Loading...
1993-06-14 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING JUNE 14, 1993 7:00 p.m. MTG.#44 RES.343-354 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Supervisor Michel Brandt Councilman Betty Monahan Councilman Susan Goetz Councilman Nick Caimano Councilman Pliney Tucker Attorney Paul Dusek PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN GOETZ ANNOUNCED THAT IT WAS FLAG DAY HEARING UNSAFE STRUCTURE PROPERTY OWNED BY DAMIEN 1. DELSIGNORE Mr. David Hatin-Director of Building and Codes-This is the estate of Damien 1. Delsignore which is located at the intersection of West Mt. Road and Mountain View Lane, Bonner Drive, that large intersection there. There are representatives of the estate here tonight to discuss this matter with you and we have some solution they would like to propose to the board. Supervisor Brandt-Declared the public hearing opened. It has been properly advertised, the Clerk will tell us if it has been properly advertised, she is not available right now, as soon as she gets back we will put that on the record. I assume it has been properly advertised and... Attorney Dusek-The nature of this hearing does not require an actual publication in the newspaper but rather the owners or people that might have interest in the property to be notified, in this particular case my office has assisted in the notification and we notified the Attorney for the estate and we also sent a letter to a Mr. Wickham he has contacted our office on a number of occasions, although I am not exactly prepared what Mr. Wickham's interest is in the property there seems to be an issue over that but I believe that the Town has notified the necessary parties, so that this proceeding may be conducted. Supervisor Brandt -So, I am going to declare the public hearing open is there someone here that would like to speak to us on it. Come on up so that we can pick you up on the microphone and it will get recorded and into the minutes correctly. Unknown-My lawyer called today and asked me if! would represent this and asked you if you couldn't give us until September 1st because we have a trial date coming up on August 12th which should settle this case. In the meantime we are waiting for a Supreme Court decision and it should be coming within the next thirty days. Supervisor Brandt-For the record could you give us your name? Joyce M. Kilmartin-My name is Joyce M. Kilmartin I am administrator to the estate. Supervisor Brandt-Thank you very much Joyce. Councilman Monahan-What is the trail date, you gave us trail dates, trials for what? Mrs. Kilmartin-To settle the case, because we have a dispute in this. Councilman Monahan-You are talking about the estate itself. Mrs. Kilmartin-Yes. Attorney Dusek-It may be helpful to have the letter from the estate read for the Board, this may offer some, shed some light on this for you if you would like I will read it. This was a letter that was faxed to me today from the Attorneys for the estate Ruberti, Girvin & Ferlazzo, a Miss Elaine M. Pers is representing the estate and the letter is referenced to the Estate of Damian DelSignore house located on West Mountain Road Dear Mr. Dusek: We are writing with regard to the hearing which is scheduled for this evening in the above- referenced matter. We are in agreement that appropriate action must be taken to demolish the building currently located on the property at issue herein. As I am sure you are aware a demolition permit has been issued specifically for that purpose. (just as an aside Dave reports to me that in fact at one point a representative of the Estate did secure a demolition permit during 1992 activity under that permit I guess started a little bit but it certainly has not been completed Mr. Wickham has contested the issuance of that permit but from everything that we can see it appears that it was lawfully issued by Mr. Hatin and the Estate appears to have authority to have requested the permit going on with the letter however) However, as of this date the Estate has not received the funds necessary to pay for the demolition. Unfortunately, the Estate has been involved in litigation regarding the payment of the proceeds of the insurance policy which insured the subject property in the Supreme Court. A motion was argued in that action on May 21, 1993. As of this date, we have not received Judge Brown's decision. However, we anticipate that one of two things will result from that decision: (1) the proceeds of the policy will be ordered to be made immediately payable to the Estate or (2) the proceeds of the policy will be paid to the Surrogate's Court for distribution in accordance with the direction of the Surrogate. A trail is currently scheduled in the Surrogate Court action for August 12, 1993. Therefore, in either case we anticipate that the funds will be made available for payment of the demolition by September 1, 1993. As a result, we believe that good cause exists for extending the time in which the demolition must occur until September 30, 1993. I have further been informed that as of this date there have not been any specific incidents which have occurred on the property which would preclude such an extension in this case. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to the Board's response. Very truly yours, Ruberti, Girvin & Ferlazzo,P.e. By: /s/ Elaine M. Pers Supervisor Brandt-It is my understanding that, that property has been boarded up. Mr. Hatin-It is not boarded but it is secured, the doors are locked and the windows are fastened. Mrs. Kilmartin-There are also signs up No Trespassing, I do not know if that does any good but there is one up there. Councilman Monahan-How about power. Mr. Hatin-The power has been disconnected, that was disconnected the night of the fire. Councilman Monahan-Any gas or anything? Mrs. Kilmartin-No. Mr. Hatin-Water has been disconnected. Supervisor Brandt-There has been no signs of anybody breaking into the property. Mrs. Kilmartin-No Mr. Hatin-Not as of yet. Supervisor Brandt-Does anyone else have input here wish to be heard on this matter? Ok. I am going to close the public hearing and I would make a motion that we do extend it, honor the request being made here seeing that there is no evidence of people trying to break into the property and trying to resolve this matter in a reasonable way. How do we do it? Councilman Monahan-Mike, do you want a clause in there in case people do start breaking in through the windows and stuff that they will have to be boarded up or something, for further protection of the Town? Supervisor Brandt-That makes sense, sure. Councilman Tucker-Are you going to give them until September 30th? Supervisor Brandt-I think that is reasonable. Mr. Hatin-If it is done by then I do not anticipate a problem. RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD FOLLOWING HEARING ON PROPERTY ON DAMIEN 1. DELSIGNORE DESIGNATED PREVIOUSLY AS UNSAFE RESOLUTION NO. 343, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, Mr. David Hatin of the Building and Code Enforcement Department of the Town of Queensbury advised that he investigated and inspected certain property identified as West Mountain Road, Town of Queensbury and bearing tax map number 74-1-21, and WHEREAS, Mr. Hatin previously advised the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury that in his opinion the partially demolished structure on the property presented a hazard and a nuisance to the neighborhood and was generally unsafe to the general public and asked the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury to take action with regard to securing the property or demolishing it if the owner fails to continue to demolish the structure in accordance with the demolition permit that was previously issued, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury in accordance with Resolution Number 301 of 1993 determined that the property owned by the Estate of Damien 1. Delsignore was unsafe and provided in that resolution for notice to be sent to the persons potentially interested in the property consisting of the owners or representatives of the owners and Mr. Wickham, and WHEREAS, by virtue of the notice sent the Town Board also indicated a description of the premises a statement of the particulars in which the premises was deemed unsafe and it also advised that it felt that the building should be demolished within thirty days of receipt of the notice unless good cause was shown by the property owner or other interested persons whereupon the time would be extended, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury in furtherance of the notice sent also indicated that a hearing would be held on June 14th 1993 at 7:00 P.M. and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has conducted that hearing and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury after listening to the representatives of the Estate and also considering a letter sent by Attorneys representing the Estate, Raberti, Girvin and Ferlaggo, P.e. has made a determination concerning the demolition and or securing of the property as follows; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby agrees to extend the time in which the building may be demolished until September 30th 1993 with the proviso that the building demolition shall commence as of September 1st, 1993 and with the further proviso that should any difficulties occur in the property concerning potential break-ins, vandalism, or other problems with the property the Town Board reserves the right to call the matter back before it and make a new determination as to whether a new date should be set for demolition, and be it further RESOLVED, that the applicant may come back before the Board should they have any further difficulties with the dates set. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993 by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES; None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION APPROVING TOWN BOARD MINUTES RESOLUTION NO. 344, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the Town Board Minutes of May 10th, 13th, 17th, 26th and June 31st of 1993. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993 by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: AYES ALL THOSE OPPOSED: NONE ABSENT: NONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN CLERK TO SUBMIT PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FOR KAY KUEBLER, MARILYN MATRICCINO, & MARTIN GALLUP TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 345, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has previously approved a form entitled, "Petition for a Change of Zone" for rezoning matters, and has directed that the same be used for rezoning requests, and WHEREAS, the Town Attorney for the Town of Queensbury has recommended that any and all applications for rezoning must first go to the Planning Department and Planning Board for recommendations regarding the same, and WHEREAS, following such recommendations, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will then review the Zoning Applications and take such other action as it shall deem necessary and proper, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that the following application be submitted to the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury for report and recommendation: KAY KUEBLER, MARILYN MATRICCINO, MARTIN GALLUP - Tax Map No.'s: 108-1-1 & 108-1-2; 32 Meadowbrook Road (Southwest Lower, Quaker & Meadowbrook Roads), Queensbury, New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Executive Director to forward the Rezoning Application to the Warren County Planning Board for review, in accordance with the General Municipal Law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates that it desires to be Lead Agent for the SEQRA review of this project and directs that the Zoning Administrator's Office notify any other involved agencies of the fact that a coordinated SEQRA review with the Town Board as lead agent is proposed and that a lead agent must be, therefore, agreed to by involved agencies in accordance with the Department of Environmental Conservation Rules and Regulations adopted in connection with the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES Mrs. Monahan ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held before vote: Mr. Martin-This is for the property on the South side of Quaker and Meadowbrook it has been in before for a petition for a zone change there was just recently a house demolished on the property that is now vacant, it is on the South side the south western corner. Councilman Monahan-That corner is very wet, that is why it was rejected before, right by those wetlands... Supervisor Brandt-By this resolution we are sending to the Town and County Planning Boards, and also designing yourself as lead agent for Seqra Review. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LEGAL ACTION RESOLUTION NO.: 346, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has reviewed the matter of a certain agreement entered into between the Town of Queensbury and Richard B. Cunningham and Monique e. Cunningham d/b/a P.e. Realty, concerning the sale of certain real property, and WHEREAS, the aforesaid matter has been reviewed with the Town Attorney for the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Attorney to commence an action in Supreme Court setting forth a claim for moneys constituting consideration due and owing under the terms and provisions of the aforesaid agreement, and alleging such other and further causes of action as the Town Attorney may recommend. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held before vote: Attorney Dusek-This deals with a contract the Town of Queensbury entered into with the Cunningham's concerning the sale of property on Quaker Road the contract provided that a building was supposed to be built by a certain time period the Town of Queensbury from the agreements appears to rely upon that building being constructed that therefore would have accrued money in terms of taxes on the property as a result of that building and this is seeking to compel payment of that money that the Town would be entitled to as a result of that agreement. Supervisor Brandt-That agreement was made in what year? Attorney Dusek- 1987 Supervisor Brandt-From your view point this is an asset of the Town and we should be pushing the matter to try and collect. Attorney Dusek-It is my opinion that you should pursue it to see if a recover cannot be had under these circumstances. RESOLUTION RENAMING ACCOUNT RESOLUTION NO.: 347,93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz RESOLVED, that the following account in the 1993 Town Budget, named "Queensbury Economic Development Corporation" Account No.: 1-6989-4400, be renamed to "Warren Washington Regional Economic Development Corporation," and the 1993 General Town Budget is amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Brandt-This is an amendment of the budget, and it is a name change it is the same account, we had previously allocated $25,000 to the QEDC but we have worked with other municipalities in forming a new corporation that will take on the activities that were being done by QEDC and this is in preparation for going into a contract with that new corporation it would properly identify the account so if we choose to enter into that contract and make payment we can do it. Councilman Monahan-QEDC is still in existence, they have money within their own bookkeeping system that would pay all their current bills, right? Attorney Dusek-That is my understanding they have not, as I understand the Town budgeted a certain amount of money for QEDC there has been no contract entered into or application made for that money so at this point because that money still rests within your accounts you are free to use it as you would choose. I do not have personal knowledge of QEDC finances...Councilman Goetz-They understand that they will not be getting $25,000. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE COMMONWEALTH ELECTRICAL INSPECTION SERVICE, INC., AS AN ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR RESOLUTION NO.: 348, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury previously adopted Local Law No.4, 87 entitled, the "Electrical Law of the Town of Queensbury," and further amended the same at the time the Code of the Town of Queensbury was adopted (Chapter 80 - Electrical Standards), and WHEREAS, Chapter 80 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury sets forth certain criteria for businesses and/or individuals to perform electrical inspections in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined that Commonwealth Electrical Inspection Service, Inc., meets the criteria to perform electrical inspections for the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Commonwealth Electrical Inspection Service, Inc., is hereby authorized to make electrical inspections within the Town of Queensbury, subject to compliance with the standards set forth in Chapter 80 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held before vote: Mr. David Hatin-Commonwealth is fairly new to this area, I did some reference checking on their experience in the area and everybody I talked to in Warren County, Wilton and Washington County, they are fairly new to the area so there really isn't any track record....noted Walt Williams did work for Middle Dept. and I had a good working relationship with Walt...Mr. Peter Dudley- presented a copy of the addendum to the insurance...Councilman Monahan-requested that the insurance be checked to see if the insurance company is licensed in the State of New York... RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE, EXECUTION AND FILING OF CORRECTION DEED RESOLUTION NO. 349,93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, by a previous resolution adopted during January ofl993, authorized the acceptance of the dedication of Ferris Drive and Hampton Court, in the Queensbury Forest Subdivision, Phase III, and WHEREAS, in connection with the aforesaid dedication, a deed was offered to the Town of Queensbury and accepted by the Town of Queensbury, which deed provided for the conveyance of the aforesaid roads to the Town of Queensbury and which deed also contained an erroneous reference to a Lot #33 as being included in the conveyance, and WHEREAS, a Correction Deed has been offered by the developer's attorney deleting the erroneous reference to Lot #33, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, on behalf of the Town of Queensbury, approves and accepts the Correction Deed, which deed deletes the reference to the Lot #33, but still provides for the conveyance of the appropriate roads to the Town of Queensbury, and hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute and place the seal on any documents that may be necessary to effectuate the filing of the Correction Deed. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held before vote: Attorney Dusek-There was a lot 33 description referred to in the deed, noted this was in error and should not have been referenced... DISCUSSIONS 1. Fee Schedule-Building Permits-Mr. Hatin explained the proposed fee schedule.. Under New Residential Present Fee includes modulars Proposed Fee does not include modulars Under BusinessIMercantile Present fee Maximum $3,000.00 Proposed Fee Maximum $6,000 or No Maximum Under Manufactured Housing Present Fee Less $25.00 for pre-existing septic system Proposed Fee Or Modular Delete septic Under Additions: Residential Proposed fee Same as New Construction Minimum m $75.00 and Under Commercial Proposed Fee Same as New Construction Minimum $100.00 Under Alterations: Residential Proposed Fee Minimum Charge $35.00 Commercial Proposed Fee Minimum Charge $50.00 Under Decks/Porches Proposed Fee Minimum charge $25.00 Under Tool/Storage Sheds Proposed Fee $20.00 per shed... this is not an increase in the fee schedule it is taking some permit categories and setting minimums ... Supervisor Brandt-Noted he would like to get out of inspecting storage sheds also Decks and Porches...Mr. Hatin-permits make sure things are built safely they also make sure they comply with zoning... Supervisor Brandt -we do not have to raise fees for that ...what if we as the board take you out of that and just say, I would like to suggest it, it is one little thing that we can simplify ... just check the plot plan...Councilman Tucker-Noted that he wanted it verified that the plot plan is checked...Mr. Hatin-I feel uncomfortable if you sent one of us out there for an inspection we found something that is wrong structurally and you kind of tied our hands and said we are not going to get involved with in it, if we walked away from an unsafe condition I think you put us in a potentially liable situation especially if they know that we are there, and we knew the problem was there I would rather not inspect them then go out there and find a problem and then have to worry about the towns liability after. Supervisor Brandt-Even if it is not acceptable standards people do not live in it if it falls down, I do not think it is a place for government to be involved, set backs I agree...Councilman Tucker-I would like to get it verified, we have a building code and zoning and suppose we ignore this and somebody does get hurt, what is our liability? Attorney Dusek-The only issue is really whether the NY State Building Code regulates these if it is regulated under N.Y. State Building Code then you have got to enforce it. Mr. Hatin-I believe they are exempted under N.Y. State Building Code. Attorney Dusek-Then you would not have to enforce it then. Mr. Hatin-I am saying, it is the inspectors that are put in a difficult situation if they go out and find something that is unsafe and now I have to take action. Attorney Dusek -spoke on the unsafe building action...ifthe concern is about zoning and set backs and you are also concerned about spending money on inspection fees when they are not necessary if you had somebody submit a plot plan and they showed where their lines were and where the building was going to be located that puts that property owner on notice of what the distance is that he has to be from the property line if there is ever a report to the Town you just go back and check your records and you will be able to enforce your zoning with no problem, without ever having made a site inspection of those that are not necessary. Mr. Hatin-We will have to change the local law to reflect that... Supervisor Brandt-Requested that the Town Attorney take that on when he gets back from vacation. Councilman Monahan-Questioned if you would pay twice if you did an addition and alteration...Mr. Hatin-yes...unless we put additional language in here that says if you are paying the minimum on one you do not pay the minimum on the other...this is something that could be addressed. Councilman Monahan-Manufactured housing-if they put in a new septic do they have to pay... Mr. Hatin-no That is included...Attorney Dusek-This will have to be placed in the format of a local law to be adopted... Supervisor Brandt -when we are doing that lets get into a discussion of storage sheds and see if we can straighten that out at the same time.... Ltr.- Requesting sign at Rolling Ridge Mrs. Charlotte Potvin presented the Town Board with a proposal to place a sign at Rolling Ridge... will go before the Planning Board for an off premise sign permit, the Planning Board has requested approval from the Town Board to use your property...Mr. Naylor has given me permission as far as the Highway is concerned as long as we conform with the zones and code... RESOLUTION REGARDING PLACEMENT OF SIGN WINCOMA DRIVE/RIDGE ROAD RESOLUTION NO. 350, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury after reviewing a proposal to place a sign adjacent to Wincoma Drive and Ridge Road in the Town of Queensbury hereby determines that it would have no objection to the placement of such a sign but also hereby makes no representation that the Town of Queensbury in fact owns the property and notes that if the Town of Queensbury does have an interest or any rights in that property that at such time as the Town needs that property it may indicate this to the parties placing the sign on that property and demand that it be taken down. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993 by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano DISCUSSION LANDFILL Supervisor Brandt-We have had dialogue with DEC and on the Landfill and we are trying to form a contract so we can start taking C&D waste and there are people wanting to bring stuff in and we want to accommodate them. Attorney Dusek-Reviewed the C&D agreements... RESOLUTION REGARDING REVISIONS TO C&D AGREEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 351,93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has reviewed a proposed agreement to be used by the Town of Queensbury when accepting C&D for disposal at its landfill, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury after review of the aforesaid agreement has made some suggested revisions to the same NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Attorney is hereby authorized to make the revisions to the agreement requested by the Board which appear in paragraph 2B to indicate or his designee, in paragraph 2C to provide that payment be made in advance, in paragraph 4 to indicate that the hours of delivery of C&D shall be during the normal business hours of the landfill, to add a paragraph indicating that if a load is rejected that verification must be obtained from the hauler thereof that it is either retumed to its source or disposed of at another landfill with the Town Attorney being given the flexibility to come up with language not perhaps exactly in the nature of what was just specified but such language in the contract to carry out the general intent of the Board in this regard and be it further RESOLVED, that upon completion of the agreement the Town Supervisor and the Town Attorney is authorized to send copies of the agreement to DEC and to any other interested parties that may desire to disposal of C&D at the landfill and be it further RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is authorized to execute the agreements on behalf of the Town once they have been executed by any interested party providing that the form of the agreement remains as approved by this Board this evening, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Town Attorney and or the Town Supervisor shall provide the Board with at each Board Meeting with the names and addresses of any of the parties who entered into agreements with the Town concerning C&D disposal at the Landfill. Duly adopted this 14th day of June 1993 by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Attorney Dusek-The Planning Board has received the application by Zaremba and as part of the site plan review, it is necessary for them to do a SEQRA review and because this Board is potentially an involved agency and the SEQRA review process they have asked that the Board authorize the Town Supervisor to execute a consent to designate the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as Lead Agent for the project. Supervisor Brandt-In our discussions we said that when you got into site plan review there would be a lot of other things to examine and we had in our discussions talked about the Planning Board taking that on. I personally think it is appropriate for them to do it and I would offer it as a motion. RESOLUTION REGARDING LEAD AGENT FOR SEQRA FOR ZAREMBA RESOLUTION NO. 352, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz Authorizing the Town Supervisor to sign a consent form indicating that the Town Board consent that the Planning Board is the lead Agent at this point for the Zaremba Rezoning Request. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Supervisor Brandt-Received a petition from residents on Pasco Avenue requesting water service...! have asked the Town Attorney to prepare the paper work on the extension of the water district... OPEN FORUM Mrs. Debbie Davidson-Resident of Pickle Hill Road-re: problems on the Harris Property-asked for an update. .. Mr. James Martin-We have seen the Harris Property we have had Keith Harris in to talk with Dave and I we have a handle on now what are the increases in his business since the court proceeding, I am now reviewing the court documents, Dave and Paul have a meeting scheduled for Wednesday to see what can be done in light of the increases that we have found...! am also actively working with Mr. Harris to find him a new site for his business out of that site. Mrs. Debbie Davidson-Questioned the status on the pigs. Mr. Martin-As far as I know the pigs are in the place that they are supposed to be according to the court order. Mrs. Davidson-He had several obligations to full fill in the resolution that allowed them and I am not sure that they have all been.. Mr. Martin-You mean like construction of a bam or pen? Mrs. Davidson-Yes, and I do not think the location is exactly where it is supposed to be. Mr. Martin-He had an area not an exact location...we have been trying through Cooperative Extension to see what was necessary for proper housing of pigs. We will continue to work on this the best we can. Mr. Louis Stone-Appearing on behalf of the Lake George Association...Asked for a show of support for a proposal that the LGA is planning to send to the Governor in the near future. We have received support from the Village of Lake George, and the Town of Lake George. We are saying that Lake George is currently very well regulated, supervised, lawed and we think it should be recognized as a distinct ECO System within the Adirondack Park. We believe this proposal that I put before you will make this evident to the Governor...Hopefully every town and village around the lake will support this...noted would like to present this to the Governor by July 1st. Supervisor Brandt-Just for the record, I called Mr. Stone about this and one reservation I had was the clause that says all parties including government agencies should comply with the laws and regulations governing the Lake George Water Shed and my reservation is that the storm water regulations which I do not purport to understand or be familiar with, but the scare me because our Town Road probably do not comply with them and I do not want to get into a position where we are forced into real high costs to try and get into compliance with something that you may not even be able to get into compliance with. I do not know the whole ramifications of that, but that was my concern at looking at this whole thing. Mr. Adamson-Questioned if there would be public input on this after they are given a chance to read it? Supervisor Brandt-I would like public input. Mr. Salvadore-Is this the legislation that is proposing 200 acre zoning? Mr. Stone-I cannot tell you that, we started on the one that came out in the fall...noted he would give to both reporters.... Councilman Monahan-Suggested that copies be made available in the Supervisor's Office.. Mr. John Salvadore-In regard to the title Warren, Washington Economic Development Corp. why was the word County left off? Attorney Dusek-I do not know, whoever created the organization picked the title. Supervisor Brandt-I was in on the session and I do not think that much thought was given to it... Mr. Salvadore-The problem with this type of contract is that you are not allowed to pay for anything you do not get, and you don't get in advance. Read from the Comptroller report... Mr. Martin-You are stating constitution in light of no public benefit but there is a perceived and derived public benefit from the creation of jobs and all that, this has been tested time and time again... Supervisor Brandt-Requested that Mr. Salvadore make available the section of the laws that he noted..and a copy of the Audit report.... Mr. Salvadore-Requested that the 350,000 to QEDC be brought back to the Town from QEDC...the Lake George Park Commission Wastewater Agreement it comes and goes, asked what the status was. Supervisor Brandt-We basically told the Lake George Park Commission that we are not going to enforce their regulations that they are going to have to do it themselves, that was in discussion form...they informed us that they would collect fees for that and that is their law and their right. Mr. Salvadore-Questioned if an agreement would have to be changed? Supervisor Brandt-The Town Board will have to discuss that matter... Mr. Salvadore-The Town Board entered into that agreement without the benefit of a SEQRA review, contrary to the insistence of a lot of us, that, that was a requirement, because the regulations themselves haven't even been performed with a SEQRA review, they neg dec'd them. Questioned is a SEQRA review will be done if you change it? Attorney Dusek-I understand that there is a lawsuit pending on the regulations, you have to understand the town's standpoint at the time all of this unfolded and that is we pursued that what we were entering into was an agreement that was administrative in nature which would not require a SEQRA review at the time, having pursued that the necessary SEQRA reviews and the proper SEQRA actions were taken at the level by the LGPC. There is a law suit that is in contention the LGPC takes the position that they did everything right and there is nothing to worry about. We have had recently some meeting with the LGPC that the indication is that the agreement will be revised, if the agreement is to take away from what the Town is going to do I do not know that a SEQRA review is necessary, I will give that a careful review once I get an actual contract. In my opinion it is not necessary for a public hearing to be held although the Town Board if they wanted to hold an informational hearing could...it is very important that one thing should be said, I was with the last Town Board when they entered into the agreement they did so at that time with the best intent of hoping to help their citizens to avoid double permitting processes, extra fees and things of that nature, that was the intent of the Town Board, they saw these regulations as valid and binding... Mr. Salvadore-the $40.00 inspection fee is a smoke screen, the important thing is that most of us in No. Qsby. will be issued interim operating permits, they are valid for three years and the Park Commission could force us into holding tanks after that period or their sewer... Supervisor Brandt-We had a meeting with the Lake George Park Commission, DEC, LGA, and our Building and Planning Dept., County DPW and the Engineers that work for the County DPW ...the consensus of that meeting was that we would come back to the Town Board and propose a committee to address that whole issue, and the participants of this meeting decided to come back and recommend to the Town Board, that the Town Board create a group to address and make recommendations on what to do on that sewering and that group would be composed of representatives and the LGA has to come back to us. If there are homeowners groups of Assembly Pt. and Cleverdale and Rockhurst or another group that could be of interest, they would have an official delegate and an alternate and DEC would be represented the Park Commission would attend and the Engineers would attend and make available all of the studies and all the information, the Pickle Hill Group is suggested as one of the participants as well as the Queensbury Environmental Committee... Councilman Monahan-Recommended the Lake George Committee on Environmental Issues... Mr. Martin-Also was mentioned the Tax Payers Association... Supervisor Brandt-What we are trying to do is ask these people to tell us what to do...by the end of summer come back with a report and tell us what they want to do, ship the sewage to the city, send it to outer space, send it to Lake George Village, treat it in basin at DunlIams Bay, treat it at Pickle Hill or don't do anything. All of those things are going to be discussed. Mr. Salvadore-The Federal EPA hired a firm to do an environmental impact statement on this subject...it was issued in 1983...there are recommendations in that for North Queensbury. Supervisor Brandt-Bring them forth. This will a chance for everybody to come to a conclusion of what to do with it, then this Board will have to act on what is brought to it. Clough Harbor will give us the input that is necessary to make the technological decision that have to be made there. Mr. Adamson-I would prefer the Park Commission to do the inspections. Mrs. Lillian Adamson-Assembly Point-Spoke to the Town Board regarding assessments...The assessments are horrible, unequal, uneven...! want the complete report on the grievance proceedings... Discussion was held regarding extra data input for the assessment review board... Mrs. Adamson-Noted that Hill Pierce did not enter properties to assess them... Supervisor Brandt-Noted that if she could document that it is my understanding that this Board entered into an agreement with Hill Pierce that they would enter into property and if they did not that has got to be a violation of the contract... Mr. Salvadore-They came to our property twice. Attorney Dusek -Noted the contract could be checked.. Mrs. Adamson-I want to report that people were not able to get meetings with the Assessor between March and April the time filled up, I had properties that I wanted to talk to the girls about they did not have time I could not get appointments. Noted that the grievance procedure was not easy...! think appointment times need to be set up for those people who are unable to sit here as I did...! represented 28 people some of those people were not able to get appeals in, in the in between period, they are thus unfairly assessed because those people that came in and were able to see somebody and were able to get some redress, they got some reductions...ifthey are going to start making reductions in neighborhoods let them start making reductions for other people too... Councilman Goetz-I was talking to someone on the Assessment Review Board and this person said that Helen acknowledges that maybe neighborhoods need to be re-looked at, this is a possibility. Councilman Tucker-Noted that it was the same way all over the town, in Ward 4 the cases were the same.... Corrine Tarana-Planning Board Member-In April one of our members submitted a letter, I believe, I have never read the letter, in regard to subdivision regs on the satellite dishes, Roger Ruel, when it came to a vote at the Planning Board it was told by Paul, as a conduit of information from the Town Board that he should not vote because he had expressed whatever his opinion was about it. I would like a clarification, we were asked frequently, we get letters from Jim to comment on these kinds of things, nobody is going to comment if we are told then we cannot vote. I will tell you right now Roger has a letter regarding the Sign Ordinance, ...has he submitted it? Mr. Martin-Yes. And he clearly stated this time as Roger Rule citizen not Planning Board Member. Mrs. Tarana-I do not see the difference, I also have several comments of my own about the sign ordinance but I am sure not going to tell you what they are. Councilman Monahan-I think we are asking for the comments as a result of the work on the Planning Board... Mrs. Tarana- The letters do not come to private citizens, they come to us as Planning Board Members. Councilman Monahan-I am looking for your comments because you have seen the problems as they come trough the Board, I do not see frankly when you tell us the problems or the lack of problems, where that should disqualify you and I am not relating to a specific situation I am saying this in general should not disqualify you from voting on something. Mrs. Tarana-Apparently the disqualification came from the Town Board... Councilman Monahan-We never disqualify. Councilman Goetz-I remember it being discussed. Attorney Dusek-My recollection is that there was a letter sent by Mr. Ruel to the Town Board and at the time the Town Board considered it at a meeting, I cannot remember who made the comment, somebody on the Town Board felt that this seemed to be, he was reacting as a private citizen with his own views and there was some question as to whether he was representing the views of the Planning Board and the recollection was and I think the reason was at that time we have to place it in chronological sequence in terms of what is happening in the community and I think there was a concern on the part of the Town Board that somebody has personal preferences that they have as a private citizen if they have lost their objectivity they certainly should not vote. On the other hand, I can see what Corrine is getting at and before I go to what Corrine is saying at the time the matter went back to the ZBA it just so happen I was there that night and I remember trying to convey what I thought was the sentiment of the Town Board and as inartfully as I did I guess, but, the question came up on that issue and my recollection of that was for some reason the way it was all coming out it was felt that maybe this was kind of felt that this was Mr. Ruel's private comments as opposed to a Board Member. I think part of it lays in this distinction and I think this is what you are driving at Corrine, first of all there is the Planning Board itself which there is only one way a Planning Board can give you a recommendation or give you any kind of an opinion and that is by Board resolution from the individual members, it really doesn't mean anything from the Board you have to have a Board action in a democratic process, the Board votes and if four of the members agree and three of them don't well, that is the Board action. Then the other possibility is and I think that is what you are getting at is that it is possible I suppose Board Members as Board Members could be individually solicited for their opinions in their capacity, just like the Supervisor maybe solicited or the Councilpersons or the Attorney or the Planner from the view point of government and working within the government sector. Then you have got the last segment which is when a person who is a Board Member is impacted because of personnel affairs in which case then he has to be very careful because now maybe he is expressing something that is strictly a personnel opinion. It seems to be that as long as when communications are running from one Board to another the Boards understand what it is that is happening I do not think there is any problem. In otherwords, if it is a Board action then it should be a Board resolution and then this Board would know that. If it is a individual Planning Board Member response but in the capacity as a Planning Board Member an Official of the Town of Queensbury I do not see any problem with that either. In those rare instances when it is just reacting as a Citizen because of a special interest, because maybe the project is right next to you or something then I think that has to be noted and put as part of the record and I think that those are the instances and the Board can correct me if I am wrong, but it is when those instances where you might have lost your objectivity that I think everybody is concerned they do not want anybody, they want that noted and they would prefer that they do not vote when they have lost the objectivity and have a personal interest at stake. Mrs. Tarana-As a Planning Board Member you do look at things within the parameters of the rules and regulations in the Zoning Ordinance and all that sort of thing, that is how we are supposed to react. I think everybody tries to do that. My feeling is like just now we were asked to comment on the sign ordinance as a private citizen I do not have too much to say about the sign ordinance I am not a business person I do not have a sign but there are some problems that I have with the sign ordinance as Planning Board Member, but if I were to write you a letter and submit it how would you know if I am submitting that based on my personal feelings or my feelings as a Planning Board Member? Supervisor Brandt-I do not care. Mr. Martin-Correct me if I am wrong, to be an Ethical violation I could see if a member of the Planning Board Member was a sign contractor or somebody in business with a sign that had, but beyond that if you are a member of the community who wants to take a position even if it is a personal opinion what difference does it make, there is no financial gain there. Supervisor Brandt-Where there is financial or where a project impacts your particular neighborhood that's a different matter that is the only... Mrs. Tarana-Everybody understands that, I do not think that is a problem. Supervisor Brandt-I think that is the only problem I have ever envisioned the rest I do not care if it is you as a Planning Board Member or you as an individual it does not make a bit of difference to me, in fact I think we are lucky to get that kind of input either way or both ways, that means you are talking to someone who has a lot of experience and got a different view point or a better view point or may look at something differently that we do. Mr. Martin-Noted that Roger is drawing on his experience from another community. Mr. Tucker-Can't this be done in the process as it goes through the Planning Board, Roger Ruel doesn't like this, Roger Ruel makes it a part of the official record that he doesn't think it is right.. Mrs. Tarana- That comes with the process, yes, but this is sort of an informal thing when something new comes up I always thought that Jim just wanted our input on it on an unofficial basis. Supervisor Brandt - I agree I think we want to encourage that sort of input if is was chilled by something that occurred I think it was a mistake and probably a misreading of what our intent. Our intent is purely that if you are impacted personally by a project that you stay out of commenting on it or stay out of voting on it it gets down to the Attorney Generals Opinion we are going to try and understand that and go by it, other than that I do not believe that this Board wants to chill your speech at all. Mr. Tucker-The only thing is Mr. Brandt every word that you utter people take it as Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury, and Mr. Ruel sitting on the Planning Board and he writes a letter to this Board condenming something that is happening I look at it as Mr. Ruel on the Planning Board, not Mr. Ruel as an individual. Councilman Monahan-I do not think he was condenming it Pliney as much as he was pointing out problems that had occurred because of his previous experience, I do not think that influences his vote as a Planning Board Member. Mr. Tucker-When I read the letter I had the feeling that this is the way he felt on the issue and it should have been a part of the official record. Councilman Goetz-How about this idea, that all Board Members, ZBA or Planning Board pool their suggestions and submit them to the Town Board as a idea from the whole Planning Board? Mr. Martin-Like Paul was saying, by resolution. Supervisor Brandt-That is an official act. Mrs. Tarana- That is an official Board acting. Councilman Monahan-I want to hear all opinions pro and con. Supervisor Brandt-I do not think people give up their right to free speech because they are on our Planning or Zoning Board. Attorney Dusek-I think if! understood what Corrine's concerns was is not so much I do not think she is saying that she gives up her right of free speech, I think she recognizes that you always have a right to speak out what her concern is though if she speaks out and then the Board says now that you have spoken out you do not get to vote on when it later comes out. Mrs. Tarana- That is exactly what happened. Supervisor Brandt-..impact, financial impact Mrs. Tarana-there was not any, Mike, as far as I know there wasn't any. Councilman Goetz-In retrospect that probably, he should not have been told that he couldn't vote, that is what is sounds like to me. Attorney Dusek - I remember the Board had some concern about his, if I recall correctly his personal ties to the situation.. Councilman Tucker-In otherwords what you are saying Paul, is what Mr. Brewer done with Hudson Pointe he should have been allowed to vote on it. Mrs. Tarana-No, that is not at all... Councilman Tucker-Somebody said if you do not have financial interest in what is happening you have a right to speak your personal feelings. Supervisor Brandt-The point is if the project impacts you financially it does not mean that you are part of the project it means that the project may impact your home, your neighborhood then you do not vote, I think that is what the Attorney General suggested or ruled. Councilman Goetz-Are we going to give them some guidance to go by because it seems to be a problem. Supervisor Brandt-Read the Attorney General's letter, good luck. Mrs. Tarana-I will tell you what the Planning Board said and maybe Jim heard it, they said fine, we will not comment anymore. I know I am not going to. Supervisor Brandt-I want their comments, speaking for myself. Councilman Monahan-Jim, maybe this will be helpful, we get the comments from the Planning Board we give them a list pro or con what ever anybody says but with no names attached or anything like that, this is a compilation of the comments that were made.... Councilman Goetz-What is wrong with that? Mrs. Tarana-Nothing except the comments are not coming from the Planning Board per se Councilman Monahan-That does not mean that is a Planning Board official stand but we are just saying, various members of the Planning Board made these various comments. Mr. Martin-I do not understand, if he wants, like Ted Tumer was here the other night for the zoning ordinance, when it comes about for an official, the Board is going to request their recommendations as a Board approve, if somebody takes a stand in the way of a personal letter and then wants the vote as a Board action I do not see where there is a conflict there. Councilman Monahan-I will take myself as an example, I might vote because it is within the rules and regulations one way even though personally I felt some different way. Mr. Martin-That may happen too. Councilman Monahan-How you feel personally doesn't always mean how you are going to vote, because you are going to vote within the rules and regulations. When you are trying to get something jelled I think everybody should speak from their gut exactly what they what they think they should do or not do. Mrs. Tarana- I think the Planning Board just needs some assurance that if they are asked to comment on an issue and they comment that they are not then going to be told well, you have already commented on this you have a pre-conceived idea about it you can't vote. Mr. Martin-The formulation of that pre-conceived idea what difference would that make if that is reflected in a letter or a vote? Councilman Monahan-It doesn't even mean that, that is the way the regulations is going to be in the long run anyway by the time it goes through everybodys hands. Attorney Dusek-There is another important thing here you cannot lose site of and that is the Planning Board and Members of the Planning Board unless there is a specific law that says that they can't vote or an opinion that says they shouldn't vote by either the Town Attorney or perhaps a legal opinion of some other source or a case law that would point to it. I do not think any other Board can tell you that you can't vote anyway because you are an independent board and you do have a right to vote on the topic. In the Rule case I really think that, that was a situation where for some reason they felt there was more of a nexus and I remember the Town Board resolution and I think that is what stirred the Planning Board because I saw the comment in the resolution or something if I remember right. It was in the minutes or something and I think that is what got it going. I tried to explain what I thought was the Board's intent, I do not think I commented legally as to as far as whether Mr. Rule would or couldn't... Mrs. Tarana-I think you said it was just a recommendation that he could do as he wanted to do. At that point obviously he was not going to vote. Attorney Dusek-I think what we could do is as the issues comes up I think the Board Members, I would be happy to talk to them myself and give them some legal parameters maybe do other the Attorney Generals decision that Mike has referred to and then lets just take it as it goes and maybe everybody could settle into something they feel comfortable with because I do not think the intent was to stifle comments from the Board Members it is unfortunate if that occurred. Councilman Goetz-To me one of the duties of both the Planning Board and the Zoning Board either as a Board or individual members is to communicate with the Town Board because we pass a lot of these rules and regulations you guys do the actual implementation work with it all the while. If we do not get feed back from you we are just operating here in a vacuum as far as I am concerned, something that may look good on paper when you go to practically use it may stink. Mr. Charles Adamson-re: Committee for Lake George-Septic Problems-Noted that he would like to see more than the LGA as a source for those appointed to the committee. Supervisor Brandt-Noted that representatives from LGA had challenged DEC, etc. suggested looking at in- basin surface discharge.. Mr. Salvadore-discussed the Lake George Park Commission agreement -noted no discussion when the resolution was passed...questioned if the resolution was passed legally...questioned if the Park Commission has legal authority to come on our land and inspect our systems... Attorney Dusek-They feel they have their own authority... Mr. Salvadore-re: Landfill contract, questioned if that was subject to environmental review... Supervisor Brandt-We are under a consent order... Mr. Salvadore-Noted he gave the Town a letter regarding Marina Inspections in North Queensbury...had questions... Mr. David Hatin-I had this discussion two years in a row, this is the third year I think. They had replaced a pipe that went through the wetlands up to their quote, unquote, non-conforming septic system at that time I challenged the validity of going out and replacing that pipe without a septic permit and variance required because of that septic permit, I was told that I had no authority because it was a minor repair even though the pipe was 500'- 700' long. The inspection that was done at the time was just to check out the state of affairs of the septic system there, but as long as they have a working non conforming system and it not showing signs of failure, the Park Commission carried the ball on that one because they were going around and make the marine replacements, John said he was forced to put one in they have a system that is non conforming they are the only ones that haven't touched their according to John everybody else has holding tanks...there is nothing we can do to force them to put holding tanks in until the septic system fails. Mr. Salvadore-I have asked Frank Dagles what the results of the test were.. (test taken by Daniel Olson) noted that the Health Office recommended holding tanks at the Harris Bay Yacht Club and that that line be discontinued to the pit...Report from Dr. Evans dated 5-10-1989. Spoke to the Town Board regarding the upcoming Triatholon noted his concern of the misuse of taxpayers money for private gain, that is what is going on ... also spoke on the Balloon festival, questioned if the promoter should pay for the extra costs such as police protection, noted he will carry this issue to the County level. Mrs. Barbara Bennett-Questioned if the Water Plant expansion had been passed? Supervisor Brandt-Reviewed the status of the expansion...passed a resolution stating the size of the plant the board is interested in.. . and asking for a request for proposal to go to bid for engineering on all of it... Mrs. Bennett-Requested that important issues be handled at Monday night meetings... Unknown-Spoke on the 25,000 for the IDA? Supervisor Brandt-It is an economic development company that was organized between Warren and Washington County... RESOLUTION TO RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 535, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION, SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby rescinds the previous resolution authorizing the Supervisor to sign a contract with the Warren Washington Regional Local Development Corporation. Duly adopted this 14th day of June 1993 by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES; None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Brandt-We did pass such a thing and what you are saying is that we rescind that and re-examine all of it. Attorney Dusek-Yes. Councilman Tucker-Why are we doing this? Attorney Dusek-To give us time to clean it up and take a look at some of the criticisms, there is no sense going into it without studying the issue. Councilman Goetz-Why do you have to rescind it, until we get your final opinion. Attorney Dusek-Because I would like it on the record before Warren, Washington County takes action on it. Attorney Dusek -You can always re-do it later, there are a couple of suggested changes. Councilman Goetz-Requested copy of the resolution for a QEDC Meeting...Councilman Monahan-I think once Sue and Mike have these copies to take with them there should be some notations, it does not have to be part of the resolution as to why these are being questioned because they may have some opinion on it and their attorneys may have some opinion on this. I think you should have some concrete notes that you can go to them, as to why it is being temporarily rescinded. Councilman Tucker-Number one we have been threatened with a law suit. Councilman Monahan-That is not a reason. If you are going to retract everything because you are threatened with a law suit the questions have been brought up the concerns need to be you guys need to know that so you can discuss it with these boards when you go to them. Councilman Goetz-The goals need, they are requesting that that goals are more definitive ..Attorney Dusek-also they are requesting that the payment not be just one lump sum payment, spread out over the .... some sort of billing structure put in place... Supervisor Brandt-This is a motion to rescind, that authorization, that authorization so far has not been signed...(vote taken) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 354, 1993 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss personnel matters. Duly adopted this 14th day of June, 1993 by the following vote: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR: AYES ALL THOSE OPPOSED: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Caimano On motion the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk-Queensbury