HomeMy WebLinkAboutDeer Remediation email from Randall B. Marcus.PDFPage I of2
Mary Jane Neff
From: Norma Manning
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 9:28 AM
To: Mary Jane Neff
Subject: FW: deer remediation
From: Randall B. Marcus fmailto:randy@bgdmlaw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 B:13 pM
To: Kate Supron; Beatrice Szekely; Norma Manning; Jim Gilmore
Cc: Jeffrey Silber; VCH-Trustees
Subject: RE: deer remediation
A?TCIRN =Y-CL I\T PRIVILEGTD COMM UN ICATICFI
ilear All,
ln :egard to the specific question of wheth*r a public hearing is required for th!s matier, please not* the
f*llowing. The decision tc ccmmenc* the program af sterilization, end to alioeate funds from the Village's
general fund to do ss, itsclf does not require a publie heering. The core proc*dural issu* r,vill be
eompliance with ihe $AQR r*quir*ments. As SIQR prccedure i* the subject of entire books, I will try tr:
focus only an the most significant points.
The Villag* mu*t compl*t* a S€GR review befor* taking an acti*n ihat potentialiy has an impaet on the
environment. Obviously, the eny deer remediation program, togeth*r with the decision to spend msney
on it, requires $EQR review. The $EQR review muet inelude participation fram all involv*d ageneieo. lf a
DHC permit is requir*d, as I understand it wiil be, for the sterilizaiion to take plaee {*r fcr the Capture
nee*ssary to undertake *t*rilhation), thsn DEC's input will be required f*r the SHQR revienr"
Onee involved agenci** have been notified, the SEQR revi*w proeess ffoves on to reaehlng a
determination of significance cf the aetion. lf, following initial review, the *oard determines th*t the d*er
rem*diati** program "will not result in any significant adverse envircnm*ntal impaets" (a
"negative declaration"), then ii is not neeesssry to prep*re an environm*ntal impaet staiement. The initial
SEQR review pfocess does not mandate conduct *f a publie hearing, though the Viilag* would have the
option to do so. Given the political focus cn this issue, I w*uld suggest thai eondu*t ai e pubii* hearing
may be to the Village's advantage, so that all perspectivs;s are {again} voieed and tak*n into a*c*unt in
reaching the $EQR determination of significance",
lf the Villago's initial SFQR review resulis in identification of "ons or rnore pctentially large *r significant
adverse impacts" (a "positive declaraiion"), it will be requircd th*t the Village prepaie an tnvironmental
lmpaet $taiement" if an El$ is required, then th*re is a mandatory public comment period, which would
ordinarily involve receipt of written eommente, though a publie heering is again an option. please note
that, if it becomes necessary as a r*sult of a pasitive declaration of significanee, ihe preparation of an El$
is a far more lengthy and involved process than the initial SEQR review.
Each step in the SEQR process has statutory time p*riod* that must be fallswed" The specifia
requirements for notifications, identification of involved agencies, ete. are extremely d*tailed" As I have
nofed on many occasicns in the past, given the complexity of th* Sf;QR statute, a lawsuit against the
Village on the issue of deer remediation most likely will be based *n a claim of viclation af eith*r a
procedural requirement of $EQR, *r based on s claim that the Board reached an arbitrary or
unreas*nable determination r:f environment*l *ignificance during the SH83 revi*w.
The foregoing exceeding brief summary of relevant SfQR points is not intended to eovcr all *f the steps
necessary to comply with $EQR. I am only trying to provlde a general description of the framewark within
07116/2009
Page2 of2
which the Village will have to proceed. As I have previously indicated, i strongly cuggest warking with DHC asearly in the proeess as possibie to obtain their input and guidance, not anly witti regl-r6 to p*rmitiing of the aeticnsto be taken, but also to best eomply with $EeR,
Very truly your$,
Randv
From: Kate Supron fmailto:katesupron@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 7:I2 AM
Tor Beatrice Szekely; Paul D curtis; Randall B. Marcus; Norma Manning; Jim GilmoreSubject: deer remediation
Good morning all.
My feeling is that we need to discuss the DRAC proposal at next Monday's meeting (7120) and that itshould be on the agenda so the public is informed of this.
Bea and I met with Paul, and my understanding is that the Board needs to make a financial commitmentto "phase I, sterllization" quickly if we are to secure the DEC permit and Cornell research
protocol/approval in time to get the process started this falvwinter.
Bea, were you able to speak with the Amherst, Ny Deer Manager?
Paul, we have board T.9l11gt 7120 (7 pm), 8/10 (12 noon), and,8124 (7 pm.) By what date do you need
a commitment from the Village? Woutd you be available to attend one of the evening meetings to
answer qs?
Randy, do we need a public hearing before we can make a decision? Certainly there are strong opinions
on all sides of the issue.
I will be out today from 10:30 but can be reached on my celi if need ed,342-1077 .
Best,
Kate
071r6t2009
cqod)
NN
|.r)()
(uOG
FFF
F?7
ooc)MIYIf
(I'(U
Po-f
o
o
_(o
o_ o_
OrOrOOF-F-ci ni c.ioc)Cf)os$o\t\trc\JcO
E
L
o
o{ c!
NOv
ll)(r)A-{
oc.io cr)o_ $-OVrN@@Ftsoo--
GO
LL.oo
o) oJe 8e 8:?NlNit >+{VVUU.; N.= N
f.- _ t-
oq oO) rn OJP 6Q T'x oox o
cf)(f)
-r -r/\ /\itt :st
ri 14 -Y
= I 9P
E O O;
.9 -c -cY
b = }t.t-
Lvedtfi n 8ee {EgH H CO
.!u oJ oi c
co c)qS S q
-OOAF" ? 5
=t t- :<5>
EE83
6Dq&Eca(o()tr)lr)a@F-rO,N c")
L
c)
OOOO rtlits\t$
A;A ONN
=@SN roddc;
-(o r.- c9 0,cd o? q c.l
Cf)(ololoN@f.*@.@@@
btststsoooo
cccC
ooooEEEE$(!oo
LLAA
Q:) o) o) o)8888
-^N.NNNxi.*.s?=gt5.Y -.s x.g x; s= {= r= NxF*xF-=F-^ f.-v^g^u^u^
f-f,"f-q c@ co co cQ oo oo oo o.9 \t.o S 9 S o *E ()E lr)b ()F
'f)- oo^ ooA cot oo
q)cDcoce
=ITIIO()OOItt :ft :ft :fL
IZJ.:<IZ9()()(Joooo
()OOO--c
====io '1:, iO ro
x($(g(!O; o_ 0_ o_ o-3
QS a
Cr)C.)(9(O(O(Ot^s\frf(ri^oooxx=!?o U
M**O
CE@(9f'- \f
xx6-qO*
5
o_
|()t..)f'- F-NN
Nt-
(E
L
c\
-i-o
|r)t*t-_
N@
oFHii:^
=XF
=
;.FYa
,ES
'NqR- xe
-oO9a)
Oic
i +h*
vvi:P Oo6 99o -do _u'-E=9R - }E:Y -O- v d!= ;=o y A-Lu
Esf fr
coNRS Rx5 xo9 5A)YO
8; 8
;
o_
NF.
NN
:
Lo
o
o
(L
Fz:)o
t
uJTol
uJ-o
uJfo
f
rrf
6
-i
^;\
N@+
-
a
OEo^o:<;
L (\l
n-ON
Y f'-(!O
EOqN!, tf)/i@v
\I
-:<(J
c)-O
=
=rzp
,^(U4-v-s6
,='O) dV =a\+o
:9n o)Y'= NF9s S I!b8 5 S:69 H aH,t!x -i xx'+= t x
=i5 > 5><o o
r\z
rzfo
O
()
uJo
tlJo
z
IJJ
59
fiu
=>;,2
tl tAo2o<ztulF
o
q)
_o
TY
TIJ
m
Ar
h0)
ro_
a>
NKP6
5<o
ai id(oE
IJF
!("
"\u ao$
TPOTF, IuIy 2Q,2Q09
Bea Szekely, notes
Village residents may have noted the obituary of Robert T. Tyrrell in the Ithac*.Journal
otr .lT fuly; Mr. Tyrrell was our f{ghway Superintendent from roughly 1970 until his
retiremeftt in 1995; born on his fbmily's farm in Genoa, he married intothe Sharpsteen
family and farmed all his life. Befare coming to the Village to work, he was employed at
the Lansing Highway Department. He was a charter member and first President of the
North Lansing Fire Company. He leaves alargefamily, prominent in Locke, King Ferry
and Genoa.
Beth Anderson, Sl5 The Parkway will be our UNe representative; I've let George
Tabet, Speeial ,{ssistant to the Viee President for Government and Conrnrunity Relations.
and Jenifer Lindbrad, Administrative Assistant inthat office, know.
Carol Kamrnen and I have been in conversation absut the search for a Vitlagc Historian;
nothing positive to report yet. But 'we"re working on it.'
Brent, Norma, Jim and fellow Trustees have had my email including a message from Jack
Rueckheim, Distribution Manager at Bolton Point, regarding the reeent reptraeement of
the water mefer at sur home, which I've brought to your affention because 9O residenfs
received the same request. Cornpliance cost our family $300.
Further re Boltsn Point: I've asked Mayor Jim if he and Former Mayor Ron Anderson,
as our watet commissioners, c&st their votes on major BP decisions in which the Village
has a financial interest, based on the outeome ofresolutions from our Board of Trustees.
Particularly, would a Village Board of,Trustees resolution be neeessary to instruct Jirn
and Ron on how to vote should the City of Ithaca ask to join the Soutirern Cayuga Lake
Internrunieipal water eommission (BoitonpoinO as a cu$tomer ar pa*ne{l r;m
assuming the answer is 'yes,' but just need to knsw.
Fellow board mernbers may note that the annurl Fire Company appea] Ietter is in the
w-orks; written by Rev. Steve Felker with editorial input fFom myseif, this year's letter
will make clear the 501O3 non-profit identify of the Fire Company as distinct from our
volunteer fire depa*ment and will ernphasize the tools and tearnwork needed for
eornmunity firefighting in the Village. I mention this now beeause of eoneerns about last
yeaf s appeal, specifically the question of why th e appeat is necessary givea the tax
support for the fire department. Hence the emphasis in the letter on the nature of the Fire
Company and its activities as distinct from, although overlappinginmembership with,
the Department.