Loading...
1983-12-27 38 TOWN BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 27 , 1983 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS MRS. FRANCES WALTER-SUPERVISOR MR. DANIEL OLSON-COUNCILMAN DR. CHARLES EISENHART- COUNCILMAN MR. DANIEL MORRELL-COUNCILMAN MRS. BETTY MONAHAN-COUNCILMAN MR. WILSON MATHIAS-TOWN COUNSEL PRESS : G. F. POST STAR , WBZA GUESTS : MR. BEAGLE , REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE FIRE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES , MR. .JOSEPH DAIRE , MR. NEALON , MR. EASTWOOD � J TOWN OFFICIALS : MR. DOUGLAS SEALY , MR. PAUL NAYLOR , MR. RICK MISSITA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN OLSON MEETING OPENED 7 : 05 P. M. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINUTES RESOLUTION NOS 265 , INTRODUCED BY DR. CHARLES EISENHART WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MRS. FRANCES WALTER : RESOLVED , THAT THE TOWN BOARD MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13 , 1983 BE AND HEREBY ARE APPROVED. DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. . EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE i ABSENT : NONE RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS RFSOIIITION NO , 266 , INTRODUCED BY DR. CHARLES EISENHART WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MRS. BETTY MONAHAN : RESOLVED , TO TRANSFER $1 , 889 . 45 FROM A1990 . 440 CONTINGENT ACCOUNT TO A1355 . 440 ASSESSOR ACCOUNT FOR LEGAL SERVICES NOT PLANNED IN 1983 BUDGET . DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS. MONAHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE RESOLUTION OF APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW RFSOIIITTON NO . 267 . INTRODUCED BY MRS . BETTY MONAHAN WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL : -� WHEREAS, THE OUEENSBURY TOWN BOARD WISHES TO REAPPOINT STEPHEN BORGOS TO A FIVE YEAR TERM ON THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW , NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE QUEENSBURY TOWN BOARD HEREBY REAPPOINTS STEPHEN BORGOS OF BUTLER POND ROAD , QUEENSBURY TO A FIVE YEAR TERM IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15 . 24 OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW , TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 30 , 1988. DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS. MONAHAN , MRS . WAALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT :NONE 39 RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE CONTRACT WITH GLENS FALLS SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER , INC. RESOLUTION NO . 268 , INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MRS . BETTY MONAHAN : WHEREAS , THE 'TCOWN OF QUEENSBURY HAS HERETOFORE CONTRACTED WITH THE GLENS FALLS SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER , INC. TO PROVIDE FOR SERVICES FOR THE ELDERLY , AND WHEREAS , NEW YORK STATE AID IS AVAILABLE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT , MAINTENANCE AND EXPANSION OF SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAMS , WHICH AID WAS EXPANDED BY THE PROVISION OF CHAPTER 1001 OF THE LAWS OF NEW YORK , 1974 , PROVIDING AMONG �'- OTHER THINGS THAT STATE AID WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR APPROVED EXPENDITURES FOR A MUNICIPAL PROGRAM, AND �- WHEREAS, THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY DESIRES TO CONTINUE ITS SUPPORT OF THE GLENS FALLS SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER , INC. UNDER PROVISIONS OF LAW SO AS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR STATE AID AS A CO-SPONSORING MUNICIPALITY , NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , THAT THE SUPERVISOR OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BE AND HEREBY IS EMPOWERED TO CONTRACT WITH THE GLENS FALLS SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER INC. FOR THE FURNIGHING OF SERVICES TO THE ELDERLY RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FOR THE YEAR 1984 AND THE PAYMENT OF $4 , 500 . 00 THEREFORE BE APPROVED , AND THE SUPERVISOR IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN AND A COPY OF SUCH CONTRACT , DULY EXECUTED SHALL BE FILED WITH THE TOWN CLERK . DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS. WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE COMMUNICATIONS MOBILE HOME APPLICATION- VANCE R. POTTER OF 13 NEWCOMB STREET REQUESTING PERMISSION TO STORE AND REPAIR MOBILE HOME ON HIS PROPERTY 13 NEWCOMB STREET SUPERVISOR WALTER- NOTED THAT A COMPLAINT HAD BEEN RECEIVED IN THE BUILDING & ZONING OFFICE ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF A MOBILE HOME ON NEWCOMB STREET , UPON INVESTIGATION THE BUILIDNG & ZONING DEPT . REQUESTED THAT MR. POTTER APPLY FOR A TEMPORARY PERMIT . . . AGREED BY THE BOARD THAT THE APPLICATION BE TABLED UNTIL THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAN APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD. . . LTR. ROBERT D 'ANDREA , MEMBER OF ASSEMBLY NOTED HE HAD RECEIVED RESOLUTION 252 OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY (. 1983) REGARDING INTEREST ON LATE REAL PROPERTY TAX PAYMENTS . ON FILE -SUPERVISOR WALTER- ANNOUNCED THAT THE TOWN HAS BEEN TURNED DOWN FOR A GRANT TO BUY A SIGN OVEN FOR THE HIGHWAY DEPT. . . . GRANT WAS THROUGH THE TRAFFIC SAFETY BOARD OF WARREN COUNTY -COUNCILMAN EISENHART- WHAT IS THE PRICE ON A MACHINE? -PAUL NAYLOR- $5 , 000 . . . NOTED THAT THE COUNTY ' S MACHINE IS IN VERY HIGH DEMAND. . . -COUNCILMAN EISENHART- REQUESTED THAT THE HIGHWAY DEPT . CONTACT THE COLLEGE LIBRARY TO LOOK INTO OTHER COMPANIES THAT HAVE THIS TYPE OF OVEN FOR SALE . . . -COUNCILMAN MONAHAN- NOTED THAT CRANDALL LIBRARY MAY BE ABLE TO HELP ALSO. . . -SUPERVISOR W'ALTER- I HAVE SPOKEN WITH ASSEMBLYMAN D+-ANDREA REGARDING SIGNS DENOTING QUEENSBURY ON THE THREE EXITS GQING INTO THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY 18 , 19 AND 20 . . . I HAVE CONTACTED DOT AND THEY HAVE AGREED AT THIS POINT PUTTING SIGNS COMING FROM THE SOUTH JUST BEFORE EXIT 18 SAYING NEXT THREE EXITS QUEENSBURY AND ALSO FROM THE NORTH BEFORE EXIT 40 20 SAYING NEXT THREE EXITS] QUEENSBURY . . . WE ARE STILL LOOKING FOR A DESIGNATION ON EXIT 12 DESIGNATING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT , . , ! WILL SAY THAT ASSEMBLYMAN D'ANDREA WAS MOST HELPFUL IN DEALING WITH DOT. OPEN FORUM -GEORGE STEC-BUTLER POND ROAD QUEENSBURY- NOTED THAT THE WARREN CO. PARKING LOT FOR SNOWMOBILES TRAILS HAS BEEN CHANGED TEMPORARILY FROM THE WEST MT . RD. TO THE OLD SITE ON BUTLER POND ROAD. . . THIS IS DUE TO THE CITY HARVESTING WOOD FROM THE WEST MT . ROAD AREA . . . REQUESTED THAT MORE ATTENTION BE MADE TO PLOWING AND SANDING OF THIS ROAD. . .NOTED HE HAD CONTACTED WARREN CO. TO HAVE THE PARKING LOT PLOWED. . . CONCERNED THAT THE SNOWMOBILES WILL BE USING AVIATION ' PiOAD . . . BUTLER POND ROAD TO GET ACCESS TO THE TRAILS . . REQUESTED THAT THE TOWN PLACE AN AD IN THE NEWSPAPER THAT THERE ARE NO TOWN ROADS THAT HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED LEGAL TRAILS. . . -RALPH NESTLE-BUTLER POND ROAD QUEENSBURY-I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE WHAT HE HAS SAID , IT IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION . . .NOTED OTHER PROBLEMS IS THAT THERE IS NO COLLECTION OF GARBAGE AND THIS HAS BEEN - A PROBLEM IN THE PAST . . NOTED THAT THE CHILDREN AND BOY SCOUTS HAVE CLEANED UP IN THE SPRING FROM THE PARKING LOT . . . THE TOWN OR COUNTY SHOULD MAKE PROVISIONS TO HAVE THIS PICKED UP . . . ASKED FOR PROPER SIGNING FOR BUTLER POND ROAD. . .NOTED THAT THE SIGN THAT IS PRESENTLY IN USE IS ONE THAT I MADE SEVENTEEN YEARS AGO , IT NEEDS REPLACEMENT . . . -.JOSEPH DA.IRE- THANKED THE HIGHWAY DEPT .I ESPECIALLY MR. DUFOUR FOR THE GOOD JOB THEY HAVE DONE THIS WINTER. . . -MR. BEAGLE-ASKED IF ANYTHING HAD BEEN DONE REGARDING CABLE TV -SUPERVISOR WALTER- NOTED THAT SHE HAD BEEN ILL AND HAD NOT AS OF YET CONTACTED MR. NOLAN REGARDING THE CABLE T.V. . . . WILL NOTIFY MR. BEAGLE WHEN INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE. . . -MR. AARON FIORE - G. F. POST STAR. . . : I AM GOING TO DO SOMETHING THAT JOURNALIST HATE TO DO , THAT IS SPEAK UP AT A PUBLIC MEETING IN OPEN FORUM. . I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO A FOLLOW UP ON OUR LAST MEETING AND I HAVE PROBABLY MADE SIX PHONE CALLS TO YOUR OFFICE OR HOME-PERHAPS YOU WERE ILL I WAS JUST WONDERINGOTHE CALLS WERE NOT . . . -SUPERVISOR WALTER- WHAT E - KIND OF INFORMATION WERE YOU LOOKING FOR? K -MR. FIORE- ROUTINE INFORMATION ON THE PREVIOUS W ETING AND THE INFORMATION THAT HAS GONE ON THUSFAR HERE. . . -SUPERVISOR WALTER- FIRST OF , I THINK YOU CAN REACH ME AT MY OFFICE WHEN I AM IN MY OFFICE. I KNOW YOU CALLED THIS AFTERNOON AND I HAVE BEEN STRAIGHT OUT AS THE EMPLOYEES HERE WILL TELL YOU. WE HAD CSEA NEGOTIATIONS GETTING THE CONTRACTS READY , I HOSTED THE INTRACOUNTY LEGISLATIVE MEETING ALSO TODAY. . . . I WAS OUT SICK LAST WEEK . . . I WAS SURPRISED THAT MY OFFICE STAFF DID NOT TELL YOU THAT . . . . -MR. FIORE- PERHAPS I SHOULD HAVE GONE TO YOUR DEPUTY IN THE EVENT YOU ARE ILL? -SUPERVISOR WALTER- MR. OLSON IS THE DEPUTY IF YOU NEED FURTHER INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE THE THING TO DO . LET ME RESPOND TO YOU, I LOOKED AT THIS MORNINGS PAPER AND I THINK THAT THERE WERE TWO STORIES ONE ON THE TOWN BOARD MEETING FOR THE TOWN OF CHESTER AND ONE OF HORICON. IF YOU DO THIS WHEN YOU GO BACK TO YOUR OFFICE YOU WILL SEE THAT THE COLUMNS THAT THEY HAD , THE COVERAGE THEY HAD AFTER THEIR MEETING� IT IS HIGHLY DISGRACEFUL THE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE THAT THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY GETS . WE HAD ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA FROM A-M WHEN THE PEOPLE PICKED UP THE PAPER THE NEXT DAY THEY SAW . . . THAT MUCH INFORMATION ON THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY. --� -MR. FIORE- It-AD TO LEAVE BEFORE YOUR PRESENTATION WAS OVER I TRIED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT4 I MADE CALLS TO MRS . MONAHAN AND DR. EISENHART TO TRY TO GET INFORMATION AND WAS DEFERRED TO FRAN . . . -SUPERVISOR WALTER- YOU WILL HAVE TO GET THE INFORMATION FROM THE SUPER- VISOR AND YOU WILL GET IT WHILE I AM IN THE OFFICE DURING OFFICE HOURS . ASKED IF ANYONE ELSE WISHED TO SPEAK IN OPEN FORUM. . . HEARING NONE THE APPLICATION FOR A MOBILE HOME OF VANCE POTTER WAS AGAIN BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR . . . -MR. SEALY-IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT A MOBILE HOME WAS LOCATED 41 IN MR. POTTER' S BACK YARD WITHOUT A PERMIT-UPON INVESTIGATION IT CAME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT IT WAS THERE FOR REPAIR TEMPORARILY SO THAT IT COULD BE BROUGHT TO ANOTHER TOWN AS A SUMMER RESIDENCE. . . . WE NOTIFIED THE OWNERS THAT THEY WERE IN VIOLATION AND NEEDED A PERMIT . . . -SUPERVISOR WALTER- NO ONE IS LIVING IN IT AND NO ONE WILL LIVE IN IT FOR THE DURATION OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT. -MR. SEALY- RIGHT. -SUPERVISOR WALTER- DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE YEAR OF THE MOBILE HOME IS? i i -MR. SEALY- NO. . . THE OWNERS DO NOT KNOW. . . -COUNCILMAN OLSON- HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN THERE? -MR. SEALY- IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION IN NOVEMBER I DO NOT KNOW WHEN IT WAS PUT THERE . -SUPERVISOR WALTER- IS THIS MOBILE HOME HOOKED UP TO ANYTHING? -MR. SEALY- NO -TOWN COUNSEL- I DO NOT THINK YOU HAVE ANY JURISDICTION IN REGARD TO -MR. SEAALY-IT DOES NOT MEET SETBACKS -SUPERVISOR WALTER- DID THE COMPLAINT COME FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. . -MR. S EALY- YES -COUNCILMAN OLSON- IS THE MOBILE HOME ON BLOCKS. . . ELECTRICITY HOOKED UP? -MR. SEALY- NO -COUNCILMAN OLSON- IS THERE ON GOING WORK TO REMODE..LS+� -MR. SEALY- YES -COUNCILMAN EISENHART- QUESTIONED THE APPLICATION WORDING ' 'LATE ON NEXT SUMMER 1984 ' ' -MR. SEALY- I BELIEVE THEY ARE GOING TO GET IT READY TO USE AS A CAMP NEXT SUMMER. -COUNCILMAN EISENHART- DOES MR. POTTER OWN THE LAND AND THE MOBILE HOME? -MR. SEALY- YES -COUNCILMAN EISENHART- HIS IDEA IS THAT HE GETS THIS FIXED UP AND SELLS IT TO SOMEBODY WHO WILL TAKE IT OUT OF THE TOWN AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE FOR A SUMMER HOME? -MR. SEALY- THAT IS CORRECT. -COUNCILMAN OLSON- I DO NOT THINK YOU NEED A PERMIT JUST TO PARK IT . -TOWN COUH EL- THERE IS A SECTION THAT SAYS THE NO MOBILE HOME HEREAFTER BE PARKED LACED IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY OUTSIDE A MOBILE HOME COURT AND OCCUPIED ACCEPT AS FOLLOWS. . . MY INTREPRETATION IS THAT THE TOWN GETS ITS AUTHORITY TO ACT HERE WHEN SOMEONE GOES IN TO IT. DISCUSSION HELD--COUNCILMAN OLSON- NOTED THAT HE DID NOT FEEL THAT THE AREA , BEING RESIBENTIALjSHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE USED FOR REPAIR WORK . . . . . . COUNCILMAN MORRELL- I WILL GO FOR A TEMPORARY PERMIT OR NO PERMIT AT ALL . . . I DO NOT THINK YOU NEED A PUBLIC HEARING ON IT . SUPERVISOR WALTER SUGGESTED THAT WE ISSUE A TEMPORARY PERMIT EXPIRING SEPT . 84 . . . COUNCILMAN MORRELL INTRODUCED A RESOLUTION , SE04DED BY DR. EISENHART . . . DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND IT WAS DECIDED THAT THE PERMIT SHOULD RUN UNTIL JULY 1ST. 1984 . . . 42 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE TEMPORARY STORAGE AND REPAIR OF MOBILE HOME RESOLUTION 269_, INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY DR. CHARLES EISENHART : WHEREAS , MR. VANCE R. POTTER OF 13 NEWCOMB STREET , QUEENSBURY HAS REQUESTED PERMISSION TO STORE AND REPAIR ON HIS PROPERTY ON 13 NEWCOMB STREET A MOBILE HOME NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVEQ , THAT THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY HEREBY GRANTS APPROVAL FOR THE STORAGE AND REPAIR OF A MOBILE HOME BY MR. VANCE R POTTER ON 13 NEWCOMB STREET AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , THAT THIS ONLY BE A TEMPORARY PERMIT TO EXPIRE ON JULY 1ST , 1984 AND THAT THIS MOBILE HOME WILL NOT BE OCCUPIED IN THE TOWN 'OF QUEENSBURY . DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE DISCUSSION HELD IN REGARD TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF HIGHWAYS. . . PAUL NAYLOR-REGARDING PROPOSED RESOLUTION : THESE ARE ROADS IN THE TOWNSHIP THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME , EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE TOWN ROADS , WE HAVE LOOKED THROUGH THE BOOKS , MEASURED THE ROADS AND WE HAVE FOUND THAT THESE ROADS WERE NEVER ACCEPTED OFFICIALLY INTO THE TOWN HIGHWAY SYSTEM. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER- ADDING THESE ROADS-- TO OUR HIGHWAY SYSTEM INCREASES OUR MILEAGE AND HELPS WITH OUR STATE AID. . . PAUL NAYLOR- NOTED THAT HIS STAFF IS STILL WORKING ON CORRECTING ERRORS IN THE ROAD BOOK . . . COUNCILMAN EISEHART- MR. NAYLOR YOU CAN ASSURE ME THAT THESE ROADS --� HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED BY THE TOWN FOR MORE THAN TEN YEARS? PAYL NAILOR= YES RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CERTAIN ROADS IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS TOWN ROADS PURSUANT TO SECTION 189 OF THE HIGHWAY LAW RESOLUTION NO . 270 , INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MR. DANIEL OLSON : WHEREAS , NUMEROUS QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED REGARDING THE STATUS OF CERTAIN ROADS WITHIN THE TOWN OF nUEENSBURY NOT SPECIFICALLY DEDICATED TO THE TOWN OF nUEENSBURY , AND WHEREAS, SECTION 189 OF THE HIGHWAY LAW PROVIDES THAT ANY ROAD USED BY THE PUBLIC AS A HIGHWAY FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS OR MORE SHALL BE A HIGHWAY WITH THE SAME FORCE AND AFFECT AS IF IT HAD BEEN DULY LAID OUT AND RECORDED AS A HIGHWAY , AND WHEREAS , THE TOWN HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY `J HAS UNDERTAKEN A SURVEY TO DETERMINE WHICH ROADS MAY COME WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 189 OF THE HIGHWAY LAW , AND WHEREAS, THE TOWN HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY HAS DETERMINED THAT THE FOLLOWING ROADS FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE MILEAGE FIGURES HAVE BEEN USED BY THE PUBLIC AS A HIGHWAY FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS OR MORE , AND FURTHER THAT THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY HAS KEPT THE SAID ROADS IN REPAIR AND TAKEN THE SAID ROADS IN CHARGE , BY PERFORMING SUCH ACTIONS AS GRADING , SHOULDER MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR , TREE AND BRUSH CUTTING , POTHOLE REPAIR, AND 34OW PLOWING. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , THAT THE FOLLOWING ROADS FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE MILEAGE FIGURES ARE HEREBY DECLARED TO BE AND ACCEPTED AS HIGHWAYS BY USE : ROAD TO BE ADDED MILE_A_GE_ 43 DAWN ROAD 628 ' OR . 12 DINEEN ROAD 1128 ' OR . 21 TWIN MOUNTAIN DRIVE 1193 ' OR . 23 JUNIPER DRIVE 554 ' OR . 10 HEWITT ROAD 894 ' OR . 17 EAST ROAD 1110 ' OR . 21 HILLMAN R]AD 2022 ' OR . 38 MASON ROAD 2220 ' OR . 42 MASON STREET 200 ' OR . 04 OLD AVIATION ROAD 331 ' OR . 06 OLD BAY ROAD 1500 ' OR . 28 CROSSOVER LANE 923 ' OR . 17 BIRCH LANE 625 ' OR . 12 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , THAT THE TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO FILE A LIST OF THE ROADS SET FORTH IN THIS RESOLUTION IN THE INVENTORY OF TOWN ROADS OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND THAT THE STATE OF NEW YORK BE NOTIFIED OF THE ADDITIONAL ROAD MILES DULY WORKED AND MAINTAINED BY THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY . DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT TO CORRECT DRAINAGE AND EROSION PROBLEMS IN VICINITY OF WEST MOUNTAIN ROAD PURSUANT TO SECTION 147 OF THE HIGHWAY LAW RESOLUTION N0 , 271 , INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL OLSON WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MRS . BETTY MONAHAN : '- WHEREAS, THE TOWN SUPERINTENDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY HAS RECEIVED COMPLAINTS OF A PROBLEM REGARDING THE DRAINAGE AND EROSION OF STREAMS AND WATERWAYS IN THE VICINITY OF WEST MOUNTAIN ROAD, AND WHEREAS, SECTION 147 OF THE HIGHWAY LAW PERMITS THE TOWN SUPERINTENDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY TO UNDERTAKE SUCH STEPS AS IS NECESSARY TO CORRECT DRAINAGE AND EROSION PROBLEMS WHEN DIRECTED BY THE WARREN COUNTY HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT AND AUTHORIZED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY , AND WHEREAS, THE WARREN COUNTY HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT HAS DULY DIRECTED THE TOWN HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY TO ENTER LANDS ADJOINING THE WEST MOUNTAIN ROAD FOR PURPOSES OF CORRECTING THE DRAINAGE AND EROSION PROBLEMS IN THE AREA , NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT SECTION 147 OF THE HIGHWAY LAW THE TOWN HIGHWAY SUPERIN- TENDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY IS AUTHORIZED TO TAKE SUCH STEPS AS ARE NECESSARY TO MITIGATE AND CORRECT THE DRAINAGE AND EROSION PROBLEMS IN THE WEST MOUNTAIN AREA. DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHCRT , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE DISCUSSION HELD REGARDING RESOLUTION NO. 271 : COUNCILMAN OLSON- THE SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN APPROVED BUT THE ROADS HAVE NOT BEEN ACCEPTED? PAUL NAYLOR- YES COUNCILMAN OLSON- THERE ARE TOWN RESIDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN FLOODED BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION . . . PAUL NAYLOR-YES SUPERVISOR WALTER- WE HOPE THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL CORRECT THE PROBLEM IF NOT WE WILL GO IN AND DO IT AND HE WILL NOT HAVE MUCH CHOICE. 44 COUNCILMAN MORRELL- REGARDING THE MOBILE HOME OF MR. POTTER ORDINANCE # 12 SECTION 5 ' ' NONE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO THE STORAGE OR GARAGING OF MOBILE HOMES NOT BEING USED FOR LIVING OR SLEEPING PURPOSES WITHIN A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE OR TO THE STORAGE OF ONE UNOCCUPIED MOBILE HOME ON PREMISES OCCUPIED AS PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE BY THE OWNER OF SUCH MOBILE HOME , PROVIDED HOWEVER , THAT SUCH UNOCCUPIED MOBILE HOME SHALL NOT BE PARKED BETWEEN THE STREET LINE AND THE FRONT BUILDING LINE OF SUCH PREMISES . ' ' SO THEREFORE WE DID NOT NEED THE RESOLUTION . . . PUBLIC HEARINGS MOBILE HOME APPLICATION- CHARLES E . MATTISON- OF SUN SET H . F . TO LOCATE A MOBILE HOME ON DAWN DRIVE MR. MATTISON PRESENT NOTICE SHOWN 8 : 10 P . M. SUPERVISOR WALTER- WE HAVE A QUESTION ON THE AGE OF THE MOBILE HOME ON THE APPLICATION IT IS LISTED AS 1976 . . .THE TOWN BOARD WILL NOT APPROVE A MOBILE HOME PRIOR TO A 1974 AND THIS LOOKS AS IF IT MIGHT BE A 1971 OR 1966 . . . ASKED FOR PUBLIC INPUT . . . -WILLIAM NEALON-ATTORNEY FOR MR. MATTISON-WHAT WE HAVE IS. A MOBILE HOME AND FROM OUR LATEST INFORMATION , I HAVE NOT BEEN THERE TO EXAMINE THE SERIAL NUMBER , IT APPEARS TO BE A 1966 MOBILE HOME. WHICH HAS BEEN IN PLACE ON A FOUNDATION OCCUPIED BY THE PREVIOUS RESIDENTS FROM WHAT WE CAN GATHER TO BE AT LEAST 1971 . I APPRECIATE THAT THE BOARD HAS BEFORE A TOWN LAW REQUIRING NEW CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY BE ISSUED ONLY IN THOSE CASES WHERE A MOBILE HOME IS 1974 OR LATER IN VINTAGE. I THINK THAT THE BOARD SHOULD ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THIS PREMISES HAS BEEN OCCUPIED FOR AT LEAST TWELVE YEARS BY PEOPLE USING THIS MOBILE HOME USING THE FACILITIES , WHICH ARE PUBLIC FACILITIES CONNECTED TO IT WITH THE WATER AND SUCH. IT HAS SEPTIC IN PLACE IT IS-NOT ON WHEELS IT HAS BEEN ON A FOUNDATION AND HAS HAD SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS MADE TO IT . THE ISSUE THE BOARD MUST ADDRESS IN FAIRNESS TO THE CONTRACTVENDEESjTHE MATTISONS AND THE ASSISTING HONOR MR. EASTWOOD IS WHETHER THE ORDINANCE DEALT HERE WITH TONIGHT , THAT IS ONE REQUIRING THAT A MOBILE HOME BE A 1974 OR LATER. HAD SOME RATIONAL BASIS. A RATIONAL BASIS WOULD BED DOES IT MEET THE HUD REQUIREMENTS WHICH WERE FIRST ANNUNCIATED IN 1974 . IN SPEAKING WITH MR. EASTWOOD WHO INDICATED TO ME THAT HE HAS BEEN IN THE MOBILE HOME BUSINESS FOR AT LEAST A HALF A DOZEN YEARS PRIOR TO THE TIME HE PURCHASED THIS PARTICULAR MOBILE HOME THESE REGULATIONS WERE INTENDED AND PERHAPS DID SUr-EED IN CULLING OUT CERTAIN MOBILE HOMES THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IN THE SOUTH OR BUILT TO VERY FLIMSEY REQUIREMENTS . :THIS MOBILE HOME IS A DETROITER MADE IN PENNA . BUILT FOR NORTHERN CLIMATE IT IS IN GOOD CONDITION . LET THE TOWN BUILDING INSPECTOR COME FORWARD., IF THERE IS A PROBLEM. WHICH WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE ISIWE WILL FIX IT , WHAT WE HAVE IS A MOBILE HOME NOW WHICH IS INSULATED , TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE , HAS COPPER WIRING IT HAS BEEN OCCUPIED WITHOUT INCIDENT FOR AT LEAST TWELVE YEARS IN THAT SAME LOCATION . OCCUPIED PRIOR TO REENACTMENT OF THE ORDINANCE , PRIOR TO THE ENACTMENT OF THE HUD REGULATIONS , THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE MATERIAL ALTERATION IN TERMS OF DEGRADATION TO THAT MOBILE HOME IN THE COURSE OF THAT TIME , THERE HAVE BEEN OWNER IMPROVEMENTS. I THINK THAT THE BOARD HAS TO LOOK AT THE MERITSjIT IS NOT A . . . . GENEROUS TYPE OF SITUATION WHERE EVERY MOBILE HOME BUILT PRIOR TO THAT YEAR 1974 HAD TO BE DEFICIENT . THAT IS WHAT THIS ORDINANCE SEEMS TO PRESUPPOSE . JUST BECAUSE IT WAS PRIOR TO 1974 IT IS BAD , THAT IS NOT SO. THERE ARE SOME THAT WERE THERE ARE MANY THAT WERE NOTE OBVIOUSLY THE STANDARD IMPOSED BY HUD IN 1974 WERE GENERATED BY REVIEW OF THOSE QUALITY CONSTRUCTED MOBILE HOMES. THEY WERE STANDARDS THAT THOSE MOBILE HOMES MET AND THOSE WERE MOST LIKELY , I HAVE NO ACTUAL INFORMATION , THOSE WERE MOST LIKELY THE STANDARDS THAT WERE ADOPTED AND PUT IN PLACE IN THE HUD REGULATIONS . IF THERE IS SOMETHING MATERIALLY WRONGjIF IT HAS ALUMINUM WIRING AND REPRESENTS IN MR. BODENWEISERS EXPERT OPINION A SAFETY HAZARD THAT IS ONE THING BUT IN THIS CASE WE CLAIM THAT THERE IS COPPER WIRING THROUGHOUT., IT IS CONNECTED TO A REASONABLE AND ADEQUATE SEWAGE SYSTEM IT HAS BEEN THERE FOR AT LEAST THIRTEEN YEARS , TWELVE YEARS , ALMOST THIRTEEN IT HAS BEEN OCCUPIED WITHOUT INCIDENT. IF IT IS A HAZARD CERTAINLY THAT HAZARD WOULD HAVE SURFACED IN THAT TWELVE YEARS THAT IT HAS BEEN THERE. WE ARE NOT TAKING A STRUCTURE WHICH IS COMING IN FROM GOD KNOWS WHERE AND SAYING WE HAVE A MOBILE HOME IT IS A 1966 BRAND X WE WANT TO PUT IT ON THAT LOT, THERE HAS NEVER BEEN ANOTHER ONE THERE BEFORE , THAT IS NOT THE CASE. WE HAVE GOT ONE THAT HAS BEEN THERE , PREDATES THIS ORDINANCE WE ARE ASKING THIS TOWN BOARD TO USE ITS DESCRETION , PROTECT THE INTEREST OF MY CLIENTS , THEY WANT 45 TO BE PROTECTED AS ANY OTHER RESIDENT OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BUT ON THE OTHER HAND THEY WANT BE TREATED FAIRLY. IF THIS MOBILE HOME MEETS THE REASONABLE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WOULD INSIST ON IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF STRUCTURE THEN IT OUGHT TO BE GRANTED A PERMIT OF OCCUPANCY. IF ON THE OTHER HAND IT DOES NOTJ IT HAS DEFECTIVE WIRING OR SOME OTHER MATERIAL DEFECT THEN WE WANT TO KNOW. I SUBMIT TO THE BOARD THAT THERE IS A MIDDLE GROUND WHICH IS AVAILABLE AND THAT IS ISSUE A CONDITIONAL PERMIT LET THE BUILDING INSPECTOR OR MR. BODENWEISER COME OVER AND INSPECT IT, FOR SAFETY PURPOSES. IF IT MEETS THE CODE AND IT MEETS THE REASONABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS BOARD AND THE TOWN FATHERS AND LADIES IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY THEN IT OUGHT TO REASONABLY BE GRANTED THAT PERMIT. IT HAS NOT CHANGED FROM SIX MONTHS AGO TO TODAY. THAT MOBILE HOME IS JUST THE SAME . IF IT WAS GOOD SIX MONTHS AGO I SUBMIT IT IS GOOD TODAY FOR A YOUNG COUPLE THAT NEEDS ADEQUATE HOUSING THEY ARE RIGHT NOW FACED WITH AN EVICTION NOTICE WHICH WAS DELIVERED TO THEM BY THEIR LANDLADY REQUIRING THEM TO BE OUT ON FRIDAY. THEY ARE ENDEVORING TO FIND A QUALITY RESIDENCE THAT WILL TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILY. THEY BELIEVE THAT THIS RESIDENCE MEETS SOME OR ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS . IF THE BOARD CAN' MIVE AN ABSOLUTE THEN GIVE A CONDITIONAL , LET THE BUILDING INSPECTOR COME FORTH LET HIM TAKE A LOOK AT IT. IF THERE IS A REAL PROBLEM FINE , BUT IF IT SIMPLY A MATTER OF SOME OTHER MANUFACTURER OTHER THEN THE MANUFACTURER OF THIS HOME DID NOT BUILD QUALITY HOMES IN EVERY MOBILE HOME THEREAFTER REGARDLESS OF ITS ORGIN IS BLACKLABE,= BECAUSE OF THAT I THINK THAT THIS BOARD REALLY SHOULD SERIOUSLY CONSIDER WHETHER THE ADOPTION OF THAT PARTICULAR ORDINANCE WAS A PROPER ONE. THERE IS A PARTICULAR INSTANCE HERE A PARTICULAR MOBILE HOME, LOOK AT IT WITH PARTICULARITY JUST AS YOU WOULD OR YOU WOULD HAVE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR OR FIRE MARSHAL DO IF IT WERE A HOME BEING BUILT ON HELEN DRIVE . THANK YOU. -DAVE EASTWOOD-I AM THE OWNER OF THE HOME LOCATED ON DAWN DRIVE. I WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS , ONE IS THAT THE APPLICATION SAYS IT WAS A 76 AND THAT WAS NOT AN ERROR ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANTS IT WAS MY ERROR BECAUSE I WAS TOLD BY A PERSON WHO HAD SEEN THE HOME FOR ME THAT IT WAS A 76 , HE MISREAD THE SERIAL NUMBER APPARENTLY THERE WAS A SEVEN AND SIX IN THE NUMBER BUT THE ACTUAL YEAR WAS IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION . THAT WAS AN ERROR BUT NOT ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANTS THEY WERE CERTAINLY WERE NOT AWARE OF THAT PARTICULAR CODE AND THE SITUATION IN REGARD TO THE SEVENTY FOUR LAW . I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT LAW VERY BRIEFLY WITH YOU. I WAS IN THE MOBILE HOME BUSINESS FOR SIX YEARS AND WAS VICE PRESIDENT OF LEISURE TIMES SALES FIRM*WE SOLD ABOUT TWO THOUSAND HOMES A YEAR. THAT LAW IN 1974 WAS GOOD BECAUSE IT ELIMINATED A LOT OF PROBLEMS THAT WERE BEING CREATED BY THE INDUSTRY WHICH HAD FLMRISHED FROM 1968 TO 1974 WITH A BOOM IN THE MOBILE HOME INDUSTRY. THE PROBLEMS WERE BEING CREATED ESPECIALLY BY THE SOUTHERN HOMES THAT WERE CREATING ATTRACTIVE LOOKING HOMES AND SHIPPING UP NORTH AND SELLING THEM WITH LITTLE INSULATION POOR FURNACES, ALUMINUM WIRING , AND EVEN SOME OF THE NORTHERN COMPANIES IN AN EFFORT TO BE COMPETITIVE STARTED THINNING OUT THE I BEAM STRUCTURE , THEY WERE USING SOME FURNACES THAT WERE LESS DESIRABLE THEN SOME OF THE FURNACES YOU COULD CET TO PUT IN A MOBILE HOME , THEY TRIED ALUMINUM WIRING BECAUSE THEY COULD SAVE THIRTY DOLLARS A UNIT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THE CODE WAS GOOD BECAUSE IT WAS UNIFIED ALL OF THAT. THERE WERE MANY MANUFACTURERS THAT ALWAYS BUILT A GOOD HOME AND BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS ESSENTIALLY A GOOD HOME . IF THE INSPECTOR COMES WITH AN OBJECTIVE EYE HE IS GOING TO SEE , ANY HOUSE THAT IS TWELVE OR THIRTEEN YEARS OLD COULD USE MAYBE NEW CARPET OR WHAT EVER BUT STRUCTURAL. Y AND FROM THE STAND POINT OF SAFETY I KNOW THAT THE HOME IS MORE THAN SATISFACTORY , PARTICUARILY WITH REGARD TO THE 74 CODE . IT HAS ALUMINUM WIRING IT HAS A EIGHTY THOUSAND MILLER BTU GUN WHICH . ABSOLUTELY THE BEST ON THE MARKET TODAY , FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES THE HOME IS SAFE AND SOUND. WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DO NOT GIVE A PERMIT IS THAT IT REQUIRES THAT THIS YOUNG COUPLE TO HAVE TO MAKE AN EXCHANGE FROM SOMEWHERE AND WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IF THEY BUY THE PROPERTY FROM ME AND TRADE THIS HOME IN . . . IT HAS COPPER WIRING , I MEANT COPPER. . . THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THIS HOME AND TRADE IT INTO A DEALER AND THEY ARE GOING TO SELL THEM A 76 , 74 HOME OR NEWER AND THE RESULT IS THEY ARE GOING TO PAY A PREMIUM IN A SITUATION THAT I KNOW DOES NOT , SHOULD NOT REQUIRE A PREMIUM TO LIVE ON THIS PROPERTY . I CAN TELL YOU FOR EXAMPLE HAVING LEARNED MY SELF IN 66 THE HOME THAT WAS BUILT IN 66 IS PROBABLY A BETTER BUILT HOME THEN THE SAME COMPANY THAT BUILT THE HOME IN 1972 . BECAUSE WHEN THEY BUILT THE HOME IN 1966 THEY ONLY BUILT TWO A DAY IN 1972 THEY WERE BUILDING TEN A DAY. I KNOW IT IS A GOOD HOME , AND ANYONE THAT WALKS IN THERE KNOWS IT IS A GOOD HOME BUT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO OUT AND PAY A PREMIUM TO SATISFY THE LAW WHICH SERVICES A NEED THAT DOES NOT FALL IN-TO THI S CATEGORY . WE THINK THAT THE HOME SHOULD RJOSF : AND FALL ON ITS OWN MERIT AND THAT YOU HAVE QUALIFIED PEOPLE TO GO IN THE HOME 46 AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT IS SAFE. ALL I ASK A$ THE SELLER OF THE PROPERTY IS TO GIVE THE HOME A REASONABLE CHANCE TO PASS A REASONABLE INSPECTION FOR A MOBILE HOME , IF IT IS NOT SAFE I WILL BE THE VERY FIRST ONE TO HAVE IT DISAPPEAR. IF IT IS SAFE HOWEVER , IT IS NOT UNREASONABLE SINCE IT HAS BEEN THERE FOR THIRTEEN YEARS FOR YOU TO GIVE AN ALLOWANCE TO A YOUNG FAMILY STARTING OUT A CHANCE TO LIVE IN IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. COUNCILMAN EISENHART- NOTED THAT THERE WAS A CASE LIKE THIS ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO. . . THE BOARD REQUIRED THAT A CERTIFIED AFFADAVIT BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD FROM THE MANUFACTURERS OF TBE MOBILE HOME STATING THAT THE MOBILE HOME MET, THE 1974 STANDARDS . . . NOTED THAT THE MOBILE HOME IN QUESTION WAS A 1973 MODEL. . .TO THE LAWYER AND MR. EASTWOOD THE PROBLEM IS NOT JUST TO SEND AN INSPECTOR OUT THERE IT IS A MATTER OF THE INTERNAL CONSTRUCTION , THERE IS FIRE RISK THERE IS WARPING , THERE ARE EXIT REQUIREMENTS , THERE ARE WINDOW THINGS THAT CAN BE POPPED OUT IN CASE OF A FIRE ETC. IF WE WERE TO APPROVE A 1966 MOBILE HOME AND GOD FORBID SOMETHING SHOULD HAPPEN AND THEY GOT INJURED THE TOWN COULD BE SUED FOR ALLOWING A PERMIT FOR A MOBILE HOME WHICH DID NOT FALL WITHIN THE RANGE THAT THE TOWN HAD ESTABLISHED, BEING A 1974 OR LATER. THE ONLY WAY I CAN SEE OUT OF THAT IN MY OWN MIND AT THIS POINT THE ENGINEERS OR SOMEBODY IN THIS COMPANY THAT BUILT THIS THING TWELVE YEARS AGO OR WHAT EVER , SEVENTEEN YEARS AGO , IF THEY COULD CERTIFY THAT INDEED THIS PARTICULAR MODEL THIS PARTICULAR YEARjTHIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF EQUIPMENT DID INDEED MEET .OR SURPASS IN ALL RESPECTS THE 1974 N. Y. STATE CODEITHEN I COULD VOTE FOR IT , BUT I CANNOT VOTE FOR IT ON THE BASIS OF SENDING OUR INSPECTORS DOWN BECAUSE THERE IS NO " WAY THEY CAN INSPECT IT REALLY WITHOUT BREAKING IT APART. COUNCILMAN MORRELL- I CANNOT FIND ANYTHING IN OUR ORDINANCE NUMBER 12 DIRECTED TO THIS PARTICULAR SITUATIONjTO ME A MOBILE HOME THAT WAS IN POSITION BEFORE ORDINANCE NUMBER 12 WENT INTO EFFECT IS GRANDFATHERED AS EXISTING PROPERTY AND CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP HAS NO BEARING AT ALL ON THIS ORDINANCE. -MR. NEALON-THIS PROPERTY IS NOT ASSESSEDIAS WE UNDERSTAND IT, AS A MOBILE HOMEJIT IS ASSESSED AS REAL PROPERTY IMPROVED AS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. -COUNCILMAN MORRELL- FROM WHAT I CAN GATHER FROM THIS ORDINANCE I DO NOT SEE ANYTHING IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT DIRECTS ITSELF TO PREEXISTING PROPERTY . . . -MR. NEALON- I WOULD AGREE 100% WITH YOU. I FIGURE THAT IT IS NO DIFFERENT FOR INSTANCE IN SAYING TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY WHOk_�STICK BUILT HOMES WERE BUILT PRIOR TO 1974 AND AT THE TIME WHEN ONE SELLS THAT STICK BUILT HOUSE BUILT PRIOR TO 1974 THAT YOU MUST UPGRADE IT TO MEET WHATEVER EXISTING BUILDING CODES ARE NOW IN PLACE. IF IT HAS A 500 GALLON SEPTIC TANK WHEN YOU SELL IT YOU SHOULD HAVE A 1000 . . . -SUPERVISOR WALTER- THAT IS VERY GOOD FOR DISCUSSION BUT MOBILE HOMES AND STANDING HOMES ON FOUNDATIONS ARE CONSIDERED DIFFERENTLY WE HAVE A MOBILE HOME ORDINANCE , WE HAVE A SET OF RULES FOR BUILDING CODES THAT ARE DIRECTED BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK SO THAT THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. THIS BOARD HAS BEEN FACED WITH MANY , MANY TIMES MOBILE HOMES WHICH HAVE BEEN PRIOR TO 1974 , I HAVE SET ON THE BOARD AND TURNED THEM DOWN . I THINK WE GET INTO A VERY COMPROMISING SITUATION WHEN IN FACT WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO COMES UP WITH NOT A 1973 BUT A 1966 MOBILE HOME AND THE BOARD IS CONSIDERING ISSUING AN APPLICATION FOR IT . IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO ASK FOR CERTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS ONE THING AS FAR AS WHAT MR. MORRELL BROUGHT UP WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT INSTANCES WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP THE BOARD HAS INDICATED THAT THOSE PEOPLEjTHEY DID NEED A PERMIT FOR A MOBILE HOME AFTER A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP . THERE IS PRE:iGE,9F�N"T ON WHAT WE HAVE DONE BEFORE OVER THE YEARS AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE A QUICK HARD LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE DONE AS FAR AS TAKING ACTION OR TAKING NO ACTION ON THE HOME THAT IS PRIOR TO 1974 . YOU HAVE VERY GOOD ARGI -,MENTS AND MADE SOME GOOD STATEMENTS BUT WE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS IN'THE PAST , IT IS A MATTER OF POLICY OF THE BOARD THAT THE 1974 DATE BE ADHEREB�,TOJI WOULD FEEL V�ERY BADLY MYSELF TO SAYS HEY FOLKS LETS GRANT THIS PERMIT WHEN IN FAC-'-" "�'�N \ OLF DOZEN OTHER PEOPLE WERE TURNED DOWN IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES. -COUNCILMAN OLSON-WHEN DOCTOR EISENHART SPOKE ABOUT GRANTING A PERMIT A FEW YEARS AGO FROM A TRAILER , A MOBILE HOME THAT WAS NOT A 74 I THINK 47 IN THAT CASE THE MOBILE HOME WAS MANUFACTURED IN 1973 , THEY VERIFIED IT WAS THE SAME MODEL AS THE 74 . . . I HAVE TO AGREE WITH MRS. WALTER AND SUPPORT HER STATMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR MOBILE HOME , THERE WERE A LOT OF GOOD ARGUMENTS MADE ON THE PART OF THE SELLER AND THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE SELLER I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO OUR ATTORNEY ON SOME OF THE LEGAL TERMS THAT WERE QUOTED. I WOULD NOT VOTE IN FAVOR OF A MOBILE HOME OF THIS YEAR FOR SIX MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS OR A YEAR UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE OWNER OR THE BOARD COULD ASCERTAIN THAT IT MET THE CODE, AS Doc SAID SOMEONE COULD GET HURT IN THE MEANTIME . -MR. NEALON-MR. MORELL , WHAT DID YOU READ : BEFORE AND WHAT DID IT MEAN? -COUNCILMAN MORRELL-IN READING THE ORDINANCE I SEE NOTHING THAT DIRECTS ITSELF TO PREEXISTING MOBILE HOMES ON VARIOUS PROPERTY IN REGARD TO THE SECOND QUESTION , *ETHER OR NOT A PERMIT WAS EVER ISSUES TO ANY OWNER ON THAT PROPERTY. . . GRANDFATHER CLAUSE IS NOT MENTIONED IN HERE AS FAR AS I CAN FIND IT . . . IF A PERMIT WAS ISSUED THE PERMIT SHALL NOT BE TRANS- `- FERRED OR ASSIGNABLE. . . . ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WAS A PERMIT EVER ISSUED TO ANYONE ON THAT PROPERTY? -MR. SEALY- YES THE PREVIOUS OWNER) MR. SWEET -COUNCILMAN MORRELL- . . . I AM SAYING IT IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS' BEING TRANSFERRED. -MR. NEALON- WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS MOBILE (OMES THAT WERE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE ENACTMENT OF THIS LAW ARE SUBJECT TO THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO CONTINUE TO BE THERE. . . . -COUNCILMAN MORRELL- THAT IS MY OPINION -COUNCILMAN OLSON- I THINK THE PROBLEM COMES IN THAT THE OWNER, THE ORIGINAI OWNER OF THE LAND AND THE MOBILE HOME WHEN THE LAW GOES INTO EFFECT ONCE THAT CHANGES HANDS THEN YOU HAVE A NEW OWNER AND THAT PERSON HAS TO COME FORWARD. THAT IS MY INTREPRETATION . . . .SUPERVISOR WALTER- THAT IS HOW WE HAVE BEEN HANDLING _IT . . . ASKED IF THE APPLICANT WISHED TO SPEAK. . . -MR. MATTISON-I LIVE AT 4 SUNSET STREET HUDSON FALLS-AS MY LAWYER HAS NOTED I DO HAVE TO(5FRIDAY TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING, AS I TAKE IT YOUR JOB TO MAKE OUR-.SAFETY A FACTOR. I WOULD LIKE THAT LOOKMrAT , BUT I ALSO HAVE A FAMILY I HAVE GOT TO LOOK AT THEIR SAFETY . . . BEING ABLE TO SURVIVE THROUGH THE WINTER. AS I LOOK AT THE HOME STRUCTURE WISE ROOFWISE TO ME IN MY OWN MIND IT QUALIFIES TO BE AS CAPABLE TU LIVE IN AS A 74 OR NEWER. WHEN I WENT TO BUY ITjIT WAS 76 IT LOOKED AS1fIT WAS A 76 AND UNTIL I CAME HERE AND FOUND OUT THAT THIS WAS DIFFERENT , THAT WAS DIFFERENT THAT IS WHEN EVERTHING STARTED GOING BACKWARDS I WOULD SAY . BUT AS FAR AS CHECKING AS FAR AS I THOUGHT WAS HAZARDOUS I COULD SEE NOTHING . . . WHEN MR. EASTWOOD TOOK OWNERSHIP OF IT HE SEALED THE ROOF AND THAT WAS A PRECAUTION FOR HIM. AS FAR AS THE HOME STRUCTURE ITSELF I DO NOT SEE- NOTHING. THANK YOU. -SUPERVISOR WALTER- ASKED FOR FURTHER INPUT. . . HEARING NONE THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8 : 36 P. M. PUBLIC HEARING NO PARKING ORDINANCE LAWTON AVE.- NOTICE SHOWN 8 :36 P. M. SUPERVISOR WALTER- TO ESTABLISH A NO PARKING ZONE ON TOWN ROAD NO. 198A LAWTON AVENUE FOR A LENGTH OF 1000 FEET ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD. . . ASKED FOR PUBLIC INPUT. . . FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC THIS WAS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS BECAUSE OF A BUSINESS THAT IS THERE AND BY A CHECK BY OUR HIGHWAY SUPT . HE CONCURRED THAT A LENGTH OF A 1000 ' WHICH IS THE LENGTH OF THE STREET WOULD BE ADEQUATE AND WOULD BE A SAFETY FACTOR. ASKED FOR PUBLIC INPUT. . . HEARING NONE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. . . 8 :37M PUBLIC HEARING FIRE CONTRACTS-TOWN OF QUEENSBURY NOTICE SHOWN 8 : 38 P. M. 48 SUPERVISOR WALTER- THE BOARD HAS BEEN NEGOTIATING WITH THE FIRE COMPANIES FOR FIRE PROTECTION IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY UNDER THE DIRECTION OF DR. EISENHART . SEVERAL WEEKS AGO THE BOARD AND THE FIRE MPANIES WERE IN AGREEMENT FOR A TWO YEAR CONTRACT THAT WILLS OME EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST . 1984 AND RUN THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST . 1985. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RECORD I WOULD INDICATE THAT BAY RIDGE FIRE COMPANY FOR 1984 WILL BE $73 , 500 . 00 QUEENSBURY CENTRAL 1984 $122 , 700 . 00 NORTH QUEENSBURY FIRE CO . 1984 $75 ,000 . 00 WEST GLENS FALLS FIRE CO. 1984 $93 , 600 . 00 SOUTH QUEENSBURY FIRE CO . 1984 $63 ,000 . 00 IN 1985 ALL THE AMOUNTS STAY THE SAME WITH THE EXPECTION OF SO. QUEENSBURY WHICH WOULD RECEIVE $89 , 151 . 00 COUNCILMAN EISENHART- PROVIDED THE PAYMENT FOR THEIR TRUCK BE DUE . . . IT COULD GO AS LATE AS 1986 SUPERVISOR WALTER- THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT THAT WERE DECIDED ON ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST YEARS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SOUTH QUEENBURY COMPANY CONTRACT WHICH WAS MABE UP BY THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO REFLECTTHE DIFFERENCE IN PAYMENT FOR THE FIRE TRUCK . COUNCILMAN EISENHART- YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THEY ARE GOING TO ORDER THIS TRUCK , IT TAKES A YEAR TO GET AND THEN THEY HAVE TO PUT DOWN THE DOWN PAYMENT AND A YEAR LATER THEY HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER ONE , IT IS POSSIBLE THAT , THAT PAYMENT WILL COME IN 1985 IN WHICH CASE THE TOWN IS AGREEING TO PAY THAT PAYMENT IN ADDITION TO THEIR OTHER MONEY , IF IT COMES LATER IT WILL COME _� OUT OF THE 86 MONEY . SUPERVISOR WALTER- I HAVE A SPECIAL REQUEST TO RECOGNIZE THE NINE MEN FROM THE SO . QSBY. FIRE CO . OR 10 . . JOSEPH DA.1RE- I AM VERY PROUD OF THE FIRE COMPANY MEN . . I APPRECIATE THE MEMBERS OF SO. QSBY. BEING HERE TONIGHT . SUPERVISOR WALTER- THE FIRE COMPANIES IN PROVIDING THE FIRE COVERAGE THROUGH OUT THE TOWN ALTHOUGH ADJUSTMENTS WERE MADE THE TOTAL OVERALL INCREASE FOR THE YEAR IS 4% TO THE TAXPAYERS OF THE TOWN . . . . WE GET EXCELLENT FIRE PROTECTION . THANKED DR. EISENHART FOR HIS TIME THAT HE PUT IN , IN THE PRELIMINARY NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE COMPANIES COUNCILMAN EISENHART- THE QUALITY OF THE FIRE PROTECTION IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY EXCELLENT . . . ASKED THAT THE PUBLIC STOP IN AND SEE HOW WELL MAINTAINED THE FIRE COMPANIES ARE KEPT. . . WE ARE VERY GREATFUL FORTHE QUALITY OF SERVICE THAT WE GET. COUNCILMAN MORRELL- IT HAS BEEN EVIDENCE IN THE LAST WEEK WITH THE ADVERSE WEATHER WE HAVE HAD TAXING THE HEATING SYSTEMS AND WHAT NOT AND THE FIRES AND NEAR FIRES THAT HAVE HAPPENED AND THE RESPONSE THAT THE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY HAVE MADE. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN- QUESTIONED THE DOLLAR VALUE OF FIRE LOSS IN THE TOWN , IT SEEMS TO BE VERY LOIN IN OUR AREA. . . COUNCILMAN OLSON- I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING TONIGHT SUPERVISOR WALTER- NOTED THAT ALL THE FIRE COMPANIES ARE ESTABLISHING CAPITAL FUNDS FOR THEIR ECUPMENT. . . HEARING CLOSED 8 :45 P . M. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ORDINANCE NO . 56 -% RFSnll]TTnN Nn 972 INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL OLSON WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL : WHEREAS , A REQUEST FOR A NO PARKING ZONE ON TOWN BOARD 198A LAWTON AVENUE WAS RECEIVED AND WHEREAS , A PUBLIC HEARING , DULY ADVERTISED BY THE TOWN CLERK WAS HELD ON DECEMBER 27 , 1983 IN WHICH ALL PERSONS WERE HEARD , NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT ORDINANCE NO . 56 BE AS FOLLOWS : ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NO PARKING ZONE ON TOWN ROAD NO . 19sA ( LAWTON AVE . SECTION 1 . FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE THE WORD ' ' VEHICLE ' ' , 49 ' ' PARK ' ' , AND ' 'STANDING ' ' SHALL HAVE THE MEANING DEFINED IN THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK . SECTION 2 . NO VEHICLE SHALL BE PARKED OR LEFT STANDING ON TOWN ROAD NO. 198A ( LAWTON AVENUE ) FOR A LENGTH OF 1000 FEET ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD. SECTION 3 . ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE ARE HEREBY REPEALED PORVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT SUCH REPEAL SHALL BE ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH INCONSISTENCY AND IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER ORDINANCES REGULATING AND GOVERNING THE SUBJECT MATTER COVERED BY THIS ORDINANCE. SECTION 4 . ANY PERSON VIOLATING ANY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2 OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL UPON CONVICTION BE PUNISHABLE FOR A FIRST OFFENSE BY A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TEN DOLLARS , ($10 . 00 ) AND FOR A SECOND OFFENSE a_ BY A FINE NOT LESS THAN TEN DOLLARS , ( $ 10 . 00 ) NOR MORE THAN TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS ( $25. 00 ) OR BY IMPRISONMENT FOR NOT LESS THAN TWO ( 2 ) NOR MORE THAN TEN DAYS. THE THIRD OR ANY SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE WITHIN ONE ( 1 ) YEAR SHALL BE PUNISHABLE BY A FINE NOT TO EXCEED ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS , ( $ 100 . 00 ) OR BY IMPRISONMENT NOT TO EXCEED THIRTY ( 30 ) DAYS OR BY BOTH SUCH FINE AND IMPRISONMENT . IN ADDITION TO THE `AFORESAID PENALTIES , THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY MAY INSTITUTE ANY PROPER ACTION , SUIT OR PROCEEDING TO PREVENT , RESTRAIN , CORRECT OR ABATE ANY VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. SECTION 5 . THIS ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY. DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE DISCUSSION HELD ON MATTISON MOBILE HOME- SUPERVISOR WALTER ON ADVICE OF COUNSEL WE NEED TO LOOK ' INTO FURTHER INFORMATION AND DECLARE OUR FINDINGS AT OUR MEETING OF NEXT TUESDAY. COUNSEL- WE ARE LOOKING INTO THE LEGALITY OF WHAT CAN BE DONE :\ . .COUNCILMAN EISENHART- I WOULD URGE MR. EASTWOOD TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE COMPANY AND SEE IF THEY WOULD CERTIFY THAT THE MOBILE HOME IS CONSTRUCTED TO MEET THE CODES OF 1974 . . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN- I THINK THAT DOC HAS A GOOD POINT IF SOMETHING MEETS THE STANDARDS I DO NOT SEE WHY YOU WOULD TURN IT DOWN. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN- REQUESTED THAT NO ACTION BE TAKEN AND ALLOW THE ATTORNEY TO RESEARCH THE ORDINANCE AND THE APPLICANT TIME TO SEE IF THE MOBILE HOME MEETS THE 74 STANDARDS. . . AGREED TO BY THE ENTIRE BOARD. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER- THE DECISION OF THE TOWN BOARD IS TO NOT TAKE ANY ACTION THIS'; EVENING ON THE MOBILE HOME APPLICATION OF MR. MATTISON UNTIL OUR ATTORNEY GIVES U5 AN OPINION RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE AND ITSAPPLICATION TO THIS PARTICULAR MOBILE HOME APPLICATION AND THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH INFORMATION FROM THE MOBILE HOME COMPANY CERTIFIED THAT THIS PARTICULAR MOBILE HOME MEETS THE CRITERA AND STANDARDS OF 1974 CODES. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUPERVISOR TO SIGN FIRE CONTRACTS RESDLUT_ aL N D_ _Z2_3,_ INTRODUCED BY DR. CHARLES EISENHART WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MR. DANIEL OLSON : WHEREAS , THERE HAS BEEN DULY ESTABLISHED IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT KNOWN AS ' 'TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ' ' EMBRACING ALL OF THE TERRITORY OF SAID TOWN , AND WHEREAS , IT IS PROPOSED THAT CONTRACTS BE ENTERED INTO WITH BAY RIDGE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY , INC. , WEST GLENS FALLS VOLUNTEER FIRE CO . INC. , NORTH OUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO. , INC. ; SOUTH 'Qt7-fNSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO . , INC. ; AND QUEENSBURY CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE CO. INC. ; FOR THE FURNISHING OF FIRE PROTECTION TO SUCH DISTRICT , AND WHEREAS DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD AT THE TOWN OFFICE BUILDING , BAY AND HAVILAND ROADS IN SAID TOWN ON THE 27TH DAY OF DECEMBER 1983 AT 7 : 30 P. M. TO CONSIDER SUCH CONTRACTS , THE NOTICE DULY SPECIFYING THE TIME AND PLACE OF THE HEARING AS AFORESAID AND GIVING IN GENERAL TERMS THE PROPOSED CONTRACT , AND 50 WHEREAS , SAID HEARING HAVING BEEN HELD AND ALL PERSONS HAVING BEEN HEARD , IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED , THAT THIS TOWN BOARD CONTRACT WITH THE SAID BAY RIDGE VOLUNTEER FIRE CO. , INC . ; WEST GLENS FALLS VOLUNTEER FIRE CO . , INC. ; NORTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO. , INC. ; SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO. , INC. ; AND QUEENSBURY CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE CO . , INC. , FOR THE FURNISHING OF FIRE PROTECTION TO SUCH DISTRICT , AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED , THAT THE SAID CONTRACTS BE EXECUTED IN BEHALF OF THIS BOARD BY THE SUPERVISOR. DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS. MONAHAN , MRS. WALTER NOES : NONE �r ABSENT : NONE RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON RESCUE SQUAD CONTRACTS RESOLUTION NO . 271 , INTRODUCED BY DR. CHARLES EISENHART WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MRS . BETTY MONAHAN : WHEREAS , THERE HAS BEEN DULY ESTABLISHED IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AMBULAND SERVICE FOR TWO VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES AND ONE PRIVATE AMBULANCE SERVICE AND THE TOWN BOARD HAS PROVIDED FOR THIS SERVICE BY CONTRACTS WITH THESE THREE SERVICES AND WHEREAS , THE SAID CONTRACTS FOR AMBULANCE SERVICE WILL EXPIRE AND THE TOWN BOARD DEEMS IT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST OF THE RESIDENTS OF SAID TOWN TO PROVIDE FOR SUCH AMBULANCE SERVICE AND WHEREAS, SECTION 184 OF THE TOWN LAW REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING UPON THE CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR SUCH AMBULANCE SERVICE , NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , THAT A PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID PROPOSED CONTRACT TERMS WILL BE HELD BY THE TOWN BOARD OF SAID TOWN AT THE TOWN OFFICE BUILDING , BAY AND HAVILAND ROADS , IN SAID TOWN ON THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY , 1984 AT 7 : 30 P . M. OF THAT DAY AND THAT THEN AND THERE THE SAID TOWN BOARD WILL HEAR ALL PERSONS INTERESTED IN THE MATTER AND THE TOWN CLERK OF THIS TOWN BE AND HE HEREBY IS DIRECTED TO PREPARE AND HAVE PUBLISHED AND POSTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW THE NECESSARY NOTICES OF SUCH HEARING . DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR . EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS . MONAHAN , MRS. WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE SUPERVISOR WALTER- NEXT TUESDAY NIGHT ( JANUARY 3RD. 1984 ) THE TOWN BOARD WILL HOLD ITS ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AUDIT OF BILLS RESOIIITTnN Nin 974 INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MRS . BETTY MONAHAN : RESOLVED , THAT AUDIT OF BILLS: AS APPEARS ON ABSTRACT NO . 83-12D ---� AND NUMBERED 2189 THROUGH 2277 AND TOTALING $40 , 596 . 87 BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED. DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS. MONAHAN , MRS. WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE RESOLUTION TO HOLD EXECUTIVE SESSION 51 RESOIIITTON N n p _ INTRODUCED BY DR. CHARLES EISENHART WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION , SECONDED BY MR. DANIEL OLSON : RESOLVED , THAT THE TOWN BOARD HEREBY MOVES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS; DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES: MR. OLSON . DR. EISENHART, MR. MORRELL , MRS. MOMHAN , MRS . WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE SUPERVISOR WALTER- ANNOUNCED THAT THE POOL COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THE REPORT OF THE ENGINEER ON THE GURNEY LANE POOL . . . SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE . . . IT WAS :RECOMMENDED THAT A MEETING BETWEEN THE TOWN BOARD, THE RECREATION COMMISSION AND THE ENGINEER BE HELD TO DISCUSS THE REPORT . . . ( REPORT IN SUPERVISOR 'S OFFICE) SET THE MEETING FOR JANUARY 17TH RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LEASE OF ROLLER RESOLUTION N0 . 27$ INTRODUCED BY MR. DANIEL MORRELL WHO MOVED FOR ITS B ADOPTION , SECONDEL Y MR. DANIEL OLSON : WHEREAS , THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY , HAS INVESTIGATED THE POSSIBILITIES OF ACQUIRING A ROLLER FOR USE BY THE TOWN HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT WHICH INVESTIGATION HAS INVOLVED EXTENSIVE RESEARCH AND DISCUSSIONS WITH VARIOUS SUPPLIERS OF ROLLERS , AND WHEREAS, THEITVWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF nUEENSBURY , HAS CONSIDERED THE HIGH CAPITAL COST OF THE ROLLER , THE NEEDS OF THE TOWN HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT TO ACQUIRE SUCH EQUIPMENT IN ORDER TO EFFECTIVELY PERFORM ITS DUTIES , THE EXTENSIVE COST OF REPAIRING AND MAINTAINING SIMILAR EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY UTILIZED BY THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND THE NECESSITY OF OBTAINING RELIABLE SERVICING OF THE EQIFE'IENT UTILIZED AT REASONABLE COSTS , NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , THAT , THE ;TbWN OF QUEENSBURY ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CONTRACTOR SALES FOR THE LEASE OF ONE NEW REX ROLLER MODEL SP910 FOR A ONE YEAR PERIOD OF TIME UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE EQUIPMENT LEASE AGREEMENT A COPY OF WHICH IS— ANNEXED HERETO AND MABE A PART HEREOF , AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , THAT THE SUPERVISOR OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE AFORESAID EQUIPMENT LEASE AGREEMENT AND ANY AND ALL OTHER NECESSARY DOCUMENTS REQUIRED TO EFFECT THIS TRANSACTION . DULY ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : MR. OLSON , DR. EISENHART , MR. MORRELL , MRS. MONAHAN , MRS. WALTER NOES : NONE ABSENT : NONE ON MOTION THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED , DONALD A. CHASE TOWN CLERK