2010-08-02-2010 MTG. #29
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1008
TOWN BOARD MEETING MTG. #29
AUGUST 2, 2010 RES. 272-279
7:00 p.m. LL #9
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC
COUNCILMAN ANTHONY METIVIER
COUNCILMAN JOHN STROUGH
COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC
1.0 PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
Mr. John Salvador- Notified the Board that the Dunham Bay Resort had a wedding reception and they had
no port-a- john on site. Filed a notice of appeal with the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals
appealing the Zoning Administrator’s wrongful determination regarding Seaboyer ‘s property, no hearing
date on the notice has been set and no stay on the issuance of the zoning permit.. The pollution of Sandy
Bay continues unabated. I have a letter from the Adirondack Park Commission and they have not
approved your amended Chapter 147.
Mr. Pliney Tucker-41 Division Road, Queensbury – Will Town government have to invest any money in
the Village of East Lake George process?
Supervisor Stec-The statue requires that petitioners that are seeking to form a village are required to
pay the town or towns in which they are looking to incorporate six thousand dollars as part of their
petition submission. The purpose of the six thousand dollars is to cover the cost through an election.
Mr. Tucker-What is going on with the City Sewer Contract?
Supervisor Stec-We have a disagreement with the City, and we will work it out.
Mr. Tucker-When the original sewer deal was put together Ciby Geigy agreed to pay for half of it, when
they got out of it the sewer plant in Glens Falls was to be a regional plant.
Supervisor Stec-It was funded by eighty seven and a half percent with State and Federal grants to be a
regional plant. The City was given the plant and they own it and we are a customer.
Councilman Brewer-We have certain rights under that agreement.
Councilman Montesi-When the Lake George sewer district did not fly, at the time Mayor Bartholomew
pleaded with the Federal Government and they gave twenty seven million of that money that was to go
to Lake George to redo the sewer treatment plant and regionalize it.
Councilman Brewer-The Town has bought capacity from the City and we have been paying our bills
there is a dispute in a couple of the quarters and we have to work it out with the City, we think we do
not owe exactly what they say, we do not know the exact number but it is a lot less than what they are
billing us, that is what we are trying to straighten out.
Mr. Tucker-I was wondering how the weighted vote was done at the County level?
Supervisor Stec-It gets changed every ten years with the census. They recalculate what the weighted
votes are.
Mrs. LaPointe-Asked if sense the last meeting has anyone looked into the Duplex Project?
Town Counsel Hafner-A memo will come out within the next couple of days to the Town Board.
Mrs. LaPointe-Are you looking at the Zoning and Planning Board when they pass these things?
Supervisor Stec-The Zoning and Planning Board were not involved in this, that is part of the question, we
are looking to see if everything was followed in our zoning code at the time as to if the building permits
were properly issued.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1009
Councilman Strough-In reference to the Zoning Administrator’s determination that allowed the issuance
of building permits for this building of seven duplexes, fourteen units on lot no. 302.14-1-79.2 is not in
accord with the Town Code in my opinion. Past site plan practice and protocol and SEQRA past practice
in law and some of the reasons that I have been brainstorming myself with, here as some of them. In
the recent past it has been the towns well established practice to require a site plan review of any and
all projects of this magnitude. Unique to this case the town did not follow its customary course, no site
plan review was allowed for this development. In the recent past it has been the towns well established
practice to require notification of all potentially affected parties of any and all projects of this magnitude
especially those within a five hundred foot zone. Unique to this case the town the town did not follow
its customary course. No notification was given for this development. In 617 the State Environmental
Quality Review, a similar project on this very same project by the very same owners received a positive
SEQRA declaration. That means there are impacts of the proposed development that need further
investigating.
Councilman Brewer-Was it the same project?
Councilman Strough-It was not the same exact project but the same magnitude.
Councilman Montesi-They filled all eight acres up this is only taking a third.
Councilman Strough-I am saying fourteen units is substantial.
Councilman Brewer-I am just making a point that if it got a negative a positive dec on a project on the
same property it does not necessitate the positive dec happening on the same property with a lesser
project.
Councilman Strough-But a project of this magnitude could have same or similar impacts but was never
given the opportunity for investigation.
Mrs. LaPointe-They were going to put fourteen houses before, that would mean fourteen septic
systems, leach fields and everything, now we still got fourteen they are just all grouped up in one spot,
you are still going to have the same amount of water that will go into that area.
Councilman Strough-That is one of the problems, the assessment of potential impact is inadequate
because there was no site plan review or public notification therefore no opportunity for the affected
public to have input into the assessment of the following potential harmful impacts; Stormwater,
groundwater, erosion, flooding, traffic safety, emergency vehicle access, interstate pollution, human
health, traffic site distance for the proposed entry and exit area, character of neighborhood, public
controversy, flora, fauna, endangered species, natural resources, open space, noise levels, waste
production, intensity of use, public controversy, any of those and probably other potential cumulative
impacts were not investigated. The town’s code states that a duplex, singular not plural, is a permitted
use. The allowance of seven duplexes is not the intent of the PU allowance, for example we have
approved residential lots or lots in subdivisions and residential uses is a permitted use you do not have
to go through site plan review ok with the Planning Board for each house that goes in that is the intent
of the permitted use. The intent of the permitted use was misused here. Also, I believe that the
building of seven buildings on a given lot violates the town’s code in restricting the number of buildings
per lot. The comprehensive plan suggests a thousand foot setback for residential zone and that violates
that intent. Also, the table of allowed uses in residential districts was not in our town board code, it is
still not in. I went on line looking for it, it is not on line either. So nobody could have looked at what
were the permitted uses in a residential zone because it is not available to anybody, me or the public. I
talk about possible codes of subdivision requirements, access management review included in our Code
was not done. The list is ongoing.
Councilman Montesi-You had an opportunity to talk to our people, Zoning etc. when you read this to
them what did they say?
Councilman Strough-I have not read this to them, I have shared this with our attorney.
Councilman Montesi-But you have not talked to the guys on line that made the decision.
Councilman Strough-You mean Craig Brown?
Councilman Montesi-Craig Brown
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1010
Councilman Strough-Craig Brown got married and last weekend and I do not know if he is in.
Supervisor Stec-Craig is in.
Councilman Strough-I will share this with Craig too.
Mrs. LaPointe-That you for looking into this. Sometimes we get overlooked as individuals, I am not very
happy about that. Spoke about a letter from David Hatin regarding sound proofing houses…noted that
she saw Dave Hatin and Craig Brown and neither one of them were receptive they really did not want
talk to me but they did. Spoke about the noise created by the Northway… you have to look at that from
the prospect of the people who are going to go in there and the neighbors.
Mr. Paul Naylor-15 Division Road – West Glens Falls - The town is going to bid for 300’ of pipe where is
that?
Councilman Brewer-Quaker Road
Mr. Naylor-The paper said they wanted to annex? That has to be contiguous don’t they?
Supervisor Stec-Among many other things.
Mr. Naylor-If you look at it I do not think they are contiguous anymore.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON ROUTE 9 SANITARY
SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2011
RESOLUTION NO. 272, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of the
proposed Route 9 Sanitary Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2011 as presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
th
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing on Monday, August 16,
2010 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury to hear all interested
parties and citizens concerning the proposed 2011 Route 9 Sanitary Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to post
on the Town’s bulletin board and publish in the Town’s official newspaper a Notice of Public Hearing not
less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing date.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES : None
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1011
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON SOUTH QUEENSBURY –
QUEENSBURY AVENUE SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT
BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2011
RESOLUTION NO. 273, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of the
proposed South Queensbury – Queensbury Avenue Sanitary Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2011 as
presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
th
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing on Monday, August 16,
2010 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury to hear all interested
parties and citizens concerning the proposed 2011 South Queensbury – Queensbury Avenue Sanitary Sewer
District Benefit Tax Roll, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to post
on the Town’s bulletin board and publish in the Town’s official newspaper a Notice of Public Hearing not
less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing date.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON WEST QUEENSBURY –
SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2011
RESOLUTION NO. 274, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of the
proposed West Queensbury Sanitary Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2011 as presented at this meeting,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1012
th
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing on Monday, August 16,
2010 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury to hear all interested
parties and citizens concerning the proposed 2011 West Queensbury Sanitary Sewer District Benefit Tax
Roll, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to post
on the Town’s bulletin board and publish in the Town’s official newspaper a Notice of Public Hearing not
less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing date.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.: 268,2010
REGARDING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. __
OF 2010 TO AMEND QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE CHAPTER 179
“ZONING” TO REZONE PROPERTIES ON COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
AND GLENWOOD AVENUE
RESOLUTION NO.: 275, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 268,2010 the Queensbury Town Board scheduled a public
th
hearing on Monday, August 16, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay
Road, Queensbury to hear all interested parties concerning adoption of Local Law No.: ___ of 2010
to amend the official Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and Map whereby:
?
the properties bearing Tax Map Parcel No.: 296.15-1-18, 296.15-1-24, 296.15-1-25, 296.19-1-
12 and 296.19-1-13 located along Country Club Road in the Town of Queensbury would be
rezoned from Office (O) to Moderate Density Residential (MDR), and
?
the properties bearing Tax Map Parcel No.: 296.19-1-15, 296.19-1-16, and 296.19-1-17 located
along Glenwood Avenue in the Town of Queensbury would be rezoned from Moderate Density
Residential (MDR) to Office (O), and
296.19-1-13
WHEREAS, Tax Map Parcel No.: should not have been included as part of the
proposed Local Law, and therefore the Town Board wishes to amend Resolution No.: 268, 2010
accordingly,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1013
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby amends Resolution No.: 268, 2010 such that
296.19-1-13
Tax Map Parcel No.: is deleted from the proposed Local Law, as set forth in the proposed Local
Law presented at this meeting, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby affirms and ratifies Resolution No.: 268, 2010 in all other
respects.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NORTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER
FIRE COMPANY, INC.’S PURCHASE OF FIRE RESCUE BOAT AND
INCURRENCE OF DEBT FOR SUCH PURCHASE
RESOLUTION NO.: 276, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.
(Fire Company) have entered into an Agreement for fire protection services, which Agreement sets forth a
number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Fire Company will not purchase or enter into
any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any
improvements that would require the Fire Company to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a
“vehicles fund” without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and
th
WHEREAS, by letter received by the Town on July 28, 2010 and presented at this meeting, the Fire
Company advised the Town Board that it wishes to purchase a new Fire Rescue Boat to replace its 1989 Fire
Boat for a sum not to exceed $170,000, such purchase already included in the Fire Company’s five (5) year
capital plan that forecasts future capital needs and expenditures, including anticipated vehicles,
equipment, tools, other apparatus, facilities or improvements to facilities to be used for firematic
purposes, and
WHEREAS, the Fire Company plans on paying for the Fire Rescue Boat by using $70,000 of its
fundraising funds and entering into a 72 month installment loan at five-percent (5%) financing with Ballston
Spa National Bank for the balance ($100,000), with loan payments to be made from the Fire Company’s
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1014
operating budget, such monies already included in the Fire Company’s approved 2010-2011 budgets and
Agreement with the Town, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board feels that this new Fire Rescue Boat will provide additional safety
protection for the Town and therefore the Town Board wishes to authorize such purchase and incurrence of
debt by the Fire Company,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the North
Queensbury Fire Company, Inc.’s purchase of a new Fire Rescue Boat to replace its 1989 Fire Boat for a total
amount not to exceed $170,000, and the Fire Company’s incurrence of $100,000 in debt for such purchase, as
delineated in the preambles of this Resolution, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury does not guarantee the debt with Ballston Spa National
Bank on behalf of the Fire Company, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town
Budget Officer to take any necessary actions to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Stec-Pointed out the leadership from North Queensbury Vol. Fire
Company are present tonight. The Fire Company presently has a used Warren County Sheriff’s Patrol Boat,
the boat after years of service is not presently safe. The Company has a chance to purchase a boat from a Fire
Company in Kentucky for $270,000. They no longer want the boat and have offered it for sale at $170,000.
The boat has less than ten hours on it. The fire company would like to purchase this boat, they would need
approval from the Town Board, they proposed to use $70,000 from private fund raising and asked the Town
to approve a six year loan 5% financing for $100,000. They will want to factor that loan into the next
contract. Representative of North Queensbury Fire Dept. - Noted that the old boat will be salvaged for parts
and then the rest destroyed.
RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING
ON A PORTION OF ASH DRIVE
IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
RESOLUTION NO.: 277, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1015
SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of a Local Law which would
prohibit parking on both sides of Ash Drive in the Town of Queensburybeginning at the northwest corner
of the property having tax map # 289.17-1-16 and then going in a generally westerly direction a distance
of 177’ ±, and
WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Town Law, Vehicle
§
and Traffic Law 1660(18) and the Municipal Home Rule Law, and
WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing concerning the proposed Local Law on
th
Monday, July 26, 2010,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby adopts and enacts the Local Law Prohibiting
Parking on both sides of a portion of Ash Drive in the Town of Queensbury, to be known as Local Law No.:
9 of 2010, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file
the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal
Home Rule Law and the Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Highway Superintendent
to post no parking signs on the appropriate section of Ash Drive and take such other and further action
necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010 by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
LOCAL LAW NO.: 9 OF 2010
A LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON A PORTION OF ASH
DRIVE IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1016
BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF
QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS:
1. Purpose:
The purpose of this Local Law is to prohibit, under penalty of fine for violation, the parking of
any vehicle on both sides of Ash Drive in the Town of Queensburybeginning at the northwest corner of
the property having tax map # 289.17-1-16 and then going in a generally westerly direction a distance of
177’± , and
2. Definitions:
For the purpose of this Local Law, the words "Motor Vehicle," "Vehicle," "Person," and "Park" shall
have the same meanings as set forth for the definitions of such words in the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the
State of New York.
3. No Parking on both sides of Ash Drive in the Town of Queensbury:
No motor vehicle or other vehicle of any kind shall be allowed or permitted to park and no
person(s) shall park a motor vehicle or other vehicle for any period of time on Ash Drive from the
northwest corner of the property having tax map # 289.17-1-16 and then going in a generally
westerly direction a distance of 177’ ±.
4. Responsibility of Motor Vehicle Owner:
Should any vehicle be found parked in violation of this Local Law, it shall be presumed that
the owner of the motor vehicle is the person responsible for parking the motor vehicle in violation
and this presumption shall only be rebutted upon a showing by the vehicle owner that another
person clearly identified had custody and control of the motor vehicle at the time of such violation.
5. Penalty:
Any person violating any provision or paragraph of Section 3 of this Local Law shall, upon
conviction, be punishable for a first offense by a fine not to exceed $25, and for a second offense by a fine not
to exceed $50. In addition to the aforesaid penalties, the Queensbury Town Board may institute any proper
action, suit, or proceeding to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate any violation of this Local Law.
. Effective Date:
6
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon its filing in the Office of the Secretary of State.
RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS –
RD
WARRANT OF AUGUST 3, 2010
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1017
RESOLUTION NO.: 278, 2010
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to approve an audit of bills presented as a Warrant
thrd
with a run date of July 29, 2010 and payment date of August 3, 2010,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Warrant with the run date of
thrd
July 29, 2010 and payment date of August 3, 2010 totaling $92,752.14, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town
Budget Officer to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this
Resolution.
nd
Duly adopted this 2 day of August, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
3.0 CORRESPONDENCE
None
4.0 TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS
Councilman Tim Brewer Ward IV
?
Congratulated Mr. Demetrius Drellos on his ranking in the Soap Box Derby being in the
top
32.
Councilman John Strough Ward III
?
Bravo to the Queensbury Planning Board for planning for the future, they were planning
for a traffic flow that was sensible and comprehensive it just wasn’t the dinner. The
dinner was one parcel of several parcels in this western part of Aviation Mall’s
property. If anyone deserved a Boo it was Pyramid they are not being proactive, they
were not setting aside certain properties that they agreed to in the past with
expansion, for the connector road and for the right hand turning lane it was not being
comprehensive. I think the Planning Board was doing what they were supposed to
do.
?
Thanked Drew Monthie and Craig Green for the landscaping at Bay and Quaker, all
volunteer work.
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1018
?
Bravo – Lake George Mirror July Second Addition- on informative ad showing
development you should do and not do in order to protect the lakes environment.
Councilman Ronald Montesi Ward II
?
Transfer Station Audit showed 589,000 dollars that goes through our stations Luzerne
Road and Ridge Road, we have safety guards on how to handle that, bravo to those folks
that handle that for us.
?
Spoke on the property next to CR Bard, will be contacting CR Bard to see if they were
interested in the property if it could be cleaned up, spoke on cleanup grants that may be
available.
Councilman Anthony Metivier Ward I
th
?
The vote for the Village of East Lake George will be held on August 26, 2010 Noon to
9:00 P.M. at the North Queensbury Fire Dept. - Both Fort Ann residents and
Queensbury Residents will vote at this location - You must be a registered voter in
Warren County within the boundaries of the proposed Village. - If you need to change
th
your registration it must be done on or before August 19, 2010 by 9:00 P.M. Please
th
vote on the 26 and research the proposal.
Supervisor Daniel Stec-
th
?
The Village vote will be held on August 26 2010 from noon to 9 P.M. at the North
Queensbury Fire House. Spoke on the various boards State and Federal a municipality
must deal with from the Comptroller’s office, Department of State, reporting details,
APA., Lake George Park Commission, DEC, Warren County, any of a number of
environmental advocacy groups and every one of these comes with a dollar amount
assigned to it. Please ask questions. Noted the Post Star and the Chronicle has had
articles regarding the formation of the Village. Villages throughout the State are
considering disillusion. I cannot quote the tax rates but I have looked around at Corinth,
South Glens Falls, Lake George people that live in those villages pay a lot more in
property taxes then people that don’t live in those villages in the very same town. If
somebody can find a village out there that’s spending less money? To me it is an extra
layer of government. Government is very good at costing money.
Councilman Strough-Will it affect their School and County taxes? Supervisor Stec-no
Councilman Metivier-At this point in time we do not have a town tax. Councilman
Strough-Will the quality of service be as good as we do? Councilman Brewer-We have
no idea, because we do not know what it is going to be. Supervisor Stec-The Town of
Queensbury looking at our budgets and you divide by our population and our spending
at the Town per capita is in fact one of the lowest of the towns of similar size in the
area. The Village Assessment for Town, County and School tax is the town assessment.
The Village can hire an assessor and reassess the village properties but it would only be
valid for village taxes. I was taught a long time ago there is no such thing as a free lunch,
the other thing a lot of mom’s and dad’s teach out there is if it sounds too good to be
true it probably is, truer words have never been spoken when it comes to government
spending and the cost of government. Councilman Strough-My concern is that the
people that are trying to promote this village are putting together a package that I do
not think represents the whole picture. I do not know what method can be used by
these people to learn the rest of the story which I think is the important part of the
story, the story that is not being told that worries me. Supervisor Stec-It is not the town
job or place to come up with a village budget for them, they have had five years to come
up with a budget and I do not think any of us have seen it. I do not think that they have
a list of questions of the list of questions that they have not thought to ask yet. I think
one of my biggest concerns is that people will not be getting all the facts and I think the
simple things are; question 1 is there a village in the State that pays less in taxes than
the town that it is in? Councilman Strough-What you have said time and again you are
adding a layer of government that should be your guiding principal. Supervisor Stec-
Some of the Village leadership was quoted in the Post Star this isn’t a new layer of
government it is a replacement. I am not a lawyer but these villages are in towns, you
have the Country, the State, the Counties and then Towns and then another layer would
be the village. The village does not succeed from the town. Councilman Strough-Just as
one example, Preston Jenkins who is the Supervisor of the Town of Moreau said that the
Village has to pay part of his salary so that is just one little …. Google New York State
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 08-02-2010 MTG # 29 1019
Village Law and it will tell what villages are required to do. These seven hundred
registered voters eight hundred full time people and all the property owners up there
whether they are in the village or not in the village they are still constituents of mine
they are still constituents of Tony’s and we care that they make a decision with good
information. Councilman Strough-Having it in August enables some of those people that
are seasonal may not be registered to vote here but have at least a voice and be part of
the discussion, I think that is necessary because this vote for the village is going to affect
their taxes, and I do not think in a good way.
Town Counsel Hafner-The Town Boards of Queensbury and Fort Ann will have to by resolution appoint
alternate Town Inspectors, should have those names for next Monday’s meeting. Regarding the
Browns Field Program we have worked on that and part of the process is for the Town to take
temporary …ownership if there is a concern about environmental things we do not want to take actual
title, we take virtual title according to a State process and then we go through a cleaning and when the
State issues a letter saying it is clean then we tell the County finish your tax foreclosure and give it to us.
We have done this if that is something that you want those are being funded mainly by the State.
Supervisor Stec-
?
The Town’s website www.queensbury.net also thank TV8 our sponsors for
broadcasting our town board meetings
?
Will be installing a large infiltrator at the Enterprise parking lot across from Price
Shopper this fall.
?
Bids upcoming for the Quaker Drainage culvert pipe replacement hope to award bid on
rd
August 23. project to be completed in September.
RESOLUTION ADJOURNING TOWN BOARD MEETING
RESOLUTION NO. 279, 2010
INTRODUCED BY Mr. Ronald Montesi WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Town Board Meeting
by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Respectfully submitted,
Miss Darleen M. Dougher
Town Clerk-Queensbury