The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2002-11-061 TB 11 -6 -02 TOWN OF DRYDEN TOWN BOARD 117EETZIVG November 6, 2002 Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayanis, Cl Charles Hatfield, Cl Stephen Stelick, Jr., Cl Deborah Grantham, Cl Christopher Michaels Other Elected Officials: Bambi L. Hollenbeck, Town Clerk Other Town Staff: Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney Henry Slater, Zoning Officer David Putnam (TG Millers), Town Engineer PUBLIC HEARING REHEARING OF CROWN ATLANTIC COMPANY O /B /O ITSELF AND INDEPENDENT WIRELESS ONE CORPORATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A 120' MONOPOLE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS AT 1387 DRYDEN ROAD Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. and Town.Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. Robert Burgdorf, Esq. of Nixon Peabody, attorneys for Crown Atlantic Company and Independent Wireless One (to be referred to "the telephone company") introduced himself and Dan Badney, project manager for Crown, Russ Archer, project manager for IWO, Shawn Flynn, RF engineer for TWO, and Ron Brunozzi, real estate specialist. He explained the telephone company needs to place a transit facility in a technological appropriate spot in order to provide adequate wireless service to what they call Dryden South ". He said that the telephone company doesn't really care where that is as long as it works from a technical standpoint and is otherwise reasonable. The original proposal started about a year ago and called for 120' monopole behind the NYSEG complex. The telephone company worked with the Town's consultant for many months culminating in a hearing in May at which time the NYSEG power pole off Mineah Road was discussed. The telephone company was unable to address it at that time and the Town did not want to proceed until that was addressed. On August 8 the Supervisor and Town Attorney met with Mr. Burgdorf and Mr. Badney. Crown by that time had been able to get documentation and investigate why the power pole did not work and agreed to supply that information to the Town. On September 19 that information was submitted to the Town. The primary impediment to locating on the power pole is that it is a 115 KB line and NYSEG has made it clear that even if they could permit them to go on it (and that would involve a lengthy and expensive study to determine), they would not permit the telephone company to take the line out of service to permit access on a reasonable basis. The telephone company could be without access for an indefinite period of time. As an essential public utility company they cannot suffer such a condition. Mr Burgdorf stated again that: the telephone company did not care where it goes as long as it works. They are anxious to secure the first reasonably workable site and move on. The meeting tonight was set for the purpose of reviewing whether the pole on Mineah Road was no longer a reasonable alternative and if not, return to the proposed site. The Town's consultant reviewed the telephone company's September 19 submission and by a report received last Thursday has now concluded that a different NYSEG pole is adequate and there are no impediments for using it. The new pole (labeled and referred to as pole #5) is located close to the proposed site, also at or near the NYSEG complex (just east of it on Route 13). Mr Burgdorf located this pole on site plan for the board. He explained that the telephone company analyzed that pole the beginning of this year at the direction of the Town's consultant. The RF engineers made certain assumptions for the preliminary propagation, Page 1 of 20 TB 1.1 =6=02 assuming that it was about 80' (they have since learned it is 651 and they assumed mounting space would be 30' below the top of the pole, reserving the top 30' for the primary purpose (the attachment: of electrical lines). In the last few weeks Der Comi (the Town's engineer) decided the telephone company can locate above the electrical lines (about a 70' level). Mr. Burgdorf stated they do not know that to be the case and have been unable to fund out from NYSEG. They did propagate the pole at 80' as directed by N r Comi and at 80' it does go a long way toward solving the gaps on Route 13 because it does have a better line of sight. Mr Burgdorf said the October 3 letter from Mr Comi raised five points and all five were addressed in the response that the telephone company submitted. The three major issues are RF transmission adequacy, access to the pole at reasonable times, and relocating the monopole from the proposed site over next to power pole 05. With respect to RF transmission adequacy, he explained the basics of wireless telephone technology require the ex7stence of a. honeycombed set of cells with the idea, of placing the facility in the center of the cell and broadcasting to the entire cell without interfering with the neighboring cells, or being so far oil' center or so low that the coverage shrinks and creates a gap. Pole #5 at 80' would cover most of Route 13 without any significant gaps, but there is still the issue of wide area coverage. The propagations submitted indicate that at 80' they would lose approximately five square miles of wide area. coverage. With respect to access to the poles, the board received with the applicant's recent submission are letters from NYSEG malting it clear that all power poles in this area are part of the 115 KB service and the same prohibition against reasonable access exists. The telephone company has made it clear that they cannot use a site where they don't have reasonably quick access to their equipment. This makes all the power poles unacceptable. Nlr Burgdorf said that Mr. Comi had stated in his letter that because there is an MLA (master license agreement) ' between I O and NYSEG, that IWO can force NYSEG to let them on any NYSEG pole and force NYSEG to give them reasonable access and Mr. Burgdorf said this is not true. An MLA is a set of prenegotiated terms that a carrier can use with a repeat landlord. r Surgdorf said the last point raised in Mr. Comi's M letter was that if the power pole is in fact impractical then the telephone company should locate it's pole right next to power pole #5. The telephone company is willing to do that if NYSEG will allow it and it works and that is what the Town wants. He said the telephone company is frustrated that this recommendation was not raised months ago so they could have been pursuing that with NYSEG. He further does not understand that is a better land use decision than the proposed site since the proposed site is further from Route 13 and behind numerous wires. Being closer to Route 13 would require a higher facility to achieve the same coverage. He stated the difference in elevation required at the site recommended by Mr Comi would be approximately 80'. R Comi went over portions of the Town's wireless ordinance with the Board. Section 6(f) states in the case of a new telecommunications tower the applicant should be required to submit a report demonstrating its effort to secure a shared used of existing telecommunication towers. The term telecommunications tower includes any tall structure. It is on the applicant to show that if they want a new telecommunications tower proof of not being able to go on a shared facility. Section 7, locations, include firstly on existing towers or other tall structures, secondly, on a site that has existing telecommunications towers, and thirdly, in a non- residentially zoned area of the town, including in municipally owned property. It also says if the proposed site is not the highest priority listed above, then a detailed explanation as to why a site of a higher priority was not selected. The person seeking such an exception must satisfactorily demonstrate the reason(s) why a permit should be granted for the proposed site and the hardship that would be incurred by the applicant or service provided if not granted. Section 6(1) says any and all representations made to the board on the record during the Page 2 of 20 TB 1 l m"2 application process, whether written or verbal, shall be deemed a part of the application and be isrelied upon in the context and in good faith by the board. R Comi says the propagation study that was originally provided says NYSEG alternate #5, 80' power pole, and he is not sure why they say tonight it is 65' pole and it is the fast time he's heard that. He stated that whenever they get studies and propagations from carriers on alternate sites, they always give there at the top of the alternate site. When they first went: through this, the study v;as assumed to be at 80'. When they started reviewing the September 19 information they were made aware of the fact that the study at #5 was done at 50' (below the transmission lines). He then asked the telephone company to do the propagation study at 80' at pole #5 and directed them to use maximum power. The engineer ran the study during a conference call and indicated that would work and provide the coverage along Route 13. They asked the engineer whether he needed to do a drive test and the engineer responded that was not necessary, he was sure it would work. R Comi pointed out that the applicant has consistently since the beginning of the application process stressed that their need was for coverage of Route 13 and now -the applicant is asking for wide area" coverage, including the village of Freeville and adjoining roads. R Comi pointed out that the Village of Freeville is about four miles from the proposed site and the applicant has staged on the record that three miles is the maximum for good service. He believes this issue has been brought up to put doubt in the board's mild about whether the coverage will work. He states the propagation study provided today for pole 45 shows better coverage on Route 13, though there is less coverage in the outlying areas. He believes that pole #5 provides the coverage the applicant is seeking according to information previously provided. Supv Varvayanis asked Atty Perkins whether the frequency of access by the telephone company to the pole was an issue the board could consider and Atty Perkins replied that he did not think so because the whole idea behind the application is to provide coverage, not to provide coverage except for when it breaks down. He doesn't think it is a relative inquiry to the Town. Cl Michaels stated it was up to the applicant to show a hardship and they must demonstrate a hardship in choosing a. lower priori ty site. Atty Perkins said if ghat is part of the reason they are picking a lower priority site, it can be considered. Cl Michaels said it is his understanding that we have a site that may or may not be 80' tall and it may or may not work for coverage. At the first hearing the attorney stated coverage was all about Route 13. Cl Grantham stated that was what it said in the application. Cl Michaels stated the board had been told at length that three miles was as far as the coverage could go, and reminded the applicant that the County had proposed a site that was more than three miles away and the board had been told if it was more than three miles it absolutely was not worth considering. He is not sure about the evidence of hardship. Applicant is saying it is lack of control or ability to be able to make repairs, and that makes an assumption that there is a significant need to have access. He has no concept of statistically how often tower equipment needs to repaired once it is up, and there has been no proof. Supv Varvayanis said they had stated they had one site where they had one scheduled shut. down day a year, but he understood that was for capacity and not coverage. R Comi demonstrated the coverage on the recent: propagation study by overlaying it on the map stating it covers Route 13 and a lot of the other area, and that it covers Route 13 better than their proposed site, and they get good area coverage at 80' of height from the ground. He said with respect to the structural issue, there is the ability to put a pole right up inside the transmission tower and put the antennas on a monopole inside the transmission. This is done in other places and the issue of doing that is the capability. The coverage provided is what the applicant asked for. Page 3 of 20 T8 11 -6 -02 R Comi staged that the attorney for IWO, Mr. Cusak, told him today that if the Board granted them a permit this evening to put an 80' pole next to al ternative #5, they would be happy with it. He noted that they are just about ready to go on a NYSEG pole in the Town of Maine. R Comi also said that capacity is not an issue in upstate New York, Atty Perkins said he would like to hear opinions regarding an 80' pole at alternate site #5 versus coverage at the original application site. R Comi said in comparing the propagation studies, the 80' on the NYSEG pole has a little bit better coverage on 13 and less coverage toward Freeville in the range of three to four miles away, though he doesn't doubt that they lost five square miles from an area. of 100 square miles of rural area, and noted that the applicant had stated on the record that anything over three miles doesn't really work well anyway. R Burgdorf said that they have the RF department saying they would like to do some final tests and look at a 100 -125' pole, but if Mike Cusack, who is the boss of the RF department says 80' is all right, then the RF engineer is over ruled, and they are trying to contact lblr Cusack. R Comi said the best way to test it at 80' is to do a drive test. Cl Stelick told Mr. Burgdorf that he never, until tonight, had heard anyone mention wide area coverage, that they were always talking about Route 13 coverage, and alternative site #5 appears to take care of the original request. R Burgdorf responded that they arc always focused on the primary coverage objective because that can't be compromised, but any RF engineer will tell you that you need wide area coverage to fill out the cell. Cl Michaels said that the board had been told at the previous meeting that anything beyond three miles was a gift, and the other question would be were there any houses in the area that was not covered. Supv Varvayanis said he still would like hear from ISO and they still need to know if it is a 65' pole or an 80' pole, and the board needs some kind of proof that the current power pole won't work. Cl Grantham agreed and said hearing from ISO %kms very important, and if they are talking about wide area coverage in Freeville, that is a new application because the first: application only refers to Route 13. 0 Atty Perkins asked if it was clear that if the pole was 65' then the discussion about ISO and access doesn't need to be addressed. FIe said they need to determine the height of the pole and where the antenna would go on the pole. R Comi said the antenna will go on top of the pole when the pole is less than 100', above the transmission line, and it has been done many, many times. The original propagation study for alternative site #5 was done at 50, assuming that the pole was 80' and they had to go under the power lines. R Burgdorf stated that the surveyors have gone out and on the survey the pole at alternative site #5 is identified as a 65' pole. Supv Varvayanis said they still needed to know whether an antenna can go on that pole and if it can, at what height, and once that is known, whether it: will provide the needed coverage for Route 13. Cl Hatfield asked the applicant if they would rather have a pole next to the one at #5, and R Burgdorf said they would because it would resolve the maintenance issue and safety issues and it would be better for a lot of reasons. Cl Michaels said the board would have to go through the same analysis for a pole right next to it or a pole a few hundred feet away. The board needs to know how high the pole is, if the antenna would go above or below the wires, whether the pole could support or be made to support the antenna array, and coverage information. Then they would need to address the question of hardship and access issues. I-Ie stated it is hard for him to hear about access issues when they are using those types of facilities in other situations and he would need more proof of hardship than just stating that it is not sufficient access when it seems to be su$cient elsewhere. R Larson said that with capacity sites there are more sites included in the grid, and if you lose a capacity site you still have coverage to that area, you just don't have as much. In rural areas where they are trying to fill a hole where there is no coverage, losing the signal Page 4 of 20 TB l l -(i -02 would cause the whole cell to stop functioning. He stated that the only ones he has done on power lines have been capacity sites. Cl Michaels said if he had to weigh the choice between an 80' pole right next to existing power lines and a 120' pole on a hillside, he would prefer aesthetically the site next to the power lines. R Burgdorf said they have conceded that, however that proposal has not been given to NYSEG and they would dictate whether it would be allowed or not, and there are a lot of variables that have not been investigated because originally the pole was disregarded because it was believed to be too low. If they can get NYSEG's approval they would be willing to do that, but if they can't, they are back where they started. They have two options to investigate with NYSEG, whether the existing pole would structurally support the extension or whether they could erect a new pole next to #5. They would rather have a separate pole. R Burgdorf asked if there was a land use objection for an 80' pole next to a 65' pole and Cl Michaels said that he was stating a strong preference for site #5. The board would need to go through an analysis as to whether it was possible to locate on the existing pole. R Corm said the.board could, according the ordinance, make the choice that it felt was in the best interests of the community. R Burgdorf suggested that there would be no land use difference between a 15' extension, assuming they can do it, and the same height pole right next to it in that spot. Supv Varvayanis said they still don't have a propagation study for a 65' height and maybe they wouldn't need a 15' extension. R Burgdorf said he was referring to visual impact and putting one monopole on existing power lines, the impact is negligible and probably wouldn't be noticed by the casual observer. R Comi said that the 65' versus 80' has not been looked at, and suggested they do a study starting at 65' right next to it for coverage along Route 13 and created a pole no higher than is necessary to cover Route 13. He said the propagation study could be done in ten to fifteen minutes. Atty Perkins asked if these coverage gaps exist for other carriers too and was told that they may or may not depending on where their sites are, but most likely they do in this community. Atty Perkins said if that. is a potential problem in the future for other carriers, are other carriers going to be able to go on the same 65' pole or does it make more sense to have a pole with the minimum height necessary adjacent to it that can handle other carriers and not have to go through this, but have the understanding that it is the minimum height necessary on the new pole. R Comi said he was sure they would be willing to build it strong enough to go higher, and a ten foot extension could be put on the pole if necessary to cover other carriers, and noted that other carriers may in fact be able to work at a lesser height. R Burgdorf said that if 65' covers Route 13, they will do whatever it takes. If it is approved that way they'll let Mr Cusack know and they can pursue wide area coverage another way. He would be willing to proceed on that basis. Cl Michaels said he was willing to accept the town's consultant's recommendation and would prefer a separate structure because it seems easier for co- location in the future. R Comi said NYSEG would simply have to let them know how far away from the existing pole, and the applicant will have to go back to NYSEG, but this would eliminate the ISO and the maintenance question. He assured the board that they would work to be sure the structure was of the minimum height necessary. The board asked whether they could approve that, or whether they needed a separate application. Atty Perkins said the board would meet again in a week and R Burgdorf said they would have the propagation studies in a week but would probably not have an answer from NYSEG. R Larson said they would have to go through a process with NYSEG and provide them with drawings, etc, and it could take up to three or four weeks. Atty Perkins asked if there was a consensus of the board that they would like to see a separate structure, no taller than is necessary to cover Route 13, and located as close to the existing alternate site #5 as possible, Page 5 of 20 TB 11-"2 and the board indicated that was the case, so long as the location was no more than 100' from site #5. R Comi clarified that the site would be on south side of the poles, not closer to Route 13. Applicant will return to the board with a site specific application and height. R Burgdorf said they will amend the application for the alternative site. At 8:35 p.m. hearing was continued for one week. RESOLUTION #1198 - CONTINUE CROWN CASTLE HEARING Cl Michaels offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby continue the site plan review and special permit application of Crown Castle LLC for a telecommunication tower at 1387 Dryden Road for one week, subject to finther adjournment at the request of the applicant. 2rd Cl Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cll-latfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED LOCAL LAW C - ESTABLISHING MINIMUM ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL AND RECREATION COMMISSION Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 8:37 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. There were no questions or comments from board members or the public and the hearing was left open. PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED LOCAL LAW D - ESTABLISHING MINIMUM ATTENDANCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD Supv Vwvayunis opened the public hearing at 8:38 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. There were no questions or comments from board members or the public and the hearing was left open. PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED LOCAL LAW E - INCREASING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE RECREATION COMMISSION FROM SEVEN TO NINE Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 8:39 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. There were no questions or comments from board members or the public and the hearing was left open. Board took a break from 8:40 to 8:46. Robert Slocum, Chair of the Recreation Commission, stated that the two positions would help enhance the Recreation Commission because they would fill those positions with people from Tompkins Cortland Community College and the Cortland State Recreation Program. It will enhance the %work of the commission. page 6 of 20 TB 11 -6 -02 Supv Varvayanis closed the public hearings on the local laws at 8:47 p.m. ® PUBLIC DARING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION OF SNEDEKER ENTERPRISES TO ESTABLISH A DRIVE THROUGH COFFEE SHOP KNOWN AS THE BUZZ STOP AT 1408 DRYDEN ROAD Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 8:48 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. Terrence Snedeker explained to the board that they are proposing a drive- through for coffee and expresso on Route 13 next to Locke Wood Interiors, hoping to draw morning commute traffic. They think there is an opportunity in the area for this type of business. Board has a copy of the application and site plan. ZO Slater explained that because it vas a drive - through, they assume there will be no need for customer parking, but there is a need for some employee parking. Board reviewed the plan presented by applicant. Applicant has applied for Health Department approval (this is included under standard conditions of approval). The building will be 14'x 28'. Cl Grantham asked how many cars they expected and Mr Snedeker said they were looking to sell 200 to 300 cups per day, mostly during the morning rush. They will have a few donuts, etc for sale, but will focus on coffee and expresso. ZO Slater has requested a 239 1 & m review from Tompkins County Planning, but it has not been received. Board cannot act without that and hearing was continued until next week. Supv Varvayanis requested that applicant complete part one of the short environmental assessment form (instead of the long form). Cl Michaels stated he will have to recuse himself from the vote on this matter for reasons related to his professional practice. PUBLIC HEARING 2003 BUDGET ® Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. Supv Varvayanis asked if there any comments from the public. Erica Evans, Turkey Hill Road, said that she thought it was very admirable that the board thought taxes are going to go down, but she hopes the board is thinking about the fact that NYSEG will be moving out and a lot of people will be moving out, and that the tax base will decrease, and perhaps it would be wise to keep taxes where they are now and put the money away for when it is needed later so that there won't be such a big jump. Dan Tier of the Dryden Fire Department said that the board of directors had discussed the proposed budget and noted that missing from the budget was a $10,000 truck replacement line that had been there for a number of years. They are concerned about that and wondered why it was no longer there. Supv Varvayanis said it was his understanding that the money was put in some time ago to replace a truck that has since been replaced. D Tier said the truck had been replaced, but they were unclear whether it was a one -time situation, and at some time in the future that truck will need to be replaced (for wear and tear, etc). In the Fire Department's budgeting process they have planned for these replacements and attempt to put the money away. They are concerned that if the funding isn't there, when the time comes to replace it, they will not have enough money to make the purchase. He asked the board if they had some proposal regarding that. The truck that they replaced eras a ladder truck over twenty years old and the replacement cost was approximately $600,000. Because of careful planning and investing they were able to purchase the truck without having to finance it and cause further expense to the taxpayers. He said financing would probably add an additional $250,000 to the cost. They believe they have been fiscally responsible in planning this way and removing the $10,000 will impede their ability to do this and he asked the board to consider putting the $10,000 back in their funding. Page 7 of 20 TB 11 -6=02 Natan Huffman, member of the Board of Directors of the Varna Volunteer Fire Company, an EMT, firefighter, and resident of the town spoke to the board regarding budget issues for the Varna Volunteer Fire Company. He stated they are sensitive to the Town's 40 budget issues and are taxpayers of the town and understand that municipalities are under pressures, and so are they. The pressures they are under have to do with public safety, which is their charge. They are a volunteer organization and they willingly serve the community. The Varna Volunteer Fire Company has never come before the board before and asked for financial relief In 2002 they were faced with an issue that directly affects the safety of their members and ultimately the safety of the community. It has to do with a self- contained breathing apparatus and is their lifeline. It hangs on their back when they are in turn-out gear and provides the air that they breath as they go about their work. `17zey use it to fight any interior fire, motor vehicle accident and any time a firefighter feels a need for this apparatus he must have it. If they are in a mutual aid situation sometimes other firefighters use these devices. The equipment they have been using is not in compliance with OSHA standards and NFPA standards. This means that they are not only exposing themselves to safety issues, but there are some liability issues they must face by using equipment that is not in compliance. The Hoard of Directors has decided they need to replace or modify the equipment they have. Total replacement would cost $60,000 (24 units at $2,500 each) or they could update the units at a cost of $12,210. N Huffman stated that is greater than I(No of their 2002 budget and presents a hardship because of the nature of what they do and the cost of the equipment they use. He asked the board for relief and asked the board to consider funding the $12,210. He said you cannot compromise on issues of safety. They have to attract young, fit members and must have compliant, safe equipment. He would like the board to consider this one -time expenditure of $12,210 for the Varna Volunteer Fire Company. The other item he wished to address he said was certainly a direct budget issue. He said he admires Supv Varvayanis' ability to "toe the line" within the Town and said he has done a remarkable job. The idea that we are a solvent community is very attractive. The community is changing and the Ellis Hollow area has seen substantial increases in the valuation of their property and hence, additional tax burden. Along with that comes a need to provide first class service and to do that, the Varna Volunteer Fire company has put together a budget for 2003. They looked at. where they had been for the past several years and their proposed budget: increase has been a very minimal increase of about two percent. The increases have not covered their costs, which means that for the past several years they have been operating at a defacto deficit and have been putting off maintenance, deferring purchases, and using equipment that perhaps they shouldn't be using. He thinks time has come for their department, given their charter, to get current. The board is looking at: a 24 month program to get: the department in a position to provide the type of service they believe the residents need and they need to insure their safety and attract new members. The Varna Volunteer Fire Company has asked for a budget for 2003 of $151,000. He stated this is a substantial increase, and he pointed out to the board that this includes several one -time purchases. "Those purchases include an emergency generator for the station because the community would look to the station as a place of warmth and comfort in case of a power outrage. This would also insure the wager in the trucks would not freeze rendering them useless in case of a fire. They estimate the cost of the generator at $9,000. Another one -time expenditure is $6,500 for scene lighting (for auto accidents at night, etc). The radio system in the County operates poorly in the Town of Dryden. Residents of Ellis Hollow are at risk, particularly those on Ringwood Road, Hurd Road, Hickory Circle, etc because emergency personnel cannot communicate using the County's radio system. Their solution is to install their own repeater. They have located a site for the repeater (at the pheasant farm on Game Farm Road). Through alignment of the antenna array they will be able • to provide coverage into Ellis Hollow and down the corridor toward Dryden, so if they need to Page 8 of 20 TB 11-6 -02 communicate with an ambulance, they will be able to do so. He said that in spite of the County's proposed answers to their communication problems, they will be able to pretty much take care of themselves by putting up a repeater. They have the talent in their own organization to do this and wTill not have to spend money on consultants. N Huffman said their budget request is very real and it is unfortunate that they have to make the request, but they need to equip the department the way it should be so that members have adequate turn out gear, boots that don't leak, and current equipment. He apologized that they had to come before the board with the request and welcomed any scrutiny by the board. He noted that the board has access to the department's financial information and their treasurer is present to answer any questions. He stated that they use public money and have a public trust., as the Town Board does, and asked that the board act favorably on their request and engage them in conversation about just what it is they are trying to do and how they can help provide better service to their community and maintain their own safety and the safety of the residents. Cl Michaels said that a logical structure for looking at emergency services in the Town would be to look at a town -wide approach (are they buying equipment that is heavily replicated by departments immediately adjacent), and ultimately what does the Town of Dryden need in terms of equipment for its volunteer force in order to service the Town. He asked if someone would be willing to work with the Town Board or a committee to look at those issues (what equipment, where should it go, how much does it cost and how do we pay for it). N Human suggested a committee be formed of chiefs and representatives from all the fire companies. Members of Neptune Hose indicated a willingness to participate. Varna Volunteer Fire Company does have a committee within their organization to search out and apply for grant funds. ® Bill Ackroyd said that Neptune Hose has had a repeater up and running for about ten years. It is located at the Town's site on Beam Hill Road, Ron Flynn said that a town -wide approach for equipment etc. could be taken up by the Town of Dryden fire chiefs when they meet and-he did not think there was a reason for an additional committee. Dan Tier spoke to the board regarding the contract with Dryden Ambulance. They are concerned that there is $100,000 surplus that appears to be adjusting the tax rate for the ambulance district. He said that not too long ago they dealt with how much the tax rate rose when they took over the ambulance service and their concern is that what appears to be happening is that the $100,000 surplus will be used to reduce the tax rate about 509/o from this year. Based on projections and as they propose the contract, in 2004 what will happen is the reverse, a 501/0 increase, to reestablish what was done by the reduction. They are concerned about future ramifications when it appears that the ambulance rage rises 50% again. Cl Michaels explained that in the budget as proposed the Town is planning for a surplus in the budget of $70,000, so the tax rate could be lowered even more, but left it as is and so are already smoothing. Supv Varvayanis said he thinks what 1) Tier is concerned about is that they asked for $295,000 and he would like the tax rate to match the contract price. 1) Tier said that would bring it more in line, and this is based on observations they have made. 0 Page 9 of 20 TB 1 1 w"2 Doug Cotterill said he had asked the Town's assistant budget officer what the surplus would be at the end of 2002 and she estimated it to be around $100,000, so they assumed that the Board has used that figure in coming up with the budget amount, and he thought that doing that would result in having an increase the followuig year, and it would be difficult for the tatpayers to understand. Cl Michaels said he thought that was a conservative estimate and the ambulance revenues are tracking at about $1.80,000. Bill Finnerty said that he was here with Bob Slocum and Matty Hamill, members of the Recreation Commission, and asked if the board had any questions of them regarding the request for a recreation director. The Commission has discussed the necessity of the position and he asked if the Board had any questions of them regarding that. They did not. Andrew Down, Chief of the Freeville Fire Department, said that they had met with Supv Varvayanis last week and the department had some concerned (as did other departments) regarding the proposed quarterly payments to the departments. He asked for an explanation for this change. Supv Varvayanis said he thought he had already explained it. Teri Allen of Dryden Ambulance said she had asked last month about the status of the contract for Dryden Ambulance. She is unable to hire necessary personnel because they are unsure of the contract status, and would like to know ghat that is. Cl Michaels said he had received a copy of a letter Erom the attorney for Dryden Ambulance, but had not seen a contract., and the board has not taken up any of the emergency service contracts. B Ackroyd said they will contact their attorney. Cl Michaels said that the appropriations for next year are virtually identical to their proposal and he thinks that is a. strong indication of where the budget is leading, and the board will take the contract in due course. There were no other comments on the budget and Supv Varvayanis closed the budget hearing at 10:42. The regular board meeting was opened and board members and guests participated in the pledge of allegiance. Supv Varvayanis asked for a motion based on the hearing for Local Law C. RESOLUTION #199 - ADOPT LOCAL LAW #1=2002 - ESTABLISHING MINIMUM ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL AND RECREATION COMMISSION AND SET PUBLIC HEARING Cl Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby adopts Local Law #1 of 2002 as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE, AUTHORITY, By Local Law No. 4 of the year 2000 the ToNrn of Dnyden Conservation Advisory Council was created and by Local Wo w No. 1 of the rear 2000 the Town of Dryden Recreation Commission was created. The purpose of this local law is to provide standards of minimum attendance by members of the Town of Dryden Conservation Advisory Council (lierein "CAC ") and the Town of Dryden Recreation Commission (herein "R.ec. Commission")at meetings of lie CAC and Rec. Conunissiort, and to provide for a procedure to remove any such members not meeting the minimum attendance requirements. SECTION 2. MINIMUM ATTENDANCE REOUIREMENTS. Members of the CAC and Rec. Conunission are expected to attend all regularly scheduled monthly meetings and all specially scheduled meetings. In the event that a member is absent from three (3) consecutive regularly scheduled monthly meetings, or in the event a member Page 10 of 20 TB I I -OmO2 is absent from five (5) meetings within any one (1) calendar year, then such member may be removed From the CAC ® or Rec. Commission as herein provided. SECTION 3. PROCEDURE. In the event a member of the CAC or Roc. Conunission has failed to meet the minimum attendance requirements set forth in Section 2, then upon recommendation from the CAC or Rec. Commission as the case may be; the Town Board may remove such member as herein provided: (a,) Notice_ Such member shall be mauled a written notice specifying the nature of the faihue of such member to meet the minimtun attendance requirements of Section 2 above. (b.) Public Hearing. Such notice shall specify a date (not less than ten [101 or more than thirty [30] days from the date of mailing such notice) when the Town Board shall convene and hold a public hearing on whether or not such member should be removed. Such notice shall also specify the time and place of such hearing. (c.) Public Notice, Public notice of such hearing shall be given by posting a notice on the town signboard in the vestibule of the Town Hall and by publishing a notice once in the official newspaper. Stich posting and publication shall be at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the public hearing. (d.) Conduct of Hearing The public hearing on the charges shall be conducted before the Town Board The member shall be given an opportunity to present evidence and to call witnesses to refute the charges. A record of such hearing shall be made. The decision of the Town Board shall be reduced to writing together with specific findings of the Town Board with respect to each charge against such member. A copy of such decision and such finding shall be mailed to the member. (e,) Action by the Town Board. Following the hearing and upon a finding that such member has not met the minimum attendance requirements required by this local law the Town Board may: (i.) Remove such member from the CAC or Rec. Commission; or (ii.) Issue a written reprintivtd to such member without removing such member; or if the Town Board shall find that the reasons for failing to meet the minimum attendance requirements are excusable because of illness. injury or other good and sufficient cause, the Town Board may elect to take no action. SECTION 4. REMOVAL FOR CAUSE. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit or restrict the Town Board's authority to remove a member from the CAC or Rec. Commission for cause (i.e_ for other than the reasons enumerated herein). The procedural provisions of Section 3 (Procedure) shall govern any hearing to remove a member for cause. SECTION S. LEAVE OF ABSENCE. (a.) The provisions of Section 2 shall not apply to any member who has applied for and been granted a leave of absence by the ToN�ii Board from their duties as a member of the CAC or Rec. Commission. The Town Board may grant such leave of absence on such terms and for such period as it may deem appropriate provided, however, no such leave of absence shall be for a period in excess of eleven (11) months. (b.) The provisions of Section 2 shall not apply to any member who has been granted an excused absence by the Chairperson of the CAC or Rec. Commission, as the case may be. To be a valid request for an excused absence, such request shall be made to the Chairperson of the CAC or Rec. Conunission, as the case may be, prior to the meeting. Grounds for excused absences shall include illness, vacation. business or employment reasons and personal or Wilily activities. SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE, APPLICABI[IjerY. (a.) THs local law shall become effective upon filing with (lie New York Secretary of State. (b.) This local law shall apply to all members of the Town of Dryden CAC- or Rec. Commission regardless of the date of their appointment. (c,) Prospective members of the CAC and Rec. Commission shall be notified of the requirements of this local law prior to their appointment. And is further Page 11 of 20 TB 11=0-02 RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is directed to file the same with the New York State Department of State. 2114 C1 Stelick Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes RESOLUTION #200 - ADOPT LOCAL LAW #2 -2002 - ESTABLISHING MINIMUM ATENDANCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD Cl Michaels offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby adopts Local Law #2 of 2002 as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE, AUTHORITY. The purpose of this local lacy is to provide standards of minimum attendance by members of the Town of Drydcn Plamung Board at meetings and hearings of such board and to establish minimum traming and continuing education course requirements for such members. This local law is enacted under the authorit-N, of Town Law §271 (9). SECTION 2. MINEWUM ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS (Aleetings and Hearings). Members of the Planning Board are expected scheduled monthly meetings/hcarings and specially scheduled to attend all regularly meetings/hearings of the board In the event that a member of the board is absent from three (3) consecutive regularly scheduled monthly meetings/hearings, or in the event a member of the board is absent from five (5) meetingsthearings within any one (1) calendar year, then such member may be removed from the board as herein provided SECTION 3. 5111NIMUNI ATTENDANCE REOUIRE,MENTS Continuing Education and Training), In the event that a member of the Planning Board does not attend at least one (1) seminar, workshop or continuing education course within two (2) consecutive calendar years in which the Town Board has designated at least two (2) seminars, workshops or continuing education courses, then such member may be removed from the board as herein provided Activities related to puling on such seminars, workshops or continuing education courses, such as speaking at or presenting at the same shall, with the prior approval of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, constitute attendance thereat. SECTION 4. CONTINUING EDUCATION AND TRAINING. The Chairperson of the Planning Board shall designate in the minutes of the meetings of the Planning Board such seminars, workshops, or continuing education courses which may be offered within a reasonable distance and which may be helpful to or of assistance to the Planning Board in carrying out its fturctions in a timely, fair and lawful manner. The costs of such seminars, workshops or continuing education courses so designated shall be a Town charge if approved by the Town Board prior to such seminar, workshop or continuing education course. Members shall also be reimbursed for travel and meal expenses according to Town policies. SECTION S. PROCEDURE. In the event a member of the Planning Board has failed to meet the minimum attendance acquirements set forth in Sections 2 or 3, then upon recommendation from the Planning Berard, the `town Board may remove such member from the Planning Board as herein provided: (a.) Notice. Such member shall be mailed a written notice specifying the nature of the failure of such member to meet the minimum attendance requirements of Sections 2 or 3 above. (b.) Public Hearing. Such notice shall specify a date (not less than ten 1101 or more tlum thirty 130] days from the date of mailing such notice) when the Town Board shall convene and hold a public hearing Page 12 o1' 2t) TB 11 -6 -02 on whether or not such member should be removed from the Planning Board. Such notice shall also specify the time and place of such hearing. (c.) Public Notice. Public notice of such hearing shall be given by posting a notice on the town signboard in the vestibule of the Town Hall and by publishing a notice once in the official newspaper, Such posting and publication shall be at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the public hearing. (d.) Conduct of Hearing The public hearing on the charges shall be conducted before the 'i'own Board The member shall be given an opportunity to present evidence and to call witnesses to refute die charges. A record of such hearing shall be made. The decision of the Town Board shall be reduced to writing together with specific findings of the Town Board with respect to each charge against such member. A copy of such decision and such finding shall be mailed to the member. (e.) Action by the Town Board. Following the hearing and upon a finding that such member has not stet the minimum attendance requirements required by this local law the Town Board may: (i_) Remove such member from the Planning Board; or (ii.) Issue a written reprimand to such member without removing such member from the board; or (iii_) If the Town Board shall find that the reasons for failing to meet the minimum attendance requirements are excusable because of illness, injury or other good and sufficient cause_ the Town Board may elect to take no action. SECTION 6. REMOVAL, FOR CAUSE. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit or restrict the "town Board's authority to remove a member from the Planning Board for cause (i.e. for other than the reasons enumerated herein)_ The procedural provisions of Section 5 (Procedure) shall govern any hearing to remove a member for cause. SECTION 7. LEAVE OF ABSENCE; EXCUSED ABSENCES. (a.) The provisions of Section 2 shall not apply to any member who has applied for and been granted a m leave of absence by the Town Board from their duties as a member of the Planning Board The Town Board may ® grant such leave of absence on such terms and for such period as it may deem appropriate provided, however, no such leave of absence shall be for a period in excess of eleven (11) months. (b.) The provisions of Section 2 shall not apply to any member who has been granted an excused absence by the Chairperson of the Planning Board. To be a valid request for an excused absence, such request shall be made to the Chairperson of the Planning Board prior to the nueeling/hearing. Grounds for excused absences shall include illness, vacation, business or employment reasons and personal or family activities. SECTION 8. SUPPRESSION OF TOWN .LAR'. This local law is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Municipal Home Rule Law § 10. It is the intent of the Town Board pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law § 10 to supersede the provisions of Town Law §271 relating to the appointment of members to Town of Dryden Planning Board SECTION 94 MISCELLANEOUS. (a.) This Local Law shall be deemed to supersede and repeal any other Local Laws to the extent therein inconsistent herewith. (b.) if any part of this Local Law shall be judicially declared to be invalid, void unconstitutional or unenforceable, all unaffected provisions hereof shall survive such declaration and this Local Law shall remain in full force and effect as if the invalidated portion had not been enacted. (c,) Nothing herein shall be deemed to be a waiver or restriction upon any rights and powers available to the Town of Dryden to further regulate the subject matter of this Local Law. SECTION 10* EFFECTWE DATE %APPLICABILITY. (a.) This local Law shall become effective upon filing NAth the New York Secretary of State. (b.) This local law shall apply to all members of the Town of Dryden Planning Board regardless of the date of their appointment to such board (c.) Prospective members of the Planning Board shall be notified of the requirements of this local law prior to their appointment to such Board. 10 Page 13 of 20 CB 11 -G -02 And it: is further RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is directed to file the same with the New York State Department of State. 2nd Cl Stelick Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes RESOLUTION #201 - ADOPT LOCAL LAW 03 OF 2002 - EXPAND THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE RECREATION COMMISSION FROM SEVEN TO NINE Cl Stelick offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this To�vaz Board herebv adopts local Law #3 of 2002 as follows: 1. The Town Board enacted Local Law No. 1 of the year 2000 establishing the Town of Dryden Recreation Commission. That Local Law was effective February 18, 2000 and provided for a commission of seven mcnibers. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify the terns of the members and to provide for an increase in die number of members. 2. The introductory paragraph of section 2 of such law is hereby amended to read as follows; "2. There is hereby established the Town of Dryden Recreation Conunission to consist of members appointed to serve as herein provided:" 3. Subsection (b) of section 2 of such law is hereby amended to read as follows: "(b) The commnission shall consist of nine (9) members „hose terms shall be as follows: 2 members whose ternis shall expire Occembcr 31, 2002 3 members whose terms shall expire December 31, 2003 3 members whose terms shall expire December 31, 2004 I member who shall be the currently serving Athletic Director or equivalent from Dryden Central School who shall serve as long as he or she is employed at that position." 4. Section 2 of such Local Law is herebv amended by adding thereto new subsection (c) to read as follows: "(c) Following the initial terns of the members first appointed, successive terms of appointment shall be for three (3) wears." 5. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to change the term of any member currently serving as of the effective date of this amendment. G. This Local Law shall take effect following its adoption and as provided in the Municipal home Rulc Law. And it is further Page 14 of 20 TB 11 -6 -02 RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is directed to file the same with the New York State Department of State. 2111' Cl Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes C1 Grantham Yes With respect to the budget, Supv Varvayanis said that the County has come through with more money and the youth service budget should be increased to $12,192 and the board agreed. The board discussed adjusting the formula for computation of water and sewer assessments in connection with the Eugene Madsen property and Atty Perkins said the usual formula would be used, with language added to accommodate the Madsen situation. Mr Madsen's property has no frontage and cannot hook into the system. He left: the meeting temporarily to get the specific language from his office. Supv Varvayanis said that Barbara Caldwell and Cl Grantham had agreed to serve on the Town and Village Planning Coalition. RESOLUTION #202 - APPOINTMENTS TO TOWN AND VILLAGE PLANNING COALITION Cl Michaels offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby appoints Barbara Caldwell and Deborah Grantham to serve on the Town and Village Planning Coalition. 2nd Cl Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes A resume has been received from Russell Kowalski who would like to serve on the Youth Services Commission. RESOLUTION #203 - APPOINT RUSSELL KOWALSKI TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION Cl Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town hoard hereby appoints Russell Kowalski to serve on the Youth Services Commission. 21111 Cl Michaels Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes C1 Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes Page 15 of 20 `IB 11 -6 -02 Resumes have been received from Barbara Skoblik and Lisa Stuttle for a vacant position on the Planning Board. The board discussed the residence locations of the current Planning Board members. Cl Grantham noted that Barbara Skoblik had been active in planning matters in the Etna community and Etna. Community Association, Supv Varvayanis said that Lisa Stuttle had been very involved in purchase of development rights and other agricultural matters and there is not currently someone on the planning board with that experience. After further discussion, the Board appointed Lisa Stuttle. RESOLUTION #204 - APPOINT LISA STUTTLE TO THE PLANNING BOARD Cl Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby appoints Lisa Stuttle to fill the unexpired term of Gordon Diebler on the Planning Board, said germ to expire December 30, 2005. 211d Cl Michaels Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes The board discussed Don Barber's letter and proposed resolution regarding the way the Stage taxes its residents, using property tax to pay for medicaid. Supv Varvayanis said he trusts his state government to make the right decisions, and objected to the cord "demand" in the resolution. Cl Stelick said it would be the same as telling the US Government not to go to war, and didn't feel it was the Town Board's job to do that. Supv Varvayanis stated that the fire departments have indicated they are unhappy with the proposal to make payment the fire contracts on a quarterly basis. Cl Stelick asked if the fire companies have been providing the information requested by the board last year and Supv Varvayanis said that they have with the exception of Etna. Cl Stelick noted that each department receives about the same amount of money, yet the call volumes are substantially different, and the board should look at something other than just increasing the amount by 2% each year. D Putnam note that they schedule their payments to coincide with receipt of the funds from the Town, and a lot of their fixed expenses come before June of each year. If the Town does make quarterly payments, the fire department will incur carrying costs. Ike said it was rumor that payments would be quarterly for the coming year, and Supv Varvayanis stated he had advised the departments in writing. Cl Michaels said the board had budgeted a total contract price and if the departments had loan payments they could discuss perhaps paying a little more up front, but he sees a lot of compelling reasons to make the payments quarterly. The intent is to have the distribution to the departments more closely match when they make their own distributions, and if the departments received their distribution just prior to having to make payments, there is less likelihood of cash sitting around. Supv Varvayanis told N Huff nann that if the Town were to boost payments to one fire department, Varna is the one with the lowest ISO rating, and if they are the ones that are supposedly best equipped in the Town, it doesn't: make sense to start increasing spending with Varna. There was discussion about what was considering in making an ISO rating, and that it may not be an indication of how well a department is equipped, but is based on performance as a department, distance to travel, whether there are hydrants, etc. Page 16 of 20 TB 11-"2 RESOLUTION #205 - ADOPT SPECIAL DISTRICT & ASSESSMENT ROLLS Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby adopt the Special District and Assessment Rolls for the Town of Dryden for 2003. 2nd Cl Michaels Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels Yes Cl Grantham Yes The board reviewed the proposed language for amending the assessment formula for the Turkey Hill Water and Turkey Hill Sewer Districts. RESOLUTION #206 - AMEND ASSESSMENT FORMULA FOR TURKEY HILL WATER AND SEWER DISTRICTS Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby amend assessment formula for the Turkey Hill Water District and Turkey Hill Seiner District to include the following language: Notwithstanding any other provision of this benefit assessment formula, no benefit assessme shall be levied upon any parcel which has no road frontage and is not currently connected to both water service and sewer service. 21ld Cl Stelick Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels No Cl Grantham Yes RESOLUTION #207 - INCREASE 2003 YOUTH SERVICE BUDGET Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby increase the amount of youth services expenditures and revenues in the 2003 budget be increased to $12,192. 2nd Cl Stelick Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes Cl Michaels No C1 Grantham Yes Cl Stelick stated that he would like to see the $10,000 normally allowed Neptune Hose Company for truck replacement put back into the budget for this year. He does not feel there has been adequate discussion and suggested that next year a committee closely look at the Page 17 of 20 t TB 1 1-C -02 budgets of each lire company and make a permanent decision regarding the $10,000 truck replacement allowance for Neptune. Supv Varvayanis said the board had. discussed the level of their capital reserves. Cl Stelick said they had not discussed this particular item, and he did not realize it had existed or been removed. He doesn't feel comfortable removing it this year. The $1.0,000 was given to them last year, and the truck that it was supposedly put in place for was purchased the previous year, so the process had been started again instead of stopping it at the time of purchase. Supv Varvayanis said he'w *as uncomfortable picking out one fire department (a Village fire department) and providing a special funding source. Cl Michaels said before the budget process lie pulled the 990's (IRS tax form filed by not - for -profit entity) of the departments that had them available, and relative to the other departments, Neptune is in a very solvent position with lots of cash on hand and reserves for equipment. He said that if the Town were going to spend $10,000 for an equipment reserve, other departments are in worse financial shape. Varna has asked for extra money for equipment and no one has made a resolution to accommodate that request. He said that we need to look at what equipment the Town needs as a whole, and look at a fiscal plan cooperatively between the departments and the Town. Cl Stelick said he doesn't expect it to be a "deal buster" on the budget, but it is something he feels strongly about. RESOLUTION #208 - ADOPT 2003 BUDGET Cl Michaels offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this `]'own Board does hereby adopt the 2003 budget, as amended. 2nd Supv Varvayanis Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes Cl Stelick Yes Supv Varvayanis Yes 40 Cl Michaels Yes C1 Grantham No Robin Seeley - I had something that: I wanted to say about Hurd Road, and I only bring it up tonight because I'm going to be out of town next week. I wanted to bring it up this month because the work on Hurd Road seems to be sort of 99% complete at this point. As you know, when the road widening issue arose earlier this year many citizens were skeptical about the Highway Department's assurances that the road wouldn't be widened. And now that the road work seems to be completed I wanted to report back to you about what actually happened. First the asphalt portion of Hurd Road which was 17 feet wide before 1994, and then 19 Y1 or 20 feet aide as a result of widening that had occurred by the town in 1994. That asphalt portion is now 22 feet wide, and the shoulcers which in June of this year were 0 to 2 feet wide for the majority of the road are now 4 feet wide on each side, and in some cases 10 feet pride. This means that Hurd Road went from being a maximum of 24 feet wide to now a standard 30 feet wide, which I think is road widening by anybody's definition. And I had surveys done just before and after the widening so I know those numbers are right. Please remember that in Section 284 Agreement: to Spend Town Highway Rinds, the Highway Superintendent stated. that Hurd Road would be a mEmimum width of 20 feet and that was what was in the agreement to spend highway funds, but clearly that wasn't true. The SEQR form for this project, if you'll recall, also stated that there would be new paved surface, but just over the existing traveled way, and that wasn't true either. The pavement now extends over areas that are new, and the shoulder material has'been added to areas of the shoulder where there were no shoulders before, and the reason wrhy there isn't any more shoulder is Pave 18 of 20 TB 11 -6412 because the Town paved over the shoulder in 1994. So there are misrepresentations in both the Section 284 Agreement and in the SEQR form. And after Mr. Bush stated at one of the October board meetings that he was proud of his five year plan, I requested a. copy of the five year plan from the Town and was finally informed by letter that no such five year plan exists. The Highway Department did share the Town of Dryden Highway Department Road Service Management System which was a report that was co- authored by a Comell intern, Mr. Bush and Mr. Sutton, and I really appreciate being able to take a look at that. But the letter from the Town that I got states the report was developed with limited input from Mr. Bush and was a recommendation only and was never adopted by the Town Board. This report is a remarkable document and recommends using several objective criteria to prioritize roads for improvement projects. It describes the problems on each and every road in the Town, what it would cost to fix the road, and gives each road a rating. Hurd Road, for example, had a rating of 65 on the east end or 58 on the west end, and the repairs to Hurd Road were estimated to cost $26,000 and ... Supv Varvayanis - What: was the rating on the west end? R Seeley - 58. Supv Varvayanis - And this is out of a hundred? R Seeley - I don't know, but the roads that are in really good shape seem to be about 79 or 80, so I don't know what the biggest possible score is. But anyway, repairs were estimated to cost $26,000 instead of the actual $98,000 that I think it's actually costing. And there was no mention of any need to cut trees. So my question to the board tonight is how you will respond to all this. You have a Town official who has pledged to you not to widen the road and has widened it by at least six feet in most places. You have a Town official who has performed work that is not approved by the Town Board and is misrepresented on the SEQR form. You have aTown official who bragged about the Highway Department's 5 year plan, but when a citizen requests a copy of,the plan it turns out not to exist. You have a Town official who sues a Planning Board member without your approval or even consulting you as far as I know. You have a Town official who has widened shoulders beyond the highway right -of -way where there was no previous shoulder and thus has basically taken property from citizens. Now these citizens might not sue, and maybe they don't care, but that doesn't alter the fact that that kind of a property taking is illegal. So I'm wondering what the board wants to do. The board can continue to act as if none of this really involves the Town Board. You could pretend that if you do nothing that your hands are clean, and you might think that by doing nothing to curb the behavior of the Highway Department: and by not discussing road policy, that: you're straying out of a mess. And it is a mess. But I'm here to tell you that by staying out of it and doing nothing you actually are making policy for the Town. By doing nothing and by actually voting for a raise for Mr. Bush in next year's budget you are setting town policy by default, because if you do nothing then the town's policy must be to widen roads and take property from landowners. So here's what I wish you would do. First, get involved in settling the lawsuit and consult with your attorney before settlement agreements are sent to us plaintiffs. Secondly, make Mr. Bush's salary a reflection of the quality of his work and his willingness to work in good faith with the citizens and the Town Board. And finally, make a firm statement that road widening and property taking throughout the Town is not the 'town's policy. Pagc 19 of 20 TB 11 m64)2 And I'm sorry I had to raise that when it's already so late, but as I said I wasn't going to be here next week. D Putnam distributed information to the Board regarding the impending Phase Two Stormwater Regulations. The Town, under the Clean Water Act, is an MS4. The Notice of Intent has to be filled out by March 3, 2003 which will outline a stormwater management program that has to be fully implemented within five years after that date. Cl Michaels said that he had spoken with Reba Taylor about bringing water to the Ellis Drive area. He said that she is of the opinion that if the DOT goes on Ellis Drive it will help solve the problem. He told her that he was in support of the Town exTloring other ways to bring water to the site, and that he understood the Village had no interest in bringing water unless annexation was involved. He said that Mayor Taylor had invited the board to their next public works committee meeting. Cl Michaels said he was not in favor of the proposed agreement with the Village to provide water to the area, as last presented. Cl Stelick said that perhaps the Town should explore other sources of water for the area. There will be a meeting at the Village Hall on Monday, November 18, 2002, to discuss the DOT relocation. Representatives of NYS DOT and Tompkins County will be present. Supv Varvayanis asked the board if they would like Egner Associates to look at the XCP building on Elm Street to see if it cordd be renovated and used for the new Town Hall and give a cost estimate. The board agreed that it should be investigated. Cl Michaels asked that they also give an estimate on renovating and expanding the existing Town Hall. On motion made, seconded and unanimously approved, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bambi L. Hollenbeck Town Clerk Paac 20 of 20 TOWN OF DRYDEN BUDGET FOR 2003 COUNTY OF TOMPKINS VILLAGES WITHIN TOWN VrLLAGE OF DRYDEN VILLAGE OF BREEVILLE Certification of Town Clerk 1, Z�Wmb, , Town Cleric, certify that the following is a true and correct/ copy of the. budget of the Town of Dryden as adopted by the Town .Board on the &-,C) day of Y I�cfXr d Dated !il,�e'i4o;� /y, ;4 ) Signed',' Town Cleric :TOWN OF DRYDEN I SCHEDULE A -A j ! 1APPROPRIATIONS - GENERAL - TOWNWIDE ' i ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE ! PRELIMINARY I ADOPTED EXPENDED ADOPTED i BUDGET i BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS iCODE 2001 2002 i 2003 i 2003 2003 TOWN BOARD Personal Services IA1010.1 . $8,8001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $204000 Contractual. IA1010.4 j $936; $5001 $500 $5001 $500 TOTAL $9,7361 $20,5001 $20,5001 $201500 $20,500 i r i JUSTICES j Justice PE 1A1110A 589,3781. $88,7891 $8813510 $901612 $900612 Equipment A1110.2 $2076111 $2,5001 $2,5001 $2,5001 $2,500 Contractual IA1110,4 ' $5,0301 $10,0001 $1010001 $10,0001 $109000 TOTAL i $971169 $101,289 i $100,8511 $103,1121 $103,112 SUPERVISOR Personal Services A1220.1 $42,368! $47,837 $6418711 $801471 $80,471 Equipment A1220.2 $2,051 $2,500 $29500 $2,500 $2,500 Contractual A1220.4 L $5,3691 $8,000 $8t0001 $8,000 $8,000 TOTAL ! $49,788' $581337 $75,3711 $90,9711 $90,971 � r RECEIVER OF TAXES & ASSMT i Personal Services IA1330.1 ! $18,5701 $201492 $26,5411 $26,541 $26,541 Equipment A1331.2 SO $1,0001 $1,0001 $1,000 $1,000 Contractual A1330.4 $3,011 $3,3001 $3,5001 $3,500 $3,500 • TOTALS $21,581 $24,792 $31,041 _ $31,041 $310041 BUDGET Personal Services JA1340.1 $61515 $6,745 $79015 $7,015 $7,015 TOTALS 1 $6,515 $69745 $7,015 $7,015 $7,015 TOWN CLERK 1 1 Personal Services JA11410,11 1 $23,660 $26,488 $32,887 $32,8871 $32,887 Equipment JA1410.2 $25s $1,000 $1,000 1 $1,000 $1,000 Contractual A1410A $4,104 $51000 $56000 $5,000 $50000 TOTALS $27,789 $32,488t $38,887 $38,887 I LEGAL Contractual A1420.4 ' $56,589 $56,200 $51 #9201 $51,920 $510920 TOTAL $56,5891 $56,200 $51,920 $519920 $51,920 t PERSONNEL General Time JA1430.1 _$2814521 $30,000 $3090001 $309000 $30,000 TOTAL $28,452 $3040001 $300000 $30,000 $30,000 r ENGINEER114G Contractual A1440.4 $3,204 • $100000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 _ TOTAL $3,204 $101000 $10,000 $1010001 $10,000 r � Page 1 Page 2 j JOWN.OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE A -A 1 (APPROPRIATIONS - GENERAL - TOWNWIDE ACTUAL BUDGET ! TENTATIVE ,PRELIMINARY'' ADOPTED EXPENDED! ADOPTED BUDGET j BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE i 2001 2002 2003 ( 2003 2003 ELECTIONS I I f Personal Services ;A1450.1 $6,977' $6,0001 $810001 $81000► $8,000 Contractual 1A1450.4 ' $6,6261 $8,700] $8,700' $8,7001 $8,700 TOTAL i $131603 $14,7001 $161700 J $16,700 $163700 RECORDS MANAGEMENT 1 i 1 Personal Services IA1460,1 $01. $4,9401 $2,000; $21000 $20000 Contractual jA1460.4 j $875 $12000 $1,000 $11000 $1,000 TOTAL j $87511. $5,940 $310001 $30000 $3,000 PUBLIC WORKS Personal Services A1490.1 $33t3701 $54,0891 $501000 550,000 $50,000 Equipment JA1490,2 $6,7151 $32,500 $421500 $42,500 $42,500 Contractual )A1490A 'r $9,0171 $60,2001 $7,5001 $7,500 $7,500 TOTAL I $499 102 51469789 $1009000 $100,000 $100,000 BUILDINGS I i Personal Services jA1620.1 $1,641 $3,0001 $35000 $30000 $39000 Equipment A1620.2 $266; $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 Contractual JA1620A $33,026; $33,2001 $38,000 $38,000 $38,000 TOTAL j $3499331 $38,2001 $430000 $43,000 $43,000 3 SPECIAL ITEMS Unallocated Insura A1910.4 $471758 $75,000; $1000000 $100?0001 $100,000 Municipal Dues A1920.4 $1,120( $3,000 $31000 $3,000 $3,000 Taxes on Property A1950A $31 $100 $100 $100 Gen Govt Support A1989.4 $750 $48000) $50450 $5,450 $50450 Contingency A1990.4 $3010001 $309000+ $30,0001 $30,000 TOTAL $79,631 i $111,160 $138,550 $138,5501 $1381550 BINGO Personal Services IA3120.1 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 TOTAL $150 $1501 $150 $150 $150 TRAFFIC CONTROL Contractual A3310.4 $49934 $5,0001 $50000 $5,000 $5,000 TOTAL I� $4,9341 $ 5,000 $5,000 $5,0001 $5,000 DOG CONTROL Contractual JA3510.4 0 $16,6381 1 27,080 $27,892 $271892 $271892 TOTAL $16538 i $27,0801 $27t8921 $27,892 $27,892 PUBLIC SAFETY" OTHER , Equipment JA3989.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contractual A3989.4 $31,662 $379900 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $31,662 $371900 $0 $01 $0 Page 2 Page 3 ;TOWN OF DRYDEN !SCHEDULE A-A i APPROPRIATIONS - GENERAL - TOWNWIDE t I ACTUAL 1 BUDGET TENTATIVE I i PRELIMINARY ; ADOPTED EXPENDED; ADOPTED p BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS I CODE i 2001 1 2002 i 2003 2003 i 2003 SUPT OF HIGHWAYS i 1 Personal Services IA5010.1 I .$94,5701 $104,673, $10812251 $110,1181 S110,118 Equipment ;A5010.2 I $2681 $210001, $2,0001 $2,0001 $2,000 Contractual 'A5010.4 $2,465' $61000! $4,0001 $4,0001 $4,000 TOTAL I $97,3031 $112,6731 $114,2251 $116,1181 $116,118 i f r i HIGHWAY ENGINEERING Contractual JA5020,4 I $7,895 $15,0001 $1520001 $1510001 $151000 TOTAL $7,895 $1510001 $1510_001 $15,000.1 $15,000 GARAGE i 1 Contractual JA51132.4 1 $52,394 $301000 $40,000 $401000 $40,000 TOTAL ' $52,394; $3090001 $400000 $401000 $40,000 STREET LIGHTING Contractual JA5182.4 $7,832; $8,000 $8,500 $815001 $8,500 TOTAL $71832 $8,000 $8,500 $8,500 $8,500 PUBLICITY ' I _ Contractual JA6410A $1,000 $509000 $01 $0 $0 TOTAL 1 $1,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 PROGRAMS FORAGING Gadabout & Senio A6772.4 $8,621 $80621 $80621 $8,621 $8,621 TOTAL $8,621 $8,621 $8,621 $8,621 $8,621 RECREATION ADMINISTRATION Personal Services A7020.1 $274 $5,4001 $302400 $35,400 $35,400 Contractual A7020.4 $0; $1,5001 $5,000 $51000 $50000 TOTAL $274( $6,9001 $35,400 $40,400 $401400 it DRYDEN LAKE PARK , Personal Services A71- 10.1 $2,436 $10,000 $53000 $51000 $5,000 Contractual A7110.4 $967 $4,000 $210001 $2,0001 $2,000 TOTAL $3,4031 $14,0001 $7,000 $71000 $7,000 FREEVILLE- DRYDEN TRAIL 1 Personal Services JA71180,1 , $0 $100,000 $100,0001 $100,0001 $100,000 Contractual IA7180 .4 $0, $46,000 $46,000 $46t0001 $46,000 TOTAL $0 $146,000 $14611000 $146,000 $1460000 r p I YOUTH SERVICES i r _ Personal Services A7310.1 1 $40805 $11,706r $12,225 $123225 $12,225 Contractual A7310.4 $86,7951 $721516 $55,1531 $55,153 $67,345 TOTAL ; $91,6001 $84,2221 $67,378 $671378 $79,570 it I Page 3 Page 4 rb I i ITOWN OF DRYDEN (SCHEDULE A -A 'APPROPRIATIONS - GENERAL - TOWNWIDE j ACTUAL BUDGET i TENTATIVE ? PRELIMINARY ADOPTED_ EXPENDED! ADOPTED BUDGET I BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS 'CODE 1 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 YOUTH RECREATION Personal Services IA7330.1 $0! $600001 $0' $Oj $0 Contractual lA7330.4 ..5181143; $18,346; $20,0001 $2010001 $20,000 TOTAL ! $18,143; $24,346 $20,000 $20,000) $20,000 LIBRARY Contractual TOTAL 1A7410.4 ! $5,500•. $5,5001 $63000: $610001 $7,000 $7,0001 $710001 $7,000 $71000 $71000 I I I HISTORIAN Contractual A7510.4 I $4001 $6001 $2001 $200 $200 TOTAL $400'1 $600; $200 $200 $200 � I HISTORICAL PROPERTY ! Dryden Historical A7520.4 6 $1,100 $1,1001 $11100 $1,1001 $1,100 TOTAL $11100 $191001 $1,100 $19100 $10100 CELEBRATIONS Contractual A7550.4 $01 $600 $600 $600 $600 TOTAL $0 $600 $600 $600 $600 I COMMUNITY ARTS Comm Programs JA7989.4. $2,000 $10,900 $9,690 $9,690 $9,690 TOTAL , $2,000 $10,900 $99690 $9,690 $9,690 i TOWNWIDE PLANNING i Personal Services yA8020.1 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $400000 Contractual A8020.4 $OE $0l $0 $5,000 $59000 Total $OI $0 $0 $459000 $45,000 RESEARCH Contractual A8030A j $1,218 $210,000 $100,0001 $1000000 $100,000 TOTAL $1,218 $210,0001 $100,0001 $100,0001 $100,000 SANITATION Garbage disposal A8160.4 $1,008 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 TOTAL ! $1,0081 $20000 $210001 $211 000 $2,000 CONSERVATION Personal Services A8710.1 $50 $1001 $100 $100 $100 Contractual A8710A $5 $1,500 $19000 $1,000 $11000 TOTAL $55 $19600 $17100 $1,100 $1,100 FLOODIEROSION Personal Services JA8745.1 Contractual TOTAL CONTROL 1 $1,6481 4,928 JA8745.4 1 $4,928-1- i $6,5761 $1,500 $2,000 $39500 $15001 $2,0001 $3,5001 $1,500 $2,000 $3,500( $1,500 $2,000 $3,500 Page 4 rb I •. ;TOWN OF DRYDEN jSCHEDULE A =A !APPROPRIATIONS - GENERAL - TOWNMIIDE ACTUAL i BUDGET TENTATIVE I PRELIMINARY' ADOPTED EXPENDED! ADOPTED I BUDGET BUDGET i BUDGET ACCOUNTS !CODE 1 2001 ; 2002 42003 I 2003 2003 GENERAL NATURAL RESOURCES Gontractua! A8790 "4 ' $01 $4090001 $80,000; $8010001 $80,000 TOTAL f $0' $40,0001 $80,0001 $80,000) $800000 CEMETERIES Personal Services A8810.1 ( $26� $14500 $1,006 $1,00ml $1,000 Contractual dA8810A $0, $500 $5001 $5001 $500 TOTAL $261 $2,000 $115001 $115001 $1,500 I ' COMMUNITY SERVICE ( ( I LW $ Womens Con'A8989.4 r $1,9601 5119601 $199601 $119601 $1,960 TOTAL $11960 $1,9601 $1,9601 $1_,960 $1,960_ EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1 Retirement 3,801 ,000 $5,000 $5,000 $51000 Social Security JA9030,80 $27, 215 $39,5001 $44,5001 $44,500 $44,500 Workers Comp (A9040.80 $7,846 $151000 $15,000 $154000 $15,000 Disability A9055.80 $658' $6001 $1,000 $1,000 $12000 Medical Insurance A9060.80 $73,352 $85,000 $125,044 $125,044 $1251044 TOTAL �� $111,046 $145,100 $190,544 $190,544 $190,544 INTERFUND TRANSFERS k TO Capital Fund A9950.9 ;' $4,370 $0! $5001000 $5001000 $500,000 , TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 1 $956,075 $196529392, $2,061,195 $291309949 $2,1431141 Page 5 . ITOWN OF DRYDEN (SCHEDULE A -R REVENUES - GENERAL - TOWNWIDE ACTUAL BUDGET 1 TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY a ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED I BUDGET BUDGET j BUDGET ACCOUNTS (CODE j 2001 2002 l 2003 ; 2003 2003 TAX-ITEMS In lieu of Taxes 1A1081 $102781 $8,0001 $5,000± S51000 $5,000 lnt/Pen on RP taxec.A1090 $7,523 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 TOTAL l , $172801! $15,5001 $12,5001 $12,5001 $7,500 $12,500 NON - PROPERTY TAXES 1 ' Sales Tax A1120 $448,391 $350,000' $550,0001 $5502 000 $550,000 Franchise IA1170 $14,235' $12,000 $12,000 $12,0001, $120000 TOTAL 1 , $462,6261 $362,0001 $5621000 $562,0001 $5622000 i 4 GENERAL GOVT ; Clerk Fees A1255 ; $2,076 $1,000 $1,0001 ,$11000 $10000 Dog Surplus A1550 $21147; $2,1001 $1,5001 $1,500 $1,500 TOTAL $4,2231 $3,100 $2,5001 $2,500 $2,500 CULTURE Z ; Dryden Chorus/Bar A2070 $21000 $2,400! $1,1901 $1,1901 $1,190 TOTAL , $2,000 $2,4001 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CHARGES Transportati IA2300 $4 ,972 $4,972; $4,972° $4,9721 $49972 Recreation IA2350 1 $3603491 $40,838 $33,689 $330689 J $39,780 Home /Community A2389 ! $5,109 $5,1091 $5,109 $5,109 $5,109 TOTAL 1 $460430 $50,9191 $430770 $43,7701 $49,861 USE OF MONEY Interest A2401 $1164604 $66,0001 $72,000 $72,0001 $72,000 Rental Others A2416 $300 $31 $300 $300 $300 TOTAL j $116,904 $661300 $72,300 $72,300 $72,300 LICENSESJPERMITS Bingo A2540 '; $641' $1,000. $500 $500 $500 Dog A2544 EE $9,7791 $8,0001 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 TOTAL $10,420; $9,000 $8,500 $8,500 $8,500 FINESIFORFEITURES Fines A2610 $90,544 $652000 $75,000 $75,0061 $75,000 Fines - Dog ,A2611 $525 $300; $300 $300 $300 TOTAL $91,069 $65,300 $75,300 $75,300 $751300 STATE AID Per Capita A3001 $13,473 $13,4731 $13,473 $13,473 $13,473 Mortgage Tax A3005 $171,910 $100,000' $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 Star Program A3040 r $1,291 $1,000 $11000 $16000 $1,000 TOTAL 1 $186,674 $114,473'1 $139,4731 $139,4731 $139,473 Page 6 Page 7 TOWN OF DRYDEN !SCHEDULE A-R ! ! REVENUES - GENERAL - TOWNWIDE ! ' ACTUAL ! BUDGET TENTATIVE ; PRELIMINARY ADOPTED f RECEIVED ADOPTED ! BUDGET j BUDGET ! BUDGET ACCOUNTS !CODE 2001 2002 j 2003 2003 i 2003 FEDERAL AID i I TraiUProject ImpactlA4889 $1713359' $137,925 $734000 $73,0001 $73,000 TOTAL j .31 7t 335 j $137t9251 $73, 000 it $73,0001 $734000 TOTAL REVENUES i $95574824 $826,9171 $990,5331 $99095331 $996,624 Page 7 Im ' ;TOWN OF DRYDEN ;SCHEDULE B -A 'APPROPRIATIONS =GENERAL =OUTSIDE ACTUAL I BUDGET i TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY i ADOPTED EXPENDED I ADOPTED I BUDGET BUDGET:, > BUDGET ACCOUNTS 'CODE ( 2001 2002 ; 2003 2003 2003 CONTINGENCY 181990,4 ! $1,000( $1,000; $1,0001 $11 000 $1,000 TOTAL ! $110001 $1,0001 $170001 $1,000 $1,000 BUILDING INSPECTOR 1 ! Personal Services jB3620.1 ! $45,7301 $47,8501 $5415984 154,835 $54,835 Equipment IB3620.2 $854' $2,000 $6,0001 $6,0001 $6,000 Contractual 183620.4 1 $5,4621 ,550 $101000' $10,0001 $10,000 TOTAL 1 1 $52,0461 $57,4001 $70,5981 S70,8351 $70,835 ZONING Personal Services B8010.1 $461700( $51,150 $56,499' $56,735 $56,735 Equipment 1138010,2 $664 $2?0001 $6,0001 $61000 $6,000 Contractual 188010.4 1 $47,6851 $25,350 $27,000 $279000 $279000 TOTAL j $95,0491 $78,500 $89t4991 $89,735 $89,735 PLANNING ! 1 Personal Services IB8020.1 $848 $1,900 $57,000 $12,000 $12,000 Contractual B8020.4 1 $728401 $56,750 $13,000 $13,000 $13,000 TOTAL $80688 $580650 $70,000 $25,000 $25,000 BENEFITS i Retirement B9010.8 $523 $10000 $1,000 $11000 $1,000 Social Security B9030.8 $71074 $10,000 $24,000 $24,0001 $24,000 Workers Comp 139040.8 $1,467 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Disability 139055.8 $1711 $150 $500 $5001 $500 Medicallnsuance 139060.8 $8,846 $11,000 $48,3001 $4893001 $48,300 TOTAL $1 8,081 $25,150 $76,800 $76,800 $76,800 r, 1I TRANSFERS To Highway DB B9901.9 $72,3811 $200,9801 $197,530 $197t5301 $197,530 TOTAL $72,381 $200,9801 $197,5301 $197,530 $197,530 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $247245 $421,680 $50594271 $4600900 $4601900 ( Im Ll Page 9 (TOWN OF DRYDEN {SCHEDULE B -R REVENUES - GENERAL - OUTSIDE i j I j ACTUAL t BUDGET TENTATIVE i PRELIMINARY I ADOPTED 1 Y RECEIVED , ADOPTED j BUDGET ( BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS !CODE 2001 2002 2003 ! 2003 2003 NON -PROPERTY TAXES i Sales Tax • j81120 i $283,4461 $10899841 so! $0 i $0 TOTAL $283,446! $108,984 1 $01 $O1. $0 PUBLIC SAFETY j Enforcement - Othe 81560 ; 5815001 $8,5001 $80500 $8,5001 $8,500 TOTAL ; $8,5001 $8,500 $8,5001 581500 -- $8,500 COMMUNITY SERVICES Zoning Fees IB2110 TOTAL P i j $27,225' j $2712251 1 $1,5001 $1020001 $1,500 $10,0001 $10,000 $100000 $101000 $10,000 USE OF MONEY Interest 182401 $27,6691 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 TOTAL $27,6691 $15,000 $15t000l $15,0001 $15,000 r PERMITS j Building 82555 $32,1091 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Zoning 82590 $8,875 $61000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 TOTAL $40,984 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 STATE AID Per Capita 83001 $28,9671 $26,946 $21609461 $26,946 $263946 TOTAL I $28,967 $26t9461 $26,9461 $26,946 $26,946 TOTAL REVENUES $416,791 $1810930 $81,446 $81,446 $81,446 t j j I � I � j - Page 9 Page 10 I ;TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE DA =A j (APPROPRIATIONS - HIGHWAY - TOWNWIDEI ACTUAL BUDGET ; TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY j ADOPTED EXPENDED ADOPTED BUDGET 1 BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS (CODE I 2001 2002 ; 2003 j 2003 c 2003 BRIDGES Personal Services DA5120.1 1 $57,8171 $63,525' $33,500] $33,500 $33,500 Contractual 1DA5120.4 1 $42,4311 $190,0001 $50,0001 $50,0001 $5000 TOTAL L 1 $100,248 $25365251 $83,5001 $83,5001 $83,500 i 1 i MACHINERY Services 1 '.DA5130.1 1 $48,893 1Personal ,75 $55,000 , $55.0001 $55,000 Equipment Contractual DA5130.2 JDA51360,4 $243,53711 1 $18311351 $299,0001 $1751000 $290,000 $148,000 $290t000j $148,000 $290,000 $1483000 TOTAL r - ! $475,565 i $551,175 $493,0001 j $493,0001 7 $493,000 MISC 1 Personal Services JDA5140.1 $100,959 $141,000 $1061000 $106,0001 $106,000 Contractual 1DA5140A ' $11,523 $12,000 $12,000 $121000 $12,000 TOTAL ; $112,482 $153,000 $118,000 $118,000 $118,000 SNOW REMOVAL Personal Services 1DA5142.1 $54,184 $128,100 $681000 $68,000 $68,000 Contractual DA5142.4 $92,667 $125,000 $1251000 $125,000 $125,000 TOTAL $146,851 $253,100 $193,000 $193,000 $193,000 1 SERVICES - OTHER GOVTS Personal Services I DA514801 $8;7481 $16,400 $121500 $121500 $12,500 TOTAL BENEFITS $8,748 $16,400 $120500 $121500 $12,500 Retirement DA9010.8 1 $1,254 $5,0001 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 Social Security DA9030.8 $20,792 $40,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Workers Comp 'DA9040.8 $10,446 $20,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Unemployment DA9050.8 $0 $10000 $1,000 $17000 $1,000 Disability DA9055.8 $413 $850 $850 $850 $850 Medical insurance DA9060.8 $38,4231 $85,100 $1443180 $1440180 $144,180 TOTAL $ 71,3281 $151,950 $203,530 $203,530 $203,530 I ! TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $915,2221- $1,3799150 $1,1031530 $1,103,530 $11103,530 j s S t 1 !) i Page 10 Page 11 'TOWN OF DRYDEN ;SCHEDULE DA -R REVENUES : HIGHWAY - TOWNWIDE t ACTUAL BUDGET 1 TENTATIVE ! PRELIMINARY 1 ADOPTED RECEIVED I ADOPTED BUDGET ; BUDGET ! BUDGET ACCOUNTS ?CODE 2001 2002 ; 2003 2003 ( 2003 NON - PROPERTY TAXES ! Sales Tax TOTAL ; DA1120 1 $50040001 1 $500,0001 $272,9961 $272,9961 $550,000 $5501000 $5500000 $55010001 S550,d00 $550,000 INTERGOVERNMENTAL Services - Other DA23d2 ( $41,1581 $45,0001 $4010001 540,0001 $40,000 TOTAL i $41,158 $45,0001 $40,0001 $40,0001 $401000 USE OF MONEY ( j Interest DA2401 1 $62,9631 $66,000'1 $55,0001 $55,0001 , $55, 000 TOTAL $62096 $55,0001 $55,0001 5551000 SALES a Equipment TOTAL j DA2665 ( $359003 $35,003 $01 $01 $01 $01 $01 $0 $0 $0 MISC - Insurance Recove DA2680 $440564 $0 $0 $0. $0 TOTAL $44,5841 $0 $01 $0 $0 TOTAL REVENUES $68397081 $3839996 $645,000( $645,0001 $645,000 i 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Page 11 Page 12 i I ! ,TOWN OF DRYDEN (SCHEDULE DB-A 4 APPROPRIATIONS- HIGHWAY - OUTSIDE f ACTUAL i BUDGET ! TENTATIVE j PRELIMINARY ! ADOPTED EXPENDED ADOPTED ! BUDGET ; BUDGET DU8 GET ACCOUNTS (CODE 2001 ! 2002 2003 i 2003 ! 2003 STREET MAINTENANCE : € Personal Services *DB5110.1 $91,3881 $176,4501 $151,000' $15130001, $1511 000 Contractual ]065110.4 ; $117,8161 $146,0001 $136t0001 $136,000 $1361000 TOTAL $20912041 $322,4501 $287,0001 $287,000 $287,000 ROADIMPROVEMENTS Personal Services :0135112.1 ! I I $33,4931 $53,6001 $53,5001 ! $53,5001 53,500 Non- cquipment D65112.21 i $395,4641 $400,000, 5420,000! $420,000 $420,000 TOTAL ! $428,957 $4537600 5473,5001 $47335001 $473,500 s , ! BENEFITS ! Retirement Social Secu 1DB901 0.8 I D69030.8 1 $1,254 $9,604 $2,000 $15,0001 $2,500 $16,000 $2,5001 $160000 $2,500 $16,000 Workers Comp jD89040.8 $4,296 $5,000 $7,500 $7,500 $71500 Unemployment Disability �069050.8 DB9055.8 $0 $248 $1,000+ .$850 $1,000 $850, $10000 $850 $1,000 1 $850 Medical Insurance I D69060.8 $50,2861 $85,100 $144,180 $144,180 $144,180 TOTAL $65,6881 $108,950 $1720030 $172t0301 $172,030 d TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS ! $703,849 $885,0001 $932,530! $932,530 I $9327530 TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE DB =R ! REVENUES= HIGHWAY - OUTSIDE 1 ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET j BUDGET ACCOUNTS RCODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 NOWPROPERTY TAXES Sales Tax ID81120 1 $380,069 $478,020 $0 $0` $0 TOTAL 1 $380,069 $478,020 $0 $0 $0 USE OF MONEY 1 j' Interest DB2401 $31,312 $420000 $25,000 $25,0001 $25,000 TOTAL $3103121 $42,0001 $25,000 $250000] $25,000 STATE AID l CHIPS ;DB3501 $152,223 $125,000 $1100000 $110,000 $110,000 TOTAL $152,223 $125,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 1 TRANSFERS From General B TOTAL '0135031 I $72,381 $72,381 $200,980 $200,980 $197,530 $1970530 $197,530 $197,5301 $1970530 $197,530 TOTAL REVENUES 1 $6357985 $846,000 $332,530 $3320530 $3329530 Page 12 i I Page 13 ;TOWN OF DRYDEN ;SCHEDULE SF -A APPROPRIATIONS - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ! ACTUAL BUDGET j TENTATIVE I 1 PRELIMINARY ADOPTED i EXPENDED; ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET I BUDGET ACCOUNTS 1CODE 2001 2002 1 2003 i 2003 2003 FIRE PREVENTION i Contractual ;SF3410.4 1 $501,9511 $525,708 $519,4961 $519,496 $5191496 TOTAL ) $501,9511_ $525,7081 $519,4961 $519,496] $519,496 BENEFITS ( 1 Workers Comp SF9040'8 1 $51,5461 $557000 $65,0001 $65,0001 565,000 TOTAL 1 ! $52,5461 $55,0001 • $65,0001 $65,0001' $65,000 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 1 $554,4971 $580,7081 $5847496 $584,496 $5841496 I � I 1 4 I 1 TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SF-R t REVENUES - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ! ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 , 2003 USE OF MONEY j Interest SF2401 1 $2,527 $1,000 $10000 $1,000 $1,000 TOTAL $21527 $1,000 $1,000 $19000 $1,000 TOTAL REVENUES $2,5271 $1,000 $1,0001 $1,0001 $1,000 t 1 _ � � 1 I Page 13 ACCOUNTS COQ DE USE OF MONEY —�- Interest ISL1 -2401 TOTAL TOTAL OF DRYDEN UFR _ VORM ►oiTL1L RECEIVED 2001 $110 $110 $110 =3jT•Zc%l ADOPTED 2002 $100 $100 $100 Page 14' SCHEDULE SL1 -R ENTATIVE BUDGET 2003 $25 $25 $25 BUDGET 2003 $25 $25 ADOPTED BUDGET 2003 I I r' i !TOWN OF DRYDEN ISCHEDULE SL1 -A ! rAPPROPRIATIONS - VARNA LIGHTING j ACTUAL 1 BUDGET ! TENTATIVE ! PRELIMINARY ADOPTED EXPENDED ADOPTED j BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS ;CODE I : 2001 ! 2002 ( 2003 ! 2003 1 2003 STREET LIGHTING i Contractual SL1- 5182.4 $4,4321 $51000j $5:000 $51000] $5,000 TOTAL I ? $4,432, $5,0001 $5,0001 $5too0i $5,000 f i I TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 1 $4,4321 $5,0001 $5,000 1 $3,000 $57000 i I 1 I i ACCOUNTS COQ DE USE OF MONEY —�- Interest ISL1 -2401 TOTAL TOTAL OF DRYDEN UFR _ VORM ►oiTL1L RECEIVED 2001 $110 $110 $110 =3jT•Zc%l ADOPTED 2002 $100 $100 $100 Page 14' SCHEDULE SL1 -R ENTATIVE BUDGET 2003 $25 $25 $25 BUDGET 2003 $25 $25 ADOPTED BUDGET 2003 I I r' Page 15 I j + TOWN OF DRYDEN JSCHEDULE SL2 -A ;APPROPRIATIONS - ETNA LIGHTING" i i 1 1 ACTUAL BUDGET i TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED j EXPENDED j ADOPTED I BUDGET BUDGET I BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 f 2002 r 2003 2003 2003 STREET LIGHTING Contractual SL2- 5182.4 ' $3.424; $3,6001 $3,750 $316001 $3,600 TOTAL j $3,4241 $3,6001 $3,750; $3,6001 $3,600 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS j $3,4241 $3,6001 $3,7501 $3,600, $3,600 � 1 j r I j A r t I _ _ } I i C ' TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SL2 -R REVENUES-ETNA 1 ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY , ADOPTED RECEIVED ' ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 USE OF MONEY i Interest SL2 -2401 j $80 $75 $25 $25 F $25 TOTAL j $80 $75 $25 $251 $25 TOTAL REVENUES $80 $75 $25 j $251 $25 j 1 i Page 15 Page 16 n (TOWN OF DRYDEN _SCHEDULE SL3 -A _ ;APPROPRIATIONS - MEADOW /LEISURE LIGHTING 1 I I / s ' ACTUAL BUDGET ( TENTATIVE it PRELIMINARY ( ADOPTED ( EXPENDED ADOPTED BUDGET ( BUDGET ! BUDGET ACCOUNTS ICODE 1 2001 2002 I 2003 I 2003 2003 STREET LIGHTING y k Contractual I SL3- 5182.4 1 $1,8071 $2,0001 $2,1001 $2,000 $20000 TOTAL 1 $1,8071 $2,0001 $2,1001 $2,0001 $2,000 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $19807 $2,0001 $271001 $2,0001 $2,000 I i I � I I 1 ! I I I Y I 1 I i - ,SCHEDULE TOWN OF DRYDEN SL3-R ` REVENUES - MEADOWILEISURE ( ACTUAL ( B7UDGET_1 TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED . RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET ! BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 USE OF MONEY - i Interest SL3-2401 $44 $50 $10 $101 $10 TOTAL $44 $50 $10 $10 $10 L TOTAL REVENUES $44 $50 $10, $10 $10 I � _ ' I l i I 1 Y Page 16 I� Page 17 :TOWN OF DRYDEN J SCHEDULE SM -A ! ,APPROPRIATIONS - AMBULANCE DISTRICT _ i • ACTUAL i BUDGET TENTATIVE ; PRELIMINARY i ADOPTED i EXPENDED ADOPTED P BUDGET i BUDGET i BUDGET ACCOUNTS )CODE 2001 ; 2002 I 2003 ( 2003 2003 AMBULANCE Contractual 540A a $311,268 $511,200 $317t500j $290,0001 $290,000 TOTAL I i $311,268 $511,200; $317,5001 $290,000! $290,000 J 1 BENEFITS Retirement ISM9010.8 ! $4451 $1.000, $0 $0, $0 Workers Comp SM9040.8 $12,7701 $20,0001 $20,000 $20,000 $202000 TOTAL 1 $13,2151 $21,0001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,000 1 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $32434831 $532,200 I � $33795001 $3109000 i TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SMY R REVENUES - AMBULANCE DISTRICT J ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS 'CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 AMBULANCE j Fees ISM1289 1 $127,905 $1241250F___ 124,250 $70,0001 $0 $0 TOTAL $127,905 $12402501 $709000 $0 $0 t F USE OF MONEY Interest SM2401 $2,395 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $2,395 $0 J $01 $0 $0 TOTAL REVENUES 30,3001 $124,250 $701000 $0 $0 � E 1 7 e Page 17 Page 18 ! TOWN OF DRYDEN (SCHEDULE SS1 -A 4 I IAPPROPRIATIONS - SAPSUCKER WOODS SEWER ACTUAL l BUDGET I TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ; ADOPTED' �EXPENDED1 ADOPTED 1 BUDGET { BUDGET 1 BUDGET ACCOUNTS +CODE 2001 j 2002 2003 2003 20031 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services 1SS1- 8110.1 „ . $01 $1001 $1001 $100 $100 Contractual SS 1- 8110.4 1 $01 $9001 $9001 $9001 $900 TOTAL s 1 $01 $110001 $1,0001 $190001 $1,000 � t SANITARY SEWERS j 1 Contraduai ;SS14120.4 ; $0, $6,000 $3,0001 $3,0001 $3,000 TOTAL 1 $0 $6,000 $3,000 $3,0001 $34000 TREATMENT /DISPOSAL Contractual jSS1 -8130.4 $9,655 $8t6001 $12,000 $16,0001 $16,000 TOTAL ( $9,655 $8,600 $12,000 $16,000 $169000 BENEFITS 1 1 Social Security SS 14030,8 $0 $50 $251 25 TOTAL I $01 $50L. $251 $251 $25 1 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $9p6551 $16,6601 $16,0251 $209025 $209025 t � 1TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SS1-R _ REVENUES ,SAPSUCKER WOODS ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 1 2001 2002 2003 2003 1 2003 FEES 1 1 Sewer Rents SS1 -2120 $8,040 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000( $8,000 TOTAL $81040 $8,000( $8,000 $81000 $80000 I USE OF MONEY Interest -2401 _ $104711 $1,000 $500 $500 $500 .SS1 TOTAL $1,4711 $1,000 $500 $500 $500 6 TOTAL REVENUES $9,511, $9,000 $89500 $8,5001 $8,500 1 1 i ( t Page 18 Page 19 1 'TOWN OF DRYDEN I SCHEDULE SS2-A ;APPROPRIATIONS - VARNA SEWER ; t� ACTUAL i BUDGET TENTATIVE ;' PRELIMINARY ' ADOPTED )EXPENDED! ADOPTED I BUDGET I BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS pCODE 2001 2002 1 2003 1 2003 2003 ADMINISTRATION i ! Personal Services (SS2 -8110.1 $4861 $3001 $110001 $1,000 $1,000 Contractual ;SS2- 8110.4 $404( $110001 $210001 $1,500 $1,500 TOTAL $890 $1,300( $3,000 $2,5001 520500 SANITARY SEWERS 1 j Contractual ISS2- 8120.4 $33100 $33:0001 $48,0001 $75,0001 $75,000 TOTAL j $33,0891 $3310001 $4890001 $7590001 $75,000 TREATMENTIDISPOSAL j r Contractual SS2- 8130.4 ; $8,4311 $35,000 _ $2010001 $20,800 $20,800 TOTAL ( $8,4311 $35,0001 $2020001— $20,8001 $20,800 ( BENEFITS Social Security SS2- 9030.8 $37 $25 $100 $501 $50 TOTAL r $371 $25 $100 -$501--- 50 $50 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $42,4471 1 $69,3251 $71,100 $98,350 $98,350 . 1 1 I r ( TOWN OF DRYDEN 1SCHEDULE SS2 -R REVENUES -VARNA ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 1 2003 2003 FEES f Sewer Rents SS2 -2120 $23,4801 $20,000 $249000 $24,000 $249000 TOTAL $23,480 $20,000 1 $24,0001 $24,000 $24,000 USE OF MONEY I I Interest SS2-2401 $2,854 $3,000 $1,000 -$116-0-01- 1,000 $1,000 TOTAL 1 1 $218541 $3,000 $1,000 $11000 $11000 TOTAL REVENUES $26,334 $230000 $259000 $25,000 $250000 1 � l f r Page 19 Page �Q - I ITOWN OF DRYDEN iSCHEDULE SS3 -A JAPPROPRIATIONS - CORTLAND RD SEWER i ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE i PRELIMINARY' ADOPTED t j EXPENDED( ADOPTED BUDGET I BUDGET j BUDGET ACCOUNTS i CODE 2001 2002 2003 l 2003 2003 ADMINISTRATION i I Personal Services SS3- 8110.1 11 $0 $1001 S501 $501, $50 Contractual SS3- 8110.4 Sol $1,0001 $16000 $14000 $1,000 TOTAL j f $01 $1,100I $1,050T $1,050 $1,050 i I I i SANITARY SEWERS Equipment SS3 - 8120.2 $0 $2,000j $Oj $0 $0 Contractual SS3 - 8120.4 $1011359 $101,0001 $110,0001 $1101000 TOTAL ( $101,3591 $103,000 $1101 000 $110,0001 $110,000 r TREATMENTIDISPOSAL Contractual SS3 - 8130.4 $378 $51000 $5,000 $5,0001 $5,000 TOTAL , $3781 $5,0001 $5,0001 $53000 $5,000 BENEFITS ( I Social Security SS3- 9030.8 $0 $50 $25 $251 TOTAL i $0 $50 $25 $25 $25 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $1019737, $109,150 $116,075 $11690750 $1169075 ( toot i TOWN OF DRYDEN ISCHEDULE SS3 -R REVENUES - CORTLAND RD SEWER ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 FEES Sewer Rents SS3 -2120 $101,359 $100,000 $110t000l $110,000 $110,000 TOTAL $101,359 $100,0001, $1100000' $110,000 i $110,000 USE OF MONEY _ Interest SS3 -2401 j .$4,944 $5r000l $1,500 $19500 $1,500 _ TOTAL $4,944 $5,000 $19500 $1,5001 $1,500 TOTAL REVENUES $1067303 $105,000 $111,500 $1111500 $1111500 Page �Q Page 21 j (TOWN OF DRYDEN 'SCHEDULE SS" APPROPRIATIONS - MONKEY RUN SEWER ! i ! ACTUAL I BUDGET ! TENTATIVE i PRELIMINARY' ADOPTED EXPENDED ADOPTED BUDGET j BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS !CODE 2001 2002 I 2003 2003 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services SS4- 8110.1 ; $73r' $2001 $1001 $1001 $100 Contractual SS4- 8110.4 i $652; $1,0001 $2,5001 $2,5001 $2,500 TOTAL $7251 I $1,2001 $216001 $2,600] $2,600 SANITARY SEWERS Contractual SS4- 8120.4 5121472 $11,100( i $11,0001 i $916001 $9,600 TOTAL 1 $127472, $11,100 $11,000 $9,600f $9,600 i TREATMENTIDISPOSAL Contractual I SS4- 8130.4 ' $22,630 $230000r $25,000 $31,8001 $311800 TOTAL 1 $2206301 $23,0001 $25,000 $311800 $31,800 BENEFITS j Social Security SS49030.8 TOTAL i $6 $6 $251 $25 $251 $25 $25 $25 $25 $25 SERIAL BONDS Bond Principle SS4- 9710.6 $47,000 $47,000 $53,000 $53,0001 $53,000 Bond Interest jSS4- 9710.7 $270600 $28,704 $25,461 $25,461 $259461 TOTAL 1 $74,6001 $751704 $789461 $78,4611 $78,461 I 1 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $1109433 $111,029 $117,086 $122,486 $122,486 TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SS" REVENUES - MONKEY RUN SEWER ACTUAL RECEIVED BUDGET ADOPTED TENTATIVE BUDGET PRELIMINARY BUDGET ADOPTED BUDGET ACCOUNTS 1CO DE IN LIEU OF TAXES 2001 2002 2003 2003 ° 2003 Outside User ,SS4 -1081 $13,305 $15,175 $191852 $252094 $250094 TOTAL $13,305 $15,1751 $19,852 $25,0941 $25,094 FEES Sewer Rents SS4-2120 TOTAL E l $17,860 $17,860 $12,5001 $129500 $8,000 $8,000 $8,0001 $80000 $8,000 $8,000 U OF MONEY Interest SS4 -2401 TOTAL $1,8161 $1,815; 2,500 $2,500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 TOTAL RgVf;NUES $320980 $3091751 $28,352 $337594 $33,594 Page 21 Page 22 i t j °TOWN OF DRYDEN (SCHEDULE SSS-A k APPROPRIATIONS - TURKEY HILL SEWER 1 _ k i ' ACTUAL ; BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY j ADOPTED j EXPENDED( ADOPTED ( BUDGET ( BUDGET ( BUDGET ACCOUNTS (CODE ! 2001 k 2002 ( 2003 ( 2003 ': 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services ISS5- 8110.1 $30 $200 $1001: $100 $100 Contractual 1 SS5- 8110.4 $1,1191 $3,000 $30000 $3,0001 $39000 TOTAL ( $1,1491 $3,2001 $301001 $3,100! $3,100 SANITARY SEWERS ! Contractual SS5-8120.4 $5?4541 $5,250 $512501 $5,2501 $5,250 TOTAL ! ( $5,454( $5,250 $5,250 55,250 $5,250 TREATMENT /DISPOSAL j Contractual 'SS5- 81_3.0.4 $0 $500 $500 $21700y $21700 TOTAL $0 $500 $500 $2,7001 $2,700 I BENEFITS Social Security SS5- 9030.8 $2j $100 $50 $50 $50 TOTAL $2 $100 $50 $50 $50 SERIAL BONDS Bond Principle I SS5- 9710.6 j $40,009 $401000 $40,000 $40,006F $40,000 Bond Interest SS5- 9710.7 $22,038 $25,000 $24,000 $22,0001 $22,00 TOTAL $62,038 $65,000 $640000 $620000 $62,00 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $68,643 $74,050 $729900 $73,100 $739100 f TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SS5p -R ( REVENUES - TURKEY HILL SEWER ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 IN LIEU OF TAXES Outside User SS5- 1081 $553 $570 $2,294 $232941 $20294 TOTAL I $553 $570 $2,294 $24294 $2,294 ( i FEES Sewer Rents !SS5-2120 $7,243 $6,000( $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 TOTAL $71243 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $61000 USE OF MONEY Interest (SS5 -2401 $2,087 $2,000 .$5001 $500, $500 TOTAL $2,087q $2,000! $500 $500 $500 TOTAL REVENUES 1 $9,883 $8,570 $81794 $897941 $8,794 Page 22 0 Page 23 'TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SS64 , 'APPROPRIATIONS - PEREGRINE HOLLOW SEWER ACTUAL ,! BUDGET ? TENTATIVE j PRELIMINARY ADOPTED ! EXPENDED ( ADOPTED ( BUDGET i BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS ;CODE P 2001 2002 j 2003 j 2003 ( 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services !SS6- 81101 $0! $3001 $1001 $100 $100 Contractual SS6-8110.4 j $1,3431 $115001 $1,0001 $1,0001 $1,000 TOTAL j ! $11343 $1,8001 $161001 $11100 511100 SANITARY SEWERS ! ! Contractual SS6- 8120.4 $6281 $8001 $800 $8001 $800 TOTAL j $628 $8001 $800 $800 $800 TREATMENTIDISPOSAL f j Contractual SS6-8130.4 $Of $100 $100 $5001 $5Q0 . TOTAL S0 $1001 $100 $500, $500 BENEFITS Social Security I SS6- 9030.8 $0j $50 $50 $50 $50 TOTAL $0 $50 $50 $50 $50 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $1,9711 $2,750 $2,050 $29450 $2,450 f ! TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SS6 -R jREVENUES - PEREGRINE HOLLOW SEWER _ � 1 ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET r BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 1 2003 FEES Sewer Rents I SS6 -2120 j $4521 $350 $400 $400 $400 TOTAL 1 $4521 � $350; $400 $4Q0 f $400 USE OF MONEY Interest SS6 -2401 $1,978 $19000 $700 $700 $700 TOTAL $1,978 $1,000 $700 $7001 $700 TOTAL REVENUES $29430 $1,3501 $1,100 $19100 $1,100 f f ! I Page 23 Page 24 I f I I .TOWN OF DRYDEN 'SCHEDULE SW1 -A , APPROPRIATIONS - VARNA WATER ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE I PRELIMINARY ADOPTED i �EXPENDED I ADOPTED BUDGET I BUDGET ! BUDGET ACCOUNTS I CODE 2001 2002 j 2003 2003 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services '4 SW1- 8310.1 Contractual I SW1- 8310.4 $4241 $402 $1,2501 $5001 $115001 $500 $1,500, $5001 $1,500 $500 TOTAL $826 $1,750+ $2,0 00 $2,000: $2,000 SOURCE OF SUPPLY R I a Equipment ISW1- 8320.2 $0 $500 $01 $01 S0 Contractual 1 SW1- 8320.4 $38,328` $37,500 5484000 $48,000 $482000 TOTAL ', I $38, 328 $38,0001 $48t0001 $48,000 $48, 000 1 TRANSMISSION /DISTRIBUTION Contractual SW1- 8340.4 $3,330 TOTAL $3,330 $41,6001 $41,6001 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $51000 $5,000 BENEFITS Social Security iSW1- 9030.8 $32 $1001 $125 $125 $125 TOTAL ! $32 $100, $125 $1251 $125 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $42,516 $81,450 $55,125 $55,125 j$55112 i i ITOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SW1 -R REVENUES -VARNA WATER ACTUAL f BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED { ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET I BUDGET ACCOUNTS ICODE 1 2001 2002 1 2003 2003 1 2003 � FEES Water Sales SW1 -2140 TOTAL ! $519064 $51,064 $42,000 $427000 $45,000 $452000 $459000 $451000 $45,000 $45,000 USE OF MONEY I Interest SW1 -2401 $71727 $6,000 $41000 a $4,000 $4,000 TOTAL $71727 $6,000 $49000, $41000 $4,000 TOTAL REVENUES $58, 791 $48,000 $49,000 $49,000 $49,000 Page 24 U Page 25 i TOWN OF DRYDEN ISCHEDULE SW2 -A APPROPRIATIONS - SNYDER HILL WATER 1 ACTUAL BUDGET ! TENTATIVE i PRELIMINARY , ADOPTED EXPENDED '+ ADOPTED [ BUDGET ! BUDGET ! BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 9 2002 2003 ! 2003 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services ISW2= 8310.1 $13i $1001 $56 $50( $50 Contractual ISW2 - 8310,4 $3671 $110001 $1,0001 $110001 $1,000 TOTAL I i $380 $1,1001 $1,0501 $10050 $1,050 SOURCE OF SUPPLY ! i l f 1 Contractual 1SW2- 8320.4 1 $3,3411 $311501 $47200; $412001 $4,200 TOTAL ! 1 $393411 $3,1501 $4,200 $4,2001_ 545200 TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION Contractual "SW2- 8340.4 $0 $1,000 $500 _ $500 $500 TOTAL $01 I $1,000 $500 $500 $500 BENEFITS Social Security SW2- 9030.8 $1 $501 $25 $251 $25 TOTAL $1 $501 $25 $25 $25 SERIAL BONDS Bond Principle °SW2- 9710.6 $5,0001 $50000 $51000 $51000 $5,000 Bond Interest I SW2- 9710.7 $3,1051 $2,760 $2,450 $2,450 $2,450 TOTAL $8,105 $717601 $7,450 $7,450 $7,450 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $11,827 $139060 $13r2251 $13,2251 $13,225 i i TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SW2 -R REVENUES'�SNYDER HILL WATER i 1 1 ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET 1 BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 FEES 1 Water Sales ISW2 -2140 1 $3,896 $3,800 $392001 $3,2001 $3,200 TOTAL 1 [ $3,8001 $3,2001 $352001 $3,200 USE OF MONEY [ — —$3,896('- j Interest ISW2 -2401 $11013 $800! $350 $350 $350 TOTAL I $100131 $800 $350 $350 $350 TOTAL REVENUES $40909 $41600 $31550 $395501 $3,550 i 1 Page 25 Page 26 TOWN OF DRYOEN 'SCHEDULE SW3 -A ;APPROPRIATIONS - MONKEY RUN WATER y i 1 ACTUAL BUDGET ( TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY ADOPTED 1 EXPENDED ( ADOPTED "'I' BUDGET j BUDGET I BUDGET' ACCOUNTS 1CODE i 2001 1 2002 1 2003 ( 2003 2003 ADMINISTRATION i 1 ; Personal Services SW3- 8310.1 6 $27 $300; $1,0009 $1,000F $11000 Contractual 1 SW3- 8310.4 $23432' $210001 $2,0001 $2,0001 $2,000 TOTAL $2,4591 $2,3001 $3,0001 $3,0001 $3,000 i SOURCE OF SUPPLY i Contractual ;SW3- 8320.4 ' $21,0301 $22,8651 $23,000 $231000 $23,000 TOTAL $21,030 $22t8651 $23,0001 $23,0001 $23,000 1 1 TRANSMISSION /DISTRIBUTION 1 1 1 Contractual 'SW3-8340,4_1 $15.527 $33,8001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $203000 TOTAL ; I $15,527 $33,800r $20,000 $200000 $20,000 I BENEFITS i Social Security SW3- 9030.8 $2 $50 $100 $1001 $100 TOTAL $2 $50( $100 $100 $100 SERIAL BONDS 1 Bond Principle SW3- 9710.6 $38,000 $38,000 $371000 $37,000] $37,000 Bond Interest .SW3 - 9710.7 $27,600 $201631 $18,100 $18,100( $18,100 TOTAL 1 $65,600 $58,631 $55,100 $55,100 $55,100 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $104,618 $1170646 $101,200 $1019200' $101,20 ( TOWN OF DRYDEN I SCHEDULE SW3 -R i REVENUES - MONKEY RUN WATER 1 ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY 1 ADOPTED i RECEIVED ADOPTED ( BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 IN LIEU OF TAXES 1 Outside User SW3-1081 $179569 $5,550 $70345 $7,345 $70345 TOTAL $17,569 $5,550 $7,3456 $7,345 $7,345 FEES Water Sales ISW3=2140 $22,997 $169000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 TOTAL $221997 $16,000 $8$0001 $8,000 $80000 USE OF MONEY Interest SW3 -2401 $2,3891 $2,000 $750 $750 $750 TOTAL $20389 $21000 $750 $750 $750 MISC REVENUES Sprinkler Fees 1SW3 -2770 l• $865 $865 $685 $6851 $685 TOTAL 1 $865 $865 $685 $685 $685 TOTAL REVENUES $43,820 $2494151 $169780 $16v7801 $169780 Page 26 L� Page 27 I � I !TOWN OF DRYDEN !SCHEDULE SW4-A i iAPPROPRAATIONS - HALL RD WATER '• ACTUAL ! BUDGET TENTATIVE j PRELIMINARY i ADOPTED IEXPENDED t ADOPTED t BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS I CODE 2001 2002 i 2003 1 2003 ! 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services ; SW4- 8310.1 $01 $501 $501 $501 $510 Contractual I SW4- 8310.4 $3671 $2,0001 $2,0001 $2,0001 $2:000 TOTAL 1 1 $3671 $2,050 $2,0501 $27050 52,050 t SOURCE OF SUPPLY i Contractual SW4- 8320.41 $7,0371 $7,7801 $8,000! $8,0001 $8,000 TOTAL $7,037 $7,7801 $8,000( .$810001 $8,000 I i I TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION i Contractuai SW4- 8340.4 i $1111 $1,3001 $200 $200 $200 TOTAL $111 $10300 $2001 $200 $200 1 BENEFITS Social Security JSW3w9030.8 1 $ $50 $25 $25F-- 25 $25 TOTAL ( ( $501 $251 $25 $25 1 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $77515 $11,180 $1092751 $10,275 $10,275 l TOWN OF DRYDEN ISCHEDULE SW4 -R i REVENUES - HALL RD WATER ACTUAL BUDGET TENTATIVE 1 PRELIMINARY ADOPTED RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS CODE 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 FEES 1 Water Sales SW4-2140 $7,2651 $6,500 $61500 $6,500 $6,500 TOTAL $7,265`1 $6150011 $6,500 $6v5001 $6,500 USE OF MONEY ! 1 Interest SW4 - 2401 $453 $300 $150 $150 $150 TOTAL $453 $300 $150 $150 $150 MISC REVENUES 1 Sprinkler SW4 -2770 $680 $680 $540 $540 $540 TOTAL $6801 $680' $540 $540 $540 i' TOTAL REVENUES $8,398 $L480_1 $7,190 $711911 $7,190 _ Page 27 Page 28 !TOWN OF DRYDEN ISCHEDULE SW5 -A 'APPROPRIATIONS - TURKEY HILL WATER , i i I ACTUAL BUDGET 1 TENTATIVE 'PRELIMINARY t ADOPTED ! EXPENDED I ADOPTED j BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS !CODE d 2001 2002 2003 I 2003 j 2003 ADMINISTRATION Personal Services SW5- 8310.1 j $01 $1001 $501 $501 S50 Contractual SW5 - 8310.4 I S7861 $1,000 $1,500 $11500 $1,500 TOTAL $786, $11100 $1,5501 51,5501 $14550 SOURCE OF SUPPLY I Contractual 1SW5- 8320.4 $91415i $10,2001 $15,0001 5151000( $15,000 TOTAL I $9,415 $1002001 $15,0001 $15,0001 $15,000- _ _ TRANSM ISSIONIDISTRIBUTI O N Contractual 1SW5- 8340.4 $311 $3001 $100 $1001 $100 TOTAL $311 $300 $100 $1001 $100 ; BENEFITS Social Security SW5- 9030.8 + $0 $50 $251 $25 $25 TOTAL -� $01 $50 $251 $251 $25 SERIAL BOND 4 Bond Principle SW5 - 9710.6 $30,0001 $30,0001 $30,0001 $30,000' $30,000 Bond Interest SW5- 9710.7 $22,6461 $24,600 $20,0001 $20,000 $20,000 TOTAL $52,646 $541600 $50,000 $50,000 $50300 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $63,158 $66,250 $6696751 $669675 $669675 s TOWN OF DRYDEN SCHEDULE SW5-R 1 REVENUES - TURKEY HILL WATER i ACTUAL BUDGET 1 TENTATIVE 1 PRELIMINARY ADOPTED 1 I RECEIVED ADOPTED BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACCOUNTS -!CODE�I 2001 2002 2003 2003 2003 IN LIEU OF TAXES 6 4 Outside Users ,SW5 -1081 $1,037 $1,0501 $2,246 $2,246 $2,246 TOTAL E $10037 $1,050 $2t246t $2,2461 $2,246 FEES 1 Water Sates SW5 -2140 ' $13,5811 $13,0001 $14,000 $14,000 $140000 TOTAL ; $13,5811 $13,000 $140000 $14,000 $14,000 1 USE OF MONEY Interest jSW54401 $1,164' $1,000 _ $400 $400 $400 TOTAL $1,164 $1,000 $400 $400 $400 TOTAL REVENUES $159782' $159050 $16,646 $16,646 $16,646 Page 28 Town of Dryden ® Town Board Meeting November 6, 2002 Name - (Please Print) 0 (A i �UNJ41 R P'I� L 1NJ dMFLW /W t Address I r=tt t4.v/XL P•oI Q 0 lk 3 57 2akee ///0// p;/ 22 -4.', ,5v.. & 5cvV4,43 V , // c jk S2 coarro./CAC Cifz IC A I aviu 0 ) Z763 4& "F/Z7dAA>VJX,( mrew Jul ke 6t (; -0 n ; C I)AJ 4Z!r _ ( Cf ,i.vAP �, �(,�C b J lv