2011-09-12 MTG#25
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 1
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING MTG#25
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 RES#273-287
7:00 P.M. B.H. 26-27
L.L. #5
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC
COUNCILMAN ANTHONY METIVIER
COUNCILMAN RONALD MONTESI
COUNCILMAN JOHN STROUGH
COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER
TOWN ATTORNEY
ROBERT HAFNER
TOWN OFFICALS
DIRECTOR OF WASTEWATER, MIKE SHAW
DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, RYAN LASHWAY
PRESS
LOOK TV, POST STAR
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN METIVIER
SUPERVISOR STEC-Opened meeting.
1.0 RESOLUTION ENTERING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH
RESOLUTION NO. 273, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns and enters into
the Queensbury Board of Health.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
Noes: None
Absent:None
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON SEWAGE DISPOSAL
VARIANCE APPLICATION OF MARION DEMARCO
RESOLUTION NO.: BOH 26, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 2
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board serves as the Town’s Local Board of Health and is
authorized by Town Code Chapter 136 to issues variances from the Town’s On-Site Sewage Disposal
Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, Marion DeMarco has applied to the Local Board of Health for a variance from Chapter
§
136, 136-11, which requires applicants to obtain a variance for holding tanks, as the applicant wishes to
install a 5,568 gallon replacement holding tank system and Ms. DeMarco also has applied for additional
variances from Chapter 136 to allow placement of such system 5’ from the west property line in lieu of the
required 10’ setback, and 45’ from the northwest shoreline in lieu of the required 50’ setback, on property
located at 43 Rockhurst Road in the Town of Queensbury,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury Local Board of Health will hold a public hearing on
th
September 26, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, to
consider Marion DeMarco’s sewage disposal variance application concerning property located at 43
Rockhurst Road in the Town of Queensbury and bearing Tax Map No.: 227.13-2-22 and at that time all
interested persons will be heard, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to
publish the Notice of Public Hearing presented at this meeting and send a copy of the Notice to neighbors
located within 500 feet of the property as required by law.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION ADJOURNING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH
RESOLUTION NO. BOH 27, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns and enters into the Town
Board of the Town of Queensbury.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi
NOES: None
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 3
ABSENT:None
TOWN BOARD MEETING
2.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS
PUBLIC HEARING – PARKS & RECREATION DESIGNATION AS SPORTS CENTER IN ACCORDANCE
WITH TOWN CODE CHAPTER 160 “TRANSIENT MERCHANT”
PUBLICATION DATE: August 25, 2011
SUPERVISOR STEC-In our Town Code there is a provision to classify a property. There is a
process to do so in being designated a Sports Center requires a public hearing. What our Parks
and Recreation Department has identified that they would need to make such application
before the Town Board, which is what they have done to be designated at their various parks
and recreation locations that the Town operates in the Town to be designated as Sports Center.
This is what they are requesting us to do tonight with that said; I will open the public hearing. If
there are any members of the public that would like to comment on this public hearing I would
just ask that you raise your hand I will call on people one at a time. These microphones not only
amplify, but they record for the purpose of the record so we ask that you also state your name
and address is there anyone that would like to comment on this public hearing?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
PLINEY TUCKER, 41 DIVISION ROAD, QUEENSBURY-Maybe you don’t know the answer, but
when this is established is it going to be put out to bid?
SUPERVISOR STEC-I am not sure I am following you. This is just to qualify them for an exception
under the Transient Merchant Law by classifying the Town of Queensbury’s Recreation Facilities
as Sport Centers so there is no bid process I am not sure I understand your question.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-A big part of this is that if they want to have a food concession there in
order to have a food concession you have to have a Sports Center we need to change the
qualification. So your next question is if we do allow people in to do a concession a food
concession will it go to bid.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Whatever our rules require.
MR. TUCKER-If you go to bid that would eliminate all the problems.
SUPERVISOR STEC-I hope so.
MR. TUCKER-Thank you.
SUPERVISOR STEC-You are welcome. Is there anyone else that would like to address the board
on this public hearing tonight, seeing none I will close this public hearing and entertain a
motion?
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
RESOLUTION APPROVING TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PARKS AND
RECREATION’S REQUEST FOR QUEENSBURY TOWN PARKS TO BE
DESIGNATED AS SPORTS CENTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE CHAPTER 160 ENTITLED, “TRANSIENT
MERCHANTS, TRANSIENT MERCHANT MARKETS,
PEDDLERS/SOLICITORS”
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 4
RESOLUTION NO.: 274, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Parks and Recreation Commission (Commission)
submitted a request to the Queensbury Town Board for each Queensbury Town Park to be
designated as a Sports Center in accordance with §160-6.1(A) of Queensbury Town Code Chapter
160 entitled, “Transient Merchants, Transient Merchant Markets, Peddlers/Solicitors,” and
WHEREAS, given the relationship between the Town and its Commission, the Town does
not require a formal application and will treat the letter as the application, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board scheduled a public hearing concerning this application which public
th
hearing was duly held on Monday, September 12, 2011, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered factors concerning the application such as the
magnitude of planned events, anticipated attendance, special services which may be required, the maximum
capacity of the forum, parking, sanitary facilities, access for persons with disabilities, security and other
relevant factors, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board believes the designation will have no significant impact on the
historical use of the parks but will allow the Commission to more freely enter into contracts for sales of food
and merchandise which will benefit the public and the Town, and
WHEREAS, the Town recognizes that the Commission will ensure that all such contracts will
include sufficient protection for the public and the Town in terms of insurance and indemnification
agreements,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board, after considering the Town of Queensbury Parks
and Recreation Commission’s request for each Queensbury Town Park to be designated as a Sports
Center substantially in the form presented at this meeting, the factors listed in the preambles of this
Resolution and the requirements set forth in Queensbury Town Code §160-6.1(A), hereby finds that the
Town Parks’ requested designation:
?
is appropriate for the sales of concessions and the Town Recreation Commission can enter into
Concession Agreements with specified and approved food and/or merchandise vendors for the
purposes of generating additional revenues for the Town;
?
will not cause an undue hardship to adjoining property owners and/or the public; and
?
will not have undue traffic impacts;
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 5
and the Town Board therefore approves the Parks and Recreation Commission’s request for each
Queensbury Town Park to be designated as a Sports Center so long as such designation is consistent with
the application, Town approvals and the Town Code, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that any contract entered into by the Parks and Recreation Commission shall require
compliance by the vendor(s) with State and local laws, including obtaining any permits and licenses that may
be required and shall include the requirement for insurance and indemnification of the Town sufficient to
protect the interests of the Town and the public, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Town Clerk,
Director of Parks and Recreation and/or Town Zoning Administrator/Code Compliance Officer to take any
actions necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC HEARING – ENACTING LOCAL LAW TO AMEND QUEENSBUR TOWN CODE BY
ADDINGA NEW CHAPTER 107 ENTITLED “LAWN FERTILIZER AND PRESTICIDE RUNOFF
CONTROL”
PUBLICATION DATE: AUGUST 25, 2011
The Town has been working on this for quite some time now I would say
SUPERVISOR STEC-
probably the better part of a year or more. Currently right now there is one other Town on Lake
George that is has taken upon itself to enact some sort of fertilizer control that would be the Town
of Lake George. To my knowledge the Town of Queensbury would be the second of all those
Towns on the lake that would identify this. After much discussion the Town Board in our review
process in our workshop process has landed on a position I think where most of us feel comfortable
where this would apply to Lake Sunnyside, Glen Lake and Lake George in the Town of
Queensbury. In general I don’t want to over simplify but generally speaking it would prohibit any
fertilizers within fifty feet of those bodies of water. It would limit in the distant of fifty to two
hundred feet it would limit you to fertilizers that don’t contain phosphorus. In addition to that we
looked at pesticides this is an area. I am just anticipating what some of the questions may be some
people want us to further regulate or restrict pesticides beyond what is called for in this law. This is
an area of the law that the State has preempted so basically local government does not have
authority to further regulate pesticides. This local law really just further requires people to provide
notice anytime they are applying a pesticide to their lawns in these areas which is all ready the State
requirement anyways so this local law really doesn’t go any farther in the area of pesticides.
Anyways that is the jest of where we are going with this local law. I will open the public hearing
and first we have two brief presentations that will be made first. First would be Kathleen Bozony
who is the Natural Resource Specialist for the Lake George Waterkeeper affiliated with the Fund for
Lake George then after her Emily DeBolt, Director of Education for the Lake George Association
so I will get out of the way so that Kathleen can use the screen.
KATHLEEN BOZONY-Good evening, I am Kathleen Bozony I am the Natural Resource Specialist
with the Lake George Waterkeeper. I am happy to be here tonight to share with you what has
been documented regarding the impacts the excess nutrients are having on Lake George’s
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 6
water quality. I am going to talk very briefly on classification of Lake George some of the things
that I have been seeing underwater the fertilizers and pesticide issues and water quality
impacts from land use. Lake George is an Oligotrophic lake and was classified by New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation in the early nineteen seventies as a Class AA
Special specifically drinking water quality. We tend to emphasize the importance of this
classification as a source of drinking water because we rely on the lake water for human
consumption, but the standards also identify as you can see in line D here that it states, these
waters shall contain no phosphorus and nitrogen in amounts that will result in growth of algae,
weeds, and slimes that will impair the water for their best usages. Lake George’s Class AA
Special designation has not been reevaluated for almost forty years. Although we would like to
think of Lake George as clear clean water there is increased evidence that these waters do
appear impaired certainly with respect to drinking, swimming, fishing and boating. Lake George
is seeing an increase of algae covering the aquatic plants, rocks, crib docks and the sand on the
lakes bottom and can even been seen here from the surface of the lake. I have been swimming
in Lake George since 1970 and I have been documenting underwater for four years now. If you
snorkel with me in certain locations you would see native aquatic plants that look like these
they are healthy beautiful and not covered with algae and are what aquatic plants should look
like in Lake George. Unfortunately you would also see far too many locations where the
aquatic vegetation is covered with algae. Algae are a natural part of the environment, but
when algae grow in large quantities covering the native vegetation and the rocks it is a
symptom that there are excessive nutrients feeding the lake. In 2008 the Lake George
Waterkeeper initiated the Algae Awareness Project after having witnessed unusual algae
growth in the lake. The Fund for Lake George and the Waterkeeper requested calls from
individuals if algae growth or changes in water quality was observed and many residences
responded. Sites were investigated where the once firm lake bottom had become mucky
where residents had witnessed changes in the clarity of the water for where large green masses
were seen floating or suspended below the surface. The consensus around the lake is that we
are seeing more slime covered boats, rocks, and docks than ever before. In the past four
summers I have visited over seventy five sites in the lake as you can see by the yellow dots
these sites that have algae growth are all around the lake. As, I mentioned Lake George is an
oligotrophic lake an oligotrophic lake will naturally age by accumulating nutrients and
sediments over the years. We could rationalize that these changes that are being seen in Lake
George today are expected except for the fact that lakes age naturally over thousands of years
not within a human generation again; this is what native plants look like in Lake George. The
changes in Lake George that we have experienced within the last five to ten plus years are not
part of the natural aging process, but an accelerating aging referred to as Cultural
Utrophication. Cultural Utrophication is the result of chemical enrichment of the lake by
human activity within the watershed. People and land use and the decisions that we make
accelerate the utrophication process. Algae growth in a lake is one indication of the lakes
accelerating aging. I am going to share with you photos taken while snorkeling in Lake George
during the past four summers specifically showing you the impact that excess nutrients and
fertilizers and pesticides are having on Lake George. As you can see algae appears in many
different forms. Huddle Bay was one of the first sites I was called to in 2008 the neighbors next
to this beach had to actual rake the dead and decaying algae every day before they went
swimming. The use of fertilizers is a land use activity that promotes algae growth. When it
rains excess nutrients in the fertilizers that you apply to your lawn and garden run off the land
directly into the lake and into the streams and tributaries and storm water drains that empty
into the lake becoming a food source for algae. The fertilizers and pesticides can also infiltrate
your groundwater which may enter the lake as well. The fertilizer includes nitrogen,
phosphorus and potassium seen as NPK on a product label and is used to boost non native
vegetation that might not otherwise survive the elements in this region. With these known
facts about phosphorus such as a pound of phosphorus will support five hundred pounds of
algae growth where most lawns tested have adequate phosphorus you might ask why not use
only phosphorus free fertilizers? Although, phosphorus is the limiting nutrient in Lake George
all components of fertilizers feed the aquatic plants and algae in the lake. Many fertilizers
including phosphorus free fertilizers are combined with harmful pesticides this is a list that I got
from one of the local lawn care companies. Dimension, Allectus, Preen, Sevin, Merit some of
the products that you may be familiar with. These are being applied in great quantity around
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 7
the lake to properties this is just five of hundreds of products that are actually being used. As
you can see these fertilizer pesticides combined products are reported to be toxic to fish and
aquatic invertebrates that are being used in great quantity around the lake. Several of the
pesticides here the Dimension, Allectus, Sevin they are included with the phosphorus free
fertilizer. So in some of the new laws these phosphorus free fertilizers with this pesticide are
approved to be used and yet you can see they are highly or extremely toxic to fish and aquatic
organisms. Even a product seemingly as harmless as mulch may contain chemicals that alter
our environment. Note the environmental hazards at the bottom of the pre mulch plus label at
the bottom the screen it is very small but it states; the active ingredients in this product are
highly toxic to fish not to mention the hazards to humans and domestic animals with all of
these products. Even though the hazards are plainly written on the label it is not easy to read
the small print and it is important to know that only the active ingredients and their related
hazards are reported on the label in this case of this algaecide only nine percent of the product
is active, which means that only nine percent is included in that environmental or precautionary
statements. The Environmental Protection Agency does not require disclosure of the harmful
chemicals that may be included in the inactive components of the pesticides. They used to call
these products inert, but now all products are labeled active and inactive percentages. Most
homeowners don’t realize what their families; pets and neighbors are being exposed to when
using these products not to mention the wildlife and the environment. As in the case of
Roundup the inactive ingredient, which is approximately fifty percent of the product has been
identified to kill our native frogs and toads. If you are interested in more information on that it
is a very important topic go to the University of Pittsburgh, Rick Relyea’s work that he has been
doing for years on the Roundup products. Quantity of pesticides and chemical products that
are being used around Lake George is truly alarming 2005 is the last year that the Department
of Environmental Conservation has actually cumulated and published data, but they are
working on more recent years. Within zip code 12845, which is the Town and Village of Lake
George and up north through Assembly Point in 2005 there was twenty one thousand pounds
and six hundred gallons of pesticides that were applied to the properties. These were applied
by the licensed lawn care maintenance companies this does not include any products any
fertilizers or pesticides that were purchased by homeowners for their individual properties.
Land use practices can dramatically impact the water quality of Lake George. Increased
nutrients are feeding the aquatic plants and algae in the lake while pesticides used to kill…and
pests are altering the natural ecology. By planting native trees and flowers on your property
you will eliminate the need to use fertilizers or pesticides because native plants thrive in our
environment without any special attention. Grass clippings left on the lawn after mowing will
generally provide all the nutrients which a lawn requires specifically nitrogen. If you are at all
questioning that look up Up Yonda Farm they use grass clippings and rainwater they have this
massive lush green lawn on their property. Next several slides document algal blooms they are
just off properties with maintained lawns and no protective shoreline buffers. Again, you will
see all different kinds of algae that I have been documenting. Some of the algae as in the upper
right hand corner as you swim over it is very loose it’s about a foot deep and it just swirls
around in the water column. This is a property in Kattskill and when I saw application by a lawn
care company to this lawn I called them and asked what products they were using and they told
me they only use phosphorus free fertilizer on this lawn and this was three years ago. I have
been there every year since I haven’t been there yet this year and about twenty feet out from
the shoreline to about a hundred feet out is this fluorescent massive bright green around this
crib dock. This is in Bolton in Bolton Bay. This is in Kattskill Bay again it looks like a water intake
pipe right off about fifteen feet off the shoreline. I don’t know if these homeowners know that
this is a blue green cyano bacteria as far as you can see underneath that water intake pipe.
There are many homes on Lake George that have a maintained lawn to the lake with no
shoreline buffer protection. Restricting fertilizer and pesticide use around the lake and
requiring the planting of a shoreline buffer would reduce nutrient loading, which is
unnecessarily feeding the aquatic plants and algae in Lake George. The cumulative impact of
lawns to the lake and increase land use activities around the lake is changing the water quality
of Lake George. However, the decline of water quality can be and has been reversed in many
watersheds. A good example of one of these watersheds is Lake Tahoe, which has been
addressing water quality issues for decades. Lake Tahoe is very similar to Lake George except
that Lake Tahoe deepest depth is eight times that of Lake George at sixteen hundred feet
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 8
compared to Lake George’s one hundred and ninety six feet at its deepest. Over thirty years
ago people began to notice and document Lake Tahoe’s declining water quality and decided it
was important to make changes to not only protect but to restore the lake even though many
thought it was too late. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency was created and was given the
responsibility to protect the lake with the authority to adopt and enforce environmental quality
thresholds that’s a key right there. It is encouraging that a trend in declining water quality is
reversible, but the algal blooms in Lake George are currently increasing and having a significant
impact on the lake’s water quality. Natural shoreline vegetation is one of the most effective
ways to protect Lake George’s water quality. To conclude this presentation the Fund for Lake
George and the Lake George Waterkeeper support the Town of Queensbury as they deliberate
adoption of the proposed Lawn Fertilizer and Pesticide Runoff Control Law, but ask that the
Town Board discuss tonight three additional components of this local law that are no longer
included in the propose document. Number one, to reinstate 107.5 from February 2011, which
read no person shall apply or authorize to apply any lawn fertilizer on vegetation within fifty
feet of any impermeable surface that direct storm water flow into any body of water. I am sure
you all understand why I think that this is so important we have so many storm water drains
going right into our lake this was a very progressive and important component to the existing
propose law. The need to use the language, body of water, in lieu of lake, Glen Lake, Lake
Sunnyside and Lake George for chemical applications setbacks included in this propose law
body of water was previously used verses lake. It was defined as any lake, river, bay, pond,
wetland, reservoir, perennial or intermittent stream or spring. New York State Law uses surface
water verses lake as well. Number three. A fifty foot setback for application of chemicals may
not be adequate enough for separation for water protection. Beginning January 1, 2012, New
York State Nutrient Runoff Law will prohibit use of phosphorus fertilizers so the propose fifty to
two hundred foot setback and beyond will no longer be different than that of New York State.
The Fund for Lake George and the Lake George Waterkeeper recognize and applaud that the
Town of Queensbury consistently conditions all development applications with the planting of a
shoreline buffer and use of rain gardens with native vegetation that does not require fertilizers
and pesticides. The Queensbury Board’s have demonstrated their understanding that our
native trees, shrubs and plants as seen in the natural vegetation that grows around the lake will
thrive without adding nutrients. Excess nutrients that feed aquatic plants and algae are
changing the water quality of Lake George. Restricting fertilizer and pesticide applications
within our watersheds will protect our drinking water and is a simple and inexpensive way to
reduce nutrients and contaminants from entering the lake. Water quality protection is our
responsibility and should be our goal. I really thank you for allowing me to share this with you
tonight.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thank you Kathleen.
MRS. BOZONY-Thank you.
EMILY DEBOLT-Thank you for having me this evening. My name is Emily DeBolt the Director of
Education with the Lake George Association. I am not used to having my back turned to more
than half of my audience so I will try this out. I am going to speak in a similar vein as Cathy who
we just heard from, but hopefully I will have a few things maybe a little different so we are not
to repetitive. In general I am going to just be talking about water quality and phosphorus with
again a focus on Lake George. For those of you who are not familiar I am with the Lake George
Association, which is our nation’s first Lake Association. We are a non-profit membership group
formed in 1885 pretty much just working to protect the water quality of Lake George so issues
like phosphorus and water quality are just one of the many things that we are involved in. In
addition to a number of education and outreach programs of monitoring water quality
educating area students, homeowners, the public aboard our floating classroom program and a
number of other projects around the lake as well on to phosphorus and water quality. To kind
of really boil it down, water quality is simple, just a result of what goes in the water and what
stays in the water. We don’t have that much of an ability to determine what stays in the water
a lot of that has to depend on the lake or the water body that we are dealing with. What we do
have a lot to do with is what goes into the water so our land use and human activities are really
what are affecting what goes into the water so that is what I am here to talk about today. This
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 9
looks familiar so Lake George is considered Class AA Special meaning again that it is designated
for drinking water, recreation and the likes. However, it is also listed on our 303D List you
might have heard that bantered around 303D. What that means is that the Federal Clean
Water Act requires the States to assess their waters and then list their impaired waters and
develop a strategy. So, Lake George and a number of its tributaries are specifically listed as
impaired for slit and sediment the cause is urban runoff and storm water and erosion. Now you
might be thinking okay slit and sediment what does that have to do with phosphorus, however,
the sediment and slit do not come alone when they erode into the water bodies. Phosphorus in
soils actually attaches to particles I won’t get into the boring chemistry of all of that right now.
But, essentially the phosphate will attach and especially to find particles, which are also more
likely to then erode into water bodies. When we have sediment coming into water bodies from
erosion it is going to have phosphorus with it. Phosphorus is an essential nutrient it is found
everywhere so it is already in our lakes and streams, however, the issue is really when we get
too much of it. The way we would get too much of it in a lake or water body are those human
activities on land that are increasing amount of phosphorus getting into the lake. As
phosphorus increasing in amounts in lakes and get too much of it then you have the increase
algal growth and plant growth that Kathy really went into detail about as these plants die and
decompose you can lose oxygen which can affect your fish and other aquatic life. Phosphorus
comes from a variety of sources it comes from our developed areas so our fertilizers also pet
waste and just natural organic matter so mulch, plants even the forest gives off a certain
amount of phosphorus into our water bodies. There are a lot of sources of phosphorus that we
can’t control; however, there are also a few that we can fertilizers being one of the main ones
that we could actually do something about. Why we are so concerned with phosphorus in
particular is because it is called the limiting factor, which means that it is the element in short
of supply for photosynthesis. The plants and algae in the lake taking in the suns light doing
photosynthesis is the amount of life you can have in a lake so your phosphorus limits that. In
most New York State freshwater lakes there is naturally not a lot of phosphorus in the system
so that is why we also call or you might have heard people say, I guess lake nerds like myself
that phosphorus is the limiting factor so how do lakes respond to phosphorus. Again, this might
look familiar this is the process of cultural eutrophication. The way that a lake responds to
phosphorus is that it essentially ages quicker than it could. I guess you could liken it to not
wearing sun screen and smoking a pack a day it is not good for the health of a lake. We would
start out with a eutrophic lake on the far left there that is what Lake George is you have clear
clean water low productivity then over time as nutrients come in from the watershed around
your lake you get increased growth and organic matter and eventually you get to the photo on
the far right there where you have a eutrophic lake that is very productive. These are these
mucky shallow lakes covered in weeds and algae that no one wants to swim in or drink from.
This is a natural process, but what happens is that phosphorus speeds up this process from a
time line of hundred and thousands of years that none of us will be alive to see to a much
shorter time line that unfortunately some of us our seeing in our years though I am not that old
yet so, I guess, I haven’t seen too much. I’ve seen a fair bit in just the few years that I have
been here. Again, phosphorus is that nutrient that limits growth this information is actually
from Office of Water from DEC we did some water testing with them. You can refer to it as TP
for total phosphorus and New York State does not have a water quality standard for
phosphorus, however, they have something called State Guidance Values. They can tell you
that if you have twenty PPB, which are parts per billion of phosphorus or more that would be a
highly productive or that eutropic lake. The middle category would be ten to twenty then an
unproductive or oligotrophic lake would be less than ten parts per billion. So, that where we
want our lakes to be at that less than ten that unproductive clear clean lake. Again, just to
remind you those are the lakes. The oligotrophic lake on the left that would equate to less than
ten parts per billion phosphorus in that water body. Our photo in the middle would be ten to
twenty then the photo on the right would be more than twenty. To put that in perspective of
lakes in our area on the left that could be Lake George in the middle that could be Glen Lake
and on the far side that could be Lake Champlain. Again, impacts of this cultural eutrophication
or aging of the lake due to phosphorus you have reduce water depth, decrease in clarity,
increase algal growth and a number of changes in the environment as well as an economic
impacts. A number of studies from New Hampshire have shown a loss in property values due
to declining water quality on lakes there. That bottom photo just shows the difference that
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 10
nice blue lake would be oligotrphic and that one on the bottom would be where we don’t want
to go that would be eutrophic. These are actually some test lakes that they use in Canada to
actually learn about how lakes work and how they respond to phosphorus. There is some
unlucky lake out there that’s being tested on, but what that means for the rest of us is we
actually have really good data about how these things are working we are not just guessing.
That is how phosphorus impacts water quality so a little bit on to land use and human activities.
It is everything in the watershed that goes into a body of water so when we are talking about
protecting Lake George or any other lake in the area we want to look at everything all around
the lake and how it is all adding up into the lake. In the case of Lake George we know from
some studies that only five percent of our watershed is developed about ninety three percent is
still forest so that is really good news in terms on protecting our lake with that nice native
vegetation that Kathy was speaking about and how important that is for water quality.
However, we also know from a study in 2001 that only that five percent of developed area is
producing forty three percent of the phosphorus entering the lake. That is a pretty clear
message to us where our phosphorus is coming from almost half of it is coming from this five
percent of the land area that is the developed area. How that is happening is that it is coming
in from surface water so this is our storm water runoff in our developed areas carrying eighty
three percent of the phosphorus into Lake George. There is around thirteen percent from the
atmosphere we can’t really do much about that, but that eighty three percent is a really big
number that we can take a big bite out of again, this just illustrates storm water runoff. The top
left photo shows a natural situation where the majority of the water could infiltrate into the
permeable ground. As you increase impermeable or impermeable surface you have more
runoff, with more runoff you have more water collecting carrying sediments and phosphorus
along with it into your water body. In the case of Lake George with over a hundred and forty
streams all coming into the lake that is a lot of places for all this runoff to gather and then make
its way down into the lake. It is not just the shorelines that we are worried about, but again it’s
the whole water shed that we have to think about when protecting our lake. This is some data
from some sampling that we do as part of a State wide lake assessment program just focus on
the top line that is total phosphorus. We have been talking about the trophic state of a lake
being oligotrophic, mesotrophic, eutrophic. There are actually three parameters often used
phosphorus, chlorophyll, secchi disk transparency, but we just have been mainly focusing on
phosphorus since that has to do with the local law proposed tonight. As you can see there
Lake George is well in that oligotrophic state meaning that we have less than ten and that is
micrograms per liter or parts per billion the units are interchangeable of phosphorus so that is
very good news our other parameters put us in that same trophic state. However, you can see
from this slide this comparison data that was a summary of some research done by RPI’s Darrin
Freshwater Institute summarizing some research from 1980 to 1990. I have compared that to
some of our data collected by volunteers and analyzed by the State of New York from 2004-
2007 was the last time I just kind of summed it up. As you can see we are already seeing an
increase just if you go down to the bottom line our lake wide mean TP, remember that TP is
total phosphorus we were closer to five parts per billion and now we are already around eight
there appears to be an increase in phosphorus levels in the lake already. Lake George is a large
lake close to five hundred and fifty billion gallons of water, however, clearly enough
phosphorus going in that it is increasing the concentration so the lake is not able to absorb
what we are putting into it. The retention time of Lake George is very long close to eight years
so what that means is that it takes a very long time for anything that we put into to get out of it
so it is very important to keep that it mind. We are not going to see changes right away
because Lake George is so large. Just to compare Lake George to some other lakes in the area,
again around seven, eight parts per billion for phosphorus. Lake Champlain up at twenty five so
that would be that highly productive lake that we would not want to get too. Lake Placid is
lower than us Lake Placid is also an AA special water body in New York State. One would think
that maybe we would be where Lake Placid is and we were not that long ago, however, now we
have higher phosphorus levels than Lake Placid. Glen Lake is actually surprisingly similar,
however, you can see with that deep water phosphorus that is what makes it mesotrophic
verses oilgotrophic like Lake George. Again, just a visual representation of what we have been
discussing of these parameters that you use to measure eutrophic state so I use some red lines
to mark where Lake George’s comes out in the scale of all of these factors. You can see we are
well on the left in the blue and that oligotrophic area and that is where we want to stay. We
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 11
don’t want to be creeping up into the green clearly illustrating algae and plants verses the nice
clear water so the idea is to stay where we are. Often this graph just shows water quality
declined over time and your remediation potential often your public awareness doesn’t begin
until the decline is significant enough that people really notice it and by then it is essentially to
late because your remediation is unlikely, your cost are too high, too much has really
happened. If we waited until everyone agreed a hundred percent that there was a problem
and we needed to act essentially it would be too late. The idea is to get a jump start on this by
doing things like working with phosphorus free fertilizers. Phosphorus Free Fertilizers this is
really a simple step that can be taken to help protect the water quality of Lake George, but also
other lakes and water bodies in the Town of Queensbury. I say simple because it doesn’t cost
of anything the products are available you can still have your lawns so you are not really having
to give anything up to make this switch. Phosphorus free again, phosphorus is that middle
content on the bag the middle number so that is what we are talking about a zero there.
Another reason why this works is because most soils in New York State already have enough
phosphorus to promote healthy lawns. We also know that phosphorus from lawn fertilizers can
account for up to fifty percent of phosphorus in storm water runoff. So we know that
phosphorus from lawn fertilizers is getting into our local water bodies. So that it just makes
sense that maybe this is one thing we can do to move forward with protecting our water
bodies. It is going to save us costs down the line of retrofitting systems to meet phosphorus
reduction requirements and again, they are available so there is not a limit there so that is all
that I have. I will just finish up by saying thank you very much for the opportunity to speak the
Lake George Association really supports this propose local law. We also would like to see
instead of it just being phosphorus free fertilizer from fifty to two hundred feet being
st
throughout the entire Town again, that is going to happen essentially January 1 with the State
Law so, then what might happen the State Law will apply to everyone from two hundred feet
out in the Town, but then people along the shorelines are going to have this local law that is
more restrictive, which is fabulous so essentially we are going to have two laws about the same
issue in play verses just having the one local law. If it covered the whole Town with phosphorus
free then it would just apply to everyone then everyone would just have one law to deal with
when they are thinking about fertilizer verses a State and a local law that people have to
understand in order to voluntary comply. I think it would have protect the water bodies and it
would also just be simpler for everyone involved, but other than that we are just very happy
that you are moving ahead with the law so thank you.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thank you very much Emily. The public hearing is opened if there are any
members of the public that would like to comment just raise your hand. I would like to since
we do have a quite a few people here I would like to ask anybody that is a Queensbury resident
or Queensbury landowner to have first opportunity to comment on the local law then we will
take comment from anyone else that may not be a Queensbury resident or landowner. Is
there anybody from Queensbury that would like to address, yes ma'am just come to the
microphone and please state your name and address for the purpose of the record.
LISA ADAMSON, 128 LAKE PARKWAY, ASSEMBLY POINT, LAKE GEORGE-I just want to read a
statement. I have talked to many of my neighbors on Assembly Point some of them are here
tonight we are very much in favor of the board passing into law tonight the proposal as its
written. Me personally, I will speak for myself with the additions that Kathy Bozony mentioned
tonight the 107.5 being reinstated and the other two points that she mentioned. We also feel
even more strongly the urgency to pass into law a no chemical pesticide law with much greater
distances from all surface waters. I heard what Kathy said about and what the board knows
about the problems I urge you to press the State for what is really critical to Lake George water
quality, which is the elimination of all chemicals and pesticides within the established critical
environmental requirement of a five hundred foot, I don’t know if you call it a setback, but a
five hundred foot distance thank you.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thank you Ms. Adamson, anyone else from Queensbury?
ROSEMARY PUSATERI, 75 MASON ROAD, CLEVERDALE-Thank you for the opportunity to come.
I support the proposed local law. When I swim and snorkel along the shoreline where I live I can
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 12
see underwater which of my neighbors is greening the lake with what they are doing on their
land with their fertilizer applications. I urge the Town of Queensbury, you the Board, to exhibit
leadership in the watershed by enacting this law. I suggest and wish that the language could be
strengthen regarding fertilizer application along bodies of water and that language be added to
restrict pesticide usage near surface water to keep poisons out of our water, thank you very
much.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thank you. Anyone else from Queensbury that would like to address this
local law?
FLORENCE CONNOR, HOLLY LANE, ASSEMBLY POINT-First of all, I’d like to say that I have been
here for fifty two years and I used to swim at the Happy Family Islands and also just this past
week I camped out on Little Harbor Island. We used to walk on the rocks along the water now
if you happen to fall into the water where the rocks are slanted you cannot get back out of the
water. They are so slimy now that literally you are doomed to stay in the water or swim to an
area where you can crawl out that was not like that in the past. I worry that our rating is going
down rapidly. The second thing is I think we need to think those of streams and such that give
the water to the lake. I am very pleased with what you are doing tonight, but I would like to
also think that we might encourage people that produce water that goes into the lake. The
third thing is how are you going to enforce this. It is going to be neighbor tattling on neighbor
or how can we do this because it is a big undertaking that needs to be enforced or it cannot
work, thank you.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thank you.
DONALD SIPP, COURTHOUSE DRIVE-I, too applaud you for you have done here, but I would like
to see a few changes made. On the first page under Article 1, Chapter 107, you have lawn
fertilizer and Pesticide Runoff Control. I would like to have you add to that herbicides we seem
to forget that many fertilizer companies add a herbicide to kill your dandelions, your ragweed
and so forth. This is very sizable it has to be in a liquid form in order to kill these plants
therefore it will run off. I agree with what has already been said about the phosphorus and the
amounts of chemicals that are used as a pesticide, but I would like to see this herbicide added
to that list. The original herbicide was 24D; 24D was strengthened by other chemicals and
became 245T. It was then strengthened again by some further chemicals and became Agent
Orange so if you are looking at a family tree 24D, which is found in many fertilizers, is the
grandparent of Agent Orange and we know some things about Agent Orange we don’t like. I
also agree that there is question here of enforcement, which should be done in a way all of the
players of local lawn people are players of these chemicals made perfectly aware of what may
happen if they don’t. It is not hard to tell who is using these chemicals nice green lawn with no
weeds, thick it a definite sign of what is needed. I think a shoreline buffer is also in need we
should expand use of these buffers or make a use of these buffers part of this in order to cut
down on the runoff going into the lake. On Page 5, number 8 on that page application of
pesticides for invasive plant control. Pesticides in themselves are not killers of plants I think
that should be either changed or dropped or changed in the way that or substitute herbicide for
pesticide, thank you.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-Don my original draft did include herbicides, but the scientists and the
experts pointed out and rightly so herbicide is within the definition of the pesticide. I had a
separate definition for herbicide, but it fits within the definition of pesticide. If you read the
definition of pesticide herbicide is part of that.
MR. SIPP-There have been cases here I know one or two in Washington County where when
24D first came out farmers jumped on it and used it as a weed spray in corn fields. What
happened in one of these spraying expeditions the farmer washed his tank and his spraying
materials in the local Poestenskil about two hours later they had a lot of dead fish going down
Poestenskill so it does affect the environment. If we ever find out what Agent Orange, which is
really just an extension of 24D we may wish we never used it.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 13
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-Don you are entirely right, but on the topic of pesticide, which
includes herbicides we did have a stricter version of that in our law our first draft this is like
draft number five, six. We were threatened with a lawsuit that if we were to maintain our
stance on pesticides as it was they were going to challenge the law DEC has complete
jurisdiction over that. In any event I agree with you a hundred percent if the door ever opens
for us to be able to work on the very things that you mentioned I think we should pursue that.
MR. SIPP-If it is under DEC jurisdiction we may be waiting a long time.
ATTORNEY HAFNER-Do you mind if I jump in.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Go right ahead Bob.
TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-What John said is we found in our research that DEC has preempted
the area for pesticides, which under their regulations include herbicides. If you want the Town
to be able to go farther than you need to persuade Senator Little, Assemblyperson Sayward and
their colleagues to change the State Law we don’t have the power to do that right now.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-We were there, but.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Is there anyone else.
BEVERLY POSEY, ASSEMPLY POINT-I would like to thank the board for enacting these laws. I
have a couple of questions about residents who are absentee and do their own fertilizing how
are we going to inform them? Are there going to be any signs put up any place or perhaps
some kind of a newsletter or a notice that goes out to all the Queensbury residents so that they
could be informed and not say, well I didn’t know about that. As, Emily mentioned in her storm
water runoff presentation we have drains along Assembly Point Road from private
homeowners and the water is taken from their property runs across the road and down into
the lake. I understand as this happens it picks up and intensifies some of these chemicals into
the lake. Is there anything that can be done in the future in our building codes that would
prohibit a homeowner from setting up a drain in his property that feeds into the lake? In other
words could he be mandated to have some kind of a drainage pit where this could runoff rather
than have it running into the water? As a small aside to that these homes in the winter
continue with this runoff one of the homes has a heated driveway, which will mean there will
be continual runoff as the snow melts. Now, it is not just the pollutants, but it is the safety of
the road as well because last year I saw the ice build up at one of those homes and that was
prior to the new home with the heated driveway, which means there will be an ice buildup on
Assembly Point Road itself. My concern isn’t just for the vehicles such as our cars, but school
buses go through there, too so it does highlight the fact we could have a serious accident there.
Again, I want to thank you all and I would like to know hopefully you will have some kind of
information to go out to the public in forming us of the law.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Well we will do all we can, but thank you that is a good idea. Is there anyone
else from anywhere Queensbury or otherwise at this point that would like to contribute to the
public hearing.
DAVE LINEHAN, EMPLOYEE OF JIM GIRARD LANSDCAPE AND MAINTENANCE-Mr. Supervisor can
I approach the board and give Karen additional information?
SUPERVISOR STEC-Sure, what is your name sir?
DAVE LINEHAN, EMPLOYEE OF JIM GIRARD LANDSCAPE AND MAINTENANCE-This particular
document is the summary of the University of Florida Study that was done recently, which I
think is very good because it takes into consideration a lot of studies in the Country that have to
do with lawn care and turf grass management. If, I may Supervisor Stec and members of the
Counsel just thank you for the opportunity here tonight to speak against the propose law as
written Establishing Law Fertilizer and Pesticide Runoff Control Restrictions. Let me say first
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 14
that I am for the lowest level of government when it comes to solving a problem I don’t think
we can wait for the Whitehouse or the State House to look after Lake George. I think the
groups that spoke before Kathleen and Emily they do yeoman’s work in giving us the picture of
what is happening to Lake George overall. I think it is very important the studies that they
present to us. What is mind boggling as Emily said when we are dealing with ten parts per
billion what does that mean to me and what does it mean to you. From there I would just like
to go over generally I think all of you may have received maybe you haven’t received maybe
you haven’t received our written comments that we provided you we sent it via email today.
This is our first time really giving any thought or look at the law this is our first look at it I am
going to thank the board for getting us a copy. We are one of the care taking companies that
does work around the lake and does work in the Town of Queensbury. I think when we first
read, Jimmy and myself read the findings, we got to the second sentence and read since lawns
are less permeable than the natural topography and vegetation we were taken back a bit and
said, it doesn’t make sense this isn’t what we are hearing from our associations with other
professional associations that are dealing with this particular issue. This particular issue of
water quality and use of fertilizers and pesticides around lake bodies I think the industry has
been looking at this for at least ten to fifteen years that’s why I felt it was important for you to
all have a copy it is over a thirty page document of that University of Florida Study. The second
sentence for example since lawns are less permeable than the natural topography and
vegetation that’s one thing, but also many artificial surfaces in the three areas that you
designated for additional control also contain services that are impervious. I can think back to
the late sixties when a six lane highway just east of all three of these water bodies was put into
effect and I can’t help but think that phosphorus happens more nitrogen happens to these
areas. Lake George is a very attractive lake more development, but the Town of Queensbury
has done a yeoman’s job in tackling the issues. There is site plan review they have done an
excellent job with storm water management Lake George the regulations that are put into
effect the number of governing bodies that patrol the lake. We think generally that these
regulations might be going beyond what would actually help the lake and that is to make sure
that the health of these what we call filters these lawns and turf grass actually help the lake and
keep it from eutrophying. The document that I just sent out the key points that we wanted to
bring forward is that properly maintained lawns and landscapes provide excellent soil erosion
control they enhance the entrapment and uptake of nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, and
improve aquifer recharge. Healthy turf grass loses among zero nutrients when its fertilized and
irrigated according to science based best management practices, or BMP’s. Maintaining
healthy turf grass requires the addition of nutrients during summer months when grasses have
the greatest ability to absorb nutrients due to more active root and shoot growth. We have
learned through our professional association our studies the researches that we have done
research that is funded by the Environmental Protection Act here in New York State that proper
timing of the nutrients is also very important. Maintaining nutrient run-off and leaching will
increase when lawns are overfertilized, and when fertilizer is applied to an unhealthy lawn.
Science based BMP’s should be combined with the education programs, for maximum
improvement of nutrient management and its impact on water quality. Wintertime fertilizer
bans are part of a comprehensive approach to water pollution problems in Wisconsin,
Minnesota and Michigan. They have banned fertilizer applications during cooler months when
grass is dormant, but not in the summer or other warm months considered active growing
periods. Again, that is why I point to this University of Florida Study we think that Florida is
warmer all year round. We are like Florida for at least a week or so I think this year was
probably Equator. I think it is important to see that this Florida Study also points to the
northern States in all the studies that have been done over the past ten, fifteen years. I think
that is all I have tonight if you have any specific questions. I think it would be helpful if you did
read through the documents that we put together there were only seven paragraphs and for
Jim to put a document with only seven paragraphs is pretty yeoman for Jim and myself. There
are quite a few footnotes available there articles and professional and scientific research that
has been done in regards to protecting the water quality of lakes with proper lawn care.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-Dave, I read the University of Florida Study and it reinforces basically
what we are doing here. It says, the title of the study is Urban Water Quality and Fertilizer
Ordinances avoided unintended consequences a review of the scientific literature. In this it
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 15
states that eutrophication is a problem. Part of the eutrophication problem is the phosphorus
coming from fertilizers it says that in the first paragraph. In the second page one, two, three,
four, five, six, seven items produced out of these studies show that we are doing the right thing.
What you are saying is some management practices might abate some of the phosphorus
getting into the lakes what we are doing is trying to restrict that even further. It is a further
assurance because the lake quality is something that is most important to us. The study says
that you are talking about educational programs restricting fertilization. The result of human
activities and managing land, energy plants, nutrients this is what is causing the problem it is
human activity adjacent to the shore the study says it. I, mean I could go on, and on, and on. It
talks about the hydrology the unintended consequences the impairment of the water bodies
everything that Emily DeBolt and Kathy Bozony had spoke to earlier. What we are hearing is we
haven’t gone far enough in restricting what we are doing.
MR. LINEHAN-Again, I go back to the point that Lake George is very popular development has
increased. New homes have been put in place and these new homes meet these newer
regulations storm water management filtering that water prior to when the lake gets in. If you
get up to Page 22 in the Study from the literature review and analysis the following conclusion
can be made. Coastal and urban eutrophication is an increasing problem and is at least in part
related to urban land based activities sources of nutrients involved with eutrophication are
numerous and the interactions with harmful algae blooms are complex. What baffles me for
example is when Kathleen reported that phosphorus free fertilizer has been applied for three
years and this law that you are putting forward is more restrictive than the State Law that is
going to be in effect just around the corner January 1, 2012 and its not doing any good. Why
are we protecting the rest of these one hundred water bodies when phosphorus free
fertilizer…..
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-Well Dave….
MR. LINEHAN-Phosphorus is very important it is part of our cells plant and animal it build
protein we need phosphorus, but we don’t need it in the wrong place.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-Dave the State did review our law you know what they said could you
make it more restrictive.
MR. LINEHAN-Mr. Strough I am just wondering if the State read the same thing as you did. At
least you read the study.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-I read the study it was very interesting very worthwhile, but it just
reinforces what I think we might do tonight.
MR. LINEHAN-Human activity does produce more phosphorus.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address this public
hearing?
DAVE DECKER- I am here representing the Lake George Watershed Coalition which makes up
nine of the other communities including Queensbury five State Agencies and the several non-
for-profits stakeholders that make up our coalition. One of the priorities we identified in 2006
was initiation of educational outreach and legislative initiatives to limit and or eliminate the use
of nutrient containing fertilizers in a manner that facilitates the increase discharge of nutrients
into the waters of Lake George. I want to commend the board and those that assisted you in
reaching this point in taking the bold and important step to protect the lake. As it has in most
instances the Town of Queensbury has often served time served as a leader protecting this
valuable resource we applaud your efforts here.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Is there anyone else that would like to address the board on this public
hearing?
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 16
MS. DEBOLT, LAKE GEORGE ASSOCIATION-I just really briefly wanted to say that I had my formal
comment to submit that I had mentioned at the end of my presentation and also the topic has
come up about how to educate people about the new law. I just wanted to offer that when the
Town of Lake George passed a similar law we designed a brochure explaining the law and why it
was important and mailed it to all of the property owners within the Town. We would make
the same offer for you in Queensbury.
SUPERVISOR STEC-We can get you a mailing list.
MS. DEBOLT-Although, I am trying to think how many live in Queensbury I might be getting into
budget issues.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Fourteen miles.
MS. DEBOLT-We could talk. We have a great brochure and we are more than happy to help
spread the word and actually do a direct mailing to folks to help with getting the word out
about the law.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thanks Emily appreciate it. Is there anyone else that would like to address
the board on this public hearing, seeing none I will close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-I would like to make a motion to approve.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Let’s get a second. John Strough makes a motion Tim Brewer seconds.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-First of all I want to give special thanks to Kathy Bozony and Emily
DeBolt and this board who all three and others worked very hard to produce a law that we are
going to vote on here momentarily. I know there are enforcement issues and I know there is
terminology such as water body. I know that we could extend our restrictions we could do
more with pesticides if DEC would allow us. Emily’s proposition of the Education Outreach
Program is excellent and I think we should take her up on that. Again, could we more clearly
address and expand the runoff from impermeable surfaces that is feeding these noxious
chemicals into our lakes, yeah we could I think it is something that we should work on. The law
as we have it now is a foot in the door and I think it is headed in the right direction and
everybody tells us that. The only addition and I don’t know why this happened Bob, but on
Page 3 of the law 107-5 Regulation of the Use and Application of the Lawn Fertilizer the work
fertilizer got dropped.
TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-My apology I didn’t catch that.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Tim you are fine with making that correction?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Yeah.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-So, I would like to make that correction.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Any other Town Board discussion?
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Just that the enforcement one of the speakers asked how this would
be enforced. Obviously we are not going to put policeman, if we forbid phosphorus to be sold
in the Town of Queensbury that would be one way of doing it. I think the enforcement is going
to come from a neighbor turning in a neighbor. Then our Code Enforcement people will go out
check it out and issue the fines.
SUPERVISOR STEC-To add what you said as is the norm of all of the Town regulations that is
typically we don’t fly helicopters over top of neighborhoods looking for zoning violations. We
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 17
react to calls or questions or complaints from the public that we see driving by our code
enforcement staff that is obviously apparent to them. The vast majority of enforcement
activity in the Town of Queensbury comes from somebody saying, I don’t think my neighbor
should be doing what he is doing. Enforcement like in any environment and probably more so
today than ever before enforcement becomes a challenge from a financial perspective for a
municipality it is always a difficult thing to do. However, for the vast majority of us perhaps not
all of us, but for most people knowing that something is forbidden by law is enough for most
people to change their behavior. Not everyone will do that and it won’t happen overnight, but
you need to start somewhere. Likewise there may be some that think we should go farther I
think a lot of us are also trying to balance how much regulation do we want to impose on our
neighbors or our neighbors in another Town as the case may be. As, I mentioned at the offset
of the public hearing Queensbury will be the second Town on the lake out of nine Town’s. I
would be willing to look at raising the Towns bar when everyone else is caught up to our bar I
think there is a lot of fairness and consistency. If that needs to be challenged around the lake
we have leadership from three active groups out there. A lot of neighbors that know a lot of
neighbors in these other communities say, well Queensbury isn’t perfect, but is better than
nothing and you matched it and let’s get all nine of us there then we will talk about the need to
expand it. Will it happen overnight will it be frustrating somebody…, but I know what the right
answer is, the right answer is to cease and desist all lawn maintenance in the Town and that will
solve this problem that is not likely to happen either. Rome wasn’t built in a day baby steps
whatever saying you want to use. Again, Queensbury will be a leader in this as we are in most
land use regulations whether that is good or bad. There are those that would argue that we
over regulate. I think that this is something that the board has consensus on, which is much
more a frequent occurrence lately in the last few years than it has been. It is always better I
think if you have consensus. I think that there is room for improvement in some minds I think
we are comfortable with where we are. Does it go too far for some tonight, maybe does it not
go far enough for others, yeah understandably we heard that tonight. I think that this is a good
first step we will be on a learning curve we will make it work.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-These are the letters of support. Then we have the nice article by the
Post Star that talked about Lake George under assault that we need to do something to reverse
this before it gets out of hand. I think we are making a step in the right direction if we pass this.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Any other discussions hearing none lets go ahead and vote.
RESOLUTION ENACTING LOCAL LAW NO.: 5, OF 2011
TO AMEND QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER
107 ENTITLED, “LAWN FERTILIZER AND
PESTICIDE RUNOFF CONTROL”
RESOLUTION NO. 275, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: 5, of 2011
to amend the Queensbury Town Code by adding a new Chapter 107 entitled "Lawn Fertilizer and Pesticide
Runoff Control,” in an effort to better regulate land use management practices specifically by limiting
water body exposure to nitrates, phosphorus compounds and pesticide-related chemicals, reduce water
body contamination, improve water body ecosystem integrity and assure healthier human, animal and
plant habitats, such regulations pertaining to the shores of Glen Lake, Lake Sunnyside and the portion of
Lake George within the Town of Queensbury, and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 18
WHEREAS, this legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule
Law §10, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board duly held a public hearing concerning such proposed Local Law on
th
Monday, September 12, 2011 and heard all interested persons, and
WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby enacts Local Law No.: 5, of 2011 to amend
the Queensbury Town Code by adding a new Chapter 107 entitled "Lawn Fertilizer and Pesticide Runoff
Control,” as presented at this meeting, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file
the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal
Home Rule Law and acknowledges that the Local Law will take effect immediately upon filing with the
Secretary of State.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
LOCAL LAW NO. 5, OF 2011
LOCAL LAW ESTABLISHING LAWN FERTILIZER AND
PESTICIDE RUNOFF CONTROL RESTRICTIONS
BE IT ENACTED by the Queensbury Town Board as follows:
ARTICLE 1.
The Queensbury Town Code is hereby amended by adding the following new
Chapter 107:
CHAPTER 107 - LAWN FERTILIZER AND PESTICIDE RUNOFF CONTROL
§107-1 Short Title.
This Chapter shall be known as the "Town of Queensbury Lawn Fertilizer and Pesticide
Runoff Control Law."
§107-2 Findings.
(1) Past Land use management practices have contributed to the decline in the water
quality in our local bodies of water. Since lawns are less permeable than the natural topography
and vegetation, chemicals associated with lawn maintenance (like those used in fertilizers,
pesticides and herbicides) are transported by stormwater into our lakes, bays, ponds, reservoirs,
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 19
streams and wetlands. When these chemicals accumulate and exceed natural concentrations, they
become contaminants, substances that can cause harm to the ecosystem. Chemicals associated
with lawn care maintenance are contaminating our water bodies and can cause of numerous and
substantive health and environmental concerns. These contaminants can endanger human,
aquatic and plant health.
(2) The increased amount of nutrients in our water bodies can cause an excess of
aquatic plants and algae, and can encourage the growth of nuisance and invasive species. Dead
and decomposing plants and algae can deplete oxygen levels and create dead zones. Phosphorus
is the limiting nutrient that promotes eutrophication in our lakes, impairing water quality and
accelerating the water bodies’ aging process.
(3) In addition to their inherent environmental value, the pristine waters of Lake
George, Glen Lake and Lake Sunnyside have an important economic role; not only are shore side
buildings and land values dependent on the maintenance and improvement of these water bodies'
quality, so too is tourism, an important component of the local economy. Therefore, these bodies
of water warrant additional and more stringent standards of protection than those scheduled to go
into effect January 1, 2012 pursuant to Chapter 205 of the 2010 Laws of New York. In addition,
it is essential that these standards become effective as soon as possible to prevent further decline
in the water quality of these bodies of water.
§107-3 Intent.
The intent of this Chapter is to better regulate land use management practices, specifically by
limiting water body exposure to nitrates, phosphorus compounds and pesticide-related chemicals,
to reduce water body contamination, improve water body ecosystem integrity and assure healthier
human, animal and plant habitats. This Chapter applies to shores of Glen Lake, Lake Sunnyside,
and the portion of Lake George within the Town of Queensbury.
§107-4 Definitions.
(1) “Town” means the Town of Queensbury.
(2) “Commercial fertilizer” means any substance containing one or more recognized
plant nutrients which is designed for use or claimed to have value in promoting plant growth,
except unmanipulated animal or vegetable manures, agricultural liming material, wood ashes,
gypsum and other products exempted by regulation of the New York State Commissioner of
Agriculture and Markets. Any biosolid-based product which is not subject to regulation as a
“commercial fertilizer” by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets is not
subject to the provisions of this Chapter.
(3) “Lawn fertilizer” means a commercial fertilizer distributed primarily for non-
agricultural uses, such as applications on lawns.
(4) “Pesticide” means any substance or mixture of substances intended for
preventing, destroying, repelling or controlling any insects, rodents, fungi, weeds, or other forms
of plant or animal life or viruses, except viruses on or in living humans or other animals, and any
substance or mixture of substances intended as a plant regulator, defoliant or desiccant.
Pesticides include, but are not limited to, chemical products used for grub control, weed killer,
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 20
fungus treatment, insect spray, crab grass preventer and include all products that are classified as
herbicides, algaecides, insecticides, fungicides, rodenticides and termicides, etc.
§107-5 Regulation of the Use and Application of Lawn Fertilizer.
(1) No person shall, whether knowingly or negligently by virtue of insufficient
control, apply or authorize any person by way of service contract or other arrangement to apply,
any lawn fertilizer on vegetation within fifty feet (50’) of Glen Lake, Lake Sunnyside, or the
portions of Lake George within the Town of Queensbury.
(2) No person shall, whether knowingly or negligently by virtue of insufficient
control, apply or authorize any person by way of service contract or other arrangement to apply,
any lawn fertilizer on any privately-owned impermeable surface that directs stormwater flow into
Glen Lake, Lake Sunnyside, or the portions of Lake George within the Town of Queensbury.
(3) Only lawn fertilizer labeled as containing no phosphorus (or other compound
containing phosphorus, such as phosphate) may be applied between fifty feet (50’) and two
hundred feet (200’) from the shorelines of Glen Lake, Lake Sunnyside, or the portions of Lake
George within the Town of Queensbury.
(4) Fertilizer use beyond two hundred feet (200’) of the shorelines of Glen Lake,
Lake Sunnyside and Lake George is not regulated by this law.
(5) No person shall, whether knowingly or negligently by virtue of insufficient
control, apply or authorize any person by way of service contract or other arrangement to apply
lawn fertilizer to any impermeable surface including parking lots, roadways, and sidewalks. If
such application occurs, the fertilizer must be immediately contained and either legally applied to
turf or other appropriate vegetation or placed in an appropriate container and properly disposed
of.
§107-6 Regulation of the Use and Application of Pesticides.
(1) All persons performing residential lawn applications treating an area more
than one hundred square feet shall affix markers to be placed within or along the
perimeter of the area where pesticides will be applied. Markers are to be placed so as to
be clearly visible to persons immediately outside the perimeter of such property. Such
markers shall be posted at least twelve inches (12”) above the ground and shall be at least
four inches (4”) by five inches (5”) in size.
(2) The markers required pursuant to this paragraph shall be in place on the
day during which the pesticide is being applied and shall instruct persons not to enter the
property and not to remove the signs for a period of at least twenty-four hours. Such
instruction shall be printed boldly in letters at least three-eighths of an inch in height.
§107-7 Exemptions.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 21
This Chapter shall not apply to:
(1) Newly established turf or lawn areas during their first growing season.
(2) Emergency situations which are confirmed by the Code Enforcement Officer.
The Town's Code Enforcement Officer will assess the emergency claim, assure its validity and
may allow an exemption, if the exemption request is the most appropriate remedial action. If the
emergency request is for the use of a pesticide, all non-pesticide remedies must be considered
first. If pesticide use is needed, it must be the least toxic effective control and its use must be
restricted to only the infested area.
(3) Situations in which a reliable soil test indicates a need for the addition of
phosphorus fertilizer. This test shall be conducted by qualified agencies such as the Cornell
University Cooperative Extension.
(4) Application of lawn fertilizer where a continuous natural vegetative buffer, at
least fifteen feet (15’) wide, exists between the turf or lawn area where the application is to occur
and any surface water or an impermeable surface. This buffer must conform to the requirements
of Town Code §179-8-040. – Shoreline Buffers. This Local Law will also apply to the Town
Code §179-8-040 Buffer Area.
(5) Agricultural uses, vegetable and flower gardens or application to trees or shrubs.
(6) Natural chemical-free pesticides and herbicides; labeled environmentally safe
and not harmful to plants, animals and humans.
(7) U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved organic herbicides, pesticides
and repellants.
(8) Application of pesticides for invasive plant control, if all applicable State and
local agency approvals have been obtained.
(9) Impermeable surfaces that discharge to approved treatment devices that are a part
of an approved stormwater management plan.
§107-8 Enforcement and Penalties.
(1) For the first violation of the provisions of this Chapter or any rule or regulation
adopted pursuant to this Chapter, a civil penalty not exceeding one hundred fifty dollars
($150.00) shall be imposed. For the second and succeeding violations, a civil penalty not
exceeding four hundred fifty dollars ($450.00) shall be imposed for each single violation. No
civil penalty shall be imposed as provided for herein unless the alleged violator has received
notice of the charge and has had an opportunity to be heard.
(2) If a property owner violates any provision of this Chapter, he/she shall be held
responsible for the full penalty.
(3) If a landscaper/maintenance service contracted by a property owner, occupant or
agent violates any provision of this Chapter, both the landscaper/maintenance service and the
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 22
property owner, occupant or agent responsible for the service contract shall be held responsible
for the full penalty.
(4) Whenever a violation of this Chapter occurs, the Town's Building and
Codes Officer, or an authorized designee may, at his or her own initiative, enforce
compliance and order the violation be remedied. All complaints shall be made in writing
to the Town's Building and Codes Officer or authorized designee who shall then properly
record such complaint and timely investigate the same. The Town's Building and Codes
Officer shall have the authority to issue a summons or take any such enforcement action
authorized by law upon any person owning, leasing, controlling or managing any
building, structure or land.
ARTICLE 2.
The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph or provision of this Local Law
shall not invalidate any other clause, sentence, paragraph or part thereof.
ARTICLE 3.
All Local Laws or Ordinances or parts of Local Laws or Ordinances in conflict
with any part of this Local Law are hereby repealed.
ARTICLE 4.
This Local Law shall take effect upon filing in the office of the New York State
Secretary of State.
PUBLIC HEARING – QUEENSBURY CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC.
AGREEMENT 2012-2014 AND AUTHORIZING INCURRENCE OF TAX-FREE
FINANCING/DEBT FOR FIREHOUSE EXPANSION
PUBLICATION DATE: AUGUST 25, 2011
ATTORNEY JOHN LAPPER, CHRIS HICKEY, TREASURER QUEENBURY CENTRAL FIRE
COMPANY
SUPERVISOR STEC-This public hearing was actually brought about there are three things that
this resolution is associated with this public hearing tonight cover. I will try to briefly give a
summary for the public. The Town of Queensbury contracts with the five fire companies they
are non-profit entities they are not part of Town government. They are addressed and associated
with Town government and State Law, but they are not an extension of government they are
private entities that the Town contracts with. The law requires that how that relationship works
is that the Town needs to have a contract for fire services for fire protection with the five fire
companies. One fire company’s contract is expiring this year and that was North Queensbury
Fire and we just renewed a new three year contract for them a month or so ago that will take
effect next year. The other four fire companies including Queensbury Central the subject of this
evenings public hearing all of their contracts expire at the end of 2012 so we do have more than
another year on theirs. Now with that said, what drove us to look at their contract a year early is
that for the last couple of years the Town has been meeting off and on with the fire company as
they worked with an architect and their membership towards what they believe is a necessary
expansion to their Station One on Lafayette Street. Little in the way of background some may
recall that about a year ago or a little less than a year ago I believe the fire company came to the
Town with a proposal for a larger expansion totaling in the neighborhood of 2.7 million dollars.
Then Town Board was certainly very concerned at that number and certainly I think we strongly
questioned the need for that especially given the economic climate that we are in. They did go
back out mixed in there; there were also some issues with prevailing wage that is a pet peeve of
mine. It isn’t going to change we just talked about pushing the State to do things I would be
happy if they could get a budget passed on time let alone address prevailing wage issues or
pesticides and fertilizers in Lake George. The prevailing wage issue also complicated this they
did come back with a smaller proposal and I am going to let the fire company address what that
proposal is and what their rational for it is. The bottom line the price tag on this proposed
expansion to the station is 1.7 million dollars so seven hundred thousand less than the original.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 23
Some would say well great that’s a great improvement there may be others that say, well we still
want to hear more about that. To incur debt and this has been an issue profusely with at least one
other company recently. In their contract and Queensbury Central nor any other fire company
deputes this acknowledges that they require a Town Board resolution formal approval of the
Town Board to take on debt of any amount clearly if they build this expansion they needed our
approval on debt that is one approval that they need. A second approval is the Town believes
that it is to theirs and therefore the taxpayer’s ultimate benefit if they pursue and achieved tax
exempt financing because they will spend less on the loan. In order to qualify for tax exempt
financing there is a process laid out in State Law that requires that we conduct a public hearing
so that is a requirement for public hearing so that is the second reason why we are here tonight.
The third reason is that the Town Board I think cognizant of the fact that it is a tough economy
there are certainly some out there that would question whether or not an expansion is needed. I
should point out that the company has consistently represented I, think the Town Board has
consistently supported that their existing building needs improvements the roof needs work it
needs to be replaced. Their heating and air conditioning that is a significant portion not a
majority of the portion, but a significant portion of the cost of this thing so I think we all
recognize that some work needed to be done there. It requires them to obtain a debt, which
requires our approval. Tax exempt financing requires a public hearing and our approval. In
order to do that the Town Board realized look we want some assurances going forward and the
fire company heard this. What we asked for is we wanted to achieve it contractually at least
moving forward, which is why we are looking at renewing their contract. We want to make sure
that we don’t get a whip saw kind of thing here where we start down a path here and then a year
or two from now you come in with a new project, a new purchase, new contract need. We’ve got
the environment of a tax cap to deal with now where we want to make sure that you understand
we are looking to commit that in writing in a contract going forward with some numbers that will
demonstrate a stable budget amount for the fire company moving forward. The Towns current
contract with the fire company guarantees them for 2012, $743,000 total contract for Queensbury
Central. What the fire company has proposed based on the feedback that they got from the board
we said we like to renew and have a three year contract starting in 2012. They proposed a no
increase for the year 2013 then for the year 2014 an increase of what amounts to a little under
one percent from $743,000 to an even $750,000 total, I think that is about a point nine percent
increase. So, what we have in front of us tonight financially is a three year contract that is more
or less flat for the course of those three years. The subject of the public hearing is on the contract
on the tax exempt financing and although not required by law by defacto it is also the discussion
on the building expansion. That is the background here and what I will next do is turn it over to
their Treasurer, Chris Hickey and their Attorney John Lapper. I will open the public hearing and
this will be part of the public hearing. I am going to ask them to cover a little bit of the
background either on the contract any details, updates on where we are since we last talked about
where we are with tax exempt financing. I think most people will probably be most concerned
with where are we going with this building expansion the justification the thought process behind
it.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
ATTORNEY LAPPER-I think Dan pretty much answered all the questions and explained why
we are here. The building itself the existing facility has been in need of upgrades and repairs
like Dan said the roof is leaking there are problems with the HVAC system so a significant
amount of the debt which, of course, it is a much smaller project than it was when it was first
proposed is going into renovations of that building. The other major component is safety
exhausting the fire trucks out of the building both existing and the addition creating more room
for storage and for uniforms to be farther from the trucks when things are moving it is just a very
tight facility. Dick Jones, the project Architect is here and he can answer every specific
question, but in general that is why they are asking for this at this time. It has been a long time
since the building was built it needs to be upgraded and this is a much more modest project than
was first envisioned. Everything is moving forward with the tax exempt financing and we fully
expect that is how it will be financed. There are proposals from a number of banks and they are
just coming in now so they haven’t made a decision so it looks like that should be fine for tax
exempt financing. If there are specific questions about exactly what the project entails Richard
Jones is the right guy to answer that.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 24
SUPERVISOR STEC-The board is familiar with it, but I think for the benefit of the public
maybe if Richard Jones or Chris or whomever from the fire company wants to just summarize
what are we getting for the one point seven million dollars we are taking about tonight?
CHRIS HICKEY-TREASURER, QUEENSBURY CENTRAL-I will hit the highlights then if
there are any specific questions we will let Richard answer those questions. The project
proposes a renovation to all the interior of the existing station that is at 17 Lafayette Street. It
will include a new roof and new mechanicals it will also include a small addition. One of the
reasons for the small addition we currently have an air system that supplies the air to our
breathing apparatus for fireman it is currently located in our Station Two up on Aviation Road.
In the truck bay it is subject to all the toxins that exist within the truck bay it does pull fresh air
from the outside, but it really is designed to be in its own space. We are putting a small addition
onto the back of Station One, which is our main station on Lafayette Street to house that piece of
equipment. In addition to that we are converting some existing space within the building to
house a gear room. John used the word uniform, but we are not putting uniforms in there we are
putting our gear in there. Right now our gear is stored right along the truck bay all of you have
been there all of you have seen this, it is right next to the trucks. It really has been a safety issue
of ours for a long time we just haven’t had a good way to deal with that. We will be converting
two existing rooms, which are right inside the door where the fireman enter to the gear room,
which will allow them to put their gear on in the room then proceed to the trucks so that trucks
aren’t moving in and out while fireman are gearing up. Those are the two major issues other
than again the original building was originally built in the late eighties. One of the reasons why
we have the opportunity and we are here in a way of not increasing the tax dollars is because we
did pay off our mortgage a couple of years ago it gave us the opportunity to deal with these
mechanical issues.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thanks for reminding me that was one of the things I realized after I
finished rambling a minute ago. I didn’t point out some people may say how are you going to
borrow that kind of money and have a flat budget and it is exactly as you said because a couple
years ago you did complete the mortgage payment for the original building. The Town Board
made the conscious decision in the previous contract to continue funding at that level in a
restricted account for the engineering work and some of the preliminary work or a future capital
purchase in case this didn’t happen it could be used for a truck. We did carry forward that
mortgage money that we were providing in the old contract so now you are going to be
substituting in a new mortgage essentially for the old mortgage that was paid off?
TREASURER, MR. HICKEY-That’s correct.
SUPERVISOR STEC-The public hearing is opened. If there are any members of the public that
would like to address the board on this public hearing I would just ask that you raise your hand I
will call on people one at a time. We asked that you state your name and address into the mic for
the record the microphones not only amplify, but they record for the purpose of the record.
GEORGE DRELLOS-27 FOXHOLLOW LANE, QUEENSBURY-Dan, I don’t have the new
contract in front of me I don’t know when you guys got it. I have the one from the last budget
your workshop meeting.
SUPERVISOR STEC-The contract itself the language in the contract is the same as the language
in the previous contract the only things that has really changed is the years and the dollars. All
the terms and the conditions on that fifteen page document…
MR. DRELLOS-The same one I have is the same one you have?
SUPERVISOR STEC-That’s not a contract in your hand George.
MR. DRELLOS-It’s the budget proposal.
SUPERVISOR STEC-What, I have is I have three numbers here and their contract talks about
three numbers seven hundred and forty three thousand for two thousand twelve.
MR. DRELLOS-That one I got.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 25
SUPERVISOR STEC-Seven forty three for two thirteen and seven fifty for twenty fourteen.
MR. DRELLOS-Do they have the new truck in there in that budget.
SUPERVISOR STEC-The next three years there is no truck.
MR. DRELLOS-They took the truck out?
SUPERVISOR STEC-There is no truck provided in this contract.
MR. DRELLOS-This one says new truck loan 2013.
SUPERVISOR STEC-There is no truck in this contract.
MR. DRELLOS-I am just asking I don’t have it in front of me.
SUPERVISOR STEC-I don’t have what you have in front of you in front of me.
MR. DRELLOS-Do you want this one?
SUPERVISOR STEC-No, I don’t need it because the truck isn’t in the contract.
MR. DRELLOS-Okay, I am just asking. Yours says one point seven million it is really two
point million total that is what the building is going to really cost we already gave three hundred
thousand.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Their principal amount will not exceed one point seven million dollars
they have spent money already, correct.
MR. DRELLOS-Dan have you got any bids on what a new roof and a new air condition heating
system cost?
SUPERVISOR STEC-I haven’t bid out their job George.
MR. DRELLOS-I know, but have you seen it have they done that?
SUPERVISOR STEC-That is a question for them they did get numerous bids on this work.
MR. DRELLOS-If we didn’t do the building expansion just with the roof and heating and air
conditioning cost…
SUPERVISOR STEC-That would be a great question to have them answer when they come
back.
MR. DRELLOS-I am kind of curious what the actual cost would have been.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Just for a roof, we can ask that.
MR. DRELLOS-Okay. Quite frankly with these economic times the way it is you are going in
debt for one point seven million dollars. People have a hard enough time right now struggling
paying their bills with what they've got we are going to spend one point seven million. Bay
Ridge is coming in with another four or five hundred thousand you can see what is happening
here it is starting all over again the process what is the next station and the next one. The practice
of leaving money on loans that are paid off truck loans whatever it is in their accounts if you
took that money out three hundred thousand dollars how much percentage would it have
dropped, twenty percent of their loan three hundred thousand of seven hundred what percentage
of that?
SUPERVISOR STEC-I am not sure I am following you with where the three hundred thousand
is coming from whatever the loan was whatever their mortgage was?
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 26
MR. DRELLOS-If the…was taking out that money which it should have been what percentage
of that?
SUPERVISOR STEC-We would have had a tax rate that was doing this all over the place and
we would have been looking at borrowing even more money for whatever we did next.
MR. DRELLOS-Is this going to be the practice of the Town is whenever a truck comes due….
SUPERVISOR STEC-We made this decision on the financing when we adopted their contract
three years ago.
MR. DRELLOS-I know.
SUPERVISOR STEC-We had that debate then we voted on the contract.
Mr. DRELLOS-…made a decision to leave the money in last year.
SUPERVIOSR STEC-Whenever we ratified the last contract 2010, 2011 and 2012. It would
st
have been right around January 1, 2010 that we….
MR. DRELLOS-Is this going to be a practice now when a truck or a loan is paid off are we
going to leave it in there because now it give the falsehood of a non budget increase.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I think what you are referring to is, two years ago when the fire
company said we need to do some stuff the proposal was initially somewhere around two million
one two million two. We said you know we are not really ready for that, but in any event seeing
that the loan is paid off you are going to have to do some bidding you are going to have to do
some architect you are going to have to design this and it is going to have to be less than two
million that was the words we gave back to them. We used that one year of money that normally
as you said could have taken it and put it towards whatever, but we gave them the opportunity to
go and reduce it so now from two million one or two million two we are down to a million
seven. I think the fire company has trimmed itself and is getting some of the things that they
need. How much would it cost just to do the roof and the heating unit I don’t know the answer to
that it might cost us six hundred thousand it might half.
MR. DRELLOS-Maybe not the three hundred thousand we gave them would pay for that.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-You still would of had to have somebody design it and you would
still….
MR. DRELLOS-A roof and a heating system.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-You just don’t go to bid and say come in and put a new furnace in
come on you know, you know better than that.
SUPERVISOR STEC-We have engineers designing a roof at the Town for our own roof.
MR. DRELLOS-An engineer to put a roof and a heating system.
SUPERVISOR STEC-I will give you Gene Melenio’s phone number and you talk to him about a
sprinkler system in this Town Hall.
MR. DRELLOS-I don’t know that kind of seems….
SUPERVISOR STEC-Town government is subject to different rules and public buildings it is
not as simple as I need a new roof on my house I wish it was it would be cheaper, but it isn’t.
MR. DRELLOS-The bottom line in my opinion this is not the time to be going into debt. I am
all in favor of fixing the roof and the heating system I said it before that is where the money
should of went instead of just leaving it in there.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 27
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thanks George appreciate that, respect that. Anyone else like to address
the board this evening on this public hearing?
PETER BROTHERS-I, too would agree with a lot of what Mr. Drellos was just saying.
Specifically with regard to a new roof I certainly don’t want to have leaks in the building.
Fireman, I think everybody agrees here really are the life blood of our community they put their
lives on the line every single day to protect citizens and greatly appreciative so in that regard
certainly want their building to be habitable with a new roof and also with heating cooling. If
they are coming back from a fire call they need to be warmed up during winter or something or
in the summer need to go into a place to get cooled off come back to the fire station so certainly
would approve of the heating cooling system as well. I think during the economic times that we
are in that the costs involved with an expansion I feel are unreasonable at best. I also feel that
maybe for us in North Queensbury gives us a more valid reason for having a North Queensbury
Fire District because of a number of issues. One thing that specifically concerns me here is that
all this being paid by the Town where as we in North Queensbury if I understand correctly, I
don’t have the exact figure with this fire boat that was purchased I think the Town went half and
half, I don’t have the exact figures but the people up in our neighborhood had to pay through
their own pocket for me it seems to be a lack of fairness. Again, to reiterate the heating cooling
system….
COUNCILMAN BREWER-What do you mean paid out of their own pocket if you don’t mind if
I ask?
SUPERVISOR STEC-Their fundraising…
MR. BROTHERS-Heating cooling system and a new roof fine, but anything that I think really
with the exception of normal operating budget and also here again they should be flat similar to
like North Queensbury to set an example for fiscal restraint I think that would be admirable for
all taxpayers in Queensbury.
BRIAN GRANGER, 41 OLD MILL LANE, QUEENSBURY-Twenty two years ago when
Lafayette Street was built was the first time in the Town of Queensbury history we borrowed
money to build a firehouse now we are millions of dollars in debt add another one point seven
million. They had it their budget prior for another truck all together the debt payments are going
to be over three hundred thousand dollars a year. I want to know if we are ever going to get back
to no debt on the firehouses. Is that the road we are going to or are we going to always have debt
of millions of dollars and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in interest. Why can’t we
postpone this when we have the money in the bank to pay for it, stop borrowing money? The
Town of Colonie is in trouble other Town’s in the area run out of money because of too much
debt we have fire firehouses in this Town that are less than twenty years old. The Ridge Street
Firehouse has a cornerstone that says 1936 on it and at sixty seven thousand dollars a year plus
or minus for maintenance in the budget of Queensbury Central Fire Company how come the roof
hasn’t been maintained? It is eight dollars a square foot to tear off a rubber roof and the
installation and put it back. Sixty seven thousand dollars a year is in the budget for building
repairs and maintenance and the roof hasn’t been maintained and the roof is leaking the building
is not that big keep borrowing money and the taxes are going to skyrocket right upward. When
John Webster built this building next door to us not this addition the Town of Queensbury paid
for it in cash. Station Two on Aviation Road was paid for cash the fireman raised part of the
funds. My father was fireman and I stood out in front of Price Chopper on Glen Street with an
oversized hat and boots on and helped collect some of the donations stop borrowing money pay
for it as you go. You have five new firehouses in this Town that are considered new compared to
a lot of other Town’s and Village’s in the area, but we just keep borrowing and borrowing and
borrowing. You have a hundred thousand dollars a year for truck payments for the tower truck
and then they have a propose truck for another fifty thousand dollars a year for payments on the
next truck. Keep borrowing money when your children, grandchildren want to come back to the
Town of Queensbury the stationary is going to say A Nice Place to Live If You Can Afford It.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Thanks. Is there anyone else that would like to address the board on this
public hearing, seeing none I will close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 28
SUPERVISOR STEC-Discussion from the Town Board.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-Mr. Jones can you go over the pricing for roof and HVAC.
DICK JONES, ARCHITECT-The project as proposed includes removal and replacement of the
existing single ply roofing. The existing roofing system is a ballasted roof system, which means
it has roughly five to eight pounds of stone ballast on it that has to be removed. As part of the
project we were also proposing replacement of all of the mechanical systems in the building that
would be the heating and cooling systems. Currently the building has a boiler system that is
failing it is starting to leak the boiler. We would be looking to replace that boiler with a new
modular high efficiency boiler. The rooftop units right now all have hot water coils we would be
looking to replace them with roof top gas fired and electric cooling units. They would be much
more economical to run. We would be downsizing the boiler to a minimum size because
basically we would be looking to only heat the apparatus bays and the perimeter wall fin in the
building insert in the office areas and the main meeting room, which would be the east side of
the building basically the cost for the roof range from anywhere from eight to ten dollars a
square foot. The existing building is a little over twelve thousand square feet, which would make
it somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred and twenty to a hundred forty thousand. The
roof ballast that is coming off of the roof is going to be deposited on site and used as stone fill so
there is no demolition or removal cost for that other than getting off the roof itself. With regard
to the mechanical systems the original roof top units are much larger than the new units that we
are proposing. The new units are highly efficient their efficiency ratings are over ninety percent
the old units the efficiency rating was in the seventy to seventy five percent ratio so our cost
savings for energy usage in the building is going to down dramatically. In looking at replacing
those units on the roof it also entails replacing, removing, rebuilding the roof curbs and actually
closing in some of the roof openings that are there. It is more than just taking units off of the roof
and replacing them in kind it involves structural work, infill of the deck, and finish work
underneath, renovations to duck work because all of the transitions change as well so there is a
lot more to it than just one on one swap. With regard to the renovations in the building itself we
are looking to upgrade ventilation systems throughout the building right now it has general
exhaust system in the apparatus bays for the trucks. If you go in the apparatus bays you will
notice a gray to dark black tinge on all of the ceilings and the walls that is from the diesel fumes
from all of the trucks. The ventilation system that we are looking at would basically entail
installation of a system to control all of the emissions from the trucks. The emissions from the
trucks are a hazard to the fireman basically it does not comply with NFPA requirements so that
has to be upgraded. The apparatus bays themselves are full of equipment the storage rooms in
the buildings have been utilized for other purposes other than storage so things are being stored
in the apparatus bay areas. In looking at the renovations and going through the program for what
the facility needed we are taking existing portions of the building existing rooms converting
them back to storage rooms or converting them to special uses such as dirty work areas, clean
work areas. We are taking the small addition on the backside of the building and we are creating
a basic clean room for the SCBA equipment for the air packs in doing that it frees one of the
bays on Station Two, which allows smaller vehicles to be moved to Station Two it is more than
just swapping and moving it entails considerably renovation within the building itself.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I think you have three feet between the apparatus and the gear.
MR. JONES-The gear lockers right now line the wall roughly three feet from the drive lane
where the trucks exit the building. As mentioned before we are actually creating a new gear
locker area, which is adjacent to the fireman’s entrance into the building their response entrance
into the building. Basically it allows them to come into a free space it is not in the drive lanes it
is basically not in the apparatus bays, but is adjacent to the entry door. They can put their
equipment on exit the room then get on the trucks and exit the building. There is a lot of safety
consideration just because of the sheer volume of equipment and storage in those spaces.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-When you speak of volume I want the public to know how many
calls do we make a year out of central?
MR. HICKEY-The last year I believe we were over fifteen hundred calls.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-This is not just a simple easy volunteer fire company.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 29
MR. JONES-I urge everyone both board members and public you really need to go to that
facility to see how that building is used on a daily basis. There are training functions going on
just about every night. There are fire company exercises going on. There is public use of the
meeting room. I don’t know how many different organizations use the meeting room on a daily
basis. When you look at the calendar of events that are taking place in that facility that facility is
used every day it gets a lot of abuse it gets a lot of use basically the building needs maintenance
it needs updating and it needs repair. As, I said before we are looking to try to conserve energy
in that building it was built in the late eighties it is not energy efficient. The installation systems
for the roofs would be upgraded to meet the new energy code. The lighting both exterior and the
interior right now the meeting room is basically light by incandescent fixtures. We would be
upgrading that to high efficiency florescent HID fixtures putting everything on dimming systems
to try and cut down the cost of utility usage within the building itself. There is a lot involved in
the renovation of the project as well as a small addition. I know originally we had proposed a
fairly substantial expansion of the parking areas we have cut that down considerably in this
proposal. We are able to get the parking up near the requirements for the planning and zoning
requirements for the facility and still maintain the traffic access drive isles the turning radius’s
that are required especially for the tower truck also to be able to have access to the fueling station
which sits on the backside of the parking lot on the eastside of the property. So basically we are
upgrading resurfacing parking lots they have not been addressed in twenty plus years. Some of
the storm retention storm infiltration devices on site the grates have basically settled we are
raising those up to new grade and basically redoing the parking lots. We are not looking at any
frills in this building we are not increasing the landscaping or anything else. We are keeping
existing light poles and putting new fixture heads on them. We are replacing exterior lights on
the building in the same location where they were. We are not adding a lot of frills of any type
to this building it is basic need and that is what we addressed as part of the project.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-Chet made sure I got a second tour of the needs of this building.
Not that the first tour wasn’t sufficient, but we all had skepticism, but there is clearly a need and
I wish that George and Peter and Brian they offered to give you the tour I think you should take
them up on it. Seeing things without the hands on approach as this board has put hours, and
hours, and hours, and, hours, and hours into this particular topic. It is not an easy board to deal
with ask the fireman we’re tough, we’re skeptical about expensive projects such as this. At least
in my mind they convinced me that there is a real need. These volunteers would have not come
to me and to us if there wasn’t a real need for this to be done now. This expansion and it
includes the roof it includes some mechanicals. There were mechanical issues there are also
safety issues with the way this firehouse is set up that would be relieved by this expansion. Then
there are always the naysayers. I, mean no time is a good time even when the economic times are
good it wasn’t a good time; sometimes never is a good time to spend money, I guess. This is
money that we need to spend for safety reasons and for a variety of others. The prices are down
right now if we wait for better economic times it is going to be more expensive it is going to cost
us even more and this needs to be done. Like, I said the propose expansion has been
significantly downsized to get back to the basic so what they really have to have now I’m
convinced that’s so. This board scrutinized them they scrutinized their budget and they
responded and they responded in a way that made me comfortable. Especially when I asked for
a three year program on the budget and we got it. We looked at that so you said about just the
basic the roof and the heating and air conditioning systems. Yeah, we went through that routine
I wish some of you were here for all of that because we went through all of that. There are some
people that say well we ought to break away and form our own fire district of North Queensbury.
Fifteen hundred calls Queensbury Central’s District produces the income that keeps the taxes
low and keeps it low for the people of North Queensbury and everybody else that means a lot of
hard work by the volunteers of Queensbury Central. I am telling you when Irene went by my
Ward got hit especially hard and they were right there. They were trimming the tree tops so that
emergency vehicles and ambulances could get to the houses that were cut off otherwise. They
were out there in the middle of that storm working hard. I even went to the station over on
Aviation Road, Station Two you could see them all there sweating from all the hard work they
have been doing all day and Dan I know you were there earlier. I wanted to see firsthand and
also to kind of let them know that I do realize these volunteers are working very hard. Some
people say twenty two years ago, I used to skateboard down Miller Hill and lived on the top of
Miller Hill where Wal Mart and Sleep Inn is that is where my house used to be. You can’t
skateboard down Route 9 today on a Sunday. The Queensbury then and the Queensbury now are
two different places, two different things. Fifteen hundred calls every year this is not the
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 30
Queensbury of twenty two or forty two years ago this is a different place. The volunteers of
twenty two years ago or forty years ago whatever term you want to use; today’s volunteers have
to go through criteria and State requirements it is mind boggling. I don’t know why these people
volunteer for this work, but they do and I want to thank them for that. The training they have to
go through and everything else is not what they had to go through twenty years ago it is severe it
is strict and I want to congratulate them on that. Volunteers how many times have I said
volunteers many times if we had to have a paid fire department….
SUPERVISOR STEC-And we won’t.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH-I do want to thank their volunteerism and I do want to show them I
appreciate it. I know we gave them a hard time about this I think we have ended up with
something that is best for the community here at least in my mind so that’s my piece.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Any other board comments?
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-Mr. Jones commented that this new system for the HVAC is going
to be much more efficient than what you are currently used to at a rate of seventy percent I
believe to ninety six percent did you make any adjustments in your budget for the cost to heat?
MR. HICKEY-I think that it was one of the issues that gave us the opportunity to hold the budget
flat. From the perspective of all the requirements that are imposed upon us by NFPA and other
standards for us to hold we would love the standards to stay the same, but we know that they
don’t. One of the opportunities for us to hold flat was knowing that we would have some
savings on the energy side.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-I know what your next answer is going to be. Maintenance cost
sixty seven thousand dollars last year where do see that going with all of the renovations?
MR. HICKEY-Again, we still have a Station Two that is antiquated much older than our Station
One as you know up on Aviation Road there are still maintenance requirements. This project
other than the air quality system associated with the apparatus this project does not deal with any
of the issues of Station Two and we don’t anticipate much. Station Two is a substation it will
always be a substation, but there are maintenance issues there. We have to answer one of the
questions before one of the problems with the roof is we have been putting money into the roof.
Year after year we have been putting money into that roof to patch it and limp along with it, I
guess is the way you put it because it is a ballast roof it makes it a lot more challenging to repair
as some of you may know. A lot of our maintenance issues believe me I was one of those people
standing out there in the road collecting money years ago because I have been doing this for
thirty three years. Our men can’t do that anymore our guys cannot be out in the road collecting
things. We used to mow the lawns and we used to shovel the sidewalks most of that buildings
maintenance cost that you are talking about there is that we, just be straight we contract out for
all of that now. We contract out for cleaning the station. We contract out for all the lawn care.
We contract out for all the maintenance of the parking lots in the winter.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-You are watching the equipment watching the trucks.
MR. HICKEY-The majority of that cost relates to things that yes thirty years ago, twenty years
ago we did do ourselves that is what volunteering fire fighting was years ago, but that was way
before there were fifteen hundred calls a year.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-The point is when your next budget negotiations come up in three
years it could be a completely different board I would hope that the next board or if it is this
board would address and be able to look at cost savings for the units and maintenance and see if
in three years we can keep another flat budget. We just don’t know and it would interesting for
me to see if this project will somehow pay for itself. The thing that I worry about is if you let
things go too long as we have mentioned it is going to be much more expensive. It is a terrible
time, but it is also a good time for us to do this because there are very hungry contractors out
there that need work.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Putting the new lights in won’t you get a benefit from Nimo?
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 31
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-I was going to ask you did you pursue that when we all were doing
these energy audit. These lights were all part of a program I know our office was part of a
program?
MR. HICKEY-We have not looked to go to NYSERDA even National Grid we can look into
that.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-It was a great program paid for itself or will pay for itself.
SUPERVISOR STEC-If, I could jump in a minute and build on something that Tony hit on this
isn’t the first time that it has been mentioned and you are not the only company that it has been
mentioned to. There may debate amongst the public whether or not it is something that they
want you to be contracting for, but we are hearing what you are saying about doing the lawn and
snow removal and all that so you contract it out. I’d feel better this is not an issue that needs to
be addressed tonight, but we have asked for this a view of the other four fire companies of the
three rescue squads. If you don’t want to do it because you guys don’t want to work with each
other get over it. Prove me wrong, I would like to see you guys pursue what is the purchasing
power do for you for snow removal, lawn care, janitorial services. If you say, look this is what
the combined price is and it doesn’t save us a penny.
MR. HICKEY-We talked about this in the budget for probably the last five or six times that I
negotiated a budget with you guys. I totally agree with that and Queensbury Central is ready to
stand there with the other companies and do that. There is one exception snow removal is
something that you have to be very sensitive to we are first on the list of our snow removal
company. If you use the same snow removal company as long as they can all guarantee that all
five fire companies plus two rescue squads we are all going to be first on line that one is
challenges all of the others Dan I totally agree with you.
SUPERVISOR STEC-What I am saying the Town Board doesn’t need to get involved in that
level of holding the hand and saying let’s get this done we hear you. We understand that you are
going to need to find a way whether it is an independent companies or big enough company that
says we can put you first on the list and keep everyone open.
MR. HICKEY-Sure.
SUPERVISOR STEC-But, there are other opportunities out there, there is a list you know what it
is.
MR. HICKEY-I do.
SUPERVISOR STEC-What is going to happen if it isn’t this board and it’s not this contract at
some point there is going to well I can tell you what is coming into your next contract no
purchase of helicopters, aircraft, and submarines.
ATTORNEY COUNSEL, HAFNER-That’s in this contract.
SUPERVISOR STEC-That is in that contract where is it Bob I want to read that.
ATTORNEY COUNSEL, HAFNER-You said it had to be all future contracts it is on Page 11,
Paragraph 5F.
SUPERVISOR STEC-The fire company shall not without prior approval a lot of this language is
already in the contract.
ATTORNEY HAFNER-It is already there.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Hint, hint, wink, wink, to the other fire companies that might be watching
what we do here. Fire companies shall not without prior approval by resolution of the
Queensbury Town Board, do any of the following. 1. Borrow any amount. 2. Purchase any
vehicle including, without limitation, fire trucks, fly cars, SUV’s, truck, cars, boats or ATV’s. I
would have gone with helicopters and submarines myself just…..
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 32
ATTORNEY HAFNER-We still can put them in they are still vehicles.
MR. HICKEY-There is a little bit of contradiction in the contract as it relates to that just so you
know.
SUPERVISOR STEC-These are the little things where somebody thinks they are smarter than
the Town Board that make us react. This is why there are crazy laws out there because there is
somebody that always think they are smarter than the Taxpayer, the Board, the Legislature, and
the President. Then the public gets ticked off because they say how could they let that happen so
that’s how stuff gets its way into the contract. What is coming if you guys don’t do it yourselves
is there will be language in the contract that says you will shop janitorial services, you will shop
lawn mowing, and you will shop insurance we have been talking about this for many years.
MR. HICKEY-We shop all those things.
SUPERVISOR STEC-But, if you shop it together you might save ten percent.
MR. HICKEY-We are five different corporate entities that is a challenge.
SUPERVISOR STEC-We are off the track here.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-Last winter I had gone to a few of the local property maintenance
groups there was a lot of resistance on that side as well.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Of course, because people are making money right John.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-I didn’t get that sense.
SUPERVISOR STEC-That’s exactly the sense I get.
COUNCILMAN METIVIER-I don’t know I don’t feel that way.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Don’t make me work for that money I am getting from the Town taxpayer
that is the attitude that I sense that is out there amongst these professional companies that are
contracting with our fire companies. You guys are fifteen hundred calls and I am going to
ballpark that if you add up the five companies you pretty much take your half you are looking at
Town wide about three thousand calls. The average the medium home this isn’t to say that we
don’t want you sharpening the pencil I don’t want to send a mix message here. If, I am going to
be forced like the board is to answer the taxpayer to justify a purchase decision or a contract or a
tax or whatever it is we are prepared to do that. Please Chris and Central and all five fire
companies and all three rescue squads never ever interrupt that as carte blanch you have a blank
check to do whatever you want to do because you are doing God’s work that is not what I am
saying here. For the public’s sake and everyone else’s sake three thousands calls a year and the
medium home in Queensbury pays less than a hundred and fifty dollars a year for fire protection.
I can live with that I understand that there are those out there that can’t live with that. I also
understand that there are those out there that it is a lot more than a hundred and fifty dollars I get
that, I understand the math believe me. Is it a good deal as opposed to some of the alternatives
like a paid service I looked at our budget many years ago compared to the City of Glens they
were almost the same total dollar amount they were a nearly similar total dollar amount spent on
fire protection. They are paid twenty four seven there are people on staff there the vast majority
of their fire budget is payroll and benefits. Where the vast tiny minority of ours well there is no
payroll the benefits are almost laughable to mention. I can’t say that you have no benefits you
do have a small retirement and there is a worker’s comp program so all that’s true. For starters, I
don’t get a lot of phone calls complaining about the fire tax, but again I don’t want the fire
companies and the rescue squads to interpret that no one cares so we can spend whatever we
want. We have a Town of thirty thousand people we had three people speak tonight I don’t want
to send the message out there that the Town says, go spend whatever you want. This isn’t
directed at you Chris you and I have had a lot of conversations and I think you and I are alike on
a lot of this stuff. This is really for those who are watching at home because you guys…every
fire company will watch what I have to say tonight. Our job is to watch the dollar and we know
that maybe there is three hundred maybe there is three thousand people that say this is crazy. We
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 33
are the ones that are tasked with doing the analysis and asking the hard questions there is always
going to be a critic that says you didn’t ask enough hard questions.
MR. HICKEY-I just want to respond to one comment because to think that we take the attitude
of well thank god we got it we are just going to find a way to spend it I think a lot of fireman
would take offense to that mentality. Take snow removal and lawn care for us as an example we
have had three different people do snow removal and lawn care I think don’t hold me to this I am
on record here over the last six years because we have gone and we’ve shopped it every couple
years we go and shop it. Granted we don’t shop it with the other six agencies so sure there is
some opportunity I think there, but we have changed both of those, which is a major part of our
building maintenance. We have changed it three times over the last six or seven years trying to
shop it so that it is the most cost efficient to the Town. I don’t want you guys think or I don’t
want the public to think that we got this money and we’re just trying to find ways to spend it
there are people probably in the back of the room that think that is the case, but you know us
we’ve gone around this a lot of times in relationship to fiscal responsibility we take it seriously I
just want everybody to know that we do that.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Chris just a word of caution and maybe I don’t want to say this because I
don’t want to silence the pipe line of information that gets to the five of us. Those are those
walking among you in the firehouses that do say not even necessarily one fire company talking
about another fire company member in your house….
MR. HICKEY-I understand.
SUPERVISOR STEC-That say they blew money on this they blew money on that. If they are
telling us they are telling him and they are telling them they are telling their neighbors. If it is
true I got an issue with it if it is not true then you guys need to make sure that you are
communicating with your own membership better. There are those in every fire company it is
not unique to Central it is not unique to any organization every organization has got their critics
in the organization that will spill their guts about the way that they think that their organization is
out to lunch.
MR. HICKEY-We are a member driven organization that approves every purchase. I will be
honest with you rarely do we have a unanimous vote on any purchase even the things that of the
most simple common sense purchases.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Even the Town Board members wonder what Dan does sometimes.
SUPERVISOR STEC-I wonder sometimes, too. We have beaten you up on this an awful lot. I
know there are those out there that would say you could of done a better job beating them up on
it, beating it down I know all the cliché we have been here long enough we are all adults we all
know how the game is played. You and I have been able to have some very I think to the point
conversations because I think you and I tend to be on the same wave link, which probably
terrifies you.
MR. HICKEY-It does.
SUPERVISOR STEC-It ought to. I appreciate the work that you and Joel have put into this your
company over the years the service the fifty some odd calls that you did in one day the other day
largely in Ward Three with the help of West Glens Falls Fire all five fire companies were
running ragged. You need to be unlike a lot of what we do around here you need to be staffed to
be able to handle that. You are not staffed for you know we are going to get Katrina here every
other day either, but you are staffed somewhere in-between and your resources. Do, I think if we
beat the heck out of this we could squeeze a little more out of that one point seven perhaps. Am
I prepared to live with it, yes. Can I fault anyone that has a beef with it and says that’s too much
for me no I don’t I understand that, I get it. Going on the information that we got the research
that we’ve done the fact that this has been out there in the public for consumption a long we had
three people come tonight that said, I don’t think this is the best use of taxpayer money, which I
respect that opinion. I had other opinions shared on other matters by other people in the past that
were completely out to lunch. This one I am not going to argue with anyone that says that is just
too much this isn’t the time, I get that. I think we got a little bit of that on the Town Board and I
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 34
respect that opinion this is not a no brainer. There have been some no brainers that we have
argued over, but I appreciate the work that you guys put in this.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Philosophically if you stop talking they will get that building built.
MR. HICKEY-I will just leave the table by saying we do appreciate all the support it has been a
long project.
SUPERVISOR STEC-We have our job to do you have your job to do and we both have our
critics of whether or not we are doing our jobs well. I sleep well at night and I am sure you do,
too.
MR. HICKEY-Absolutely.
SUPERVISOR STEC-Any other discussion is there a resolution somebody want to make a
motion.
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 - 2014 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND QUEENSBURY
CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC.
AND AUTHORIZING INCURRENCE OF TAX-FREE FINANCING/DEBT
FOR FIREHOUSE EXPANSION
RESOLUTION NO.: 276, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.
(Fire Company) previously contracted for fire protection services, and
WHEREAS, the Agreement for fire protection services sets forth a number of terms and conditions,
including a condition that the Fire Company will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase
any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any improvements that would require the
Fire Company to acquire a loan or mortgage without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and
WHEREAS, the Fire Company has presented to the Town Board a proposal to construct an
expansion of its firehouse on Lafayette Street for a principal amount not to exceed $1,700,000 and proposes
to finance the expansion project through tax-exempt financing provided under §150(e) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and
WHEREAS, the Fire Company plans to negotiate with local banks to enter into a financing
agreement for the amount of $1,700,000 for 15-20 years at a market rate expected to be approximately 2.5%
and this financing arrangement is intended to qualify as tax-exempt under §150(e) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 as amended, if tax-exempt financing is available, and, if not, non tax-exempt financing is
estimated to be approximately 3.75%, and
WHEREAS, in accordance with §150(e)(3) and §147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, the Fire Company has requested that the Town Board conduct a public hearing to authorize
approval of the financing and the Town Supervisor to execute approval of the financing to comply with the
statutory requirements, and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 35
WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that it is in the best interest of the Fire Company and
Town residents as required by the Internal Revenue Code to conduct a public hearing concerning the
proposed expansion project, and
WHEREAS, the Town and the Fire Company have also negotiated terms for a new three (3) year
Agreement for fire protection services, and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Law §184 and General Municipal Law §209(b), the Town
th
Board scheduled and duly held a public hearing on September 12, 2011 concerning the proposed
Agreement, and in accordance with §150(e)(3) and §147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, the Town Board also conducted a public hearing to authorize approval of the financing and the
Town Supervisor to execute approval of the financing to comply with the statutory requirements the Fire
Company’s proposal and tax-exempt financing as required by the Fire Company’s Agreement with the
Town and the Internal Revenue Code, and heard all interested persons, and
WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Agreement has been presented at this meeting, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board believes that the firehouse expansion will help provide for additional
safety protection for the Town, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board therefore wishes to adopt a Resolution authorizing the 2012-2014
Agreement, firehouse expansion and the Fire Company’s corresponding incurrence of tax-exempt debt,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board on behalf of the Fire Protection District, hereby
approves the Fire Protection Service Agreement between the Town and the Queensbury Central Volunteer
Fire Co., Inc., for the years 2012- 2014 substantially in the form presented at this meeting, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further approves of the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire
Company, Inc.’s proposal to construct an expansion of its firehouse on Lafayette Street for a principal
amount not to exceed $1,700,000 and proposal to finance the expansion project through tax-exempt financing
provided under §150(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further approves of the Fire Company’s incurrence of
approximately $1,700,000 maximum amount in debt for such expansion, and
BE IT FURTHER,
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 36
RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury does not guarantee such debt with the financial
institution on behalf of the Fire Company nor does the Town Board create or intend to create any
assumption on the part of the Town of Queensbury of any obligation or liability for the financing, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute
the 2012-2014 Agreement substantially in the form presented at this meeting and the Town Supervisor
and/or Town Budget Officer to take any action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011 by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Stec
NOES : Mr. Brewer
ABSENT: None
3.0 PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
PLINEY TUCKER-Spoke to the board regarding Exit 18 noting his concern with the manhole
cover being low.
SUPERVISOR STEC-To contact Kevin Hajos regarding this.
4.0 RESOLUTIONS
.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WITHDRAWAL FROM CAPITAL
RESERVE FUND #64 FOR PURCHASE OF LASERFICHE AND
WORKSTATION UPGRADES AND ESTABLISHING
NEW CAPITAL PROJECT FUND #186 – LASERFICHE AND
WORKSTATION UPGRADES
RESOLUTION NO.: 277, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury’s Technology Coordinator has requested Town Board
approval to purchase laserfiche and workstation upgrades (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”), and
,
WHEREAS the Technology Coordinator has requested Town Board approval of such Project for
an amount not to exceed $35,000 to be funded from the Capital Reserve Fund #64, and
WHEREAS, New York State Bidding is not required as the purchase price for the Project is in
accordance with New York State Contract No.: PT65340 pricing, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board is authorized to withdraw and expend funds from the Capital Reserve
Fund subject to permissive referendum, and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 37
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to authorize such Project and appropriately establish a
Capital Project Fund,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the purchase of laserfiche and
workstation upgrades (“Project”), and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the establishment of a Capital
Project Fund to be known as the “Laserfiche and Workstation Upgrades Project Fund #186,” which Fund
will establish funding for expenses associated with the Project and establishes initial appropriations and
estimated revenues for Capital Project Fund #186 in the amount of $35,000 to be funded from Capital
Reserve Fund #64, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Town’s Technology
Coordinator purchase of the equipment from General Code Publishers and Dell Computers in accordance
with New York State Contract No.: PT65340 pricing for a total amount not to exceed $35,000, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Budget Officer to take all action necessary to establish the following accounts for such
appropriations and revenues as necessary:
?
Increase Appropriation 001-9950-9128-0064 Interfund Transfer by $35,000;
?
Increase Revenue 186-0000-55031 Interfund Revenue by $35,000;
?
Increase Appropriation 186-1680-2001 Misc. Equipment by $35,000; and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to amend the
2011 Town Budget, make any adjustments, budget amendments, transfers or prepare any documentation
necessary to establish such appropriations and estimated revenues and effectuate all terms of this
Resolution, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to sign any
necessary Purchase and/or Maintenance Agreement and any other needed documentation, and the Town
Supervisor, Town Budget Officer and/or Technology Coordinator to take any and all actions necessary to
effectuate all terms of this Resolution, and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 38
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that this Resolution is subject to a permissive referendum in accordance with the
provisions of Town Law Article 7 and the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to
publish and post such notices and take such other actions as may be required by law.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011 by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier
NOES : None
ABSENT:None
RESOLUTION SETTING HEARING ON MARIANNE MC DONOUGH DBA
GRAYCOURT MOTEL AND THOMAS J. MC DONOUGH LAW OFFICE’S
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE/WAIVER REQUEST FROM SANITARY
SEWER CONNECTION REQUIREMENT SET FORTH IN TOWN CODE
CHAPTER 136 – SEWERS AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL
RESOLUTION NO.: 278, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board is authorized by Town Code Chapter 136 to issue
§
variances from 136-44 “Connection to sewers required” which requires Town property owners situated
within a sewer district and located within 250’ of a public sanitary sewer of the sewer district to connect to
the public sewer facilities within one (1) year from the date of notice, and
WHEREAS, Marianne McDonough dba GrayCourt Motel and Thomas J. McDonough Law Office
§
(the McDonoughs) have applied to the Town Board for a variance/waiver from 136-44, as the McDonoughs
have requested a continuing waiver and/or permanent relief from the Town’s connection requirements to
connect the Graycourt Motel and Law Office properties to the Town of Queensbury’s Route 9 Sewer District
nd
for the reasons set forth in the McDonough’s August 22, letter and application presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
th
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board will hold a hearing on Monday, September 26,
2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, to consider Marianne
McDonough dba GrayCourt Motel and Thomas J. McDonough Law Office (the McDonoughs)’s sewer
connection variance/waiver application concerning the properties delineated in the preambles of this
Resolution and located at 1082 and 1088 State Route 9, Queensbury (Tax Map No.’s: 296.9-1-8 and 296.9-
1-9), and
BE IT FURTHER,
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 39
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to send the
Notice of Hearing presented at this meeting to the McDonoughs as required by law.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi
NOES :Mr. Stec
ABSENT:None
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF OCCUPANCY FUNDS TOWARD
REIMBURSEMENT OF TOWN RECREATION PROJECTS
RESOLUTION NO.: 279, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, by prior Resolution and Agreement the Queensbury Town Board provided in the 2011
Town Budget for the Town’s receipt of occupancy tax revenues from Warren County in accordance with the
Local Tourism Promotion and Convention Development Agreement (Agreement) entered into between the
Town and Warren County, and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that specific expenditure of the funds provided under the
Agreement are subject to further Resolution of the Queensbury Town Board, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to accordingly authorize provision of such funds, in the amount
of $9,791.95, to be used toward reimbursing the Town Recreation Department for expenditures related to the
Department’s improvement investments in two area recreational attractions, Gurney Lane Recreation Area
and Hovey Pond Park, both of which are used by not only the general public, but also by visiting tourists,
thereby serving as an economic boon to the Town of Queensbury and entire area, as delineated in the Town
th
Parks & Recreation Director’s August 19 Memorandum to the Town Supervisor presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the expenditure of
funds in the amount of $9,791.95 for reimbursement to the Town’s Recreation Department as delineated in
the preambles of this Resolution, such funds to be from Warren County occupancy tax revenues received by
the Town and to be paid for from Account No.: 050-6410-4412, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes the Town Budget Officer to take any and all
actions necessary to effectuate the following 2011 Budget Amendment:
?
Increase Appropriations in Use of Occupancy Tax Account 050-6410-4412 by $9,791.95;
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 40
and adjust the expense codes as needed, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Town Budget
Officer and/or Director of Parks and Recreation to take such other and further action as may be necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING COMMENCEMENT OF SUPREME
COURT ACTION AGAINST LEEMILT’S PETROLEUM, INC.
RESOLUTION NO.: 280, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, Leemilt’s Petroleum, Inc., owns property at 330 Aviation Road in the Town of
Queensbury, Tax Map Parcel No.: 301.8-1-19, formerly the Getty Convenient Mart, and
WHEREAS, the Town’s Director of Building and Codes Enforcement, David Hatin, reports to the
th
Town Board that he visited such property on or about June 27, 2011 and the building on the property
has been tagged with graffiti on all four sides and is showing signs of disrepair and neglect such that the
paint is chipping, there are broken windows, the planters are overgrown with weeds, the guard rail is
completely destroyed and a section of roof has been blown off the structure leaving a hole in the roof,
and
WHEREAS, such conditions on the property constitute violations of the New York State Property
Maintenance Code adopted by the Town, and
th
WHEREAS, Mr. Hatin advised the property owner by letter dated June 27, 2011, which letter
served as an “Order to Remedy Violation Notice,” that the property owner must bring the property into
compliance over the next 30 days, and yet the property owner has not made any changes to the property, and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 41
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Court lacks injunctive power to require compliance with the
Town Code, and
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to pursue preliminary and injunctive relief,
requiring that Leemilt’s Petroleum, Inc., bring the property into compliance with the Town Code,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the commencement
of a Warren County Supreme Court action to pursue preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against
Leemilt’s Petroleum, Inc., concerning the property located at 330 Aviation Road in the Town of Queensbury
(Getty Convenient Mart - Tax Map No.: 301.8-1-19) as referenced in the preambles of this Resolution, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town’s Budget Officer to arrange
for payment of any Court and/or litigation costs related to this matter from the account(s) deemed to be
appropriate by the Budget Officer, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes Town Counsel to cause a title search to be
made to assure that all necessary parties are named in the litigation, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs Town Counsel to file any necessary
documentation to commence such proceeding and the Town Supervisor, Town Counsel, Director of
Building and Codes Enforcement, Code Compliance Officer and/or Town Budget Officer to take any and
all action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer
NOES : None
ABSENT : None
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH WELLCHOICE, INC. / WELLPOINT
HOLDING CORP. FOR PROVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FOR RETIREE
DRUG SUBSIDY PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES
RESOLUTION NO. 281, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 42
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, by prior Resolutions, the Queensbury Town Board authorized Agreements between the
Town of Queensbury and Wellchoice, Inc., now known as WellPoint Holding Corp. (WellPoint), to
provide services related to the Town’s participation in the retiree drug subsidy program administered by
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has been satisfied with WellPoint’s services and therefore
wishes to enter into a similar Agreement for 2012, and
th
WHEREAS, a proposed letter-form Agreement dated August 26, 2011 between the Town and
WellPoint is presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the Agreement
between the Town of Queensbury and Wellchoice, Inc., now known as WellPoint Holding Corp.
(WellPoint) to provide administrative services for the retiree drug subsidy for the year 2012 as set forth
th
in the letter-form Agreement dated August 26, 2011 presented at this meeting, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute
such letter-form Agreement substantially in the form presented at this meeting and any other needed
documentation and the Town Supervisor, Town Budget Officer and/or Accountant to take such other and
further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES : None
ABSENT:Mr. Brewer
RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE WAIVER OF FEES FOR
WOODY YARD WASTE DISPOSAL
RESOLUTION NO.: 282, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury currently charges Town residents $15 per cubic yard
(hereinafter referred to as the “Fee”) for the disposal of woody yard waste at the Town’s Transfer Stations,
and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 43
WHEREAS, as a result of the emergency situation created by the severe effects of Hurricane
th
Irene on August 28, the Queensbury Town Board decided to, on an emergency basis, facilitate the clean-
up of Town properties as easily and as efficiently as possible and therefore waived such Fee for an
approximately five (5) week period, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to ratify such actions,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that, due to the emergency situation caused by Hurricane Irene, the Queensbury Town
Board hereby authorizes and ratifies the waiver of the $15 per cubic yard Fee for the disposal of woody
thst
yard waste at its Transfer Stations from August 30 through October 1, 2011, for residential use only,
and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Solid Waste
Facilities Operator and/or Budget Officer to take such other and further action as may be necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier
NOES : None
ABSENT : None
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON GLEN LAKE AQUATIC
PLANT GROWTH CONTROL DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2012
RESOLUTION NO. 283, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of the
proposed Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit Tax Roll for 2012,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing on Monday, September
th
26, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury to hear all interested
parties and citizens concerning the proposed 2012 Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit
Tax Roll, and
BE IT FURTHER,
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 44
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to post
on the Town’s bulletin board and publish in the Town’s official newspaper a Notice of Public Hearing not
less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing date and to mail a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing along with
a copy of the Tax Roll to each property owner within such District.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi
NOES: None
ABSENT:None
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FUTURE DEDICATION OF SANITARY SEWER
FORCE MAIN FROM SCHERMERHORN RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS, L.P.
AND/OR WESTBROOK SENIOR RESIDENCES, LLC
RESOLUTION NO. 284, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, Schermerhorn Residential Holdings, L.P. and/or Westbrook Senior Residences, LLC
(“Schermerhorn”) and/or other future owners of the Senior Residences located at 1260 West Mountain Road,
Tax Map Parcel No.:288.-1-64, will be constructing a sewer system to serve its new development called
Westbrook Apartments, and
WHEREAS, such sewer system will connect to the Town of Queensbury’s sanitary sewer force
main near the intersection of Route 9 and Gurney Lane close to the Warren County Municipal Center, and
WHEREAS, Schermerhorn has agreed to sign an Out-of-District Agreement with the Town and
WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer force main will pass under Interstate Route 87, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation needs the sanitary sewer force main
to be dedicated to the Town after construction, and
WHEREAS, the sewer system has been constructed with excess capacity that, if the Town owned the
sanitary sewer force main, the Town could in the future provide sewage capacity to other Town properties or
a new sewer district in such area, and
WHEREAS, it is a critical requirement to the Town Board that the Town shall not be responsible for
any additional costs and that Schermerhorn pay all costs associated with this sanitary sewer force main, even
if it is owned by the Town,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 45
RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury shall accept dedication of such sanitary sewer force
main after its construction upon the following conditions:
1. That Schermerhorn sign an Out-of-District Agreement in form acceptable to the Town
Supervisor and Town Counsel;
2. That Schermerhorn construct the sewer system, including the sanitary sewer force main,
consistent with the plans and specifications provided to and approved by the Town
Wastewater Director, who shall confirm that it is constructed in such fashion;
3. That Schermerhorn dedicate, at no cost to the Town, such sanitary sewer force main to
the Town so that the Town shall have the right to use any excess capacity;
4. That Schermerhorn shall make payments to the Town as if its property were in the
Town’s Route 9 Sewer District;
5. That, in addition, Schermerhorn shall pay all costs for operation and maintenance and
repair and replacement of the sanitary sewer force main in accordance with Town
standards as shall be determined by the Town Wastewater Director;
6. That Schermerhorn shall grant the Town such reasonable easements as the Town may
deem necessary or desired to be able to connect other properties in the Town to the
sanitary sewer force main in such locations as the Town Wastewater Director shall
determine;
7. That Schermerhorn shall maintain the pump station to be constructed as part of the sewer
system to Town standards, and, if the Town Wastewater Director requests it,
Schermerhorn shall transfer, at no cost, the pump station to the Town; and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Town
Wastewater Director and/or Town Counsel to sign all documents and take all actions necessary to effectuate
the terms of this Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION APPROVING RE-PURCHASE OF CEMETERY LOTS IN
PINE VIEW CEMETERY FROM KATHLEEN PATEMAN
RESOLUTION NO.: 285, 2011
INTRODUCED BY : Mr. John Strough
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 46
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY : Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission previously sold five (5) cemetery lots
in the Pine View Cemetery to Kathleen Pateman – Plot No.: 8-B, Horicon Section, and
th
WHEREAS, by letter dated September 7, 2011, the Cemetery Commission has recommended re-
purchase of the lots and requests approval of the re-purchase from the Town Board,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Cemetery Commission's re-
purchase of five (5) lots in the Pine View Cemetery from Kathleen Pateman – Plot No.: 8-B, Horicon
Section, for the amount of $1,167, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Cemetery Superintendent to arrange for
the payment of such amount to Kathleen Pateman and properly account for the sales in the Town’s books and
records.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer
NOES :None
ABSENT:None
RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDITS OF BILLS –
NDTH
WARRANTS OF SEPTEMBER 2 AND SEPTEMBER 13, 2011
RESOLUTION NO.: 286, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to approve two (2) audits of bills presented as
ndth
Warrants with run dates of September 2 and September 8, 2011 and respective payment dates of
ndth
September 2 and September 13, 2011,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Warrants with the run dates of
ndthndth
September 2 and September 8, 2011 and payment dates of September 2 and September 13, 2011
totaling $98,551.80 and $600,548.60, respectively, and
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 47
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town
Budget Officer to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this
Resolution.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES: None
ABSENT:None
5.0 CORRESPONDENCE
NONE
6.0 TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS
COUNCILMAN METIVIER
?
Received a letter today from a woman who was on vacation starting the Saturday
before Irene hit she was up on Lake George on Assembly Point she was trapped in a
home that trees had fallen on both the front door and the back door. The fire
department did rescue the woman I believe through a window brought her to my
Mom’s house so she could stay there a while until they could actually get her off the
point. There were so many trees down on Assembly Point that the fireman were
literally trapped on the point then they needed to wait for guys to get them that
hadn’t responded yet so they brought backhoes in they just started literally cutting up
a route for people to get in and out of Assembly Point. This woman for finally
rescued then eventually the fire department when they could get her out brought her
over to Dunham’s Bay Lodge where she stayed for the evening she sent me a nice
letter to thank my mother, but also wanted to have me pass along her sincere and
profound thanks to North Queensbury Fire. They were professional extremely
competent and very protective I knew instantly that I was in good hands and well
cared for. I have never seen a group of individuals work so well together as I did
that day. I just can’t believe that we have a group of individuals that really when
they need to step up to the plate like North Queensbury, in fact all five fire
companies. Thank you very much to North Queensbury and to all the fire
departments.
?
Spoke regarding Main Street in West Glens Falls if you haven’t been to Main Street
lately you need to go there. They are almost done with their project it was a really
nice drive they have done a great job it looks so good. I am very proud of that
project if you haven’t been on Main Street please go patron some of the businesses
they have been hurt terribly over the past year they need your support I think now
they will get it. It was five o’clock in the afternoon I had no traffic please go visit
the Exit 18 corridor it is lovely. Thanks to everyone again for a couple of weeks ago
with Irene this Town can really step up to the plate when we need to.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI
?
Jack LaBombard, Chairman of the Recreation Commission sent a letter to Mike
Travis the Superintendent of Highway thanking them for the effort of putting in a
parking area on Meadowbrook Road. We have a new Meadowbrook Preserve there
it is a mile long trail. Warren County Soil and Water did the signs and placed the
signs through that trail. The trail is now opened the only thing left that we need to
do in terms of the Recreation Commission is the meadow to get to the trail
sometimes is a little wet. We are going to build some walkways across that meadow
it is passable now as long as it doesn’t rain for a couple of days it becomes very
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 48
passable. Thanked Mike Travis, Highway Superintendent he has been a great
Highway Superintendent easy to work with whenever we need him he is there for
us.
COUNCILMAN STROUGH
?
I want to second that thank you to Mike Travis and their Highway Department. It
was my Ward that got particularly hit badly. If you haven’t been up by Gurney
Lane, West Mountain Road, Old West Mountain Road, Lehland Estates,
Whippoorwill, Mountain View Lane trees down I just couldn’t believe what I was
hearing as the wind was rushing trees were crackling and falling in the forest. I do
want to extend a thank you to the Highway Department and Queensbury Central and
West was there helping us out National Grid did a stellar job as well. Also I want to
thank my fellow board members for assisting with the Fertilizer and Pesticide
Runoff Control Law.
th
?
1762 that’s when Queensbury was founded our 250 Anniversary is coming up in
2012. I have been working with the Town Historian, Marilyn VanDyke and Joan
Aldous to try and develop a program for a celebration. It is going to be a multimedia
event we hope we will see what kind of budget we have to work with we would like
to start with some full banners on Main Street.
?
SUNY Adirondack in Queensbury is having their Fiftieth Anniversary this Saturday,
September 17, 2011 and Warren County Bicentennial in 2013.
COUNCILMAN BREWER
?
Reiterated with all the help that they got from the fireman I do respect them for what they
do. I do appreciate all the work that our Highway Department did and the fireman and
EMS.
SUPERVISOR STEC
?
Spoke regarding Irene spent a lot of time at the Municipal Center that weekend. Brian
Stratton who is in the Governors Cabinet the Canal Corporation he and some of his staff
were pre-stationed in Warren County to coordinate from there so it nice to meet him the
Governors Office was truly amazing in their response to this storm. I did venture out on
Sunday afternoon I drove up to North Queensbury Fire and talked to the guys there and I
think every single volunteer member of their organization was there along with their support
people. I drove down to Bay Ridge the same there then I guess I beat John to Station Two
as bad as the peninsulas got it that stretch along West Mountain Road and all the
neighborhoods on either side of it really from Potter Road all the way to Gurney Lane got
hammered. The fire company and rescue squads did everything that we wanted from them
and the Highway Department did a great job thank you for a job well done.
?
Thanked sponsors and Look TV for televising the Town Board Meetings.
?
www.queensbury.net
?
Main Street there will some sort of ribbon cutting ceremony it is likely to happen at the end
of September will be speaking with Kevin Hajos they haven’t forgotten your fence Tim and
they did send some information regarding the banners. Thanked the board for working so
hard on Main Street it is a project that we can all feel pretty good about what we
accomplished there.
RESOLUTION ADJOURNING REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING
RESOLUTION NO. 287, 2011
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-12-2011 MTG # 25 49
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Regular Town
Board Meeting.
th
Duly adopted this 12 day of September, 2011 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier
NOES: None
ABSENT:None
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
DARLEEN M. DOUGHER
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY