1993-07-26
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING
JULY 26, 1993
6:30 P.M.
MTG#55
RES#414-422
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Supervisor Michel Brandt
Councilman Pliney Tucker
Councilman Nick Caimano
Councilman Susan Goetz
Councilman Betty Monahan
TOWN ATTORNEY
Paul Dusek
TOWN OFFICIALS
Jim Martin
PRESS
Moreau Sun, Post Star, WENU,
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR BRANDT
DISCUSSION COST CONTROL ASSOCIATES - KEITH LAAKE
Mr. Laake spoke to the Board regarding a recent audit of utility bills for the Town of Queensbury.
Reviewed the errors found in the existing billing for a number of years, noting they will be receiving a
refund. Also, recommended to the Board that an inventory be done for the number of traffic lights in
Queensbury to verify billing and to request from Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation a traffic light rate
change in electrical billing of traffic lights. The following resolutions were passed.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING INVENTORY OF STREET LIGHTS
RESOLUTION NO. 414, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHEREAS, Cost Control Associates through agreement with the Town of Queensbury has performed
various audits of the telephone, electric, and gas bills being incurred by the Town, and
WHEREAS, Cost Control Associates has recommended that the Town request that Niagara Mohawk do a
complete inventory of the Town's street lights and has advised that this could be done at no cost,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to make
written request and complete such other documents that may be necessary on behalf of the Town to request
that Niagara Mohawk do a complete inventory of all Town street lights, and
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury would request that the inventory be
completed within three months from today's date.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
Ayes: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt
Noes: None
Absent:None
RESOLUTION REGARDING TRAFFIC LIGHT RATE CHANGE
RESOLUTION NO. 415, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz
WHEREAS, Cost Control Associates has reported to the Town Board that certain of its traffic lights are
being billed by Niagara Mohawk under PSC 207 Rate Two - Small General Service rather than the rate that
is specifically designed for traffic signals PSC 213 Rate Four - Unmetered Traffic Signals Service, and
WHEREAS, Cost Control Associates has recommended to the Town Board that they consider changing the
current billing of the traffic signals to the aforesaid PSC 213 Rate Four,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to
request and negotiate with Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation for a change of its traffic lights from the
PSC 207 Rate Two to the PSC 213 Rate Four, and
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby agrees that the Town shall be bound
by such a change in electrical billing provided that the change may be accomplished for a rate not greater
than $1,200 with the understanding that if it shall cost more than $1,200 to change the lights that no
agreement may be entered into and no change may be made without first returning to the Town Board and
obtaining a further resolution of authorization, and
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the cost of the change provided for herein shall be paid for from the General Fund by
billing the same to the line item account existing therein for traffic lights.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt
Noes: None
Absent:None
PUBLIC HEARING
SMALL CITIES GRANT APPLICATION
NOTICE SHOWN
OPENED 7:05 P.M.
Charles Barber - AMG Industries and Robert Murray - Shelter Planning and Development
Supervisor Brandt-I'll declare the public hearing opened.
Robert Murray-Presented Board members with a one page summary of the project. The Town is in a
situation where it has the opportunity to seek HUD funds which would be granted to the Town and then in
tum use those funds as a loan to AMG Industries to help assist them in the financing of their new facility in
the Queensbury Industrial Park. Our organization has been involved in the HUD Small Cities program for
a long time and we've worked with the program and its components and been successful in assisting
communities in making application in getting these funds. The HUD Program has $41 million dollars in it
this year available to all communities on a competitive basis. The program is divided into a series of
components. Basically you have single purpose grants and you have comprehensive grants within the
single purpose category you can go after housing money, public facility money or economic development
money. The Towns situation is such that you have an industry that wants to locate in the industrial park,
wants to expand, employ more people and it needs to finance that expansion. It has worked to pay a good
deal of that financing, but it needs a little more to be able to assist and make that project work. The Small
Cities Program provides that opportunity the public money through HUD is available because of the jobs
that are created as a result of this kind of project. The application deadline for the Small Cities Program is
August 11th. I've met with Mr. Barber and I've met with the Queensbury Economic Development Group
and with your Supervisor and have had several meetings with Jim to discuss the project and the problems
that go with it. The grant maximum under the single purpose category is $400,000. As it tums out that
amount of money is approximately the right amount of money to assist in meeting the financing needs of
AMG when you combined the HUD Grant with the rest of this financing. I would point out that a HUD
Grant is a grant to the Town, but a loan to the company. So, if your successful you have the opportunity to
get $370,000 or $400,000 dollars which is a gift to you which is loaned to the company and which is paid
back with interest to the Town. It allows the Town to use those repayment streams to create a revolving
loan fund and assist other businesses over time it's kind of like an endowment it's a very fortunate thing to
be able to get. You have to have the right situation and it appears that the expansion of this particular
industry and community provides that opportunity.
Supervisor Brandt-Before you go much further, I think we should also tell the public that Jim Martin
worked for you at one time, right?
Mr. Murray-That's correct. Jim was certainly an interracial part of our office and he knows as virtually as
much as I do except about these kinds of things. Except that his focus lately has not been on this particular
technical aspect of this kind of grant work.
Supervisor Brandt-And when this came up I talked to Jim about it and said, how can we handle this? He
said there is one guy that knows more about this than anybody around and that's Bob Murray, and I suggest
that we hire him as a Town. I want that on the record so everybody knows that it's above board and was
well known when we went into this and there is no subterfuge in it whatsoever.
Mr. Murray-I would be glad to answer further questions. They said the purpose of the hearing is to give the
public an opportunity to comment on the proposed application and on the proposed project. To comment
about any other economic or community development needs you might have that might be something that
HUD funds could be use for. That's the purpose of the hearing it's a requirement to make the application
and subsequent to the hearing we would hope the Town would authorize submission of the application.
We're in the process of putting that together at the moment, as I say it's just a matter of putting the
documentation together so you have a competitive application. It appears to us that it would be very
competitive if all of the pieces that we believe are there come together the way we discussed so far.
Supervisor Brandt-Is it common for applications that come to a community to be competitive or is this an
unusual situation?
Mr. Murray-It is somewhat unusual to have a project of this size that is going to be competitive. Most of
the economic development deals that we see have some kind of problem associated with them which make
them very hard to get funded and therefore they are not competitive. They either have a situation the
company really doesn't need the money is one that happens frequently and thought it would be a good idea
to get government money that generally doesn't work. You have a situation where there is virtually no other
money in the deal that isn't looked on as favorably as a situation where there is equity in bank financing all
ready a part of the project. I would say that this is very fortunate and that it is competitive and unique and
it's one you want to try to take advantage of if you can.
Councilman Caimano- What is the percentage of the grant verses the total project?
Mr. Murray-I think we're looking at $2,300,000 as the total project cost in change so $400,000 is a small
percentage of it.
Councilman Monahan-But, there is some other money involved that is either economic development
money or that type of money in this project isn't there?
Mr. Murray-There is equity and loan funds. Equity meaning, Mr. Barber's money and the rest of it is a
bank loan or a bank guarantee to be able to purchase bonds so at the moment that is the money that's in it.
There are a number of ways he might finance this project and he has certainly looked at a variety of
alternatives, but at the moment this appears to be the way the company finds it most advantageous to do it.
So you end up with the company's money a very sizeable amount, a bank loan that is very sizeable, and a
loan from the Town which is in the neighborhood of $400,000 and that completes the financing.
Councilman Caimano-But, really what we're looking at here forgetting about everybody else as far as the
Town of Queensbury is concerned this is an opportunity for the Town of Queensbury to be a conduit for
money and raise interest money assuming everything goes well for further...money that's all we're involved
in right?
Mr. Murray-That is absolutely correct. You have no liability one way or the other it is a grant to you.
Hopefully, Mr. Barber's project is successful he'll pay it back to you with interest.
Councilman Tucker-This application cost about $5,000 dollars?
Mr. Murray-That's correct.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-For the application preparation, yes.
Councilman Tucker-Did I hear a meeting or so ago the Barber's might be interested in paying part of that?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes. The arrangement that was worked out was Mr. Barber would pay half
of that fee and QEDC is picking up the other half.
Councilman Tucker-There is $30,000 dollars for the administration of this loan...
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Right.
Councilman Tucker-Who gets that and who does it?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-That will be to cover the cost any cost incurred by my office in
administering the grant. Also, preparation of loan documents and things of that nature. There is probably
going to be two loans here, one for the working capital portion and one for the purchasing equipment.
Those will require two separate documents with two separate terms, rates, and so on conditions that will be
the primary use of the money. The other thing is that there is a federal requirement in terms of preparation
of environmental review record that's done on the project that's another cost after grant approval. Just
setting up the tracking system for the payments and all that....
Councilman Tucker-Your office will be doing this?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Whoever the Town Board appoints to do that. I would think that our office
would be a likely choice, but it could be the accounting office.
Councilman Caimano-But, the Town gets it?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Right.
Mr. Murray-We have in the past when we do these after grant approval been retained by the communities
to take care of a good portion of that administration the Town is under no obligation to do that. We would
hope that at the point that this is approved and in place that you would consider using us in conjunction
with Mr. Martin's office to carry this through but, certainly there is no obligation on your part to do that at
the moment. We'll come back to for that you can promise I'll come back that's a major interest I have in
one getting approved and two getting it carried out the way we said we we're going to get it carried out so I
have an interest in that, but there is no contractual obligation for us to be there at the end.
Councilman Caimano-What is the interest rate?
Mr. Murray-The interest rate is yet to be determined because we're still doing projections. In otherwords
that rate will probably be close to prime for some part of the application and the other part of it will depend
on an assessment ofMr. Barber's capacity to pay that back particularly the early years and that hasn't been
worked out because we haven't finalized the projections yet.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Usually that's a fine tune that's done at the end Nick to see what Mr. Barber
can afford to pay. You want to get certainly a reasonable rate, but you don't want to make it so high that it
threatens his ability to repay.
Councilman Caimano-Who sets that rate?
Mr. Murray-That will be part of our final recommendation...
Councilman Caimano-You will set the rate?
Mr. Murray-In effect that's what happens it has to be competitive. In addition after the Town actually says
to HUD that they've reviewed this application and what they are presenting to HUD they determined is
reasonable and consistent with the public interest, but not burdensome to the point that it forces his
project... .
Councilman Caimano-Under.
Mr Murray-To have trouble. I have to look at that and make that on your behalf.
Supervisor Brandt-It's a public hearing any other questions from the Board?
Councilman Caimano-Not right now.
Supervisor Brandt-It's open to the public come right on up.
Mr. Salvador-It says here Small Cities Grant application what's the definition of a small city?
Mr. Murray-A small city is any community in New York State that is not an entitlement community
generally less than 50,000 thousand, but in addition not what they call an entitlement. There are a series of
communities through the State, Glens Falls being one of them, but particularly with Buffalo, Syracuse,
Rochester, etc., that under the Community Development Block Grant Program our allocated money each
year based on a congressional appropriation they get their money on a formula they don't have to compete
for it. The balance of the State is under a category in the Community Block Grant Program called, Small
Cities and that means every other community in the State other than those.
Mr. Salvador-It says that in the legislation?
Mr. Murray-Yeah.
Mr. Salvador-Is it possible to review that? Is that available?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-It's a matter of the congressional record.
Mr. Salvador-I like to see that Queensbury qualifies as a small city. We got into this with UDAD Grants,
Urban Development Action, Urban, Urban. The Town of Bolton qualified as an urban community, you
know the trouble that we got into up there.
Mr. Murray-They got 5 million dollars.
Mr. Salvador-They didn't get anything.
Mr. Murray-They got a 5 million dollar grant.
Mr. Salvador-They....bankruptcy they didn't get anything, okay. What is the repayment schedule on the
principal?
Mr. Murray-We just explained it that the payment schedule is going to depend on a series offactors....
Mr. Salvador-Your talking about the interest. The principal....
Mr. Murray-We're going to work out a payment the rate to term is the issue. For instance a classic
equipment loan has got a seven year term a building loan has a fifteen year term. When you say what's the
principal repayment schedule it's going to be consistent with the use of the money in the way that it will be
competitive.
Mr. Salvador-How much exposure is the Town of Queensbury going to incur before they start to see any
hope of getting any money?
Mr. Murray-The Town has no exposure.
Councilman Caimano-No exposure.
Mr. Salvador-That's Jim Martin working, his department working,
we're talking about it tonight.
Councilman Caimano-That's the question that I asked before. It seems to be John absent the argument
HUD money is all of us paying from the general tax fund. If your looking at the Town of Queensbury it
seems to be that we're getting paid on.... we are nothing but a conduit. If the thing goes belly up the worst,
it seems to me anyway worse case scenario is we're out what ever labor dollars Jim Martin and his group
have put in up to that point. If it succeeds and it seems to be a great opportunity that it will succeed then
for acting as a conduit the Town stands to pick up some sixty or seventy thousand dollars. Thirty thousand
dollars of the administrative fee assuming that none is paid out to a private fund and the interest, I just
guessed at eight percent I don't know what the prime will be when this happens so we're looking at sixty to
seventy thousand dollars of found money on being nothing more than a conduit. There is no question that
there is a risk the risk is that AMG won't work. I guess we could figure that out, well we could worse case
scenario we lose the thirty thousand dollars that we invest in his time.
Councilman Tucker-No you wouldn't.
Councilman Caimano-We have to pay that money up front labor dollars up front.
Mr. Murray-You'd get the four hundred back plus interest the whole thing is yours.
Councilman Caimano-Mr. Salvador is asking what if and I don't mean to imply that Mr. Barber's not, but
what if he never makes a dimes worth of payments what's the worse case scenario?
Councilman Tucker-But, the thing is if he gets the grant we get our thirty thousand right up front.
Councilman Caimano- That's right.
Councilman Tucker-Jim could through the whole project and we're not going to lose a dime as far as his
time is concern because our money is there.
Councilman Caimano- If we get the grant the thirty thousand comes up front.
Councilman Tucker-Right.
Councilman Caimano- Then that answers that question.
Mr. Salvador-Where do we stay in the line of succession on getting repaid what position does this Town
have? First, second, third, fourth?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-We know that much that it would be first position on the equipment portion
of the grant. On the equipment portion of the loan we'd be in first position and the remainder is working
capital.
Mr. Murray-You would be behind other lenders you would be secondary to them.
Mr. Salvador-How many other lenders?
Mr. Murray-At the moment one.
Mr. Salvador-Who is that?
Mr. Murray-That's a bank.
Councilman Caimano-Wait a minute let me continue on with that question. We would be behind any other
lenders or just bank lenders?
Mr. Murray-The other lenders.
Councilman Caimano-Let's assume he get another bank or a personnel loan.
Mr. Murray-You are the bottom of the tier in all loan funds in the deal.
Councilman Caimano- That's the answer to the question.
Mr. Salvador-Your last in line.
Councilman Caimano-It would have to be because it's funded money.
Mr. Salvador-Thank you.
Supervisor Brandt-Anyone else who would like to speak on this or ask questions?
Dick Palmer-Queensbury. I just kind of question the repayment schedule based on the ability to pay. If
you were to give someone a raise, let's say there wasn't money to pay the loan off and you raised all the
officers salaries now the ability is not there to pay is that correct?
Mr. Murray-That's correct.
Mr. Palmer-We could end up never being paid?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-What's sent on as part of the application is the actual formula....that was
used to come to that bottom line figure. That's analyzed by the reviewer at HUD and he is going to
determine how accurate and reasonable each one of those projected expenses are. If anything is out of line
then you lose your competitive edge and you won't be funded. The other thing is that before dollar one is
advanced there is going to be a loan agreement executed between the Town and the company, AMG that
has all the force and weight of law of any agreement. If they do into default on that it has the same so of
default mechanisms in it as any loan agreement would.
Mr. Palmer-I guess why I'm questioning this is that it came to me somewhere along the line here in some of
these other programs that the money did not have to be paid back if they proved that they did not have the
ability.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-That's not an option.
Mr. Palmer-It is in there whoever the people are that are borrowing it they will guarantee that this payment
will be made providing.....
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-The other safeguard here is before the loan agreement can be executed it
has to be sent off to be reviewed at HUD by their Attorney's for its accuracy compared to what was
promised in the application. They don't advance the money until that it signed off upon.
Mr. Palmer-I think that to get the money back it's really not that we would lose four hundred thousand
because we are a conduit, but what we would take a chance of is not being able to have that money for
future use.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-The only thing that is at risk here initially up front is the five thousand
dollar application fee and any additional time spent by my office or employees of the Town on this
application. After that if the grant is awarded then you have the thirty thousand dollar administrative line
item to help you with the administrative expenses from that point forward....cover them completely and
then the obvious repayments plus interest from the loan.
Mr. Palmer-I would like to see that we are sure that we get payment and that can't happen that they can say,
well we just are making the profit level where we should be because of some of these cost that are incurred
in raising up salaries and things like that.
Councilman Goetz-Could you just give your name for the record. Dick Palmer, Queensbury.
Councilman Goetz- I just have a question on the five thousand dollar application fee. If we don't have that
awarded would AMG still be paying twenty five hundred of it?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes.
Supervisor Brandt-I have a question. I thought that the statement just made is interesting. It leads me to
wonder when we're reviewing the application here I would assume that there is an operating history of
salaries to the principals. I would assume that operating history would be looked at as far as the future
salaries of the principals is that correct?
Mr. Murray-That is certainly true. But, what it is no different than if a bank is making the loan. You make
the loan there is an interest rate that's established HUD approves the contract and they start making
payments. If they raise the salaries of their executives they still have to make the same payments to you. If
their cost go out and their margins are closer they still have to make the same payments to you just as if
they have to make them to the bank. You can't go to the bank and say, oh by the way my cost went up a
little bit I'm going to pay you less this month you can't do that here either. If they get to the point where
they have to renegotiate terms with the bank then they are going to come back and try to renegotiate terms
with the Town. But, those are things that are pretty serious before anybody comes back to do that. If your
cost go down you got a little more money you just keep the payments going. If your cost go up you do the
same thing your business has got to have enough margin to accommodate that kind of fluctuation as I'm
sure his projections will show that he does. But, the loan repayments are not tied to whether or not they are
profitable or how profitable they are as has been the case in some of the old UDADS that were referred to
where they tied the repayments schedules to successes and percentage of profits and that is just simply not
the case in this kind of a situation.
Councilman Caimano-Is there a term for this loan or do we set that, too when we get down to it?
Mr. Murray-We'll be doing that certainly, as I said a standard equipment loan is seven years so I doubt that
we're looking at longer than that.
Councilman Monahan-Is this loan binding only on the corporation or is it also binding on the corporate
officers?
Mr. Murray-Not binding on the corporate officers it's binding on the corporation.
Councilman Monahan-Some bank loans now corporate officers do have to sign on their personal assets and
also the bonding companies.
Mr. Murray-That's bank practice. The practice in the program that I've seen does not include that.
Supervisor Brandt-First is there anyone else who has a comment and then I'll come back second round, go
ahead.
Gilbert Boehm-Are you the agent of the Town in representing their interest or the applicant?
Mr. Murray-I'm the agent for the Town.
Mr. Boehm-So, in effect your there to protect our interest somewhat, too.
Mr. Murray-Absolutely.
Mr. Boehm-I miss somewhere exactly what this project is for.
Mr. Murray-It is a request to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for a grant to the Town.
The Town if they the grant is going to make a loan to AMG Industries to help them finance a 2.3 million
dollar expansion to be located in the Queensbury Industrial Park. It's part of the financing of a very large
expansion which will result in at least fifty new manufacturing jobs.
Mr. Boehm-Forgive me, I really don't know who AMG is what do they do?
Mr. Murray-They are custom metal manufacturer's with cliental like I.P., Kodak, and General Electric.
Mr. Boehm-I heard the name Barber that is not the same Barber involved with the Waste Treatment Plants
and that is it?
Mr. Barber-No it's not.
Mr. Boehm-Why does the Town have to put up the grant application money at all?
Mr. Murray-Because they are the applicant.
Mr. Boehm-However, they are not the ones that really want the money.
Mr. Murray-They do want the money it is in the Town interest to get that grant.
Mr. Boehm-But, the applicant is primary.
Tape inaudible
Councilman Tucker-What money are you talking about the money for the application?
Mr. Boehm-Yes.
Councilman Tucker-The Town is not paying it.
Councilman Monahan-Paying half of it.
Councilman Goetz-I thought QEDC was paying half.
Mr. Boehm-I heard before there was a split.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Twenty five hundred dollars from AMG, twenty five hundred from QEDC.
Supervisor Brandt -QEDC is the Queensbury Economic Development Corporation.
Mr. Boehm-There is some money at risk. Now, suppose the grant is not granted and we're out twenty five
hundred dollars?
Mr. Murray-QEDC is out twenty five hundred dollars and so is AMG Industries.
Mr. Boehm-So there is at least twenty five hundred dollars at risk.
Councilman Tucker-Another thing that ought to be pointed out. These people are doing business in the
Town of Queensbury right now and they were on their way to the Town of Moreau when this package was
put together.
Mr. Boehm-That's a presumed threat.
Councilman Caimano-Gill, I'll have to tell you that what you say is correct but, again there is no free lunch.
It's a four percent gamble to win ninety six percent. If we lose we're betting or QEDC is betting twenty five
hundred dollars that we're going to make sixty thousand. There ain't no free lunch, I mean nobody is going
to give us money for nothing.
Mr. Boehm-I understand that.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-The other thing to bear in mind here is that there are residual affects of fifty
employees with payrolls and all that filter's on down through the community and into the local economy
that is very hard to gage the impact of that yet alone the direct impact of increased real property taxes and
so on and so forth.
Mr. Boehm-I understand that, but that same gambit is being used by every company in every community to
try to get public money. It's the same thing used all over and usually it's just a threat because it also costs
them money to pack up and leave that don't come easy, that's all my comments.
Supervisor Brandt-I have a question Bob. We all pick up the paper and read about a bad loan that's having
a problem in one of these programs are there good loans?
Mr. Murray-A majority of them that we used to work with are good. I would say that eighty, eighty five
percent of the project we worked out the loans are good and are paid back and you never hear about them
what you hear about are the bad ones. I worked for at least five different communities that have revolving
loan funds in most of the communities the loans are good. There is always one that for whatever reason or
business reasons the company doesn't make it. But, a good many of those are not companies of the size and
stature of the company that we're talking about here. A good many of these projects that you see are
smaller operations that don't have the where...and you would like to see them locate and expand and grow
and create jobs some of them make it and some of them don't there is a very high risk for those. The larger
the company or a company of this stature of the one that we're talking about here and the risk of it not being
paid back is very low.
Councilman Goetz-Charlie could you come up? I heard your presentation at the QEDC meeting and it was
my understanding that you would of had to move your facility anyway. It wasn't the only possibility that
you would go to Kingsbury or Moreau.
Charles Barber-That's correct.
Councilman Goetz-I found it very interesting your contracts that you were going to get and that's why you
had to expand the business the Asian contracts.
Mr. Barber-AMG unlike many many manufacturing firms in the current recession AMG is in a growth
phase. We've seen considerable growth and sales over the last three years. We're expanding our customer
base we're now a world wide manufacturer. Our products are found in Eastern Asia, Soviet Union,
different parts of Europe, South American, and Australia. Our big forte these days is something called
floater dryers. They are primarily used in converting industry not as in the paper industry, but people who
make special tapes or special films. Our domestic customers are companies like Polaroid or Kodak, we
also work for Monsanto or Philip Morse. Our dryers are unique they are stainless steel they require a lot of
skill, they require a lot of labor. The people that we use as employees to do that in our particular facility
are union, we make them union we bring them in off the street. We can take them out of vocational schools
or right out of high school, tenth grade or we can take them when they are a professional welder. We train
those people to do what we do. It is proprietary as to what we do so I can't get into that too far. We have
people who have been with us since the company was founded which is nineteen years ago. We're
celebrating our twentieth anniversary next November and we have employees who have been with us six
months. What we have is we have a very large contract with a domestic corporation and at this point due to
the confidential nature of that company, I'm not allowed to disclose that corporation. I will say, it's a very
large contract and it last at least five to seven years. It's forty systems in all and requires that they be done
by the year 2000. At the very least it will involve us hiring a new fifty people to do that and it also involves
a good thirty thousand square feet of space. Where we are on Luzerne Road is a lease facility. We have
twenty thousand square feet of manufacturing space obviously you can't take a thirty thousand square foot
project. What we have done is the company has come to us and said, yes we will start this project we will
start in 1994, we believe it's first quarter it could be second. Right now we built the prototype for the
system it's our proprietary design they can't go anywhere else, okay. However, there are certain agreements
that if we don't have the space or don't have the employees then we can't hold them back, they are in a
growth phase as well. They are a public company they've been told by their stock holders to get back into
their core business get rid of to spinoff their unproductive business and there core business in film. We've
been told by the people we work with for this company to either put up or move on to the next project. We
discussed whether we wanted to stay on Luzerne Road it is a lease facility the current property would not
allow for this size expansion that we would need instead we started looking to see where we could go.
Queensbury was not our first choice, I have to be quite honest about that. We did not get into to this to get
into a bidding war. Originally we looked to the Warren Washington IDA because we wanted to use the
IDA as a conduit. We looked into industrial revenue bonds and the public generally does not realize this,
but when you get IDA bonds you didn't get money. What you did is you got the right to go get money and
not have to pay mortgage tax, sales tax, on your facilities that's all you've really got. For that, it would cost
us about sixty thousand dollars in different legal fees, bonding fees, and various fees. We went to Warren
Washington IDA about eighteen months ago or so and at that time they were in the mist of some other
problems that they had going on and we didn't really get any place. Earlier this year we looked into
Saratoga County because we saw what the SEDC which is Saratoga Economic Development Corporation,
we saw what they were doing. What we did is we discussed with them our need for a facility and they said,
well we have actually two parks going up in northern Moreau they are right across the river one is actually
owned by, I guess it's the Moreau Industrial Park and then one is at EPIC Ventures and we opted to look at
EPIC Ventures. During that since we would be leaving Warren County to go to Saratoga County Saratoga
is required, actually they did it out of courtesy to tell Warren Washington IDA we we're leaving. Warren
Washington IDA asked for a second chance and generally you can't do anything in New York State to
move one group. The State cannot finance somebody to move from place to place generally that's the why
it works there are certain cases where they may be true, but not necessarily, not usually. So, what we did is
we agreed to looked at Warren Washington, we also agreed to work with Queensbury. To be with the IDA
we've be going to Kingsbury so obviously we would be leaving Queensbury. The closet thing to our
customers and employees happens to be in Queensbury and it happens to be a very nicely site in the
Queensbury Technical Park the property is very well suited for what we do. We've worked with the QEDC
the difference between Warren County and Saratoga County is Saratoga County has very significant
incentives for manufacturing corporations. In today's climate where we are a manufacturer although we do
different types of union work we could be a manufacturer anywhere in the United States because very few
of our customers from manufacturing are in New York State. Primarily they are in, actually Chicago,
Illinois area as well as in the deep midwest for our domestic customers. Our main competitors of
manufacturing come out of the areas like North Carolina, Georgia, different parts of Florida, they have very
low property rates they have very low labor rates. We've tried to put a package together that makes us as
competitive as possible. This program has been available only through an applicant like ourselves, I
shouldn't say that only the Town can be an applicant, but only through an association with a company like
AMG a manufacturer who is going to provide new jobs who can sustain the payment flow can you put in
this application, is that correct?
Mr. Murray-That's correct.
Mr. Barber-We happen to fit nicely with what the application is. The QEDC agreed to pursue it and it's
because there hasn't been application like this in the past that you don't have a revolving loan fund. Where
over in Washington County they do, Saratoga County does. This is not something that is not seen in these
communities and it's unfortunate some company's can't pay it back, but we believe we can.
Councilman Goetz-Thank you.
Supervisor Brandt -Charlie what is your payroll roughly today?
Mr. Barber-It's up. When we started this application we had about sixty people full time right now we've
got about seventy five people full time. I think since we're union shop we pick up union pipe fitters and
millwrights we're about one hundred ten this week. That will probably top off around one hundred thirty
through September when the major shut downs in this area go on we do a lot of work with the paper
companies in this area. As far as gross cost it's about 3.2 million on an annual basis.
Councilman Monahan-Charlie what is your pay scale and I'm going from the guy off the street which I
don't know if you put him in as a helper or as an apprentice or what under the new regulation to your union
people?
Mr. Barber-Your talking manufacturing? If your talking anything else there are very specific contracts
rates.
Councilman Monahan-I'm just talking manufacturing and also installation out in the field.
Mr. Barber-Our installation work we'll address that one first because that's the easiest is either millwrights
or sheet metal workers or whatever and those happen to be contracts through the local unions. A
millwright would be about $17.35 an hour gross plus benefits and a sheet metal worker, I believe is about
$20.50. Our manufacturing on the otherhand is something iliat we bring the people in and we train them
we start them as our own apprentices and work them up through. They generally start between $8.00 an
hour that if they have no training and they can go into different tiers based on whatever training they've had
prior to that. It's not uncommon to see someone to come in at $10.00, $12.00, or $8.00.
Councilman Monahan-So when you've worked them through the tiers in manufacturing what is the highest
rate that you'd be paying on the manufacturing level?
Mr. Barber-There is no set highest rate. There are fellows quite a considerable time making access of
$17.00 an hour.
Councilman Monahan-And I know or I did know that your benefits for your union people probably run a
minimum, I'm not talking about social security, I'm talking about what you pay into the union for
hospitalization etc., at least five dollars an hour.
Mr. Barber-Our production people are about four fifty, mill wrights about six dollars an hour, steel medalist
about eight fifty and that's over and above whatever we put in their paycheck.
Supervisor Brandt-It's still a public hearing any other questions any other comments, Mr. Salvador.
Mr. Salvador-I just like to mention that the UDAD Grant previously mentioned and referred to did not have
a fix payback agreement was in fact fixed at six percent interest due on the unpaid balance five million
dollars over a ten year period in quarterly payments and the five million due after the ten years in the form
of a balloon payment the developer makes six quarterly payments.
Councilman Monahan-Charlie, am I correct in saying that most of what you manufacturer you also field
install?
Mr. Barber-Locally, yes. Nationally, no. Probably eighty percent goes out of New York State and probably
fifty percent of the total goes out of the country. We probably install overall in all our manufacturing we
do probably ninety percent of what's in the state we probably do fifty percent of what's in the U.S.
Mr. Boehm-What's the probability we may, in fact get the loan? What happens to his business if we don't,
does he move?
Mr. Murray-The probability is very high because we have a very strong company a strong applicant that
has demonstrated that he has a project where he needs the money to fill the financing gap.
Mr. Boehm-But, your in competition with a lot of people.
Mr. Murray-We're in competition with other communities iliat are trying to do the same thing.
Mr. Boehm-Do you have any idea as to what the....
Mr. Murray-Odds are? Better than fifty percent chance of winning. Certainly, I consider that much higher
than that, but that's certainly reasonable. I would say your looking eight out often being a very reasonable
position in terms of a chance of being successful otherwise we wouldn't do it. It doesn't do us any good to
promote a project with any community or any company that we don't believe that has a very high
probability of being funded. There is no guarantee's in life that's the caveat you don't know for sure. But,
when you look at the history of the program and look at the kind of grants that have been approved, I did
two last year that were approved. My sense of it this is worth doing because you have a real good chance
of winning.
Councilman Monahan-Is this competition just within New York State? I realize it's federal money, but is
so much given to each State and then the competition for the money is within the State?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes. As a matter of fact it's even just a portion of the State. New York City
has it's own separate area and own separate funding pool, this is all of upstate New York.
Mr. Boehm-Second part of my question are you moving?
Mr. Barber-AMG has decided to remain in Queensbury and locate on Dix Avenue regardless of whether
this application is approved by HUD or not we intend to stay in Queensbury.
Mr. Boehm-Thank you.
Supervisor Brandt-Any other questions or comments?
Mr. Palmer-I guess one more question. If this major project that your looking at that needs thirty thousand
square feet of space and your in the area of forty thousand now, if that were not to happen what would be
the projection for the company past this point?
Mr. Barber-All our projections that we've included with our application as well as to the banks we're
working with assume that the project did not exist. We're not betting on the....when we're building this
facility we are containing our cost to be equal to what we pay now in lease and taxes we're on a net, net,
net, lease. To answer the questions specifically we don't have to have that project to service this debt.
We're not specifically building this facility to obtain that project. We're building this facility because right
now we need about forty thousand square feet to do what we do now. This current customer we do a
certain amount of work for this would be the primary work we would do for them. The fact that we move
to this facility and we get this big job it's an added benefit, but we have really no choice we have to relocate
or build a larger facility regardless.
Councilman Monahan-Charlie are you doing shift work? Do you have two shifts or just one shift?
Mr. Barber-We do shift work. Currently we have one shift operating.
Supervisor Brandt-Any other questions or comments? I'll close the public hearing then.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:50 P.M.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF
SMALL CITIES GRANT APPLICATION
RESOLUTION NO.: 416, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development will be accepting
applications for the Community Development Block Grant Small Cities Program, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned Small Cities Program makes funds available for providing
assistance to new and expanding corporations in the support of job creation and expanding local tax base,
and
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury intends to submit an application for Small Cities Funds to
assist the AMG Corporation in their proposed expansion within the Queensbury Economic Development
Corporation Technical Park on Dix Avenue, Queensbury, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has held a public hearing on July 26,
1993 to explain the specifics of the Grant application and to provide opportunity for the public to comment
on the Application,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorizes the submission of the
Grant Application for Small Cities Funds by August 11, 1993, to assist the AMG Corporation in their
proposed expansion within the Queensbury Technical Park, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorizes the Town Supervisor to
sign any and all necessary documents to properly complete the Small Cities Application.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
A YES: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT:None
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN CLERK TO SUBMIT PETITION
FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FOR CHARLES AND BARBARA SEELEY
TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. 417, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has previously approved a form entitled,
"Petition for a Change of Zone" for rezoning matters, and has directed that the same be used for rezoning
requests, and
WHEREAS, the Town Attorney for the Town of Queensbury has recommended that any and all
applications for rezoning must first go to the Planning Department and Planning Board for
recommendations regarding the same, and
WHEREAS, following such recommendations, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will
then review the Zoning Applications and take such other action as it shall deem necessary and proper,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that
the following application be submitted to the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury for report and
recommendation: CHARLES and BARBARA SEELEY - Tax Map No.: 105-1-38,49 Glenwood Avenue,
Queensbury, New York, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates that it desires to
be Lead Agent for the SEQRA review of this project and directs that the Zoning Administrator's Office
notify any other involved agencies of this.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt
NOES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Caimano
ABSENT:None
DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE
Councilman Monahan-Questioned the details on this change of zone?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Noted it is a request to change the zone for the Seeley residence on
Glenwood Avenue which is just up from the Northern Home property the southern border boundary what
was formally the Northern Homes property from residential zone to highway commercial one acre.
Councilman Caimano-Stated there have been problems in iliat area.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Stated it should be noted that there is a current nonconforming use
occurring there in the way of a machine shop.
Councilman Goetz-Questioned if the machine shop is grandfathered?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes.
Supervisor Brandt-Noted that this is resolution is to send it to the Planning Board then it will come to the
Town Board.
RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1993 BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO.: 418, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHEREAS, certain departments have requested transfers of funds for the 1993 Budget, and
WHEREAS, said requests have been approved by the Chief Fiscal Officer,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the funds be transferred as follows, for the 1993 budget:
PLANNING:
FROM: TO: AMOUNT:
01-8020-4090 01-8020-4400 $ 325.00
(Conference Expense) (Misc. Contractual)
01-1990-4400 01-3620-4110 $ 950.00
(Contingency) (Veh. Maintenance)
01-8020-1610 01-8010-4400 $ 366.00
(Planning Assistant) (Zoning, Misc.
Contractual)
and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the 1993 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT:None
DISCUSSION HELD
Resolution to Set Public Hearing on Proposed Amendment Zoning Ordinance - Fences (No Action Taken)
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Noted this problem came through a recent application that was made to the
ZBA regarding a fence on a corner lot. Having looked into that one particular case thoroughly it was noted
around Town there are probably hundreds oflots that would be of the same nature where people have put
fences on corner lots, noting it would create quite an enforcement issue and a lot of work for the Zoning
Board. It appears that the local law in dealing with this was in need of attention which started this whole
process. The amendment to the fence ordinance the first thing it corrects is inconsistency in the ordinance
in terms of the three foot fence requirement in the front yard, noting it is not practical as all building supply
companies have four feet as a standard height. The second thing that it does is it does allow for a higher
fence what normally would be the side yard, but since it's fronting on a corner the person that the ordinance
was written out was limited to a three foot fence in either front yard. This change sets up what is termed an
architectural front yard which is the yard containing the architectural front entrance to the house. The
second front yard would be just a front yard and would allow a fence up to five feet in height, but not a
stockade style, it would be more picket style to allow some sight through it.
Councilman Monahan-Questioned the wording of the clear-vision zone in the law, noting that the wording
is not correctly written.
Attorney Dusek-Stated that this section could be reorganized to read better.
Supervisor Brandt-Questioned if this should be reorganized and be brought back before the Board, again?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Noted this would be the opportunity to reorganize this. Will have a new
draft prepared for the Board next week.
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION
RESOLUTION NO. 419, 93
INTRODUCED BY THE ENTIRE TOWN BOARD
WHEREAS, Sara Rae Gore is the newly crowned Miss New York Teen USA 1993, and
WHEREAS, Sara is a resident of Queensbury and an honor student at Queensbury High School, and
WHEREAS, Sara was also named Queensbury High School's "Iron Woman" in a fitness competition last
year, and
WHEREAS, Sara will represent the State of New York at the "Live" CBS telecast on August 10th, 1993 to
an estimated viewing audience in excess of 600 million with satellite feed throughout the world (79
countries),
NOW THEREFORE BE IT KNOWN, that the Queensbury Town Board on behalf of the residents of the
Town of Queensbury, does hereby commend SARA RAE GORE for her achievement and wishes her
success in the upcoming national pageant.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993 by the following vote:
Ayes: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt
Noes: None
Absent:None
DISCUSSION HELD
Councilman Tucker-Spoke to the Board regarding a letter from the Highway Department concerning a
tractor and mower.
Supervisor Brandt-Noted that they are requesting the purchase of a Ford Tractor and a request to go out to
bid for a Articulating BoomIMower. After further discussion the following resolution was passed.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF FORD TRACTOR AND AUTHORIZING BID FOR
ARTICULATING BOOM/MOWERHIGHWAYDEPARTMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 420, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHEREAS, the Town Highway Department has communicated with the Town Supervisor and provided
certain information and a request to purchase one 1993 Ford Model Utility Tractor on State contract total
cost of $15,108.00 and is also using Warren County Bid Specifications requesting to go to bid for an
Articulating BoomIMower,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and/or approves as may be
necessary the purchase on State Contract the 1993 Ford Model 4630 Utility Tractor with the cost of the
same to be paid for from the appropriate Highway fund account, and
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury also authorizes and approves the going out to
bid for an Articulating BoomIMower using Warren County Bid Specifications with the bid retumed date to
be left to the Highway Superintendent's discretion and with the further caveat that the Town Board reserves
the right to approve the bid for the BoomIMower after bid opening.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt
Noes: None
Absent:None
ATTORNEY MATTERS
Attorney Dusek-Spoke to the Board regarding his research of DunlIam's Bay Road. Has had meetings with
parties involved and an agreement to the exact layout of the road could not be reached nor could any other
arrangement. Therefore, it seems that it's up to the Town to take action it would deem appropriate. Based
on all the research, I think there is a strong case to be made that is a Town Road. However, as I admitted to
you before it is a question of fact, but based on all the evidence it would appear to be a strong case to be
made that it is a Town Road. If the Town Board is in agreement recommended to take the road as you
would any other Town road by use treat it the same as you treat any other Town road by use. If the Town
Board desires this the next step would be to petition New York State to have them define their boundary
line of interest for Route 9L, which is adjacent to that and overlaps. New York State should abandon
whatever it is that they don't need and tum it over to the County. The County in tum should abandon it to
the Town so that would clear up the interest up there in terms of the roadway. The other thing, I think the
Town Board may want to consider is retaining a traffic engineer to make certain recommendations on that
road as to whether it should be one way, whether there should be stops out up, whatever other
recommendations he might have. The parties did express concerns about the way the road comes down
from 9L, whether it should be one-way, two-way, etc. Of course, as Attorney, I'm certainly not in the
position to recommend how the road should be used. You may want to work through the Planning
Department to solicit some proposals from engineers for your consideration to review that.
Councilman Caimano-What happens to the parties involved do they still have access to use it as they wish?
Attorney Dusek-It's a Town road it would up to the Town to maintain it and take care of it as it deems
appropriate. If you wanted to make it two-way, one-way, limit parking, you do whatever you think is
appropriate up there.
Councilman Caimano-I'll say one thing, if we decided it's our road then we make the decision. Then the
three parties can't make the decisions....
Supervisor Brandt -Can all get mad at us.
Attorney Dusek-I will say this. I think the Town obviously working through my office, I think the Town
has made a good faith effort to try to work this out. Leon Steves developed a map showing the road
together with a proposed boundary line for the outer edge of the road. As you know, first of all starting
with the investigation that was done and then secondly, leading right up to the very end when we tried to
draft maps and tried to work this out, I think the Town certainly did put a good faith effort into this.
Supervisor Brandt-Put a lot of effort in it. I think we ought to carry it to a conclusion. If you believe that is
the logical conclusion I have no problem with it. How do we move from here?
Attorney Dusek-As, I mentioned working with Mr. Martin's office maybe the thing to do would be to see if
you could find a traffic engineer that could give you some proposals as to cost. The second thing is we
could petition the State and I could put together the necessary paperwork to ask them to abandon the
portion of the highway that we feel they should abandoned. I'll need a little assistance from Leon Steves on
that, but we can put that together and bring a resolution back to the Board authorizing that.
Supervisor Brandt-What constitutes a traffic engineer?
Councilman Caimano-I don't know why we need a traffic engineer.
Attorney Dusek-I'm just thinking of a professional that would know something about how that street should
be signed, whatever.
Councilman Caimano- The kind that would tell us that the intersection of Aviation Road and Greenway
North is not busy, I have no faith.
Supervisor Brandt-Maybe we can go to the Warren County Engineer and ask his advise. He certainly
knows traffic and roads probably as well as any engineer around.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-From my understanding they are starting to build some real capacity in that
department in terms of engineers that can review these types of things. They have some traffic modeling
programs on their computers now it might be a good place to start.
Supervisor Brandt-Let's go to them and ask for their help here and then see if this can be brought to a
resolution.
Councilman Tucker-We have to get the blessings of the State of New York, Warren County before we can
implement anything right?
Attorney Dusek-I think you should. Although, I do think if your thinking of working through Warren
County presumably the services won't cost the Town anything that you could start right away. In terms of
talking to them and seeing if they'll take a look at it in the meantime we can make our application to New
York State. I'm concerned and want to do that only because we have a very unusual situation here where it
would seem that State and Town jurisdiction overlap. I just assume get that issue cleared up on this
roadway so that as you do your thing up there the State doesn't come back and say, well you can't do this,
this is our property.
Supervisor Brandt-There has been a lot of effort necessary to bring forth all the information just to get it all
on the table to find out who owns what and what the history is. While that's done that ought to be put into a
formal record and maintained so that somebody doesn't have to go back through that in the future. While
we're trying to resolve this maybe we ought to put a resolution together that identifies what we're trying to
do so that we're on record of what we're trying to do and assembles the record that's been made. If the State
is slow is accommodating what we need at least there will be a formal record of everything that's done so it
can be continued on in the future.
It was noted that Executive Director, Mr. Martin to help with this project.
DISCUSSION LANDFILL
Supervisor Brandt -Questioned if anything further has been heard on the landfill, noting they have been
attempting to communicate with the City for a long period of time.
Attorney Dusek-Nothing further. Noted that the application that the Board approved for the State funds
there were a few questions the Board had. One of the questions was other sources. Has spoken with DEC
and they have indicated the source of funding they were looking at is like federal grants which are
mentioned in the definitions. Also, sometimes there are industrial users of the landfill that may have a
responsibility to close out they didn't want a community to assume that industrial users closeout of the
landfill that was an examples that he gave me. Basically they are looking around for any source of funding
that you have in place by way of contract or something like that that would fund the closing of that landfill.
But, they are not looking at tipping or users fees that you would generate. The other issue that the Board
had considered that night was the closure of the landfill. They have taken the position that the eighteen
months runs from June of 1992, even though the regulations refer to an approval date of the application he
referred to another section of the regulations which they feel gives them authority to run from June of 1992.
Has reviewed the insurance with Gary Eddie there were no problems with no provisions.
Councilman Monahan-Questioned if Attorney Dusek reviewed the hold harmless?
Attorney Dusek-Noted that he did not review the hold harmless, but will contact Mr. Eddie to double check
this.
Councilman Tucker-Questioned the approval of the closure plan, noting that they have not done it as of yet.
Attorney Dusek-Stated the deadline is August 1st, 1993 for them to approve that. Asked if the Town has
made all of its submission through Morse Engineering on that?
Supervisor Brandt-It has been submitted. There has been one layer of approval and now it's to the second
layer. Has asked for this to be pushed along so this can be finished so the bidding could start this to get
closure of the first cell. They said it might take a month it looks like they are right it might take a month or
more. Noted his concern that the landfill is operating with the City without a contract with no payments
made in 1993, no administration payments. Has spoken with the Mayor regarding this matter and the
Mayor noted he would talk to the City Council about it.
Attorney Dusek-The ultimate solution under the contract provides for a termination of the relationship.
Supervisor Brandt -Stated they need to sit down and define our relationship and formalize it.
Attorney Dusek-Recommended in light of the communications received last week at least on its face it
shows promise. Recommended to give them this week and if nothing happens then resolutions should be
prepared for the next meeting to take action.
Supervisor Brandt-Stated the Town is looking at a closure cost in the millions of dollars. We signed an
application to the State saying, we want to apply for 1.2 million dollars. But, that contract literally says, if
you as a City do this or you as a Town do this, that, and the other then you qualify. But, we as a State if we
don't have the money then we don't have to give it to you, noting the big gaps that the Town has to face.
Attorney Dusek-Noted the concerns regarding this. Although the funding would appear to be there
depending upon who you talk to there are people still nervous about the funding because of new legislation
that has just come through which supposably is going to repeal the previous funding act. That is one reason
why the Town Board took action as quickly as it did on the contracts to get them moving.
Supervisor Brandt-In the landfill we were taking in about four to five thousand dollars a week and losing
money operating it. Now, we're taking C&D which has come up to about twelve thousand a week, starting
to see positive cash flow and accumulating some money towards closure. But, even if this work out we
won't be near the money needed for closure. If the State money isn't there then we're really hurting. Spoke
to the Board regarding a phone called received from Tim Welch regarding a customer with C&D. Could
bring one hundred cubic yards per day, six days a week for the rest of the time the landfill is open, but will
only offer twenty five cents less than the stated price, noting it would be up to the Board as to what the
decision would be.
Councilman Tucker-Questioned the status of the Pasco Avenue Water District?
Attorney Dusek-Has done some work on it, by next week will have an answer on it. Doesn't see a problem
of moving ahead with it, it's a matter of how the resolution will be drafted to set up the district.
Councilman Tucker-Asked if this would be done by this fall?
Attorney Dusek -You will probably be able to start some construction on that. We can probably move
ahead with the one water main out of the district, the other one may take longer the rest of the district. This
is one of the elements, I'm trying to ascertain which is going to be faster so I can come back with a firm
recommendation on that.
Supervisor Brandt-Noted the bids on the engineering for the Water Plant Expansion have come in. Has
spoken with Tom Flaherty, Water Superintendent and have concluded that there could be an evaluation
prepared for the Town Board for next Monday night. Once we have this we need to move rapidly to stay
on schedule. Spoke to the Board regarding a seventy three acre parcel of land owned by Dr. Reed that he
would like to give to the Town of Queensbury. Asked Attorney Dusek if he could look into this.
Attorney Dusek-To contact Dr. Reed and look into this matter.
COMMUNICATIONS
Deputy Clerk, O'Brien-Read the following letter into the record. Letter to Highway Superintendent, Paul
Naylor, from concerned residents on Fox Hollow Lane requesting for the road to be paved. (Letter received
July 13th, 1993, on file Town Clerk's Office)
Dear Mr. Naylor:
I live on Fox Hollow Lane and would like our road paved. The reason I would like our road paved is
because there are a lot of kids on our block that rollerblade and ride bikes. The road has never been given a
top coat. Now might be a good time for the road to be top coated because all the houses have been built on
our block that can be built.
Sincerely,
Kim Noble, Mary Kusior, MD, Mr. Beckos, Ann Beckos,
Addendum:
There are also numerous small pot holes starting to form. The road did not hold up well through the winter.
I also cannot enjoy pushing my baby in her stroller as the rough pavement causes a lot of jarring to the
baby.
Mary Kusior
DISCUSSION HELD
Supervisor Brandt -Spoke to the Board regarding two phone calls received from residents on Knox Road,
Assembly Point, where there is a documented history of PCB's in the road oil on that road. The road is
breaking up and the residents request that the Town pave it so PCB's don't migrate into Lake George.
Noted if more money becomes available or if Chips money comes in this should be a high priority.
Councilman Monahan-Spoke to the Board regarding petition received from residents on Mannis Road. (Not
on file in Town Clerk's Office)
OPEN FORUM
Charlie Adamson-Assembly Point, North Queensbury. To start out with what promoted my visit here
tonight was the article on the 23rd of July in the Post Star, Queensbury Assessment Role Finalized. As you
get to the end of the article there is a quote in here, "When perhaps, listened to a vocal minority a little too
much. I'm part of the vocal minority so you probably shouldn't listen to me too much. But, it quotes the
Supervisor Mr. Brandt as saying, "let's hope that it, the revaluation has been fixed up." I'm here to say that
I don't think it has in anyway, shape or fashion. What, I would like to say would pertain in many parts to
Mrs. Otte, please don't take any of this personally. I am talking about Mrs. Otte as the Sole Assessor of the
Town of Queensbury. Considering the time and money at Mrs. Otte's disposal and the lessons available
from the mistakes of her predecessor, Mrs. Otte should have produced a balanced, carefully explained, and
thoroughly understood revaluation in 1993. She did not. She produced an uneven often incomprehensible
hodgepodge that angered, frightened and baffled hundreds of property owners in all parts of Queensbury.
She failed to be forthcoming and candid in what she was doing and how she was doing it. The March roll
tentative roll, sub-tentative roll has horrendous errors, a large number of which still existed in the tentative
roll of May 1st. And scores of these errors still exist today, even after the Herculean, and that's very large
efforts, I was impressed with the efforts of the Grievance Board, one member of which, one member of the
Grievance Board very close to the end of it said, never again. Why did the sole Assessor do such a poor
job? There are lots of reasons, I can't go into all of them tonight. But, the main thing that I see is I don't
think she ever had the experience with a Town this size. She never had experience with property like Glen
Lake and Lake George. These are resort properties they are different she admits that herself in the article I
referred to in the Post Star. She never understood, this I think is the big thing. She never understood what
any real estate broker could have told her that the only way to handle the fewer than 700 disparate
properties, different all different on Lake George was to examine each one individually inside and out,
whether or not this is common in what she called a mass appraisal. She had plenty of time in the two
summers available to her to do this. She even had two people from Hill Pierce whom she could of trained
to do this and if those two people instead of going like the bobsie twins together around the lake properties,
had worked separately she probably could of done the job with same amount of money in roughly the same
amount of time. I'm still talking about why I don't think she did a good job. She developed faulty,
unjustified front footage schedules for Lake George. She applied sales data for year-round houses to
seasonal properties. That doesn't make sense the seasonal dwellings with absolutely unjustified results that
led her to violate in my opinion the basic trust placed in her to establish fair market value as of January
1993. She never explained her depreciation schedule, where it came from and how she applied it. In 24
cases she assessed properties on the lake below their purchase price, even when some of these had
expensive additions subsequent to purchase. At the same time she raised other year-round and seasonal
properties sometimes to ridiculous meaningless levels. If you read the Post -Star article which, I just
referred to on you willleam that Mrs. Otte isn't concerned one whit with her errors. Why? Because the
number of properties assessed are within the statistical limits acceptable in normal assessment practice.
The assessment may not be right, but who cares? The complaints in case of the lake are coming from
those, Mrs. Otte says paying the highest taxes. These people "are more likely to want to come in and refine
the system." Why shouldn't the system, I ask be refined by the sole assessor from the beginning, so that no
one has to come in to get fair treatment and avoid having his property, his tax money, confiscated by a
callous public servant. In the same Post Star article, this comes to you people is basically why I'm here.
The same Post Star Mrs. Otte accuses the Town Board of lack of support to some degree and indicates she
feels it may have gone overboard in performing its duty to question the revaluation. The way to escape
responsibility is to blame someone else that seems to be what she is doing. Obviously from Mrs. Otte's
point of view a sole assessor can make no mistake. The fault has to be elsewhere. No matter what Mrs.
Otte claims, I'm almost done the Queensbury Town Board has bent over backwards to be fair to her. When
the value of the revaluation was questioned in all parts of the Town, the Town Board with a praiseworthy
object of saving something in the neighborhood of $100,000, voted to cancel the 1993 revaluation. At this
point Mrs. Otte was hanging in midair. What saved her and the revaluation was the best example of grass
roots democracy in which I have ever been privileged to participate. The East Side Property Owners
Association, representing more than 300 property owners along the Lake George shoreline, asked the Town
Supervisor and the Town Board to reconsider. The East Side Property Owners hoped that the revaluation
would produce a higher, and thus more favorable, equalization rate for Queensbury property owners in the
Lake George Central School District. We don't know yet about that. The Supervisor arranged for East Side
Property Owners to present its case at two Town Board meetings as a result the Town Board reversed its
decision and voted unanimously to reinstate the 1993 Revaluation. Ingratitude is not a virtue. For my
money I think Mrs. Otte owes the Town Board an apology and her personal thanks for reinstating the
revaluation. She, not the Town Board, is one who has caused all the revaluation problems. While she's at
it, she might thank some of us in the East Side Property Owners Association, too. All some of us got from
her for our efforts to reinstate the revaluation was a hard kick in the teeth. It is my personal opinion that
Mrs. Otte could serve the Town of Queensbury best by resigning and letting someone else introduced a
greater element of fairness into the assessment process. That's all I have to say. I've been very grateful to
you people for the support you have given those of us who have felt mistreated. Any questions? I have
copies of this for you. I have a copy of this for Mrs. Otte.
Councilman Goetz-I don't Pliney Tucker voted.
Mr. Adamson-I'm sorry.
Councilman Caimano-It was four to one.
Supervisor Brandt -You got to give him credit.
Mr. Adamson-Pliney, I'll have to give you more credit than was due Pliney.
Councilman Tucker-Oh no, you didn't give me any credit.
Supervisor Brandt-Thank you.
Councilman Caimano- Thank you for your comments.
Councilman Tucker-Thank you very much.
Mr. Adamson-Thank you for the time.
Lillian Adamson-I want to follow up with just one thing. Mine is directed at the Town Attorney, Mr.
Dusek. In reviewing the assessments I find that those people who just bought property up on the lake are
assessed at what they purchased it which is far below the assessor's land scale. While the rest of us are
assessed at her far higher land scale. So, you find neighbors pitted against neighbors which is a unfriendly
situation and a very unhappy situation. Of course, it forces many of us to go to Small Claims Court
because the satisfaction that was given by the Grievance Board while helpful for many of us was not
helpful for a large segment. What I wonder what is the fairness and what is the legality involved when you
assess one property at one land schedule and the remaining properties at a far higher land schedule?
Attorney Dusek-I really couldn't comment on the legality of this point until I understand fully exactly what
system she employed or the rational behind it. I can tell you this much that the courts will typically look at
or the arbitrators or the attorneys who sit in these small claim hearings they'll typically look at what the
total market value of the property is. In otherwords even though under assessment rules and regulations
they divide the assessment of the land and buildings. The courts as well as the hearing officers will look at
the total assessed value as to whether or not that is a value that equates itself against the market value of the
property in the first instance. The second thing they test for will be the equality of the assessment between
the parcels. The way they show that, of course, is whether each parcel is in fact assessed at whatever the
percentage of assessment is, in this case I imagine it is a hundred percent. The question would be whether
these parcel's were all assessed the same. If you can establish that they are not and yours is higher than
everybody else's for instance then you would be entitled to have it lowered.
Mrs. Adamson-I guess my question goes a little bit beyond that. Does the Town not have some
responsibility to say to the assessor, hey look what you did? How can you assess one similar property at
$180,000 and the next one at $250,000 or $340,000 or whatever because we have side by side properties
that are assessed differently.
Attorney Dusek-I don't think at this point it's gone so far that the recourse is through small claims, Article
7, whatever mechanism may be available. I don't even know if the assessor can change the role now, I don't
think she can.
Mrs. Adamson-She can't change the role. But, what happens is she can agree when these goes to court not
to fight them, she can agree that she's done this. She has reduced these herself from what she had them at
or the Grievance Board has reduced them to the sales price because it's pretty hard to assess a piece of
property at more than it sold for. It is the same thing that we had before. It's the new buyer who gets the
break and the rest of us who are living up there they just throw whatever figure, she threw whatever figure
she felt like throwing at us and we're left to try to say why. I really resent this and think that there should
be some strong recommendations that are made by the Board and by the Town Attorney for her to take a
look at this and begin to be prepared to go to small claims and willingly make the adjustments rather than
try to hold people to these assessments that are umeal that she's placed upon them.
Attorney Dusek-Of course, as I mentioned the only way I could get involved or make any
recommendations if I, first of all spoke with her and understood this. I'd speak with you, of course, too to
understand the problem more fully. Certainly as you say, when you go into a small claims setting if in fact
she feels up front that the assessment is in some fashion an error, I have no problem with her saying that.
But, I should also mention small claims I have not become involved in. When, I first came here I had them
up to my ears but, over the years I withdrawn from those and left them to the assessor. At this point I
haven't planned any involvement into small claims at all leaving that to the assessor as we did last year.
But, in the Article Ts, which I am still very much involved in the appraisers that we hire for the Town as
well as when I even first started to review assessment the first thing we do is take a look at the assessments.
The first thing I do, the Attorney goes down and says, will it pass mustard? Will it hold the challenge? Are
there any holes in it, did you do something wrong? For instance just as an example, if we have a
commercial property and we find that a portion of the property was over assessed because they thought it
was one thing, but it wasn't the other the first thing we do is pick up the phone and say, look we realize you
filed a petition here is the error here's what it's worth in terms of reduced assessment. What we're looking
for and I stress this to everybody is what we want is the correct assessment. This is not, I mean it is an
adversarial relationship to the extent that it goes before the court in Article 7. But, in my mind as the
Attorney for the Town is not an adversarial relationship of me verses you it's just a matter of what is the
correct assessment. We may disagree on that, but that's the goal of that what is the correct assessment for
the parcel. So, can she do the same type of thing on a small claims level, I don't see any reason why she
can't. The question is whether or not she truly believes there is a problem. Like I say, not talking to her not
knowing anything about this I can't really address your specific concerns.
Mrs. Adamson-But, you can understand it, I trust?
Attorney Dusek-I can understand that if there is a problem Helen knows the philosophy. If there is a
mistake and we recognize it then my recommendation to this Board as well as to Helen in past, I mean
we're not going to try to maintain an artificial front against the citizen that's not the name of the game.
Mrs. Adamson-As these things go to court and get corrected come next year Helen has the option doesn't
she around March or May she'll be putting out the next role. She has the option does she not of making
corrections and lowering properties if she feels that they are higher relative to other properties? In
otherwords I'll tell you what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned about the people who didn't realize this
was happening. The people who didn't file for grievance day and so therefore cannot go onto small claims
they don't know about these new buyers who have done this and have gotten these reductions because of
the purchase price. So, as people start going through the small claim process and through the Article 7
those assessments are going to be lowered again. There is a lot of inequality now there is going to be a lot
more inequality and these things need to be addressed and to be leveled out. I like to see that it begin to
happen so that one man with the same type of property isn't assessed more than somebody else. Is that
something that she would have the possibility of doing or that she could be directed to look at and do, do
you have any role like that?
Attorney Dusek-That can't direct her because that's the independent assessor she has to be able to set the
values on her own.
Supervisor Brandt-But, she can change the assessment.
Attorney Dusek-She has a certain amount of freedom to change it, but her hands are also tied to a certain
extent. Here again, it would really depend on whether she found there was an error in the assessment
certainly if she found an error she can correct it. I don't know what else to say beyond that.
Councilman Monahan-Lillian, I can only tell you that I was talking to Helen the other day about this same
situation. She told me that she felt that this was going to be an on going process to evaluate some of these
pieces of property that she wasn't just turning her back on it and walking away that she was going to be
keep looking at this situation.
Mrs. Adamson-It's a tragic situation. I find that the newspaper reports and the treatment of it are very very
callous. When somebody gets a letter that says, well your taxes last year were $6,000 and this coming year
they are going be $15,000 it forces people into court and that sort of situation. I think this is a terrible thing
and I think that the Town is responsible for this. Helen may have done it, but the Town Board has to
assume a responsibility for it because Mrs. Otte was hired by the Town Board, a previous Town Board
except for Betty but, it's still the responsibility of the Town Board. I want to emphasize that what my
husband says, I'm in complete agreement with. I think that Mrs. Otte has shown that she is incapable of
doing this job and that she should resign.
Supervisor Brandt-Anyone else?
Mr. Salvador-Spoke to the Board regarding DunlIam's Bay Road, noting that he takes exception to Attorney
Dusek's comment regarding the Town and Town Board having acted in good faith since May of 1990, in
trying to resolve the disputes that exists in this neighborhood. Requested that the variance that the Zoning
Board granted regarding this road be withdrawn pending the outcome of the survey. Spoke to the Board
regarding his driveway access permit application that is over a year old which has been held up pending the
outcome of this issue. Requested that he driveway access permit be granted.
Attorney Dusek-To review this matter with the Highway Department.
Supervisor Brandt-Requested the Town Attorney to make it a priority to review the matter regarding
SouthWorth Machinery.
Mr. Salvador-Noted whatever decision is made regarding DunlIam's Bay Road it will be a decision that the
neighborhood will have to live by and act by accordingly. Asked for an update regarding the wastewater
facilities at the Harris Bay Yacht Club.
Attorney Dusek-Has spoken with Dave Hatin, Director of Building and Codes. Mr. Hatin noted there was
a permit issued and a decision made back in 1989, 1990. Noted that whatever decision was made back at
that time would be the decision they would have to stand by.
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-To contact Dan Olson regarding the test results and what has been done
regarding the Harris Bay Yacht Club.
Mr. Salvador-Noted that there is a going to be a hearing regarding the Trash Plant.
Supervisor Brandt-Hearing to be held on Wednesday, August 11th. Meeting being held on the County
level to work out how the public hearing will be handled.
Mr. Salvador-Has never seen published by the developer of the trash plant the conversion rate that they
guaranteed.
Supervisor Brandt-Noted he did not know what the conversion rate would be.
John Schreiner-Questioned if the person looking at DunlIam's Bay Road will only look at the traffic of the
road or look into where they enter that right-a-way road?
Executive Director, Mr. Martin-He will look at whatever the Town wants him to. Would like to put
together a list of questions from properties owners for him.
Mr. Schreiner-Would like him to look at the situation that takes place going into the right-a-way road.
Questioned if the handicap sign that he put up could he leave it there?
Supervisor Brandt-Noted he wouldn't disturb it.
Mrs. Adamson-I read the tax roll on 4-1-13, DunlIam's Bay Boat Company they were $628,800 before and
they are $664,000, now. Last time when the tax came due on the new assessment they paid less than they
paid before. This time it is probably going to be the same deal this is a business. Castaway Marina sold for
2 million dollars we mention this to Helen some time ago and she said, oh yes she was aware of this and
she was going to do something about it. I can't understand when I look at six sixty four and I go down your
tax roll and I see private residences assessed the same amount and more money. Here you have a business
and you know what kind of boats they sell up there and the volume of business that the place does. I kind of
what to know what kind of collusion goes on between the Assessor's Office and the businesses and so forth
that they get the kind of break that they do and the private residences don't get that. We have homes up
there, as I've told you numerable times over a million dollars and yet they don't see fit to do something
about the businesses, they, she, I should say. I think that this Board should put some pressure on her. She
can make corrections and make them up also next year, I've seen it done.
Supervisor Brandt-Okay.
RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS
RESOLUTION NO. 421, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the Abstract appearing on
July 26th, 1993 and numbering 93258800 through 93284300 and totaling $351,670.12, and
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the following voucher's were pulled for explanation to be approved by the Supervisor.
Vendor #2611 in the amount of $800.00. Vendor #0341 in the amount of $6,020.42. Vendor #707 in the
amount of $552.38.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Brandt
Noes: None
Abstain:Mr. Caimano #00127, Glens Falls Post Star
Absent:None
RESOLUTION ENTERING EXECUTIVE SESSION
RESOLUTION NO. 422, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and
moves into Executive Session to discuss personnel matters.
Duly adopted this 26th day of July, 1993, by the following vote:
All Those In Favor: Ayes
All Those Opposed: None
Absent:None
No further action taken.
On motion the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully Submitted,
Darleen M. Dougher
Town Clerk
Town of Queensbury