Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-10-20 Town Board Meeting Minutes1 | P a g e Town of Danby Town Board Meeting Minutes Held Monday, October 20, 2025 Board Members Present: Joel Gagnon, Town Supervisor Leslie Connors Katharine Hunter Tyler Stein Patricia Woodworth Town Staff: Mariah Dillon, Town Clerk Laura Shawley, Bookkeeper (Via Video Conference) Greg Hutnik, Town Planner Other Attendees: Captain Tilton, USNR Ted Crane Garry Huddle Ronda Roaring Steve Selin Zach Larkins Jennifer Tiffany Jim Holahan Mark Pruce Dan Klein Brenda Walker Kevin Fullagar Tom Duddy Gene Sczepanski Steve Willcox Supervisor Gagnon announced the opening of the Public Hearing. Public Hearing – Timber Harvest Local Law Public Hearing started at 6 :00 Spoke In Favor of the Timber Harvest Law Spoke Against the Timber Harvest Law Ronda Roaring Public Hearing ended at 6 :04 Call to Order 6:0 4 Additions/Deletions to the Agenda Executive Session Regarding Purchase Negotiation – 1840 Danby Road ~Moved to Business Report on the Feasibility of Initiating the Annual Charge for the Beardsley Lane Drainage District ~ Moved to Business Update on South Hill Cider ~ Moved to Business Privilege of the Floor 2 | P a g e Ted Crane Requested an update on the status of the enforcement action on the situation on Nelson Road and elsewhere. Ronda Roaring Read the Special Event Law and suggested that in section “B” she would like to add NGO’s . “Such as the Finger Lakes Land Trust, the Cayuga Trails Club, things like that. They typically have certain special events. They don't charge a fee or anything ; it's just a celebration of their work. I think that they ought to be listed in here, somewhere at the end, where it says, including those related to governmental, religious, and school functions, and you could put in NGO’s.” Steve Selin “I wanted to give a quick update, on South Hill Cider. I'm sure Joel might have some of this information already, but I just wanted to let everybody know that we are working conscientiously to receive input from all of our neighbors on the impacts that we have on them. We held a publicly open meeting to all the neighborhood that was attended by at least 22 people. But the primary people complaining chose not to participate, and they've denied to discuss any of their concerns directly with us on how to mitigate. I would like to offer [that] there are organizations that would help mediate a discussion, and I would love to have a mediated discussion with people who are concerned about the impact South Hill Cider's having. We also canceled last Friday's concert. Publicly, we just said it was due to unforeseen circumstances, or beyond our control or something. But honestly, it was to be nice neighbors. I truly think that we can legally host these events, but I'm trying to be a really nice neighbor. Especially because a couple of them just had a baby, and I didn't want to disturb them with any sound at all. So that's why we canceled the concert from last Friday. And then we also sent a letter to all the neighbors that we invited to the meeting and men tioned the things that we're, you know, trying to do to be nice neighbors, like cutting off the music at 8.30 p.m., measuring decibels to try and calibrate what is an acceptable level and what's not. No longer allowing bands to have their own sound technic ians, because that can get too loud and out of control. Also, we've acknowledged that some nights have been really what I deem is pretty loud, and I would like it to be less loud, and so we're trying to figure out how to do that. We've moved some music off the stage to make it quieter on the recommendation of one of our next-door neighbors. We've reduced the frequency of evenings of amplified music. So, just wanted to let everybody know we are conscientiously reducing our impact and seeking more input from neighbors on how to have less impact on them. I would urge anybody that has any concerns to come to me, or if you want to use mediation, I'm totally open for that, and I will cover the cost of that. As will other organizations that will help us cover the cost of that. And then, in regards to the event law, I'm not opposed to an event law. I think having an event law on the books that everybody, or most people, can agree to would be a benefit to the town because it might decrease some unwanted events, but it would also open a pathway for people to do other creative events that they might wonder, well, can I do this or can I not do this? It would create a pathway and a system for people to actually hold more events in this town that could be creative and good for the community. One of my concerns, of course, as a business we've hosted well over 100 events with well over 100 people over the past 5 years and only the loudest ones are the ones that have made people unhappy. That's why we're addressing the sound in particular. So, in terms of the event law, Section 1, B, where it defines which special events are not considered special events , it mentions an event held on property used for commercial purposes with available parking for such event . I guess my question is, is that where South Hill Ciders events would fall? Because we are an agricultural and commercial enterprise, and we do have available parking for our events. If someone could clarify that when you discuss this later in the meeting, that would be great.” Tyler Stein Regarding th e Special Even ts law: “ I have a number of changes that I would like to propose at that time, but I would like to use the Privilege of The Floor to speak uninterrupted on this proposed law for just a couple of minutes to frame my general feelings about it. It was a hard choice between that or speaking in support of the logging law, which I could have done a moment ago, but I wrote this before 3 | P a g e I came and wasn't prepared. I am really excited to discuss tonight, though. A gathering of only 100 attendees is not special. It's just a normal day in a healthy community. We should not have an everyday events law in Danby, and I think a law like this one should regulate events of more than 1,000 attendees, not small get-togethers of 100 people. I also feel that there is no reason for any exemptions to a law of this type. If the honest intention is to protect the citizens and environment of Danby from the negative effects of large events, there's no justification to select a handful of communities within Danby for whom these rules won't apply. If we were to leave the triggering number of attendees so low, as it's written right now, 100 individuals, then the exemption for weddings, family gatherings , holiday parties, religious celebrations, and graduation parties - which are the activities listed in Section 1B exemptions - those exemptions would be necessary only because gatherings of 100 people are not and should never be considered criminal. So, if those are exempt then only all other small gatherings of 100 people would be criminal without 90 days’ notice and an approval from the BZA. Does everybody see the problem here? But, of course, permits should not be required for weddings, church events, or family gatherings, not because they're specifically exempt from this law, but by the simple virtue that weddings, church events , and family gatherings are not attended by thousands of individuals, and they do not cause any significant or unacceptable disturbance to the town of Danby. Neither would a Pride party or a pie-eating contest, although neither of those would be exempted, unfortunately. Spontaneity be damned. This proposed law is misguided. As written, it is an antisocial law which criminalizes the right of rural citizens across this country to celebrate the best thing in the world - coming together to cultivate and grow and share our love with one another. No one is entitled to a neighborhood without gatherings. You cannot choose for your community that they may not hold small gatherings, and we should not pass a law that likewise interferes with the ability of our community to spontaneously party. Please do not kill Joy. And the last thing that I have to say right now is that one major reason churches are exempt from this proposed law is that when people are organized, they are able to effectively fight to protect their rights. To the people of Danby, who don't want this law: You need to organize yourselves if you want to defend your right to organize yourselves. Correspondence ~ None Announcements ~ None Meeting Minutes Resolution 246 of 2025 To Accept the October 6 th, 2025, Town Board Meeting Minutes Moved by Gagnon    Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 246 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Reports and Presentations • County Legislature Rep Dan Klein “[Tompkins County is] currently looking at a 3.3% increase to the tax levy. That would come out to a $20 increase on the average homeowner in Tompkins County. We have 4 | P a g e another meeting tomorrow night where we'll take the budget to the next stage. It might change a little bit, but I wouldn't expect it to change a lot. “Internet update – Tompkins County put in an application about a year and a half ago to get broadband internet to every home in Tompkins County. We’ve been told the whole time by everybody involved - by the industry, by the government, by everybody - that fiber is the gold standard. Fiber is the best way to get internet to homes, and that people didn't think that was likely to change over the next few decades. So , the grant programs that we were applying to only allowed you to apply for fiber. They didn't want to waste anybody's time or money installing anything less effective than that. Well, about 3 weeks ago, the federal government changed the policy a nd they are no longer requiring fiber . The only thing that they will consider for Tompkins County is what's called licensed fixed wireless . What that basically is, and I know my terms aren't going to be maybe technically correct, but they're basically radio waves from cell towers a nd that's why we had the approximately 1,000 homes that still didn't have internet after that program. It's a real setback in my opinion that this is what we're being offered now is licensed fixed wireless. Now, what they did say is that the technology's gotten better over the last 10 years, but nobody could guarantee that this is actually going to work for us. So, that's where we're at. Our application is in. They said they're going to make a decision by the end of the year and if we're approved it'll take up to 4 years to finish the project. Hopefully, it'll be done before then.” Crane : “I had a chat with a company that a pparently is going to be providing that licensed fixed wireless. They did not quote speeds that I could repeat, but if the reliability problems that were experienced with Clarity Connect are overcome - and they did feel that the products they're using are much more robust than the 10 -year-old products that Clarity had - I think we would not be foolish to expect much better speeds than was provided by Clarity.” • Supervisor’s Report and Request for Budget Transfer Resolution 247 of 2025 To A pprove Budget Transfer of Funds Between Accounts RESOLVED, the Town Board approves the following budget transfers between accounts: FROM TO AMOUNT DA5142.4 Snow Removal – Cont. DA9060.8 Health Insurance 15,320.00 Moved by Gagnon    Seconded by Connors Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 247 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Warrant Abstract 20 of 2025 Resolution 248 of 2025 To Approve General Fund Vouchers 394 - 409 for $13,158.17 5 | P a g e Moved by Connors    Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 248 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Resolution 249 of 2025 To A pprove Highway Fund Vouchers 195 -205 for $22,646.28 Moved by Connors    Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 249 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Business Timber Harvest Local Law Stein spoke in favor of the Timber Harvest Law protecting roads and streams. Brenda Walker Asked why the town would pass a law that doesn’t pertain to residents. Stein answered that it wouldn’t pertain to regular non -commercial properties. Walker asked how many private properties that are businesses are logging in this area? Gagnon answered that the town does not know, and this is the reason for the law – to get information and provide for a registry of businesses that are logging in Danby. A question came up about the time of day that logging would be allowed. Connors brought up best practices concerning both time of day and seasons/weather conditions for logging. Discussion ensued regarding nighttime logging practices. Insurance concern s were also discussed. The approval process was brought up and how a permit would get approved. The draft law has the Highway Superintendent issuing the permits. Shawley mentioned the system of documenting that the Highway Superintendent must complete. Gene Sczepanski questioned how much time the board was spending on this issue. Hutnik brought up inconsistencies with the approval process. “ Right now it [the draft law] says that the Planner is the enforcement officer, the Highway Superintendent is the person who approves the permit, and then the Planner is the one who denies the permit. ~ I think that something in here needs to be changed. It might be as simple as just r emoving the line in Section 9, where it says, “in the event the permit is denied by the Planner, Zoning officer, Stormwater Management Officer,” … you could just get rid of that and say, in the event the permit is denied, comma, the applicant may appeal th e decision to the Board of Zoning 6 | P a g e Appeals.” It was agreed that the draft law will be tabled for now and revised – clarifying the approval process to make clear that the Planner would issue the permits and possibly adding an estimated hours of operation to the information requested of operators in the application form . Resolution 250 of 2025 To Table Local Law #6 of 2025 Timber Harvest Local Law Moved by Gagnon    Seconded by Woodworth Discussion: It was determined that the law needs to better clarify the permit approval process and possibly add times to the estimated dates of harvest. Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 50 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Set Second CDBG Public Hearing for November 3 Hutnik clarified that the town has two open C ommunity Development Blocks. “The town has one for homeowners that meet income requirements to upgrade their homes. This public hearing is for the multifamily 2023 program. It was a small pot of money, about 150 grand. It's been mostly used to upgrade the two multifamily units across the street on Danby Road. And so, that program has reached 75% of its amount, in terms of what has been expended. So, there's 25% left [which is the trigger for the second public hearing].” Resolution 251 of 2025 To Schedule the Second CDBG Public Hearing for November 3 , 2025 Moved by Gagnon   Seconded by Woodworth Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 51 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Special Events Local Law – Ready to Propose? Gagnon asked if the current version of the Special Events Law was ready to be advanced. Gagnon stated: “Keep in mind that the reason we're doing this at all is to enable that which is not currently allowed in our zoning. We're not trying to discontinue anything or curtail activity. We're trying to enable the kind of thing that Angelo wanted to do o n South Danby Road in a better way.” Discussion ensued regarding what makes an event special, including the number of people, cars, admission charged, time of scheduled music, overnight accommodations, availability of bathrooms, ambulance accessibility, having a stage constructed, requiring permits, and health department approvals. 7 | P a g e Connors asked for a chart that lists sites where potentially 100 people would gather and the effect this law might have on them. Discussion ensued as to what is “commercial” activity. The Board agreed to make updates to the draft law and revisit in the future. Hutnik agreed to do more research and bring it back to the board . Resolution 25 2 of 2025 To Extend the Meeting by 30 Minutes Moved by Connors   Seconded by Gagnon Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 5 2 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   CDBG Rehab Approvals – 6 West Jersey Hill Rd, 572 Nelson Rd, and 1055 Coddington Rd Resolution 25 3 of 2025 To Approve CDBG Grants for 6 West Jersey Hill Rd, 572 Nelson Rd, and 1055 Coddington Rd Moved by Woodworth   Seconded by Connors Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 5 3 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Feasibility of Initiating the Annual Charge for the Beardsley Lane Drainage District Gagnon: “You will recall that the drainage district was established and the expectation on the part of the residents was that we would initiate the annual charge, starting soon.” Hutnik passed around the Engineer’s Report of the Proposed Town of Danby Drainage District #1: CMC Development Subdivision . The Town has provided the Tompkins County Assessment Office with the properties in the district, and the Assessment Office will add (for the first year) an additional $309 to each of the 22 properties in the district . Going forward, district residents will be charged on an annual basis for the cost of maintenance. Hutnik clarified: “According to this [engineering] report, as of 2021, the town retains $4,177 in an escrow account that will be applied to the first -year maintenance. The $309 charge for those 22 lots will be $6,793, and that's a combined $10,970. That's what the estimated cost is o maintain for the first year of maintenance for these ponds.” 8 | P a g e Hutnik will draft a letter to the residents of the drainage district to inform them of the initiation of the annual charge and what to expect in the first year. Update on South Hill Cider Hutnik and Gagnon met with three attorneys from the Department of Agriculture and Markets. Gagnon: “They (Ag & Markets) mentioned that they don't normally get involved unless it's at the request of a farmer that's defending him or herself from an action by the municipality to enforce some law that they think is unreasonable… and they (Ag & Markets) did offer to mediate in the event that we wanted to have them act as sort of an interpreter of the law , with Steve [Selin’s] cooperation. It all requires Steve's cooperation … Steve [Selin] himself, did not ask for that from them. He asked them to review the Special Events Law and the Noise Law. We had [also] asked Ag and Markets to review the Special Events Law , because we thought it was fairly close to something we'd be willing to consider.” Gagnon went on to say that Selin had not yet asked Ag & Markets to review his (Cidery) operation. Gagnon mentioned that Mark Pruce suggested the Town could create a Planned Development Zone (PDZ) for the Cidery that could provide clarity regarding what is and is not allowed. Gagnon shared this idea with Selin who was interested in expanding the definition of what is considered to be agricultural in Danby and apply it to that zone. Gagnon mentioned that a ny such expanded definition would apply to the entire Town of Danby. Connors noted: “The Town shouldn't consider PDZs unless it's an activity or a use that the Town wants to have happen there.” Gagnon mentioned several other tools available to the town to provide clarity for activities. Executive Session Regarding Purchase Negotiation of 1840 Danby Road Resolution 25 4 of 2025 To Enter Executive Session Regarding Purchase Negotiation on 1840 Danby Road and to Extend the Meeting to Accommodate the session Moved by Gagnon    Seconded by Hunter Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 54 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   The Board Entered Ex ecutive session at 8:2 8 PM Resolution 25 5 of 2025 To Leave Executive Session Regarding Purchase Negotiation Moved by Woodworth   Seconded by Connors Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  9 | P a g e Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 5 5 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   The Board Returned from Executive Session at 8:42 PM Resolution 25 6 of 2025 To Authorize the Purchase of 1840 Danby Rd at the Appraised Value Moved by Gagnon    Seconded by Connors Vote:  Connors Yes  Hunter Yes  Stein Yes Woodworth Yes  Gagnon Yes         Resolution 2 56 of 2025 passed on October 20, 2025   Crane inquired as to the appraised value of 1840 Danby Rd. Gagnon replied that is was $26,000. Discussion of next meeting Agenda Adjourn 8:45 Mariah Dillon, Danby Town Clerk