1993-09-07
TOWN BOARD MEETING
SEPTEMBER 7,1993
7:00 P.M.
MTG. #64
RES. 493-504
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Supervisor Michel Brandt
Councilman Betty Monahan
Councilman Susan Goetz
Councilman Nick Caimano
Councilman Pliney Tucker
Attorney Paul Dusek
Supervisor Michel Brandt -Opened the Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING
Declared the Public Hearing Opened Notice Shown
Mobile Home Ms. Fern Hall
Supervisor Brandt-Is there anyone that has come to speak on that matter?
Town Clerk Darleen Dougher-Mrs. Hall is present
Supervisor Brandt -Yes I know that. Does anyone have any questions of Mrs. Hall? Does anyone what to
speak on this matter? If there is no one to speak on it then I am going to close the public hearing. 7:03
p.m.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVOCABLE PERMIT
TO LOCATE A MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE OF A MOBILE HOME COURT
FOR MS. FERN HALL
RESOLUTION NO.: 493, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury regulates mobile homes outside of mobile home parks
pursuant to ~ 113 -12 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, and
WHEREAS, Ms. Fern Hall has filed an application to replace her old mobile home with a new
mobile home at property situated at Bennett Road, Queensbury, New York, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury held a public hearing with regard to the
aforesaid permit,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the issuance ofa
revocable permit in accordance with the terms and provisions of ~113-12 of the Code of the Town of
Queensbury.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr.
Brandt
NOES None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION CONCERNING MOBILE HOME PARK APPLICATION
OF MR. BARRY CONVERSE
RESOLUTION NO.: 494, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHEREAS, Mr. Barry Converse previously made application for the establishment of the
Converse Mobile Home Park on April Lane in the Town of Queensbury as required by Chapter 113 of the
Code of the Town of Queensbury entitled, "Mobile Homes," and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, in accordance with said Chapter 113 of
the Code of the Town of Queensbury, referred the application to the Planning Board for review, received
written recommendations from the Planning Board, set a date for a public hearing, and acknowledged the
fact in a resolution adopted on or about June 7, 1993, that the applicant was required to give notice, by
ordinary mail, to all property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the proposed site for the
Mobile Home Park, and
WHEREAS, on or about the 12th day of July, 1993, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury
held a public hearing, complied with SEQRA requirements, and ultimately approved the issuance of a
Mobile Home Park application, with certain terms and conditions attached thereto, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has now been notified of an allegation
that certain property owners that should have been notified in accordance with the requirements of Chapter
113 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, were not notified, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, is desirous of addressing the allegations
and feels that it would be appropriate and proper to set a date for a second public hearing in connection
with the application ofMr. Converse for the Converse Mobile Home Park on April Lane in the Town of
Queensbury,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby sets a new hearing date on
the application of Mr. Barry Converse, for a Mobile Home Park on April Lane in the Town of Queensbury,
for September 20th, 1993, and hereby further directs the applicant to provide such written notice as is
required by Chapter 113 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury to all property owners within 500 feet of
the exterior boundaries of the proposed Mobile Home site, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby directs that the applicant,
Mr. Barry Converse, be 2notified that the resolution previously authorizing the permit for the Mobile Home
Park is hereby rescinded, until such time as the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury makes a new
determination on this matter following the public hearing provided for herein.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr.
Brandt
NOES None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Town Clerk notified the Town Board that this was a re-hearing due to the fact
that some residents were not notified of the first hearing. Supervisor Brandt-It is my understanding that
may be been screw up by our own staff is that correct? Executive Director Martin-That is right.
Supervisor Brandt-On the tax maps they missed a group. So, exactly what does this entail? Attorney
Dusek-The resolution brings you back through the process of the rehearing and reconsideration of the
application, it rescinds your previous resolution, it does not effect the SEQRA findings. The reason why I
am recommending this course of action of the board this was something that I carefully considered and it
seems to me that since the statute only provides for notice in writing and no newspaper notice at all that the
defect in failing to notify a number of people is fairly significant and I think it would be in the best interest
of the Town to address it now rather that just wait and see if something happens in the future. I think it is
better to put it right on the table deal with it again and then you know you went through the proper
procedure as far as law is concerned and then we can see where it goes after that. (Sept. 20th was accepted
as the date of the hearing) vote taken.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE TOWN BOARD MINUTES
RESOLUTION NO. 495, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
RESOLVED, that the Town Board Minutes of July 6th, 26th and August 2, 1993 be and hereby are
approved.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1993 BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO. 496, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED FOR 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:
PINE VIEW CEMETERY AND CREMATORIUM:
FROM:
TO:
AMOUNT:
002-8810-4400 002-8810-4230 $ 250.00
(MISC. CONTRACTUAL) (PURCHASE OF WATER)
and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the 1993 Town Budget is hereby amended
accordingly.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING TOWN OF QUEENSBURY POLLING PLACES
RESOLUTION NO.:497, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 4-104 of the New York State Election Law, the Town Board of
the Town of Queensbury must submit to the Warren County Board of Elections a listing of the polling
places in the Town of Queensbury in each Election District in which elections and registrations may be
held,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the following locations be and hereby are designated as the respective polling
places in the districts as enumerated:
WARD/ED.
LOCATION
1/1
1/2
1/3
1/4
North Qsby. Rescue Bldg.
Bay Ridge Firehouse
Bay Ridge Firehouse
Warren County Center
2/1
South Qsby. Firehouse
2/2
2/3
2/4
2/5
Qsby. Activity Center
Qsby. Central Firehouse
Qsby. Activity Center
Roberts Gardens Rec Room
(Not Accessible)
3/1
3/2
3/3
3/4
Qsby. Central Firehouse
Qsby. Senior High
John Burke Apts. (Not Accessible)
Kensington Road School
4/1
4/2
4/3
4/4
4/5
4/6
W.G.F. Firehouse (VanDusen/Luzerne)
W.G.F. Firehouse (VanDusen/Luzerne)
W.G.F. Firehouse (Luzerne Road)
W.G.F. Firehouse (Luzerne Road)
W.G.F. Firehouse (Luzerne Road)
W.G.F. Firehouse (VanDusen/Luzerne)
and that such locations are accessible to the Physically Handicapped, pursuant to Article 4-104-1-a of the
Election Law unless otherwise noted, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Warren County Board of
Elections.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr.
Brandt
NOES None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held-It was noted that residents will be notified of any changes in voting locations by the
County Election Board.
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RES. 467, 93 CONCERNING SETTING
PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SIGN ORDINANCE
(CHAPTER 140 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY)
RESOLUTION NO.: 498, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury previously adopted resolution no. 467,
93 to set a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Town of Queensbury Sign Ordinance,
and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to make further modifications to
the Sign Ordinance, and therefore finds it appropriate to rescind resolution 467,93,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby rescinds resolution no. 467,
93, for the reason set forth above.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt
NOES None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Councilman Goetz-We had another workshop and after we set the first public
hearing we realized that there some refinements that were needed, primarily in the areas of allowing signs
lets say for political signs and church supper non-profit groups and also the fee schedule had to be refined.
So, we have something to present for a new public hearing to be set. Vote taken
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING
ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SIGN ORDINANCE
(CHAPTER 140 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY)
RESOLUTION NO. 499, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHEREAS, there has been prepared and published a codification of laws, ordinances, and
regulations of the Town of Queensbury, and
WHEREAS, the Sign Ordinance of the Town of Queensbury is included in such codification as
Chapter 140, and
WHEREAS, it appears appropriate to amend, supplement, change, and/or modify said Ordinance,
and
WHEREAS, at this meeting there has been presented for adoption by the Town Board of the Town
of Queensbury, a proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, prior to any amendment, supplement, change, or modification to the said Town of
Queensbury Sign Ordinance, it is necessary to complete a SEQRA review and conduct a public hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall meet and hold a public
hearing at the Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York, at 7:00 p.m., on
the 27th day of September, 1993, to consider the said proposed amendment to the Town of Queensbury
Sign Ordinance, and to hear all persons interested on the subject matter thereof concerning the same to take
such action thereon as is required or authorized by law, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to publish and
post the notice that has also been presented at this meeting concerning the proposed amended Sign
Ordinance in the manner provided by law, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby determines the action about
to be undertaken to be a Type II action pursuant to the rules and regulations adopted by the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act since
it involves continuing agency administration matters.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr.
Brandt
NOES None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Councilman Goetz-Before the vote could I just bring to your attention on
section 140-4 A4 the wording, The following temporary signs are prohibited A frame style, temporary sign
boards, portable signs; when I read it that way it seemed like it was describing a variety of signs and Jim
Martin said no, it means just one kind of A frame style. Councilman Tucker-What kind of sign is that?
Councilman Caimano- The kind that is up there now next by the ... Executive Director Martin-The signs
like the A frame that fold out and they are self supporting like and example is in front of the strip shopping
center mall there next to the log Jam. Councilman Monahan-So, Jim you are just referring to A frames
style I think we have to change the punctuation. I was going to say A frame style temporary sign board;
portable signs. There are to be two restricted here, A frame style temporary sign boards is one portable
signs are another. Attorney Dusek-The way to do that would be to put a small (a) before A frame style of a
temporary nature, and then put down (b) right before portable signs, that makes it clear that you are
referring to two separate things. Councilman Tucker-What kind of a portable sign are you going to
eliminate? Executive Director Martin-Portable signs are defined in the first page of the local law.
Councilman Caimano-144-Al All temporary signs shall be granted a permit or permits for a period not to
exceed sixty days per calendar year. I am assuming now contrary to what we did before a temporary sign a
political sign if you will you could get it for sixty straight days and not thirty days and then have to
...Executive Director Martin-Right. Councilman Caimano-Then follow over onto El Five temporary signs
permits per applicant for a maximum of sixty days per calendar year, I am not understanding this.
Executive Director Martin-What we are trying to do is to give people the option of getting sixty days all at
once or if they want to break up their sixty day periods into five different times of the year so they do not
have to lump it all together this now permits, permits for as little as twelve days in a permit period.
Councilman Tucker-All this that is underlined is new has that all be approved? Executive Director Martin-
It has all been gone through by the committee and brought before this Board. Councilman Tucker-Have we
approved it? Councilman Caimano-No. Councilman Tucker-I was charged a hundred bucks the other day
to put out political signs. Executive Director Martin-It would still be that, ten or more. Councilman
Tucker-But this is all new. I was only charged fifty dollars last year. Executive Director Martin-That part
of the fee is still the same, the part that is new about this it has moved into another section of the code of
the regulations and that is why. It says right now in the code book temporary signs or group of identical
signs fee of $25.00 that is the part that is incorrect and a deposit of $25.00 that is incorrect for ten signs or
more a deposit of One hundred dollars. Attorney Dusek-As I read this law I heard a comment earlier made
that the minimum time frame would be twelve days the way this is written the minimum time period would
be a day. They could come in for five one day permits is they wanted to or five two day or any
combination.
Vote taken
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING
ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. _, 1993
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 127 TO BE ENTITLED,
"PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT"
WHICH CHAPTER SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF
CERTAIN OTHER TOWN DEPARTMENT ACTIVITIES AS MORE SPECIFICALLY
SET FORTH THEREIN.
RESOLUTION NO. 500, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHEREAS, at this meeting there has been presented for adoption by the Town Board of the Town
of Queensbury, Local Law No. _, 1993, A Local Law Amending the Code of the Town of Queensbury
by adding a new Chapter 127 to be entitled, "Public Utilities Department," which Chapter shall provide for
the establishment of the Department of Public Utilities and the consolidation of certain other Town
department activities, and
WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized pursuant to the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State
of New York, and
WHEREAS, prior to adoption of said Local Law, it is necessary to conduct a public hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall meet and hold a public
hearing at the Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York, at 7:00 p.m., on
the 20th day of September, 1993 to consider said Local Law No. _, 1992 and to hear all persons
interested on the subject matter thereof concerning the same to take such action thereon as is required or
authorized by law, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby
directed to publish and post the notice that has also been presented at this meeting concerning the proposed
Local Law No. _,1993 in the manner provided by law.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt
NOES Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Caimano
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote:
Councilman Caimano-Could we just carry on a little bit of a dialogue?
Supervisor Brandt-Sure.
Councilman Caimano-I think that this kind of a resolution is a, may have far reaching effects for this town
or any town and I recognize and applaud the fact that not only towns, municipalities, governments but
businesses are paring down and stream lining and I think it is a great idea but because it is such a great idea
I just wonder if we ought not to have a relatively extended period of discussion. What I am thinking about
of course is the fact that we are coming into what some people would call the silly season but in actuality is
a very important political season and that this is if nothing else the most important thing that we can argue
about for the next oh month and a half, two months. I wonder if we ought not to set it when we think about
this, set a date which would be, which would either have a public hearing right after November 2nd or
certainly not put the vote out until after November 2nd. This also has as you have mentioned to me
ramifications on our budget and I think we ought to think long and hard about something that is going to
transform our government, transform our budgets before we jump into something.
Supervisor Brandt - I do not think it is anything to be taken likely I think its very major piece of legislation
but I think that there is I have no problem with, first of all your point is I think that it should be enacted and
put into effect after the general election I think.
Councilman Caimano-Right.
Supervisor Brandt - I think in effect that is probably what will happen anyhow because this piece of law and
at least the budget that I am going to propose are certainly intertwined very, very deeply and I think that if
we all get voted out of office over this I think we would have to respect the vote and say well, lets not do
that and if that is what we hear in the process on the other hand I think it is healthy that it is part of the
public dialogue and the people have a chance to speak very directly to the questions.
Councilman Caimano-I think so too, and one of the things for example that is not at least not as far as I read
it that is not said in here is the use of privatization for example to affect economies in government. You
and I have talked about that in the past and that is the fact that many of the things that we do today which
cause us to have employees and they are very good employees but they will be employees until they retire
and this does nothing but mushroom a budget. There are operations that might better be handled over time
outside of government and not with employees.
Supervisor Brandt-I think you will find those at least some of them the ones that I have identified
incorporated in the budget and we go hand and glove with this concept.
Councilman Tucker-Wouldn't putting this on the agenda and going forward with it bring out the dialogue?
Supervisor Brandt-I think so and I think we also as part of this have to interview people and look for the
right candidate to run this and this is really tied into the over all organization of the Town government.
Councilman Tucker-I just have a feeling no matter what time we decide to do this, this is political hot
potato and
Councilman Caimano-It should be, but my problem is that it limits, it limits this to only the five of us. In
fact I see out there at least three other people, four other people who may very well want to be a part of this
decision making and by delaying until after November 2nd. then I think it would become much more
clearer who should be a player in this thing and who should not and in the mean time from now until then
all of those people who want to be players in this thing would have legitimate dialogue and not just gum
beating.
Supervisor Brandt -You are going to have dialogue when it comes to the election I will guarantee you.
Councilman Monahan-I think the objectives of this is very commendable but I think we are putting the cart
before the horse and I am seeing a very great package but I am not seeing the contents of the package and
frankly I have many questions about this I think it is a piece of legislation that needs to be re-worked or
there is a possibility it needs to be re-worked before this goes to public hearing. I think it is a major piece
of legislation and I think it deserves a workshop frankly.
Supervisor Brandt-I do not want to delay it I am going to put it on the table and you can vote it up or vote
it down but I think let the public give input, this is a concept it can be a lot of disagreement with it, there
can be agreement with it, let the public give us input and that leaves us to give input too. Certainly if you
think a piece of it incorrect you have got a right to ask for changes and that is the process.
Councilman Monahan-Well, if it is introduced I would like a discussion period after it is introduced to put
some of my concerns on the floor before we vote on it please.
Councilman Goetz-I am very interested in having it come to a vote because to me it is not a new idea this is
something that at least I have heard discussed since I took office. I think this is the best way to bring it to
the public and let them pick who they want. You cannot have a better way of doing it, and there would not
be enough time in my opinion after the election.
Councilman Tucker-The renegade republican will second it.
Councilman Monahan-Mike, can we have some discussion now please.
Supervisor Brandt-The motion was made and seconded. We are open for discussion.
Councilman Monahan-I am going to start right in on page one under 127-2 Legislative Intent. The objective
of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is to permit and foster the orderly, efficient and most
economical operation of the departments and activities etc. I want to know where are the hard costs and the
hard savings? Where is the analysis who has looked at tasked, duplication of men and equipment and made
the hard decisions that need to be made and where is this report.
Supervisor Brandt -You are going to do that with the budget?
Councilman Monahan-I think you need to do that as ground work before you pass this legislation, I think
that is a tool that the Town Board needs before this is legislation.
Supervisor Brandt -You will have it, you can't help but have it, when you start this process by the time you
can enact this you are going to have to go through your budgetary process you are going to have to look at
every bit of this.
Councilman Monahan-But this should have been done before the plan, that is my point when I say it is the
cart before the horse. Now to go on, if! may go on. B. 127-3 Effect The intended effect of this legislation
is to provide for the consolidation of those activities of the department affected, which may be
consolidated, while allowing those activities which are not practically consolidated to remain under
separately performed (as if no consolidation had occurred) but under the direction of one administrator who
will report to the Town Supervisor and/or the Town Board. I really do not know what that sentence means
and what the practical application is and I have looked at page five to see the tiers, I don't really know what
we are saying in that sentence in that piece of legislation.
Supervisor Brandt-Paul, you want to describe that you wrote it.
Attorney Dusek-As I understood the desires that were expressed to me the point was to, to conso-it says
here to consolidate whatever possibly can be consolidated. In some of your districts your water districts
particularly there are some function that are just not practically consolidated. A good example would be
you technicians who service and who have no other function but to service the water supply in town to run
tests on the water supplies to maintain the proper amount of chemicals
in the water they are so busy doing that you are not going to obviously take one of those people and put
them into some other area of town so they would stay. They would be part of your consolidation plan put
underneath the division of water but there function and everything would still be strictly the water district
or that particular task they have always performed. There are some employees on the other hand fore
instance as I understood it like your building and grounds employees that may switch from job to job that is
of a construction nature but they may, or maintenance nature but they may go and do maintenance in
various areas. They do maintenance in the water dept. they may do maintenance in cleaning fore instance
in the Town in which case they would be crossing over and there would be consolidation of functions in
that instance. Also the statement also refers to the concept of the fact that your budgets still have to be
different for your various districts. You cannot consolidate all of the budgets into one because you have
different tax bases supporting different, the district as opposed to other general Town funds. So, when I
drafted that statement that was what was going through my mind in terms of trying to fit everything
together as I understood to be the desires you know.
Councilman Caimano-I guess it is the very next sentence that really has me concerned and that is why I
wanted to ask, that is why I am asking for more dialogue. The very next sentence reads, The determination
of which functions will be consolidated and which shall be separately performed under each division of the
Department of Public Utilities is determined in part herein but may also be determined by the Town Board
of the Town of Queensbury by separate resolution after the legislation is placed into effect. What bothers
me about that is we are, we have agreed this is a very far reaching piece of legislation and that sentence
seems to indicate that we are only doing a broad brush we will do the hard work later as we stumble over it.
Supervisor Brandt -Some of that is inherent I think you are going to give, you give your best try at a major
organization what I have found in re-organizing anything you sometimes make mistakes and sometimes
look at them and say gee that was not the best way to do that particular thing. This clause in the law allows
you to modify whatever you did. Its really gives you some flexibility in administering this law.
Attorney Dusek - I might make just one comment if I may in this especially since you are in these areas of
intent and affect. It is important of course for the Town Board to feel comfortable with the language that is
used if these paragraphs because this is your language if you do not feel comfortable with it you can of
course revise or change anything here that you feel appropriate and I just think it is important for me to
mention. There is no legal ease to this type of ..what it is, is an attempt on my part of draft what was asked
of me based on the information that I had.
Councilman Monahan-The sentence that I referred to I am not sure if somebody reading that five years
from now will know what we are talking about.
Attorney Dusek-We can certainly expand on that if you would like.
Supervisor Brandt-That is part of the public hearing process, everybody can give their input.
Councilman Monahan-To go on. B. Department Budget. Page 3 The budget of the Department shall
include separate budgets for any special district or other expense that is subject to being assessed, charged,
and/or collected from an area less than the entire Town and hence, not properly included as a Town-wide
expense. The departments consolidated hereunder will no longer prepare separate budgets, but rather, the
budgets submitted for the Public Utilities Department shall incorporate all of the budgets of the affected
departments. Well we all know in practicality each department under that department will still prepare
their budgets because they are the only people who knows what is going on and know what they need. I
just wonder how practical this is for flowing that kind of procedures through accounting and if its going to
be much more expensive in the way that we flow it through the accounting now. That's why I'm asking for
a cost analysis on whether or not this is cost effective. To go down to Section 127-5. We're talking about
the Chief Executive Officer or Administrative Head of the Department of Public Utilities shall be the
Executive Director of Public Utilities. Then it goes on to say. The Town Board of the Town of
Queensbury shall fix the salary of Executive Director and the position shall be in the unclassified service of
the Civil Service System. Do we have it in writing from the Warren County Civil Service Department that
this position can be an unclassified position?
Attorney Dusek-I haven't done any of that.
Councilman Monahan-Before you put this out for public hearing we need this type of information. The
salary will be paid from the General Fund of the Town of Queensbury and shall not be a charge, in whole
or part, upon any improvement or benefit district of the Town. Much of this persons work is going to
involve special districts. Can we legally not charge that persons time back to special districts? If we can
should we morally do it that way because is it fair for the general taxpayer to pay for the time that's spent
on special districts, Paul I've often said, I thought your time should be broken up and charged back.
Attorney Dusek-Legally you can do it the way it is. In answer to your other question, yes you can structure
it and divide it up among the districts.
Councilman Monahan-It is my belief, frankly that is what should be done. Page 6, Section 127-8-A. We're
talking about the provision of engineering services to highway and drainage. Aren't we kind of putting this
persons activities, kind of stepping where the Highway Superintendent is suppose to tread, I have a little
problem with that. Then we go down to the bottom. Fleet and Equipment Maintenance Divisions. The
provisions and administration of repairing and maintenance of vehicles and equipment owned, leased
and/or used by the Town of Queensbury, except that this provision shall not affect any vehicle, equipment,
etc., secured by or under the care and custody of the Highway Superintendent or assigned to the Highway
Department and/or any other department or commission, which by law, has the sole right to direct the use
of its equipment. My question is this department is going to need a garage, where is the garage coming
from that's he is doing all this maintenance in? Are we building a new garage or are we, I'm assuming from
what I've tried to read on Town Law, since I've looked at this that the Town Board actually has the
Highway garage under its own custody and control. I'm assuming we could kick the Highway Department
out of that garage and give it to this position.
Supervisor Brandt-I don't think we can kick them out of the garage.
Councilman Monahan-But, is this what we want to do? Is this what we're trying to do or are we building a
separate garage? Where is this garage coming from that's what I want to know?
Supervisor Brandt-These are all things that we have to work out.
Councilman Monahan-But, I think those kind of things need to be worked out before this goes to public
hearing. Page 8. Recreation and Parks Division. Now, we're talking about the divisions that are under this
Chief Executive Administrator. The responsibility for the supervision of maintenance and all public parks,
playgrounds, athletic fields, and other Town of Queensbury owned and leased recreational facilities. I'm
assuming that says, the Chief Executive Administrative Head is suppose to have that responsibility. In
addition this division shall be responsible for the operation of all recreation programs within the Town.
But, then it goes on to say, which to me is two things going in opposite directions. The Executive Director
of Public Utilities shall exercise no managerial control over the initiation, development, maintenance, or
elimination of said recreation programs. Now, one sentence we made him responsible and the next
sentence we took it away.
Supervisor Brandt-We made him responsible here for the maintenance of the parks.
Councilman Monahan-But, that isn't what its saying.
Supervisor Brandt-In that process you don't want a person in charge of the parks themselves who has no
responsibility about the operation of those parks. If you have a Recreation Director who goes onto a ball
field with the teams to play an know ones mowed the grass its not going to work. You have to keep both
responsibilities under one person. This person will be in charge of both the maintenance of the grounds and
the parks, and will be responsible so that they are properly operated. However, that person is not going to
set up the recreation programs. The recreation programs will be set as they are today. What your doing is
your just saying to the guy, your in charged of the parks keep them in good shape, but your going to work
with the Recreation Director and your going to make sure that you execute the whole thing so it works.
Councilman Monahan- I agree with you Mike, I think that the actually of up keep of parks should of been
under Building and Grounds long ago. I think the acquisition of land should be under the direction of our
Department of Community Development. But, I'm saying what it says, what it says is muddy. Page 10.
Section 127-10. Transfer of Property, Equipment, and Budgetary Appropriations. The Town Board of the
Town of Queensbury shall provide by resolution for the transfer of all property, equipment, and budgetary
appropriations of and for the Waste Water Department, Water Department, Landfill Department, there I
stop. That Landfill Department owns equipment that is partially owned by the City of Glens Falls.
Supervisor Brandt-That's not true.
Councilman Monahan-That's what the contract reads.
Councilman Tucker-We don't have a contract.
Supervisor Brandt-Which contract?
Councilman Monahan-I think the original contract that set that all up....
Supervisor Brandt-We have no contract with the City right now.
Councilman Monahan-But, the original contract that step up how that equipment was to be bought. I would
have a hard time until we get some real legal opinion on that of saying that we don't have a problem here to
deal with.
Supervisor Brandt-Clearly, we have no contract with the City.
Councilman Monahan-That's true, of the State.
Supervisor Brandt-Clearly, we need to define that with the City. Clearly, we've been asking for that for a
period of time. They do not want to work in the landfill as a partner, so these, we have to form a contract
and I think we can kind of dictate those terms, I believe. I don't think
Councilman Monahan-But I think we have prior commitments and prior ownership that we need to check
into and see if we can do that before we get ourselves in a mess.
Supervisor Brandt-You know you get into the landfill, Betty, the contract was modified in the last
administration in such a way that it said the City has no obligation for the closure of the landfill.
Councilman Monahan-Mike, you know that there
Supervisor Brandt-Now, wait a minute.
Councilman Monahan-I know but
Supervisor Brandt-I don't care to be interrupted.
Councilman Monahan-Okay, excuse me
Supervisor Brandt-I do not care to be interrupted I have a right to speak to.
Councilman Monahan-Excuse me.
Supervisor Brandt-We this Town in its last administration left the city off the hook I am not sure that
contract is legal I have real reservations that is was properly done I think that there is questions on the
landfill as to whether they can get away with, from some responsibilities if there is a problem with that
landfill, they contributed that is, those are legal questions. As far as the equipment up there, right my view
is they do not own a thing they said so in their own meeting. They said they do not want to own anything
we said do you want to be an even partner with us and be a partnership and take on all the liabilities and all
the assets they clearly said no, they do not want to do that. So, I do not think we have to worry too much
about that.
Councilman Monahan-I still think it is a legal thing that needs to be determined. Then we go down and we
are still talking about transfer equipment and budgetary appropriation and it says provided however that if
any property or equipment or other asset is transferred from an improvement district or other department
within the Town of Queensbury for which funds are not raised by taxes levied upon the entire town a
payment to the appropriate district or department budget shall be made from the Town general fund if the
equipment, materials and or assets are not assigned to a related division and used solely for the benefit of
the particular district. My question is who is going to appraise all that equipment and get a legal appraisal?
That was another question. Then I come back to one that to me has a lot of conflicts all through this whole
thing. If you go to page 2 A Personnel. The Department shall consist of the Office of Executive Director of
Public Utilities, and such other officers and employees as may be assigned by reason of the consolidation
of departments provided for herein or as may be determined by the Town Board of the Town of
Queensbury to be needed. So we have given that power to the Town Board. Now you go to I will tell you
the page in a minute, 127-6 on page 5 all officers and employees of the departments affected hereby, shall
be transferred to the Department of Public Utilities as provided for herein. All other additional or future
officers and employees of the Department of Public Utilities shall be appointed by the Town Board of the
Town of Queensbury and shall hold the position to which appointed at the pleasure of the Town Board, it
goes down then to give the Executive Director can appoint the temporary seasonal and emergency
employees. Then you go to 127-9 which in on page 9 which says transfer of Employees; Status. The
employees of every department affected by this consolidation shall be transferred to the Department of
Public Utilities and shall be continued as employees of the Department of Public Utilities with the same
classification, salary, benefits, pensions, and retirement rights and privileges as they had immediately prior
to such transfer and the Executive Director of Public Utilities not the Town Board as has been stated in
previous paragraphs shall have the right to hire, fire, and discipline such employees. Now this only refers
to the transfer of employees does that mean that we have got certain people that we want to get rid of and
we are giving the Executive Director that power.
Attorney Dusek-That was not intended, that should be consistent with all other paragraphs, when this was
being drafted there were several different notes so I will take the blame on that, that should be consistent all
the way through as Town Board, my apologies.
Supervisor Brandt -So, before we go to public hearing that probably should be changed.
Councilman Monahan-I think you have got a lot in here that needs to be changed including some muddy
language.
Councilman Tucker-Gee, I would like to know what the public wants to say about it, myself.
Councilman Caimano-So, would I. That is why I want an extended time period because once more it is
interesting that one of the notes that I made here and I mentioned it to you earlier that you are working
yourself out of a job here, the Supervisor has little to do. At a time when government and businesses are
paring down and cutting and consolidating and stream lining we seem to be adding layers and I maybe
wrong and that is why I am asking for an extended period of discussion a real organizational charts that
show, what, who and why and what it is going to cost us.
Supervisor Brandt-We are going to develop it.
Councilman Caimano-Before we vote I hope.
Councilman Monahan-Nick, do you remember, when not when this idea first came down the pike but a
while afterwards when Mike had, a chance to work on it he asked us to interview an engineer and you and I
did that interview together and one question I asked that engineer was can you do this job without the
department heads that we have now? He said absolutely not, I need their expertise. I have showed this to
several people and frankly that is the question a lot of people asked me is two of them. Where are you
going to find a person expert enough to do all these categories and all these different types of jobs be
knowledgeable in personnel, be able to get along with personnel and business administrator and engineer
and expertise in accounting and budget process and then they said to me and what is the Supervisor going
to do after you get all this together.
Councilman Tucker-He is going to retire.
Supervisor Brandt-Change town law and eliminate him maybe I don't know.
Councilman Monahan-And that question was raised to me, raised several times to me.
Councilman Tucker-From my minimum experience of setting on this Board this public law right here we
are all going to be a lot older and a lot wiser before it becomes law.
Councilman Monahan-That is why I would like to at least be in good form Pliney before it goes out to
Public Hearing. And we check the things like having this position be unclassified, we do not have that
information.
Councilman Tucker-We will develop it as we go.
Supervisor Brandt -You are going to get it, you see this, we are going to change this thing a lot I am sure of
that, I am sure you are going to find problems it is everybody's best effort at this point, the concept has to
be developed it has to be articulated we have to look at how it can work with. We certainly are going to
have to define many, many things including positions, salary levels, total costs, all of that is part of it but
you have to start and this is the way to start. Fine we are catching one piece that is wrong at this point as
far as I am concerned get it started.
Councilman Goetz-I do not see the threat of the Supervisor's job changing its a big issue isn't that what you
said from the beginning before I knew you as well as I do now?
Councilman Caimano-What's that?
Councilman Goetz-That you always thought that if the Town was set up differently that...
Councilman Caimano-I do not have any problem what so ever with setting up the town differently and
streamlining it, I want to see before hand before I vote on it that is all I care about.
Councilman Monahan-Sue, that was not meant as a threat to legislation.
Councilman Goetz-No wait a minute I have not finished my thought.
Councilman Caimano-Go ahead.
Councilman Goetz-I just think that we always talked about that possibility, that seemed like the best way to
go, that one person shouldn't have that much to say as the elected official and it could be done a whole
different variety of ways.
Councilman Caimano-Schools tell you that one supervisor should never have more than seven or eight
people reporting to him and obviously or her, and obviously the Supervisor has that now. So, clearly there
is room for stream lining and re-organization clearly in our general fund there is room for it. I just, I do not
want it done willy nilly I do not want it done with short trip I want it done with thought and since it is
political year I want everybody who can be and wants to, to have input into this thing. So, I say fine, lets
do it how about November 8th for a public hearing.
Supervisor Brandt-As far as I am concern you can start the process as soon as possible ...
Councilman Caimano-How about a couple minutes.
Supervisor Brandt-Because I think already you have a change and you will have other changes I think the
way work out a law is to start working. What is the soonest you can set it?
Attorney Dusek-The law requires a minimum days, time period of five days notice in the paper.
Supervisor Brandt -So you could two weeks from now comfortably start it.
Councilman Tucker-I would just like to make one further comment about concerns about the Supervisor's
job before I came here tonight I am watching TV and Mr. Clinton got on Television he is going to cut the
budget or government by one point two billion dollars and he is going to lay two hundred and fifty
thousand people out, stood right there on the lawn at the White House
and said he is going to do this stuff. Well maybe he will loose his job and if he does we can bring him here
and he can direct it.
Councilman Monahan-Pliney, I think government needs stream lining my objection is that I have got a
sloppy piece of legislation and I do not have enough background for it. I think, I agree that government
needs stream lining there is ways to stop duplication
but I think this, we have to give more thought to it and get a good piece of legislation and that is my
problem and I know I hate sloppy legislation.
Supervisor Brandt-My God if you hate sloppy legislation how did we get this zoning law that we have that
is that thick and we have spent a year and a half trying to fix it up and we haven't even started. So, sloppy
legislation.. Jet me tell you I think all legislation has flaws and you work with them and you try to improve
them. I think this Town Board wrestled with a Planning Zoning Building Codes, Dog Control Officer, Fire
Marshal all of that and we certainly had our arguments and when we are all said and done we have got a
real good functioning department. Nick contrary to what you represented in the newspapers we do save
money.
Councilman Caimano-Yea I think we did to.
Supervisor Brandt-Well, I can tell you we do. In 1990 those departments the Town, cost to the Town
$503,955. in 1991 the year before we took office $452,973 in 1992 we went through the re-organization we
ended up $416,000 $36,000 less money in 1993 as compared to the budget of 1991 we saved $63,000 that
is a lot of money and we have a smooth operating department so I think that the record should be clear and
straight and we saved money and we improved the control the Town Board has over these functions we are
running it far more coordinated in sink with what the Town Board wants to do and I think that is what we
have got to get to with all our government. Certainly I am sure that this piece of legislation will be
modified and will argue and debate how to best organize and that is health and I think that is good and
when we look back we may laugh at this initial piece of legislation to what we enact but that is the process.
I do not think there is anything wrong with it the sooner you start the process the sooner you will get there.
It is not easy it is not comfortable it is not nice but it has got to be done.
Councilman Caimano- I guess I will say that you are absolutely right I did talk out of my ear and when I,
when I had it checked I saw that the numbers were exactly as you say and let that be a lesson to all of us
lets do our homework before we say anything.
Supervisor Brandt-It is not right for the public to read a great big article that sound authoritarian that no
money was saved, and I think that should be, they have a right to know that.
The next meeting that this can be handled is, two weeks from now, the 20th. If that is acceptable to you
Mr. Tucker I am going going to specify the 20th of September.
Attorney Dusek-If you are going to entertain this as a resolution can I make a suggestion that page 9 be
corrected to take out that executive director and just put in Town Board.
Agreed to by the Town Board...
(Vote taken by the Board)
Supervisor Brandt-Requested that the Town Attorney review the next resolution.
Attorney Paul Dusek-What you have before you is a resolution that would propose an amendment to an
existing agreement that the Town currently has with the Lake George Park Commission, an agreement that
was entered into in 1991 provides that the Town will do basically all of the enforcement and management
of the Lake George Park Commission regulations insofar as it deals with wastewater. This agreement takes
away from those duties and only leaves the Town with the obligation to, I guess it is best outlined in
paragraph, on page 3 paragraph 2 it says the Town is responsible for enforcing the requirements that no
person shall construct a new or replacement system or alter an existing system without first having issued a
permit. It also provides before that if the Town issues a permit that a permit therefore from the commission
will not be necessary. There will be notification procedures etc. set up inspections of the existing systems
something that had been done by the Town appearing in paragraph 8 on page 4 will be done by the
commission now. The town retains the authority to grant variance upon notice. You will see some pencil
marks through the agreement those are just some, in the first instance some changes such as in the Code of
the Town of Queensbury they had it referenced as the old Ordinance number. On page 3 there was a
correction instead of saying copies, list, David Hatin advised me that list are being sent up so it was just
made to comply with what the practice is. On page 5 I am recommending to the Town that the words only
for good cause be taken out. This leaves you with the option to cancel the agreement on sixty days notice
otherwise you have to show cause and I think in light of the experience that we have picked up on this that
it would be advisable not to have that for good cause in there. That is basically what this does, the
resolution of course on top really approves it and authorizes the Supervisor to execute the agreement. The
agreement was drafted by the Lake George Park Commission it was not drafted by myself, the corrections
were put in by myself.
Councilman Monahan-I am looking at clause 15 and then wondering about our present agreement, does the
present agreement have that clause in?
Attorney Dusek -Yes. They had for good cause in the original agreement.
Councilman Monahan-So, can this take effect immediately, or do we have to give them sixty days notice by
registered mail?
Attorney Dusek-No, we are agreeing, both parties are agreeing to modify.
Mr. Gilbert Boehm-If you enter into this agreement in effect what you are doing is you are doubling my
town taxes and this is probably true for a lot of other people because the fees that they will be charging and
essentially equivalent to the Town tax. that is a fairly significant hit. The other thing is the original
agreement never did have an EIS to substantiate it I would suggest that you let this thing sit and if in fact
the Lake George Park Commission does not agree with the way you are doing it now which is on a catch as
catch can basis then let them go through and EIS and force you to change.
Supervisor Brandt-I was not here when the original agreement was made and did it need an EIS did it?
Attorney Dusek-Based upon my review of the regulations since this is a administerial continuing
management type of thing in terms of you are talking administration you are not talking about the
regulations themselves it is my opinion you do not need to go through an EIS you did not need one then
you do not need one now. I realize that the rules themselves are subject to challenge under SEQRA
whether or not that battle is won in court or how that turns out I do not know and that very well could effect
obviously everything. In the first instance because it is administerial I do not think you need it anyway and
the second thing is that presuming that the SEQRA review that was done on the regs themselves is upheld
by the Courts which I believe it has been to date then you would not need it for that reason as well.
Mr. Boehm-It essentially still is in court.
Attorney Dusek-That is my understanding.
Mr. Boehm-At the appellate level now we intend to take it to the appeals court if necessary, but in the mean
time just letting it ride you are going into winter if you continue with the Town as having it a fill in job like
you have been doing in the past there is no great risk to the lake either. We avoid the hit to the individual
taxpayers. The other thing is this with the way the rules are set up right now the Lake George Park
Commission could double their fees just as a result of a commission action. That is pretty loosey goosey.
Councilman Monahan-I would like to ask you a little bit about fees because because you made the
statement that your fee to them is the equivalent to your taxes.
Mr. Boehm-Right.
Councilman Monahan-Are you talking about County, Town?
Mr. Boehm-Town only.
Councilman Monahan-It is my understanding that there fee is roughly about $40.00 am I correct in that or
am I wrong?
Mr. Boehm-That is right. My town tax is $39.60 and going down I hope.
Councilman Tucker-How often do they inspect?
Mr. Boehm-They will register or excuse me they will impose a fee yearly I believe from what I remember.
What they are trying to do is they are trying to fill out their budget too.
Councilman Tucker-Are they going to inspect it every year?
Mr. Boehm-No, but I believe that they will charge us a fee every year.
Councilman Monahan-They can charge the fee without doing an inspection, that is a question?
Mr. Boehm-I am a little bit loose in there I do not really remember exactly how that is worded.
Councilman Goetz-Wasn't there a meeting held Jim with the people from the Lake George Park
Commission and various representatives?
Mr. Martin-That was in I think May now. We had a meeting in May going through what the logistics
would be to carry this out. My recollection and I could be wrong I thought the $40.00 was per inspection to
cover the cost of the inspection. I do not know that it is an annual fee just per property but I could be
wrong about that.
Mr. Boehm-I am not too sure about that either.
Mr. Martin-I thought it was a fee to cover the cost of inspection.
Supervisor Brandt-Does someone know that?
Mr. Stone-I think the way I heard it Mike, was that it was going to be like a dock fee and a boat fee we pay
on an annual basis. We have a dock we pay an annual fee, we have a septic system we pay an annual fee.
Your inspection will be, I believe they are trying to inspect as often as they can whether it will be every
year or not is another story.
Councilman Monahan-Mr. Stone are you saying that your understanding now what they are going to do is
charge that fee whether or not they inspect, in other words.
Mr. Stone-That is what I understand Betty.
Councilman Monahan-Suppose the Town of Queensbury was still doing the inspecting are they still going
to charge you?
Supervisor Brandt-We could certainly find that out.
Mr. Salvadore- Mike, the fee is for the issuance of a permit that is what you pay a fee for, you are trying to
get a permit to operate. Whether you get a permit or an interim permit, an interim operating permit is
something else, but the fee is for the issuance of a permit.
Supervisor Brandt-And a permit is an annual permit? Or is it a three year permit, isn't it?
Councilman Goetz-It sounds like we have got to get more information.
Councilman Tucker-Can you find out?
Mr. Martin-I can find out.
Mr. Salvadore-They can issue a permit for a specified length of time and when the time is up they come
agaIn.
Supervisor Brandt-We are meeting with these people again as the Board I am looking at the North Qsby.
Sewer System and we can certainly bring that up then. We can call them and ask these questions sooner
but I think that is reasonable that those questions should be answered.
Mr. Boehm-Will you table it then until then.
Supervisor Brandt-Somebody has got to put it on the floor, someone has to introduce it, all we have to do is
take no action at this point.
Councilman Tucker-Jim, you are going to have an answer on it when?
Mr. Martin-Next week, for our meeting next Monday.
Mr. Salvadore-For the record my name is John Salvadore, I have told this Board or members of this Board
on previous occasions you people are dealing with a very, very powerful organization, agency, the Lake
George Park Commission. They have been given powers by the legislature that the Attorney General for
this State has ruled, has opined to be unconstitutional. And they are still in effect today, inspite of his
opinion. This subject of wastewater regulations in North Queensbury has a lot to do with the furtherance of
a sewer system of some kind or another. One happens to be on the boards at Warren County. Now, we
took these regulations to court based on the fact that the Lake George Park Commission made a negative
declaration in the SEQRA process, they neg. dec. these regulations. I have before me a Supreme Court
Judges decision in that regard favorable decision which is now on appeal by the Attorney General. Given
the obvious relationship between the regulations and sewering the Lake George basin issuance of a
negative declaration was incredible as a matter of law. It is well settled that the threshold for triggering
preparation of an environmental impact statement is low. Particularly where the intended project is a type
one action. Indeed the courts of this State have been unhesitating in enjoining projects for a failure to
prepare an adequate EIS. Now you are entering into an agreement with that agency that we feel has
promulgated wastewater regulations that are not in accordance with the SEQRA process. That is the lower
courts decision it is on appeal. That is the lower courts decision. It is on appeal oral arguments will be
heard in November.
Attorney Dusek-One thing that is important to note with this agreement for the Board's consideration and of
course whatever you decide to do is totally up to the Board but I just want to bring one thing that I think is
important to note that there is already an agreement in place between the Town and the agency and what
this agreement, new agreement does is remove some of the towns obligations in so far as the wastewater
regulations are concerned. So, it is not adding to your obligations but rather taking away from the
obligations. If in fact the legislation should ultimately fail then in my opinion everything else would come
tumbling down as well. All the agreements and everything else. But, until we know that it is not the towns
job to have engaged in the SEQRA review process that is up to the Lake George Park Commission and the
Courts to decide whether or not they have done their job right. Right now there is a, as John mentioned
there is an appeal we do not know what is going to happen at the end of that appeal but right now they are
acting with regulations that are in effect and this like I say this agreement actually pulls you back from
some of the duties and responsibilities.
Mr. Lewis Stone-North Qsby. I just want to dwell on a point that Gill made and it is something we all
should be aware of he said if this went through and the Lake George Park Commission charged $40.00 per
year for our septic system permit or inspection or whatever it is, it would nearly double his taxes which
means he is only paying as I am, only $40.00 a year to the Town. I think we get a lot more than $40.00 a
year for the Town and if they are going to inspect out of that money then we are not really paying our share
for the rest of the Town and I really think regardless of how you vote on this thing we all should be aware
that we not not pay very much in town taxes. We see these signs up there, Queensbury Tax Town and the
amount of money that each individual home owner pays to the Town is very little and if it costs $40.00 to
inspect the system then that's all we are going to get, that is all we are paying for in our Town taxes and we
are getting snow plow removal, snow removal and all those other things for free and I do not think that's
correct. I am willing to pay for pay for both. I just think we ought to keep that in mind the Town taxes are
relatively low. Town taxes, not County, not School I will argue about those at another time, but Town
taxes are quite low. Obviously if you people think that you can do the good job you are doing they will be
even lower.
Supervisor Brandt-Thank you.
Councilman Monahan-I would suggest that we need to get some answers to those questions.
Supervisor Brandt-I think we should leave this alone for now and get some answers.
Mr. Salvadore-There is nothing stated in this agreement as to who standards are going to apply on the
inspection. Whoever does the inspection, it is really not to consequential unless you have a failure, if you
have evidence of a failure then this permit interim permit nothing happens and you have to immediately
proceed to correct a failure. Now, who standards apply on the correction of the failure, the Park
Commission has standards, separation distances, set backs and the Town of Queensbury has separation
distances and set backs. Which will govern, which govern today? Which will govern if you enter into this
agreement and they are significant. Mr. Borgos attempted to change the Town Sanitary Code with regard
to these separation distances, ok, and I reminded him that he had to do an EIS to do this. He withdrew that
attempt and nothing has happened since. Right now the town separation distances and the Park
Commission's regulations separation do not compare. There is a significant difference. So, who is going, if
they have jurisdiction what applies in the case of a failure. This is important.
Attorney Dusek-In that instance there is obviously over-Iapingjurisdiction and the more restrictive
regulation will control.
Mr. Salvadore-Yea, the park commission. What Steve Borgos was trying to steam roll through. Which he
could not do without an EIS but the Park Commission can it is so inconsistent.
Supervisor Brandt-That will be revisited later.
RESOLUTION RETAINING MORSE ENGINEERING, P.C. REGARDING
ROAD IMPROVEMENT WORK AT PEGGY ANN ROAD/RESERVOIR DRIVE
RESOLUTION NO.: 501, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
WHEREAS, it is the Town of Queensbury's intention to perform road improvement work in the
area of Peggy Ann Road/Reservoir Drive, and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to retain the services of an engineering firm to provide professional
assistance in conjunction with said project, and
WHEREAS, Morse Engineering, P.c., has offered to perform the necessary engineering services
for the project,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the retention of
Morse Engineering, P.c., to provide the services described in the preambles hereof at a cost not to exceed
$ 5,000 to be paid for from the 1-1440-4400 account,
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to sign an agreement for
the professional services, said agreement to be in a form to be approved by the Town Attorney.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr.
Brandt
NOES None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Brandt-I got a letter this morning by fax from Morse Eng. basically
saying that they can do the job and that the maximum they will charge is $5,000. and I would like to move
this along to solve this problem on Peggy Ann Road. We started this process with a complaint from
neighbors who did not like to have people's automobiles upside down or on their side in the people yards
and they decided that maybe we ought to do something about the road. In looking at it we found that they
were right there was a very bad blind spot where your coming east on Peggy Ann Road you did not really
know that you were getting into trouble and in an icy road situation you were in trouble by the time you
saw it. We looked at straightening that road out now, in the process we found problems over there and we
found that we really need a different design than what we started with. The initial design was to lower the
road and because of the age old problem where there are some PCB's in the road beds of some of our roads
and this one has them we really should not be excavating very much of that road. So, we came to the
conclusion that the best thing to do is to change the whole design philosophy and we are down to where we
are going to need some technical work done and this resolution is to hire Morse Engineering to do that
work. Initially I contacted Rist Frost to do that work since they are already an approved engineer, but as
late as last week Friday they told me they could not do it, contrary to what they previously had said and
they dropped out.
Councilman Caimano- What are our request for proposal limits?
Attorney Dusek-$IO,OOO.
Councilman Goetz-Do we have anything from Haanen, are they involved?
Supervisor Brandt-I tried to get ahold of Haanen, but they were not available at the time and I did talk to
Haanen today and they told me that Morse is more qualified in this than they are and they think we would
be better served to move ahead with Morse than for them to compete for that job.
Councilman Monahan-In the Morse Eng. letter it says, nor does it include any hazardous waste remediation
work.
Supervisor Brandt-Hazardous Waste remediation here would only be a factor if we find PCB's in the
concentration of fifty parts per million otherwise it is classified, forty nine parts per million is classified as
not a hazardous waste, not a toxic waste, I guess so, there have been two tests performed and two more that
are being performed and the highest value of the two performed one was at two parts per million so we are
way below those figures. That is all certainly important in the concept. We took two more test to be sure
we have a good sampling we have talked to the neighbors we know the history of the oiling of the road and
when things were paved and so what we did was more testing in the area where oiling took place for a
longer period of time and those test are being performed right now the results should be in before the week
IS over.
Councilman Caimano-I do not mind Dick does a good job for us and I do not mind doing this and
especially since you guys have started this thing and it needs to be finished. I just think that we are looney
if we just put this in for five thousand because the paragraph above the cost says this proposal is for design
services for the road and does not include any construction inspection or contract administration then it
goes on to say it does not include any hazardous waste remediation...ifwe approve this for $5,000 sure as
God made green apples we are going to be adding on this and that and the other thing, so we might as well
bite the bullet now and if we think it is going to be more than $10,000 then we ought to put it out for bid,
that is all I am saying. I think to put it out for $5,000 is hiding our heads in the sand because it is not going
to be $5,000.
Supervisor Brandt-If we find tests where this material has more than excessive amounts of PCB's we do not
have to move it, what we can do is cover it, and that is what we would do so we do not get into that kind of
work. I do not think that we can afford it and I would not propose for a minute to get into remediation of
hazardous waste, I do not think we need to I think we can avoid that. If we are well below that than I think
it is probably smart to move the material out of there and I think the tests are the answer here. I have no
idea if we get into construction and inspection if we need these people and if that is going to be a lot more
money I really do not know, I think we need as soon as we have a total design in place to look very
carefully at going to bid and we may have to contract at that point and maybe we have to re-bid what we
are doing as far as construction inspection goes, I do not think for a minute that we are going to be into
$10,000 and I think we have an obligation of the people that live in that area to move this project along. I
think it is wrong to nit pick it and slow it down we have got to move it these people are very much effected
by it I do not think that anybody went into this to hurt the neighbors, I think we are trying to solve a
problem it got to be more complicated than we realized and so we are into what we are into, I am going to
offer the resolution.
Councilman Monahan-Is this being planned to be done, the work itself I am talking about not the
engineering work, but the actual installation of the road by our own forces, you said something about
contracting?
Supervisor Brandt-We are not making that determination at this point. In the beginning I will tell you that
our own people are very hesitant to work there when they heard that there are some PCB's there and that is
what started this whole process. Our people came and said that they did not want to work there is there was
PCB's and I can understand their hesitation I brought that forth to Paul Naylor after consulting with the
Attorney I contacted DEC and got all their input and I think we are doing it the best it can be done I think it
will solve the problem, whether our forces work on it or whether we contract it out that is a determination
that this board is going to have to make.
VOTE TAKEN
DISCUSSION HELD-Supervisor Brandt-noted receiving a proposal from Haanen Eng. for drainage
problems ... $2,900 lump sum... this will cover Homestead ViI., Hidden Hills and Applehouse Lane
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE RETENTION OF THE SERVICES OF HAANEN ENGINEERING
RESOLUTION NO. 502, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano
WHEREAS, it is the Town of Queensbury's intention to obtain certain engineering review and work
concerning drainage issues involving Homestead Village, Hidden Hills and Applehouse Lane, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board finds its appropriate to retain the services of Haanen Engineering in
accordance with the terms of a proposal dated September 7, 1993 providing that the cost shall not exceed
$2,900.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the retention of the services
of Haanen Engineering at a cost not to exceed $2,900. to be paid for from the 1-1440-440 and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to
enter into an agreement with Haanen Engineering for the services to be rendered such agreement to first be
approved as to form by the Town Attorney for the Town of Queensbury.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Goetz, Mr.
Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
DISCUSSION STREET NAMES-Supervisor Brandt -passed out a list of streets to be named to the Town
Board ... noted that this in conjunction with the new numbering of homes in the Town of
Queensbury.. .involves the Post Office and the Emergency Services 911 system.. .asked Mr. Hatin to check
with the residents on streets that have no name and asked their opinion in naming the street, and give a
recommendation to the Town Board...another thing I will bring to you is a proposal that we should consider
and that is we went out to bid to find out who could make new numbering signs for the mailboxes so they
will be uniform throughout the Town 3" in size, it is fairly inexpensive, it may be appropriate for the Town
to buy those and provide them to the citizens...so emergency services can use and expect to see when they
are in Queensbury. Mr. James Martin-There may be the potential to buy street signs, the board may
consider picking up, some are private roads that are on the list.
Councilman Monahan-Noted she had read the collection management policy formed by the Historian,
requested that the Attorney draw up resolution to adopt the policy...
Supervisor Brandt-I agree with you, it is a well written document.
Councilman Goetz-We had approved the Town to sponsor a balloon for the festival, we had mentioned we
wanted someone to take our ride on our behalf so on behalf of the Board I contact the Make a Wish group
and they are in the process of working something out so a local child can take our ride.
DISCUSSION DCO
Mr. Jim Martin-Introduced Ms. Colleen Kimble new DCO. Spoke to the Board about expanding the
department to an ACO (Animal Control Officer) largest change would be the carrying of a gun if
necessary, that is like a peace officer designation...
Attorney Dusek-That would change the way you structure your animal control legislation so I need to know
that, before a new local law is drafted. Councilman Monahan-Questioned if it was a gun or tranquilizer
gun...Mr. Martin-I believe it can go either way...my recommendation given the rabies that are in the
community ...we should give the opportunity to the ACO to use a gun...Councilman Monahan-requested
the pros and cons of a gun vs a tranquilizing gun...Mr. Martin-Noted that Mr. Warner appears to be not in
favor of carrying a gun but DEC Officer Timko is in favor of it. Mr. Charles Warner-ACO City of Glens
Falls and Warren County Humane Officer-Noted a tranquilizer gun is a valuable asset, it does take a lot of
training, the only thing you can use a tranquilizer gun on would be dogs or cats it is prohibited for
wildlife.. . fire arm is valuable tool, no objection to gun being in a vehicle but I do not think that the gun
should be worn, it is a matter of public image. Noted gun would be securely locked in the
vehicle...Councilman Monahan-Noted concern over shots going astray... Supervisor Brandt-Colleen have
you had training in fire arms? Ms. Kimble-Yes. I have had firearms safety training I hunt, I have got guns
and know how to handle a gun, if I were allowed to have a weapon I would like to keep up regular practice
....Supervisor Brandt-I have talked to DEC about this, many people in DEC think that because of the rabies
that our officer should have a weapon in fact they talk about a rifle that is, both a 22 and 410 over under.
From my view point to have a weapon is necessary to have training in the use of that weapon is essential, I
checked with our insurance carrier there is no extra additional premium for this it would be covered by our
existing policies, there is no big cost in it. I would like to amend the law and arrange the training and do it
professionally, even maybe go for a uniform...it is time to move it to animal control officer speaking for
me. Councilman Caimano-Questioned if other peace officers and what they feel about another layer of
officialdom carrying a gun? Mr. Martin-Noted that Mr. Timko DEC was emphatic about the need to carry
a weapon. Councilman Monahan-We need an ACO I am for that, I just wish DEC regulations permitted a
tranquilizing gun I would feel a lot more happier with that...Councilman Goetz-Would you keep the gun
unloaded? Ms. Kimble-Yes always unloaded. Councilman Monahan-Questioned if Ms. Kimble was going
to take the van home to have access to it 24 hours a day... and have the gun in a secure area... Supervisor
Brandt-When an officer is given a weapon that is their weapon and they have got to secure it and it is their
responsibility, re: van I do not have a problem with that, I think we have a special situation and we have got
to respond to it. Mr. Martin-Questioned overtime, 1. Comp time or 2. out right paid overtime it is my
recommendation to pay the overtime, as a one person show I do not think there is any time we can afford to
have her down by making it up with comp time. Councilman Goetz-What is her response time, does she
live nearby? Mr. Martin-She currently lives in Gansevoort, but she is actively looking for apartments in the
area. Supervisor Brandt-Do you guys want to commit yourselves to the Attorney on how you want to write
the law. Councilman Caimano-Speaking for myself I am all for the upgrade, philosophically I cannot go
for one more person having a gun, no reflection on you or anybody else I am dead set against it.
Councilman Tucker-With the proper training I am in favor of it and I am in favor of having her on call.
Councilman Caimano- The rest of it is fine with me. Councilman Tucker-And I guess we will have to buy
her a uniform. Mr. Martin-She will have tan shirt, brown slacks and black boots as a protection measure, I
also want to get her a badge and give an good official appearance. Councilman Goetz-I am for upgrading
the position, having a gun and being on cal1...Councilman Monahan-I am for upgrading the position, having
her on call and I am on the fence as of this moment about the gun I want to do a little bit more research.
Supervisor Brandt-My feeling is keep the Queensbury Vehicle in Queensbury, when she gets to the vehicle
where ever we keep it, I cannot see taking it to Gansevoort. Councilman Caimano-No, I cannot either. Mr.
Martin-My last thing is a pager, given the weekend availability. Supervisor Brandt-I do not have any
problem with that either. Board agreed. Councilman Monahan-Questioned backup on weekends... Mr.
Martin-she has second and third backups even on weekends... Supervisor Brandt-Mr. Warner thank you for
your continuing help.
DISCUSSION
QUAKER ROAD 1994 BENEFIT TAX ROLL
Mr. Mike Shaw-The Town Board needs to file a benefit tax roll by September 15th. (passed out formula's
to the Town Board) Changes: Commercial Building-Now Commercial property with a building gets billed
on its acreage and its water usage, the base for the water usage is 240 gallons a day, three points, there has
been some complaints that the base of 240 is too high what I have done is backed it back off using the same
ratio of 3 points for 240 gallons to 2 points to 160 gallons. The other adjustment is vacant residential land,
we have heard some complaints about vacant residential land, I have backed that off from 1 point per acre
to 3/4 of a point per acre. What I have done here in this whole formula in all these classes, one problem
that we have had when first started this out is that residential property is paying much more than a
commercial property and it is generally felt by the Town Board that they thought a commercial property
ought to pay more than a residential property. So, in doing that I had to build in some formula that would
basically have every commercial property paying at least more than a residential property.
Councilman Monahan-But if they are using no water at all...
Mr. Shaw-But for a commercial occupied business they are using water.
Councilman Monahan-No this one isn't because the water hooked to another business and that business is
paying it on, so it is double charged.
Mr. Shaw-I know the property you are talking about, the way this is set we do not know what that property
uses.
Councilman Monahan-When you are using zero I find it a very poignant form of taxation when you tell me
I am using something.
Mr. Shaw-Each commercial parcel occupied has to pay their water rate...
Councilman Goetz-Is that the only instance in town where that exists?
Mr. Shaw-you are talking about one meter, in the sewer district that is right.
Councilman Goetz-Is there a mechanism for a variance procedure for something so unusual?
Mr. Shaw-There is currently nothing in the sewer law now.
Attorney Dusek-The only thing that is available to you, if there was a special class that you wanted to
establish that may be the answer. Mike has tried to address it in terms of a water consumption formula
which is one way to address it another way maybe is to establish some all together different class in your
roll.
Councilman Goetz-On your proposal for the vacant residential per acre, what is the monitoring that would
go on should it changed to developed?
Mr. Shaw-Once a piece of property is developed proper changes are done once a year through the County
tax roll.
Councilman Monahan-Why couldn't that happen thorough a building permit, because if you build where
there is sewer you have to hook up.
Mr. Shaw-This roll is adopted in October, once it is the classes cannot be changed...
Councilman Monahan-You do not bring anybody on in the middle of the year?
Mr. Shaw-We bring people on but they do not pay on the bond until the next year. Back to the water
usage, what I did was backed that off to 160 per day 2 points...reviewed comparisons with the board of
different properties...Noted it Route 9 Ext. comes on board it will have a positive effect...
Supervisor Brandt -questioned the commercial I, II and III.
Mr. Shaw-Commercial I - Small Business Commercial II is a restaurant Commercial III largest user.
Residents is also in there too...
Councilman Monahan-How many parcels are near the commercial III?
Mr. Shaw-They are by far the highest...80's....when you back down water usage to a zero factor or any
lower than 160 for 2 points what in effect you are going to have commercial properties out there paying
less than the residential.
Supervisor Brandt-For one case I would like to address that on a sperate basis, the only question in my
mind how many other people that we do not know about have these combination water meters.
Mr. Shaw-Within the sewer district there is nobody else.
Councilman Tucker-Asked that the special case be explained...
Ms. Wendy Savale-The piece of property that I own is a small part of what used to be a large plot. When
the property was split up we had an agreement with the owners of the other part that they would continue to
allow us to get water from the house, in exchange he uses my parking lot. It has worked well, all we have
is a toilet there is only one person that works in the building. When the sewer went through somebody
decided that we should not get our septic free so I came to the town and we talked about it and they arrived
at a figure of $140.00 annually they decided I used about 15 gallons of water a day I agreed to it that figure
lasted one year the next year Mr. Shaw came up with a new scale and said that from now on I should pay
$550.00 per year. I have a problem with that.
Councilman Goetz-I do not want this blamed on Mike Shaw I think it was a Town Board decision,
questioned that with some of the proposals it would deducted down in the range of $370.
Mr. Shaw-Commercial, I would, Wendy Savale, I put it in there for that reason.
Supervisor Brandt-I have no problem with the arrangement where she is paying the same as a home, I do
not think you can justify paying less than a home, I think there is a problem in the whole district, no
question, it is way too expensive I think it is you have to be equatable and I think it is a very special case
and if we handle it that way no problem with it.
Ms. Savale-What rate would that be?
Supervisor Brandt-Anywhere from $377 depending on what we do here to as low as $370 or $367 it is in
that range...
Ms. Savale-What happened to the $140. figure that the Town gave me two years ago?
Councilman Tucker-Who in the Town gave it to you.
Ms. Savale- The Attorneys office and the Clerk.
Attorney Dusek-I do not recall being involved in a formula.
Ms. Savale-I do not know who the Clerk spoke to when I came in she disappeared out of her office and
went into the Attorneys Office and came back out and said you are absolutely right we cannot bill you this
much because your not using anything and Dr. Wasserman is already paying for it all anyway, therefore
you arrived at a nominal figure or whoever she spoke to, arrived at a figure that they felt was fair
considering we only used between 10-15 gallons of water a day, I think 160 gallons a day is a little high in
my case.
Councilman Goetz-It sounds like we are willing to address your special problems.
Councilman Monahan-What she is saying Dr. Wasserman is already paying for it and she is paying for the
very same gallon of water.
Supervisor Brandt -She has a toilet, she is flushing it she is getting a benefit, basically this is a benefit roll
where if you are hooked in you are getting the benefit of being able to flush a toilet and have it go into the
system, whether you have 12 or 2 people in the family or one person...
Councilman Monahan-If she is going to pay it you ought to deduct that Dr. Wasserman because he is also
paying it that is the problem here, we have two people paying on the same gallon of water and that is a
problem.
Supervisor Brandt-In effect what you are saying when you have minimum gallons here there is a lot of
people that don't use that much water and they are charged that much.
Ms. Savale-Why can't we put a lower scale, from zero to fifty then from fifty to one hundred and sixty.
Supervisor Brandt-Rather than make an over all law for the whole district which gets extremely
complicated I think try and handle this on a one case basis and from my view point I think it has got to
come in at about the same as now which is the lowest rate we have that may not be the best but I do not
think we have a right to ask other people to subsidize your operation and it is too bad, we have got a
problem. When you expand the district the costs come down for everybody. It means basically some re-
zoning of the community forcing more growth in that area to get the costs down.
Ms. Savale-Don't you feel it would be more fair to charge a person by their actual usage.
Supervisor Brandt-I do not think anythings totally fair we have went through this whole thing, we had
many hearings you hear all sides and the guy that is paying $100,000 for sewer certainly doesn't feel it is
fair.
Councilman Caimano-My understanding is somewhat different, two people are paying for the same gallon
of water, that makes it a totally different problem.
Mr. Shaw-If those two parcels had separate water meters they currently would be paying the same bills. In
the sewer O&M charge zero to fifty thousand gallons is fifty dollars per residence there is a lot of people
out there that hardly use even fifty gallons residents paying the fifty dollar charge. In your current water
rates you have a rate of $12.00 per quarter for the first seventeen thousand gallons there are a lot of people
out there using no water, vacant house is charged $12.00.
Councilman Monahan-That is a long ways from $384.00
Supervisor Brandt-The water usage is a small component in that total $370.
Attorney Dusek-Ms. Savale does not have a separate a meter on her property, if she did then we would not
be debating this issue because you would clearly see that, that is one parcel this is another parcel they are
both getting water, what has happened she is getting water through another parcel but it does not make her
usage of the water any different than it would be had they had two meters, she is actually getting a break on
whatever the water is right now. That is all that is missing here is a meter.
Supervisor Brandt-To inflict on here the cost of putting in a new tap and a new metering system I do not
that is the answer either.
Ms. Savale-Then you would charge me for 240 gallons a day when I was still only using 15 gallons a
day..the scale is too high.
Mr. Shaw-If you lower the scale you are going to run into the same problem, the commercial property will
be paying less than a residence, this is why this was built in to make the commercial properties pay more
than a residence.
Ms. Savale-Ifyou own a home that has two bathrooms and a dishwasher and a washing machine and a
swimming pool and a jacuzzi and live in it all day long and I only have a toilet that get flushed twice or
three times a day you should be paying more than me.
Supervisor Brandt-It is hard to set that up in law. You may be right but to adjust the whole law I do not
know how to do that, we put an enormous amount of effort in putting this law together and I think it is a
fairly good law, probably you are the one situation where it is not equitable, but to change the whole law
for that would make enormous complications I think. What we got to do is to try and solve your problem
and as far as I am concerned I stated where I think we ought to be.
Ms. Savale- The problem is if we do not resolve it he is going to put me on the role and I am going to be
locked into it for another year like what happened last year.
Supervisor Brandt-Next week we have got to set it.
Mr. Shaw-That is why I brought this forth to try and bring some of these things out so there is time enough
for the Town Board to think and possibly generate different ideas.
Supervisor Brandt-But we said already lets treat this as a special case, we will re-examine it without trying
to alter the whole law and do it like Paul Dusek is suggesting, make an adjustment for your parcel I think
we have all week to look at it and discuss it and see what the ramifications are and put it together.
ATTORNEY MATTERS
Attorney Dusek-There was a discussion concerning the Service A wards program for the Ambulance
Workers, I have been working on the necessary local laws the biggest issue at this point is that we need the
services of Ed Holohan, he did the work on the original service plan....Councilman Monahan-questioned if
someone serves on both the fire service and rescue squads are they going to qualify for both programs?
Attorney Dusek-It looks like it would be either or, however that can be addressed in the local law.
RESOLUTION REGARDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN MR. ED HOLOHAN AND TOWN OF
QUEENSBURY
RESOLUTION NO. 503, 93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker
RESOLVED, that the Town Attorney is hereby authorized to contact Ed Holohan and if Mr. Holohan is
available to provide services enter into an agreement with Mr. Holohan for the provisions of services in
connection with the ambulance service awards workup necessary for the proposition to be on the ballot in
November and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes an expenditure of funds not to exceed $3,000. and to be paid
for from the general contingency account.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
OPEN FORUM
Councilman Tucker-Reval: I have been getting complaints about School Taxes everybody is being hit,
Queensbury's share of the library fund is going up quite a bit and I think the reval is to blame for that too.
Councilman Monahan-No it is the way the budget has gone.
Mr. Fred Champagne-Sunnyside No. - Concerns about the Dept. of Public Works...It is my belief as a
resident of Queensbury area I would not feel qualified to either be in favor or disfavor of this law given a
public hearing with the next two or three or four weeks. I have a real problem, a problem with the concept
without having competed number one the problem. I have no where to identify what is the seriousness of
the problem. Sue, you indicated from your resources that you are aware of a number of people that have
concerns over the delivery of services that are being made in the community. I am here to tell you tonight
that over 1800 homes that I visited in the last two months I have yet to hear very many complaints about
the services that are now being provided by Queensbury.
Councilman Goetz-When did I say that?
Mr. Champagne-Earlier in the discussion you mentioned that you had, well we would have to go back, if
my memory is correct you said something to the effect that you have heard over the course of your time
being involved that there has been a number of people asking for some streamlining was the word you
used.
Councilman Goetz-No, you miss understood me, but I will let you finish and then I will answer you.
Mr. Champagne-Anyway, during these past two months I do not really believe that the public out there has
the major concern perhaps that we have here at this Board I get the feeling that we are in the business of
making change or change sake, what is the real honest to goodness problem that we have identified clarify
that for us. When we come to a public meeting lets not just be looking at paper work that spells out
incidentals kind of things that are going to happen as a result of this change, I think the important thing to
me is why. For what purpose is this change being made, there may be that I am not aware of. So
essentially I guess is to clarify the problem so that the man on the street and I have been following
government here for the last six or seven months and believe me after reading the paper I still have a
problem in fully understanding what your purpose is and I guess I have a bigger problem in terms of what
are the out comes. I would like you to tell me before I can again take a position on this paper. I think
there are a lot of good things in there, don't get me wrong, I think there are some real merit. However, we
have got some real problems in terms of how do we get to where we want to go. I think Pliney made a
statement earlier regarding the Clinton effort along with Al Gore in trying to revolutionize the government
and I applaud that, however I think what you are going to find is that the method used and the processes
applied to the job will be from top down support from the bottom up concerns. In otherwords this Clinton
the organization itself the administration will be working with the people who are part of the problem and
evidently they are part of the problem. I do not know Mike maybe you have met with those people out
there maybe those employees that had more input than the message than what I am getting. If that is the
case so be it but from what my understanding is that we need to hear a little bit more about where they are
coming from. Keep one thing in mind that these people will still be working for us and with us after this
revolution takes place. So lets identify the problem, Case Scenario Number 1. Two what effect or to what
extent will the employee be involved in this total process? Lets get them now on the line and lets hear from
them. Is this job satisfaction that we are looking for are we in the process of making some changes that
will do harm to the organization? If we are talking about job satisfaction if we are talking about total
quality government services then lets not cause people to be anymore upset than what they are here in this
Town Hall today. You have got to fill in the voids, there are just too many gaps in this plan and until you
do that again I will say it I am not ready to take a position on this plan. It may be the best plan in town but
I need to see precisely the concept taken in final detail so that we all have an understanding. Too much
information lacking, and lastly and I think most importantly in my mind lets plug some dollars into this
plan. I cannot talk whether this is a valuable move or not so valuable move, I think the important thing is
lets look at the real savings and perhaps there are some in there, but lets get the dollars applied to it and
then I think we can all better serve you and the board and make this a realistic approach to getting the job
done.
Councilman Goetz-I did not, I do not believe I made any comment about what I heard from the public,
maybe I did not describe what I meant the right way. Since I have been on the Board within the Board I
have heard the talk of going toward this effort.
Mr. Champagne-I think it is a wise effort I think we need to look hard at the process. I think the process is
critical.
Supervisor Brandt -Fred, as far as financial information thats the job we have and we will certainly develop
that, that is a responsibility we have by the 20th of this month a budget I have to bring out a budget it will
include this. That will be public information. It has to be part of it, it will be.
Mr. Champagne-Mike what I am asking for is before the public hearing, pre-public hearing lets put the
dollars in place and budget for this plan so that we as voters can offer you our best advise based on what we
see in terms of dollars. I mean it looks to me like we are adding another layer of bureaucracy in there.
Supervisor Brandt-I do not think you will find that when it is all said and done. I think you will find, we
are not doing it to raise the cost of government so lets look at it when we get it all out and stay cool until it
happens.
Mr. Champagne-It is not a question of staying cool it is a question Mike of getting the details out on the
table so that all understand where you are going with this, it is a simple statement. I just want to look at the
cost savings.
Mr. Boehm-Since you are in the budget process and since this plan is somewhat iffy, does that mean that
you are really preparing two budgets?
Supervisor Brandt-I am not. I am preparing one budget that is tough enough. I proposed this in the last
budget and backed off on it because the Town Board did not want to wrestle with a problem a year ago we
had an enormous amount of cuts to make and the Board really did not want to wrestle with both issues at
the same time and we pulled that budget way down, now if we want to find more economies we have got to
do something different and that is what I am proposing I am going to propose a budget. It does not have to
be adopted. The Town Board can remake the budget anyway they want to I am going to propose a budget
and that's my job that is what the people hire me to do by law that is what I am suppose to do and I am
going to do it.
Mr. Boehm-I am just confused it seems like you are getting double work. Because really to come up with
whether or not you have savings or not you need to have both budgets.
Supervisor Brandt-We have a budget in place and the departments have all basically said well take my last
budget and add 5% to the union contract and da-da-da-da with some minor things, it is not very magical
and when you look at it and say ok how can we really change the delivery system to get better economy
then you got to look at re-organization and major concepts and this is a concept.
Mr. Boehm-So really you do have two budgets.
Supervisor Brandt -Well yea, you really do, you do the existing budget and the requests by all the
departments so that's a, I do not remember what it is called under the law but it has a name and then there
will be my, the requested budget is what I think it is and then my budget will be the next one.
Mr. John Salvadore-Re: Utilities Dept. I have two concerns one of them was addressed by both of the
gentlemen that spoke previously. The only way I can decide is that it is going to have some cost savings,
otherwise it is just building bureaucracy, we just do not need that. Be prepared to have a comparison not
just one alternative I want to look at if we don't approve the utilities program.
Supervisor Brandt -You have got that right now.
Mr. Salvadore-What will that approach cost us next year? Not what it has cost us this year. The
comparison is what will each of the two alternatives cost us in the ensuing year.
Councilman Monahan-Brought into 1994 dollars.
Supervisor Brandt-That is already part of the document.
Mr. Salvadore-The one issue that has not been talked about at length, I am very concerned that these
districts we have bear the full burden of the cost they incur, whether it is two hours of an attorneys time or
four hours of somebody elses time or a contract I want to make sure that the Town general fund is not being
raided to support these districts out there. I do not care if it is legal or what you do but we will fight hard
that the user bears the full cost the full burden of what he is getting and you do not hit somebody else for it
thorough the general fund.
Supervisor Brandt-I think we have been pretty good about that.
Mr. Salvadore-We want to make sure that not a penny, and if we have costs...
Supervisor Brandt-John, if you want to get ridiculous we all get paid and when we administer all of these
nobody allocates my pay to these various districts or these guys pay
Mr. Salvadore-Why not.
Supervisor Brandt-Because they don't. Do you want me to rewrite Town Law I am not interested in doing
it, I am going to run it the best that I know how if that does not satisfy it go to court.
Mr. Salvadore-Maybe there is a way to allocate, just because the law says you don't have to doesn't mean
you can't.
Supervisor Brandt-We can and I think that is going to be part of the Department of Public Utilities, there is
a lot of accounting in that. Accounting is relatively simple today we have already got the systems, we have
got the computers...
Mr. Salvadore-Discussion on Dog Control Officer and Animal Control Officer. It seems to me we got into
this discussion and the proposal from Mr. Martin and simply because we have an impending rabies
epidemic is that true?
Mr. James Martin-No. Irregardless of rabies or not I would like Animal Control capabilities. The thing
that made the difference in my mind was to whether there should be a weapon carried or not.
Mr. Salvadore-It is my understanding that in the event the services of Animal Control, wild or otherwise
are required I call the Sheriff. On duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week he has a vehicle, he has
everything he needs to do the job and I am paying for it through this town. Why do we have to go through
what we are talking about, uniforms, cars, response, communications, training we got it all, just because we
have a potential of an epidemic in the Town?
Mr. Martin-The Sheriff will respond but he does not know...
Supervisor Brandt-But the Sheriff then calls an Animal Control Officer...
Mr. Salvadore-It has never happened in my case. The Sheriff doesn't need anyone the Sheriff is armed and
can do the job, I call the Sheriff before I call the DEC, the DEC I know won't do anything for me.
Supervisor Brandt-Maybe we don't need an animal control officer at all as long as we got the Sheriffs
Dept.
Mr. Salvadore-That is something that we should consider. What kind of a reduction do we get on our taxes
that we pay in our contract fee that we pay the Sheriffs Dept. for these services?
Mr. Martin-I will have a report to you next week on what those differences are, because there are limited
instances where a Sheriff can act and respond.
Mr. Salvadore-If there are limited instances we don't have cover because you do not have the capability the
DEC does not do it and now you are telling me the Sheriff can't.
Mr. Martin-I also believe it is just not a matter of whether or not you have and what is the quality of that
service supply. DEC has limited resources the environmental conservation officers have been cut back for
the last decade.
Mr. Salvadore-It is all falling onto the Sheriff, and this town is relying on the Sheriff to do it.
Supervisor Brandt-We have had dog control officer since I have been here...
Councilman Caimano- The interesting thing is that the arming thing, just to make kind of a funny, ironic
funny point, you are taking about quality of service if in fact you are going to tranquilize the animal and
take care of it than the quality of service becomes important. If in fact you are going to shoot somebody in
the head with a bullet it is hardly worth while to have a background in animal husbandry.
Supervisor Brandt-Well, you do not shoot them in the head that this the key because then you cannot find
out if they got rabies, you are going to kill you are going to disable the animal you are going to kill the
animal but the way you do it is very important. If you screw up the evidence then you are going to subject
your citizens to going through this whole shot series and I think that you ought to do your best to prevent
that.
Councilman Caimano-So what we are saying is that they have to be marksmen and they have to know what
they are doing.
Supervisor Brandt -Or they shoot the right kind of a weapon and they know where they are shooting it so
they do not destroy the brain of the animal.
Mr. Salvadore-Sheriffs Deputies don't get on the payroll without having those qualifications, they are
trained they know their responsibilities they wear a badge...
Supervisor Brandt-The Sheriff would have to address that, I do not know.
Councilman Tucker-Mr. Martin said he would have the answers to this...
Discussion held on Sheriff Contract... Supervisor Brandt-Every Town in this County has Sheriff protection
including this Town, under State Law the Sheriff has to provide police protection...
Councilman Tucker-That is why we are getting out of the contract for $50,000 per year... Mr. Salvadore-If
they have a responsibility that comes out of another tax treasury to supply us those services you should not
be obligated to pay one penny. Supervisor Brandt-...from now you won't.
Mr. Salvadore-RE: Dunhams Bay Road...we do not have road signs...what is the status.
Supervisor Brandt-We asked for it to be surveyed...
Attorney Dusek-Noted that the surveyor was there and Paul Naylor was there my understanding is a map
should be out almost any day...
Mr. Lewis Stone-I want to go on record as saying that there is no such thing as bad idea, every idea has
some merit and ideas can come from anywhere. The Town Board should not be afraid to take an idea
whether it is a bad idea or a good idea call this public utilities department and expose it to people who
could make it a better idea, namely the public. There is no harm in going before the public once, twice, two
or three times in building a better law. Don't be afraid to do it.
Councilman Monahan-I agree with you but my problem is a public hearing is an official type of thing I
think we should have information hearing and dialogue like we have during open forum on this and then
put it together in good shape.
I would like to ask one question, there was an article in the paper that concerned me. I thought the paper
made a mistake until a read this letter from Mayor O'Keefe, it said in exchange for sharing costs, we are
talking about the landfill, Queensbury would have waived $70,000 in administrative charges to the City for
1992 and 93. Instead of owing $70,000 at the present time the City would only owe $6,000 O'Keefe said.
Now the way this reads this was a town board decision I would just like to go on record that I knew nothing
about this, that you were re-negotiating the contract, I knew, nothing about that they were going to get
money back that they already owe us. To me this is the taxpayers money and we have no right to say to
them you do not have to pay a bill that you already owe us and I just want to go on record that I knew
nothing about this until I read this in the paper.
Supervisor Brandt-Of course then it can't be true can it because only the Town Board can make agreements
to represent the Town and no matter what is in the newspaper the fact is that only the Town Board can do
it. I do not know the point of your comment, I do not write the newspaper.
Councilman Monahan-Mayor O'Keefe in his report and I would have wondered about the newspaper until I
read the letter from Mayor O'Keefe which said Mike Brandt has agreed to waive the administrative fee of
$35,000 for 1992.
Supervisor Brandt-Mike Brandt can not do that can he.
Councilman Monahan-No he can't.
Supervisor Brandt-Mike Brandt can negotiate with another entity to try and make an agreement and that is
what I entered into I proposed certain things and I can only propose them for him to look at then if he and
their board like them then we have to look at them and see if we like them and if either group doesn't like
them then it does not happen does it. Come on we are not in first grade we all been through it.
Councilman Monahan-I am just surprised that you would go and offer to waive something like that if that is
what you did.
Supervisor Brandt-I am going to offer a total package as I think is fair what the other side was if you want
to look at it was that they would pick up fifty percent of the liability of the landfill, the liability that you
guys gave away Betty, and said that they do not have to pay for it.
Councilman Monahan-I never gave that away and ...
Supervisor Brandt-The fact is that I made a proposal the proposal was that they we would waive those fees
but they would take 50% of the liability of the operation and the closure of that landfill and from my view
point I had no problem bring that forth to the public and to the board in trying to sell it because I think it
would have been a good deal for us and them and I think it would have been a responsible answer so if you
want to pick one part of it apart take it in total.
Councilman Monahan-Well I have always maintained Mike that they had a responsibility with us for
closing the landfill.
Supervisor Brandt-How did you vote, or how did we come into this contract where they got out of it?
Councilman Monahan-If you remember there was some concern when some language was added to that
contract.
Supervisor Brandt --You were there tell us about it.
Councilman Monahan-I can't tell you about it...
Supervisor Brandt-The Board never talked about it?
Councilman Monahan-I am saying to you that we had discussed, when some language was added to that
contract because it was with the different typewriter.
Supervisor Brandt -You were there, when was it added.
Councilman Monahan-I was not there when anybody added anything.
Supervisor Brandt-It was written and it got signed by the, how did you allow the Supervisor to sign a
contract?
Councilman Monahan-My first knowledge of anybody telling Glens Falls they did not have a responsibility
to close that landfill was when I read that also in the Post Star and I also called the Supervisor to account
for that. Now, that was his opinion.
Supervisor Brandt-In a public record did you bring that out and try and prevent that contract from going
ahead.
Councilman Monahan-All I can tell you that contract was looked at and you know it was looked at...
Supervisor Brandt-In this administration it was looked at.
Councilman Monahan-And you know that there were some flaws and it looked at because some of us
raised some of those questions.
I still say Paul, I do not know if we have a legal right to waive something that is already owed by another
community and that is my question right there.
Attorney Dusek-In terms of a contact if you enter into a new contract I think you have quite a bit of
flexibility but ...
Councilman Monahan-You have a bill out there owing from 1992 that has not been paid.
Attorney Dusek-When you enter into a contract your consideration can be whatever terms you want, you
cannot just forgive it. At this point we just couldn't let it go.
Councilman Monahan-That is what I am talking about.
Councilman Tucker-No one party setting on this board can do that.
Attorney Dusek-You would have to have Town Board approval.
Councilman Tucker-I can walk down to the Mayor of the City of Glens Falls and say I am going to give
you half of Queensbury.
Councilman Monahan-I guess my problem was that you picked up the consensus in the article that the
Town Board had done this.
Supervisor Brandt-I did not write the article Betty, I do not publish the paper.
Councilman Caimano- Y ou received and gave us a copy of a letter from the New York State Commission
on Cable Television we have to choose on option as to what we are going to do when are we going to
discuss that?
Supervisor Brandt-Any time you want to.
I do not want to get into regulating Cable Television in Queensbury.
Councilman Caimano-I do not want to regulating it except when you read this letter you find that actually
the FCC is going to set the rates and it is a matter of who oversees it, the State or some outside expert that
we hire or us.
Councilman Monahan-Reviewed the old system where the Town approved the rates...
Councilman Caimano- The question is there is the possibility of the our citizens getting whipped sawed and
do we want the State to represent us or do we want to represent ourselves?
Attorney Dusek-Passed on some affidavits to the Town Board on a Bond Issue that need to be signed.
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION
RESOLUTION NO. 504.93
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session on
two matters of Litigation and one matter of laborlpersonnel.
Duly adopted this 7th day of September, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr.
Brandt
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
On motion the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Miss Darleen M. Dougher
Town Clerk-Queensbury