HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-27 - TB TOWN OF ULYSSES
SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING
AUGUST 27 , 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.
Others Present : Tammy Morse, Christopher Thomas , Martha Ullberg, William Coon,
David Filiberto, Geoffrey Hart, Jim Dennis , Stan Seltzer, Joan Ormondroyd, Rebecca
Schneider, Geri Keil, Don Schlather, Michael Malpass , Jackie Merwin, Liz Cameron,
Eric DeJager, Tom Myers , Krys Cail , Rordan & Lindsay Hart.
Mr. Austic called the meeting to order at 7 PM and stated that on the agenda for tonight is
the proposed resolution introduced at the Special Board meeting of August 22 , 2007 by
Mr. Ellis .
Mr. Ellis moved, seconded by Ms . Tyler to re-enter the following resolution into record :
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
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,
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 ,
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
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
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) .
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
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,
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 ,
Special Town Board Meeting 2
8/27/2007
Be it i'Iow 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 .
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 .
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 opened the floor to public comments and noted that there will be no public
comment at the end of the meeting.
Jim Dennis said that for a matter of procedure he heard a motion and a second and did not
hear a vote on the resolution to put it on the table.
Mr. Austic called the vote to discuss the resolution .
Mr. Austic aye
Ms . Tyler aye
Mr. Ellis aye
Ms . Marino aye
Adopted.
Ms . Marino reminded the public of the Town Board rules of procedure on public
speaking and public decorum in the meeting.
Rebecca Schneider of Pine Ridge Road said that she thought it was a well drafted
resolution and liked the fact that it laid out all these points that needed to be dealt with
and thinks that the Town Board is thinking through this carefully, thoughtfully and
comprehensively.
Gerri Keil wandered what the chances would be to get a grant or a no interest loan in the
future or will this just be a process and this type of money will become less and less
available.
Mr. Ellis said that the EFC has already started a program to reduce the points in order to
qualify smaller upstate municipalities because it wasn ' t in balance .
Mr. Austic said this year' s grant for hardship funding from EFC is at a higher level of
points then we have qualified for (the Town ' s qualifying points for the interest free
money was at 275 ) . All the funding meetings that Mr. Austic has attended recently with
EFC , Rural Development and USDA and other funding agencies have increased the
number of points necessary to qualify for funding or have increased the number of years
to pay for a loan; either one of those things will increase the costs to the residents . This is
probably the only time in the near future we will see the Town of Ulysses qualify for this
type of interest free money.
Ms . Marino stated that she was not at the meeting that the DOH had with the State but
she did listen, to the recording of the meeting and she heard that the State would be re-
Special Town Board Meeting 3
8/27/2007
evaluating the point system so that rural municipalities such as ours have a better
opportunity to compete .
Jason Fulton as the Fire Chief in charge of protecting the Town of Ulysses residents and
also the Village residents said that he has not heard it said very often that fire protection
is a concern and it ' s a big concern for the Fire Department . The Trumansburg Fire
Department use Enfield Fire Department as a big supporter of Trumansburg; they bring
water to us when we need water. We ' re volunteers ; a hydrant system is great for us we
can ' t guarantee we put a truck on the road if we could have a hydrant system where we
could just pull up and hook up to a hydrant and not worry about other fire departments
coming that ' s an asset to us . If not, we have to look for our water supplies via a pond, a
creek, whatever and it ' s tough on the firefighters . By doing what you ' re doing tonight
you ' re going to hurt the whole Town of Ulysses .
Rebecca Schneider commented on the issues Jason Fulton brought up and the need for
the Town as a whole and wondered about the actual need for people within Water District
#5 and if there was a survey done .
Mr. Austic said that he had a survey to go out to the people within the district and had
suggested sending those several times but the Town Board did not approve that to go out.
Ms . Schneider asked about the Comprehensive Plan survey.
Mr. Austic said that the survey for the CP is back and being tabulated by Cornell at this
time but he has read the tabulation of all the comments and they do mention the need for
water.
Ms . Tyler said she had asked for a water survey which Mr. Austic voted against .
Mr. Austic said yes he did because that was a survey of the whole Town and not just the
district. The CP survey does have questions on water and that went to the whole Town
and Village.
Geoffrey Hart said that what he sees is that we have a current reality of a $ 5 million loan
interest free, and we are setting that up against the possible eventuality, the indeterminate
future project of what we have several projects on the table, we have only one and if we
don ' t go with this one we have no idea in reality what will be available in the future and
it will be a very serious mistake to fail to accept this project.
Mr. Austic read his response to Mr. Ellis ' s resolution into the record as follows :
This is perhaps without a doubt the most irresponsible resolution that Mr. Ellis has
presented in his term in office on the Town board . It is full of unfounded opinions of one
individual who has stated that he cannot support anything that the supervisor supports .
This is without regard for the benefits of such a proposed district, only one person ' s
vendetta against the supervisor. Let ' s go through the points of the resolution :
1 . While it is true that we have extensively reviewed this proposal with the village, it
seems that the Town board is more concerned with the village ' s opinion than with
the Town residents who have actually brought forth a petition in favor of the
proposal, which the Town board refuses to acknowledge. I don ' t understand what
point # 3 in this motion even means . There have been reviews of this project by
several engineers (EFC, NYS Health Department, Local Health Department, The
Town of Ithaca, and even the Village ' s Engineers) and all of these have stated that
this plan addresses needs in the Town and solves several problems which exist.
As for Financial review, EFC has reviewed the proposal and had enough faith in
the project to award funding for the project .
2 . What significant long term risk? What are the divisive characteristics of the
district proposal? There is no question that the stability of the cost of the district
to the resident users . It will be stable once the district is established and actual up
to date costs and construction costs are established. That is the nature of an
improvement district.
Special Town Board Meeting 4
8/27/2007
3 . There was never an actual Town board approved plan presented in 2003 which
outlined the district and its boundaries.
4 . The vote by The Village of Trumansburg in October 2006 was made by the board
existing at the time and there has been no such resolution by the present village
board . In addition, this is a Town matter and not under the direct control of the
village other than through influence put on Town board members by uncaring
village board members who are not farsighted enough to assess the real long term
benefit of the proposal .
5 . The Town cannot develop a memorandum of understanding involving a project
which has never been moved forward to a point where it is clear that it will
become reality.
6 . The Town Board did in fact approve the efforts of B &L to find funding for the
proposal in its vote to approve the scope of services . One of the items in the
scope was to investigate funding. The process of investigating funding includes
filings of applications for consideration of available funding . This was done in
accordance with the Town board vote on the scope of services presented by B &L.
7 . The project did come from existing planning initiatives, the 1999 Comprehensive
Plan, and the zoning which followed . This along with additional data as to Health
Department related issues in the area led to the development of a project which
could be funded at the same time would become a solution to many existing
problems within the Town.
8 . True, the distribution system prior to our districts may have limitations, but they
are not such that they cannot be overcome. The truth is that there is enough water
supply to supply #3 and #5 without any improvements in advance of our systems
and still have a supply available if needed .
9 . To vote to refuse funding that has been awarded without regard to the desires of
the residents within the proposed district is absolutely arrogant on the part of the
Town board . This funding was not awarded to the Town per se, but to a specific
project area of Town residents who have not been asked how they feel about
accepting the responsibility for debt to extend municipal water to their area. The
most logical step would be to complete the Map Plan and Report and petition the
proposed district to approve or disapprove the plan as they see fit, not by a Town
board decision .
10 . Written comments from the Comprehensive Planning Survey have already
indicated the need or desire of many residents for municipal water, the main issue
seems to be at what cost. This project is another step in meeting the water needs
in the Town, making it easier and possibly cheaper to extend to other areas . The
issues of cost is directly related to funding. Whether you believe it or not,
information from funding agencies have not been encouraging. Point scoring, and
acceptable levels of user costs have risen sharply due to the lack of Federal and
Stateimoney to fund water projects . It will be extremely hard to qualify for this
type of loan guarantee in the future and projects will cost the user a lot more,
perhaps double the cost of the present proposal . For the Town to spend taxpayer
money to investigate the water needs that most people already know exist with
little chance of finding affordable funding is not sound fiscal policy. The Town' s
own Comprehensive Plan Survey already indicates areas wanting water service .
11 . Here again, to spend Town Tax money to investigate solutions to resident water
problems is not sound fiscal policy. This information is available through
Tomkkins County Health Department staff and from Cayuga Lake Watershed
Network and at the best are only temporary solutions and not a final solution such
as municipal water.
In my opinion, the Town Board is putting more stock in the Village ' s response
and opinions than it is in the needs of the other residents of the Town. When Mr.
Filiberto says that the village should control its own destiny, why shouldn ' t the
residents of the Town have the same right? Those Town residents receiving
village water now are at the mercy of the village ' s aging infrastructure and do not
have access to fire protection water and yet have no vote as to water rates or what
improvements to their supply is made . They only get to foot the bills through
increased water rates .
Special Town Board Meeting 5
8/27/2007
This proposed district will supply hundreds of Town residents as well as
thousands of people who come to visit Taughannock Falls State Park. Why then
does the Town board ignore the residents and prevent them from voting on their
own water destiny??
Ms . Marino said that she believes very strongly that the Village is part of the Town and is
one third of the population. This water district is a little bit unusual with regard to legal
procedures in that it has a very large financial effect on actually more people that are
outside of the district; direct financial effect not thinking about planning or anything else
than it does for people inside the district so Ms . Marino has felt as a Town Board member
that the Town Board needs to take their own evaluation of it beyond what the people
within the district want or don ' t want and we have received a petition from many people
who do want it, and we have had many people write to us and speak at public meetings
that do not want it . The other thing Ms . Marino would like to say on that regard is that it
is the law and the legal procedure that the Town Board has to establish the district, we
take out the bond for the money and we have to do it as part of our responsibility.
Ms . Marino responded to Mr. Austic ' s point #6 that the Town Board did in fact approve
the efforts of Barton & Loguidice to find funding and giving legitimacy to the fact that
the Town of Ulysses applied for a $ 5 million dollar financing without the Town Boards
knowledge, any discussion of the project ever, or any resolution accepting that
engineering report or any other one . Ms . Marino read the scope of service that the
Supervisor refers to that the Town Board adopted February 2005 (on the Ulysses web
page in the minutes) .
Scope of Services
The intent of this study is to expand on the preliminary information/water service area
alternatives presented at our September 23rd workshop meeting. (Ms . Marino said that
this was not a formal TB meeting and that she as a Town Board member was not notified
of it and there are no minutes . ) A copy of this preliminary information, which identified
six (6) potential water supply alternatives, is enclosed . The following Scope of Services
is proposed for completing this engineering study:
1 . Review available information such as prior studies, soils information, Health
Department reports , tax maps, aerial/GIS images, proposed zoning maps, agricultural
district maps, and wetlands maps .
2 . Review the park's existing water infrastructure with park personnel . Summarize
system capacity and known deficiencies . Likewise, review the Village's existing Indian
Fort /Waterburg Road transmission main with Village personnel to identify general
condition and capacity.
3 . Conduct a windshield survey of the potential water service area(s) to identify current
development and general constructability.
4 . Update the population basis for the potential service area(s) . Estimate water demands
and storage requirements for each of the six (6) water service area alternatives .
5 . Prepare a preliminary layout for waterline locations, sizes and storage systems to serve
the potential service area. Develop preliminary hydraulic models of system alternatives
by expanding on the Water Cad model developed for WD3 .
6 . Prepare preliminary project and operating & maintenance (O&M) cost estimates for
the water service alternatives .
7 . Identify estimated user costs for each alternative based on potential grant funding (i . e. ,
point scoring and grant eligibility), estimated project/O&M costs, and potential
equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) .
Special Town Board Meeting 6
8/27/2007
*Ms . Marino said she is assuming this step is the one that is the authorization to apply
without the knowledge or approval of the Town Board for a $ 5 million dollar financing
grant.
8 . Identify th'e steps to proceed towards implementing the recommended waterline service
alternative.
9 . Prepare a brief report (draft) summarizing the above findings, estimated costs and
recommendations.
10 . Attend one meeting with the Town and other interested parties (e . g. , Park, Town of
Ithaca and Village personnel) to review the draft report. Finalize the engineering report
based on comments received.
Ms . Marino said that the engineering report was not accepted as finalized ever by the
Town Board though it was submitted to the State with draft removed from the cover letter
and the Town does not to this day have a copy of that report which Ms . Marino has asked
for in writing four times . Ms . Marino said her long point being that the Town Board did
not approve the efforts to go to this extent for this project without reviewing any of it or
having more public comment and the reason this is important is because we are locked
into where we are right now with no ability to change; we either take this project the way
it is or lose the funding because it went forward so far to the point it could not be changed
because of EFC rules once a financing hardship determination was made .
Mr. Ellis pointed out that there is a resolution of February that Ms . Marino just read
where the word alternate and alternative appears and is written five times ; we have
instead a written take it or leave it proposal advanced by intimidation and almost no
cooperation to find alternatives and discuss alternatives . Mr. Ellis has said that there are
all kinds of alternatives and what has come out of the discussions are all kinds of
discoveries. Mr. Ellis said all kinds of things that were true when the Board began are no
longer true. Mr. Ellis read a short list of the things that are not true any more ; 1 . We can
not mix water from two municipalities 2 . We can not have water districts across
municipal lines 3 . The fact that WD#5 would provide a secondary source for the Village
of Trumansburg.
Mr. Ellis said that is enough that there are a lot of things that were true and not true
anymore but on the optimistic side this has been a great exploration and a lot of things
have been brought forward and he thinks that they are quite promising and not to be blue
sky about the whole thing it is difficult to come up with funding but funding always
exists ; is one of the State ' s major functions in these kinds of things, they need their jobs,
we will continue what has gone on for decades and there will be funding.
Mr. Ellis said another true thing is that the Village well is abundant and is a source of
water and other wells could be drilled. The Village and the Town have gained a lot by
cooperating and developing water, the State Park situation can easily be provided because
there is an abundance of water available up hill from the State Park; it is not a technical
or tricky thing. Mr. Ellis said that a joint Town and Village water system could solve
many problems and through cooperation could be in a place where we could sell water
rather then buy it. There are things to be addressed and opportunities .
Ms . Tyler said she spoke with the Village Water Commissioner today about fire
protection and she understands that the fire department would really like to have
enhanced fire protection but she was told that in the event of a normal house fire in the
Town that currently we do have adequate protection.
Mr. Fulton, Fire Chief said he would like to disagree with that comment.
Ms . Marino said she is concerned with this because in the Supervisor' s comments he
states that "jhose Town residents receiving village water now are at the mercy of the
village ' s aging infrastructure and do not have access to fire protection water ' and Ms.
Marino said be has tried to look into this because she is concerned that the Town of
Ulysses has i contract with the Village Fire Department to supply Ulysses with fire
Special Town Board Meeting 7
8/27/2007
protection and we are taxing our residents under the belief that they have fire protection
even though a majority of this Town can not be in a municipally served water district, so
she would like Mr. Fulton, Fire Chief and Mr. Thomas , Water Commissioner to clarify
for her whether or not under the Town ' s current contract that the Village of Trumansburg
can provide the residents in the Town of Ulysses who are not now or can never be on
municipal water adequate fire protection. Adequate, not ideal, just adequate.
Mr. Fulton said adequate fire protection? When his pager goes off that there is a fire the
Fire Department may have all the trucks on the road and he can tell you that noon
tomorrow you may get one truck on the road which carries 900 gallons of water on the
first truck out. Mr. Fulton said under the rules you have a two in, two out program,
which is a State rule. The truck can not go out unless two people are in the fire house and
two people to go out. Mr. Fulton said adequate fire protection is when all the trucks are
on the road you would have 3000, 3400, 4000 gallons of water but with only one truck
you have 900 gallons . You may have to call for back-up and hope that you get it. If
Enfield ' s in the situation of a year ago we couldn ' t get help from them . The fire
department can not grow water on the truck and would have to go look for it, in a pond or
creek or look for a fire hydrant. Mr. Fulton said to his knowledge that is not adequate fire
protection, if you can get to a fire and hook to a fire hydrant then you have a constant
flow of water at 1 ,200 gallons per minute that is fire protection. Mr. Fulton said yes that
they supply fire protection to the Town and hopefully you get all the trucks on the road
but that is not a guarantee, they are volunteers and right now their volunteers are
outstanding, probably one of the best in the surrounding areas and we are lucky to have
that but there is no guarantee in the future that will continue . We might go back to
staffing levels of the past. Mr. Fulton said that this has been a real concern of his and no
one has really come to him personally and asked it has always been through someone .
Ms . Tyler reminded Mr. Fulton that she had contacted him personally about this issue .
Mr. Fulton said that she could have, but this has been going on for how long now .
Mrs . Georgia, Waterburg Road stated that she has fire hydrants up the road from her
house and asked Mr. Fulton if they worked .
Mr. Fulton said that they will not work.
Mr. Austic ' s point in his statement was that residents being served by the Village for
water that are outside of the Village do not have access to water in the fire hydrants . His
point was that if residents have a fire hydrant along their road there should be water
available for fire protection.
Ms . Marino commended the fire department for and outstanding job . Ms . Marino is
concerned because she has been contacted by people who feel that they may not be
getting the adequate fire protection and this may not be the time or place to discuss it but
she wants Mr. Fulton to clear up something and that is does Mr. Fulton believe that only
people in the Town of Ulysses that are in a water district have adequate fire protection
because of fire hydrants?
Mr. Fulton said that is true there is enhanced fire protection in a water district.
Ms . Marino responded then we are making a decision to give some of our resident' s
adequate fire protection and not others .
Mr. Thomas, Fire Commissioner said that fighting fires in a rural district with volunteers
is probably the most complicated process that you can imagine, and that said, any good
fire fighter will say that there is no such thing as adequate fire protection but there are
concerns with water supply, concerns with volunteers, getting them when you need them
and as you need them but in this conversation in the context of water the fire department
believes that there is adequate enough protection in terms of water supply to fight a fire to
investigate the sale of the Village ' s tanker truck. If we were really in danger of not
providing adequate fire protection that would not be a consideration. Mr. Thomas said
when he talked to Mr. Fulton and asked if he felt if the people are getting adequate fire
Special Town Board Meeting 8
8/27/2007
protection he answered by saying something like "it is complicated and it is difficult but
they are going to get someone there" .
Ms . Cail said if I understand you correctly, if I had a fire at my house, first T-burg would
come, then ask for help from Enfield or Mecklenburg rather that from the town of Ithaca
which is much closer.
Mr. Austic said that the fire department would hook up to a hydrant from District 3 or 4 .
Mr. Austic read a letter that was received into the record as follows :
As I must be out of Town for the 8/28/2007 Town meeting please read and enter into the
record the following,
Thank you,
Michel Vonderweidt
8/25 /2007
To : Members of the Ulysses Town Board
From : Michel Vonderweidt
7148 earsburg Rd
Trumansburg NY 14886
Re : Water district and annexation
I urge you to 'think of and represent your constituents tonight in rejecting both the
annexation motion and the Ellis Water District motion. You were elected by the residents
of Ulysses, NOT by voters any other municipalities, and I would expect that your actions
this evening would reflect that .
What advantage for Ulysses residents having the annexation pass? Absolutely none ! But
it would advance the agenda of some of you to squash the Water District. At least be
honest as to your motives !
Residents ha�'e suffered not only with poor quality but with unsafe drinking water for
long enough. (There have been exhaustive studies done in the past showing need and at
least let the water district move on. The Tompkins Department agrees that this is a
problem . We Ido not need more studies, but positive action to get us safe water and
greater fire protection. This is a great opportunity to improve the quality of life for so
many Ulysses families , I ask you to not let partisan politics and personal issues get in the
way.
Granted this water district is only a start but to turn down all the monies available for the
chance of getting some in the future is not sound planning. Mr. Ellis appears to have
confidence that in the future there will be a similar source of grants when in actuality they
are drying up at all levels including State, Federal and Park. So where will the money
come from?
This district will not spur growth as some of you are concerned. We have in place strong
zoning and the strict septic regulations to address this valid fear.
The editorial in the last Free Press did an excellent job of summing up what is really
happening. After the August Board meeting as one member passed me he gloated that he
had "convictions", I believe a better word would be "vendetta"
Please all think for yourselves rather than following flawed thinking and not so secret
agendas .
Sincerely,
Michel Vonderweidt
Mr. Austic asked if there were any more comments from the Board.
Mr. Ellis saidjto 'cast the process as political; Mr. Ellis can not see how that can be and
this has been a very deliberate process with people asking for information and organizing
information and if information had been processed a lot of information may have been
available withl a Town wide survey which is a missing piece.
Special Town Board Meeting 9
8/27/2007
Mr. Ellis said that one thing that has not been touched upon and he could not believe did
not go through and that is the financial adequacy with the people in the Village who are
one third of the people in this Town. Mr. Ellis said that there was a good effort going
there and had all kinds of numbers written up that were provided to the Village to buy
water so that they would not lose revenue and that has been dropped and no
memorandum of understanding from the Village .
Mr. Austic said that nothing was ever received back from the Village on the Town ' s
proposal to buy water and save them from losing revenue . No one from the Village Board
responded or wanted to talk about it and work on it .
Mr. Ellis said that he can accept that as true but he does not see how that excuses the
Town as officials who are responsible for all of the people in the Town just because the
Village ' s elected officials did not respond .
Mr. Austic said wouldn ' t you assume that if that was a concern of the Village Board
members that financial assessment that they would come back to the Town and at least
discuss the offer that was made. The Town passed a resolution in May asking the Village
to respond and to this date they have not . Mr. Austic said he can not do the Village
Boards work that is their job .
Ms . Cameron of the Tompkins County Department of Health wanted to address the
statement of the future with the funding and she understands that there is frustration on
both sides and the process that is taking place here . Ms . Cameron said that everyone
should know that TC Health Department does support WD#5 ; however she does have a
lot of concerns about taking action that will preclude continuing the project while other
things are being evaluated and what information can be developed.
Ms . Cameron said that in her discussions with the State Health Department that she has
learned that funding levels are increasing and it will be harder and harder to get funding.
Ms . Cameron said that there is a high chance that if this district is turned down the Town
of Ulysses will not be eligible for funding in the future .
Mr. Ellis and Ms . Marino raised again the comments of the NYS DOH representative at
the meeting the County Health Department had with the Town and Village in early
August, regarding the EFC looking to revise the current system for funding cycles
beyond this year, to be more favorable to rural municipalities .
Ms . Tyler said that one thing that has not been discussed very much is the constrain
distribution system from Bolton Point coming through the Town of Ithaca and according
to several statements from the Town of Ithaca ' s Engineer, Dan Walker this is really the
last district coming out this way that can be supplied in the near future unless a piping
change is done through the City of Ithaca; it is a distribution problem, it is not a Bolton
Point supply problem, so it is a limited supply of water and therefore does not make sense
as in this district to give some of that limited supply to 40% of the people in WD#5 who
are already served by municipal water. Ms . Tyler says that she has had letters from a
number of Town residents who are not in this district who have very bad water who
would like to be served by this district.
Mr. Austic said that it is fine and great if the Village can drill another well but that they
would still have the problem of no redundancy in supply line from that area where the
water is to the Village or other areas of the Town. It is the same as Ithaca that has an
unlimited supply of water but they can not get it here because of lines . If you are going
to build a redundant line coming up from Frontenac to the Village that would eliminate
that problem but Mr. Austic has not heard anything about that plan. He has not heard if
the Village has approached the Health Department or set up moving forward on drilling a
well or what the chances are to getting a good well . The question is at this point to stop
the water district without all this information from the Village and without information to
investigate the effects of General Municipal Law Article 716 which addresses the fact of
Town improvement districts in relationship to annexation, which could mean you could
have a Town water district that is not effected by annexation if the district was
Special Town Board Meeting 10
8/27/2007
established before annexation it could remain a Town district if the Village is in the
Town where annexation takes place. So at this time with the Village not having a
definite plan for a emergency source or a second total source to eliminate the possibility
of any of this through the WD#5 project seems premature and would hope the Town
Board if they are concerned with the Village residents would NOT approve this
resolution and stop this project at this time until further information about the General
Municipal Law and the Village plans.
Ms . Marino did not understand Mr. Austic ' s reference to General Municipal Law 716 and
asked if that Was new information that the Board has not seen.
Mr. Austic said that he had just come across this information and explained it again and
would like to iexplore.
Ms. Marino said that she had forwarded the resolution that is on the table tonight to the
attorney for review and Ms . Geldenhuys did send back a couple of things that should be
clarified in the resolution. Under paragraph 3 refers to a 2003 agreement with the Village
and the Town and it was not a written agreement but was a memorandum of
understanding and the resolution should be amended before a vote is taken. The Board
agreed to amend the resolution to read "memorandum of understanding".
Ms . Marino has also prepared a statement that she read into the record and that is as
follows :
As a Town Board member, I am responsible to consider carefully and objectively all
aspects of the information and public opinion available to me when deciding on a
proposal before, the Board, especially one which involves taking on long term public
debt, and has a significant financial impact on a majority of the residents of the Town. I
have done my best to do this with water district number 5 .
The Town Board is making a long-term planning decision for the Town when it decides
whether or not to initiate construction and then accept public infrastructure such as water
distribution lines, and this decision must be made in the context of comprehensive
planning, public discussion, and Intermunicipal cooperation.
According to law governing formation of a water district, the Town Board must make
several specific determinations in order to establish the district. One of these is whether
all the property] and property owners within the proposed district are benefited. Another is
whether it is in the overall public interest to grant the petition .
I have outlined 'and explained my concerns with the proposed water district 5 in a
previous public statement at the October 23 , 2006 Town Board meeting, and in an
opinion piece for the Trumansburg Free Press written in March of this year. I am
submitting both of these as part of the public record tonight. (These two documents
follow this statement)
Since March, I and others have continued to research the issues . The Town and Village
have both receied further engineering information, clarifying both the maximum volume
of water available to come up to the Town of Ulysses from Bolton Point via the Town of
Ithaca infrastructure, and the maximum sustainable volume of water available from the
Village well .
After listening to the recent Village Board discussions, and the discussion at the very
recent joint meeting with the County and NYS Dept of Health, I believe that there are
feasible, fundable, and quite possibly preferable options for providing municipal water to
residents in need in this part of Ulysses and meeting the DOH mandate to the Village for
a second source that could be developed in cooperation with the Village of Trumansburg,
rather than in conflict with it, as water district 5 has proceeded to date.
For example, the recent Village water study indicates that the Village well is a high
quality, very high capacity source . It would seem that there may be opportunity for an
Intermunicipal infrastructure project to form a water company in Trumansburg that could
supply water to residents in need in the northern part of Ulysses, supply the State Park,
Special Town Board Meeting 11
8/27/2007
and still leave Ulysses with enough water supply capability from the Town of Ithaca to
support a water district to meet known public health needs and allow growth and
development in the southern portion of the Town .
Residents in several other areas of Town beyond the proposed WD5 have raised their
needs for municipal water over the years, and the Town has not yet considered in any
comprehensive way the long-term ramifications for Townwide water needs and resource
options in the future.
I believe this needs to be done before more water infrastructure is built, especially in
context of the recently received documentation from the Town of Ithaca clarifying the
maximum potential water supply to the Town of Ulysses for the next many years, until a
large expansion of infrastructure in the Town of Ithaca is implemented.
Given the controversy over the currently proposed water district 5 , I feel that moving
carefully and thoughtfully with water infrastructure development is the most responsible
way to proceed, to ensure that all issues have been aired and that the public is
comfortable with both the scope and short and long term costs .
I support this resolution as a much needed fresh start to begin work on a comprehensive
Townwide assessment of water needs and concerns, and to renew Intermunicipal efforts
to find an equitable solution to the water needs of the Town and its Village.
The Town Board should learn from the flawed process of water district 5 and heal the
divisiveness that has resulted from it . I am committed to the effort.
(Insert of Ms . Marino ' s two attachments previously stated. )
(Published in the Free Press Opinion 3/7/07)
Planning for Water
The proposed WD5 is a large infrastructure project, adding roughly 14 miles of
distribution main at an estimated cost of $5 million . Town taxpayers both within the
proposed district (who largely bear the actual cost of construction and maintenance) and
in the Village of Trumansburg (as a result of a significant loss of customer base) will
bear direct financial costs. Costs associated with the project into the future, such as
growth and development, affect the entire Town. A responsible decision by the Town
Board to undertake this scale of infrastructure expansion demands careful and thorough
consideration, both from financial and planning aspects. I and other elected officials
have worked hard to do this, and several of us have legitimate concerns.
In his Op-Ed of Feb. 28, Supervisor Doug Austic states that the majority of the
Town Board is against the proposed water district (WD5) because we are "in fear of
development and perhaps unduly influenced by the Village Board. " The truth is far more
complex than this, and speaking for myself the decision is not based in fear. Let 's first
consider the position of the Trumansburg Village Board. The unanimously adopted
resolution in opposition to the WD5 plan by the Trustees was based in part on the need of
the Village for a long-term solution -- a full second source of water. The current WD5
plan would only provide short-term emergency back up (30 days or less under water
restrictions). The joint village- Town water committee formed last June estimated that the
Village would lose roughly $40, 000 per year in water revenues, as customers are moved
to WD5. Additionally, the Village contribution to WD5 would be $330, 000 over 30 years.
Thus, the overall cost to the Village over this time period for the emergency-only source
could exceed $1 . 5 million. Trustees also cited concerns about the possible impact of
development in the area surrounding the Village, and the lack of any planning
discussions to date. The proposed WD5 has been very divisive between Town and
Village. Is this something our Town government should ignore, rather than work to find a
solution to water needs based on, inter-municipal cooperation ? The citizens of the
Village are also voters and taxpayers of the Town, and I and others on the Town Board
must consider their concerns in making a decision on proposed WD5.
Special Town Board Meeting 12
8/27/2007
There are potentially significant costs to the residents in WD5 as well. The annual
cost per resident in the district would increase without the Village financial contribution.
Additionally, if the Village does not transfer ownership of the Village water lines which is
part of WD5; new lines would have to be built in those areas. The base annual charge to
all residentsjin the district could easily increase from the estimated $330 to over $400.
While some tesidents in WD5 have a strong need for better quality water and will gladly
bear the cost, others who do not need municipal water are concerned about their ability
to afford the annual costs.
Considering development, do I fear or oppose it ? Not at all. Development can and
will occur in our Town. It is inevitable, and important to maintaining a viable Town
environment However, I believe that the interests of the Town are best served when
development follows a planned process, with public engagement. Contrary to Mr.
Austic 's assertion that the Town zoning already in place takes care of development
concerns associated with WD5, by his own admission at a joint Town - Village meeting
last April, aLIsolutely no consideration of water infrastructure expansion in the areas now
proposed was incorporated into any discussion of the zoning law adopted in August
2005. Also, the Town Board recognized that criteria for cluster development were
important to help protect open, agricultural land and limit sprawl, but decided to delay
incorporating this concept into the zoning law until after the Comprehensive Plan review
(currently ongoing) was completed.
There are many good reasons for considering development and planning
concerns associated with a water district. A large body of planning knowledge holds that
water infrastructure expansion is inextricably linked with land-use planning and water
resource protection. Current EPA "smart growth " policies encourage medium density,
compact housing development to reduce long term costs of water infrastructure by
reducing the length of pipe that needs to be laid and maintained, and by spreading out
costs among more users. These considerations are applicable to Ulysses, even though we
have not seen development in WD3 over the relatively short time since it was completed.
It is a premise of long-term affordability of a water district that development will occur,
to help offset jincreasing costs as infrastructure ages. The guidelines for review of water
projects for hardship funding in New York State assume a 50% probability of
development of vacant lots. Much of the area in the proposed WD5 is in a state-
designated agricultural district, and is currently zoned for low density, residential
development or agriculture, rather than land uses that allow higher density or
commercial economic development.
The currently proposed WD5 was designed by the consulting engineer to best
"connect the blots " as one citizen who spoke at the public information meeting in June put
it, with almost no consideration of cost-benefit criteria other than including water
problems that give enough points to meet the State funding cutoff. The result is a district
with two single property nodes where 40% or so of the estimated demand (and so debt-
service support) is concentrated. This also increases risk to the long term stability of
costs to the district users.
There jis, as Mr. Austic says, now enough information on WD5 for any reasonable
person to make a decision, and I believed a decision was made. The Town Board was told
in October th2 t if the Map Plan Report step necessary to move WD5 forward was not
begun within a month, the project would not happen with the current financing. At the
October 23 Town Board meeting, a majority of the Board, after considering all the
information available, made the difficult decision not to proceed. The Supervisor was
quoted as saying the project was "dead ". Unless new information comes to the Town
Board, I still feel compelled by the concerns cited here and in my statement from the
October Board meeting not to support WD5 as currently proposed.
What we need is a fresh start, with public input and involvement of the entire
Town Board, to design a water district that best meets the important needs of the Town
(including the State Park), and the Village. The Town should also explore mechanisms
beyond water district formation to identify households with severe water problems and
provide assistance toward other possible and less costly solutions. Such actions should fit
into a Town-wide master plan for water needs and infrastructure that is based on the
Comprehensive Plan review, and is developed with inter-municipal cooperation .
Special Town Board Meeting 13
8/27/2007
Submitted by Roxanne Marino to the Free Press
Marino statement on Water District 5 Map, Plan, Report proposal dated 10/23/2006
As a Town Board member, I am required to exercise careful consideration in making
important decisions which will affect the lives of Town residents and businesses.
I have studied the details of this project and thought long and hard about the issues
raised by other Board members and Town residents both in support of the proposed WD5
and opposition to it. I have read over much of the background material on the
development of WD5 as a second source for the Village prior to my taking office (Jan
2004) and all the material available to me since the Town contracted for the study of
possible alternative WD5 plans in Feb 2005.
While it is clear that the proposed project is feasible from an engineering and DWSRF
financing standpoint, it is not at all clear to me that this water district is in the best
interests of Town of Ulysses as a whole, or the residents that it affects. The proposed
project has been divisive both within the Town and between the Town and Village.
The process for developing this plan has been flawed from the beginning, because Town
Board members and their constituents were not included in the discussion of alternatives.
The plan put forward to the State for financing was not reviewed or approved by the
Town Board before the application was made, nor was it presented to those potentially
affected by it in public meetings until after financing was offered. Lack of clarity about
process for developing the project and about the costs and benefits of different
alternatives, and a lack of inclusion of all necessary parties in discussions has been a
serious problem. This is evidenced by the Village of Trumansburg resolution denying
their support of the project.
The financing offer from the State locks the project in pretty tightly to the current
configuration, with no room for any substantive change without resubmission as a
project.
I have several concerns with the project, which appear to be irresolvable within the
constraints of time and the current financing offer:
1 . There are two nodes where 40% or so of the water use is concentrated and long
stretches of pipe in between with very low user densities. This goes against a large body
of information on smart growth and development of water infrastructure (including a
2006 EPA study and report) .
2. The two large nodes of water use are single property owners (Auble MHP and NY
State Parks) and this seems like a high risk situation with regard to long term stability of
costs to the district users.
3. A primary reason for creating water district 5 up until this plan was to provide a
connection to WD3 for a second source to the Village. The Village Trustees are strongly
against water district 5 as currently proposed, and have voted not to support the project.
Also, the proposed district would use some of the current Village lines, and if the Town
goes forward without the Village, the project may incur substantial additional costs if the
Village chooses not to sell or rent to the Town.
4. Several other areas of Town over the years have raised needs for municipal water;
these should have been addressed by the Board and in public meetings before a decision
was made to put this plan forward for financing.
Special Town Board Meeting 14
8/27/2007
5. We heard 'during recent discussions of the Town- Village joint committee that the
additional volume of water for this proposed water district is likely to commit the bulk of
the supply possible to Ulysses from the Town of Ithaca and Bolton Point for the next
several years, until large expansions of pipe or plant capacity are implemented.
6 I believe the Town should have a 5- 10 year plan for water infrastructure expansion
based on they revision of the comprehensive plan we are currently undertaking, and
developed with inter-municipal considerations and cooperation.
I understand that some Ulysses residents within the proposed district have a need for
clean potable water that this district would meet. I very much regret that I am compelled
by the concerns I listed to vote against moving forward with the currently proposed WD5
by contracting to complete a map, plan and report to use as the basis for formation of the
propose water district.
Ms . Tyler also read a statement into the record which follows :
Reasons behind Lucia Tyler's vote on WD5 .
The water district #5 plan drafted in November of 2005 is not in the best overall interest
of the people of the Town of Ulysses . It is not a good plan to meet the very real water
needs of the people in the Town.
1 . The plan its based on sporadic and questionable water quality data. It is not based upon
any systematic study of the water needs in the Town.
2 . Because of a constrained distribution system from Bolton Point this is the last district
from that source that can be supplied in the foreseeable future . Therefore, it doesn't make
sense to give some of that limited supply to the 40% of the people in water district 5 who
are already served by municipal water.
3 . The plan is financially risky because a large proportion of the dollars contributed over
30 years to the project must come from the trailer park owner who may sell the park in
the future . There is also financial risk to the people in the district in the area of operation
and maintenance because it is a low density, large district with over 14 miles of pipe.
4 . The project was not developed with reference to the comprehensive plan which is a
sort of blue print for the Town. In fact it is contrary to two of the stated objectives in the
comprehensive plan which is to preserve watersheds and unique natural areas and to
enhance the ;existing business district.
5 . The impact on development was discounted for over a year after the plan was proposed
and in recent months there was not time to engage a planner that would look at
development impacts in the context of the entire Town. The only planner proposed had
done an inadequate job helping the Town in the past .
6 . The plan does not meet the Village of Trumansburg ' s need for a second source as
defined by law .
7 . The plan is detrimental to inter-municipal cooperation since the Village Board voted
not to support it in October of 2006 and the new board has not rescinded that vote .
Mr. Ellis said that the regrettable paragraph that begins here in the "Response to Ellis
Motion" he would like to say that in matters of civil affairs a person may very well take
both large and small exceptions to the actions of others and that does not constitute
vengefulness or a vendetta and he has nothing but a fine disposition and he has had many
civil conversations and a few shared angry moments with Mr. Austic and feels that Mr.
Austic ' s statement does not apply to him.
Mr. Austic again said that he really urges the Town Board not to do this because it
severely effects the ability to work further with the Village till they determine there
source of water or their new source of water or whether the Town could have some other
Special Town Board Meeting 15
8/27/2007
kind of agreement because killing this water district will not allow an economical hook
up to WD#3 .
Mr. Ellis asked why that would be true.
Mr. Austic said that the cost determined by Hunt Engineer and Barton Loguidice to run a
line over to hook on to WD#3 just for the Village is some where between $400,000 &
$ 500, 000 and that is not economical for the Village .
Mr. Ellis said he is questioning Mr. Austic ' s word economical because economical is a
term that is determined by the entity that is spending the money not someone else ;
because he may find some thing that is economical and Mr. Austic may find it not.
Ms . Marino said that before the vote is called there are two small errors that need fixing.
Mr. Ellis said that he will move to amend his resolution with the two small areas adding
"the" in paragraph 8 and in paragraph 9 after the word financing will replace the word to
with the word will not . Ms . Tyler seconded the motion. Unanimously approved.
Mr. Austic pointed out that last week the Board passed a motion to fill out papers for the
Winner' s grant of $ 35 , 000 that he did and has been sent and now you want to take it out .
•
Mr. Austic called the vote on the following resolution :
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
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,
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 ,
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
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
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) .
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
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,
Special Town Board Meeting 16
8/27/2007
And jwhereas 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 the most necessary and best use
of this finite water supply resource to address unmet municipal water needs and
public health concerns in Ulysses,
Be its 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 will not continue with currently proposed
Water District #5 project.
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 iriput at all steps in the process .
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.
Mr. Austic moved to adjourn, seconded by Ms . Tyler. Unanimously approved .
Meeting adjourned.
Respectfully: submitted,
Marsha L. Georgia
Ulysses Town Clerk
MLG : mlg