledges that the Planning Board has reviewed this rezoning request and recommends approval, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates that it determines this to be an unlisted project under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, that it would desire to be lead agency in connection with any reviews necessary pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act and hereby authorizes the Executive Director to notify any agencies determined to be involved for purposes of SEQRA of the need to agree on a lead agency for SEQRA review purposes and that the Town Board desires to be the lead agency. Duly adopted this 29th day of March, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT : Mr. Caimano Discussion-James Martin-This came through the Planning Board and the one recommendation they had was to keep the lots fronting on the Country Club Road side single family residential, MR-5 the interior portion and that fronting on Bay Road. RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW REGULATING PARKING ON MANOR DRIVE IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 215, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, at this meeting there has been presented for adoption by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, a Local Law which would provide for the regulating of parking Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized pursuant to the Town Law, Vehicle and Traffic Law, and the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, and WHEREAS, before the Town Board may take action with regard to the proposed Local Law, it is necessary to conduct a public hearing on said proposed Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proposed action is determined to be a Type II Action under the rules and regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation relative to SEQRA, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York at 7:00 p.rn., on the 12th day of April, 1993, to consider said proposed Local Law and to hear all persons interested on the subject matter thereof concerning the same and to take such action thereon as is required or authorized by law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to publish and post the notice that has also been presented at this meeting concerning the proposed Local Law in the manner provided by law. Duly adopted this 29th day of March, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano DISCUSSION LANDFILL CLOSURE Supervisor Brandt-We have, the engineer had made us a little synopsis of what cost would be in his estimation and what the potential revenue could be if we used paper mill sludge for both grading and for certain parts of the closure, that is barrier protection layer. He also suggested that the barrier itself and top soil but in both those cases, those have not been approved by DEC at this point and it's questionable whether they could or couldn't. We have to make an application and in that application we have to tell our engineer basically what we are trying to do. If you look at the first page of what I gave you it shows the costs as he defined them and I added the water distribution system to bring town water to the residents in the area that is being affected by the plume of the leachate coming out of that landfill that is an eight hundred thousand dollar figure. So, that the total closing cost using the engineers figures plus that figure is three million one hundred and sixty five thousand dollars. Of that on the right hand colunm we have a million three or there about so we are really looking for a million eight hundred and sixty five thousand. In the next several pages you will see scenarios at different prices for taking in sludge material and that is what you are going to have to look at, because we have to negotiate on this, we cannot discuss it in a closed session so it has to be a public discussion. What I want to point out in any of these scenarios if you are getting to where, what it is going to take to bring in that kind of money you are really talking about almost a thousand one hundred truck loads of sludge. I think that has a major impact on our community. That might be over six months or over a year and a half but it is a lot of trucks going through our community to our landfill so that we can generate this kind of revenue. I think we have to know that and we have to be aware of it and I wanted it on the table before we start processing paper work and I would like to get the approval to tell the engineer to start the paper work so that we can create this revenue strearn. Our dilemma is if we have to tax the public to do this I do not know what the figure would be but we could figure it out but it is an enormous amount of money per household to do this and I am sure it is more than six hundred dollars per home to do it in taxes. So what we have got to do is find a way of generating some revenue that off sets this cost. That is one of the things we are attempting to do. Another possibility, is to start an application for a beneficial usage determination to treat the ash coming from the burn plant and use that as part of the gas venting layer and that could be a parallel application. That application would be one where we would ask DEC to consider the technical data and make a determination of whether it was safe or not safe. I personally think that we should do both of these things at once. I personally think if we are going to cover these costs we have to talk about a fill a quantity of about three hundred thousand yards if we use paper mill sludge. If we are able to go with the Rolite process on ash it would reduce that an enormous amount and that would be fine if we could do that, but that is going to be DEC that tells us and not us. So, I would like to suggest that we start application for both of those things at this time so we can essentially start taking paper mill sludge immediately as soon as DEC approves that part and start requesting the review of the Rolite process. Put that in the form of a motion. Councilman Monahan-Mike, I must say I am not too much in favor or doing a motion three minutes after we have got some figures, some papers in front of us. I would like a chance to review these I would really like a meeting with Dick Morse, before we go quite that quickly frankly. Supervisor Brandt-Dick Morse has the flu also and couldn't be here tonight but he has suggested that we start talking about it because we cannot process the paper work until we have made up our minds which way we want to go. Councilman Monahan-I realize that and I think we need to have a little time to digest these figures and I think we need to be able to talk to Dick Morse and I am sure within a week he will be able to talk to us. Supervisor Brandt-Will try to set up meeting Thursday or Friday of this week. Councilman Monahan-I would also like Dick to start thinking about what the truck, the roads that the trucks would be using in order to bring this over also. Supervisor Brandt-I think that would probably be our decision, but any route you take it's basically coming from Corinth you are going to go either Exit 19 and go Quaker and then Ridge or you are going to go 20 and go up through the Half Mile congestion. Councilman Monahan-I would like him to give that a little thought and make some recommendations to us... Supervisor Brandt - I think you are talking a major impact of a thousand one hundred truck loads of material going through it is not minor. We are going to have to think it through hard it tells me we ought to push hard for Rolite while we are at it. Attorney Dusek-One thing that is important to mention, although the IP Corinth is stated in here the total volume from them is not known yet nor is the price. That is not something that has reached any firm agreement. They are currently checking into their trucking abilities and stuff so those numbers that you have in here may vary but I think, it is my understanding that the numbers, Mike, is projections of what the Town needs to make this type of capping process. Supervisor Brandt-I am looking at it from the income stream and saying the bottom line is we do not want to use taxes to close this so what does it take to do it in another way. These are two alternatives and I do not know of any other alternatives. Councilman Monahan-Do we know right now that IP is going to have this amount of paper sludge available cubic yards on a yearly basis is that a known figure or is it something they are also checking. Attorney Dusek-They have, the issue of how much paper sludge they have is not a problem the real issue becomes a trucking situation and whether and when it becomes non economical for them to send it over to us. Supervisor Brandt-They have three million yards over the variable. Attorney Dusek- The other issue is we do have some on going discussion with some other paper mills as well and in the end what is going to happen is that you are going to have variety of variables I think that you would hopefully will be in a position to consider. Location of those mills, what roads they take how much you can get it for and what volumes they can send to you. So far though I will say our negotiations and talks with IP have been most extensive so that is why. Supervisor Brandt -But, in far the largest source of material that is available to us we have a small mill that would start delivering next week if we could take it but we have to process the paper work with DEC before we can take any, so that is what I am trying to keep it moving so we can start taking in whatever we can and that mill is very happy to come in at $5.50 a yard. Councilman Monahan-That they will pay us for us to take the sludge. Supervisor Brandt-That is right. Councilman Monahan-How much do they think that they will have? Supervisor Brandt-They are a small producer, I hate to just, it is like a truck load to two truck loads a week it is not much. Councilman Monahan-So they do not have a stock pile now, it's what they are generating. Supervisor Brandt-This is what they are generating it is very small mill in Washington County. Councilman Monahan-So, we really do not need to worry too much about the, what is going over the roads as far they are concerned because the quantity is so little. They only thing I would say right now with any paper company that they stay off Jenkinsville Road some of them tend to take a short cuts and it is pretty dangerous for the kids through there when you start doing that. Supervisor Brandt -You look at the impact of that kind of traffic on the Town and you look at if DEC would address the Rolite Process and if they were to approve it you are talking for about the same amount of money two truck loads a day five days a week instead of eleven hundred truck loads so it generates about the same amount of money. What I have learned I am told that DEC has approved given beneficial use permits to the use of slag coming off from metal furnaces that are full of lead and full of all kinds of heavy metals which is then treated with cement exactly like Rolite is treated and it forms an aggregate and it is used for road bases and it is approved. This has got a stigma and so they do not really want to deal with it. I would like to push it and force them to deal with it. Councilman Monahan-I think we have to be so very careful because of the aquifer there too that we really must be double careful. Supervisor Brandt-Well, that is for them to look at the data, the data that I have seen says the metals don't leach out. That is what they seem to have found out in other places. We will then take it up either Thursday or Friday whenever Mr. Morse can be available. Attorney Dusek-I have a couple of things for the Board, called for an executive session on a couple of items... Supervisor Brandt-We could do that after open forum DISCUSSION Attorney Dusek -One issue arose recently regarding appointments in terms of appointment of members on the ZBA in terms of the intent of the Board to have their terms all expire at the end of the year or expire within five years of their actual date of appointment. It is my opinion that you have an option and it is not clear in our own local ordinance as to which way you wanted to exercise that option, the new state law went to making them all expire at the end of the year. Now, when I say all expire it does not mean they all expire in one year but rather they will be staggered over the course of many years but when they do come to expire they would expire at the end of the year. Obviously the thing that is favor, of that type of scenario is you will always know when your members terms are going to expire so you are not caught by surprise. What we have right now in Town is that members appointments expire almost at any month and then you never know for sure who is coming up unless you happen to get notification from somebody. I wanted to bounce this off the Board to see if you wanted to make a sleight change in the Local Law that we have on the subject or whether you want to keep it the same... Councilman Tucker-We have an appointment coming up shortly would that be for four years and nine months? Attorney Dusek-If it is an unexpired term what you do is all your terms when ever they expire next they would instead be advanced to the end of the year... Supervisor Brandt-If the rest of the State is going to a year end maybe we ought to do the same thing, that is my opinion. Councilman Goetz-I think we should because it has always been a problem wondering who is expiring and when. Councilman Monahan-I have no problem with that... Supervisor Brandt- Agreeable, Pliney? Councilman Tucker-Sure. OPEN FORUM Ms. Ann Castle- John Street re: Assessment CL T and the Town of Queensbury does not have a fair assessment... 1987 assessment for home $62,000 now for $81,500 noted other homes on the street are the same, same builder, same house, same amount ofland...noted some homes have been changed but without building permits...noted another house exactly the same on the street went from $63,000 to $77,900 that shows there is no rhyme or reason how they came up with these assessments...noted her house has not been changed since it was built, a house for $77,900 has a finished basement, screen in porch, deck ... I do not understand the reasoning on it...Noted a three bedroom home in the neighborhood is assessed for $81,000 with a finished basement... Councilman Goetz-Have you had an informal meeting yet? Ms. Castle-Yes, but wished to appear before the Town Board, hoped that others would come forth.. . noted that she had only five minutes to go thorough the books to compare assessments before the informal meeting. Councilman Monahan-If you have additional information that you did not have at the time of the interview, put it in writing to be added to your file..also spoke about the Computer System and how to use it to see what was used as comparable to your property... Councilman Goetz-A meeting was held between Hill Pierce and CLT, CLT said our data base was not accurate, they worked from the cards in the office and that maybe part of your problem... Councilman Tucker-They did not get paid to go out and look at it they got paid to take it off the cards..! think this lady is saying to this Board that people have bought homes and done work on their homes without building permits therefore the information is not in the office... Councilman Goetz-lam concerned about the lack of accurate data, how can you do it fairly if you do not have the right starting point. Supervisor Brandt-I have gotten a lot ofletters telling horror stories of problems in their assessment I am concerned because of the short time we have to accept these assessments if we do that we put our citizens in a position of having to defend themselves in a tax hearing or court and I do not think that is what we should be doing. We should take our time and get the data correct and if it takes an extra year, it takes an extra year but I do not think we should be pushing it against the wall. I think we have flaws in the system, we have flaws in some of our data, we have flaws in some of the way data was assembled, I do not know the full extent of it but I am concerned that we make sure everybody has a chance to bring in the factual information before we tell them, they have to go to court to do it. I am concerned if we accept this re- valuation the way it is and we end up in court that it is going to cost the town a lot of money with its public taxes to fight its own citizens and do not really like that idea at all especially if there is a good chance that the Town is wrong in what they are doing. We certainly are asking that the Assessor look at this very carefully and see if it wouldn't make sense to slow the process down and give everybody a chance to bring in their information and see if we can straighten it out and build it on a good accurate base. Mr. Bob Mahar- West Mt. -I cannot understand the assessment. Assessment $265,600. which is better than double...Had appointment, they are to get back to me how long does that take? Councilman Monahan-I understand it will be sometime after the 15th of April. Mr. Mahar-The property is on the side of the mountain stumps and rocks the only thing it has going for it is it has thirty acres, also in the Adirondack Park ...questioned the number of acres you had to have to build on... Supervisor Brandt-Noted that the man had a very steep piece ofland. Councilman Monahan-Question how much road frontage he had... Mr. Mahar-800' approximately... Supervisor Brandt -You have to see the site it is not very valuable land along the road. Mr. Mahar-It drops off on one side 20'and goes up on the other and the roads go across it. Councilman Tucker -You are the gentlemen that hauled in the top soil for garden. Mr. Mahar-Yes....Would like to have something done about that. Mrs. Barbara Pallozzi-Ridge Road-Noted that a lot of people have done things to their property without a permit and maybe there has to be a way to go in and see exactly what they do have. I have met with Assessment Company and I had a question that I forgot to ask and I called Saturday and they could not answer my question. Since this company is currently the reval for the City of Glens Falls, if the City reassesses its property and since they claim that so much of the property is undervalued now what affect will that have on a Town of Queensbury Taxpayer in the Glens Falls School Dist.? They do not know. Will my taxes go up or down? Supervisor Brandt-Noted this is a problem and we need to discuss it with the City. Councilman Monahan-If both areas are reassessed at the same time they can go to a school wide taxing district where the equalization rate does not come into play but that takes some legislation, to do that.... Ms. Pallozzi-Ijust wanted you to know that they could not answer my question... That is not the reason why I am here tonight, in a matter of a day I will have to expend a couple thousand dollars to make some repairs to my property, a portion of my driveway collapsed Thursday night, I have tried for a long time to get certain information out of certain town employees and I find it regrettable that I have to come to the Town Board to get information. I have a copy of 9-26-92 letter to the Director of Water and Wastewater requesting that if a certain properties grey water system was connected to the sewer or if it remained currently in use, I have not received a response. I need from the Board is the grey water system in use or is it not and if it has been disconnected and has been connected to the sewer then why wasn't it closed and in compliance with Local Law number 3 of 1988. It was never cleaned and it was never filled, there was nothing done to stabilize the land. (gave copy of the letter and copy of excerpts from LL3 and copy of permit for the property the owners are no longer then ... I would ask you to take note that the permit was issued five days after the work was done) I will need the information as soon as possible... Mr. Gilbert Boehm-Lake George-Spoke to the Board regarding resolution 399 which excludes Qsby. from the No. Qsby. sewer system from the Warren Co. Sewer system... that resolution differs from the draft resolution, the draft asked that you drop from the Warren Co. Sewer Project as configured and be modified to incorporate any of the following: upgrade of individual home sewer systems when failure occurs, construction of neighborhood system to serve specific problem areas or pumping sewer out of the basin for the G.F. Treatment Plant, does this Board really want to completely disassociate itselffrom the Warren Co. Sewer System, if so you are missing out on a lot of engineering help and are apt to be on the hook at some later date. Supervisor Brandt-There were two resolution one on the County level concerning the same thing and we did draft it parallel to what was requested and I think the County resolution incorporated alternatives, incorporated going to the City incorporated going to the Village of Lake George, we have a meeting tomorrow on this...It was my understanding in the County level meeting that there was not enough money on the County project to look at alternative design in Queensbury but rather the County money was going to be used to detail design Hague and some other Town work which was approved and moving forth, I have not got all the information yet. Mr. Boehm-I think the Board needs to think whether or not they want to be completely unhooked the way they are presently unhooked. Supervisor Brandt-This was a Town Board resolution it was not a County resolution. Mr. Boehm-It was accepted by the County. Supervisor Brandt-I think conveniently accepted that, but their own resolution did not say that. I think their own resolution parallel the wording of what you suggested here. Mr. Boehm-I would suggest that the Town Board reconsider the wording that they put together and perhaps amend it or withdraw it and modify it so the County has a better feeling for what the Board really wants. Right now they would like to unhook you to save money. Supervisor Brandt-I think the answer is local systems... Mr. Boehm-I think you need support for tomorrow, the County can say we have got a letter from you passed by your board saying unhook. Supervisor Brandt-I will tell them our problem and they need to look at alternative design. Mr. Boehm-You need to rethink this. Supervisor Brandt -Suggested that the people in that area form a committee and make suggestions and come to us with a rough plan that we could adopt ... Noted that he would argue it tomorrow. Mr. Boehm-What they have got on their records right now says you people do not want anything from us and that is not the way it should be left. Supervisor Brandt-Help us design one that works... in basin, small neighborhood systems... Mr. Boehm-And acceptance of on site septic systems. Mr. Michael O'Connor-Attorney for Robert McDonald - Southern Exposure Subdivision I received a copy of a memo from Mr. Martin dated 3-25 ...it seems we are going over the same ground again, I do not understand the jurisdiction of the Planning Board or even the thought process of the Planning Board. They want to formally, want to look into the validity of the Southern Exposure Subdivision at their next meeting on April 20th. What they are looking at is a 1983 variance application and whether or not it was properly granted. This is the same thing that was done by our Planning Board in April of 92. Why it was done even then I objected and appeared under protest at the expense of Mr. McDonald and why we are going back to the same erroneous or questioned now I have no idea. Somebody has to put some control on the Planning Board. The Planning Board should not be wasting staff time and it probably took Mr. Martin a better part of a day to put together this memorandum, or taxpayers money in making taxpayers prepare for and make presentations at these things. Councilman Goetz-Paul is there a statute of limitations on challenging a ZBA determination, I do not understand the whole process as to why it is going back to that. Attorney Dusek-I do not know that this is challenging a determination in as much as I understand the situation from my previous involvement as it is an interpretation of what they did. That seems to have been the issue that has gone around and around as Mike has mentioned. I have not had a chance to thoroughly review this memorandum that has recently come out from Jim Martin, I did glance through it, it seems to have recapped the events as I have understood them to occur I have not yet read thorough the Planning Boards actual minutes that Mike referred to in terms of their setting up this new schedule except I was told that they asked me to come to that meeting to talk to them about this. At this point I do not interpret this as a challenge to their decision I think it is more of a question as to what it means. Attorney O'Connor-Questioned if it was not the same question that was raised in April of 1992? Attorney Dusek-It was the same topic... Mr. James Martin-It is the same topic. Attorney O'Connor-Noted the minutes are available to the Planning Board, ..motion was made that the plat on file at the County Clerk's Office is enforced and that the Board take no action, adopted the 21st. day of April 1992... I think there is a alterative motive for this obviously and I question and probably will question formally that, to the point that I think we are going way overboard and we are going out of bounds and we are in an area we should not be. You are telling people not to do business in the Town of Queensbury. Supervisor Brandt-I am not. Are we putting politics ahead of good government? Perhaps. Are we trying to make some cheap shot politics at the expense of major investors in this Town? Perhaps Is this is a violation of the Attorney Generals opinion on representation on a Board when it affects your neighborhood? Perhaps I think there are a lot of questions that ought to be asked and I am delighted you asked thern. Attorney O'Connor-...I think this Board owes some duty to Mr. McDonald his rights are being abridged here....something should be done, asked the Board to look at the memorandum from 1992...noted subdivision was approved in 1981 reapproved in 1983. Supervisor Brandt-In simple english this was a shot at trying to stop Hudson Pointe by the Planning Board, that simply what it is... Attorney O'Connor-I hope that is not what it is, but I think there are certain people that have that motivation.. . Asked that this be looked into before next Monday night... Barbara Bennett-As far as reassessing is concerned if only when a property is built and they are first reassessed by a certain set of criteria they are then computerized for a ten year review when they would automatically get a notice, you would not have mass reassessments on any new property and every individual one would be kept up and at that time given a certain percentage knocked off according to the year built comparing it to the year you are reassessing for depreciation you would keep it going on anything new without mass reassessment. They would be individually reassessed and you would be dealing with what exists already which would gradually phase out while the other builds up and you would get away from unequal mass reassessments if they were all reassessed individually according to a ten year period. Supervisor Brandt-We certainly have got to find a better answer than what we have got...I think the Assessor can make adjustments in the assessment rolls if they see a problem and I do not think it has to be done totally by a mass reassessment and I would like to see us look at that. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 216, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss three matters of personnel, one labor collective bargaining agreement matter, one other personnel matter and Attorney Client Privilege Matter involving a matter that is in court, personnel-labor relations and one personnel matter. Duly adopted this 29th day of april1993 by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: AYES ALL THOSE OPPOSED: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Caimano On motion the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk