Loading...
1993-12-27 TOWN BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 27,1993 7:00 P.M. MTG # 92 RES NO. 772-789 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT MICHEL BRANDT -SUPERVISOR BETTY MONAHAN-COUNCILMAN SUSAN GOETZ-COUNCILMAN PLINEY TUCKER-COUNCILMAN BOARD MEMBER ABSENT NICK CAIMANO TOWN ATTORNEY PAUL DUSEK TOWN OFFICIALS JIM MARTIN, MIKE SHAW, PAUL NAYLOR PRESS: GF Post Star, Moreau Sun PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN MONAHAN Supervisor Brandt called meeting to order ... first item on the agenda is a public hearing on Hudson Pointe. PUBLIC HEARING - HUDSON POINTE NOTICE SHOWN 7:00 P.M. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -It's been advertised properly? TOWN CLERK DOUGHER-Yes. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Okay, so, I'm going to declare it open. If you want to make a presentation, please start. ATTORNEY MICHAEL O'CONNOR-Mr. Brandt, I'm Mike O'Connor from the firm Little and O'Connor. We have filed the FEIS and I would let that document stand on it's own merits for the amendments that have been made to the project. We think they are improvements. They are a real strong attempt by the owner of the project, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, to meet the concerns that have been raised by Board Members, by citizens and by everyone whose looked at the project. I would be glad to hear what the public has to say in this forum as to the amendments that we have made. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim, will there be a new Part I done for that? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JIM MARTIN-I don't know that there will be, I don't think so. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I thought we had discussed that, that night in your office Mike, that you would do a new Part I. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-I left to Saratoga Associates the completion of the FEIS. I know we talked about it. I don't know what purpose it would serve at this point. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Well, I think just to pull it down to the present scope of the plan. You know, just to clean it up a little bit, that's what I would think. I mean, I think the new plan is great, I have no problem with it but I just thought that ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-I think the FEIS narrative does bring the scope down to what is proposed. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That and your finding statement. ATTORNEY DUSEK-Betty, did you question, do we need to do a new Part lEAF? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I just wondered if we were going to because I think it pulls the scope, you know, what we're talking and it makes it a little easier for people to comprehend. ATTORNEY DUSEK-The first EAF document that you did when you go through COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-No, I'm talking about the, you know, just the questions of the size of it and etcetera. ATTORNEY DUSEK-Right, those were the working documents through the process. The only documents that are going to matter in the end as far as the environmental review is concerned, is your final findings and the final EIS together with the DEIS but it's as modified by the FEIS. So, when somebody looks at the environmental review, they're looking at those tale end documents. They won't be looking at the first, you know, Part I that you did because that was a working document to get you started, like the scoping session was and everything else. So, I think you're, if your concerns are as to the environmental completion part of it, my opinion is that I think you're all right. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Okay, this is a public hearing. So, anyone from the public that would like to comment, now is the time. Come on right up and give us your input. MR. STERLING AIKENS-Sterling Aikens, I live on the Corinth Road. I think the plan has improved greatly from what it was and I have just a couple of concerns in it. The first one is, and they may have changed it since we talked about it before but where they're talking about putting a day care center, I think that's probably the worst spot that they could put it, being as close as it is to the power house and the open canal. It's within about four hundred feet of each one of them, I believe, it might be a little bit more then that. If a child should get away from the day care center, it could get in alot of trouble in a hurry right down there. The other thing is that it directs, as I understand it's for the public use and it directs traffic through the whole development to get to it, where it is. The other thing is, on the third acre lots, I don't know what the ruling will be from the Health Department but septic tanks on a third acre lot, they're going to be pushing that area to put that many septic tanks in that area and that's my only concerns on it. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Okay. Anyone else that would like to speak? MS. ANNIE RUCHALSKI-I'm Annie Ruchalski and I've been to most of the meetings and I just want to say that I'm very pleased with the compromise that has been made here. I think that most of the residents didn't want to see anything there and of course, Saratoga Associates wanted to see quite a large development and I think we've come to a pretty nice compromise. And I think the only comments that I have is that I just hope through the building of this project, that everyone just stays aware of the environmental concerns and not let anything fall through the cracks and that we'll be watching and making sure and hoping that everything is done properly, because I think that it will be a nice, not subdivision, nice SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Development. MS. RUCHALSKI -Thank you, a nice development when it's done and I just hope that, that point area is protected and that the third party that we've been talking about, wondering who it's going to be, that is chosen appropriately and is a good party to watch over that land and make sure that it stays as nice as it is. So, thanks for the compromise. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -It's the applicant that made the compromise. Anyone else? I can't imagine this short of a public hearing on Hudson Pointe. TOWN CLERK DOUGHER-Mike, I have one letter. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Go ahead, please read it. TOWN CLERK DOUGHER-This is from Joan Robertson, Southern Adirondack Audobon Society. Due to the unavailable circumstances, I am unable to attend the Hudson Pointe hearing scheduled for December 27th, 1993. I would like to state however, that we as a group are pleased with the efforts made by the developers to act upon the suggestions made by the public in the reference to density, critical environmental impacts, protection of a fragile ecosystem. The most recent plan reviewed on December 16th, seems to meet the criteria set forth in the public hearings and general discussions over the past several months. We appreciate the opportunity to be heard and to present positive comments toward a solution that will enhance the area and benefit the town. Thank you. Joan A. Robertson, Director, Southern Adirondack Audobon Society. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Okay, last call for any comments on the Hudson Pointe project. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I just have some questions for Paul when the public gets done talking. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Okay, well let the COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I have a question SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Go ahead, if it's part of the, do you want it on the public hearing? COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Yea. The easements on the, what is it, ninety plus acres in the development itself, what was the final decision on whose going to handle those, the easements? Has there been one made or will that happen in ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-No, we will, as part of the process, approval process consult with the Town Board and subject to Town Board approval, designate a third party to whom we would convey that property to. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Okay, thank you. MR. TIM BREWER-That will be brought to the Town Board? COUNCILMAN TUCKER-That's what he said. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-That's what he said, yea. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-We understand that's how the Town Board wishes to make it's approval. MR. BREWER-Can I ask one question about that then? When that, when that entity is brought to the Town Board, is it possible that people could be aware of who it is? Just so we know, for our own information. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-I can't speak for the next Town Board but I would be surprised if they wouldn't let you know. MR. BREWER-I would ask that for a comment to be put on the record. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Okay. Any other comments? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Paul, I'm assuming that, this is one of my questions that Pliney had, that during the findings, we will tie up that conservation easement so that, that doesn't get away from us? ATTORNEY DUSEK-Yes, you have two major steps yet to come. One is the findings, the other one is the actual legislation. In both instances, there will have to be some sort of an addressing of that issue and also, typically, we have used a contract form if you'll recall with some of the other PUDs. So, I'll be exploring all three of those avenues, to tying the thing down and making sure that the conditions and contingencies are all met. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-And I also remember that we had a letter from an attorney talking about the rubbish that was on that land that's coming to the town in the conservation easement, so I'm assuming we'll address that and have that cleaned up and etcetera and so on. ATTORNEY DUSEK-We'll address it, I don't know what the outcome will be yet but yes. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Yea, but I mean, you know we've got a few things like that, that we really need to look at which we can do during the findings procedure, right? ATTORNEY DUSEK-Sure, yes. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Anyone else that want's to comment on the Hudson Pointe Development? Okay, then I'm going to declare the public hearing closed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Supervisor Brandt-Does this Board want to do anything? I think, appropriately it's the next Board that will see the approvals through. Attorney Dusek-You're correct Mike, because we're in that ten day window period under SEQRA which prevents you from taking action in any event. So, until that's exhausted which I believe, my calculations show the 30th or 31st of December, and then after that, the next steps can occur. PUBLIC HEARING - LOCAL LAW - TAXATION NOTICE SHOWN 7:10 P.M. ATTORNEY DUSEK-This is that business tax exemption law we talked about at the earlier meeting which right now, it doesn't, the underlining statutory authorities that used to exist for this law have both been removed. And there's a question in my mind, if you'll recall as to whether or not this really can serve any purpose at all in it's present form and because I'm concerned about leaving something in your books that could cause a problem in the future, especially when nobody knows what it really does or what it's all about, my advice to you is, it's better to get it off the books because you can always pass a new local law. I mean if you have authority, you can always reenact it. If you don't have authority, then it's better to get it off the books. The only other comment I would make on this is that there is a grandfathering clause put in here so that if there is anything out there that we don't know, where rights have accrued, they won't be destroyed by this move. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-For the public's benefit, would you describe what this local law, that we're proposing to do away with, accomplish. What did it do? ATTORNEY DUSEK-Under the commerce law of the State of New York and also under real property tax law, there used to be this business tax exemption they called it which basically provided an exemption of certain years and percentages for businesses who were able to be eligible for it and it was tied into a work force program that you had to have tied in with the State Government as far as meeting certain qualifications and criteria. So, it's a very unique type of tax exemption. I don't know if anybody in town is currently getting it, off the top of my head, I wasn't sure but like I say, there's a grandfathering clause to protect them if they are getting it. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Okay, so it's been properly advertised and I'll open the public hearing on changing this local law. Is there anyone here that would like to speak to us at this time on doing away with this old law? Okay, I'll close the public hearing on it. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW NUMBER 17,1993 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY CHAPTER 155 THEREOF, ENTITLED, "TAXATION," BY DELETING AND REPEALING ARTICLE II, ENTITLED, "BUSINESS FACILITIES TAX EXEMPTION," AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, §155-4 AND §155-5 THEREOF. RESOLUTION NO. 772, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury Chapter 155 thereof, entitled, "Taxation," by deleting and repealing Article II, entitled, "Business Facilities Tax Exemption," and more specifically, § 155-4 and § 155- 5 thereof, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board at the time the Resolution was adopted which set a date and time for a public hearing, and WHEREAS, on December 27, 1993, a public hearing with regard to this Local Law was duly conducted, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 155 thereof, entitled, "Taxation," to be known as Local Law Number 17, 1993, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Law presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to file the said Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and that said Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano LOCAL LAW NO. 17,1993 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, CHAPTER 155 THEREOF, ENTITLED, "TAXATION" BY DELETING AND REPEALING §155-4 AND §155-5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The Code of the Town of Queensbury is hereby amended by deleting and repealing Article II, entitled, "Business Facilities Tax Exemption" and more specifically, § 155-4 and § 155- 5 thereof. SECTION II. Effect of Deletion and Repeal. Notwithstanding Section I of this Local Law, the provisions of Article II entitled, "Business Facilities Tax Exemption," of Chapter 155 and more specifically set forth in §155-4 and §155-5 shall continue in effect as if the provisions had not been repealed or deleted for those eligible business facilities, which on the date this law is repealed, are currently receiving the granted exemption as indicated by appropriate notation or entries on the tax assessment rolls for the Town of Queensbury. Nothing contained in this "grandfathering" provision shall be deemed to increase or decrease any scheduled benefits to be received by the affected eligible business facilities under the former business facilities tax exemption clause of Chapter 155 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury. FurtlIer, nothing set forth herein shall be deemed to provide benefits for any previous business that may have been qualified to receive the business facilities tax exemption, but had not so qualified pursuant to the terms of this grandfathering clause prior to the date of the adoption of this Local Law. SECTION III. Effective Date. This Local Law shall become effective immediately upon filing as provided by the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York. PUBLIC HEARING - LOCAL LAW - SEWERS & SEW AGE DISPOSAL NOTICE SHOWN 7:17 P.M. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-The next one is a local law to set our sewer rates and taxes. So, do you want to lead us? WASTEWATER SUPERINTENDENT, MIKE SHAW-Sure. ATTORNEY DUSEK-If! may, just make one comment of course, that one thing that's very important to note here is that this is a sewer rent law setting the sewer rents for the three sewer districts but it does not set and does not affect the capital taxes that accrue in the Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District because they are set by the sewer benefit roll which you did in September. So, this is only 0 and M for that district. For Hiland Park, there is no capital expense at this point, so there just 0 and M on that one. Queensbury Technical Park is the same, that is just an 0 and M. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-This is just a catch-all, isn't it, to catch everything that SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Operation and maintenance costs. ATTORNEY DUSEK-Right and this is something that you readjust every year depending upon what your expenses are and your revenues and then Mike can explain it better then I can from there. MR. SHAW-Okay, as Paul has stated, this local law is to set the rates for 1994 for the 0 and M sanitary sewer districts, Quaker Road Sewer, Technical Park Sewer, Hiland Park Sewer. Basically, what I'll do is I'll go over what the rates were projected for this year, then, if anybody has any questions. Quaker Road Sewer District, first I'll start with that. Basically, the residential rate will remain the same for 94 which now is fifty dollars for the first fifty thousand gallons and two seventy-five for each thousand gallons after that. The commercial rate will change, it will go up to five dollars and ten cents per one thousand gallons of water usage. That's a forty cent raise from last year's four dollars and seventy cents. The Technical Park Sewer District will remain the same, commercial rate, there's only commercial users in that district currently, at two dollars and twenty cents per thousand gallons of water usage. This year on Technical Park Sewer and Hiland Park Sewer, we'll be billing quarterly, based on quarterly water meter readings. Last year it was based on an average water meter reading for the prior year. This year we want to go to the quarter meter readings and that way we use actual usage. For Hiland Park, this year for 94, we're projecting a rate for residential at fifty dollars per the first fifty thousand gallons of water usage and four dollars and fifty cents for each thousand gallons after that. That rate will reflect approximately a dollar fifty less per one thousand gallons of water usage for the resident. Commercial, I'm reflecting a rate this year of thirteen dollars per one thousand gallons of water usage. That is some four dollars and fifty-five cents less then last year's rate. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-It's a public hearing and I declare it open. Is there anyone that wants to comment on sewer rates? Come on right up. MS. BARBARA PALLOZZI-Barbara Pallozzi, Ridge Road, Queensbury. Question. Hiland Park is going down, Queensbury Technical is going down, Central Queensbury Quaker Road is not and since our capital part has been increased this year over and above what you did last year, not by a great deal but by a small amount because of what Mr. Shaw has told me is a decreased usage of water by commercial properties in the district and since I have to pay more for that, I'd sort to like to know why, you know, if Hiland is going down, if Queensbury's going down, why isn't Central Queensbury Quaker Road? SUPERVISOR BRANDT -Mike, do you want to answer that? MR. SHAW-Okay. Queensbury Technical Park is not going down, that's remaining the same. Basically, there hasn't been any change there, there hasn't been any change in what the City's rate currently is and there's no other activity as far as additional users at this time. There is a projected user for 94 but that hasn't been yet set. Hiland Park Sewer District, the basic change in there is some six or seven thousand dollars less in the projected revenues to be raised this year and basically that's a, the six thousand dollar shortfall difference was from prior year of 92. In 93, they had to raise an extra six thousand dollars to pay for a shortfall in revenues. So, basically that's really, the change is only reflecting the additional amounts that doesn't have to be raised in Hiland Park. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-In otherwords, there was a shortfall in the account and so there was, in effect, a surcharge to cover it and that isn't needed this year. MR. SHAW-That's right. As far as what you're seeing in Quaker Road Sewer District, there are some things reflecting in Quaker Road Sewer District, the actual monies in the 0 and M budget have probably decreased but we have some other things passed. Last year we used some sixty thousand dollars from an appropriated fund balance. This year we're only using thirty thousand dollars from appropriated fund balance. The city treatment bill is estimated to be some twenty thousand dollars more this next year. We have additional revenues also from last year that we aren't receiving this year from Hiland Park, some nineteen thousand dollars and what we're seeing is also, I'm projecting some eight million gallons less water usage within the district. But, currently that's billed water usage. Actually, the actual MS. PALLOZZI-Is that water billed water or spilled sewer water usage? MR. SHAW-That eight million gallons is actual billed water, actual water usage at the ... the actual sewer we're pumping to the city is up. MS. PALLOZZI-Is the water usage actually, the actual total amount of water used by the commercial properties in the district decreasing? Or is it because they have extra lines and they have hoses connected to fire hydrants, etcetera for which they are paying no sewer rents on? MR. SHAW-I don't know MS. PALLOZZI-How much water, how much of the water that the commercial properties are using is not going through sewer rents? MR. SHAW -None of it. All of it is metered water... MS. PALLOZZI-I'm not talking about, you're missing the point, okay. I understand if you have a second line or if you've got some other funny connection over there that you have to have a meter on it. But if you have a property using one million gallons of water and five hundred thousand passes through one meter and five hundred thousand passes through, quote, a separate dedicated meter where you don't pay sewer rents because quote, it's not going anywhere. MR. SHAW-They're billed on the five hundred thousand gallons. MS. PALLOZZI-Right. MR. SHAW-That's correct. MS. PALLOZZI-How much of the water usage goes that way? MR. SHAW-Percentage wise? MS. PALLOZZI-Yea. MR. SHAW-What you're asking is, how many dedicated meters were installed MS. PALLOZZI-Well, I would like to know that also but I'd like to know how much of the water usage is not hitting sewer rents? MR. SHAW-All the water usage, okay, if you have a dedicated meter, a dedicated meter is so sets, so it's basically outside water users or a processing in, you know, manufacturing type operations which would not enter the sewers. All water that's metered, that's going through water meters, that's the sewers, is billed as such on ... MS. PALLOZZI-Right, I understand that but you don't know, like, how much is or what the percentage is and how many properties have it? MR. SHAW - I think what you're asking is, you're asking what percentage last year was dedicated meters. I do not know that percentage. That's us going out and reading two meters and trying to compare past prior years ... MS. P ALLOZZI -So, you don't have a record, you're not keeping a record of it? MR. SHAW - We have a record of dedicated meters, yes. I don't know the difference between the dedicated meter and the other, no. MS. P ALLOZZI -Approximately how many properties in the district has these lines? MR. SHAW-Dedicated, they're not lines, they're dedicated meters, it's the same line, the same feed line, just another meter installed and the plumbing as such that it won't take in calculations or outside water users ... MS. P ALLOZZI -Well, I think if you have something connected to a fire hydrant, I don't really think that it's, you know, the line coming into the building. MR. SHA W-Ifthere's somebody connected to a fire hydrant, it's most likely outside water usage and the water department has a way of billing as such and that has no effect on the sewer bill because it's not entering into the sewers. MS. PALLOZZI-But that is something that is not available to every single property owner within the district, correct? MR. SHAW-Dedicated meters? MS. PALLOZZI-Or two lines. MR. SHAW -You're asking a question about the Water Department. I believe if you want to pay to have two separate water taps, you certainly can be water metered ... it's available. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Yea, if you want a dedicated meter for doing your lawn and that's sort of thing, that's available. MR. SHAW-Sure, that's all available and dedicated meters are certainly available. MS. P ALLOZZI -Well, I have a line that the Town of Queensbury turned off at a special meeting that was never publicized, that I was never notified about, that I requested information on concerning it to the point where I even made a Freedom of Information Law Request that the Town of Queensbury ignored and I didn't really get copies of any information until I went to the Executive Director of the Committee on Open Government. It was such a flagrant violation of law on the part of the Town of Queensbury, that a copy of the four page opinion letter that was sent to me, was also served on the Town Board. I will state for the record that it is not this Board. But what I'm saying is, if I have to pay so much and the commercial property's have it, then, you know, I'm entitled to the same. Residential properties are entitled to the same and the only thing I ever asked of the Town of Queensbury and you were quite familiar with this Mr. Shaw, is I asked you to certify the work that you inspected. You and Thomas Flaherty have refused to ever certify the work and I know there's a couple of other funny connections that you've inspected. MR. SHAW-The connection you're talking about, we sent you all the records and we sent our inspection records MS. PALLOZZI-You didn't send all the records and the inspection records show very little ... SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Wait a minute though, we're getting off the path because MS. PALLOZZI-Alright, well, I'm just talking about, you know like ... MR. SHAW-But the dedicated meters are available for residential use and SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Yea, if you wanted a separate meter in your house for outside use, that can be put in but it's at your expense. MS. PALLOZZI-I understand that. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-And it's a matter of, if you use enough water that it's worth doing that, some people are doing that. That's available to anybody. MR. SHAW-That's correct. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-The other issue isn't really relevant to this hearing and I understand, I mean we've heard a little bit about the issue and I'm some what familiar with it but I don't think it's relevant to this public hearing. So, let's stick with what we're talking about which is the operating maintenance cost for the sewer district. MS. PALLOZZI-So we're not going down? SUPERVISOR BRANDT-Okay, anyone else that would like to ask questions or comment on this? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Mike, just for clarification, I'd like to ask Darleen a question. Darleen, isn't the procedure in this town that all Freedom of Information filing is to be done through your office? TOWN CLERK DOUGHER-That's correct. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-So, anybody who is filing Freedom of Information has to file it through the Town Clerk's Office for it to be properly addressed. TOWN CLERK DOUGHER-Anyone's that I have received from Mrs. Pallozzi have been answered. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-And again, that happened before this Board came in here MS. PALLOZZI-That's correct. SUPERVISOR BRANDT -And so COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But I just didn't want people to leave with the impression that you file that with the Department head or anything like that. By law, the way we set that up MS. PALLOZZI-It was filed with the Records Access Officer. SUPERVISOR BRANDT-We're getting off ofa public hearing here. Let's stay with the public hearing which is, on this, these sewer rents. Is there anyone else that's here to speak on that? Then, I'm going to declare that public hearing closed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:25 P.M. Councilman Monahan-Mike, just a question. When this law is passed and put into effect, everybody then will be paying their sewer rent on, in every part of this town that's got sewers, except the one out of Glens Falls, Ashley, Pershing, but all of these that we talked tonight, will be paying it on the current reading and it will be based on the actual water use, no more estimates of prior years? Mr. Shaw-That's correct and the reason we did that as you remember, was because of the districts being so new. RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW NUMBER 18, 1993 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY CHAPTER 136, THEREOF, ENTITLED "SEWERS AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL," TO AMEND ARTICLE XXIV CONCERNING "ESTABLISHMENT OF SEWER RENTS." RESOLUTION NO. 773, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury Chapter 136 thereof, entitled "Sewers and Sewage Disposal," to amend Article XXIV concerning "Establishment of Sewer Rents," as more specifically set forth in the proposed Local Law presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board at the time the Resolution was adopted which set a date and time for a public hearing, and WHEREAS, on December 27, 1993, a public hearing with regard to this Local Law was duly conducted, and WHEREAS, the legislation is proposed in connection with the continued operation and management of the sewer district and is therefore determine to be a Type II Action under SEQRA, not requiring any further SEQRA review, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 136 thereof, entitled "Sewers and Sewage Disposal," to amend Article XXIV concerning "Establishment of Sewer Rents," to be known as Local Law Number 18, 1993, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Law presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to file the said Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and that said Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano LOCAL LAW NO. 18,1993 A Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 136 thereof, entitled "Sewers and Sewage Disposal. " BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 136 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Article XXIV, Section 136-137, is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Annual charges pursuant to § 136-135 hereof for the Central Queensbury/Quaker Road Sewer District: (1) For residential properties: fifty dollars ($50.) annually for each residential unit, plus two dollars and seventy-five cents ($2.75) per thousand gallons of water consumption in excess of fifty thousand (50,000) gallons per year as indicated by the current water meter readings billed on a quarterly basis. (2) For nonresidential properties: five dollars and ten cents ($5.10) per thousand gallons of water consumption as indicated by the current water meter readings billed on a quarterly basis. (3) For nonresidential properties that are not equipped with functioning meters, the following schedule of charges shall apply: (a) All properties, except restaurants, taverns, bars or similar uses with one (1) rest room: two hundred fifty-five dollars ($255.), annually. (b) All properties, except restaurants, taverns, bars or similar uses with two (2) or more rest rooms: five hundred ten dollars ($510.) annually. (c) Properties with restaurants, taverns, bars or similar uses: seven hundred sixty five dollars ($765.) annually. B. Annual charges pursuant to § 136-135 hereof for the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District; (1) For all occupied properties: two dollars and twenty cents ($2.20) per thousand gallons of water consumption, as indicated by the current water meter readings billed on a quarterly basis. C. Annual charges pursuant to § 136-135 hereof for the Hiland Park Sewer District: (1) For residential properties: fifty dollars ($50.00) annually for each residential unit, plus four dollars and fifty cents ($4.50) per thousand gallons of water consumption in excess of fifty thousand (50,000) gallons as indicated by the current water meter readings billed on a quarterly basis. (2) For nonresidential properties: thirteen dollars ($13.00) per thousand gallons of water consumption as indicated by the current water meter readings billed on a quarterly basis. SECTION 2. This Local Law shall take effect January 1, 1994. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINUTES RESOLUTION NO. 774, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approve the Town Board Minutes of November 29th, December 6th and 9th of 1993. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BIDS FOR 1994 OFFICE SUPPLIES RESOLUTION NO. 775, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Director of Purchasing for the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, duly advertised for bids for specified office supplies, pursuant to bid specifications previously submitted and in possession of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, G. F. Blackmer & Son, Inc., has submitted the lowest bid for the aforementioned office supplies in the total amount of $ 6,142.81, and WHEREAS, Darleen M. Dougher, Town Clerk, has recommended that the bid be awarded to the aforesaid lowest bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, hereby awards the bids for the aforementioned office supplies to G. F. Blackmer & Son, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that said supplies are to be paid for from the General Office Supplies Account. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING HOVEY POND CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 776, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has previously established a Capital Project Fund for the construction of Hovey Pond Park and would like to set budgetary appropriations for said Fund, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has also, by previous resolutions, established a method of financing for the aforedescribed project and transferred funds as necessary, and WHEREAS, it was brought to the Town Board's attention that the Capital Project Fund should have a total project budget, and WHEREAS, total project expenses as of December 16, 1993 equal $244,202, and accounting for additional expenses it is anticipated that total project costs will be approximately $269,033, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that total project appropriations set forth in the budget for the Hovey Pond Park Project, Fund No. 82 be set at $269,033, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby determines that previous resolutions have already authorized a transfer of funds and it is not necessary to authorize a further transfer of funds. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY CITY OF GLENS FALLS CONCERNING THE LANDFILL RESOLUTION NO. 777, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, a proposed agreement has been presented at this meeting, which agreement addresses the Town of Queensbury and City of Glens Falls legal and financial relationship concerning the Ridge Road Landfill and the two Transfer Stations operated within the Town of Queensbury for solid waste disposal, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the agreement presented at this meeting, and authorizes the Town Supervisor to execute the agreement and forward the same to the City of Glens Falls for its approval, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Resolution No. 737, 1993, adopted by the Town Board, is hereby rescinded. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Tucker-When we originally talked about this and I know the answer already myself but I'd like to put on the record, we were talking about a hundred and eighty-seven thousand dollar close out and we wind up doing it for a hundred and fifty-five and I know that when you talked to us before, you said that these figures would be adjusted. Attorney Dusek-I think what happened was, the biggest difference was that there was a billing for a law suit of thirty-one thousand five hundred dollars that was actually included twice. It was included in the 1992 amounts that were claimed due and then it was again included in the 93. So, that was a double billing which of course the town is not entitled to do anyway and that was one of the things that caused the number to make a drastic jump downwards of about thirty thousand dollars. Councilman Tucker-Thirty-two thousand it was. Attorney Dusek-This agreement is a little different then the last agreement you adopted because it also closes out your relationship as to the closure aspects. It says that you're going to pay for it out of the funds that you have and that's it, you're not going to look to the city for any further money. And as far as all the other things, like I said earlier, they're releasing the equipment over to you and basically, just completing the relationship. Supervisor Brandt-It's my understanding from an informal discussion I had with the Mayor and a previous one with the City Council that this would be acceptable to them but I haven't heard it in final form. In other words, they've received this and they have to look at it and I'm not positive that they totally agree with this but I would think that they would. Councilman Tucker-And we shall have the check by the end of the month? Supervisor Brandt-They said they would pay us right away if that was, if that's what the agreement was and I take them at their word. Councilman Tucker-And the Board coming on agrees? Mr. Fred Champagne-Very much so. Councilman Monahan-Paul, can we assume because we have said they don't have any liability for closing Ridge Road, that they're also not going to try and say that we have any liability if they have to re-close Mount Trashmore? Attorney Dusek-First of all, I don't know if there was ever any written agreements concerning that one. Councilman Monahan-There wasn't. Attorney Dusek-Then you get into an issue of whether there's any common law responsibilities or liabilities and I couldn't really give you a straight answer Betty to let you know whether or not you would have any. I would say this, though, this agreement certainly isn't going to cause you to be responsible or not to be responsible for that. No matter what you did on Ridge Road, that's not going to change whatever may exist out there in terms of a common law or an environmental law type of responsibility, if there is any and there may not be. Supervisor Brandt-It's really something that, in the discussions that were left, for the future Boards. The two Boards that are coming in can address that and see what they want to do. Vote was taken. RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1993 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 778, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, an increase is needed in the Transfer to the Joint Landfill Fund from the Queensbury General Fund in order to offset the Town of Queensbury's share of the 1993 operating deficit, and WHEREAS, the City of Glens Falls has offered to pay for their share of the 1993 operating deficit of the Joint Landfill Fund, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that funds be transferred as follows, for the 1993 budget: LANDFILL: FROM: TO: AMOUNT: 1-9901-9004 1-8160-4400 $123,000 (Transfer to Highway (Landfill Expense) Fund) and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that estimated revenues in the following accounts will be modified as follows: 1993 1993 REVENUE ACCOUNT: CURRENT BUDGET: PROPOSED BUDGET: 4-4-5031 $1,623,000 $1,500,000 (Highway Estimated Revenues From General Fund) 1993 1993 REVENUE ACCOUNT: CURRENT BUDGET: PROPOSED BUDGET: 910-910-2390-1 $ 77,000 $ 200,000 (Landfill Estimated Revenues From General Fund) RESOLVED, that the 1993 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION APPROVING INSURANCE COMPANY RESOLUTION NO. 779, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 100, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury must approve the insurance company or companies affording coverage generally to the Town of Queensbury, its officers, employees and operations, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the provision of insurance coverage for 1994 by the Hartford Insurance Company and Kemper Insurance Companies, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to notify Cool Insurance of the selection and take all other steps that may be necessary to provide for insurance coverage through the aforementioned companies, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the premiums for insurance coverage are budgeted for and provided for in the 1994 Town Budget and shall be paid for from the appropriately budgeted accounts. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION REGARDING E. GALUSHA & SONS ASPHALT PLANT RESOLUTION NO. 780, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker DEFEATED WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury through James M. Martin, Executive Director, has commented by Letter of December 13, 1993 on the above proposal, and WHEREAS, those comments have been responded to by letter of December 16, 1993 by Little & O'Connor, attorneys for the applicant, with an enclosed copy of the March, 1993 traffic study prepared by Morse Engineering, P.e., NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury does not believe that the establishment of the E. Galusha & Sons Asphalt Plant on Lot 37 of the Warren Washington Counties Industrial Development Agency Park will have any significant impact upon the Town of Queensbury or residents of the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury believes that establishment of a second asphalt plant may have a positive economic impact upon the cost of asphalt concrete in the Town of Queensbury and County of Warren and surrounding areas. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz ABSENT: Mr. Caimano DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Monahan-I really think that this resolution is inappropriate. What we expressed to the Boards in the Town of Kingsbury and Washington County were concerns that were voiced at our resolution and I think it's up to us to let their SEQRA process go forward and address those concerns, see whether or not they're valid and they should make a decision. We really, I don't know if you've had a chance to read the letter from John Caffry or not, but everything that we have heard really has been a one sided presentation. It reminds me maybe, of listening to my teenage kids and I've leamed not to just listen to one when their's a sibling type of thing going on, you listen to two and I think this resolution would really be very inappropriate and is involving something that should be done by the Boards in Kingsbury and Washington County. All we mentioned was that we had the concerns about jobs, we had concerns about traffic and we asked them to address it. Supervisor Brandt-I think we've done that. Councilman Monahan-But we've done it Mike, listening to one side. In a court of law, you just don't listen to one side, you listen to both sides and we really don't have the ability or the time to see what's presented to us, whether or not it has actually been fact or if what we're getting in from John Caffry is a fact that has a bearing on this and I just think it's an action we, should not be taken. We have expressed our concerns and it should go through the process and the Town of Kingsbury Planning Board will decide whether or not those were valid concerns or whether or not they've been answered. Supervisor Brandt-Kingsbury will decide that, Washington County will decide that and as a neighboring town, what we're saying here is that we don't have a big problem with it in our town and we're not getting into the middle of their decision making and we're just saying we're not in any way telling them what to decide or how to decide it. We're simply stating that it can have some benefit to our community and we don't see a big problems to our community. And so in that vein, I'm offering it and let's see where it goes. Councilman Tucker-Can we have some information from Mr. Galusha's attorney where this stands as far as Kingsbury, where it is in the process over there? Attorney Michael O'Connor-For the purpose of the record, I'm Michael O'Connor from the firm of a Little and O'Connor. Basically, what has happened at this point is that the IDA has given approval under their subdivision rules and regulations. They made us refer to the FAA, they gave us approval as to any possible impact that it would have upon the airport. The Town Planning Board has completed it's SEQRA review and found that it will not have any significant impact upon the town and has given a negative declaration. The County Planning Board, Washington County Planning Board has reviewed it and has recommended approval to the Town Planning Board under it's site plan review process. Presently, right now, we're in site plan review and special use permit review before the Kingsbury Town Planning Board. Councilman Monahan-It's my understanding Mike, that Washington County Planning Board did the approval process so that the Kingsbury Planning Board would address the concerns of all the people involved and that was a very much of a condition of their approval. Attorney O'Connor-1 don't know where you get your understanding Betty, if you look at the minutes, they made a recommendation of approval and asked that the Town Board consider impacts that the project will have upon the neighborhood and it's in the minutes of that resolution, I've got the resolution with me if you'd like me to read it into the record for you, I'd be happy to read it into the record for you, if that's different then your understanding of it. Basically, you have taken a position through your letter with Mr. Martin and I came here with an attempt to be sure that the Kingsbury Planning Board was properly aware of what your position is. I've referred to Mr. Martin, I don't know if he has any comments to make on it, he was the consultant that you have. We've had actual consulting engineering reports submitted that backup the positions that we have. Some of the positions that we have, have been factually controverted but not been anyone's expert testimony that has been excepted by any of the board's who have heard both sides present their cases. Councilman Monahan-Well, we have a traffic report submitted to us through John Caffry's firm, that does ask alot of questions about the traffic and asks alot of questions relative to the routes it will be leaving from there and how the numbers have been generated by your traffic Attorney O'Connor-That same report was submitted to the County Planning Board and to the Town Planning Board and rejected by them in their obvious approvals that they've granted. If you would take a look at that, that is by a fellow out of Syracuse and that is part of the team that was presented, we believe by our competitor and with them that night was an attorney out of the firm of Delvowitz, Stestenski, Gilberty and Smith from Syracuse, New York. They had a very well put together presentation, they would not acknowledge who was paying them for the presentation, they would not disclose the interest that they were representing before the board and beyond just that issue, which was a sticky issue, the board rejected their traffic report. Their traffic report which shows forty trips per hour assumes that everybody will carry asphalt in a tandem truck. Nobody will use a thirty ton truck. That just doesn't happen. Councilman Monahan-Well, we can't talk about the future Mike and I realize that but you know very well when the road contracts are let for 149, the widening of the bridge, route 4 and etcetera, alot of these figures are going to go down the tube anyway. Attorney O'Connor-No, I don't think so because I think those contracts take into account big projects on an average basis happening throughout the county. Each year, I don't know what the figure was, I think Warren County got three million dollars, Washington County got two million dollars in the latest letting from the State for repaving. Every year there are some big projects. There's only so much asphalt that's produced in this area, there's only so much asphalt that's used on an annual basis. We're not talking about increasing the market, we're not talking about changing the product. All we're talking about is changing the place from where it will be produced and delivered, probably by about a mile and a half. Supervisor Brandt -So, the impact on the Town of Queensbury as far as I can see is going to be whatever number of trucks are going over there to get blacktop, they're going to go through Queensbury, they're going to go through whether they go to one plant or the other. Attorney O'Connor-This is going to change the amount of asphalt that's going to be used in Warrensburg. It isn't going to change the asphalt that's going to be used in Lake George. That's happening now, that traffic passes through the town now. Probably because of the circumference route that they must now take, it takes more time and travels on more of the roads in the Town of Queensbury then what we propose. Supervisor Brandt-And this gives the towns and the counties a second source so they can bid and that can't help but serve the public interest, as far as I'm concerned. Attorney O'Connor-We've shown clearly and I think it may a big impression upon the planning boards that towns where there is competition, do have a much more competitive pricing for blacktop and municipalities are one of the biggest users of it and it actually will mean a great savings to taxpayers. I think the figures I've used and we used in the brochure, was that Warren County had thirty-three thousand tons in one year, Washington County had thirty thousand tons. You're talking three to four dollars a ton. So, you're talking a significant amount of money. So, you're going to have more roads paved for less money if you have better competition. If you really want to look at the facts and circumstances, we're putting in state of the art plant as opposed to what's presently there. Our plant in an of itself, is going to be a better operation then the existing plant. I really don't know the reluctance. You've put your foot forward and all I'm saying is put your foot forward fairly. Take a look at Mr. Martin's letter, I think it does take a position. I think it takes a position that sounds as though this board is opposed to the project and that was the purpose of my resolution is to let the board in Kingsbury is not unfavorably influenced by what you say is not your position, you said you just took concerns. Supervisor Brandt-We addressed concerns and I think that if they've looked at those concerns, I don't want to meddle in their business. I think it's their approval process, not ours. Councilman Tucker-I've got a question for Mr. Martin. Does Kingsbury Planning Board have all the information pertinent to the questions that were asked by this board? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Yes, they probably have alot more information then we've had sent to us. We've gotten some matters of traffic reports and things like that. They have all the information, yea. Councilman Tucker-I mean as far as our concerns in this town. I'm not talking about the entire project. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Well, I think the concerns in my letter basically broke down into one of two areas. One was more of a technical concern that dealt with traffic and the second one was more of a philosophical nature that dealt with the use of the park. They certainly have alot of information about the technical aspects of traffic related to this project. In terms of the philosophical argument about or the discussion of use in the park, heavy as opposed to light, they've apparently dealt with that and are satisfied that this in keeping with their ordinance. I just raised the issue. Supervisor Brandt-Okay, I'm going to ask for a vote. Vote was taken, Resolution was defeated. Attorney Dusek reviewed with the Town Board the following resolutions regarding the donation of property by Robert and Margaret Reid. Attorney Dusek-Dr. Reid, just so that the land is clear, at this point then, you're willing to deed all those parcels, that 1, lA and 2? Dr. Robert Reid-Yes. Attorney Dusek-Also, then you're willing to deed to whatever extent you have in interest left in that right- of-way, to the town. Dr. Robert Reid-Yes, it's totally ours. Attorney Dusek-Okay, because to the best of my knowledge, that's not referred to in the current deed. So, we'll have to correct this deed that's in front of you to reflect that access. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Just so we don't get tripped up again, does anybody in that subdivision have rights over that road? Dr. Reid-Only me. Executive Director, Mr. Martin lead the Town Board through the Short Environmental Assessment form, Part II. A, Does action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12? Answer, No. B, Will action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6NYCRR, Part 617.6? Answer, No. C, Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: Cl, Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Answer, No, a positive effect, protecting it from any future impacts. C2, Aesthetic, agricultural, archeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Answer, No, keeping the aesthetic quality and protecting it - a positive effect. C3, Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Answer, No, if there are any, we're protecting. C4, A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Answer, No, if follows our goals of protecting our natural resources - a positive effect. C5, Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Answer, No. C6, Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in CI-C5? Answer, No, all positive, protection. C7, Other impacts? Answer, Only positive. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? Answer, No. RESOLUTION ADOPTING DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE OF ACCEPTING DONATION OF PROPERTY FROM ROBERT A. REID AND MARGARET F. REID RESOLUTION NO. 781, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is considering accepting a donation of 82.785 acres of land for dedication as open space from Robert A. Reid and Margaret F. Reid, parcel I located at the corner of Win coma Drive and N.Y.S. Route 9L (7.795 acres; tax parcel #55-1-2.125 and 55- 1-2.121), and parcel II located northwest of Hunter Lane (74.99 acres; tax parcel #55-1-1), in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is duly qualified to act as lead agency with respect to compliance with SEQRA, which requires environmental review of certain actions undertaken by local governments, and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an unlisted action pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, after considering the action proposed herein, reviewing the Environmental Assessment Form, reviewing the criteria contained in Section 617.11, and thoroughly analyzing the project with respect to potential environmental concerns, determines that the action will not have a significant effect on the environment, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby finds that the proposed responses inserted in Part II of the said environmental assessment form are satisfactory and approved, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to complete and execute Part III of the said environmental assessment form and to check the box thereon indicating that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse impacts, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the annexed Negative Declaration is hereby approved and the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the same in accordance with the provisions of the general regulations of the Department of Environmental Conservation. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Attorney Dusek-Before you introduce it, at the very end of the resolution, the end of the resolve clause, I would suggest that we state; including such action as may be necessary to acquire a right-of-way to the parcel II. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION OF PROPERTY FROM ROBERT A. REID AND MARGARET F. REID RESOLUTION NO. 782, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury is desirous of accepting a donation of 82.785 acres of land for dedication as open space from Robert A. Reid and Margaret F. Reid, parcel I being located at the corner of Win coma Drive and N.Y.S. Route 9L (7.795 acres; tax parcel #55-1-2.125 and 55-1-2.121), and parcel II being located northwest of Hunter Lane (74.99 acres; tax parcel #55-1-1), in the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, pursuant to the Town Law of the State of New York, Section 64(6), the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to execute and place the seal of the Town of Queensbury on any and all documents necessary to arrange for transfer of ownership of the property to the Town of Queensbury, and arrange for the filing of the documents with the Town Clerk and the Warren County Clerk's Office, as may be necessary, including such action as maybe necessary to acquire a right-of-way to parcel II. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano DISCUSSION AFTER VOTE: Councilman Monahan-Thank you Dr. Reid. Supervisor Brandt-I want to thank you. I know you made me aware of this some time ago and it's finally happening. I think it's very generous on your part and I certainly hope that the town leams how to accept land and set up a system for handling land as it comes it's way so that we can encourage more of this. Thank you. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ESCROW AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 783, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution dated July 21, 1992, the Town of Queensbury Planning Board approved a revised site plan for the Queensbury Plaza and in accordance with the revised site plan, the Olive Garden Restaurant has been constructed, and WHEREAS, the Olive Garden Restaurant is nearly complete but requires the issuance of a certificate of occupancy from the Town before it can legally be open and operated, and WHEREAS, all of the site plan conditions required by the Town of Queensbury Planning Board with respect to the portion of the Plaza north of the entrance drive on New York State Route 9 (which area of the Plaza contains the Olive Garden Restaurant) have been completed with the exception of certain curbing and landscaping, and WHEREAS, it is not practical to complete such curbing and landscaping at this time due to weather considerations, and WHEREAS, the owner has proposed to place funds in escrow to cover the cost of completing the curbing and landscaping, and therefore be granted a temporary certificate of occupancy, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is in favor of such proposal, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the Olive Garden Restaurant, conditioned upon the placing of $12,000 in escrow with the Town of Queensbury to cover improvements, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the Escrow Agreement presented at this meeting and hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to execute the same on behalf of the Town and also hereby authorizes James M. Martin to be the Escrow Agent for the agreement with the understanding that the funds will be deposited through the Town's Accounting Offices in the appropriate bank as required by the Escrow Agreement. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1993 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 784, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker 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: FROM: TO: AMOUNT: 02-8810-1430 02-8810-1800-11 1,400.00 (Laborer B - (Cremator) Part-Time) 02-8810-4400 02-8810-4300-11 1,000.00 (Misc. Contractual) (Utilities) 02-8810-4400 02-8810-4200 475.00 (Misc. Contractual) (Insurance) and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the 1993 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Attorney Dusek reviewed with the Town Board the landfill closure project management plan agreement, noting changes that he's made. Councilman Monahan requested the following language be added to the management plan: that change orders are to be approved before the work is done. RESOLUTION APPROVING LANDFILL CLOSURE PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN RESOLUTION NO. 785, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, in accordance with the contract for state assistance payments for municipal landfill closure projects between the Town of Queensbury and the New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation, the Town has developed a Project Management Plan, and WHEREAS, the aforesaid Project Management Plan has been submitted at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the Project Management Plan described in the preambles of this resolution, and authorizes the Town Supervisor to submit the same to the New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION AMENDING 1993 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 786, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has received a Records Management Grant from New York State, and has begun expending the funds, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves, authorizes, and directs that the 1993 Budget be amended as follows: 1) Increase Estimated Revenues in the Records Management Grant Account #001-001-3060 in the amount of $7,400.00; and 2) Increase Appropriations in the 1993 Budget: Misc. Payroll Account #001-1460-1002 in the amount of $7,400.00; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the 1993 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERFUND ADVANCES RESOLUTION NO. 787, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9-A of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized to temporarily advance moneys held in any fund to any other fund, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the temporary advance of funds to the accounts or funds indicated, and in the amounts indicated, as set forth below: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT 40 - Queensbury Water 910 - Landfill Fund 3,500.00 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer, is hereby authorized and directed to arrange for and accomplish the above-authorized transfers, and temporary advances, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer, shall keep suitable records and arrange for the repayment of the temporary advances as soon as possible, and the Town Supervisor shall also determine the amount of interest, if any, to be paid, upon repayment. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID FOR TRANSPORTATION FOR THE ELDERLY - H&L TRANSPORTATION RESOLUTION NO. 788, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz WHEREAS, the Director of Purchasing for the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, duly advertised for bids for transportation for the elderly in the Town of Queensbury for the year 1994, and WHEREAS, H&L Transportation has offered to provide transportation services for the elderly for the year 1994 for an amount of $13,985.92, and is determined to be the lowest bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, hereby awards the contract for transportation of the elderly for the Town of Queensbury for the year 1994 to H&L Transportation, for an amount of $13,985.92, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the contract amount shall be paid for from the previously budgeted account. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano Bids on file in the Town Clerk's Office. ATTORNEY MATTERS Attorney Dusek-The only thing I have for you is some affidavits I need signed on a bond closing. DISCUSSION - LAND DEDICATION - WILLIAM POTVIN Executive Director, Mr. Martin-This is in regard to the Potvin Subdivision, it's actually like a second step to the Clendon Ridge development. It's a twenty lot subdivision and they're proposing to dedicate some land east of Clendon Brook with frontage on Luzerne Road. I believe it's about twenty some acres in size, twenty-nine point twelve. This is just going through the process now, the Planning Board is considering it and in compliance in our code, it's being sent on to you for your opinion at this time. You'll be the board that ultimately accepts it and it's also going to the Recreation Commission for their opinion. Then the Town Planning Board will also decide whether they will like to accept it or not. But it's ultimately your decision but it's coming to you for your opinion now at this time. Supervisor Brandt-Here again, I think the next board is going to have to set a policy and a direction on acceptance of land and how they want to handle it. But from my view point, this is a wetland, isn't it? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-Most of it's wet and there's some steep slopes associated with it but it does have frontage on Luzerne Road and it does encompass a fairly significant portion of Clendon Brook. It would be my recommendation to take it. Supervisor Brandt-In lieu of recreation fees? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-This is in lieu offees this time, yes. Supervisor Brandt - I have a hard time with that. I think we ought to set up some kind of a conservation trust of some type where the town takes over the liabilities of handling that land and being entrusted to the town, taking the liabilities that come with that for the benefit of the public but I can't see it in lieu of recreation fees. I think the land is totally restricted and I don't think it's, you don't send your kids to the swamp to play. That isn't really the recreation ordinance, that isn't really what we're trying to accomplish with it and I'm just telling you from my feeling and the rest the board, go right ahead. Councilman Tucker-I believe this piece ofland was offered when the first phase of the development was done and it was tumed down at that time. Councilman Monahan-It seems to me that if I remember our, in lieu of recreation fees, it has to be usable land and I would want to read that over again. But I'm not prepared to do an opinion tonight in favor, I need two things. One, I want to walk the land and number two, I want to review our ordinance in lieu of recreation fee. Councilman Tucker-I believe this is all flagged. Is it not? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-At least a significant portion of it is wetland. Councilman Tucker-We had a similar piece to the south of Luzerne Road, Herald Square and that was all flagged wetland and I think it should be pointed out that nobody can do anything with this land if the town takes it. These are flagged wetlands and they're under the jurisdiction of the State of New York. Supervisor Brandt -You've heard our opinions. So, I think properly the next board ought to address that and they will anyhow. And there needs to be an in depth look at where we're going on that as a town. OPEN FORUM No one spoke. OPEN FORUM CLOSED Councilman Tucker-I have a question for Mr. Naylor. I got a phone call today on the cameras over there in the shop. Where does that stand? Highway Superintendent, Paul H. Naylor-Same place it has been. The cameras are still there and still working good. Councilman Tucker-It's been brought to my attention that we might be in violation of some people's civil rights with this thing. Do you know anything about that, that we could be or couldn't be? Attorney Dusek-I don't believe that there's been anything improper over there in terms of the cameras from what I understand of the laws, there are no legal restrictions for putting cameras up. They're frequently in banks, stores, allover the place these days. So, unless, the issue of civil rights I suppose might go to the use of them but if they're just for purposes of security and proper surveillance, I don't know that there's a problem. But this is the first that I've heard of a civil rights type of thing. RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN RESOLUTION NO. 789, 93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Susan Goetz RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns. Duly adopted this 27th day of December, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Caimano No further action was taken. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK-QUEENSBURY