HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-22 - TB TOWN OF ULYSSES
SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING
AUGUST 22 , 2007
Present : Supervisor Douglas Austic ; Town Council Roxanne Marino , Don Ellis, and
Lucia Tyler; Rod Ferrentino absent; Town Clerk Marsha L . Georgia; Deputy Supervisor
Richard Coogan ; Town Attorney Mariette Geldenhuys .
Others Present : Shern Hart; Geoffrey Hart, Tammy Morse, and Heather Hartwell .
Supervisor Austic called the working session to order at 7 PM to discuss the advantages
or disadvantages and impacts to the Town of Ulysses on the annexation application of
William Auble .
Mr. Ellis moved, seconded by Ms . Marino the following :
BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ulysses discuss
annexation.
Mr. Austic aye
Ms . Tyler aye
Mr. Ellis aye
Ms . Marino aye
Adopted.
Ms . Geldenhuys has prepared and distributed an outline draft "Resolution, Findings and
Order of Town Board Approving/Denying Petition for Annexation" that she said would
be good to help structure discussion and keep some order to the meeting.
The Board discussed and submitted findings to question #2 "The proposed annexation of
the Territory in the Town to the Village as described in the aforesaid petition is/is not in
the overall public interest in that :
* the following are the findings that came out of the Board ' s discussion — for full
comments the tapes are available for review.
a. Municipal services
Police protection - if annexed Village would service and be cost to Village
No disadvantage to Town
Advantage to residents
Fire Protection - Advantage to Town pay slightly less for fire contract — tax down
Disadvantage to Village loose fire contract revenue — taxes up
Disadvantage to residents — with annexation no WD#5 would loose
enhanced fire protection with more hydrants
Health Regulations - no advantage or disadvantage to either Town or Village
Water Service - Residents have water service which will remain
No annexation would give residents enhanced water service with
higher pressure with WD#5
With annexation a lower water rate, but no guarantee would be
passed on to residents . Owner would profit
Future water rate could be higher with Village infrastructure
repairs with bonding
WD#5 rate could be lower
Village would loose water revenue up to or around $26,000
Sewer Service - No disadvantage to Town •
Special Town Board Meeting 2
August 22 , 2007
Village would loose revenue up to or around $?
With annexation a lower sewer rate, but no guarantee would be
passed on to residents . Owner would profit
Public Utilities - No advantage or disadvantage — service would remain the same
Public education - No advantage or disadvantage — service would remain the same
Effect on tax revenues
Sales Tax - Disadvantage to Town of a decrease in sales tax revenue of 5 . 5 %
because of loss of 265 residents (tax based on population) a loss of
$ 31 , 791 (based on these years ' figures)
Revenue Sharing - Disadvantage to Town — loss of 265 residents would be a loss of
$ 1920
Real property tax - No advantage Town would still collect town tax
The projection could possibly be more property tax for town IF the
property were to be developed. At this point there would be NO
development until the Village found a second source of water
because the Health Department will not allow any water extensions
at this time . The property can be developed if it remained in Town
because it is zoned at this time Commercial .
Village gains Village tax
Residents would have to pay Village tax
Unity of purpose and facilities to constitute a community
Extent of contiguity between Village and Territory
Not much change
Extent of contiguity between lands remaining in Town in the event of annexation
Six Town parcels would be surrounded by Village
No detriment for services except for the physical non-
connectedness
Highway maintenance would have to be contracted by the Village
from the Town by an intermunicipal agreement
* * At this point of the meeting Mr. Ellis introduced his written statement which the Board
discussed.
As a matter of the common good of all the Town : It is most advantageous to the Town to have
within it an orderly development of housing and commerce . In keeping with plans developed by
the Tompkins County Planning Department and good planning strategy as I know it. This core of
housing and commercial development should be in the Village of Trumansburg . Ceding the Auble
lands to the Village revitalizes the Village by providing development space much less physically
encumbered than space now available .
As a matter of formalizing patterns that already exist: The Village is in the best position to
provide services to the Auble MHP . The Village already provides :
The fire protection service
Water and sewer
In 39% of cases, the first police officer on the scene
As a matter of economic advantage: Concentrating housing and economic services makes those
services most economical to provide . Adding the Auble acres to the Village is a clear move in
that direction. Further, it overcomes the lack of any similar opportunity in the Town's current
Special Town Board Meeting 3
August 22 , 2007
planning thereby reducing the current trend and pressure toward " spot zoning" and arbitrary
commercial sitting.
Ms . Tyler quoted from Ms . Geldenhuy' s memo referencing active services . It was
mentioned that the water services to the trailer park are maintained
by Mr. Auble because he installed the line and not the Village.
Disposition of property — the two roads that are currently Town roads (Meadowview Dr.
and Parkside Dr. ) would become property of the Village
Other Factors
39 . 5 acres now zoned Town commercial property would go into
the Village therefore the Town would lose commercial property
The trailer park would be lost to the Village leaving the Town
without a large mobile home park. The only other mobile home
park is on RT 96 (Washington Heights) which is very limited with
a possible 4 sites .
Town would have to find a space with services .
Land in a State and County Ag districts allow farming and the
Village does not allow agriculture within the Village and all of the
land in the Trailer Park Parcel is in an Ag Zone . If annexed into the
Village something would have to change.
However the Ag districts could be re-evaluated.
The loss of $4 . 5 million dollars, no interest funding for Water
District #5 , which essentially is a grant of over $3 million dollars .
The loss of the Winner Grant of $ 35 , 000 for the advancement of
Water District #5 .
The emergency source for the Village is gone by annexation and
loss of WD#5 .
The Board discussed the loss of Water District #5 and the weight
to give it for their findings and no agreement was reached.
Ms . Tyler said with the annexation the Village may find a way to build a sidewalk for the
residents of the TRA development because the Village is in the business of building
sidewalks .
Mr. Austic felt that it would not be an advantage to either the Town or the Village
because it would be a cost.
Ms . Tyler said that it is a possible advantage to those people living in that area.
Ms . Marino said it is an advantage to the Village if potentially the Town and the Village
were to work together to make an interconnected sidewalk network that connects the
whole Village and that could be a reasonable possibility based on the State interest on
certain projects ; enhance connecting all the units that would allow people to walk into all
the services in the Village ; down the road if a grant was received to fill in the rest.
Ms . Tyler said that it has been said at meetings that the developers would have no place
to go in the Village commercial property unless they wanted to go into one of the historic
structures so this would give them an objective as per the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan of
1999 , which talks about strengthening the current commercial district in Trumansburg.
This would have the affect of providing land so you could get a diversity of businesses
that would not fit into those historic structures .
Special Town Board Meeting 4
August 22 , 2007
Mr. Austic said you can look at that another way whether it is in the Town or the Village
he has heard it would not strengthen the core of the Village because business at that end
of the Town would distract from the Village. It is not contiguous to the core of the
Village. The vacant land to be annexed has been zoned commercial for about 20 years
and has not been developed because of lack of cooperation with the Village for water and
sewer.
Ms . Marino emailed her statement that she read into the record as follows :
Auble Annexation request discussion of positive and negative aspects :
Town Board Special meeting August 22 , 2007 R. Marino notes
8/30/07 note to M Geldenhuys and Marcia — I did not raise all of these things at the
meeting: these were the notes I had made in preparation for the meeting (cleaned up into
full sentences) . I didn 't mark which I did raise in the discussion: I believe it was most all
of them.
I. Town of Ulysses
Positive impacts of annexation of the proposed parcels :
• Financial
o Annexation to the Village and availability of Village services will
potentially make the undeveloped land more attractive to a diversity of
projects that would increase the overall tax base of the Town . The
availability of Village services could promote opportunities for high
density residential development to fulfill identified needs in the Town (and
Village) such as affordable housing for low income families or senior
citizens desiring to remain in the community. (hard to separate the Town
and Village on this)
o A strong and vibrant Village core is something that is recognized as
valuable to the Town and desirable to maintain (Comp Plan Objectives :
Support and Strengthen Trumansburg ' s existing commercial base,
Encourage development that efficiently utilizing existing municipal
services) . The annexation would allow expansion of the Village core,
potentially making the Town a more attractive place to live and visit,
increasing both property values and income to local businesses .
o Slightly less road maintenance (small savings) for the two roads in the T-
Burg Country Estates
• Land Use
o Walk ability can be increased, as the T-Burg Country Estates is willing to
build a sidewalk; annexation to the Village will allow that sidewalk to be
built, where they have an infrastructure for maintaining sidewalks and a
commitment to enhancing the walk ability of the community.
A sidewalk to RT 96 from TCE could provide a link toward an
Intermunicipal sidewalk project that would connect all the way from the
North end of the Town (Village) to the grocery stores and pharmacy in the
Town at the S end of the Village, allowing walking access to many
businesses and services . The State is very interested in Intermunicipal
projects and I think one such as this would be ideal for a grant application,
and would enhance the Town and Village both in terms of economics,
aesthetics, and safety, and further promote use of mass transportation.
• Promoting Intermunicipal cooperation — Intermunicipal cooperation has become
very desirable from the State perspective, and there are many funding
opportunities available to promote such projects . The Village has strongly
(indicated by 4 - 1 vote) decided that it is in the best overall public interest and in
the best interest of the Village long term to annex this property; the Town and
Village working cooperatively on a vision for growth at the North gateway to the
Town benefits all Town residents by opening up possibilities for funding for joint
Special Town Board Meeting 5
August 22 , 2007
Intermunicipal projects . One example is the sidewalk project above. Other
examples would be combining shared municipal services for efficiency and cost
savings to taxpayers. Many Ulysses residents have expressed a desire for better
cooperation between the Town and Village governments.
Negative impacts on Town
• Loss of County sales tax revenue due to decrease in Town population and
increase in Village population . While this is a true loss of dollars the Town would
potentially have to spend, I don ' t believe it would have the degree or immediacy
of negative effect that the Supervisor outlined in his recent memo . The Town
would lose roughly 5 . 5 % of the sales tax revenue we are currently entitled to , but
this would not directly translate to a 5 . 5 % increase in real property taxes to
maintain the 2008 budget at 2007 levels . The TB very carefully considered and
decided as a policy not to use more than a maximum of 90% of the projected
County sales tax available to the Town as revenues supporting budget
appropriations . [I advocated for a policy that used even less than 90%, and for
not requesting all of the money from the County; the Supervisor chose to request
the full amount] . The other — 10% of the sales tax that would come to the town
would go into reserve accounts ; the Board has specifically discussed looking into
establishing one such account for "tax relief ' in future budget years .
So, the Town didn ' t commit to use 10% of the projected revenue, hence I don ' t
see a tax increase required to maintain the budget at last year ' s level . Also, at the
Supervisor ' s advice, the 2007 budget included some larger than usual
appropriations to reserve funds for future expenditures such as highway
equipment. These levels do not have to be kept the same in future years, and in
fact Board discussions recognized future such reserve appropriations might not be
sustainable at those levels .
Also , since the Board didn ' t commit 100% of the sales tax as revenues, we will
have —'30K in excess this year, if the sales tax revenue projections play out as
outlined, to include into consideration in the 2008 budget.
[I think it is important to evaluate the Town ' s current policy on using most of the
available County sales tax allocation as revenue in the budget, given this analysis
of how a loss of population might affect tax rate stability. ]
• Loss of 0% financing offer for the proposed WD5 . This is undoubtedly a
negative impact on those residents of the Town that are in the proposed district
and need municipal water. It is would not necessarily be viewed as a negative
impact on those residents who do not need water and oppose the district because
of its cost . There is a loss of enhanced fire protection to residents in the area of
the proposed WD5 that would be provided by WD5 .
I believe after listening to the Village Board discussions last night, and the recent
DOH meeting that there are other feasible and possibly even preferable options
for providing municipal water to residents in need in this part of Ulysses and meet
the DOH mandate to the Village for a second source, that could be developed in
cooperation with the Village of Trumansburg rather than conflict with it, and that
State funding will be available (changes in evaluation system for rural
municipalities referred to at DOH meeting by INYS DOH representative) .
I also believe that it is quite plausible that the Town as a whole will benefit from
an Intermunicipal effort to explore and develop other options for a Village second
source, in conjunction with the recent Village water study indicating that their
well has a large surplus of water. This could provide the opportunity for a water
supply company in Trumansburg that could meet the needs of the Town residents
in the north end of Ulysses, such as those identified by water district 5 , while
leaving enough water available from Bolton Point to supply a water district to
meet known needs in the southern part of the Town. This would not be possible
with the water supply constraints from the Town of Ithaca and water district 5 .
Special Town Board Meeting 6
August 22 , 2007
• Creation of 3 — 5 parcels of land in the Town that are surrounded by the Village .
This is of concern with regard to the unity of purpose criteria. However, I don ' t
see that there will be any change in services available to these parcels currently,
with regard to road maintenance, school districting, or police or fire protection,
and so don ' t see this as a strong negative impact . Annexation of the surrounding
land would likely make it easy for these parcels to be annexed into the Village the
future should the owners choose to request it, and gain municipal services .
As Trustee Hrubos stated at the Village annexation hearing and vote, this part of
the town already is perceived as a unified with the Village by most that come to
Trumansburg. The annexation won' t change the surrounding land use with regard
to the MHP parcel , and the eventual land use on the open parcel will be equally or
possibly more constrained and unified in land use with the isolated residential
Town parcels as it would be if the property remained in the Town, depending on
the zoning the Village puts in place (currently it is zoned Business in the Town) .
• Concern of Town (outside the Village) residents about possible land use for the
parcels if the property is annexed with the current Village zoning — see resident
objections bullet under Village; it is my understanding from answers to my
questions at the Village annexation hearing and vote meeting that a zoning
amendment is required at the time the land is annexed, to address the zoning of
the particular parcels . The Village Board majority felt strongly they could do a
good job of getting appropriate zoning in place, using a variety of tools including
a moratorium .
Positive to the Village
• Same as town financial with regard to tax base (Village is part of the Town) ;
economic development opportunity at the entrance to the Village
• According to the analysis done by trustee Hart, while the Village will lose a net of
26,000 for the next 3 years, the increase in sales tax revenue will eventually
negate the loss in water and sewer revenues (8 year break even, if no development
of the open parcel) and the Village will gain financially in the long run .
• Village has more control over the land use at the northern gateway to the Village
(pending completion of the Comp Plan and zoning revision), and this would
provide for better continuity of land use, in accordance with the 20 year vision for
the Village being developed in the Comp Plan; this was cited by the Chair of the
Village Comprehensive Plan committee and others as a reason in favor of the
annexation at the joint public meeting in June .
• Provides for a site for mobile homes as per the Village mobile home park law, one
is not now currently available.
• Enhances walk ability in the Village (this extends to a Town benefit as stated
previously)
Negatives to Village
• Resident objections, in large part due to mistrust of the landowner and concern for
lack of zoning currently in place to regulate development of the open parcel — the
Village trustees feel strongly that they have tools to ensure that no highly
undesirable development will occur while the Comp Plan and zoning revisions are
being finished; one example was a moratorium (it was noted that there is a forced
moratorium by the DOH until the second source issue is resolved) . Also , the
Village attorney clarified that that the Village will need to amend the zoning law
as part of the annexation procedure, to deal with the parcels . This provides
opportunity for public input and discussion through the required procedures .
• Short term loss of revenue due to reduction in water and sewer income
• Loss of 0% financing and the water district 5 project, and so loss of WD5 as an
available option for a second source to meet the DOH mandate; the Village stated
Special Town Board Meeting 7
August 22 , 2007
in their findings on the annexation decision there are other viable options for
meeting this requirement, and overall found as part of their affirmative annexation
decision that the long term benefits of annexing the property outweigh the loss of
this option.
• A sidewalk in the TCE will provide extra safety and promote use of public
transportation. This sidewalk provides the start towards a continuous connection
for residents of the annexed parcels to walk to Village businesses and services .
Positives to residents of the parcels requested for annexation :
• Enhanced police response (they are not required to be called in to respond via the
mutual aid procedure, but can be dispatched directly) and protection due to
Village taking over primary responsibility for the calls ; this results in increased
safety, may increase property values .
• Possible reduction in monthly expenses, due to savings to the property owner
from lower water and sewer rates (no guarantee this will be transferred to the
residents by the property owner) .
Negatives to the residents
• Fire protection would be enhanced by water district 5 ; note that this does not
mean there is no , or inadequate fire protection currently — the Village Fire Dept
that the Town contracts with for fire protection has a pumper truck; the Village
Fire commissioner went through this at the Village annexation discussion.
Mr. Ellis moved, seconded by Ms . Tyler to amend the motion to discuss annexation to
enter the following resolution into the record of tonight ' s proceedings for the purpose of
discussion at the next Town Board meeting :
Resolution to Put Aside the WD#5 Proposal and to Proceed with Planning for a Water District that is
Equitable, Economically Solid, and Necessary for the Town
1 ) Whereas the Town Board has extensively evaluated the value and impact of the proposed
Water District #5 (WD #5) project as described in the November 2005 draft engineering report
presented to the Town Board by Barton and Loguidice , including 1 ) considerable dialogue with
the Village through the Joint Water Committee, 2) a recent engineering study examining concerns
and shortcomings related to the provision of a second source of water to the Village of
Trumansburg, and 3) an effort to accurately assess the financial and other impacts of the proposed
project upon current and future subscribers to other water services in the Town,
2) And these efforts have answered many questions and revealed some benefits, but also have
revealed numerous flaws and divisive characteristics of the proposed district, including aspects
that pose significant risk to the long term stability of costs to the residents in the proposed WD#5 ,
3 ) Whereas the scope of WD #5 as currently proposed is a substantial expansion of water district
5 as originally envisioned by the Town of Ulysses and the Village of Trumansburg in their 2003
agreement, and
4) Whereas the Trustees of the Village of Trumansburg voted unanimously in October 2006 to
not support the proposed WD #5 , and further, requested that the Town of Ulysses not proceed
with the currently proposed project, and
5) The Town has not worked out a solution and a memorandum of understanding with the Village
of Trumansburg outlining a plan to resolve the significant and long-term financial impact of
WD#5 on residents of the Town outside the proposed district (Village of Trumansburg) .
6) Whereas the Ulysses Town Board never adopted a resolution in support of application to the
New York State Drinking Water Revolving Fund for financing of the proposed WD#5 project, or
endorsed the draft engineering report sent to the Environmental Facilities Corporation as part of
the Town of Ulysses application for financing, and
Special Town Board Meeting 8
August 22 , 2007
7) The project did not come out of a comprehensive assessment and planning process for town-
wide water needs and infrastructure, and the potential development impact of the proposed
district has not been evaluated,
8) And whereas there is a clear limitation on the quantity of water that can be provided to the
Town of Ulysses from Bolton Point through the Town of Ithaca infrastructure without costly
future improvements, and there has been no comparative analysis to date of whether WD#5 is
most necessary and best use of this finite water supply resource to address unmet municipal water
needs and public health concerns in Ulysses,
9) Be it now resolved that the Town of Ulysses will immediately notify the Environmental
Facilities Corporation, Senator Winner's office, and all other affected parties that it will not
proceed with the steps necessary to complete an application packet for financing and to continue
with currently proposed Water District #5 project.
10) Be it further resolved that the Town will begin work on a comprehensive assessment of water
needs and concerns in all parts of the Town of Ulysses, to be used in conjunction with the Town
of Ulysses Comprehensive plan to best design water infrastructure projects that meet the
important needs of Ulysses residents, including those in the currently proposed WD5 . Such
assessment will use the information and studies done to date, and will be developed with the
continued engagement of the Village of Trumansburg, the NY State Parks and other
municipalities as willing, and with clear public communication and opportunities for input at all
steps in the process .
11 ) Further, the Town Board resolves to immediately begin the process of engaging professional
services to explore mechanisms beyond special improvement district formation to identify
households with severe water problems anywhere in the Town and attempt to identify assistance
toward solutions.
Mr. Austic nay
Ms . Tyler aye
Mr. Ellis aye
Ms . Marino aye
Adopted .
Ms . Marino suggests that the meeting scheduled originally for August 27 still go forward
for the discussion of the resolution brought forward by Mr. Ellis along with the meeting
scheduled for August 30th for the annexation vote .
Ms . Marino moved, seconded by Mr. Ellis to schedule a meeting for August 27th and
August 30th at 7 PM .
Mr. Austic aye
Ms . Tyler aye
Mr. Ellis aye
Ms . Marino aye
Adopted.
Ms . Geldenhuys said that one possibility is that she can compare findings under the
headings that include all the findings and facts that the Board brought up tonight in one
document and then the Board can add or delete some. There will be some in there that
only some of the Board members will consider to be factors . This she will have to the
Board before the meeting.
Mr. Austic asked if the Board would like to take a straw vote of how the Board felt on
annexation.
The Board was in agreement that because the full Board was not in attendance they
would not do a straw vote; Ms . Geldenhuys agreed.
Ms . Tyler would like to introduce another factor which is the personality and past track
record of Mr. Auble. Ms . Tyler was concerned about that because she feels that it was
Special Town Board Meeting 9
August 22 , 2007
brought up so many times at the different meetings but feels that findings can not be
based on the personality of the owner of the property.
Ms . Geldenhuys said that it is suppose to be objective findings based on the best interest
of the Town and Village residents and the overall best interest.
Mr. Austic said that Mr. Auble is the one to gain the most with annexation .
Ms . Marino said that if you view it as an individual gain that is true but she does not
believe that is how the Village was viewing it .
Ms . Geldenhuys said that this Board needs to be the best interest for the Village, the
Town, the residents in assessing the overall best interest if that happens to be a benefit or
a detriment that is the consequence but that is not the basis of the decision.
Ms . Geldenhuys said that there is no right or wrong answer to any of these things ; it is a
matter of using your judgment and discretion and seriously considering weighing the
facts .
Ms . Geldenhuys will follow up with what has been said at this meeting and present the
findings to the best of her ability.
Mr. Austic asked if he heard a motion for adjournment .
Ms . Marino said before that she would like some clarification on what is happening with
the zoning revisions . Ms . Marino said she understands that the Board needs to address
Ag and Markets comments .
Mr. Austic said that the Board has now presented the revised Zoning Law to the Planning
Board to look at. (The Planning Board had requested this . )
Ms . Marino said that the Board already had a final draft document and had held a public
hearing on that document, which the Planning Board did not attend.
Mr. Austic feels that there may be a few other issues in the law that needs to be
addressed .
Ms . Marino asked if the Board was going to schedule a time to address that or will it be
done at the September Regular Board meeting.
The Board discussed the need procedure .
The Board decided to have the Zoning Law discussion placed on the agenda for the
September Regular Town Board meeting.
Hearing no further business Mr. Ellis moved, seconded by Mr. Austic to adjourn the
meeting. Unanimously approved . Meeting adjourned at 9 : 05 PM .
Respectfully Submitted,
Marsha L. Georgia
Ulysses Town Clerk
I
1