Loading...
1993-04-12 TOWN BOARD MEETING APRIL 12,1993 7:00 P.M MTG #29 RES #234-245 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT MICHEL BRANDT -SUPERVISOR BETTY MONAHAN-COUNCILMAN SUSAN GOETZ-COUNCILMAN NICK CAIMANO-COUNCILMAN PLINEY TUCKER-COUNCILMAN TOWN ATTORNEY PAUL DUSEK TOWN OFFICIALS Jim Martin, Mike Shaw, Dave Hatin PRESS: GF Post Star, WENU PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN GOETZ Supervisor Brandt called meeting to order ... our first item on the agenda is a public hearing on a local law regarding parking on Manor Drive. PUBLIC HEARING LOCAL LAW - REGULATING PARKING MANOR DRIVE NOTICE SHOWN 7:01 P.M. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-I'm going to open the public hearing. This is law designed to regulate, prohibit parking on Manor Drive. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak on that? How fast can we close a public hearing? I think we just set a record here, for us. I'm going to close the public hearing then. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:01 P.M. RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW REGULATING PARKING ON MANOR DRIVE IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO. 234, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law which would provide for the regulating of parking on Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, a copy of the said proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law Regulating Parking on Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury" has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board, and WHEREAS, on April 12, 1993, a public hearing on said proposed Local Law was duly conducted, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adopts and enacts the proposed Local Law Regulating Parking on Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury, to be known as Local Law No.7, 1993, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Local Law presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed 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 that said Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Caimano-Questioned the time before the posting of signs? Executive Director, Mr. Jim Martin-I spoke with the Clerk's Office today, it takes about a month before the signs are actually posted. We have to file the law with the Department of State, it takes a couple of weeks to get their comments back and then we have the signs printed and posted. I informed the apartment owner of that today and they were very pleased with that schedule. LOCAL LAW NO. 7,1993 A LOCAL LAW REGULATING PARKING ON MANOR DRIVE IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: 1. Purpose: The purpose of this Local Law is to prohibit, under penalty of fine for violation, the parking of any vehicle on Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury. 2. Definitions: Curbline: The prolongation of the lateral line of a curb or, in the absence of a curb, the lateral boundary line of the pavement of the roadway. For the purpose of this Local Law, the words "Motor Vehicle," "Vehicle," "Person," and "Park" shall have the same meaning as set forth for the definitions of such words in the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York. 3. No Parking on Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury: No motor vehicle or other vehicle of any kind shall be allowed or permitted to park and no persons shall park a motor vehicle or other vehicle for any period of time on or on either side or in the right -of-way of: On Manor Drive in the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren, State of New York, which begins at the intersection of Manor Drive and the northerly curbline of Aviation Road and proceeds north and west to the intersection of said Manor Drive and the easterly curbline of Farr Lane. 4. Penalty: Any person violating any provision or paragraph of Section 3 of this Local Law, shall, upon conviction, be punishable for a first offense by a fine not to exceed $25.00, and for a second offense by a fine not to exceed $50.00. In addition to the aforesaid penalties, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury may institute any proper action, suit, or proceeding, to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate any violation of this Local Law. 5. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing thereof in the Office of the Secretary of State. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION APPROVING MINUTES RESOLUTION NO. 235, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the Town Board Minutes of February 12th, March 6th and 15th of 1993, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby notes the correction of 9:00 AM. time to the Minutes of March 6th, 1993. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: Ayes ALL THOSE OPPOSED: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN SUPERVISOR TO SIGN WARREN COUNTY - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY SOLID WASTE DISPOSITION AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 236, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has been presented at this meeting with a Solid Waste Disposition Agreement to be executed by the Town of Queensbury and the County of Warren, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves and agrees that the Town should be bound by the annexed Solid Waste Disposition Agreement, and hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury to execute on behalf of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury and the Town of Queensbury said agreement. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Attorney Dusek-That's the agreement that, in December or early January, the Town Board had authorized to seek with County of Warren in terms of allowing you to take paper sludge and C&D debris at your landfill from out of the County. If you recall, the County Flow Control legislation and regulations that are under that, restrict your ability to do so unless you have their consent. The County has indicated their acceptance, both by their Attorney and Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. This is just to get your consent to the agreement. Councilman Caimano- This is just C&D waste and sludge, right? Attorney Dusek-Right and this is only an agreement with Warren County, it doesn't mean that you'll take it, it means that you have the authorization by the County to take it. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN SUPERVISOR TO SIGN CONSOLIDATED LANDFILL USER MODIFICATION #2 AGREEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 237, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has been presented at this meeting with a Consolidated Landfill User Agreement Modification No.2, between the Town of Queensbury and the Towns of Thurman, Bolton, Warrensburg, Lake George, Stony Creek, Horicon, Johnsburg, Chester, and Lake Luzerne, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves and agrees that the Town should be bound by the annexed Consolidated Landfill User Agreement Modification No.2, and hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury to execute on behalf of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury and the Town of Queensbury each and every one of the agreements presented for each and every one of the respective towns. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Attorney Dusek-This is the same type of thing, only this is with all the Towns in Warren County. If you recall, the agreement the Town previously entered into on the Consolidated Landfill User Agreement, had certain provisions in it which restricted, once again the acceptance of solid waste. This opens the door so the Town can accept C&D and paper sludge and I believe it also mentions ROLITE in there as well. Councilman Caimano-It says, ash to be converted into the product ROLITE. Attorney Dusek-Right, and here again though this is the authorization, it doesn't mean you'll necessarily do it until you reach contracts with independents. Supervisor Brandt-Right and with ROLITE you need a beneficial use determination from a permit from the State. Attorney Dusek-That's correct. RESOLUTION APPROVING/DISAPPROVING VARIANCE FROM REQUIRED SEWER CONNECTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 238, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized, pursuant to § 136-44.1 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, to, upon request, waive the sewer connection requirement of § 136- 44 thereof or vary the time in which such connection must be made, provided that certain standards and criteria or conditions are met or demonstrated and provided that a certain procedure is followed, and WHEREAS, the following individuals have requested additional time in which to hook into the sewer system: Carol Vannier 1 Meadowbrook Road 059-6-11 Thomas Russell 65 Meadowbrook Road 059-3-3 Rita Frasier 692 Glen Street 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 Glen Street 13-1-1.2 Robert Blake 335 Ridge Road 109-3-21.3 Merrill Automotive 620 Glen Street 102-2-8 , and WHEREAS, 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 hereby grants the aforesaid properties a temporary variance until June 30, 1993 in which to complete sanitary sewer hook-ups. Duly adopted this 12th day of March, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Mike Shaw, Wastewater Superintendent-This resolution is for an extension of time for sanitary sewer connections for six parcels; 1 Meadowbrook Road, 65 Meadowbrook Road, 692 Glen Street, Queensbury Factory Outlet Center, Glen Street, 335 Ridge Road and 620 Glen Street. The reason for an extension of time is because the severe weather this year, we decided to give these people additional time this Spring to make the connection until June 30th, 1993. Councilman Tucker-You will keep track of these and make sure it happens? Mr. Shaw-Yes, yes I will. Supervisor Brandt-This will be consistent with all the other ones we've recently given out. Mr. Shaw-That's right. Councilman Caimano- This is the end? Mr. Shaw-I hope so. RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE RESOLUTION NO. 239, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz 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 Stanley A. Juckett, whereby his parcel of land, known as Tax Map No. 109-1-6, would be changed from SFR-IA to NC-IA, 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 SFR-IA (Single-Family Residential- 1 Acre Zone) to NC-IA (Neighborhood Commercial - 1 Acre Zone) that portion of property which is a part of a small subdivision existing along the east side of Ridge Road just north of Quaker Road, in the Town of Queensbury, such property situated within the boundaries of that property having tax map number set forth in the Town of Queensbury Zoning Map Book as 109-1-6, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the said public hearing shall be held on the 24th 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 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Monahan-Jim would you prepare a map with the adjoining zones? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes. RESOLUTION OF TOWN BOARD DETERMINING THAT PROPERTY OWNED BY HARLEY JAMES IS UNSAFE - TAX MAP NO. 125-3-2 RESOLUTION NO. 240, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHEREAS, Mr. David Hatin, of the Building & Code Enforcement Department of the Town of Queensbury, has advised that he has investigated and inspected certain property identified as Corinth Road, Town of Queensbury, and bearing tax map no. 125-3-2, and has made findings as more specifically set forth in a letter dated July 28, 1992, a copy of which is presented to this meeting, and WHEREAS, Mr. David Hatin advises the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury that, in his opinion, an open structure on the property presents a hazard and a nuisance to the neighborhood and is unsafe to the general public and has asked the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury to take action to have the property secured if the property owner fails to board up all windows and doors, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 60 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, the Town Board may, by resolution, determine whether, in its opinion, the structure is unsafe and dangerous and thereafter order their repair or demolition and removal and further order that notice be served upon the owner or other certain persons interested in said property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, upon reviewing all of the evidence presented at this time, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is of the opinion that the property and structures thereon, bearing tax map number 125-3-2, appear to be: 1. Presently unsafe and dangerous; 2. Potentially an object of attraction and danger to minors; and 3. Unfit for the purposes for which it may be lawfully used, 4. May warrant immediate boarding up or repair as an emergency action, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Director of Building & Codes be and hereby is authorized to serve a Notice upon the owner(s) of said property, said Notice being in substantially the form presented at this meeting and generally providing: 1. A description of the premises, 2. A statement of particulars in which said structure thereon appears to be unsafe and dangerous, as set forth in Mr. Hatin's letter, 3. The Town Board feels, based on current information, that the structure should be repaired or removed, with work commencing within 30 days of service of this notice and completed within 60 days thereafter, unless good cause is shown by the property owner or other interested persons whereupon the time shall be extended by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, 4. That a hearing before the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, in relation to the dangerous or unsafe condition of the property shall be held on April 19th, 1993, at 7:00 p.m., in the Queensbury Activities Center, or not less than five (5) days from the date of service of this said Notice, whichever date if later, 5. That, at the hearing, the Town Board will also consider whether there is a clear and imminent danger to the life, safety or health of any person or property unless the building is immediately closed and boarded up or repaired, as set forth herein, and whether to authorize the Director of Building & Codes to immediately repair or close the premises and thereafter assess any charges to the real property as per §68-11 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury. 6. In the event that there is neglect or refusal to comply with the order of this Board to board up the structure located on said property, the Town Board is authorized to take action to have the property secured and to assess all expenses thereof against the real property on which it is located, and to institute special proceedings to collect the cost of said action, including legal expenses. and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that service and filing of the Notice provided for herein shall be in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 60 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Dave Hatin, Director of Building and Codes-This is an abandoned home by a subject who was transferred to the Warren County Adult Home in Warrensburg. We became involved in this through the Warren County Nurses Service who provide care to this gentleman. The residence inside is somewhat unlivable due to the fact that he had no running water and basically there was alot of human debris in the bathroom. We currently have quite an unsanitary condition inside. Paul and I have worked on this for almost a year now trying to find a way to condemn this because there is some what of an unique deed. Attorney Dusek-What it is, the person that was living in there was living under a life estate and the underlying owner of the life estate has been very difficult to get a hold of, in fact we still don't have an address for this person although we have spoken with her. My recommendation to Dave was, first of all have the person evaluated, once the gentleman that had the life estate, which he has now left. It's my understanding Dave from your evaluation, at least preliminary boarding up the place will protect the public health as well as the safety. That will give us a little more time to see if we can't resolve the issue of contact with that person that holds the underlying estate. This will start the process and then you've got a hearing you'll have to go through next week. No one will probably attend but you have to go through the formalities and we can keep on moving it from there. Mr. Hatin-I have pictures here for the Board if you wish to review them. Councilman Monahan-Dave, the public health nurses do they think that this gentleman, were this fit to live in, would be retuming? Mr. Hatin-No, he is currently a resident of the Warren County Adult Home, a permanent resident. Every once in a while he'll talk about leaving but they discourage that. He's seems very happy, I did talk to him about three weeks ago to get his permission to do what we had to do. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERFUND ADVANCES RESOLUTION NO. 241, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9-A of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized to temporarily advance moneys held in any fund to any other fund, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the temporary advance of funds to the accounts or funds indicated, and in the amounts indicated, as set forth below: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT 40 - Queensbury Water 910 - Landfill Fund 70,000.00 40 - Queensbury Water 04 - Highway Fund 100,000.00 40 - Queensbury Water 910 - Landfill Fund 20,000.00 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer, is hereby authorized and directed to arrange for and accomplish the above-authorized transfers, and temporary advances, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer, shall keep suitable records and arrange for the repayment of the temporary advances as soon as possible, and the Town Supervisor shall also determine the amount of interest, if any, to be paid, upon repayment. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Tucker-I'm presently out of the good graces of the Republican Committee and there was a comment made by Ron Montesi, during a Republican Committee meeting where it was stated that I would have trouble getting highways paved in Ward 4 this Summer. I want to make it part of the record and the only control that we have over the Highway Department is through it's funding and I want to make it part of the record that I will demand that Ward 4 gets it's fair share of paving. Supervisor Brandt-Once you transfer this money, you don't have much more that can be said through the expenditure of this money. The Highway Department spends about, I think the payroll is about fifteen thousand a week, so it's about a hundred thousand dollars a month. This takes you into three or four months of funding. If you want to maintain control, why don't you change that figure from four hundred thousand to one hundred thousand, enter into discussions with the Superintendent of Highways and come to an agreement. Councilman Caimano-Before we change it from four to one, it seems like we ought to ask the Highway Superintendent because it may not fall in a linear basis. It's one thing to go one month at a time, but it may not be linear. I can understand your point of view and his point of view, why not call him in and ask him? Supervisor Brandt-I know you have certain expenditures beyond payroll, if you put a hundred thousand in, it certainly will take care of three weeks absolutely minimum. If there's any problem, next week we can do something else. Since I introduced that, I'll introduce it at a hundred thousand dollars on the highway fund instead of four hundred thousand. Who seconded that? Councilman Caimano- I did. Supervisor Brandt-Would you accept that? Councilman Caimano-I don't mind, I just think there's so many questions here that we ought not do anything unless we talk to the Highway Superintendent. Supervisor Brandt -Well, you've got to do something because he can't make payroll. Councilman Caimano-He needs money now? Councilman Tucker-Yea, that's why it's here. We can have Paul here next week and I don't care who guarantees it for me but I'd like it guaranteed. Councilman Caimano-Okay, I just don't know if it's linear and that's why I'm concerned about it. RESOLUTION RELATIVE TO PROPOSED WARREN COUNTY SEWER DISTRICT FEIS RESOLUTION NO. 242, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHEREAS, in 1992, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury adopted a resolution acknowledging that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Warren County Sewer District was submitted in September of 1990, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury then noted that it had come to their attention that there were potential flaws in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which had not been properly addressed and that the Town Board would like to go on record with the recommendation that the Warren County Sewer Project exclude the North Queensbury sewer system as proposed, and that it supported the rest of the sewer project, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has reviewed or been informed of the impact to the North Queensbury residents caused by the Lake George Park Commission Waste Water Management Regulations Interim Operating Permits (lOP), and the lOP's require remedial action at the end of the three years, and WHEREAS, the Town Board acknowledges that it has been informed that on FEIS pages 111-135 it is stated that: It was determined in Chapter 5 that the degree of need for the new waste water facilities varied between subareas of the southern basin. For example, the Queensbury improvements are needed immediately due to the widespread difficulties in meeting the LGPC Waste Water Management Regulations for private on-site systems. Areas such as Area P in the Town of Lake George also have a documented need, however the need is currently less critical than that in Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has been informed by Mr. Salvador and Mr. Boehm that apparently comments raised concerning the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Final Environmental Impact Statement concerning sewer impacts in the North Queensbury area have not been addressed because the County has apparently excluded the sewer project from the North Queensbury area in view of Resolution No. 399, 1992 adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to indicate its opposition to the failure to address comments raised in the DEIS and FEIS, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates its opposition to the failure to address the aforesaid comments on the DEIS and FEIS, and that it is interested in a sewer project that might include other alternatives involving the North Queensbury area, and therefore, would request that the Full Environmental Impact Statement respond to all Queensbury comments, including: -Utilization of on-site systems to continue wherever possible -Acceptable alternate locations to the Pickle Hill Treatment Plant -Construction of small neighborhood systems including the use of alternative and innovative technology and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that to the extent that this resolution is inconsistent with Resolution No. 399, 1992 adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury that the resolution is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Supervisor Brandt-Referred to the second page of the resolution, under the Resolve paragraph where there are two sentences standing alone. I'd like to propose a third sentence, construction of small neighborhood systems including the use of alternative and innovative technology. Attorney Dusek-Questioned whether all Board members have studied the final EIS and if not, you might want to indicate that you've been put on notice of it or something like that. Recommended the following changes: Third Whereas - Delete clause completely; Fourth Whereas, where it says the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has reviewed - add additional language - reviewed or been informed of; and Fifth Whereas, the Town Board acknowledges that - add additional language - acknowledges that it has been informed that on pages III through 13 5 Town Board agreed to proposed changes which are reflected in approved resolution. Councilman Caimano- I forgot to put on the record last week, in the Month of May I will be going to Walmart and only going to Walmart as the Advertising Director of the Post Star. Referred to a situation that happened over the weekend with a transient business, noted that something should be done soon. Attorney Dusek-Noted that there's a meeting scheduled for Wednesday to have a revised version of the law in front of you for your next meeting. I think hopefully that will address some of these things. Councilman Goetz-Referred to Mike Shaw, Wastewater Superintendent's request to go to the New York Water Environment Association. Questioned whether it's in his budget? Mr. Shaw-Yes. Councilman Goetz-I'd like to recommend that he attend. Town Board agreed and the following resolution was proposed: RESOLUTION TO ATTEND CONFERENCE RESOLUTION NO. 243, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHO MOVED IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby recommend that Mike Shaw, Wastewater Superintendent attend the New York Water Environment Association on June 15th and 16th of 1993 in Alexandria Bay, New York. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Goetz-I would like to schedule another workshop session on the Sign Ordinance. Town Board agreed to schedule a workshop session for May 4, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. in the Supervisor's Conference Room. Executive Director, Mr. Martin spoke to the Town Board regarding a transportation concept proposal for Route 254 and Route 9 intersection. I will be giving you a revised listing that would reflect the actual cost and detail of what's included, the final draft to you next week. Would like to note that we're looking at a completion of the draft by July 31 st of this year. OPEN FORUM 7:40 P.M. Mr. Paul Arnold, Glens Falls Farmer's Market-Noted, we've been over a year trying to get a market set up in the Town of Queensbury. It seems like numerous delays and most of it was due to the transient merchant law and the fee that was involved. In the past couple of weeks, an exemption was found. I read it and I feel that it works towards us and make us exempt from this fee. It reads on number 4 on the exemptions, it says the casual sale of goods or services during a transient merchant or solicitor market sponsored by any bona fide non-for-profit corporation having offices within a fifteen mile radius of the Queensbury Town Hall. This is obviously casual sale because we do not operate five days a week. We are a non-for-profit corporation, I have brought my corporation papers with us. My home is the office for the corporation and we are within twelve miles of Queensbury Town Hall. In bringing this to Jim Martin, he said he would talk to the Attorney. I'm hoping for an answer tonight due to the fact that we are getting within three weeks of this market starting, May 3 rd. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-He has called me, I wanted to make sure that I check with Paul before suggest waiving a thousand dollar fee. I wanted to make sure it was in fact in compliance. Supervisor Brandt-It sounds good to me, I think your market is a service to our people and I'd love to see it happen. Councilman Tucker-How many people from Queensbury will be in this farmer's market? Mr. Arnold-One. Councilman Tucker-Just one? Is that all you had apply? Mr. Arnold-Correct. Councilman Monahan-Was it your plan to operate one day a week or more? Mr. Arnold-One day a week. Councilman Tucker-Where is going to be located? Mr. Arnold-At this point it will be operated at the Glenwood Manor Antiques parking lot. We have another question on putting up a sign there. We have a permit and the question is, whether or not our sign would interfere with Bob Tyrer putting up signs? Councilman Goetz-What signs does Mr. Tyrer want? Mr. Arnold-I don't know but we don't want to interfere with his business and his ability to put up signs that he wants. Councilman Tucker-You have a permit for your sign issued by our department? Mr. Arnold-I don't have a permit yet because Bob Tyrer isn't going to sign because he's the landowner until he finds out if it's going to bother his signs. Supervisor Brandt-Who would make such a determination? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I have no problem with it providing he has the property owner's signature on the permit. Supervisor Brandt-Would you go visit the property and talk with Mr. Tyrer and check it out? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes whatever, last I knew they were going to have a sign, I didn't know Mr. Tyrer had any question. Councilman Tucker-He's concerned about, if they issue him a sign, would it affect the gentleman that owns the property of getting signs. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I don't believe, it's a separate parcel, it's a separate lot, he would be permitted a sign, providing Mr. Tyrer wasn't looking to advertise his business on the other side of the road where you're going to be. I don't see a problem with it. Mr. Arnold-Okay. Councilman Monahan-Are you sure it's a separate parcel? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes it is. Attorney Dusek-That section seems to require basically two things. A non-for-profit corporation and the fifteen mile radius of the Queensbury Town Offices. I heard you said you're within the fifteen mile radius. Mr. Arnold-Twelve miles. Attorney Dusek-Are you a non-for-profit corporation? Mr. Arnold-Yes, Jim has the papers. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes, I have those papers. Attorney Dusek-Then I don't see how the Town can assess the fee, he's exempt. Supervisor Brandt -Good, look forward to seeing you in business. David Kenny-I'm here representing the Queensbury Business Association tonight. I'll read the first one, it's regarding the Zoning Board membership. Recently a member of the Queensbury Business Association Inc., reported to us that he had been advised by the Town Board that he would not be considered for an appointment to the Zoning Board due solely to the fact that he was a member of the Board of Directors of the Queensbury Business Association. If this is position that has been taken by the Queensbury Town Board, we must express our outrage for this obvious attempt to blackball members of the Board of Directors of the Queensbury Business Association. If our information is incorrect, we apologize in advance. However, the feelings that are so deep here that we thought it necessary to respond immediately without trying to verify what we have received from our member. Why does being a member of the Board of Directors of the Queensbury Business Association disqualify from serving on the Queensbury Zoning Board? Are only members of the Board of Directors of the Queensbury Business Association disqualified? What about members of Board of Directors of local banks, chambers of commerce or other broad based groups? Why are the Queensbury Business Association officials being singled out for discrimination? And I signed it as president of the Queensbury Business Association. (letter on file in Clerk's Office) Like I said, we don't know this is true. It's been brought to our attention that this was stated and we've done some research and we know that there's been other Board of Directors of other organizations that have been on the Boards. We feel strongly that we should be looking for the best people on these Boards. Councilman Goetz-I don't think we singled out the QBA in particular. The feeling was that you are active in bringing statements to the Town Board on different things that happen in the Town and it might work adversely for that Zoning Board member to be on the Board of Directors of any organization that is active and I think your activity is good. Mr. Kenny-If it's the Town's position, fine but I do know in the past it hasn't been. Councilman Goetz-The State criteria for selecting members of the Zoning Board, one of the items that's listed is they don't want a one issue person. I thought that was a valid concern. Mr. Kenny-That should be the reason then given because you feel a person is disqualified, not because he's the Board of Director or member of an organization. Supervisor Brandt-I think you have a very valid point. I think in the United States, you basically have a freedom of association. I think you do have a right to associate with anyone you want to and I think government should be very careful not to infringe on that right of association. I've very sympathetic with your VIew. Councilman Goetz-Do you think that the Town Board would reconsider this person in Executive Session, talk about it further? Supervisor Brandt-We have a code of ethics and it basically says that you can't act when you have a conflict of interest. I think the person on the Board knows when they've got a conflict of interest and they won't. I think you've got to trust that. If you know that they did, well then you've got room to take them off the Board. But what we're really doing is saying, because they might have a conflict of interest, we won't let them on. I think we could have a session on this after if you want to have an Executive Session. Mr. Kenny-The other letter has to do, again this is in reference to Queensbury Business Association. It's about Town assessments. The Queensbury Business Association recommends that the Queensbury Town Board stop the implementation of the proposed new assessments due to the fact that they are fraught with errors. We believe it would be an injustice to the taxpayers of the Town to adopt the assessments as they are presently proposed. We believe the assessments should be reviewed with the idea of adopting a new proposal for May 1, 1994. (letter on file in Clerk's Office) Councilman Tucker-Did you give a copy to the Assessor? Mr. Kenny-No, not at this time. Supervisor Brandt-We'll forward this one. Mr. Kenny-Again, this is the Queensbury Business Association and I thank you for your time. Councilman Goetz-We had a meeting with her last Friday and there was three of us on the Board that asked her to delay it a year. Nick, you had asked for some input from her before you made your decision. So I would like it on the record that I want her to delay. Supervisor Brandt-We have asked her many times to delay this so that we can make field inspections. We've offered to fund personnel to make those field inspections, if we delay it for a year to clean this up. But she is the sole Assessor under law, for six years, she's the Assessor. Mr. Dan Valenti, member ofQBA-The meeting we had with her, we discussed some of the problems that we had, we pointed out a series of faults in the assessment. And she said, we must have missed it and we're going to rectify before the end of the month. Then we asked her directly, are you going to sign this because we know that once she signs it, it's law and she said the way she felt that she could correct the inequities between now and the end of the month. So we said, are we going to have a chance to respond to these if we don't agree with you. She said they were supposed to go out the third week of the month but we're so busy that we're probably going to get them out the last week of the month. So, I said, what recourse do we have at that point because May 1st, when she signs it, that's it. She indicated that the only other way that you could possibly get it reversed, is when you go to grievance day and you better have the proper documentation to back yourself up. And that was basically the way it was. She said that they went out and they looked at these properties and they did these assessments. Well, in one case I have an entire building that was assessed that doesn't exist. I pointed that out to her, I said that is a gross inequity, we have an eight thousand dollar tax bill on a building that doesn't exist. How was that missed? I said what about these assessments where you took the pictures of the building, new structures between 1988 and now, they took it during construction and when I was issued the CO and the assessments, we never sold a unit at that price and that's what they were assessed at. I said, where did you come up with these numbers, we're not selling units at these prices. The most expensive unit that was for sale in that development, at that time, was a hundred and twenty-four thousand and she assessed the lesser unit which the most expensive was at that time, one hundred nineteen, at one hundred thirty and if anything, things have gone the other way since 1988. And she couldn't give us a definitive answer. She said she hasn't done every piece of property and I can understand that. So, we were just trying to get some feedback. We asked her if she was going to reconsider, she felt in her heart she felt that it was a good job and she was going to go forth with signing it, regardless of what happens. The problem is, we just don't have any recourse here once she signs it. And the other thing that offends me personally, we were all involved in 1986 and 87 when we went through the grand, talk about the green space and all this business and I had plenty of land that was rezoned to larger lot size to keep this and now because I own all this land, I'm being penalized for it. Her attitude and it's documented in the paper and I confronted her with this, that you want to sell this land so it becomes developed and she agreed. And I said, where were you in 1986 and 87 when we had a grand reorganization in the Town for open space. She said, well I wasn't here for that but that's not the way I look at it. So one person is now, the Assessor is dictating to the Board and to all the people in this community who have lived here for the last fifteen or twenty years, that we're going to change what we just did all this work for five, six years ago. How can one person change everything? Councilman Caimano-Well, she can't. She doesn't have that authority, in fact we questioned her about that and she backed off of that. She doesn't have that authority to force development. She's supposed to do one thing and one thing only, assess ... Mr. Valenti-No, but when you shift the assessment, you're shifting the burden. Councilman Caimano-But the answer to your question, she does not have that authority. Mr. Kenny-One other major point at our meeting was that, we really felt, you know my concerns, probably a good part of them will be answered because I went down and fought. His concerns may be answered, but what about the people that haven't gone down there and what about the people that have felt because they got an assessment saying this is going to be my taxes and find out, there's got to be a change. I know my property alone is about three million dollars in mistakes. I got a piece of property assessed on Route 9, I'm selling for two hundred thousand, it's assessed for over four hundred thousand. I got a landlocked piece of property assessed for over five hundred thousand, I paid eighty thousand. Councilman Tucker-Did they rectify it for you? Mr. Kenny-Well, I won't know until May 1st until they get the letter out. But the point is, it's going to effect somebody. Councilman Tucker-I got a letter from a guy today, his residence went from two hundred and fifty some thousand to five hundred and some thousand. He called for an appointment and they told him to write a letter. Supervisor Brandt-We are very, very concerned about this. Pliney and I met today and we met with the Attorney and then the Attorney met with her. To my understanding she's going forth with this. We as a Town Board have clearly said to her, we'll work with her in fixing these and funding the work that's necessary to fix these inequities, these adjustments that have to be made and take a year to do it. She's given us all kinds of reasons why it won't work but I think it will work if she decides that it will work and it won't work if she decides it won't work. Councilman Caimano- What recourse do we have left? Mr. Valenti-The other question I asked her, when you shift the burden to who ever you're shifting it to, it happened to be the business people and the vacant land owners, where did you get that direction from? I finally got an answer from her directly, it was her. Councilman Caimano-It didn't come from here. Mr. Valenti-I know, it didn't come from the Town or the previous Board. The other answer I asked for was, could you please tell me what the equalization rate is? To me it doesn't matter that we go to a hundred percent, because it's a matter of dollars that you have to generate to run the government. But she couldn't give me any idea what the equalization rate is, so it could even be higher. And the last thing, I got involved on one of these things in 1976 in Lake Luzerne. I filed a class action suit against the Town of Lake Luzerne because they inequitably assessed me. All the people in the area were terrified of the assessor. I got a group of them together, we filed a class action suit and we won. And you know where we won on it? We won on one thing, we proved that the Assessor did not get out and go visit every individual site which she's admitted to and gross negligence on their part for not getting all these things corrected in a timely manner. They reversed the tax decision until the entire Town was reassessed. We had to pay the taxes but they put them in escrow and then they had to refund them back to all the people who filed a class action suit. All the people that weren't involved in the class action suit, paid the taxes that they were assessed. Councilman Goetz-What recourse do we have? I mean, can we bring action against her? Attorney Dusek-The problem you have is that the State law, the way it's set up, is that they've got an entire process set in there that they mandatorily impose by State law upon the Towns. Once the Assessor system is put into place like we have here, then they dump all of the authority into her lap and say, here's what you can do. They leave the recourse to the taxpayers through the Article Ts, through the small claims proceedings, the Assessment Board and they say, in the law, this is your recourse as taxpayers, this is what you can do. They really take it out of the hands of the Town Board which it makes it difficult for the Town Board to necessarily impose their will in this case because they have to follow State law too and they can't superimpose their judgement on the Assessor because she is supposed to be independent for good reasons. You don't want the Assessor into a political situation where she's playing games with assessments. So under the laws, she's set up as an independent person to do this job. We're looking into it. We'll look into it a little further to see if there's anything at all else there that's available to the Town Board to study the situation but I've got to tell you, it looks like it's really in the Assessor's ball game as far as setting the assessed values. Supervisor Brandt-Why can't we fund the lawsuit, a class action for all of the people? Attorney Dusek-I don't know the answer to that. Supervisor Brandt-I'd rather do that then fund the lawsuit against anyone of the taxpayers where there's an inequity that we caused. Mr. Kenny-Who hired the contractors? Supervisor Brandt-We as a Town hired the contractors. Councilman Goetz-On her recommendation. Mr. Kenny-On her recommendation but the Town Board had to approve who was actually going out there and do the physical field work? Supervisor Brandt -Yes. Mr. Kenny-Because that's where I really believe most of the problems are. I don't believe the proper amount of work was done. They did not visit sites at all. Supervisor Brandt-We leamed last time we talked with her Friday, this is a mass reappraisal, reval and the way we've chosen to do it with her recommendation is that we've gone and hired just certain parts of it done. Which did not include going out and inspecting every piece of property. Had you gone out and inspected every piece of property, it might have cost you somewhere around six hundred thousand to eight hundred thousand dollars to do Queensbury. The last time iliat was done, no one was very happy with it. This system she's using, they did alot of computer work and garbage in and garbage out, we've seen that and we don't have a good product here. The problem is, it's State law, this is the way, these are the procedures the State says you have to use. And they're flawed, they're very flawed. Mr. Valenti-The State law doesn't say it has to be done by this year, does it? Don't we have another year? Attorney Dusek-You don't have to do a reval under State law. It's the Assessor's job to come up with a uniform roll and you do a reval if you feel it's necessary to help you reach that resolve. Mr. Valenti-Okay, but there's nothing on the books that says it has to be signed this month? Attorney Dusek-No. Mr. Valenti-Is there someway we can prevent her from signing this thing? There's got to be a legal way to stop it, one person can not control this whole Town. Councilman Monahan-Dave, how many members do you have in QBA? Mr. Kenny-Last year there was a little over a hundred. Councilman Monahan-Of that amount of people, how many people in your general conversation do you think, who think that their assessments were not correctly done? I'm not saying that they had to like it, but feel that they were not correctly done. Mr. Kenny-I don't know, I probably got a dozen phone calls myself. We didn't go out and try to dig up problems. I really don't know. Maybe two dozen possibly. The big problem we're running into, we're concerned about people that aren't complaining, that don't know, I mean alot of people just assume that their assessment went up twenty-five percent but because their taxes are going down or staying about the same, they didn't really look at it and pay alot of attention to it. I think an awful lot of the commercial that I've spoken to, have said they're upset with it. She told us how many there were, I think she said twenty- four percent of the commercial problems have come in and objected. Mr. Valenti-The total for the whole Town was fifteen percent, but of business it was twenty-two percent. Mr. Kenny-She said, I think it's twenty-eight percent of vacant landowners. Mr. Valenti-Right, and the lowest point were the single family residential. Councilman Tucker-I had a long conversation with your wife, she mentioned your wetlands. Did that ever get, explain to the public what happened there. Mr. Valenti-We have a piece of property that's part of Bay Bridge Town Homes that during the approval process we knew it was a wetland area so we went to DEC and had it cut out of the development. Which we found out afterward, now, that it only can be assessed at three hundred dollars an acre if it's a designated wetland. Well, we never knew that and we've been paying alot more. When I got the new tax bill, the bill assessed me at four hundred thousand dollars for twelve acres of wetland that is part of the subdivision that was approved in 1985 and is on the record. She said, we don't have the maps and it's not our job to look at those maps as far as the topo goes and it's not on the regular map, that's why we missed it. Supervisor Brandt-There's no site inspection, it comes right back down to it. Mr. Kenny-But this was a site plan that was approved by the Town Planning Board, it's on file, there's a mylar there that it's undevelopable land. Mr. Valenti-The point was, we brought it up time and time again and that's what I said to her, I said we can sit here all night and talk about inequities but the point was I challenge the company that did the work and don't you think we can delay the assessments until we get this rectified because it's not just Dan Valenti or Dave Kenny, there's alot of people. Alot of people that won't even be able to get into a meeting and talk to them directly. Mr. Tom Philo-Lake Sunnyside, Queensbury. What Mr. Valenti and Mr. Kenny brought up, there's some valid points and I agree with them. We meet with some retired people every Wednesday at the Elk's Club and there isn't one person that is happy with this. I would say ninety percent of this Town is dissatisfied. This should be thrown out, there's no justice. Supervisor Brandt-We don't want to throw it out, we've gathered a bunch of data. We started a process, we want to take our time and refine it. What's scares me is that by the time we find out how many inequities there are, it's going to be too late, we're going to be locked into the system and right now is the time to stop it or that is, delay it, gather more information and refine it. But if we go on, we could have a real bad disaster here and I sense it. I've talked to lots and lots of people who see it coming and there's alot of people who have not come in yet, we get letters every day. There are alot of inequities out there and we as a Town are causing that and I don't think we're supposed to be doing that. I think it's our job to help our citizens. Councilman Caimano-Even though it doesn't have any legal, is there anything wrong with this Board passing a Sense of the Board Resolution from a political standpoint and at least putting pressure from that end? Is there anything wrong with that? Supervisor Brandt-No, nothing. Councilman Goetz-I don't even think it's political, it's just common sense. Mr. Philo-There's alot of people who are retired and they're scared they're going to lose their property. Supervisor Brandt -Lots of people, lots of people. Mr. Philo-And I don't think this Town should be subjected to that. If there's a legal way, I think it should be looked into further. Mr. John Salvador-On the subject of Assessments and I have other things I'd like to talk about. But I'm going through the revaluation as well and I went for my review Friday. I must say though that up to that time and even up to today when I came back in, I can't find anything that I could criticize the Assessor's Office for in the way of non-professional approach, the inadequacy of the consultants. I think they did a hell of a job in doing a commercial evaluation of our property. I don't agree with alot of the figures but they did come to the site, we had eighteen buildings on the premises. They did a hell of a job. There are some errors, housekeeping type errors in it and we'll clean those up. I haven't been denied the privilege of getting those things cleanup. But as we sit here tonight, I can not support what I have heard so far concerning the assessment. Councilman Caimano-How will you clean them up, at the Assessment Review? Mr. Salvador-No, I submitted a letter today with a complete list of all the errors and that sort of thing that I found in there. Raw data, square footage, age of the building, whether or not it had air conditioning, type of heating system, that sort of thing. Supervisor Brandt-John, the problem I have is that what we're doing, we're going to put all the people who have problems to the Board of Assessment Review and it's a legal proceeding. Mr. Salvador-I'm not saying I'm not going to be there. Supervisor Brandt-No, but what I'm telling you is, if the person goes there doesn't like the results, then they've got about one thing they can do and that's go to court. Mr. Salvador-That's within the system. Supervisor Brandt-And that Board of Assessment Review is going to have to handle hundreds and hundreds of cases I think. Possibly four or five hundred and you think that those folks are going to sit there and really be a judge on each one of those impartially. They can overload, these are citizens that have a job. They're in there extra hours. They're going to just look at this and finally say, oh alright, take it, go, if you don't like it, appeal it. I mean they're just going to, at some point, not be able to do their job and that's what scares me. Mr. Salvador-I'm sorry there's no excuse for that. If they take that job, they've taken ajob to do and because there aren't enough hours in the day, is not an excuse. Supervisor Brandt-Yea, I know it's not an excuse but ... Councilman Goetz-You ask Nick Caimano, he told us what happens. Councilman Caimano-I can tell you that everybody tries to do the job as proscribed and they try to do just what you say but the eyeballs roll, there's no question about that. After twelve, fourteen, fifteen hours, the eyeballs roll and I can't sit here and tell you that if you're looking at four or five or six hundred people, that the people at the end get you just as fresh as people in the beginning, because they obviously don't. Mr. Philo-Nick, what about the poor people that can't afford a lawyer? Councilman Caimano-Let's make sure we understand the system. Everybody has an opportunity, free of charge without any cost whatsoever to go to the Board of Assessment Review. The second step, if you don't like that is small claims court for residential and then Article 7's and that's the one that can be expenSIve. Mr. Richard Nicholson-But this is a simple thing though. Do we believe in right or wrong? That's as simple as it is. I mean if this woman is reasonable, she would be willing to say, let's make this right. Even if she just does wrong against one person ... Councilman Caimano- You've been here many times and you're absolutely right except you're standing right next to a man who said, she did it right. Mr. Salvador-No, no, excuse me. Councilman Caimano- Y ou didn't agree with her numbers. Mr. Salvador-I don't agree but I'm saying is, that I don't think she's guilty of alot of things she's accused of here tonight. What you might call, non-professional practice. In my case, okay, the firm that did our job, came out to the site, spent time with us, walked around, inspected the site. Councilman Tucker-You've got to realize that there was other people that wanted the same thing to happen from that firm and it didn't happen. You've got to realize that you got an appointment and there are people out there that asked for an appointment and never got them. Mr. Salvador-This was done before the tum of the year. Mr. Nicholson-Let me say this, he has his right to an opinion and if he feels that's right, that's good. I'm not mad at him about that. Now, within a half mile radium of my house, I guarantee you, I can get you twenty- eight signatures tomorrow that are against it and I'd be glad to. Mr. Kenny-I'd like to make a comment from the QBA. We have not accused anybody of being non- professional. We think she's done a very professional job, we think there's alot of inadequacies with it. Our concern is, I wish we had sixty more days left before May 1st rather than say, well let's hope May 1st, everything is corrected and if it's not, well we made a mistake. We don't have the time and that's the problem. Nine times out of ten in construction, anything you do, if you get down to the last minute and you rush, you make more mistakes and screw up more than anything else and that's our concern. Maybe we should go to the State, appeal to the State, see if it's possible to get June 1st before the tax assessment roll has to go into effect. Why can't the State realize we have a problem and give us maybe another sixty days to get this straightened out. Why does it have to be May 1st? Maybe there's another way of going through it, appeal to the State. Mr. Charlie Adamson, Assembly Point-I live on Lake George and we fought this problem in 87. I have a two page letter, I won't read the whole thing because the things that Dave and Mr. Valenti have said pretty much cover the general attitude. Let me read a couple of things. I come before you tonight to request respectfully that you do all in your power to delay the implementation of the 1993 revaluation. New evidence continues to pour in, the flaws in the 93 revaluation of property in Queensbury equal or perhaps exceed those in the 87 assessment. When you consider that this year the whole Town, not just the shoreline areas, is also suffering and trying to understand, 1993 may even be a worse battle. I go on, let me try read the end and then I have a comment on what Paul Dusek says. The Town Board really does need to delay the very flawed 93 revaluation unless the Assessor is prepared and she does not have time to do this, so I won't even read the rest of it. She has confused the seasonal house with the year round house. But Paul, let me point out, you talk about the recourse that we have. What she is doing, may be legal but it's unethical as hell, that she's doing this to her own neighbors and she must know this. The recourse doesn't work and I'll tell you why. The recourse is grievance, small claims or article Ts. We have done that, my wife is pretty good at it, she's been doing this. We did this starting in 87. Now what she has done, is reversed that. She is saying in my way of thinking, that every hearing officer in small claims, every Judge in Article 7's was a dunce, didn't know what he was doing. She is saying that she is the only one that knows anything about full value, property value and this is simply not true. So I make the point, this is the longer range point, but I think out of this should come some move towards the State. There needs to be something corrective about this. This person has too much, not Helen, I'm not angry at Helen, I'm angry at the position. You don't put that much power in one person without any recourse. Mr. Nicholson-Can we put the Board on, like you said, on the record? Supervisor Brandt-We're going to do that, we're trying to work our way though it. Mr. Nicholson-Because I want to find out how we stand. Supervisor Brandt -We're trying to think our way of how to form a resolution. Mr. Dick Palmer-I haven't heard anybody say that they want anything but fair and all of the people that I've talked with, they want fair. My personal experience is that they just took a figure and they doubled it, my taxes went up fifty percent. I didn't think that was fair. Perhaps, a figure of, it went from seventy-seven to one fifty-four and I believe that one twenty would have been fair. Somehow we must get to the Assessor and let her know that people are not looking for anything but fair. I think the whole community will be suffering if this isn't postponed for a year, we shouldn't let iliat happen. Supervisor Brandt-I'd rather spend more money, alot more money with our own taxes to do this job correctly to put people out, professionals in the field to inspect what has to be inspected, gather the data and correct it corrected and make it fair then I would to fight over this in court because I can see it coming that we're going to have a potential disaster here. Once we go beyond a certain point and we're almost at that point, we are ...to where we can't get out of that position. Mr. Palmer-Has there been any indication from the Assessor that she doesn't have funds to look into it further? Supervisor Brandt-No, we've told her we'll fund it and this Board doesn't like to fund anything but we said we'll fund this, this is wrong. We don't want to fund legal action against people. Mr. Palmer-That would be much more expensive. Mr. John Buecking, Ridge Road-It occurs to me that about ten dollars per site was allocated for these folks to do their job. A hundred and twenty thousand dollars and twelve thousand different home sites, commercial sites, various site. If you look at it that way, no wonder the lady came up with, I would come up with that, if I was given ten bucks to look at each and every one. I don't think that from the inception of this thing, that enough money was dedicated to the absolute probative final good assessment of everybodies property. This is a very, very critical issue because one, some people may have to leave the area or sell the properties that they have. Two, it's fundamental that as property taxes increase, property values decline. It's just a basic law of economics which impacts us much into the night and down the road and down the next three or four years after whatever happens here. So I think it's very, very important to spend the money, get a good assessment here that everybody can not only feel is fair but isn't going to have such a disastrous economic affect on us all. Councilman Caimano- Y ou used the word probative, I don't want to mislead anybody here too, there's twelve thousand parcels. The word probative, fair and equitable to twelve thousand parcels in one year, ain't going to happen. You're not going to be able to argue every single case out in the field. Mr. Nicholson-Yea, but you can spend an hour at each one of them. Councilman Caimano-No you can't, we won't have enough people to do that. Twelve thousand parcels, it's got to be done in one year because if you don't do it in one year, then you're not comparing apples and apples. So we have to be very careful and I'm not saying we're not going to do it, I'm just saying that we've got to use some good old fashion horse sense here and realize that we're all not going to get our way. Mr. Nicholson-Well, it ain't getting your way. Like the gentleman just said, he was looking for his way, he's looking for fairness. Supervisor Brandt-That's right, that's what we all want and I'm sure the Assessor want's that. But she has legal deadlines and she's doing her best to do this job and she's sure she can get it done. I'm not as confident as she is, that there won't be alot of litigation over what she believes is fair. Mr. Nicholson-She's going to make alot of people suffer, is what she's going to do. Mr. Tim Brewer-If she can legally put this offfor another year, where does the deadline of May 1st coming from? Councilman Caimano- The State, there has to be a tax roll. Supervisor Brandt-Part of the problem is that she took the tax roll on January 1st and has been working on it in this process four months and in those four months there's been alot of changes that took place in the community and those changes were brought into the new work. She didn't put all those changes into the old tax roll, so suddenly she's got to take all those changes that occurred and bring up the old tax roll on the computer and make all those adjustments. That's a big job too and she doesn't think she can get that done. Mr. Brewer-Where does the May 1st deadline come in? Supervisor Brandt-State law. Mr. Brewer-He just got done saying, she could put it off for a year. Councilman Caimano-But she has to come up with a roll, the old roll or the new roll. Supervisor Brandt -Right and I think if it's necessary we're going to have to find help to help her input the data. There's problems to solve here and they're not simple. Mr. Nicholson-You as a whole Board offered to fund that, right? Supervisor Brandt -Yes. Councilman Caimano-Let's put something together. I think we should put together a sense of the Board. Mr. Gilbert Boehm-As a member of the Eastside Property Owner's Committee to look into this, we met with an assessor and with an attorney, two separate meetings. Those two gentlemen said in order to do a site by site analysis, even on a group basis, the prices are somewhere between five hundred and seven hundred dollars per house. That's the kind of cost you're up against, if in fact you do a site by site evaluation and in a mass reassessment you can't do anything like that. Supervisor Brandt-We have all these assessments in our roll. We have site cards, we have description of the buildings and all that. So it's a matter of going and checking if they're accurate or not accurate. It isn't a matter of going back like there was nothing done. Mr. Boehm-All I mean to do is to convey to you what had been conveyed to us as a result of talking to these two individuals. The other thing, if you remember she sent out these inquiry sheets at the beginning of the year asking us ... Supervisor Brandt-And not everybody filled them out. In fact, very few people filled them out. Mr. Boehm-Okay, and where those people didn't fill them out, they're then responsible for the errors in affect. Supervisor Brandt -Yea, in the end though, I hate to say, because you didn't fill it out, I'm not comfortable with that. Mr. Boehm-I have one additional question, that is, assuming this went through with her signature and in fact now, you went through the complaint process, is it within the Board's purview to in effect instruct those reviewers to be easier? Supervisor Brandt-No, we don't have any say in it. Mrs. Carol Martindale-We have alot of realtors locally, they could give us a very fair evaluation of the properties in the area. Why should we hire outside concern? Why couldn't we give them some money and if times are slow, they would work with us? Supervisor Brandt-I can't give you an answer to that. Mrs. Lillian Adamson, Assembly Point - I just want to add a very few brief remarks on this and one of them is of course our concern of the lake frontage charges. These are things that are across the board. This is where our extreme hit comes in, with land values at twenty-eight hundred at a front foot. We're not in here talking about increases often thousand or twenty thousand a property, we're in talking at increases that are at a minimum, most of them at a hundred thousand a property and some are two and three and four and five hundred thousand a property. I mean these are big increases. We have never had a property sell at over a million dollars accept for the one property which was the Beal's property which was an estate on the end of Assembly Point which was purchased back in 1987 for two million dollars. I attended a meeting that the State came up to and the State said, we will not use that. That will not be used against you as a comp and low and behold, I found that we have assessments up in the lake now that are over a million dollars. I've seen them at a million two and a million three and on one of those properties, handwritten and I told this to Paul Dusek today and to Pliney, this two million dollar property was used as a compo They through out, I did alot of work getting alot of properties ready to get letters in, in time and so I went down and I did alot of research, through the cards and things. I found that, you know this computer work is supposed to be done and they have five properties so I spent alot of time trying to find out all about those five properties. When I went in for my appointment to see the young lady, she said, oh we didn't use those, they weren't comparable. So, she signed a list that for all these properties, they didn't use the comparables, they wrote in their own that they decided to use at the spur of the moment. So you know, they have data and they throw it out. But we're talking increases that are so umeal that I don't know how people can live with these and try to defend them. Now, when we did go to see somebody, we saw an appraiser and he said to appraise properties, so that they can be taken to court, this is where we're in the six and seven hundred dollars per and then when we go to an attorney, we're going to be in it whatever the fee is per. So, this is big money that people have to start to spend to defend. Town Board, after further discussion agreed to word a resolution to delay the process. RECESS 9:00 P.M. (A recess was taken at this time to allow Town Attorney to prepare a resolution for the Town Board's consideration) RETURN FROM RECESS 9: 15 P.M. RESOLUTION OF REQUEST RESOLUTION NO. 244, 93 INTRODUCED BY: THE ENTIRE TOWN BOARD WHEREAS, after listening to many examples from the residents of the Town of Queensbury - owners of homes, commercial properties and vacant landowners, etcetera, the Town Board feels that there may remain many inaccuracies and inequities in the assessment roll being developed as part of the Town wide revaluation procedure, and WHEREAS, the Town Board recognizes the sincere effort and dedication of the Town Assessor but also feels that additional time would be helpful to review and finalized the assessments and that additional staffing would be helpful and appropriate to investigate the concerns raised by the residents, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby respectfully requests the assessor to delay the implementation of the new revalued assessment roll and use last year's roll as a basis for this year's assessment roll and hereby also states that it recognizes it's obligation to the Assessor to provide reasonable and adequate funding for data entry for new information that may come in or has come in during the course of this year, funding and proper staffing to review and complete the tax assessment rolls and sufficient funding so that the entire reval procedure can be accomplished by next tax year, 1994. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: Ayes ALL THOSE OPPOSED: None ABSENT: None OPEN FORUM CONTINUED Mr. Salvador-Mr. Martin, will there be opportunity for public input to some suggested solutions for the Route 9, Quaker Road intersection? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes, many times. Mr. Salvador-How? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Advertised public hearings. Mr. Salvador-Before the final design? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Definitely, yes. Councilman Monahan-Jim, you said public hearings, do you mean information meetings rather than public hearings? Executive Director-I'm sorry, informational meetings, yes. Mr. Salvador-Mr. Tucker, during the meeting, you mentioned that something about the fact that you were presently out the out's with the Queensbury Republican Committee. Does that mean eventually you expect to be in? Councilman Tucker-No, I don't think so. Mr. Salvador-You said presently, I was wondering if you meant that eventually... Councilman Tucker-Not with the committee that is there now but they may not be there forever and I might. Mr. Salvador-Mike, I'd like to ask, last week we had a discussion on North Queensbury Fire house, I'm very concerned that maybe there are some inequities in this fire tax in that we don't have a district approach to that. We have a Town, the Town is the total fire district and it frequently comes up that we're paying for the largest in another section, they're paying for the largesse in our section and we tend to lose control over it as citizens. First of all, I have no idea what the inequities might be with regard to the tax revenue that is raised in a particular fire district vis-a-vis another one. Is that information available? Councilman Caimano-The information is available, certainly. Mr. Salvador-Readily? Councilman Caimano-Yea, as far as I know, right? Supervisor Brandt -Yea, I'm not sure, we don't access by fire districts. There has just recently been an agreement as I understand it defining every piece of property in the Town as to which fire district they are m. Mr. Salvador-Okay, that's fair. Supervisor Brandt -So as we're computerizing that tax mapping system, we could set it up to do that. I think Mr. Borgos did a study on that or some people with him, that data is still around. That's dated now, it's changed some what but not enormously. We don't keep it current, it's not an easy, we can't just go to the computer and bring it out. Mr. Salvador-Neither am I looking for the last two percent. If we got one fire district that's bearing forty percent of the burden of the total Town and the other four are spread out equally over the other sixty percent, there's cause for concern. Councilman Caimano-Are you talking about financially or physically? Mr. Salvador-Yes, no, no, I'm talking about the tax burden. Councilman Caimano-It's relatively easy for you to figure that out, if you want to take the time to do it. Mr. Salvador-Well, you've got to have the data. Supervisor Brandt-I'll give you what data, I just recently was made aware of it, we found it recently and I'll gladly share it with you. Mr. Salvador-Okay. If there are inequities, big inequities in this, what is the procedure we would go through, as citizens or you as a Town Board to change this to a district? Supervisor Brandt -Someone provided me with a manual on that, I haven't read it through but I can get you a copy of it. But the consensus was among fire departments that, that isn't going to happen, it's going to get too difficult to resolve all the internal issues. What's more apt to happen is to form a district with fire commissioners instead of Town Board members running. That's happened in some communities and I don't know the success record with that. It's forming a new government, right now we are that government for that district. You would be forming a government where you elect people specifically for that. Mr. Salvador-I'm not proposing increasing the size of government. What I'm trying to do is get the taxes that a particular fire district pays allocated to the operations in that district. Supervisor Brandt-That's the one that, the members of the fire departments have told me they don't think that's possible to do. That it's, you won't come to a consensus, there's going to be too much political division on that. These are people who have looked at it over the years and I just take their opinion as probably better founded then any that I have. Mr. Salvador-Yea and I can understand that, if you've got one district that's bearing forty percent of the load and four districts the other sixty percent. When you talk to the other four, I can understand the message. Supervisor Brandt-I don't know that your figures are correct. Mr. Salvador-I'm using them as examples, I have no idea what the split is and believe me, I wouldn't raise the argument if we're talking about two percent. I'd like to get the data, I'd like to see what the spread is. Supervisor Brandt-Whatever we have, I'll share with you. Mr. Salvador-Okay. Up in Lake George on the weekend of the 19th and 20th of June, there's an event called the triathlon. This is a big national event that's going to draw thousands of people. It's an activity, if I understand correctly involves, running, swimming and biking. To accomplish and this is the cause of concern at the present time, it looks like there will be a proposal to close Route 9N from Lake George Village to Bolton Landing from six o'clock in the morning to twelve noon on the 20th. Supervisor Brandt-What day of the week is the 20th? Mr. Salvador-Sunday morning. There are alot of people that live and who have businesses on the Bolton Road that are very concerned about this. The subject came up this morning at the County Traffic Safety Board meeting. Fred Lamy is complaining about all the extra costs that he does not have in his budget for the security and the control of crowds and racers and everything else. Fred Austin is complaining about all the extra costs he's going to incur after a heavy snow plowing season that he doesn't have to do whatever he has to do to get that road closed. My concern, if this does go through and the Sheriffs Department and the Department of Public Works do incur extra costs, we're paying for them. We in the Town of Queensbury are paying for them. They haven't been budgeted and this is another example of a promoter using the public utility at taxpayer's expense. You, Mike will hear about this in the Tourism Committee meeting, this is part of the Spring Festival which has got everybody concerned. There are alot of obligations out there, alot of commitments going on with no contracts written and it could be a very, very embarrassing situation for the County. The County's got it's name on these things. Supervisor Brandt-I'm aware of that one. Mr. Salvador-Alright. I have here tonight a copy of a document that was prepared by the County Tourism Department, it's entitled, Criteria for Local Support Funding. Supervisor Brandt-We all have that, it's been distributed along with the proposed contract for the Town of Queensbury or not a contract but a proposal. Mr. Salvador-How you can participate. Supervisor Brandt -Yes. Mr. Salvador-I understood they were working on that, I didn't realize it had been finalized. Supervisor Brandt-I have it and there's two events that were proposed for Queensbury. One is the Opera Festival and the other one is the Balloon Festival and I given this stuff to the Attorney because there are some legal questions that I'm concerned about and he's looking at it. Mr. Salvador-I'd like to draw your attention to the fact, it says here that the events must be for a Warren County event, activity or cultural offering which generates tourism. I looked it up in the Dictionary, a tourist is a person traveling for pleasure and tourism is the practice of traveling for pleasure. I would like Paul to review this very carefully to see that the Town does qualify to engage in these activities. I should also tell you that I heard at this same meeting this morning, Fred Austin complaining about a woman who fell in a ditch out at the airport during the Balloon Festival and has a law suit against the County. So you do expose the taxpayers of this Town to these kinds of things when you do engage in this kind of work. On the criteria list, item 3 says that the event must be open to the public. I've been asking for more than three years for an interpretation of that statement and I haven't heard anything yet. I just don't get an answer and I challenge that, that means that no admission will be charged. I think that's the intent of that limitation, that no admission will be charged. Attorney Dusek-John, when you say you have been asking for three years, who were you asking for that? Mr. Salvador-County Board, County Tourism Committee, the Warren County Supervisor's Committee on Tourism, there always going to get an answer and it's just never forthcoming. I have never gotten a satisfactory answer to that. It says here the requester must be the sponsoring organization. You guys going to start sponsoring balloon festivals? Okay, thank you. Mr. Francis Martindale-I was pleased tonight to see the Town Board grant a gentleman the right to have a farmer's market. I think it's interesting that he could have and there were loopholes found in the law stating that he didn't have to pay a merchant license premium. The Town is about to study the Transient Merchant Law, I have a copy of it, if it has changed in the last three or four weeks, I understand that it's going to be necessary for farmers that live right here in the Town, if they want to sell their produce, they're going to have to have a transient merchant permit which is going to cost us a thousand fifty dollars. If this is the case, I think the people in this Town are getting slapped in the face again. I do urge that when you're studying this transient merchant law that you keep in mind, there are at least three or four of us people that sell vegetables here in this Town that's going to come under that law, unless I'm reading it wrong. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I think you must be, that was never the intent and that's not what I wrote. Mr. Martindale-Well, I guess we have to go some other people in your office or in the ... Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I know what was written, nobody else wrote it, I wrote it and that was never the intent and I'd like you to show me where you're getting that. Mr. Martindale-So you're saying that the farmers in this Town are not going to have to go pay a thousand dollars to get a permit to sell? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-The main change was that transient merchants be brought into compliance with zoning. Mr. Martindale-Okay, that's a concern of mine and that's why I'm saying, here a farmer's market and they might be listed as a non-profit organization but everyone of those people that are selling merchandise are profit and they will affect the income of other people in this Town that's selling vegetables or any produce of any sort. I would also like that gentleman's name. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Paul Arnold. Mr. Martindale-Thank you. Does anybody know about the zoning change I've asked for or the corridor study, where we stand. I know that you're tremendously busy, I'm not arguing that point. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-No, I'm not making any excuses either. The corridor study, a draft will be done in the next week. We've gotten alot of input and we're trying to take as much of that into consideration as we can. Councilman Monahan-I believe Jim, you're also getting additional information from the State, aren't you? Supervisor Brandt-Yea, we met today. Councilman Monahan-That has alot of impact on that. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-We just met with DOT today regarding, we finally found out what are the specific descriptions behind their so called proposed changes to the road that are due in the next two years. Supervisor Brandt-Several things too place after the meeting, the last neighborhood meeting. We had a Glens Falls Transportation Council meeting and they're we brought forth the idea that was expressed at the neighborhood meeting that people desire to have Route 149 remain as a main corridor to Vermont and not trying to make some alternate route. That puts it into a certain designated class of highway where there's quite a bit of money available to make improvements. We also put the State on notice that we were looking at a rezoning there and we're looking at the character of the area and we wanted to preserve that. That lead to a meeting that took place today between the State Highway Department and our Planning people and dialogue has started. They respect what our intent is and they're willing to work with us. I was not in the meeting accept very briefly but that's the sense that I got and they're very willing to work with us in involving their criteria and their design with us. So we are working together on that level. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Our next thing was to bring a report to the Board and again, that would be subject to public input. I want to get on with it, I want to get to a point of resolution. Mr. Martindale-Does anybody have a time frame? Councilman Monahan-I think the dialogue with the State was very, very important because that really has to be factored in. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I would like to say by May 1st, that that report will be to the Board and I was sitting here saying, I wanted April 1 st and we tried our damest. It will be May 1 st. Councilman Monahan-But you can't ignore the State's plans for that road either because that has a big impact on the planning. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Right, as a minimum it's going to be, there's ten foot lanes there right now with about three, four foot shoulders. At a minimum it's going to go twelve foot lane with eight foot shoulders and with what they call a thirty foot clear zone. So you're talking about fifty foot from the center line to either side and the clear zone is the area that's flexible but the twelve foot lane and the eight foot shoulder is pretty much fixed in their minds. Councilman Monahan-Jim, are they planning on doing any reconfiguration of the road at all? Have they talked about that? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-They've done no field work at all, they actually have not come and visited the road. The figure we have which is a six and half million dollar cost which is based on an average for this type of road and this type of situation. But they say, that, they can't give a firm answer on because due to limitations of property owner's up and down the road, the physical constraints, the cost involved, the cost benefit ... Councilman Monahan-But I'm wondering if they're looking to take out some of the bad site distances. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes, to the extent they can, the bad curves, the short site distances, those things they're going to try to correct. Mr. Martindale-They will do all they can outside of the Adirondack Park. They will not be doing that much inside the Adirondack Park and I think this is another thing the Town should be aware of and keep working on. A four lane has been talked, no way are you going to see environmentalist let anymore of their precious Adirondack Park be divided up by a road. So, always keep in mind we want to keep as much commercialism coming to this Town. When you start talking four lane road, as what was talked in that meeting, that four lane road is going to start down between exit 16 and 17, it's going to go way out in farmland that they can buy cheap. And it's going to bypass this Town and it's going to take a tremendous, tremendous amount of money out of this Town. Supervisor Brandt-I think that's pretty much to bed. I believe that everybody agrees that Route 149 is going to be the entrance, there's no question in my mind there will be a constant evolution over there. But meanwhile we can't wait for the entire evolution to move, so we've got to do rezoning, we've got to work in with these people and this process will go on for a whole life time, I'm sure, and then some. Mr. Martindale-I also ask you to keep in mind that you are on a very close border with the Town of Fort Ann and the Town of Fort Ann would to anything under the Sun to get commercialism on their side of 149. So in your process, have pity on the people that want to develop on 149. There's no zoning in Fort Ann and there's no setbacks. All there is a simple site plan review and they are actively and I'm on that Board, actively looking for commercialism. So please keep that in mind because this Town needs it as much they do. Thank you. OPEN FORUM CLOSED ATTORNEY MATTERS DISCUSSION - EAP DIRECTOR Attorney Dusek-Referred to the Employee Assistance Program, EAP Board, the election of officers. Under your contract with the program you have a right to appoint the members and their Board of Directors. Whoever that Director is, has a right to vote and nominate on the president and vice-president. According to the records ofEAP, KatWeen Kathe is still the Director. The question is, whether you want to appoint some other person to the EAP Board to act on your behalf. Councilman Monahan-Recommended Barb Howe, feeling that she would be an excellent choice. Noted, she's close with the employees and they're comfortable with her. Town Board agreed to have Town Attorney prepare a resolution for the next Board meeting. DISCUSSION - ROAD DEDICATION Attorney Dusek-Noted, Collette Construction approached me, he bought the lot in Hiland. Paul Naylor has indicated that it will cost about seven thousand dollars to put the top coat on that road. Collette has indicated that he would like to offer the road to the Town for Dedication with a typical letter of credit, he'll be responsible for that letter of credit and to put the top coat on it as soon as he's through with the houses. His reasoning is, he doesn't want to ruin the top coat of the road while he brings in heavy equipment for the houses as he builds them. I believe he's looking probably for the typical two years. Town Board held discussion, agreed not to accept letter of credit noting the risks involved with letters of credit and would like to see some consideration in changing that policy. Councilman Tucker recommended cash up front. After further discussion, the Town Board agreed to cash up front and the road to be paved within a certain period of time, that certain period of time to be determined by the Executive Director, Mr. Martin. DISCUSSION - PASCO A VENUE WATER DISTRICT Attorney Dusek-I had a conversation some time ago with Haanan Engineers where I suggested to him, because there's two parts of this district, one is the improvement that's going to be billed to the consolidated district while another part is going to be the Pasco Avenue District, that he needed two separate reports. He indicated to me in this letter, that Haanan Engineers will include in their work the additional map, plan and report addressing the transmission main improvements for the consolidated water district, that there will be no additional expense, however they would like to request a time extension of two weeks to complete the project. Town Board agreed to time extension of two weeks. DISCUSSION - TOWN BOARD MEETING, AGENDA FORMAT Councilman Caimano-Requested a change in the agenda, that the Town Attorney matters are to be handled before Open Forum. Town Board agreed to change the agenda. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 245, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session to enter Executive Session to discuss selection of people for the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Board, one Collective Negotiation Matter and one Personnel Matter. Duly adopted this 12th day of April, 1993, by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: Ayes ALL THOSE OPPOSED: None ABSENT: None No further action was taken. On motion, the meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK-QUEENSBURY