Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-01-22 Town Board Meeting Minutes1 | P a g e Town of Danby Town Board Meeting Minutes Held Monday, January 22, 2025 Board Members Present: Joel Gagnon, Town Supervisor Leslie Connors Katharine Hunter Patricia Woodworth Paul Hansen Town Staff: Laura Shawley, Bookkeeper Mariah Dillon, Town Clerk Greg Hutnik, Town Planner Steve Cortright, Code Olficer Other Attendees: Dan Klein , County Legislator Tyler Stein Ted Crane Zach Larkin s Ronda Roaring Jim Holahan Debbie Benson Captain Charles Tilton Meeting Called to Order 6:03 PM Additions/Deletions to the Agenda • Budget Transfers – Added to Warrant Abstracts • Report on the Audit of the Court – Added to Business • Removing Authorize Signing of Snow and Ice Agreement • Changing the date of the February 17 th Town Board meeting – Added to Business Privilege of the Floor Steve Cortright spoke on the response to the Board of Elections letter sent to the town Board regarding the West Danby polling place: “As a West Danby resident and a voter that has voted in every election, including primaries, since I was of age, I would strongly urge the board to not support closing the West Danby voting station. I don't want to drive to Newffeld to vote, as they're suggesting here. If I absolutely have to I will drive up here to Danby. I do so every day to work, but I think it could be an issue for some residents of West Danby to get up here to vote, as it could be an issue for them to go for early voting in person. And many people don't trust the mail to vote by mail. I realize why they (the board of elections) would like to do it, (remove the polling place) because it is costly, but in the big picture, what is the cost of losing the ability of constituent’s votes? I would urge you to not support their wanting to close the West Danby polling place. Ted Crane Agrees with Cortright that the West Danby polling place not be closed. Thanks the clerk’s olfice for ffxing website issues. “I think the town's website is using software that is extremely complicated, beyond easy user maintenance. And I think they could do better.” 2 | P a g e “I do not see on the calendar any mention of meetings related to either the Comprehensive Plan revisions or to any other revisions to town laws. In fact, I attended the planning board meeting last night, and I got the idea that there was no intent to make these open to the public. I realized that unless there are a certain number of town board and/or planning board or other elected or appointed olficials present, the Open Meetings, law does not apply. Nevertheless, I think it's a very bad look not to publi sh these so that people can at least come and listen and see what's happening. It leaves an impression that, if someone said at the opening of this meeting, gee, I have to scramble back on my on my transcript here, that there are secret meetings being held outside of the view of the public. I just think it's a bad look, and it's no skin off your back if you make th e schedule of these known and make them open to people to listen in.” Supervisor Gagnon assured Crane that the regulatory review meeting was on the calendar. Planner Hutnik explained additional details of the regulatory review meetings. Crane: “My comment stands . Meetings which affect the future of the town s hould be open to the public and announced. It doesn't matter if there's two people in the meeting, if they're discussing the town business, I think they should be open. I think my point is clear.” Correspondence Board of Elections (BOE) Response to the West Danby Polling Location Letter Discussion ensued regarding the Board of Elections (BOE) Response to the West Danby Polling Location including the possibility of putting together a petition . Connors mentioned that the BOE would be happy to come out and have a meeting with West Danby Residents. She met with the BOE and they explained that it was a cost issue. The BOE is not really interested in what the town Board has to say and is more interested in what the residents of West Danby have to say. Connors emphasized the importance of organizing a meeting for the residents of West Danby to provide feedback. Gagnon suggested putting an article in the newsletter . Resolution 55 of 2025 To Arrange Meeting with the Board of Elections in West Dany to Create an Opportunity for the Residents There to Express Their O pinions and Share Them with the Board of Elections as Soon as it can be Arranged. Moved by Gagnon Seconded by Connors Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 55 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025   Announcements - None Reports and Presentations County Legislator Dan Klein Klein announced that he has been elected chair of the Tompkins County Legislature. He also mentioned that Tompkins County has a new Administrator, Korsa h Akumff. 3 | P a g e Klein mentioned tha t he will not be running for County Legislator again. Klein told the board the County Legislation passed a resolution about the Cargill salt mine, similar to what the Town of Danby has done. In fact, most of the towns in the county have done that, basically asking for an environmental impact statement. Klein also stated that he would look into the West Danby Polling Station concerns. Town Historian’s 2024 Report Meeting Minutes Resolution 56 of 2025 To Accept the January 6, 2024, Town Board Meeting Minutes Moved by Gagnon Seconded by Connors Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 56 of 202 5 passed on January 22, 2025   Warrant Abstract 2 6 of 2024 Resolution 5 7 of 2025 To Transfer Funds Between Accounts FROM TO AMOUNT A1650.400 Central Communication A1620.420 Website $1,502.00 A5132.400 Garage Contr. A3310.400 Tralfic Control $214.00 A9060.800 Health Insurance A9070.800 Drug Testing $40.00 Moved by Connors Seconded by Gagnon Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 5 7 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025   Resolution 58 of 2025 To Approve General Fund Vouchers 511 - 530 for $13,059.18 Moved by Connors Seconded by Gagnon Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 58 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025   4 | P a g e Resolution 59 of 2025 To Approve Highway Fund Vouchers 246 - 253 for $17,673.48 Moved by Connors Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 59 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025   Resolution 60 of 2025 To Approve West Danby Water District Fund Vouchers 39 - 43 for $7,367.23 Moved by Connors Seconded by Gagnon Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 60 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025   Warrant Abstract 0 2 of 2025 Resolution 61 of 2025 To Approve the General Fund Vouchers 13 - 22 for $62,686.42 Moved by Connors Seconded by Gagnon Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes Resolution 61 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 Resolution 6 2 of 2025 To Approve Highway Fund Vouchers 1 - 7 for $20,352.97 Moved by Connors Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes Resolution 62 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 5 | P a g e Business Resolution 63 of 2025 to Authorize Signing of CSI Agreement Moved by Gagnon Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 63 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 Resolution 64 of 2025 to Authorize Signing of Tokio Marine Cyber Security Insurance Contract Hunter Spoke about the cyber security threats plaguing business organizations and municipalities, and the complexities of obtaining cyber security. She mentioned meeting with Wilson Henry, Senior Cyber Risk Partner, who recommended Tokio Marine, to handle our cyber security insurance. Tokio Marine quoted the Town $2,392.26 including taxes and fees, with a retention/deductible of $2,500 per claim with a $7,500 aggregate for cyber insurance. Supervisor Gagnon expressed concerns about where the money will come from since cyber security was not in the budget. Tyler Stien asked if the $2,4 00 cost was annual or monthly. Hunter responded that it’s the annual cost. Moved by Gagnon Seconded by H unter Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes        Resolution 64 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 Resolution 65 of 2025 to Authorize the Town Supervisor to Sign the Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District Agreement for 2025 Moved by Connors Seconded by Hansen Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes Resolution 65 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 6 | P a g e CAC Proposal for Involvement in Development Decisions The CAC has sent a proposal for involving the CAC in town board, planning board, highway department, and BZA, decisions where there are potential signiffcant environmental impacts. There is a list of triggers to engage with the CAC. Planner Hutnik explained that there are occasionally development proposals that would benefft from CAC involvement. Resolution 6 6 of 2025 to Adopt the Criteria to Involve the CAC in an Advisory Role for Proposed Development or Construction and Incorporate them into planning procedures of the Town Board, Planning Board, BZA, Planner, and the Highway Department. The following triggers shall apply to engage with the CAC: Effects on erosion: Considering topology, ground cover, and soil type , is the site steep, highly erodible, poorly covered with vegetation? Does the plan involve extensive moving or removing soil?  Aquatic impacts: Are there perennial/intermittent streams or ponds, or vernal pools that have inifow or outifow in proximity to any disturbance? Are there slopes above streams or ponds that might be prone to erosion? Are there wetlands within the development or in downstream proximity that will be disturbed or impacted? Forest: Will the proposed development impact forested areas? Are there unusual or valuable species of trees or vegetation  present?    Is old-growth present? Wildlife: Considering what is known or is likely about wildlife habitat in the area of the proposal, will the proposed development impact the use of property by wildlife? Will important wildlife habitat be affected? Will the project impact a “wildlife corridor”? Is the property part of a larger area of grassland used by threatened wildlife populations? UNA or high Natural/Exceptional Value : Is the property in or near a Unique Natural Area (Tompkins County designation)? Moved by Connors Seconded by Hansen Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes Resolution 66 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 7 | P a g e Discussion of Next Steps in Sewering Consideration The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) informed Danby Town Supervisor Joel Gagnon that the town has been awarded a $4,587,272 Water Quality Improvement Project (WQIP) grant. This amounts to about seventy-ffve percent of the funding necessary to install a municipal sewer system in the hamlet areas of Central and West Danby. Supervisor Gagnon explained that Tim Steed from Hunt Engineering pitched the case to apply for a water quality improvement grant to implement the recommendations of the engineers in their report, which the Town commissioned. The preliminary engineering report, which was prompted by a desire to explore options for having some sort of shared wastewater treatment because without it, we were limited to the individual wells and septic, which is very limiting in terms of what you can do to focus growth in the hamlet, which the Town Board agreed was our objective. That engineering study looked at the whole range of (Sewage System) possibilities, including serving the hamlets with their neighborhood zones and what it would cost to do each , and various ways of implementing it for each - whether force means or gravity sewers, and various ways of treatment, including leach ffelds and bio reactors and conventional sewage plants, and narrow ed the options to a couple that they thought were potentially feasible, which involved serving the two core areas of Danby and West Danby. That's what we applied for funding for, and we got it ! But the trouble is, as Tim indicated, if you can get th e grant, you are three quarters of the way there, and then once you've got that, you're in a much better position to try to come up with the rest of the money from other sources. Connors asked what the core hamlet is. Gagnon explained that the core, or center, of the hamlet of Danby runs down 96B from Miller Rd to Michigan Hollow. A number of questions came up including: Is there going to be a cost for those who already have septic systems to hook up to the treatment plant? Where would a treatment plant be located? What about ongoing costs of the project? – Operating costs could be as high as $1,500 per property on the system per year. The type of system is in question – grinder pumps and force mains, gravity sewers, or a combination , with a variety of treatment options for each Several ffnancial options were put forth , as well as the possibility of creating a special sewer district. What is the scope of the project? How is the Town going to pay the remaining costs of the project (25 to 35%)? Will this cost be spread to all Danby residents or only to those hooking up to the system? Ga gnon explained: If we thought this was really important, we could say, because we're about a million and a half short, we could say we could bond for a million and a half in the interest of promoting the vision 8 | P a g e in the comprehensive plan and make it a town wide obligation. There's no way we can say we're going to take a million and a half and make it an obligation for those ending up in the sewer district. D Benson, a resident of Bald Hill Road was recognized by the board: “My question is whether or not you all have the authority and ability to just go ahead and proceed in terms of whatever the cost may be for the taxpayers . Without either the input of the community or even, like a referendum vote. Because we're talking about a serious amount of money and a big change, moving forward, and a big obligation for the rest of existence, depending on how it goes. Planner Hutnik mentioned that in order to form a special district it wouldn’t automatically go to a vote but there could be an appea l to that special district formation that w ould trigger a vote. Gagnon said the ongoing costs, once the systems is in place, would fall on the people who are in the sewer district, although to the extent that the Town bonds for if it would be a townwide obligation. Connors explained that we had this opportunity to apply after the study was done, to see how it would play out, but with the understanding that we can say no even if we got the grant. Discussion ensued regarding the pros and cons of building a sewer system in Danby. Gagnon concluded: ‘The reality is that there's very little construction happening in the absence of infrastructure. Apartment buildings that are being built in Lansing and Dryden, they've got access to water and sewer. Very rarely does the developer put up an apartment complex and put in their own septic system to service it. In terms of lowering the cost of construction, if you have a s ewer system, you can have small lots which are cheaper to develop and providing the services to those lots with the sewers is also cheaper. There are fewer roads.. There's a lot of savings involved that make development more feasible. It doesn't guarantee it, though. It's state policy to encourage development to go where the infrastructure exists. So, places that don't have the infrastructure are kind of left out in the cold. It's almost a mandate for sprawl because you've got no support for promoting housing where the infrastructure doesn't exist. We have indicated our desire to be a pro housing community. If we had the sewers, it would put us in a better position to help address the housing needs. That need isn't just in Danby, of course, but all over . The bottom line is how much money it is going to cost to somebody who's going to end up in that Sewer District ?” Hutnik added that “in the newspaper article from Tompkin’s Weekly, it states that it's part of the contract that the Olfice of State Comptroller must approve the DEC documentation of the project, before the DEC can begin the steps of executing the contract. And the note in here is that the DEC will expect the contracts to be executed within 90 to 1 20 days. That's after the state comptroller has approved the DEC process. From what we found looking into WQIP awards (Water Quality Improvement Program a wards), past WQIP awards have taken at least six months for a contract to even be in place. Last year, a few towns in Tompkins County were awarded them at Christmas time and they didn't see a contract until deep in the summer from the DEC. So, it might work well in the town's favor that the town might have about four or ffve or six months before even seeing a contract that the state says you need to sign within 90 to 120 days.” There would be no obligation unless the Town signs the contract. 9 | P a g e Hutnik stressed the importance of reaching out to the program administrators to get answers to these questions. Crane stated: “The only way that people not in the district could become ffnancially liable for this was if it didn't come in on budget, or if the town could not get it funded externally, in which case it would be a bond and it would have to come up to a vote, where people would be asked : Do you want to be paying for something that provides you no services?” And: “I read in there, (the Tompkins weekly, or Ithaca Times) which was that this kind of grant is generally for improving an existing system, whereas - this is what I think the article said - this is not improving an existing system. This is installing a brand-new system. If I understand correctly, my second question is: How do you justify that?” Gagnon responded: “We pitched it as a way of dealing with existing and potential future water quality issues. A sewer system would both address current inadequacies and forestall future ones.” Discussion ensued regarding the types of septic systems, and questions about whether individual property owners could take advantage of the grant, long term maintenance of sewage systems, affordable housing and the future of growth in Danby. Hutnik: “Tim Steed said, (in the Sewar Study Report) …this WQIP program would test the provability, or the fundability of this. The number that always sticks out that Tim mentioned was somewhere between $640 and $650 . He said that the State uses that number as the affordability benchmark per person , per year. If they believe that a sewer project like this can produce no more than a $640 or $650 expense per year per person in that district , it's considered an affordable project. If it's beyond that, it's not regarded as affordable, and they're not going to provide funding for that. So, I think the fact that the town got the WQIP indicates that it could be affordable. There's still a huge ffnancing gap with this. Hansen: “Because of what is being presented to us, we're looking beyond a possibility. It could become a reality. I want to know what we're doing with it. You know what I mean, I want to know why?” “I think it really would be great to set out these different steps that are being engaged in. Because ffrst of all, this a major grant. I had been thinking that they were like a cadre of grants that were going to be coming after this, I'd like to know what all those are. I'd like to know what the monies are involved in this Then - what you were talking about - what would happen next, and then next, and th en next would be a great help.” Gagnon: “I'm hoping that we can soon identify what are the critical steps. And it looks like what (Hutnik) is saying - and I concur - that creating a district might be a critical enabling step, before we can even chase additional money. Hutnik: “In the report, Tim and his team did put together a potential project schedule that goes from the preliminary engineering report that we have here, from March of 2024 all the way through spring of 2028. A pretty aggressive timeline, but in it there are about 20 steps. The next step that we're on, potentially in July of 2025, is special district formation. In that same month, July 10 | P a g e 2025, there's a grant opportunity using the water structures Improvement Act, that would be applied for. He's also suggesting that in that same month, or by that same month, there's discussion about a bond resolution. since that WQIP grant is not going to cover th e full amount.” Hansen asked for a Venn diagram showing the steps and timeline of development and when Danby residents would be charged. Hutnik suggested construction could begin in 2027. Crane mentioned that an article in the Tompkins Weekly implied that the Town of Danby would ask existing residents to pay for something that they don't need, that will effectively benefft people who move in, changing the lifestyle of the existing residents. He stressed that the Town needed to make it clear why that’s a good thing to happen. Gagnon replied: “One thing that's changed in 40 years that I've been observing and talking to people is that 40 years ago, if you'd asked people, nobody want ed development in Danby anywhere - most people just didn't. In the meantime, there's been a growing willingness to entertain the possibility, because of what we've lost along the way and would like to recapture, and the recognition that we have to do something different, or the trajectory is losing more and not gaining anything.” He mentioned the importance of the Comprehensive Plan. Audit Report – Woodworth and Hunter conducted an audit of the Danby Town Court, and reported that they will write their ffndings, otherwise reporting that the court has been duly Audited. Resolution 6 7 of 2025 to Create a Committee of Hunter and Woodworth to Audit the Supervisor and the Town Clerk Moved by Gagnon Seconded by Hansen Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes Resolution 67 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 Resolution 68 of 2025 to Move the February 17th meeting (scheduled on President Day) to Thursday, February 20 th at 6:00 PM Moved by Gagnon Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hansen    Yes Hunter Yes  Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes Resolution 68 of 2025 passed on January 22, 2025 Discussion of Next Meeting Agenda 11 | P a g e Adjourn 8:06PM