No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-08-02TB 8 -2 -00 TOWN OF DRYDEN SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING AUGUST 2, 2000 Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayanis, Cl Ronald Beck, Cl Thomas Hatfield, Cl Charles Hatfield (arrived at 7:25 p.m.), Cl Deborah Grantham Absent: None Other Elected Officials: Bambi_L. Hollenbeck,_Town Clerk Jack Bush, Highway Superintendent Other Town Staff: Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney Supv Varvayanis called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Board members and guests participated in the pledge of allegiance. Soil & Water Conservation Applications Supv Varvayanis - An-opinion keeps coming -up that we aren't even able to spend.Town money to help individuals out. Would Mike (Lane) or Craig (Schutt) or Mahlon care to address that issue? Craig Schutt, Tompkins County Soil & Water Conservation - I brought a copy of New York State Soil and Conservation District Law, Chapter 9(b) of the Consolidated Laws. Article 2, number 15 reads "whenever the work relating to soil erosion and other preventative control measures proposed by the directors of a soil and water conservation district shall benefit the highways, bridges or other property of the county or town, either by repair of actual damage inflicted or prevention of damage likely to be inflicted by flood waters or erosion, the county or town shall be authorized when permission is granted by the proper authorities thereof to contribute necessary funds or to loan equipment or furnish them necessary aid without charge for the use of such equipment for the work to be done for the particular imp_ rovements. No such funds contributed or equipment loaned or aid furnished shall be used except for work which shall benefit such municipality so furnishing the same." Supv Varvayanis - That sounds like its for Town or County. C Schutt - If it is the Town that's doing it, the way I read it is the Town Board has the authority to say yes we can use funds for that purpose on property in the Town. Supv Varvayanis and Cl Beck pointed out that it refers to property or bridges owned by the Town. Reba Taylor, Dryden Village Mayor - I pulled out the original stuff that I had when we originally formed the watershed for the Town and the Village. It was done under the auspices of the Clean Water Act 1996, and it quoted a.lot of the things you. are saying,. but it was. determined that it was to be to the benefit of a group of individuals, but it didn't say that you could do it to benefit a private individual. It had to benefit an entire neighborhood or area, some section of the community. It couldn't benefit just one. I can make copies of what I have for anyone who wants it, but mostly it came out of Tompkins County Soil and Water. Never was it mytmderstanding that the intent was to do individual pieces of property at any time. Page 1 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 C Schutt - The way I read it was if it benefited the area, it could still be done on an individual property, if it was some benefit to that local area. Mike Lane - That's always been my understanding and that's why when the County came up with-this grant program it made it a tri- partied_kind_of thing. We felt that the individual municipality ought to be making these kinds of determinations as to whether this makes sense for the Town and. for the area. Because one individual has a problem he wants to fix, that's not necessarily going to be grantable. It had to go to the Town and have a committee of the Town (and I know that the Town of-Dryden and. the Village of Dryden decided to have a joint committee) to make a recommendation on that. I don't really see a problem there if that committee is seeing a benefit to the municipality, erosion that may affect bridges or how it, may affect other lands neighboring through scouring or other things. I think that's reasonable. R Taylor - Of the projects that we. had. this. year, I_found one I could. agree with-because it was going to benefit the bridge and the Dryden Trail system. The other one is obviously to the benefit of a private individual, just. one private individual._ It was basically to save that individual's home, and I didn't feel that it was something that we should be involved with and I told Mark that. When we did the Penny Lane project, we did an entire neighborhood, benefited an entire neighborhood high and low, plus we saved two roads and culverts. It seems like we are getting off of doing that and looking at more private property things. I know some of the applications from last year I thought were basically just to the benefit of an individual. They wanted something done on their property and they wanted somebody to pay for the majority of the work. Somewhere we've lost our sense of being in this. We've gone from benefiting entire community areas to personal property. The Town had made an application under the program but it has been withdrawn. Cl T Hatfield - We've been consistent with what we've been told and what we've been saying. As long there is a benefit to the town or county taxpayer, bridges, roads or community.... M Lane - What Craig needs is for the municipality to pass on the application. Either support or not support the application. Cl Beck - How do you define a community? If you're preventing erosion on somebody's personal property you are hopefully keeping the creek from silting up, and downstream you've got a lot of people that could be affected, and you've also got immediate neighbors and if you fix one problem it may make the other one worse or better. How do you define this community? How many people do you have to benefit before it becomes a.Town problem? Obviously you're fixing one person's immediate problem, but its a little bit different in my mind if you are going to save bridge or trail or something else that's definitely Town property. It's real hard to say okay we'll fix this problem and we won't get silt in the creek and therefore the water supply in Cayuga Lake is going to be cleaner. Yes, but its a very minor problem. Our discussion before led us to think that we have to have a much bigger project to think about that type of benefit. I agree with the position we took on the ones that we rejected at this point, and there are a couple before us now that are a little bit different. Cl T Hatfield - One of the two is what Reba's saying. R Taylor - Mark and I met and he showed me three projects. One was the Town's for the dam site which I thought definitely, but we found another source of funding for that, so that was withdrawn and the only other one I saw that was of benefit and as a committee member I would have backed was the one that would stabilize the bridges and stuff along the trail system because that was the entire Dryden trail system. I don't have a problem with that. Page 2 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 Cl T Hatfield - If that's the recommendation from the committee then I think it's appropriate • we make a motion to have Town support for that one. If you think the other one is a problem, we can accept one and reject one. is it? Cl Beck - Where do we stand with the committee recommendations at this. point? Cl T Hatfield - I think we just heard it. C Schutt - Who is on the committee? R Taylor - Mark and I met and I discussed it with Jon Bradley and I would think Jack Bush is.... Supv Varvayanis - Don Gilbert was on it, and I guess we should formally appoint Jack. R Taylor - And Jon has always been appointed, so it's Jon and I from the Village and it was the Supervisor and the Highway Superintendent. from- the Town. That's how the resolution was done, Mayor and Public Works, Supervisor and Public Works. Cl Beck - When we brought this up a few meetings ago, did the Board have a written notification of a committee recommendation? Supv Varvayanis - No. Cl Beck - Do we now in writing? • Supv Varvayanis - Not in writing. Cl Beck - I think that should be part of the application. The Town Board takes the action, but the committee is to come up with the recommendations. They can give it orally too, but it seems like it would be proper to have it before us in writing prior to the meeting. Supv Varvayanis - I thought we were going to have more of a complete discussion about the program in general. We had some questions about the legal aspects. Cl T Hatfield - I think that's right. We had questions. We looked long enough to know that one had a positive benefit to the trail and the other didn't affect or benefit anything that the Town owned. I think the biggest question was the legal issue. Cl Beck - Can we ask Mahlon if he has any different take on it than what we got from Craig? It sounds to me pretty clear in that. That's not Town law is it? C Schutt - State law. Atty Perkins - That's absolutely consistent with Article 8, Section 1 of the State Constitution, that you cannot make a gift of public funds to a private entity or person. Cl Grantham - How do you reconcile that with the Better Housing grants then? Atty Perkins - Federal money. It's not subject to the State Constitution, federal program. Supv Varvayanis - We could say well, we reduce the silt load into Cayuga Lake or keep the septic tank from falling in. We could make the case that there was a public benefit. It • would be up to us to decide a little of that. Page 3 of 20 M:: 11, Atty Perkins - I doubt it. Unless you can find a direct nexus between the project and some Town infrastructure because you_ are benefiting a.private party, not public property. Cl Beck - Even though the failure of the private property would have public detriment, that's the fault of a private individual, correct? Atty Perkins - That's correct. The only person that benefits directly from that is them. They can.be compelled under other provisions of the Tompkins County Sanitary Code to fix it. R Taylor - We went through that this morning with another individual's property. And basically FEMA said it is not something.they would fund. It would be up to the individual-to do something or perhaps, as I told Mark, it might be a good project for the Project Impact committee to look at because that's the kind of thing they are looking at, some kind of mitigation, including the possibility of moving the house, which the property owner rejected. Vickie Wilkins - Explained that it was her property that was being discussed (one of the current applications) and that moving the house was not an option because the only place to move it was very close to someone else's land, very expensive and a very inefficient way to address the problem. Their water is not contaminated now and never has been. They need a way to stop the erosion. R Taylor explained the Project Impact program to Ms Wilkins and told her that what needs to be done at the property would be a very viable thing for Project Impact to do. Cl Grantham stated that Henry Slater has been made aware of the Wilkins application and feels that it is a good candidate for Project Impact. Cl Grantham asked Mike Lane to explain-the process. for the flood_ mitigation. program. M Lane - There is $25,000 per year in the County Budget for this program. The municipalities recommend applications and the county reviews and selects the projects. Cl Grantham - If we were to put in an application that looked at a larger area, such as to look at a large section of Fall Creek, maybe do some education about stream bank stabilization and a couple of demonstration projects, is that something the County would consider? M Lane - It would not-be exactly within the guidelines of that program. We'd have to take a look at it. It's not the way the project is set up at the present time. We have $25,000 and it is not likely that that amount in one year would-be allocated to one thing-like that. Cl Grantham - I really feel strongly about looking at erosion, particularly stream bank erosion, from a watershed. perspective. When you do work in.one short section of the stream, that changes everything downstream. When you do that kind of work, even if you did a long stretch of the stream, the land use changes in the watershed, changes the hydraulics of the stream, and what you did may not work anymore. I just keep coming back to more of the watershed. perspective and I'd really like... M Lane - There are other sources of grant funding for those kinds of things. Cl Grantham - I understand that, but I'm trying to find-out if this would be a_source. M Lane - I think the scale is smaller. It's an effort by the County to acknowledge there are problems, but we don't have money like the state and federal government has, but we'd like to try to help. The County had a program in the middle 80's. I was with the Village at the time, and we benefited greatly from that for the dam project.. Then it was suspended for along Page 4 of 20 TB &2 -00 time when the County was going through some financial cutbacks, and it was reinstated here a few years ago. Efforts to raise the amount of money the last two years have not been successful. I certainly agree with you that a study of the whole stream is probably warranted and that maybe making an application through the intermunicipal organization or some other entity that will have grant funding available would probably be the way to handle that. People in the Fall Creek basin are looking at that now. But I don't think-we should not try to take care of some of the small projects. I'm not convinced some of these small projects are going to change the whole stream. Maybe in some cases it might, but usually these are defensive measures. That's what I've seen. Cl T Hatfield - The issue here is whether Town government can fund those projects that benefit an individual without affecting or benefiting the taxpayers as a whole. M Lane - If we hear at the County level that the Towns aren't interested in these projects, I'm sure there are a lot of people in the City and Town Ithaca on the County Board that would be happy to vote to put that money somewhere else. Kate Hackett - Deb you bring up a very important point. Taking a step back and looking at why we're here from a broader perspective is important because if the municipalities in Tompkins County each got together and formed a larger watershed management plan it would not only help address some of the concerns that you mention (the downstream and upstream effects, which I'm particularly interested in) and also help guide the process for you as a Town of which applications to choose and recommend because you would naturally choose applications which would support your watershed management plan. This money is intended for much more hard construction projects and. less for more of the natural approaches to flood mitigation. I think that it might be worth talking about whether or not an application that would like to institute some sort of storm water buffer would be eligible for the project and that might be somewhat of what you are addressing, if the municipalities had a program or plan to create a buffer system. In terms of the environmental impacts, outside of whatever advisory committee you have to the Town Board and whatever you decide as a Board, it is an explicit criteria that we consider the upstream and downstream effect. I'm on the advisory committee that examines applications and we spend quite a bit of time considering those effects from a variety of different perspectives and the planning perspective, the engineering perspective, so we want to make sure that we are not funding just random projects and individual projects. It takes a couple of different layers to make sure that does happen. To the extent that you want to form a watershed management plan, I would be happy to provide assistance. Cl .T Hatfield stated that last year the Town had submitted- an application for-the Yellow Barn area and it was rejected. The Town had done a study that addressed the entire watershed. Craig. Schutt said. that the application was for so much money and the project so big that they didn't feel they could touch it. Cl T Hatfield - Of the two projects in front of us, one certainly qualifies with. the criteria that we've laid out because there is a benefit to the Town. It looks to me like the other one doesn't which is what the committee recommended. C Schutt - I think every municipality looks at it a little different, but that's what you have to decide, how you want to work with it. Cl Beck - Are there other towns that are granting private property jobs? • C Schutt -Yes. Page 5 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 K Hackett - The Town of Caroline has a collection of private property owners that have p come together and did the team approach. to a segment of the stream. So in terms of whether they are funding individuals, yes they are but it is for a larger community. There are other individuals that have submitted. projects where there is no public benefit and they are not receiving support from the municipal level or the county advisory committee. Cl Grantham - Before we decide on these applications, I have asked Sharon Anderson from Cooperative Extension to come because she has been working with the Fall Creek Committee that Marshall Taylor was involved with. I was hoping that we could see a role for that committee tonight or maybe there is a roll for that committee in the fixture. Would you mind telling us about the committee again and. what kinds of reasons for them Io exist there are? Sharon. Anderson - The committee started a lot out of Marshall's vision and seeing a need. My roll is public education and provide staff support, not a committee member per se. It is a group of citizens that live in Fall Creek and are interested in.learning more about the creek and the watershed as a whole and how it affects the creek, and what they can do to protect it. One of the things they've been, doing is learning about water monitoring and water quality. That is a beginning place and they are interested in learning more about the land uses that affect water quality, some of the erosion concerns that are out there, what are the healthy stretches of the stream, what are some areas that could be identified as needing some type of assistance. They are looking for how they can help and be of use to the community in.terms of helping educate people. It is education for people about water quality issues, but they are hoping they could also be of service to people like the Dryden Town Board. They could assist in identifying stretches of stream or being part of a group that would walk a stream or look at areas of the stream. They are educating themselves, but they also want to be of use to the communities, and that is their long -term vision. 0 that is re much the way the group in Caroline started and Cl Grantham. - I think pretty y gr p they now provide a lot of input to the Town. S Anderson - They actually receive funding from the Town. C Schutt - The Town of Caroline puts money in their budget yearly to match this program. They appropriate $10,000 to do stream work so they can do the work. Supv Varvayanis - The Fall Creek Watershed Committee includes the City and Town of Ithaca, Town of Dryden, and how far up do you go? S Anderson - The hope of the group is to be watershed -wide. That is different than the Caroline committee which is more town. based. The thought is to look at it on a watershed basis. We have had some participation from people in Cortland County. We've been in touch with soil and water people both there and in Cayuga County. They are interested in targeting parts of the watershed, but the intent is to be watershed wide. C Schutt - The stream bank inventory that the IO has been doing should be helpful because that will identify stretches that are in need of work. Jack Bush.asked if the money was approved.when would the work.be done and who would do it. Craig Schutt stated that Caroline usually gets private contractors to do the work. J Bush stated that he had not seen any of the applications and assumed that he would be the one responsible for doing the work. Supv Varvayanis stated that he would not be responsible. Craig Schutt stated that Lansing does do the work itself. 0 Page 6 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 J Bush - If I am going to be involved in the work, I should at least be able to review these applications to let the board know before they make a decision that I may be willing to do the work. C Schutt - Jack should be on the committee. When-we sent out the packets. we listed who we felt should be on these committees and certainly Highway Superintendent was one, for that every reason. J Bush - At this point in time I'm thinking this would have to be all contracted out and that is possibly a different amount of money that you are looking at approving. Supv Varvayanis - The applications as I saw them- came in for contractors. and. they were looking for straight money. RESOLUTION #195 - RECOMMEND HOAG FLOOD MITIGATION APPLICATION Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town.Board recommends that Tompkins County approve the application of Jean Hoag under the County's Flood Mitigation Program. 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck_ Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham_ Yes Supv Varvayanis - Jack's application has been withdrawn, so the one still standing is Wilkins. Cl T Hatfield - They are looking for recommendations, we don't need to act on it. Cl Grantham - Do we need to approve the expenditure? Cl T Hatfield - Not yet, they would have to come back to us if the application is approved by the County. Kate Hackett asked whether the septic system was being threatened on the Wilkins property and Cl Grantham explained that it was roughly 20 feet from the creek and the leach field extends to the land side, although it is in the flood plain. Cl T Hatfield suggested that Jack be formally appointed to the watershed committee. Reba Taylor noted that engineers, Peter Novelh for the Village and Dave Putnam for the Town, review the applications before recommendations are made. Cl T Hatfield - What is the formal title on the committee? R Taylor - It's the Dryden Watershed Committee and it's composed of the Mayor, the council person, the department of public works supervisors, and advisors from the engineers. If you want I can pull out the original resolution that comprised it. Cl Grantham - I'd like to see that. Page 7 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 R Taylor - I think I have criteria, the stuff where we originally set the committee up. RESOLUTION # 196 - APPOINT JACK BUSH TO DRYDEN WATERSHED COMMITTEE Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby appoints Jack. Bush to serve on the Dryden Watershed Committee. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote c. . , , Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl-Grantham- Yes Supv Varvayanis - Dianne wanted me to bring up that we have a bill from Logue and Rodman about the master plan analysis. They had estimated under $2,500 and you authorized.me to spend up. to $2,500. They had-estimated 80_hours for analysis;_ it came in 125. Data entry was higher and they have submitted a bill for $3,066.42. Cl Grantham - I think the data entry took them way longer than they estimated. Cl Beck - Is that because of the overwhelming response? Supv Varvayanis - We did-have 35% response. Cl Grantham - They had a ton of comments and the Planning Board asked them to enter all the comments, so it did take longer. But I think it was reasonable. Nobody expected it to be that much. Cl Beck. - You think we should just go ahead_and. pay it. then, Deb? Cl Grantham - Yes, they're not cheating us. Cl Beck - Five hundred and some more than projected. Cl Grantham - I don't think there's any problem with that bill. Supv Varvayanis - I have to admit I honestly think they spent at least 125 hours on it. RESOLUTION # 197 - APPROVE LOGUE & RODMAN BILL Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Supervisor is authorized to pay the bill submitted by Logue & Rodman in the amount of $3,066.42 for data entry and analysis in connection with the master plan survey. 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Page 8 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Peregrine Hollow Sewer & Water taxable parcels Supv Varvayanis - Mahlon, Dianne asked about this. Were you planning on bringing that up today? Atty Perkins - I can talk about it. I think it is basically set forth in the memo I sent to everybody. If anybody has any questions, I can address those. It certainly seems that there are plenty of ways to give some relief there, and you and I spoke briefly about that possibility. It seems to me if the inclination is there it is something that ought to be addressed at budget time. You aren't going to do anything until then. Cl T Hatfield - I happened to stop by yesterday and spoke to Dianne. She seems to think one of the problems is with assessment in. the County and time is growing. short if we are-going to get that assessment redivided. I think she said to me that if we had a chance to discuss it, maybe the Board should pass a resolution asking Assessment to get that burden spread the way it was originally intended to be spread. I remember your memo. Phase lAl was treated as one parcel and that's causing an imbalance so that units with housing going in are getting wacked pretty hard. Atty Perkins - There were 44 lots approved and then there is the rest of the land. The formula that you have assesses the entire cost of the district, including money set aside or money raised to cover the cost of the construction of the meter pit. and. the flow meter. You are only raising that on less than half of the lots because that's all the Assessment has separately assigned. If you had all 44 lots, you could lower the cost per lot, and if you adjusted your formula so that you didn't place so much on assessment and eliminated the distinction between units and half units, you could give the people that are paying the lion's share of it right now some relief and place the burden where it really belongs - -on the developer who still owns most of the lots. Supv Varvayanis - Can you request that assessment assess the 44 lots? Atty Perkins - Yes. They would do it probably just in a letter if that's the sense of the board. Supv Varvayanis - Do we want to have Mahlon send a letter? Cl T Hatfield - Yes, or if he feels uncomfortable going forward, come back to us next Wednesday with a-written recommendation. Do. you need axesolution? Atty Perkins - I talked to Steve Whicher and he told me it would not be a problem if that is what the Town wanted to do. Cl T Hatfield - I think it's only fair. Cl Beck - Why has it not been done before? Just a mistake, an inadvertent... Atty Perkins - Apparently, and I can't vouch for these facts, the proper subdivision plat was filed with the Tompkins County Clerk and a copy is at Assessment. Somebody at Assessment only put in or only mapped out and assigned numbers to the lots in Phase IA, although 44 were approved. Trying to get Assessment to admit who did it and at whose • request is a circus. Page 9 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 Cl T Hatfield - But we have an opportunity to correct it. We need to do a little e encouraging here. Cl Grantham - All that Assessment would do is assess it on all 44 parcels, they wouldn't change the formula. That's up to us, right? Atty Perkins - Correct. Cl Grantham - And this letter would ask-them to spread the assessment over 44. lots, Atty Perkins - I can talk with Steve Whicher and if he requires a resolution, we can prepare one for next week. Cl T Hatfield - What would be the time frame for modifying the formula? Any time between now and adopting the budget? Atty Perkins - You annually set a formula when you decide how much you are going to raise and how you are going to raise it. Cl Beck - Can we adopt a resolution now that Mahlon can have when he goes to Steve? RESOLUTION # 198 - REQUEST TOMPKINS COUNTY TO SEPARATELY ASSESS THE 44 LOTS IN THE PEREGRINE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden hereby requests that the Tompkins County Division of Assessment separately assess all 44 lots contained in the Peregrine Hollow Subdivision in the Town of Dryden. 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl Grantham distributed publications entitled "Fingerlakes Landscape: Landscaping for Erosion Control ". Copies are also available at Cooperative Extension. Cl Beck - Had a conversation today with a fire chief, a former fire chief, a long term EMT and a couple of other people concerning the unrest that's going on between the hired paramedics and the volunteers. From the input I got, and I talked to Doug in person, he is extremely unhappy. I believe the Town has to look into this immediately. We may lose him. It may be too late already. The people I talked to assured me that Doug is a good employee that we don't want to lose and that he's highly respected throughout the emergency system in many Towns and Counties, and he could go to another municipality at a 30 to 40% raise in a minute. I'm not sure how we address this because I'm not totally sure how this works, but apparently in the chain of command we hire Doug and all the paid people and I suppose that he is responsible to us, but I believe that he's responsible to the ambulance chief and this isn't flying and they aren't working together. In fact he can't get drivers at times because the volunteers are supposedly to provide drivers for the ambulance and people don't like to work under those conditions so the number of volunteers has gone down to nothing. There isn't enough people to man the hours that we don't. have paid. personnel. There is apparently a sentiment going around that the Town is paying some people and they ought to pay everybody that works on Page 10 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 the ambulance. I think we have a contract with the ambulance that says they'll provide the • vehicle and a certain amount of personnel. They have agreed to provide volunteers haven't they, in the contract? Atty Perkins - Yes. They've agreed to provide the ambulance service. Cl Beck - I believe that they may not be living up to their responsibility from what I'm being told. Cl T Hatfield - I think you're getting-one side of the story. Supv Varvayanis - We have lost a couple of very active volunteers and they had another one that just kind of burned out. Cl Beck - I guess what I'm telling you is we may lose our chief paramedic and director of operations. He didn't know about the meeting held last night until this morning. Supv Varvayanis - They do have communication problems. Cl Beck - There's a problem and we need to address it. Cl T Hatfield - I'm aware of it and Mark's aware of it and we've been working with Dryden Ambulance, Inc. You'll probably remember that at the last meeting we were directed to accomplish three things, and we're on item 2, which I've just handed you. Please mark these Draft. This is an attempt to come up with some policies and procedures in writing to address some of the issues that you are hearing about. We've been through some transition since January 1. The facilities here were taken down and the paid folks were moved to Dryden Ambulance, Inc. We down on manpower' so the pressure has been increased. We have a full timer that is being hired, a third one. I don't think Dryden Ambulance, Inc. will let us down on delivering service, at least their board is committed to getting service delivered. The folks involved there are pretty solid folks. There is no doubt a communication problem. There is also I believe diffi culties with respect to employees who don't-maybe understand-fully the structure. When they were here, the Town aspect of that, the billing, receivables and managing that was separate. When they step onto that ambulance they step on as a volunteer. We release them from their Town duties and on board that ambulance they work for Dryden Ambulance, Inc. as a volunteer. The next step of the assignment_ I_ was given.is to get Mahlon and - myself together, with their board or representatives and we'll take a look at the contract and how the budget is set up. The budget session is coming up soon-and the committee will have a. recommendation for everyone to take a look at. Cl Beck - So even though that person -is an employee of the Town, when he's on the ambulance he's no longer an employee of the Town, he's a volunteer. I certainly didn't know about that. Cl T Hatfield - That's a.structure that was developed over time and-has worked, successfully for five or six years. He's been informed of this. You should exercise some caution that you are getting a story. It's interesting because he's been coming to me on a daily basis and I've been telling him the process and where we're going. Cl Beck - He didn't come to me. I got it from three other people. • Supv Varvayanis - Let's make sure we all agree he's a good employee and we don't want to lose him. (Board agrees.) Page 11 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 Cl T Hatfield - Absolutely. Nobody's questioning it, and by the way neither are they. There is a clear need here for this individual. to have a_clear_ line of authority. No doubt about that. When they worked up here they were close to the Supervisor's office and they had a clear line on this side andwhen.they were called they went down-and-got on-the ambulance. Relocating the office and with construction going on made perfectly good sense. We raised all these issues, and it may not be a long term answer. Cl Beck - Another concern they have is the security of the private records that they handle. They're on somebody's desk in-full-view of all-volunteers and any fire department people that want to come in there. They don't have a separate office or any way to lock anything-up. When you get a.callyouu are not going-to clean-your desk off and file it on-the way to the ambulance, so that's a concern. Cl T Hatfield - I ask each of you to read this thoroughly. This is a first shot,, it hasn't been reviewed by many people yet, it's in draft form. Look for two things. What's wrong with what's written here, or what's right with-it. Give Dianne a_copy to look at. What. they are trying to do is create a uniform set of policies and procedures whether you're paid or not. For the ones that are paid, you've got the Town.employee package that's got to go with-this. But still, when it comes to how they interact with Dryden Ambulance, Inc. it should make no difference. Cl Beck - I'll echo your thoughts though. There's another side of the story that you haven't heard and I heard it today. So be forewarned that there are some other opinions out there. Cl T Hatfield - There are two sides to this, and maybe three or four, it's a difficult. issue, no doubt about it. Supv Varvayanis - Do we need. an executive. session-to discuss this? Cl T Hatfield - I think we should. I think it's an important issue. Supv Varvayanis - We can-wait till-later in the meeting. Cl T Hatfield - A couple of other things. You sent out a couple of letters Mark that we ought to address. Apparently there is either some confusion or some lack of communication, but I would certainly like to know a little more about where you are coming from on a couple of these things. The first paragraph of your letter (dated July 27, 2000 from Supv Varvayanis to the Town Board, attached) indicates there is some confusion over how we run Town Board meetings and I'd like to know what. your orientation is on. that. I''ve got Article 63 right here. I'm a little confused. I can't quite follow what you are talking about. Supv Varvayanis - Most meetings, like this one, I'm very lax and I let whoever wants to speak speak when they want to. Last month I'm sure you all can recall people were shouting out left and right and some of those people were right here on the board and I don't think that helps me run a smooth meeting. I'm just asking that when things are tending to go out of control that you do not contribute to the chaos. What don't you understand? Cl T Hatfield - I guess I understand what you are saying there, but part of the reason I think there was some... Page 12 of 20 TB 8 -2-00 Cl Beck - I think your comment was directed to me and the motion I made to close the public hearing, is that correct? Supv Varvayanis - There was a lot of people shouting out. That was one of them. Cl Beck - I don't know that there was other comments from the Board. We heard a lot of comments from the audience, but I don't recall any other board member making any out of line comment. I felt the meeting was out of control and I said we'll put a stop to this, let's close it, and if we can get it back in control which we did somewhat, then I withdrew that motion. You may be right that you have to recognize everybody that speaks, but at some point I think the meeting has to be handled. In my opinion you weren't keeping it under control at that point and that's why I took the action I did. If you take exception to that, I'm sorry. As far as the legality of it, we didn't find anything in Article 63 that said we couldn't enter a motion. I think you're right about this business about moving the previous questions, and my understanding is it does require a two- thirds vote. That's under Roberts Rules of Order. Cl T Hatfield - I think that's the main issue. We have operated here over the years with the understanding that's why we adopt Article 63 every year, because it has several differences from Roberts Rules. Under Roberts Rules the presiding officer, in this case yourself, is not allowed to make a motion, not allowed to make a second, only votes in the case of tie. Article 63 specifically prohibits us from adopting those types of rules because it would then make you unable to participate. That's not the intent of New York State Law. It specifically states in Article 63 that prevailing practices of the Board should prevail. As you just said it's kind of how we've always run things for the seven plus years I've been here, and Charlie's been here for a long time. I don't see where it's been anything other than that. I can understand your request. It's control and trying to help keep that control. I don't think there's any other shouting from the board during the hearing that I recall. Supv Varvayanis - Maybe my memory is faulty. You're just saying that any outbursts that I may or may not have heard if I imagined it, were all under control. Cl Beck - I don't know that there was any other. Supv Varvayanis - That's what I'm saying. You were just trying to help me get control. Cl Beck - I thought the meeting was out of control. We were off the subject mainly. It was well beyond the scope of what we were there for. I said this is baloney, we need to stop this and if we can't get back on track, then let's adjourn. That's my point. Cl Grantham - I think the point was that Mark, and I tend to agree with him that those points were part of the questions that HUD was asking. in the materials that they sent and, that they were legitimate parts of the discussion and that people should have been heard. Supv Varvayanis - I think right at the point that he tried to close it Martha did get offhand. That was I believe when she said that she was Jewish. Cl Beck - And the Hanshaw Road sewer and water project was way out of line. I don't think we need to discuss it any further. We've got other things to do. Cl T Hatfield - The next thing that I'm a little concerned about or curious about is your next paragraph. We had put together a statement that we did not hand out at the last meeting when we got through the hearing. As long as you're being honest, we might as well tell you what our thoughts are too. If you want I'll read this for the folks that are present. • Cl T Hatfield read the statement. A copy is attached to these minutes. Page 13 of 20 IY:: 1 Cl T Hatfield - This was done in an effort to be very, very positive in saying let's get going, let's get off the campaign. 0 Supv Varvayanis - Well, since we're going,_ let's get a list of projects that you-think-have died. Cl T Hatfield - There's a list that. we were given in January at the organizational-meeting I'll produce on the 9th. Dave Putnam gave us thirty -some projects and they are all things that we have been working on over a period of time. And that's not to be critical, Mark. We've got to go through a learning curve. There's a lot going on. You're saying you are bending over backwards. We are trying to be very patient. Somewhere we are not communicating. The meeting you called tonight- -you sent us a notice. Ron didn't happen to get it. Charlie had a funeral. I'm not feeling that well. But we got here. Cl Beck - I called Craig and that's how I found out about the meeting. Cl T Hatfield - A phone call asking, hey, are you guys available this night. We need to communicate more not less, if we are going to work together and move forward. I'd like to talk about the agenda, meetings, there are a lot of things we can talk about together. Maybe we ought to rearrange this table so we can look at each other instead of looking out, so we can work across from each other. I. got digging, around after your comments in paragraph one and it seems to me that maybe we should all step back and take a little time and study it over and maybe we ought to change the way we approach our agendas, the way we approach our business. There are a lot of questions. I just don't have that many answers right now. I think all five of us should have input. The. way we've been doing business I think is a disservice to all of us, especially the community. We're willing to sit down and try to figure out how to make this work because that's our job, I think. This wasn't handed out last time. We got on with the meeting and let it go. You send us this memo and then in the last paragraph you fire Charlie. That. doesn't seem to hold together. He's. the most experienced guy we've got. I don't know how you address that. If you've lost confidence in some members, have you lost confidence in Charlie? Ron or myself? It just hangs there, that's all. It's time to figure out how we're going to work together instead of trying to figure out how we're going to oppose each other. It just doesn't make any sense. Then we get this letter tonight. Cl Beck - Obviously we are not going to agree on all the issues, that's been well demonstrated.. But we've certainly got to address the issues and discuss them and come up with some kind of a solution. Either we sue them, or we compromise or we don't do it. Cl T Hatfield - Tonight's meeting. was pretty straight forward, and there's no reason why they can't all be that way. We don't have to agree on every issue. Then you sent this letter off which is fine. There's no problem. These are questions. Have we had a chance to have them in our normal course of conversation? I don't know why we wouldn't ask our own attorney to give us an opinion whether or not this makes sense. I'd love to hear what Mahlon has to say about this. It's not been addressed. The only thing you've heard from him has been what we've asked him. to produce. Now we might be waiting quite awhile for these guys to talk to us. We've got a County attorney; we've got a Town attorney. These are issues. Let's ask the professionals that work for all. of us to address them. I'd_ love to have this addressed. Supv Varvayanis - I thought that I've asked Mahlon to address that... Cl T Hatfield - Have you seen this Mahlon? We just got it tonight. No, he's not cc'd on that. Some of this stuff he doesn't get. We just have to figure out how to stop all this sniping. Here's a good.example. Last time we adopted a resolution-five zip to try to work with the County in the Town and work at it and we asked Hanson to get us something. Now Deb can Page 14 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 . take this, I think she was the one who raised most of the questions, and take a look at it and come next Wednesday we should revisit that resolution. Let's take a look at that resolution and see if there are some details that need to be worked out in the wording. We ought to work it out and either through you or through Mahlon, get Jim Hanson or Mike or whoever from the County and let's make this move forward. We can go back and revisit the map, plan and report, give people an opportunity to vote on it. There are a lot of things that we can be doing. Right now we are going nowhere because we are not even talking about a direction. I personally would. like to have Mahlon take a look. at this issue. L think we need to have that addressed. Cl Grantham - He commented on -it in the materials -he sent to HUD. Supv Varvayanis - I thought that question was asked of Mahlon and I thought he did give his comments. Cl T Hatfield - So why are we asking _these folks for a separate opinion? Supv Varvayanis - Because quite obviously I didn't believe Mahlon's opinion was accurate. Cl T Hatfield - So why don't we ask the County attorney? The County is the one who initiated the... Supv Varvayanis - Okay, you want to ask the County attorney, go ahead, ask the County attorney. Cl C Hatfield - See, there you go taking offense again. Instead of trying to. work with the Board you get on the opposite side of the fence every time and dig your heels in. Supv Varvayanis - I don't think I just dug my heels in. I said he... Cl C Hatfield - You raised your voice and said go ahead. Supv Varvayanis - Okay.. Do you want me to ask the County attorney? Cl T Hatfield - I don't have a problem with it. I think you should. If for some reason you think the Town attorney has a conflict of interest, and obviously you-think that. It's not been my experience, but it's okay. I'm one voice. If you think that then let's take the next step. Supv Varvayanis - Let me tell you why I went straight to the Attorney General and the Comptroller. I was given the advice that probably HUD would not make a decision until they render an opinion. I was told they may very well-not render an opinion for up to six months. That's why I'm writing to Hinchey and Luster. I've been told they can probably push it ahead to less than two months. Cl Beck - Is that something you felt we didn't need to be part of, that decision? Or even inform us? You've got the letter written without giving us any of the background. I find that a little bit difficult in a lot of the things that happen. There's a lot of communication that we aren't getting. There are meetings you're attending or you're not attending, or things that are going on, that we hear about second hand. We aren't getting the proper input from-your office. This is one instance. I don't know that I can site anything more specific right now. I have seen several cases where I thought Mahlon should have been informed on a lot of these issues when he came to the meeting, and he didn't even have the stuff that we had. I would think it's pretty • standard that the attorney get most of the stuff the Board gets so he can be prepared and at least have seen it. Page 15 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 Supv Varvayanis - I will be more careful. This he obviously wasn't cc'd on, but I did try to cc him in on... 0 Cl Grantham - He is on the letter to HUD which includes all the enclosures. Cl T Hatfield - That's not the cover letter. Look, we're trying to respond in an honest fashion and saying. let's start communicating and stop the misinformation_ that probably is inadvertent. Nobody is saying it's even on purpose. It's part of going through the learning process, but we've been sitting- here for seven months now and we need to figure out a way to do better than we're doing. Everybody is a little frustrated. Meanwhile, the folks that are getting hurt are the community. Cl Beck. - We have the perception, at least I have the perception at least, that there is a segment that thinks that this Board doesn't have the interest of the Town at heart. I take real exception to that, and obviously there are various views as to what the Town's interest is, but when we see attempts to either stop issues or make decisions without any discussion at all, then it seems like our opinion is the wrong opinion, and we aren't even going to get a chance to voice it. That's the kind of feeling I'm getting on some of these issues. Cl T Hatfield - And you also pointed out in here something about a draft resolution that was disseminated. There were some presumptions stated in there that were quite key I thought to some of the conclusions. I don't think they were intended to be for discussion. It looked like were already decided. Supv Varvayanis - Then why were they sent out two weeks or three weeks before the meeting? 0 Cl T Hatfield - I don't know. It's the first time it's ever happened. Supv Varvayanis - Because she wanted to discuss the issues, I assume. Cl T Hatfield - Then why not do a letter that says here are the issues I have. Let's discuss them. Instead of coming to a conclusion that says rejected, when four of the members of this current board already voted aye on it in the past? Supv Varvayanis - I recall, correct me if I'm wrong, you sent a memo. That was not actually a draft resolution was it? Cl Grantham - That's right. Cl T Hatfield - It was a resolution. Cl Grantham - And I sent it early so that everyone would get it and see what.I was concerned about. Cl T Hatfield - It's behind us now. I think in the spirit of moving forward-maybe we ought to look at a couple meetings of months. I don't like that, but you've expressed it a couple of times. Maybe we should have a.meeting.on the first Wednesday of the month-to do the bills and set the agenda and discuss like we did tonight, some relatively open discussion, things that are going on. Give you a chance to report to us on some of the meetings that you've attended since we met last. Supv Varvayanis - I think that would be very helpful. By the time I get to my section, it's 11:30 at night. 40 Page 16 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 • Cl T Hatfield - The other thing I'd like to see if we can't figure out some way, like Reba told us when we met with her the other day, to be done at 10:00 or 9:00 p.m. There's got to be a line in the sand where if we're not done we either have to reconvene the following Wednesday or something. I think we need to be a little careful about how much we package in there. It's unfair to people that come to these meetings and want to see us conduct our business of the community. It's not that the other things aren't interesting. You've brought some folks in here from NESTS and Ornithology. Those are things we should be hearing about, but maybe we need to repackage the way we put that stuff together. Sometimes they all get stacked up on a particular night. It's something to think about and we should revisit it next week and see if we want to try to move in that direction for August. Cl Beck - I want to ask you a question. You scheduled a hearing for Environmental Associates next week. It doesn't look-like it's ready for a hearing. Supv Varvayanis - It doesn't look like it to Henry or me either, but she insists she wants to come. Cl Beck - Are we obligated. to conduct a hearing- on her insistence. Supv Varvayanis - I think we are, aren't we? Atty Perkins - Not until you deem the application complete. Cl T Hatfield - Doesn't the code enforcement officer have to deem it's complete before we hear it? Cl Beck - It's been before us previously, and I thought it was quite clear that when it was ready and Henry says we're ready, then we'll hear it again. And yet, Henry's letter says that she says the Board promised her a hearing next month. Sure, if the application is ready, but I can't remember saying you're scheduled for a public hearing next month, and I would suggest that if it's not ready we cancel it. Supv Varvayanis - Lthink_part of the problem is that Henry's told.her_no and-she doesn't take Henry's word for it. Henry didn't know what to do, and I didn't know what to do with her either. She's coming to us for an interpretation_ of the Zoning Ordinance,. which we can't even do. That's for the ZBA. Atty Perkins - You can hold the hearing. It's a_special permit; you can make the findings and deny it. The threshold question is whether she's met all the things that she's supposed to give you. Cl Grantham - I'll explain that to her. Cl T Hatfield - I would volunteer if-you. want and you. and. I_ can get together and put some thought into how we want to address some of these things we talked about tonight. Do we have on-the agenda.the DOT resolution for Wednesday, a carryover from last month? I don't know where it belongs. Cl Grantham - Why do you want to revisit that resolution? Cl T Hatfield - Because I've been asked by Jim Hanson to revisit it. The County would like amore concrete answer. They'd like something along the lines of what was in that original • resolution. Basically Mark and I met with them as we explained the other night. The State has selected Hanshaw Road. You had some questions about other sites, and Jim.has put this Page 17 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 (map) together. They would like to be able to go forward with their planning process with the understanding that the Board's in support of them being here in the Town of Dryden. Obviously we can look at in the next week, some of these things, issues that you want to bring to our attention or need to, then we can go back and revisit it. We've got a week to look at some of this. Cl Beck - Is the major question whether we would grant them out of district user status with sewer and water? Cl T Hatfield - Basically. Cl Beck - We say yes or no, and whether that becomes a district is another. question. Cl T Hatfield - We already know what the procedure is for doing that. That way they can go forward.with their planning process and if they are going to be an out of district user, that's their garden to hoe. It's going to cost X number of dollars to put the lines in and just like any other out of district user, they will be responsible for what they put in and operate and so on. We can go forward with the map, plan and report, get the community involved, get the feedback and take it to a referendum. There is a procedure that we've followed many times before with water and sewer districts. Sometimes it takes two or three years before you find the right combination of what satisfies the community. Sometimes it's overwhelming and you walk away. The reason that Jim Hanson has come back to us on this is very simple. It involves the City. It involves waterfront. It involves the Town, Cortland County, Tompkins County, and DOT isn't that unhappy with where they're at, but this is the site they've picked out. They've looked at a lot of other sites here in. the Town,_ and-they've identified the fact that in order for this to work because it is Cortland and Tompkins Counties, that Dryden is pretty much the community that they've got to be located in to make it be effective. is Cl Beck - Do they have to go through the permit process, or are they exempt from that once they want to go there? Atty Perkins - Who's the applicant? Cl T Hatfield - Either the State or the County. Supv Varvayanis - I think it's the County, isn't it? M Lane - It would likely be the County, but that.hasn't been worked-out completely. Atty Perkins - You can ask them to go through site plan review or whatever procedure you have, but it is unlikely that you are going.to have jurisdiction over the County in their plans. Supv Varvayanis - As far as a formal resolution, I think we've stated many times that we wouldn't object to them coming in as an out of district user, but I would think before we make a formal resolution to accept them as an out of district user, we'd have to see the plans. Cl T Hatfield - I forget the way that resolution was worded, but I don't disagree with what you are saying. I think it was worded such that it was part of the process, but we ought to go back and look at it. If we can get it on the agenda for next Wednesday, we all have it in our minutes from last time. If not, well have Jim fax it to us if we don't have it here. Let's take a look at it and address the issues that we each had, and there are some that we all had, but let's get at it some where before the end of the meeting because I think it's an important issue. Page 18 of 20 WINS: ►3011, • Atty Perkins - The Town was made a party in a foreclosure action because it has an easement over certain property that serves the Turkey Hill Sewer District. The complaint seeks to extinguish the rights of the Town, although I think the Town's easement precedes the date of the mortgages. I'm not sure why the Town is made a party. But you should put in an answer to defend the Town's interest in it or else get it dismissed as to the Town. I'd like your authorization to go ahead and undertake that on.behalf_of the Turkey Hill-Sewer District. Cl Grantham - Can you explain it more fully? Atty Perkins - M & T Bank is the owner of certain mortgages that cover property owned by William and Millie Reed. They are in the process of foreclosing those mortgages. The first mortgage was dated 1990. The Town-has an easement that was-granted in_ 1989 . by the Reed's predecessor in time, Lesiuk, and for some reason the plaintiffs attorney named the Town as a party defendant. If the Town doesn't do anything, the Town's interest in the easement will be cut off, so we need to protect the Town's interest, and make sure we get it dismissed or settled as to the Town. Supv Varvayanis - In all probability it's writing a letter. Atty Perkins - I'll call him and see if I can resolve it over the phone. If not, well put in an Answer. RESOLUTION # 199 - AUTHORIZE ATTORNEY TO ANSWER SUMMONS & COMPLAINT Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes Attorney Mahlon Perkins to answer the Summons and Complaint served on the Town in the matter of Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company vs. William L. Reed, Mildred E. Reed a /k /a Millie E. Reed, Commissioner of Labor of the State of New York, Town of Dryden o /b /o Turkey Hill Sewer District, Staflflngs Personnel Services, John Doe and Jane Doe. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham. Yes At 8:42 p.m. on motion of Cl T Hatfield, seconded by Cl Beck and unanimously carried, the board adjourned to executive session to discuss the employment history of a particular individual. Board moved back to regular meeting at 9:15 p.m. RESOLUTION #200 - AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO MEET WITH DOUG SMITH Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to meet with Doug Smith and discuss the current situation with the Ambulance District and. possible solutions. • 2nd Cl T Hatfield Page 19 of 20 TB 8 -2 -00 Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl. C Hatfield. Yes Cl Grantham Yes On motion of Cl Grantham,. seconded by Cl T Hatfield, and unanimously carried, the meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, A2f 9-/-;y I / wa "-K Bambi L. Hollenbeck Town Clerk Page 20 of 20 OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR 65 EAST MAIN STREET DRYDEN, NEW YORK 13053 -9505 FAX 607444 -9599 E -MAIL drydentna lightlink.eom TEL 6074448619 July 27, 2000 To: Town Board From: Supervisor Varvayanis I think it has become necessary for me to explain the way meetings are supposed to go. Board members are not supposed to speak until I recognize them. At the July 126, meeting I accepted Ron's resolution because I did not feel like getting into a shouting match. I should point out that he seemed to mistakenly believe that he had some parliamentary right to speak. This is false. The Town Board has agreed that the meetings would be run by rules of procedure in section 63 of Article 4 of the New York State Consolidated laws, which would give me great latitude. If the board now wishes to use Robert's Rules of Order I should point out that a motion to "Call the Question" (really move the Previous Question) can only be for ending debate on a motion, it can not be used to end a hearing. A motion for the previous question must pass by a 2/3 majority. To take business out of its proper order needs either 2/3 or a unanimous vote depending on several variables. I have been bending over backwards for the past seven months to work with the board. Unfortunately the majority of the board clearly has been trying to end - run around the supervisor. An example of an attempt to work with the majority was the dissemination several weeks ago of Deb's draft resolution listing all the possible concerns she had. Rather than talking to her or me about the validity of her concerns ahead of time there was great theatrics about a minor point at the meeting. Since I have lost confidence in the objectivity of some members of the board I am exercising my duty to remove Charles Hatfield from his position as Deputy Supervisor and appoint Deb Grantham to the post. /m 7112� v •F � ... Council privilege of the floor (�lv -- � U/ 40 ?e�r would like to ask the Town Supv. To find a way to work more co- operatively with the entire board and the professionals that we have hired to serve the Town of Dryden. Our community deserves to be governed and governed well — to date - with more than 25% of your term completed, you have not articulated any goals or set any direction — instead, you have, ambushed County officials in public meetings and in the process created an environment of distrust, confusion and worse, hurt our community by eroding the confidence that other public officials once placed in the Town of Dryden. It is critical that Dryden be able to work with Village, County, State and Federal officials so that together we can provide the citizens of Dryden with the services they need and expect from their town government. It is simply not possible to govern well in a campaign environment. We should all be working for the best interests of the Town, on fire, ambulance, sewer, water, property issues, instead we are focused on old campaign issues and allowing the many projects that were in process on December 31, 1999 to languish. If your goal is to stop these many projects, then say so, if it is to provide new direction, lets get going, in short its way past time to stop campaigning and start governing, the people deserve this and the members of this board deserve this. The professionals that we have retained deserve the opportunity to work with us, they should be given the opportunity to assist us in moving forward, instead you are taking unwarranted campaign style swipes at them in the press. t� Therefore, again ask that you find a way to work with us, the make up of this board did not shift significan y on January 151 and we have certainly tried to be patient while you went through the learning curve. We are interested in governing for the next seventeen months, there will be plenty of time for campaigning in the fall of 2001. We ask that you leave the campaign efforts behind and work with us to move the Town of Dryden forward. TOWN OF DRYDEN OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR 65 EAST MAIN STREET DRYDEN, NEW YORK 13053 -9505 FAX 607 -844 -9599 E -MAIL drydent@lightlink.com TEL 60M44 -8619 July 31, 2000 The Honorable H. Carl McCall Comptroller of New York State Alfred E. Smith Building Albany, NY 12236 The Honorable Eliot Spitzer New York State Attorney General The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 -0341 Dear Mr. McCall & Mr. Spitzer: I am the Town Supervisor of Dryden. I am writing to get an opinion of whether the Town Board and/or the former Town Supervisor had been or are in violation of various sections of Article 18 of the general Municipal Law or other state laws, by the funding request from HUD, since the then Town Supervisor, James Schug, owned 11% of the applicant (Cayuga Press). I am specifically concerned that a violation of Section 801 (1) which I believe did exist would by Section 804 make the contract void; and that our actions continue to be extra legal. In December 1998 two hearings were scheduled; one for January 6, 1999 to publicize the availability of a HUD funding opportunity, the next for January 13, 1999 to discuss the Cayuga Press application. The former Town Supervisor, James Schug, presided over both hearings even though he owned 1 I % of the stock of the company and his family owned the remainder. Prior to the January 6, 1999 hearing James Schug had a meeting with Karl Heck, (of the Tompkins County Planning Department who would process any grant application) and Peter Schug (President of Cayuga Press and James' son) to discuss the grant. James Schug signed the application as the chief fiscal officer of the town. Page 2 The October 11, 1999 resolution to follow HUD regulations and accept the grant was signed by the Deputy Supervisor, who was appointed by James Schug, In November 1999 James Schug lost his bid for re- election and his term expired on December 31, 1999, Sincerely Yours, Mark Varva Y anis Supervisor /m Enc. Minutes of the public hearings on January 6, 1999 and January 13, 1999 Karl Heck's memo of January 6, 1999 Portions of the original application (4 pages) Cc: Town Board The Honorable Martin Luster The Honorable Maurice Hinchey "a �I ik 1 1 I II It � ( I ♦ I 1 r .III I, 1 J P ` 1 1 I II It � ( I ♦ I 1 r .III I, 1 P ` � ;I I � I • z II\ F 1 I J4 K 7 11. Y Nra f t} OFF 11� A" �1 li% T{.• . 1.' 1. ♦ F � ] V �'1 1� hL f t} OFF 11� A" �1 li% T{.• AUG -01 -00 02:41 PM f 01999 a resident of the )p Any'Oen Dec to board of com. ;r District is gov. )p St Compt File ierwise, all town I after April 81 •d, and not by a established prior wn board unless petition filed no rp St Compt No. he matte open to 457, -d is necessary to vote must take of the board, A precluded from ase voucher sub- : or requirement ntpanicd by rc- •yuire receipts as pt File 481 -169. d Me the ennsti- %cribed time, the ,uy Olin Aug 8 hecomes vacant 4th of offcc and :he functions of Miceli whose acts 'uld if they had r. 1977 Op Atty Supp MAHLON R PERKINS PC A town board ntcnther In attvlttt hoard nivvtings colic antler Public Office Comps File #(0578 Once a town has passe Ing the salaries of its offs Is no requirement that th § 63, Presiding c RESEARCH REF 25 NY Jur 2t1, 26 NY Jur 2t1, Texts! Anderson, New TOWN LAW hu cuuskWitly nuglocts night be removed from Law, § 36. .1978 Op St its final budget conwin- rs and employees, there salaries be further ap• 6078448961 proved tit the urgonizati,mal However, the town hoard stay at its organizational meting salaries of the town board find by a simple resolution. 1934 C 25. 63 meeting in January, cll5Ctisa such SnIMleB and may reduce the other elected ofGccrs ip % Comp File 484. And rufeS of procedure ".ES AND PRACTICE AIDS; cs, Towns, and Municipal Corporations 128, 131 -131 es, Towns, and Municipal Corporations § 4571 Zoning Law and Practice (3d Ed,) $ 4221 CASE NOTES 12 In general i Town board could cstutltsh official leuerhend and policy for its use by tow�t officials. 1996 Ops Ally Con 1 96 47. in towns which have Icstablished the office of deputy supervisor, this �fficial will preside at a board meeting when the supervisor Is absent, In towns which have no suer oftice, the absence of the supervisor at a board rt'ecting requires the other members to designate dp of their own to act as temporary chairman, 1980 Op St Compt File #2986 The town board mayl by resolution determine when during the month �f January it shall hold its organization meeting since the Town Law does not prescribe any specific time, At the organization meeting the supervisor nay make those appOint- menti which arc providc�i for by the board's rules of procedure And any outer appointments provided for by the Town Law, lit titosit towns having a deputy supervisor, it is c dcputy supervisor who will preside over town i nerd meetings in the ab- scnec of the WNrvisor. itut in thane towns not having a dcputy supvrvisrir dw board shall designate who shall preside' and m y choose a motubcr of the board based on senioritS6 1982 Op St Compt pile #82- A5, 26 Postponing Meeting t When several public local laws or ordinance meeting date, the town I the later- scheduled head the first hearing without ing onto the next, provil muck at the scheduled next hcuring will coaullu current hcuring, tool fort is opened until after it Atty Gen July 5. (IntSore earings are scheduled on for the same town board and dues not have to open s on time, but may finish terruption before proceed- i that an announcement Is me to the effect that the rc at the conclusion of the r provided that no hearing nubli4lwd 61110, 1979 Op 3. Voting A determination by 041 tuwn hoard, which found healed' tt. 5ngl4gcdopetitioltetr ,cwovidaboinremanded, where one Of the mcmbl'rs of thu buard who voted with the niftjority was tttr wife of a town superinten r dent of highways, who participated in the Investiga- tion which resulted in the filing of charges and who was a witness at the hearing, and where the failure to obtain the affirmative vote of the majority of the qualified members of the town board would result in a foiluro to find petitioner guilty of A Specified Charge. Vesely v New Windsor (1982, 2d Dept) 90 App Div 7d 770, 455 NYS2d 289, A town board may not, through adopiion of "Roberts Rules of Order," eliminate or curtail the power of the supervisor to introduce, second or vote on motions, resolutions, or other business that comes before the board. Under "Roberts Rules ", the meeting chair cannot introduce or second motions or vote on any other matter other than to break a tie, where as, under the Town Law the supervisor is o member of the town board possessing the frill au- thority of a member of that body and cannot be prevented front Acting on legislation and other busi- nesses bcfore the board, 1990 Ops Atly Can 190 -40. The board members may riot cast their votes by telrphcntc on matters which rLquire hoard upnroval. 1979 Op St Compt File #2`43, A resolution of the a >wn board which reeclVes two affirmative votes, one negative and two ubslun- tiolts, fails, 1979 Op St Compt Pile #529. A town board by resolution may provide that a member's abstention from voting shall be consid: Bred an affrmadvo vote, I980 Op 51 Compt rile #122. A majority vote of the town board is necessary to approve payment of vouchers, The vote must take place at a regular Or special meeting of the hoard, A member of the town board is not precluded from voting on the approval Of nn expense voucher sub - milled by him, There is no 5lUNN or fequircmerit that nn oxpcnso voucher be accumpnnieci by re- ceipts; however. town hoard nary require rcceipls as a !natter of pnficy. 1981 Oil St Cotnpt Pile 481.164. Where a town owns a boarded -up mansion, a . memher of the town board harA the right 10 enter and I it. He may also bring a rensonahle number of interested persons with him, subject to ccnain conditions, However, no single board member can cause the mansion to be Opened for it general public Incpcclion without the nrrroval of a nlaJorily of the board, 1981 Op St Catnpl File #715, 73 i P -04 ill '•r .,t• . 4 I. t�l ;'•ti • • AUG -01 -00 02:42 PM MAHLON R PERKINS PC 6078448961 "A § 63 1 CONSOLIDATED CAWS SERVICE A village bond relofution to finance the purchase of it fire truck over ra period of ten years approved by three board me %bars with two abstentions Is Ineffective unless tf�e resolution is submitted to a mandatory refercnduin. 1983 op St Compt File #839 36. , W41611 mcrtthcr of the town board possessing the full au- thority of a member of that body and cannot be prevented from acting on legislation and other busi- nesses bcforc the board. 1990 Ops Atty Gen 190 -401 Approval of claims ppresented to the town board may be accomplished by a vote of the hoard duly recorded in the minutes, although the rules of proce- 4, Minutes I duro of the town board may additionally require A town clerk is r�qulred to record in the minutes board members to initial or sign vouchers, 1980 Op of the town board m retinas all activities and consid• St Compt File #4179 ,rations of the boa�tt Including the votes on all The town board may determine its rules of proee- motions, resolution , ordinances, or local laws dure so that a proposal which is not seconded will whether they were assed or defeated, The town not be placed on the agenda, However, since rho . board may require at some or all of the discus• minutes must contain everything of substance, the sions taking pplace t a particular meeting be re- fact that a councilman made a particular proposal corded verbatlnt, vtJltcre a board member requests must be included In the minutes, 1981 St Compt that his statement N entered In the minutes to its File #81 1Ri. entirety, the board must determine, by Its rules of The Town Law does not prescribe any formal procedure, whether t�te clerk should record the state - rules of procedure for the conduct of town board meet or whether tit board member should submit meetings but rather authorizes town boards to Por• the statement in w ing which would then be en- mutate and adopt their own rules. In the absence of tered as part of the ainutes, 1982 Op St Compt File adoption of any formal rules, the town board should 111821811 follow accepted usage and common practice, 1981 A town board, b resolution or local law, may Op St Compt File #80 -7K require the town cle�k to submit the minutes of the A town board may adopt its own rules of proce- preteding meeting t) the board for approval before doge and a rule which provides that a defeated they may be pabli5b d or made it part of the official motion may not be resubmitted unless done by a record of the town. 1 89 Op St Compt File !!83.54. board member whose original vote on'the motion Although the tow t clerk is required to record in was in the negative, is not prohibited by either the the minutes of a to wn board meeting the name of $late or Federal Constitution, 1982 Op St Compt „ each member of tit - board who was present, the File #82.124. clerk Is under no sta utory• duty to record the names I Consistent with Open Meetings Law, town board of other persons attei ding the meeting, A decision to could adopt rules prohibiting verbal 'interruptions,• publish the minutes f a town board meeting must shouting or other outbursts, slanderous or obscene be made by the affryative vote of a majority of all Iangunoc, or signs at meetings, and likewise could the members of the tl;wn board, and not by the town regulate movement so as not to interfere with meet- supervisor acting un latcrally, The town board may I in s or reveal rhos, in attendance from observing Also elect to publish at town expense the report of or healing deliberative process, Comin on Open examination prepar d by the office of tho state Gov't OML- AO.2794. comptroller, 1990 Og St Compt No, 90.52, S. Rules of procedu •e 6, Committees A town board rrfay not, through adoption of A local law authorizing the town board to estab- "Rciberts Rules of ¢rder," eliminate or curtail the fish, structure, and appoint members of advisory power of thtt supervi for to introduce, second or vote eo,nmineos Is subject to a mandatory referendum. on motions, resolutions, or other business that 1990 Ops Ally Gen 190.47, coin," before the bos�rd, 'Under "Robcm Rules ", the Town board by local htw may establish citizens meeting chair cannot introduce or second motions or advisory committee for improvement district or may Vote-Oil any other mtotter other than to break a tic, empower town board to estublish such committee as where as, under the 1Town Law the supervisor is a it deems nccessar)% 1987 Op 5t Compt No, 87,69, 164. Cencrill p,.wers of town boards Subjcct to law a>ld the provisions of this chapter, the town board of ev'cry town: 1. Control of Itown finances. Shall have the general managemetlt and control of the finances of thh town and shall designate' in the manner provided by section fen of the general in 4111clpal 10ty the' depositaries in which the supervisor, town clerk, tax collector, tax Ireceiver, and trustees of the freeholders and commonalty of a town shall deposit and secure all moneys coming into their hands by villue of their offices.' l (For sub 1 -a, sees parent volume) 2. Acquisitionl and conveyance of real property. May acquire by lease, purchase, in the manner i rovided by law, or by acquisition in the manner provided by the elttirtcnt dolnnlin procedure law, any lands ur rights therein, either within or outside the tuwn boundaries, required for any public purpose, and play, upon the. adoption 74 , P.OS Stipp of a resolui resolution sl acquired by eminent don rights descri' shall thereu; amount whit purpose shill thereof shall and rights n section one I (Added, L 1980 2-a. Acquisii dispose of 1: otherwise pill [For subs 3-10 -- (Added, L 1982 1{l -b. Tempt heating on s conditions ft comallsbione event on a ti party, celebr: -shall cause authorized ei and to provic 11. Official newspaper rt second class town of the - to the latest general circa in the eouni newspaper is the town, an• county and I natedi the 1% ordinance in the town or, entered as st in any nca- authorization of the town l the English I Lions and or sions of this official paper newspaper o' so designate( (For subs 11 -a- 12, Appropr' town may 4114