Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNov 20 2012 spec minutes.pdfVILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Special Meeting - Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 1 DRAFT MINUTES UNTIL BOARD APPROVAL Present: Mayor Supron, Attorney Marcus, Trustees: Andolina, Crooker, Hamilton, Karns, Riesman, and Szekely, Police Chief Steinmetz, Clerk Mills Call to Order Mayor Supron called meeting to order at 9:05AM Mayor Supron addressed the Board and members of the audience reminding them that this special meeting has been scheduled to review options and determine specific actions for the deer management program. As a result of the Village receiving the property use consent forms, there are not enough culling sites in the Village. As a result the Village Board asked the DEC for permission to increase the number of deer sterilized. Mayor Supron wrote a letter to the Special Licensing Unit at the DEC prior to our 11/13 meeting, and received a response from them on Friday granting a modification to the Village’s License to Collect and Possess, increasing the number of does to be captured and sterilized from 60 to 145. Attorney Marcus reviewed the steps the Board would need to take to modify its deer management plan. The only potentially significant adverse impacts the Board identified during its extensive SEQR were the actual physical impact of culling on the deer and the public controversy over culling. These two “positive declarations” triggered the Environmental Impact Study, conducted for the Board with assistance from Tim Miller Associates. The Board acknowledges that based upon property use consent forms submitted by Village residents to the CHPD, we do not currently have enough culling sites needed for phase 2 of the Board’s approved deer management program, and therefore wishes to increase the number of does to be sterilized. This change requires an amendment to the Findings Statement, which was drafted by Attorney Marcus and distributed to the Board for review on Saturday. Attorney Marcus reviewed the draft of the revised Findings Statement, which follows the same format of the original Findings Statement, approved by the Board on 4/11/2011. The change currently being considered by the Board reduces the potentially negative impacts identified by the Board during its SEQR, by adopting the “sterilization only” approach reviewed during SEQR. Attorney Marcus discussed the contents of the proposed SEQR Findings Statement Amendment – subsection 4. Attorney Marcus read subsection 5 of Part A as being the operative component with respect to amending the SEQR Findings aside from adding the pages of information. Attorney Marcus explained and read selected portions of the draft he had circulated to the Trustees of the Findings Statement Amendment. State Environmental Quality Review Findings Statement - Amendment Deer Management Plan Village of Cayuga Heights Tompkins County, New York Adopted: November 20, 2012 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 2 This document is an Amendment of the Findings Statement prepared and adopted by the Village Board of Trustees on April 4, 2011 (the “Findings Statement”) pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617.11 implementing the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). This Findings Statement Amendment draws upon the information in the Village of Cayuga Heights (the “Village”) record in connection with the Village's program for deer management (the “Deer Management Plan,” of “DMP”) as set forth on the Village's website; the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) dated November 1, 2010, and comments received on the DEIS at a duly noticed public hearing held on December 6, 2010, along with written comments received on the DEIS; the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) dated March 14, 2011, and comments received on the FEIS between March 14, 2011 and ten days thereafter; the Findings Statement itself; the Decision, Order and Judgment dated September 14, 2011 of the State of New York Supreme Court, Honorable Phillip R. Rumsey, Justice Presiding (the “Supreme Court Decision”), in the action brought against the Village by opponents of the DMP seeking annulment of the DMP and challenging the Village’s SEQRA review of the DMP, along with all documents filed in connection with such action; the Memorandum and Order dated June 14, 2012 of the State of New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, Justice Lahtinen presiding (the “Appellate Court decision”), in the appeal of said action, along with all documents filed in connection with such appeal; and such information and materials provided to or obtained by the Village since undertaking the DMP. In preparing this Amendment of the Findings Statement the Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees has given due consideration to the DEIS, FEIS, the Findings Statement itself, community and agency input and other documents reviewed and considered in conjunction with the SEQRA process. Further, this Amendment of the Findings Statement incorporates by reference the facts and conclusions in the DEIS and FEIS relied upon by the Board of Trustees to support its decisions, and considers and balances the relevant environmental impacts with “social, economic and other considerations” which form the basis for its decision (6 NYCRR 617.11(d)). Pursuant to Article 8 (SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, the Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees as Lead Agency made and adopted the Findings set forth in the Findings Statement and makes and adopts the additional Findings set forth in this Amendment. The Findings Statement and all of the Findings set forth therein are hereby incorporated in their entirety into this Amendment by reference. All capitalized terms used in this Amendment but not defined herein will have the respective meanings given to such terms in the Findings Statement. A. Additional Information Obtained Since the Findings Statement and Additional Findings. 1. Confirmation of the Village’s Compliance with SEQRA The Supreme Court decision provided confirmation that the Village’s SEQRA review of the DMP was wholly consistent with the requirements of the SEQRA process. The Court concluded that “there is sufficient evidence in the record to show that [the Village] complied with SEQRA,” that the DMP “adopted by [the Village] is generally consistent with the DEC’s recommendation for managing deer populations in urban and suburban areas” and that the petitioners’ “contentions have been considered and have been rejected.” Following the Village’s receipt of the Supreme Court’s confirmation that Village had in all respects satisfied the requirements of SEQRA and that the DMP could proceed, the Village began the necessary steps for implementation of the DMP. 2. Further Confirmation of the Village’s Compliance with SEQRA The opponents of the DMP then appealed the Supreme Court decision. The Village again prevailed, with the Appellate Division in to affirming the Supreme Court decision. The Appellate Court decision concluded as follows. VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 3 We are unpersuaded by petitioners’ contention that respondent failed to provide sufficient data for informed public comment and failed to take a hard look at important adverse impacts of the plan. The DEIS was detailed in describing the problem, the proposed solution, the potential impacts, and the alternative approaches. Moreover, the DEIS was similar in its recommendations to the DRAC report, which had been issued and made public over a year before the DEIS was issued. There was ample information and sufficient time to comment, as reflected by over 60 comments received. The comments were sufficiently addressed in the FEIS. The issues of human treatment of the deer problem as well as asserted potential impact on human health were adequately considered. The remaining issues have been considered and are unavailing.” 3. Proceeding with Implementation of the Deer Management Plan Subsequent to receiving the Appellate Court decision, the Village proceeded with implementation of the DMP. In order to undertake both the sterilization component of the DMP as well as the culling component of the DMP, the Village sought the written consent of property owners to use their properties for each component of the DMP. The Village sent consent forms to all property owners in the Village. A copy of the “Landowner Consent Agreement” form is attached for reference. Once the Village had collected the written consents of property owners, the Village consulted further with Dr. Paul Curtis (“Dr. Curtis”) of Cornell University, who had been providing consulting services to the Village regularly throughout the development and implementation of the DMP, and with Dr. Anthony DiNicola (“Dr. DiNicola”) of White Buffalo, Inc. (“WB”), the wildlife management firm that the Village has intended to contract with for implementation of the DMP. The owners of approximately ten percent of the parcels in the Village responded that they did not consent to use of their property for the culling of deer. In accordance with NYS Environmental Conservation Law Section 11-0931(4), the discharge of a firearm within five hundred feet from a dwelling house is illegal without the consent of the owner of such house (except in specified circumstances, such as the authorized use by a police department). The Village identified the locations of the dwellings of the owners who did not provide consent to culling and measured a five hundred foot radius around each such dwelling. Although these property owners made up only approximately ten percent of all property owners in the Village, the dispersal of these properties throughout the Village resulted in the five hundred foot radius circles around such dwellings covering a majority of the area of the Village. As a consequence, only limited locations in the Village currently would be available as sites for the culling of deer. As a result of the Village’s analysis of the property owner responses and consultation with the Village’s experts, the Village determined that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible sites to cull deer in order for the culling component of the DMP to succeed. 4. Further Consideration of Alternatives for Implementation of the DMP. In recognition that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible sites to cull deer for the culling component of the DMP to succeed, the Village undertook further consideration of other options for management of the excessive population of deer in the Village in accordance with the DMP. In the process of developing the DMP, the Village had considered and reviewed, including in the DEIS, the FEIS and the Findings Statement, the alternative of sterilization only as a deer population management alternative. “Under this alternative,” the Findings Statement stated, “… greater numbers of deer would need to be sterilized in order to stabilize the herd at the numbers recommended by the DRAC. This option is slower and more expensive than culling alone or the combined approach of sterilization and culling. It would take three to five years to stabilize the herd, and herd reduction would not be evident for five to six years …” In connection with undertaking the sterilization component of the DMP, the Village had received from the NYS DEC a License to Collect or Possess up to 60 female deer for the purpose of surgical sterilization (the “LCP”). A copy of the LCP is attached for reference. The Village consulted with various officials at NYS DEC who have been aware of and involved with the Village’s DMP, as well as with Dr. Curtis and with Dr. DiNicola. Dr. Curtis explained certain relevant aspects the deer management program that he has been conducting for many years on the Cornell VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 4 University campus, immediately adjacent to the south of the Village. In particular, Dr. Curtis explained that the Cornell program had achieved a sterilization rate of 90-95% of the female deer, and that after approximately 3-4 years of maintenance of that level, the population of the deer herd on the Cornell property had stabilized and was indicating a decline. In addition to relaying these results to various Village officials, Dr. Curtis presented this information to the full Village Board at its regular meeting on November 13, 2012. For in excess of a year, the Village has been discussing with Dr. DiNicola the terms of a proposed contract for WB to undertake both the sterilization and the culling components of the DMP. These discussions have been undertaken primarily between Dr. DiNicola and the Village attorney, with regular consultation with the Village’s Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Deputy Treasurer. Evaluation of the proposed contract terms, and, in particular of the various cost components of the work, made it abundantly clear that mobilization costs for the work were a substantial expense. Consequently, significant costs advantages would accrue to the Village if more of the work could be completed immediately following one mobilization effort than if WB had to conduct only a portion of the work on one occasion, and then return to the Village, re-mobilize and continue with the work on subsequent occasions. The Findings Statement had noted that the sterilization component of the DMP would take place over a two year period, and that it would not be expected that the physical activities to achieve sterilization would be significantly disruptive as they would be of a short duration. This “short duration” was indicated in the Findings Statement to be “over several months annually.” As the terms of the WB contract evolved, it became clear that the sterilization work could be completed in an even shorter time frame, particularly if a greater number of female deer were permitted to be sterilized initially, without having to undertake re-mobilization for additional work on subsequent occasions. Also of relevance was the point made in the Findings Statement that “Depending on decisions made by the Trustees the sterilization effort could take place over one or more seasons.” Given the Village’s collection of the foregoing information, and taking into account the information previously collected by the Village, as set forth in the Findings Statement and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, the Village determined to further consider the use at this time of sterilization only as a deer management tool. In order to proceed with this possibility, the Village contacted NYS DEC to request modification of the LCP to authorize the Village to capture a larger number of female deer for sterilization. In response to the Village’s request, on November 16, 2012, the NYS DEC issued to the Village a modification of the LCP that authorizes the Village to capture up to 145 female deer for sterilization. A copy of this permit is attached for reference. 5. Impacts of Proceeding with Implementation of the Deer Management Plan. The Village has considered all of the information contained in the Findings Statement and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, as well as all of the additional information obtained by the Village since the adoption of the Findings Statement. For the reasons outlined in this Amendment of the Findings Statement, the Village currently will not have the opportunity to undertake the culling component of the DMP and would consider currently proceeding with management of the deer population in the Village by increasing the number of female deer sterilized. The most significant impacts considered and evaluated in the Findings Statement and the other SEQRA documentation for the DMP were (1) the actual impact on the deer that would be euthanized in the culling component of the DMP and (2) the degree of public controversy related to the DMP. As noted in the DEIS, “Controversy has been caused by opposition to culling the deer herd and, to a much lesser degree, by opposition to sterilization. Opposition comes from a relatively small minority of resident and primarily from individuals living outside of the Village.” Uncontrovertibly, the inability of the Village currently to undertake the culling component of the DMP and sterilization of a larger number of deer instead will result in significantly less actual impact on the deer. Likewise, the Village’s current inability to proceed with the culling component of the DMP substantially diminishes the public controversy concerning the DMP. Also as noted in the DEIS, in the event that no culling were to take place, “community objections to this aspect of the proposed program would be placated.” In summary, VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 5 currently proceeding with sterilization of a greater number of deer and wi thout culling does not result in any impacts that were not already considered and evaluated in the SEQRA process and largely eliminates the most significant impacts that had been identified in the SEQRA process. B. The SEQRA Process. 1. Amendment of Findings Statement. In accordance with SEQRA (6 NYCRR Part 617) the Village had prepared, reviewed and adopted the Findings Statement. Further in accordance with SEQRA, if a modification or change of circumstances related to the project requires a lead agency to substantively modify its decision, Findings may be amended and filed in accordance with subdivision 617.12(b) of SEQRA. This Amendment of the Findings Statement constitutes such an amendment of the Village’s Findings. 2. Required Permits & Approvals. As the Lead Agency, the Village of Cayuga Heights has primary responsibility for review of this proposal. The only other agency that has permitting authority is the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, who has authority to grant the requisite wildlife management permits. C. Conclusions The Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees finds and certifies that:  The Village Board has given due consideration to the Draft and Final EIS, the Findings Statement and information derived from other documents and public hearings and Trustee meetings during the course of this SEQRA review process;  This Findings Statement Amendment has been prepared pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617;  Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations of the proposed action, the No Action condition and other reasonable alternatives, the proposed action assessed in the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, the Findings Statement and this Amendment of the Findings Statement is an action that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable; and,  Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, potential adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmenta l impact statement process will be avoided or minimized by various plans and policies and procedures that will be incorporated into the Deer Management Plan as identified as likely and practicable in the Draft EIS, Final EIS, the Findings Statement and this Amendment of the Findings Statement.  The Trustees as the Lead Agency have considered reasonably related long-term, short-term, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, including other simultaneous or subsequent actions and determined that there are no significant long-term cumulative impacts. Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees Kate Supron . Signature of Responsible Official Name VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 6 Mayor November 20, 2012______ Title Date VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 7 Landowner Consent Agreement This Agreement is made by and between ______________________________________, whose address is____________________________________, (the “Landowner”), and the Village of Cayuga Heights, a New York municipal corporation having offices at 836 Hanshaw Rd, Ithaca, New York 14850 (the “Village”), acting through the Village’s Police Department (the “CHPD”). A. The Landowner is familiar with the Village’s efforts to manage and reduce the population of deer within the Village, referred to in the Agreement as the Village’s Deer Management Plan (“DMP”). B. The Landowner understands that the Village has engaged or will engage the services of an independent contractor to assist with the DMP (the “Contractor), and that Contractor may be White Buffalo, Inc., a Connecticut nonprofit corporation with offices at 26 Davison Rd, Moodus, Connecticut 06469. C. The Landowner is willing to allow the Village, including the CHPD, and the Contractor to use the Landowner’s property in connection with the DMP as stated in this Agreement. For the consideration set forth in this Agreement, the Landowner and the Village agree as follows: 1. The Landowner owns the property located at __________________________________, in the Village of Cayuga Heights, Town of Ithaca, New York (the “Property”). 2. The Landowner hereby consents and grants permission to the Village, including to the CHPD, and to the Contractor to use the Property to take the following action(s): a. Place or install bait sites for deer YES NO b. Capture deer and remove captured deer YES NO c. Discharge weapons within 500 feet of the residence on the Property YES NO d. Kill deer and remove deer carcasses YES NO 3. Any action taken on the Property will be in accordance with applicable Village law, New York State law, any permit required for such action issued by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the agreement between the Village and the Contractor. 4. The Village will arrange for the Contractor to remove from the Property all deer killed. 5. The Village agrees to indemnify the Landowner for, and save the Landowner harmless from and against, any and all losses, costs, damages, expenses, claims, liabilities and obligations (including reasonable attorney’s fees) sustained or incurred by the Landowner as a result of the Village’s or the Contractor’s performance of the actions that the Landowner has consented to in Section 2 of this Agreement, except to any extent sustained or incurred as a result of any action of the Landowner. Executed this __________ day of _______________, 20________. Village of Cayuga Heights Landowner(s) _________________________________ ____________________________________ Authorized Representative Print Name ____________________________________ Signature ____________________________________ Print Name ____________________________________ Signature VoCH Form 2012 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 8 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 9 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 10 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 11 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 12 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 13 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 14 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 15 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 16 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 17 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 18 The discussion continued around property use consent forms and the number of actual properties in the Village. Chief Steinmetz indicted that he had not counted all the forms that had been received. Mapping those properties the owners of which refused consent to firearm discharge within 500 feet of their dwellings demonstrated that culling would not be a viable option at this point. It was noted that the deer hunting in New York State is no longer adequate in keeping the population down. Mayor Supron indicated that Dr. Curtis noted the requests for licenses in the Cornell controlled hunting program has doubled for this year. Trustee Andolina reminded the group that the sterilization only program was thought to be too expensive and would take so much longer to see results was why the Board voted to go with the sterilization and the culling. However, this option is not on the table and we have to do what we can. Mayor Supron said that the large scale sterilization and reduced timeframe may make our sterilization program more cost efficient than Cornell’s program. Sterilizing 145 doe within a short period of time will be a major impact in the Village by sharply reducing the population growth rate, reducing aggressive behavior of doe associated with protecting their fawns, and by not attracting bucks during the rutt. Mayor Supron reminded everyone that in 2005 the program of Cornell in the Village resulted in only 23 doe were sterilized. What we want to do now will have a greater impact. Mayor Supron will continue to work with the DEC about increasing this number even more once this program is evaluated. She thanked the DEC for the flexibility and relatively quick response for the amended license. She would however, like to talk with them again once we analyze the size of the herd. The contractor will be able to accurately determine the current size of the deer population in the Village once the sterilization begins. If we have 125 deer per square mile, then 145 doe would be 90% of the females in the herd. However, if there are 200 deer per square mile, then we will very quickly achieve 145 sterilized does. The goal is to sterilize 90 to 95% of the herd. The Village would in this case need to ask the DEC increase the sterilization number in this season. One would assume by the granting of the modification, the DEC supports the goal of high percentage sterilization. Attorney Marcus indicated in his communications with the DEC, the DEC was exceedingly encouraging to do anything that the Village can do to diminish the deer population. The representative he spoke with indicated they would be happy with any and every option used to diminish the population, not only in the Village but across the state. They have been very responsive and are intent upon supporting deer management efforts through any means available. The Village is one of the few municipalities willing to spend the huge amount of money to take charge of this problem. This is a state-wide problem and they hope other municipalities will see what this Village has done and will follow suit. Motion: Trustee Szekely Second: Trustee Hamilton Resolution #7201 to accept amended Findings Statement to the SEQR Discussion: no other comments All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried Attorney Marcus read the amendment to the plan VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 19 RESOLUTION # 7202 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Special Board Meeting, November 20, 2012 Whereas, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Village of Cayuga Heights (the “Village”) has undertaken the implementation of the Village’s deer management plan (the “DMP”); and Whereas, in order to undertake both the sterilization component and the culling component of the DMP, the Village sought the written consent of property owners to use their properties and the Village sent consent forms to all property owners in the Village; and Whereas, the owners of approximately ten percent of the parcels in the Village responded that they did not consent to use of their property for the culling of deer; and Whereas, in accordance with NYS Environmental Conservation Law Section 11-0931(4), the discharge of a firearm within five hundred feet from a dwelling house is illegal without the consent of the owner of such house (except in specified circumstances, such as the authorized use by a police department); and Whereas, the Village identified the locations of the dwellings of the owners who did not provide consent to culling and measured a five hundred foot radius around each such dwelling, and although these property owners made up only approximately ten percent of all property owners in the Village, the dispersal of these properties throughout the Village resulted in the five hundred foot radius circles around such dwellings covering a majority of the area of the Village; and Whereas, as a consequence, only limited locations in the Village currently would be available as sites for the culling of deer; and Whereas, as a result of the Village’s analysis of the property owner responses and consultation with the Village’s experts, the Village has determined that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible sites to cull deer in order for the culling component of the DMP to succeed; and Whereas, the Village has undertaken further consideration of other options for management of the excessive population of deer in the Village in accordance with the DMP, including the alternative of sterilization only as a deer population management alternative; and Whereas, in connection with undertaking the sterilization component of the DMP, the Village had received from the NYS DEC a License to Collect or Possess up to 60 female deer for the purpose of surgical sterilization (the “LCP”); and Whereas, the Village has consulted further with Dr. Paul Curtis (“Dr. Curtis”) of Cornell University, who had been providing consulting services to the Village regularly throughout the development and implementation of the DMP, and with Dr. Anthony DiNicola (“Dr. DiNicola”) of White Buffalo, Inc. (“WB”), the wildlife management firm that the Village has intended to contract with for implementation of the DMP; and Whereas, mobilization costs for the sterilization and culling will be a substantial component of the expense of this work, and significant costs advantages would accrue to the Village if more of the work could be completed immediately following one mobilization effort; and Whereas, given the Village’s collection of the foregoing information, and taking into account the information previously collected by the Village, as set forth in the SEQRA Findings Statement (the VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 20 “Findings Statement”) and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, the Village has determined to further consider the use at this time of sterilization only as a deer management tool; and Whereas, in order to proceed with this possibility, the Village contacted NYS DEC to request modification of the LCP to authorize the Village to capture a larger number of female deer for sterilization; and Whereas, in response to the Village’s request, on November 16, 2012, the NYS DEC issued to the Village a modification of the LCP that authorizes the Village to capture up to 145 female deer for sterilization; and Whereas, the most significant impacts considered and evaluated in the Findings Statement and the other SEQRA documentation for the DMP were (1) the actual impact on the deer that would be euthanized in the culling component of the DMP and (2) the degree of public controversy related to the DMP; and Whereas, the inability of the Village currently to undertake the culling component of the DMP and sterilization of a larger number of deer instead will result in significantly less actual impact on the deer; and Whereas, the Village’s current inability to proceed with the culling component of the DMP substantially diminishes the public controversy concerning the DMP; and Whereas, the Village’s currently proceeding with implementation of the DMP in this manner does not result in any impacts that were not already considered and evaluated in the SEQRA process and largely eliminates the most significant impacts that had been identified in the SEQRA process. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Board of Trustees of the Village of Cayuga Heights that the Village currently proceed with the implementation of the Village’s deer management plan by sterilization of a greater number of deer in accordance with the terms of the modified LCP issued by the NYS DEC to the Village. Discussion: Trustee Andolina asked about the 5th Whereas, - center of the paragraph, “and although these property owners made up only approximately ten percent of all property owners in the Village”, I would replace “parcels” instead of the property owners. Motion: Trustee Andolina Second: Trustee Hamilton All approve: Trustee Andolina, Trustee Crooker, Trustee Hamilton, Trustee Karns Trustee Riesman, Trustee Szekely No nays or abstains – motion carried Attorney Marcus indicated the next step in the process is to finalize the contracts with White Buffalo and Cornell. The last of the negotiations were to be final negotiation of fees and how they would be assessed. Mayor Supron would like the Board’s input on whether the final terms are acceptable. Motion: Trustee Riesman Second: Trustee Karns Resolution #7203 to move into executive session for contract negotiations discussion. Discussion: no other comments All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 21 Motion: Trustee Andolina Second: Trustee Szekely Resolution #7204 to enter into an executive session with the Village Attorney to discuss contract negotiations, followed by private session with attorney, at 9:50AM Discussion: no other comments All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried Motion: Trustee Andolina Second: Trustee Crooker Resolution #7205 exit executive session and private session at 10:30 AM Discussion: no other comments All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried Attorney Marcus asked to post for the record: As a result of the discussion of various issues, the Board would like to further consider certain points made in the amended Findings Statement and in their consequent resolution. So as to eliminate any lack of clarity as was suggested in the course of the discussion: In the Findings Statement Amendment at section 3, second paragraph – the first statement will be revised to read: “Some owners of parcels in the Village responded they did not consent to the use of their property for the culling of deer.” The next two remain the same. The following sentence will read: “The dispersal of these properties throughout the Village resulted in the five hundred foot radius circles around such dwellings covering a majority of the area of the Village.” Motion: Trustee Andolina Second: Trustee Riesman Resolution #7206 to amend the Findings Statement Amendment as stated. Discussion: no other comments All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried Attorney Marcus and the Village Board made changes to the previous document and have adopted this as their final amended copy: VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 22 State Environmental Quality Review Findings Statement - Amendment Deer Management Plan Village of Cayuga Heights Tompkins County, New York Adopted: November 20, 2012 This document is an Amendment of the Findings Statement prepared and adopted by the Village Board of Trustees on April 4, 2011 (the “Findings Statement”) pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617.11 implementing the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). This Findings Statement Amendment draws upon the information in the Village of Cayuga Heights (the “Village”) record in connection with the Village's program for deer management (the “Deer Management Plan,” of “DMP”) as set forth on the Village's website; the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) dated November 1, 2010, and comments received on the DEIS at a duly noticed public hearing held on December 6, 2010, along with written comments received on the DEIS; the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) dated March 14, 2011, and comments received on the FEIS between March 14, 2011 and ten days thereafter; the Findings Statement itself; the Decision, Order and Judgment dated September 14, 2011 of the State of New York Supreme Court, Honorable Phillip R. Rumsey, Justice Presiding (the “Supreme Court Decision”), in the action brought against the Village by opponents of the DMP seeking annulment of the DMP and challenging the Village’s SEQRA review of the DMP, along with all documents filed in connection with such action; the Memorandum and Order dated June 14, 2012 of the State of New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, Justice Lahtinen presiding (the “Appellate Court decision”), in the appeal of said action, along with all documents filed in connection with such appeal; and such information and materials provided to or obtained by the Village since undertaking the DMP. In preparing this Amendment of the Findings Statement the Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees has given due consideration to the DEIS, FEIS, the Findings Statement itself, community and agency input and other documents reviewed and considered in conjunction with the SEQRA process. Further, this Amendment of the Findings Statement incorporates by reference the facts and conclusions in the DEIS and FEIS relied upon by the Board of Trustees to support its decisions, and considers and balances the relevant environmental impacts with “social, economic and other considerations” which form the basis for its decision (6 NYCRR 617.11(d)). Pursuant to Article 8 (SEQRA) of the Environmental Conser vation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, the Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees as Lead Agency made and adopted the Findings set forth in the Findings Statement and makes and adopts the additional Findings set forth in this Amendment. The Findings Statement and all of the Findings set forth therein are hereby incorporated in their entirety into this Amendment by reference. All capitalized terms used in this Amendment but not defined herein will have the respective meanings given to such terms in the Findings Statement. A. Additional Information Obtained Since the Findings Statement and Additional Findings. 1. Confirmation of the Village’s Compliance with SEQRA The Supreme Court decision provided confirmation that the Village’s SEQRA review of the DMP was wholly consistent with the requirements of the SEQRA process. The Court concluded that “there is VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 23 sufficient evidence in the record to show that [the Village] complied with SEQRA,” that the DMP “adopted by [the Village] is generally consistent with the DEC’s recommendation for managing deer populations in urban and suburban areas” and that the petitioners’ “contentions have been considered and have been rejected.” Following the Village’s receipt of the Supreme Court’s confirmation that Village had in all respects satisfied the requirements of SEQRA and that the DMP could proceed, the Village began the necessary steps for implementation of the DMP. 2. Further Confirmation of the Village’s Compliance with SEQRA The opponents of the DMP then appealed the Supreme Court decision. The Village again prevailed, with the Appellate Division in to affirming the Supreme Court decision. The Appellate Court decision concluded as follows. We are unpersuaded by petitioners’ contention that respondent failed to provide sufficient data for informed public comment and failed to take a hard look at important adverse impacts of the plan. The DEIS was detailed in describing the problem, the proposed solution, the potential impacts, and the alternative approaches. Moreover, the DEIS was similar in its recommendations to the DRAC report, which had been issued and made public over a year before the DEIS was issued. There was ample information and sufficient time to comment, as reflected by over 60 comments received. The comments were sufficiently addressed in the FEIS. The issues of human treatment of the deer problem as well as asserted potential impact on human health were adequately considered. The remaining issues have been considered and are unavailing.” 3. Proceeding with Implementation of the Deer Management Plan Subsequent to receiving the Appellate Court decision, the Village proceeded with implementation of the DMP. In order to undertake both the sterilization component of the DMP as well as the culli ng component of the DMP, the Village sought the written consent of property owners to use their properties for each component of the DMP. The Village sent consent forms to all property owners in the Village. A copy of the “Landowner Consent Agreement” form is attached for reference. Once the Village had collected the written consents of property owners, the Village consulted further with Dr. Paul Curtis (“Dr. Curtis”) of Cornell University, who had been providing consulting services to the Village regula rly throughout the development and implementation of the DMP, and with Dr. Anthony DiNicola (“Dr. DiNicola”) of White Buffalo, Inc. (“WB”), the wildlife management firm that the Village has intended to contract with for implementation of the DMP. Some owners of parcels in the Village responded that they did not consent to use of their property for the culling of deer. In accordance with NYS Environmental Conservation Law Section 11 -0931(4), the discharge of a firearm within five hundred feet from a dwelling house is illegal without the consent of the owner of such house (except in specified circumstances, such as the authorized use by a police department). The Village identified the locations of the dwellings of the owners who did not provide consent to culling and measured a five hundred foot radius around each such dwelling. The dispersal of these properties throughout the Village resulted in the five hundred foot radius circles around such dwellings covering a majority of the area of the Village. As a consequence, only limited locations in the Village currently would be available as sites for the culling of deer. As a result of the Village’s analysis of the property owner responses and consultation with the Village’s experts, the Village determined t hat the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible sites to cull deer in order for the culling component of the DMP to succeed. VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 24 4. Further Consideration of Alternatives for Implementation of the DMP. In recognition that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible sites to cull deer for the culling component of the DMP to succeed, the Village undertook further consideration of other options for management of the excessive population of deer in the Village in accordance with the DMP. In the process of developing the DMP, the Village had considered and reviewed, including in the DEIS, the FEIS and the Findings Statement, the alternative of sterilization only as a deer population management alternative. “Under this alternative,” the Findings Statement stated, “… greater numbers of deer would need to be sterilized in order to stabilize the herd at the numbers recommended by the DRAC. This option is slower and more expensive than culling alone or the combined approach of sterilization and culling. It would take three to five years to stabilize the herd, and herd reduction would not be evident for five to six years …” In connection with undertaking the sterilization component of the DMP, the Village had received from the NYS DEC a License to Collect or Possess up to 60 female deer for the purpose of surgical sterilization (the “LCP”). A copy of the LCP is attached for reference. The Village consulted with various officials at NYS DEC who have been aware of and in volved with the Village’s DMP, as well as with Dr. Curtis and with Dr. DiNicola. Dr. Curtis explained certain relevant aspects the deer management program that he has been conducting for many years on the Cornell University campus, immediately adjacent to the south of the Village. In particular, Dr. Curtis explained that the Cornell program had achieved a sterilization rate of 90-95% of the female deer, and that after approximately 3-4 years of maintenance of that level, the population of the deer herd on the Cornell property had stabilized and was indicating a decline. In addition to relaying these results to various Village officials, Dr. Curtis presented this information to the full Village Board at its regular meeting on November 13, 2012. For in excess of a year, the Village has been discussing with Dr. DiNicola the terms of a proposed contract for WB to undertake both the sterilization and the culling components of the DMP. These discussions have been undertaken primarily between Dr. DiNicola and the Village attorney, with regular consultation with the Village’s Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Deputy Treasurer. Evaluation of the proposed contract terms, and, in particular of the various cost components of the work, made it abundantly clear that mobilization costs for the work were a substantial expense. Consequently, significant costs advantages would accrue to the Village if more of the work could be completed immediately following one mobilization effort than if WB had to conduct only a portion of the work on one occasion, and then return to the Village, re-mobilize and continue with the work on subsequent occasions. The Findings Statement had noted that the sterilization component of the DMP would take place over a two year period, and that it would not be expected that the physical activities to achieve sterilization would be significantly disruptive as they would be of a short duration. This “short duration” was indicated in the Findings Statement to be “over several months annually.” As the terms of the WB contract evolved, it became clear that the sterilization work could be completed in an even shorter time frame, particularly if a greater number of female deer were permitted to be sterilized initially, without having to undertake re-mobilization for additional work on subsequent occasions. Also of relevance was the point made in the Findings Statement that “Depending on decisions made by the Trustees the sterilization effort could take place over one or more seasons.” Given the Village’s collection of the foregoing information, and taking into account the information previously collected by the Village, as set forth in the Findings Statement and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, the Village determined to further consider the use at this time of sterilization only as a deer management tool. In order to proceed with this possibility, the Village contacted NYS DEC to request modification of the LCP to authorize the Village to capture a larger number of female deer for sterilization. In response to the Village’s request, on November 16, 2012, the NYS DEC issued to the Village a modification of the LCP that authorizes the Village to capture up to 145 female deer for sterilization. A copy of this permit is attached for reference. VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 25 5. Impacts of Proceeding with Implementation of the Deer Management Plan. The Village has considered all of the information contained in the Findings Statement and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, as well as all of the additional informatio n obtained by the Village since the adoption of the Findings Statement. For the reasons outlined in this Amendment of the Findings Statement, the Village currently will not have the opportunity to undertake the culling component of the DMP and would consider currently proceeding with management of the deer population in the Village by increasing the number of female deer sterilized. The most significant impacts considered and evaluated in the Findings Statement and the other SEQRA documentation for the DMP were (1) the actual impact on the deer that would be euthanized in the culling component of the DMP and (2) the degree of public controversy related to the DMP. As noted in the DEIS, “Controversy has been caused by opposition to culling the deer herd and, to a much lesser degree, by opposition to sterilization. Opposition comes from a relatively small minority of resident and primarily from individuals living outside of the Village.” Uncontrovertibly, the inability of the Village currently to undertake the culling component of the DMP and sterilization of a larger number of deer instead will result in significantly less actual impact on the deer. Likewise, the Village’s current inability to proceed with the culling component of the DMP substantially diminishes the public controversy concerning the DMP. Also as noted in the DEIS, in the event that no culling were to take place, “community objections to this aspect of the proposed program would be placated.” In summary, currently proceeding with sterilization of a greater number of deer and without culling does not result in any impacts that were not already considered and evaluated in the SEQRA process and largely eliminates the most significant impacts that had been identified in the SEQRA process. B. The SEQRA Process. 1. Amendment of Findings Statement. In accordance with SEQRA (6 NYCRR Part 617) the Village had prepared, reviewed and adopted the Findings Statement. Further in accordance with SEQRA, if a modification or change of circumstances related to the project requires a lead agency to substantively modify its decision, Findings may be amended and filed in accordance with subdivision 617.12(b) of SEQRA. This Amendment of the Findings Statement constitutes such an amendment of the Village’s Findings. 2. Required Permits & Approvals. As the Lead Agency, the Village of Cayuga Heights has primary responsibility for review of this proposal. The only other agency that has permitting authority is the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, who has authority to grant the requisite wildlife management permits. C. Conclusions The Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees finds and certifies that:  The Village Board has given due consideration to the Draft and Final EIS, the Findings Statement and information derived from other documents and public hearings and Trustee meetings during the course of this SEQRA review process;  This Findings Statement Amendment has been prepared pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617;  Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations of the proposed action, the No Action condition and other reasonable alternatives, the proposed action assessed in the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, the Findings Statement and this Amendment of the Findings Statement is an action that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable; and, VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 26  Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, potential adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental impact statement process will be avoided or minimized by various plans and policies and procedures that will be incorporated into the Deer Management Plan as identified as likely and practicable in the Draft EIS, Final EIS, the Findings Statement and this Amendment of the Findings Statement.  The Trustees as the Lead Agency have considered reasonably related long-term, short-term, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, including other simultaneous or subsequent a ctions and determined that there are no significant long-term cumulative impacts. Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees Kate Supron . Signature of Responsible Official Name Mayor November 20, 2012______ Title Date VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 27 Attorney Marcus re-read the changes to the Board Resolution #7202 Motion: Trustee Karns Second: Trustee Szekely RESOLUTION #7207 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES as amended Special Board Meeting, November 20, 2012 Whereas, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Village of Cayuga Heights (the “Village”) has undertaken the implementation of the Village’s deer management plan (the “DMP”); and Whereas, in order to undertake both the sterilization component and the culling component of the DMP, the Village sought the written consent of property owners to use their properties and the Village sent consent forms to all property owners in the Village; and Whereas, some owners of parcels in the Village responded that they did not consent to use of their property for the culling of deer; and Whereas, in accordance with NYS Environmental Conservation Law Section 11 -0931(4), the discharge of a firearm within five hundred feet from a dwelling house is illegal without the consent of the owner of such house (except in specified circumstances, such as the authorized use by a police department); and Whereas, the Village identified the locations of the dwellings of the owners who did not provide consent to culling and measured a five hundred foot radius around each such dwelling, and the dispersal of these properties throughout the Village resulted in the five hundred foot radius circles around such dwellings covering a maj ority of the area of the Village; and Whereas, as a consequence, only limited locations in the Village currently would be available as sites for the culling of deer; and Whereas, as a result of the Village’s analysis of the property owner responses and consultation with the Village’s experts, the Village has determined that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible sites to cull deer in order for the culling component of the DMP to succeed; and Whereas, the Village has undertaken further consideration of other options for management of the excessive population of deer in the Village in accordance with the DMP, including the alternative of sterilization only as a deer population management alternative; and Whereas, in connection with undertaking the sterilization component of the DMP, the Village had received from the NYS DEC a License to Collect or Possess up to 60 female deer for the purpose of surgical sterilization (the “LCP”); and Whereas, the Village has consulted further with Dr. Paul Curtis (“Dr. Curtis”) of Cornell University, who had been providing consulting services to the Village regularly throughout the development and implementation of the DMP, and with Dr. Anthony DiNicola (“Dr. DiNicola”) of White Buffalo, Inc. (“WB”), the wildlife management firm that the Village has intended to contract with for implementation of the DMP; and Whereas, mobilization costs for the sterilization and culling will be a substantial component of the expense of this work, and significant costs advantages would accrue to the Village if more of the work could be completed immediately following one mobilization effort; and Whereas, given the Village’s collection of the foregoing information, and taking into account the information previously collected by the Village, as set forth in the SEQRA Findings Statement (the “Findings Statement”) and VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Marcham Hall Nov 20, 2012 – 9AM Page 28 elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, the Village has determined to further consider the use at this time of sterilization only as a deer management tool; and Whereas, in order to proceed with this possibility, the Village contacted NYS DEC to request modification of the LCP to authorize the Village to capture a larger number of female deer for sterilization; and Whereas, in response to the Village’s request, on November 16, 2012, the NYS DEC issued to the Village a modification of the LCP that authorizes the Village to capture up to 145 female deer for sterilization; and Whereas, the most significant impacts considered and evaluated in the Findings Statement and the other SEQRA documentation for the DMP were (1) the actual impact on the deer that would be euthanized in the culling component of the DMP and (2) the degree of public controversy related to the DMP; and Whereas, the inability of the Village currently to undertake the culling component of the DMP and sterilization of a larger number of deer instead will result in significantly less actual impact on the deer; and Whereas, the Village’s current inability to proceed with the culling component of the DMP substantially diminishes the public controversy concerning the DMP; and Whereas, the Village’s currently proceeding with implementation of the DMP in this manner does not result in any impacts that were not already considered and evaluated in the SEQRA process and largely eliminates the most significant impacts that had been identified in the SEQRA process. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Board of Trustees of the Village of Cayuga Heights that the Village currently proceed with the implementation of the Village’s deer management plan by sterilization of a greater number of deer in accordance with the terms of the modified LCP issued by the NYS DEC to the Village. Discussion: no other comment All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried Motion: Trustee Hamilton Second: Trustee Andolina Resolution # 7208 to authorize Mayor Supron to sign a contract with White Buffalo, not to exceed $150,000 with terms and conditions approved by the Village Attorney, allocating additional funds being drawn from the General Fund. Discussion: no other comment All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried Motion: Trustee Andolina Second: Trustee Hamilton Resolution # 7209 to authorize Mayor Supron to sign a contract with Cornell University, not to exceed $30,000 with terms and conditions approved by the Village Attorney allocating additional funds being drawn from the General Fund. Discussion: no other comment All approve – no nays or abstains – motion carried At the request of Treasurer Mangione, Mayor Supron will solicit by RFP for auditing services – for the audit FYE12. Adjourn @ 10:40AM Submitted by Clerk Mills