Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-04-10 - TB TOWN OF ULYSSES REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING APRIL 10, 2007 Present : Supervisor Douglas Austic ; Town Council Roxanne Marino, Don Ellis, Rod Ferrentino and Lucia Tyler; Town Clerk Marsha L. Georgia; Deputy Supervisor Richard Coogan absent; Town Highway Superintendent James Meeker; and Town Attorney Mariette Geldenhuys . I Others Present : Scott Sherwood, Juraj Gavurnik, Marcia Horn, Krys Cail, Tammy Morse. Supervisor Austic called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 PM and led those assembled in the pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. APPROVAL OF MINUTES BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ulysses approve minutes of the Regular Town Board Meeting of March 13 , 2007 and the Special Town Board Meeting of March 23 , 2007 as corrected. FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Board table the minutes of March 20th & 26th, 2007 . Mr. Austic aye Mr. Ferrentino aye Ms . Tyler aye Mr. Ellis aye Ms . Marino aye Adopted. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ulysses approve the previous examined voucher # ' s 114 through 135 , excluding voucher # 135 in the amount of $3000 for a total of $ 34, 117 . 19 . Mr. Austic aye Mr. Ferrentino aye Ms . Tyler aye Mr. Ellis aye Ms . Marino aye Adopted . REPORTS OF REPRESENTATIVES Tompkins County Board of Representative Jim Dennis — Mr. Dennis was absent. Trumansburg Fire Department — Ms . Tyler read Chief Fulton' s report. IPlanning Board Report — no report . PUBLIC PRIVLEDGE OF THE FLOOR Request for change in PUD Mr. Sherwood addressed the Town Board and stated the following : As written in the Town of Ulysses Zoning Law (August 2005) under Development District No . 1 Spruce Row Campgrounds paragraph 16 . 3 . 1 (h) : Regular Town Board Meeting 2 April 10, 2007 Item #2 currently states : "There shall be no commercial sales of camping vehicles at Spruce Row Campgrounds . " Mr. Sherwood said that he requesting Item #2 is amended to read : Commercial sales of camping vehicles are allowed at Spruce Row Campground. Mr. Sherwood said they would like the ability to apply for a NYS motor vehicle dealer's license so that they may buy and sell new and used camping trailers or RVs . To apply for a license they must have permission from the town, hence the reason for the request for change of the Zoning Law. It is important the Board understand we do not intend to develop a large sales lot, we would merely like the ability to order new units upon request f or attend auctions to buy or sell on occasion. There would be no visible difference from Kraft Rd or Colegrove Rd. Any units for sale would be located in the current parking lot, storage area, or on a camping site. As a member of Campground Owners of New York we network with campgrounds all across New York. Many of the campgrounds posses a NYS Dealers license and maintain that it creates another revenue stream that is a good fit with the current business operations as a campground. Mr. Sherwood said that prior to this board meeting I have spoken with Doug Austic and Alex Rachun and they have indicated that they would be in favor of this change . The Board discussed Mr. Sherwood ' s request. Mr. Austic said that at the last working session on the Zoning Law the Board had made a change to allowed sales of camping vehicles with some stipulations attached . The Board recommended that Mr. Sherwood present a plan which would include a sketch as to where the sales operation would take place and also include the number of campers to be on site at one time. This information can be brought back to the Town Board at there meeting scheduled for April 23rd for the Board ' s review and then would be reviewed and forwarded on to the Planning Board for their review and recommendations . After that the Town Board would set and hold a public hearing on the amendment to the Pun TOWN REPORTS Highway Superintendent James Meeker read into record the following report : • Plow and salted as needed • Worked on grader brake system • Hauling stone for summer projects • Patched the worst holes in the blacktop roads (waiting for warmer weather to finalize patching) • 6000 hour service on loader — changed oil in transmission, differential oils and new seals and shim washers for bucket • Starting to grade shoulders that got dug up during winter plowing operations and rake sod • Announced that Ron Durling will be retiring April 20th, 2007 • Announced that the Halseyville Road Bridge would be closed for repair Krys Cail asked for the enforcement of the PUD for Moore ' s Outboard Motor Shop on DuBois Road. Ms . Cail believes there are way too many boats on site . Ms . Cail also believes that Stormwater is not being enforced at the building sites on DuBois and 3 Glenwood Heights Roads . Mr. Austic will have Mr. Rachun look into both issues . Code Enforcement Officer Alex Rachun absent and Mr. Austic reported that no new permits have been issued for new housing starts this year. Regular Town Board Meeting 3 April 10, 2007 Town Clerk Marsha L. Georgia reported that a total of $ 1 ,425 . 50 was collected for the month of March and of that $630 . 38 was turned to the Supervisor for Clerk fees and $706 . 75 was turned over to DEC , no plumbing permits this month. Mrs . Georgia turned over all the unpaid taxes for 2007 to Tompkins County Budget and Finance along with the last payment of $ 35 , 727 . 05 . The Supervisor was paid a total of $ 648 . 80 for the penalties collected for March. The Ulysses Town and County Tax Account is at zero and balanced. There is still one outstanding check for $ 1672 . 60 that was paid for an overpayment in February that Ms . Georgia will check on . Board Members and Committees Councilwoman Tyler reported that she attended the Dock Regulations in the Town of Fayette where a presentation was put on how Towns regulate waterfronts and docks . Some towns regulate there docks through Boat and Harbor Regulations . The Town of Ithaca did a very extensive presentation on their Dock Ordinance which is draft form which they are about ready to have the planner review . Ms . Tyler has a copy of this document. Ms . Tyler said that there were many residents from the lake that attended with questions and comments . Councilwoman Marino reported that the Recreation Partnership is working on revising the contract and sort out issues . Ms . Marino said at the Youth Commission meeting in February (missed the one in March) a commitment was made to make an overall assessment of youth programming needs and services and the best use of the available Town and Village funds . Committee formation is going slowly but Nancy Zahler had offered to facilitate and help out with the meeting. Ms . Marino has received a survey on municipal youth services planning from Karen Colman with the County Youth Services Department which she would like it filled out by a broad spectrum of people such as elected officials, law enforcement, youth parents , seniors, library officials, etc . and would like returned by the 23r1 of April . Ms . Marino gave copies to the Clerk who will share with the Village Clerk to distribute and return to the County Youth. Supervisor Austic reported that he had distributed the Supervisor Financial Report for the month and asked if any one had any questions . No questions were heard . Deputy Supervisor — absent no report . OLD BUSINESS Water District #5 - Map, Plan and Report Ms . Marino said previously emailed questions to Attorney Mariette Geldenhuys . The email Ms . Geldenhuys had sent was not legible so Ms . Geldenhuys handed out copies which follow : Questions Presented Roxanne Marino submitted a series of questions regarding the legal rules applicable to Water District formation and operation . This memorandum provides a preliminary response and is limited to the statutory requirements . A more detailed response will require further research . Roxanne's memorandum and questions are set forth in italics below and responses follow each question. All references (unless otherwise indicated) are to the Town Law. II. Applicable legal rules Questions submitted to Ulysses attorney regarding Special Improvement (Water) District formation and operation Regular Town Board Meeting 4 April 10, 2007 Water District law My understanding from experience to date with the currently proposed Water District 5 is that when a water improvement district is proposed and a draft engineering plan prepared, a cost estimate is made based on assigning a number of equivalent dwelling units ("EDU's) to each user in the district. This can be one, or a fraction of one EDU; for single families, or more than one EDU for a user such as a business or multi-unit facility or recreation facility on a single tax parcel property. An amount of annual debt service and operation and maintenance cost for each EDU is calculated, based on the total estimated cost of the project (including financing) distributed equally over the total number ofEDU's in the district. Both the information on the total estimated cost of the project and the justification for the estimated cost per property owner in the district need to be part of or accompany, the Map, Plan and Report MPR) required for Town Board consideration of district formation by either Article 12 or 12A . 1 ) Once the district is built, the total cost will likely be somewhat different than the estimated cost due to changes in cost of materials, etc. How do the EDU assignments made when the district is legally formed relate to the actual debt service and operation and maintenance cost assignments to each property owner in the district when construction is complete and operation begins ? That is, are the ED U assignments to individual properties made for the cost estimates during the district formation process legally binding in any way once the district is operational and debt service begins ? See response under question 2) below . 2) Once the district is built and the debt service payments begin, what are the required procedures and criteria (if any) for changing the EDU /cost assignment for a given property ? The map and plan (whether it accompanies the petition or is prepared upon a resolution of the Town Board) needs to state estimates of the cost of construction and acquisition of the facilities shown on the maps and plans (§ 190-c and 191 -a) . If the district is formed under Article 12 (pursuant to a Petition) the Town needs to enter an order (which is published with the Notice of Hearing), stating, among other things, the maximum amount proposed to be expended as stated in the petition, the estimated cost of hook-up fees, the estimated cost of extension to the typical property, and if the typical property is not a one or two family residence, the cost of extension to such a residence . The terms "typical property', "typical one or two family home" , " cost of the district or extension to the typical property" and "cost of the district or extension to the typical one or two family home " are defined in § 193 (2) . Prior to the publication of the copy of the Order, the town must prepare a detailed explanation of how the estimated cost of hook -up fees and extension to the typical property and one or two family • residence was computed. § 193 ( 1 ) . The method to be used is not specified, other than the definitions contained in § 193 . § 197 provides that, when a contract is awarded for performance of the work to establish the district, the total expense cannot exceed the maximum amount stated in the petition [or, under Article 12-A, stated in the order adopted by the Town] . The only way to increase the maximum amount to be expended based on a petition (if the district establishment was initiated by a petition) , is by the filing of a petition seeking the increase . The Town Board can approve the increase after a public hearing, if it considers the increase to be in the public interest, and the increase is subject to the approval of the State Comptroller. § 202-d . The Statute (other than the provisions of § 193 ), does not specify exactly how the costs are to be calculated. 3 ) What if debt service and operation and maintenance annual charges due to the district from a property owner are not paid, or are only partially paid (for example if the EDUI cost assignment for a parcel is contested) ? Is the cost of the missing annual revenue spread over the rest of the r Regular Town Board Meeting 5 April 10, 2007 district property owners until this revenue is recovered, and how is this extra cost to the district apportioned? On a per-EDU basis, or some other basis ? Under § 193 (a), the cost of installation, maintenance and repair are district charges to be assessed, levied and collected as provided in sections 202 and 202-a . These sections contain further details about how the expenses are levied. In essence, the levy becomes a lien against the individual property if unpaid. Under section 202-a, maintenance expenses are levied in the same manner as the expenses for the improvements to the district . A uniform service charge can be levied for the supply pipe connecting a property to the system ( § 193 (3 )) . Failure to pay will be handled in the same way as failure to pay water rents . Water rates can be established from time to time under § 198 (d) and the charges are a line on the real property. The Town can provide for a penalty after 30 days and disconnection from the water supply after 60 days . Any unpaid water rates/rents are transmitted to the County annually to be levied with the tax bill . Any unpaid special assessment is levied in the same way . 4) If it is necessary for the district to take legal action to recover debt service or other annual payments due from a property owner, do only the special improvement district residents pay for the legal action, or is the municipality responsible ? See above - unpaid assessments are handled in the same way as liens against the property. 5 ) What would be the legal recourse to the special improvement district (or municipality, as responsible) for recovering unpaid annual debt service monies, should there be a default on annual payments ? for example, a lien on a property ?) Roughly, how long would it take to resolve such an action and regain the revenue the district requires for support of the annual debt service ? See above - it would be handled in the same manner as a lien. Past experience with unpaid liens could provide some guidance here . Further research would be required to establish exactly what kind of lien and relevy with taxes applies to each kind of charge . Article 12 - Petition method for establishing a water (special improvement) district 1 ) To advance a petition, the petition needs to be signed by owners of taxable real property located in the district that own in aggregate at least one half of the total taxable assessed valuation of property in the proposed district. Yes, this is what § 191 requires . This section also states that, if there are any resident owners, the petition shall include the signatures of resident owners owning taxable real property aggregating at least one- half the assessed valuation of all the taxable real property of the proposed district owned by resident owners, according to the latest completed assessment roll . Thus, the Town of Ulysses needs to have a complete list of all of the tax parcels and owners in the proposed district, and the taxable assessed value of each property, and the sum total taxable assessed value, in order to determine whether the petition requirements have been met. This structure for advancing a special district seems to result in individuals who have properties with higher taxable assessed values having proportionally more weight in the decision than those with lower TAV's. The EDU assignments for individual properties when a district is engineered do not necessarily reflect the TAV of the properties, as they are based on projected water use per parcel. 2) The petition must be accompanied by a Map and Plan Report for consideration of a water district, to give owners being asked to sign the petition some idea of whether their property will benefit from the proposed district, and what the cost will be. a) Only the maximum amount to be expended on the proposed district is required by law to be included. Regular Town Board Meeting 6 April 10, 2007 Yes, this is what § 191 requires . However, the town can ask for supplemental information with the MPR detailing costs, so it is available to the residents when considering the petition. It will require further research to determine whether the Town can require that the Petitioners provide this, or has to do so itself in order to provide the details of how estimated costs were computed (as outlined in b) below) . b) Before the public hearing on the petition, the details of how estimated costs were computed is required to be on file with the clerk and available to the public. 3 ) The Town board may appropriate a specific amount of money for preparation of the Map Plan (or the residents who are petitioning can pay for the Map Plan as the alternative) . These funds are to come from "townwide general funds ", and such appropriation requires a permissive referendum. Once the district is formed, these costs are reimbursed to the town as part of the cost of the improvement. The Town of Ulysses has a commitment letter from State Senator Winner 's office for a grant to pay for a MPR. The Town does not have the funds in hand - - as Doug has explained these types of grants, the Town requests reimbursement from the State after the work is done. Thus, the Town needs to appropriate Town (taxpayer) funds to be spent up front. a) It would seem that according to Article 12 , the appropriation of funds for a MP R would be subject to permissive referendum, is this correct? This is correct, if the Town, under an Article 12 proceeding, decides to have the map and plan prepared prior to a petition. § 191 -a provides that the resolution is subject to a permissive referendum. b) Would the Townwide funds the law refers to be "Part town " (or town funds, outside the Village) in our case, or the "Townwide " (General, or A) fund (which includes the Village) ? c) The language. in § 191 -a is " . . . the expense incurred for the preparation of such maps and plans shall be a town charge, and shall be assessed, levied and collected in the same manner as other town charges . " No mention is made of excluding funds from the Village . The way Town charges are generally paid will need to provide guidance here . What are the procedures and legal requirements of the permissive referendum process ? The procedures are set forth in Article 7 of the Town Law and are as follows : § 90 : Within ten days of adoption of a resolution subject to a re\permissive referendum the Town Clerk has to post and publish notice setting forth the adoption resolution in the same manner as a notice for a special election. The referendum is initiated in one of two ways : A) by filing of a petition within thirty days of adoption of the resolution petition must be signed as required in § 91 , by at least 5 % of the electors qualified to vote on a proposition to raise and expend money, in a number equal to at least 5 % of the total vote cast for governor in the town at the last general election (but must be at least 100 in a town of the first class and a town of the second class) . A special election is held within 60-75 days after the petition is filed (if there is a biennial Town election within this time frame, no special election is needed) . OR B) by the Town Board, upon its own motion, can pass a resolution to submit the decision to the electors in a special election. This has the same effect as if a petition was filed (§94) . Regular Town Board Meeting 7 April 10, 2007 III. Conclusion The above responses are a brief summary of the applicable statutory provisions . Please let me know if you need further research or information about any aspect of the procedure under Article 12 (district formation initiated by petition) or 12-A (district formation initiated by Town Board) . Mr. Austic asked what the Board wanted to do and suggested that work start on the Map, Plan and Report so work does not get that far behind. Ms . Marino said she has the same comments that she has had every meeting and is opposed going forward because she feels that there are a lot of issues and problems that make it not in the best interest of the residents within the district or in the Town. Ms . Marino said that she would also like time to review what the attorney has provided. The Board did discuss Ms . Geldenhuys information. Mr. Ellis said another issue is that all the cost are borne by the users in the district and has a large dependence on several users of the service, Auble ' s ' Trailer Park in particular. Mr. Ellis said that his objections are pretty much the same as he has stated before. One of them is the lack of planning and he thinks the Auble threat coming and going is a good example of how there is not the right planning in place for a project of this scale. The Board discussed the combined numbers of people in District #3 and 5 . Mr. Austic said that it would be somewhere around 55 % of households in the Town of Ulysses . The Board continued discussion . Mr. Austic had provided a map of the proposed district #5 that includes parcels and buildings which he suggested you could get a very good reference of numbers of residents included in this district of 192 houses/families that do not have water now and 148 families that do for a total of 340 families and does not include businesses like Alpha House. Mr. Ferrentino expressed again that he feels the people should decide on the district. Ms . Tyler repeated that there are people in the district and people effected indirectly that can not vote. Mr. Austic repeated again doing the MPR and asking the people involved to vote on it and stated that this project is a good project and affordable for the people involved and should not be ignored. Nothing was decided. Mr. Ellis said that maybe it would be better to bring a resolution to withdraw the project then to ignore it and should be one or the other because this is just silly to keep bringing back the resolution to do the MPR meeting after meeting and do nothing about it. Either you are for this project or we are for a different project . Mr. Austic said that there is no different project for this price. The area of this district is the most highly populated area in the Town other then Rt. 89 along the lake . Mr. Austic would hate to see the project abandoned he would much rather see the people speak for the project. Mr. Ferrentino agreed that the people should make the decision. More discussion continued and discussed talking again with the Village . NEW BUSINESS Set Up Zoning Work Session The Board scheduled a work session for April 23rd, 2007 to continue work on the Zoning Law. Also at this meeting Mr. Sherwood would bring in the information that the Board requested to amend the PUD for Spruce Row Campgrounds . Regular Town Board Meeting 8 April 10, 2007 PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms . Tammy Morse said that as everyone knows Water District #5 is a concern of hers and even though she works for the Village she is now speaking as a resident who lives in the proposed district. Ms . Morse said that she can see the end of both water districts the Village district and WD#3 from her house. The numbers that are floating around that Mr. Austic comes up with are numbers that she provided to him and anyone is welcome to check her math. Ms . Morse said she works really hard on those spread sheets and it bothers her that people think Mr. Austic makes up those numbers . Ms . Morse asked if anyone had taken the time to ask people in the proposed district as to how much people spend now on water. Ms . Morse says she has done the math and she has a family of four and she spends around $ 1600 a year on water, so the risk that some mention about the price per year for the district she believes that the price per year for the district would not be anywhere close to what she spends now. Ms . Morse said she would also like to say about the public meeting held last June that there were a lot of people who did not come because of the tension between the Town and the Village. Ms . Morse says she works for one and lives in another and although we are all Town residents and nothing is perfect but we have to start some where. Ms . Morse said she thinks Mr. Ferrentino is right and the people should have the say. Krys Cail said that she buys water most years because she does not have water in her well which they get water shipments weekly and last about five days . Ms . Cail feels a water survey and a water density study that is appropriate to the density along the road are needed. Ms . Cail said in reference to being close to the water line is that if you are someone they like the Town will hook you up to the water. Ms . Cail feels she thinks it is time to stop including people who are special and spending time and money on engineering studies for the favorites . Ms . Cail says there has been a lot of money spent on engineering and none of it has been addressed to some of the places where the most housing is being built and some of the biggest water problems and frankly she thinks that it is really important that at the very least the people keep the promise that was made to the people in June at the public meeting who tried to talk about their water needs and were told that they could not speak until after the people in the proposed area spoke and by that time all of the press had left and many other people had left. Ms . Cail said she did not get the opportunity to speak until after 9 : 30pm and was told that there would be other public hearings . Ms . Cail feels that it is decided in advance which people or areas get engineering studies . Mr. Ferrentino asked Ms . Cail if she remembered the title of the public hearing. Ms . Cail said it was for Water District #5 and said again that it is consistently been certain particular people who have been favored and it is not fair. Ms . Cail believes for it to be fair is to hire a planner who does not have either a partisan or a vested economic interest in the out come and who can handle it in a fair manner. Mr. Austic thanked Ms . Morse and Ms. Cail for their comments. Ms . Marino would like to make a comment in regards to Ms . Morse ' s comments . Ms . Marino said that the Town used Ms . Morse ' s numbers and at the time of the joint meetings they agreed to those numbers . Hearing no further information Mr. Ferrentino moved, seconded by Ms . Tyler to adjourn the meeting. Unanimously approved and meeting adjourned at 9 : 05PM . Respectfully submitted, Marsha L. Georgia Ulysses Town. Clerk MLG : mlg