Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-18TB 8-18-22 Page 1 of 15 TOWN OF DRYDEN TOWN BOARD MEETING August 18, 2022 Zoom Hybrid Present: Supervisor Jason Leifer, Cl Daniel Lamb, Cl James Skaley, Cl Loren Sparling, Cl Leonardo Vargas-Mendez Elected Officials: Bambi L. Avery, Town Clerk Rick Young, Highway/DPW Superintendent Other Town Staff: Ray Burger, Planning Director Cassie Byrnes, Secretary to Supervisor Amanda Anderson, Bookkeeper Supv Leifer opened the meeting at 6:05 p.m. Board members and the audience participated in the pledge of allegiance. RESOLUTION #124 (2022) – APPROVE MINUTES Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the meeting minutes of July 14 and July 21, 2022. 2nd Cl Skaley Roll Call Vote Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes Supv Leifer Yes PRESENTATION BY INSERO ON TOWN AUDIT Evan Cleveland of Insero & Co. CPAs, LLP introduced the team that performed the 2021 audit of the towns finances and reviewed their audit documents and findings. Concerns that came out of the 2020 audit have been addressed by the town and resolved. No problems or issues were encountered in conducting the recent audit. He reviewed the findings for this year. The board will have a resolution to consider next month accepting the audit. PUBLIC HEARING (continued) IAWWTF BOILER REPLACEMENT PROJECT Supv Leifer opened the public hearing at 6:20 p.m. and explained that it was being continued from last week. There were no comments from the board or the public and the hearing was closed at 6:21 p.m. RESOLUTION #125 (2022) – ADOPT PUBLIC INTEREST ORDER IAWWTF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR BOILER REPLACEMENT Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 2 of 15 RESOLVED, that Dryden Town Board hereby adopts the following Public Interest Order In the Matter of the Proposed Boiler Replacement Project Pursuant to Town Law §202-b for the Wastewater Treatment Plant in the City of Ithaca serving the Town of Dryden known as the Boiler Replacement Capital Project PUBLIC INTEREST ORDER WHEREAS, a plan and proposal have been duly prepared in such manner and in such detail as heretofore has been determined by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden, Tompkins County, New York, relating to the Capital Project recommend ed by the Special Joint Committee (SJC) for Boiler Replacement, pursuant to Town Law § 202-b, at the Ithaca Wastewater Treatment Facility (IAWWTF) in the City of Ithaca owned and managed jointly by the City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca and Town of Dryden (Owners), which wastewater treatment plant provides wastewater treatment services for the Town’s Consolidated Sewer Districts served by such wastewater treatment plant, such improvement to be constructed and owned by Owners, and WHEREAS, said plan and report have been prepared by MRB Consultants, duly licensed by the State of New York and have been filed in the office of the Town Clerk where they are available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2022, the Special Joint Committee (SJC) resolved to recommend to the Owners to establish IAWWTF Capital Project #423J Boiler Replacement in an amount not to exceed $650,000.00, and WHEREAS, the SJC thereby recommended authorization of this project contingent upon action by Owners committing their percentage of reimbursement shares to the Joint Activity Fund allocated per the Joint Sewer Agreement as follows: Municipality Percentage Project Cost City of Ithaca 57.14 $371,410 Town of Ithaca 40.88 $265,720 Town of Dryden 1.98 $12,870 ============= TOTAL: $650,000.00 ============= WHEREAS, the IAWTTF serves the Town of Dryden Consolidated Sewer District, and TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 3 of 15 WHEREAS, the maximum proposed to be expended for the Boiler Replacement is $650,000.00 of which Town of Dryden’s share is $12,870, with the proposed method of payment being that the Town will reimburse the City of Ithaca for the former’s share pursuant to a contract between the Town and the City of Ithaca. The Town will not issue or co-issue any bonds but pay its share of expenses from sewer rents and charges from the Consolidated Sewer District, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Dryden adopted an Order on July 21, 2022 calling a public hearing upon said plan and report and the question of providin g said Boiler Replacement, and the question of executing any related agreement, and to hear all persons interested in the subject thereof, all in accordance with the provisions of Town Law §202 -b and applicable provisions of the General Municipal Law and Local Finance Law, and WHEREAS, said public hearing was duly held on August 11, 2022 at the time and in the manner set forth in said Order, and continued to August 18, 2022, and all persons interested in the subject thereof were heard concerning the same, and WHEREAS, The Town Clerk of the Town of Dryden, Tompkins, County, New York, caused a copy of the said order to be published once in the official newspaper of the Town, and also posted a copy thereof on the Town signboard maintained by the Clerk, not less than ten (10) nor more than 20 days before the day designated for the hearing as aforesaid. WHEREAS, the Boiler Replacement project has heretofore been determined to be a "Type II Action" pursuant to the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the implementation of which as proposed, the Town Board has determined, will not require any environmental review for the following reasons: the Boiler Replacement project includes the purchase of equipment; replacement in kind of facilities on the same site; maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or facility; and construction of accessory/appurtenant non-residential structures or facilities involving less than 4,000 square feet of gross floor area and not involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent with local land use controls ; and WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize the Boiler Replacement to be known as IAWWTF Capital Project 423J Boiler Replacement, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden, Tompkins County, New York, as follows: Section 1. It is hereby determined that it is in the public interest to make the Boiler Replacement hereinafter described and such improvement is hereby authorized. Section 2. The maximum proposed cost to be expended for the Boiler Replacement is $650,000.00 of which Town of Dryden’s share is $12,870, with the proposed method of payment being that the Town will reimburse the City of Ithaca for the former’s share pursuant to a contract between the Town and the City of Ithaca. The Town will not issue or co-issue any bonds but pay its share of expenses from sewer rents and charges from the Consolidated Sewer District. Section 3. That this Order is subject to a permissive referendum in the manner provided in Town Law Article 7 and Town Law Section 209-q. Section 4. That the permission of the State Comptroller is not required because the Town of Dryden does not propose to finance the cost of the Boiler Replacement by the issuance of bonds, notes, certificates, or other evidences of indebtedness of the Town. TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 4 of 15 Section 5. That pursuant to subdivision 6(d) of Section 209-q of the Town Law, the Town Clerk is hereby directed and ordered to cause a certified copy of this Order to be duly recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Tompkins within ten days of the date this Order becomes effective pursuant to Town Law Section 91, which when so reco rded, shall be presumptive evidence of the regularity of the proceedings and action taken by the Town Board in relation to the aforesaid Boiler Replacement. Section 6. This order shall take effect immediately. 2nd Cl Lamb Roll Call Vote Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes Supv Leifer Yes PUBLIC HEARING UNSAFE STRUCTURE AT 28 LEISURE LANE Supv Leifer opened the public hearing at 6:22 p.m. The owner, Elaine Schwartz, is not in attendance. Service on her was not accomplished in a timely manner and the matter is adjourned until September 8, 2022. Comments: Nikki Morgan, 26 Leisure Lane, said she has lived in her home for 21 years and 28 Leisure Lane has not been occupied for 21 years. She has emailed the board and code enforcement numerous times. The building is dilapidated, dangerous, an eyesore, and is reducing the value of her property. She is raising her son as a single parent next to that garbage heap that she has to look at every day. She pays her taxes and maintains her property to be safe and in accordance with neighborhood standards. She has been communicating with the town since July of 2021. She is frustrated that the town has taken a year and half to really take action. It is frustrated that she has been trying to rectify the health and safety issue in their neighborhood since July of 2021. She is happy the board is hearing this tonight, and is hoping the momentum continues. Suzanne Cole has lived on Meadow Drive for 20 years and to the best of her knowledge the owner has not lived there. At one point there was a notice put on the structure that the owner was to secure the premises. The garage had been left open for a long time, then a notice was placed and the garage was never closed. The space was never boarded up. From the front porch of the property, you can look through a window and see up through the roof. The only thing holding the structure together is the frame. The flooring and walls have fallen in because of years of being exposed to the weather. It can be seen on Google Earth. There are y oung kids in the neighborhood. Wildlife has moved into the site. It is an eyesore and a danger to the community. It may be affecting sale of properties in the neighborhood. Art Degaetano said he lives on the Meadow Drive side of the neighborhood and really has nothing to add other than what has been mentioned. Clearly the house is an eyesore. Clearly the house is a safety issue. The house, in the condition that it is, is bringing down the property values of houses in the neighborhood. It is noticed by people looking to buy in the neighborhood. TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 5 of 15 Allison Meyers said she lives diagonally from the property in question and knows that the house has been steadily deteriorating. Neighbors are concerned about increased numbers of problematic wildlife they are seeing. The lawn is not mowed, so there is quite a meadow there. The critters will try to make their way into neighboring homes when the weather turns cold. It is clearly not a safe structure and is full of junk. She has been told that some people have entered the property and it really is not safe. She wants to support her neighbors for whom this has been a very important issue. It has been a long time with nothing being done about it. She thanked the board to putting the matter on the agenda and for trying to solve the matter. Alice Donnelly said she has lied at 8 Meadow Drive since 1990. She agrees with what has been said. As a veterinarian, there is a definite concern about the wildlife that are inhabiting the open, dilapidated structure. The neighborhood takes pride in caring for each other and maintaining a good appearance and this detracts from the neighborhood. There is concern for children with the presence of this dilapidated structure in the neighborhood. Owners there have a high standard of keeping their properties nice and this detracts from it. Cl Lamb thanked them for their comments and said he didn’t know why the report took so long, but the board has tried to get this on the agenda as soon as possible. He is fami liar with the neighborhood, and it seems like a really great community. The board will stick with this and get the matter cleaned up. This public hearing will be continued on the September 8 agenda. The owner will be served again, and if she can’t be served in time, it will be heard on the 15th. If the owner does not attend the next hearing and she has been served, the process can continue. PUBLIC HEARING 1892 SLATERVILLE ROAD Supv Leifer opened the public hearing at 6:36 p.m. Ray Burger said the board has the code enforcement report on the condition of the structure. There were violation notices served last April that pointed out both the unsafe structure and the property maintenance code violations. They are now proceeding under the Town’s unsafe structure statute. Supv Leifer acknowledged receipt of emails from Mr. Enslow today. Jack Enslow said he feels if the board got his response to Ed’s (his neighbor) complaint letter, then he should have addressed what the concerns were: Camper on the property – He and his family lived in the camper after their house burned. Code Enforcement told them they could not live in the camper. He obeyed and made his family homeless. RV on the property – He was told the RV was okay, but he still had it removed and sent the town a receipt for that. Possibility of pipes draining to the creek – That is not happening. When his family no longer had access to the Science Center due to Covid, they built troughs and pipes, and they do their own home schooling, and there is nothing draining to the creek. If that were happening, it would go to where the children play and past there to where he harvests dirt. He is a dirt farmer, a permaculture food forester. Where the creek settles down before his next door neighbor’s property, it slows down, and it goes back and forth, and he digs worm castings, and he pulls dirt from there. Afterwards that goes to his neighbor on the other side of Ed Dellert. They are in constant contact, and he sees her regularly and there are no problems. The water then flows to a culvert, crosses under the road, goes to the neighbor across the road diagonally, then into a nature conservancy and then to Six Mile Creek. The water is clear when TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 6 of 15 it flows, right now it is dry, but there would be evidence. He worked at Enslow and Sons Septic Service when he was young, has worked in port-a-johns, and you can’t flush mess down a creek and not know about it. Unsafe Structure – It is on posted property. It is not a structure. The house relit over and over and they had to bring an excavator in and knock it down. It’s a pile. It’s raw materials and memories. It is fenced off. The small access point closest to the main driveway is blocked by a huge beam and cement blocks. No one can get access to it. He described the difficulty now accessing property. Access otherwise is through posted property and perma- culture food forest and dense, thick growth. You won’t just happen upon the structure. He understands the structure is his problem and his responsibility. It’s not beautiful and he understands it needs to be finished. It will be finished, and is in process. No one is suffering because of this. Everyone’s assessment and taxes around him went up, including his. No one is complaining that his property is costing someone money. Dellert is increasing his property holdings, not selling it off. That would not be an argument now. His family is in a rough spot. Financially they been below the poverty level since 2015. He went through a divorce and lost control of the home for six months and when he got back to it, it was trashed. He fought through that. He fought through flooding of the creek. He fought through fire. His family just needs some more time now. He sent another email saying that as of August 22 he has a court date for child support. Since 2015 when his finances were hit hard by divorce and child support, he didn’t know that he was grossly overpaying. The support magistrate has given him a $75 temporary order. That order may be solidified Monday, but it is not guaranteed. So he can’t guarantee where his finances will be until Monday. If it holds, he will be working with roughly double the money he has had since 2015. It means that they can make a bigger difference. He knows that businesses are thriving near him. Incodema has bought Crispell’s Garage. Mandeville’s fruit and vegetable stand is doing great business. He understands his property is ugly, and he wants to fix it. He has been making progress. Whenever something specific is addressed to him, he handles it. He’s worked with Kevin Ezell and Dave Sprout and worked through issues. What he is now suffering is an angry neighbor. We don’t need to waste time bickering over this. Dellert’s tenants throw trash on the road and rodents are in the garbage , and he (Enslow) doesn’t file complaints. He doesn’t want to be blamed for Dellert’s tenants. When that trash makes it to his property, he picks it up. He respects the maintenance his neighbor does, but that is monoculture, and not what he does. He does permaculture food forest and that means there are 1.8 acres of carbon credit bank roll gold when the time comes, because it is going to matter soon. Permaculture food forestry feeds his family. He used to be on 100 mg fentanyl patches and worse medicines for his body. He no longer takes even ibuprofen. He heals his body off the land. He takes his food and medicine off the land as much as he possibly can. This is nothing but beneficial. It is not typical, but it is right to agriculture and to farm. He has ducks, chickens, and is raising bugs and beetles to make meal worms, isopods from potato bugs, and crickets. These are all future food crops, and he can do it in small areas. He is growing amaranth and bringing in seed from South America because it makes our native species look sad. They have countless fruit and nut trees and different kinds of berries. Enslow said he has issues where NYSEG has driven a mini-excavator through his property and into Dellert’s yard. He picked it up and NYSEG did a wonderful job giving Dellert TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 7 of 15 green grass and grass seed and told him they do his kind of properties. They di dn’t know what to do for the grape vines that they tore down or the berry bushes they ran over. He understands that he is still handling all the ramifications from different things, but there is a lot going on here. He has a decent number of neighbors or people who live in the area who will say they are not suffering and are willing to give him some time. Town should cease and desist all action against him and tell Mr Dellert to wait and stop complaining, stop wasting time and be a good neighbor and get along. The conversations he has had with Mr Dellert are not what the letter he sent says. The letter is a year and a half old. He can address the complaints if he knows exactly what it is and wasn’t provided that in a timely manner. He will take care of everything he can. Maybe Dellert can’t see progress, but it is there. The issues that were outlined and are in the official complaint have been addressed. If people want more, let him know what. The proposed bill of $30,000 is debilitating. He won’t be able to pay that, and if it gets put on his taxes, he won’t be able to pay that, and his property will be taken. That will be the sentence by the Town of Dryden if this gets enforced. He has already gone homeless to obey. Give him time. If you want to help him, lend him equipment, or give him tools to work with, not put a debilitating bill on him. Give him peace of being able to live and thrive. Cl Vargas-Mendez said he is glad Mr Enslow came and spoke to the board. J Enslow said he understands there is a lot to it that nobody knows. He is a very private human. He doesn’t knock on his neighbors’ doors and make his business theirs. He doesn’t have a choice now. The home was not insured when it burned. He was purchasing it on land contract and the seller was to carry the insurance policy. They did not pay the insurance and it lapsed. It could not be reinstated with the barn fall on the property, and he was cleaning that up when the house burned. He owns the property now, but has not been able to get it insured since. The property is his free and clear now. His ex-wife is not to be involved in any way. He has a quit claim deed from her, and she should not be involved in this process at all. Cl Lamb said he hopes J Enslow understands the position of the board. They just acted on another unsafe property and are in full agreement with the residents. It’s a little hard to turn and look at another perhaps more unsafe situation and say we can wait. They both look unsafe. J Enslow pointed out a note on the Planning Department monthly report for a variance granted for a house fire ten years ago. Lyn Donahue said she lives three doors down from J Enslow. She has seen him and his family occasionally and returned home after visiting family to find his property had burned down. It was awful and the neighbors were upset about that. She p rovided money for a couple of dumpsters to help take things off the property. She and other neighbors were helping. She is not bothered by what is there. They have provided her with good food s of which she hadn’t even heard. They are great folks and don’t bother her. Her land is fine, and she understands other neighbors feel the same way. Peggy McKernan said she lives at 1877 Slaterville Road, diagonally from the Enslow place. The stream that comes through her property is clear, so the question of polluting is not an issue. She thinks they need more time and probably some help. Can the town lend TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 8 of 15 equipment? There are neighbors here that will work together here to get this right. The question is timing. She supports this family that is trying to make a go of a terrible situation. Nathan VanWhy, town attorney, explained the town cannot lend equipment because it would be a gift of public funds/equipment for a private purpose. Under the Town Code if the town goes in and addresses the issue itself, it is required to charge the cost of the removal of the debris to the property. Supv Leifer noted there are two violations. One for the unsafe structure and one under the property maintenance code, which has to do with trash and such. J Enslow requested time to know how much his finances will be. He had submitted a 5–10-year cleanup plan and R Burger said that was not adequate. With what he has changing, a 5-year timeline is not hard to see. He has to choose what he most needs to provide for and do. Does he need to make his property pretty in his neighbors’ eyes, or does he need to provide the necessities of life for his children? He can’t take that risk for his children. They have been living homeless because they can’t live on the property. He has a plan of attack, but takes money and time. They don’t have a vehicle. Five years doesn’t seem like a substantial chunk of time, considering the date of the complaints. Anytime he was asked to fix something he has done it. He needs more time for this. He has made contact with a civil engineer that NYSEG used to run gas lines through there. He has someone else that knows the property and is a civil engineer that he has consulted with. J Enslow said he is a competent, capable, and intelligent human being. He has worked plumbing, electrical and company. He has worked maintenance for Lucente Homes. He is broken in some ways, but he can do, and work and function. It takes time or more tools. His family has end goals. What they are growing will help contribute creating a seed library as well as a tool lending library for people who want to help do gardens who can’t for themselves. They think this is a very important thing to help folks out overall. They are looking at relocating a yurt to the topside of the property, near the railroad track, and as a better camping situation. One barn will be upgraded and turned into a place to live. He would have to get some materials and a building permit to start, but that is the goal. There is a home for his family there and better camping for his family there and a better future. They want to be self-sufficient and off the grid as much as possible. They are looking for composting toilets, a wood cookstove, and solar if they are lucky. Right now, he is running a hand-crank generator or solar/hand-crank generator combo. He is asking for more time to improve his situation. William Enslow, Jr – asked what is minimum that needs to happen and what is the maximum timeline? It isn’t realistic that this all can be done in a few weeks. What kind of timeline can he have, or is it a matter of progress shown? Or does it have to be done and finished by a certain day? What is the expectation? Atty VanWhy said if the board were to pass a resolution tonight and direct that the property be remediated, demolished, and removed, the Town Code requires the board to set a period of time in which a person has to comply with that. The code doesn’t actually say wha t that period of time is, so it is ultimately at the Town Board’s discretion. The default would be a 30-day period of time. If the Town Board believes that a particular circumstance justifies an extended period of time, that would be appropriate. The property owner has identified some reasons why he is facing difficulty and that is where it is appropriate to ask what time frame he is thinking. The default would be 30 days. TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 9 of 15 Cl Skaley suggested this hearing be continued to next month, given that the pr operty owner has to resolve his situation. As long as he is working toward a solution and working with code enforcement to come up with a plan, it seems appropriate. Cl Vargas-Mendez said he would support that. Cl Lamb said the board has no ability to accurately assess the owner’s financial situation and path forward. This can’t persist and five years is too long. The town needs something more concrete in terms of a plan to address the situation. Supv Leifer said the board needs to understand what the additional time is for with a realistic time frame. We can give you time, but if you don’t make that timeline, the town can take action. J Enslow stated he knows that some of his neighbors have sent emails in support of his position. There is one neighbor who is not happy. Cl Sparling said there is clearly support from neighbors. He knows the town cannot donate to private individuals. There are volunteer organizations such as GoFundMe that could be helpful in this situation. He understands living at the poverty level and that everything requires money. If catastrophic events occur on you, you just don’t know where to start. He suggested starting a GoFundMe because there is support from neighbors and J Enslow doesn’t know who they know. That may provide money for dumpsters or more. The board can defer this for a month and J Enslow can figure out his finances. We have the minimum of bringing the place back up to code, but he understands the utmost priority is to get a residence for the family. That will address one of the issues. It is sort of a vicious circle, and he is sympathetic. He urged J Enslow to find alternative means of support. Because he has a vision of where he needs to get to, and he needs money to do that. The board needs to see progress. J Enslow said his property is in kind with his neighbors. You see only a small glimpse of the burnout. Anything that is ugly has been removed from the perimeter. It’s not a big, huge nasty mess. It is not what Dellert is used to. It’s not old agriculture; it’s different and not everything is going to go away. Neighboring properties have the same growth on the front. Renee Keating lives directly across the street. She has a lot of compassion for the family and their situation. She would like nothing more than to see the pile gone. She suggested the town work with him on financial issues. Perhaps the town could remove it and then work with him on the financials so that he could afford the cost and spread it out over many years. She understands he wants more time and has a plan, and she doesn’t see that being realistic for just Jay to handle. It is a concern for her, and she has shared that. Her property assessment is affected. Before the fire was an issue, there was a lot of garbage on the property and he has made an effort to clean up the property in general. It might be a situation beyond his ability. She has respect for his lifestyle. Her property is well manicured, and she understands and respects that other people do not do that. If there is way for the town to help him clean it up in a way that he can afford, it would be a win-win. Suzanne Cole (she and Nikki Morgan share this thought) She heard a comment that the town is looking at two unsafe structures and trying to treat them the same. There is a significant difference. Leisure Lane has an unsafe structure that has had no residents in it for 20 years. He may have an unsafe structure, but he is trying to work with what he has within his means. It’s a big difference and as anyone knows, it is expensive to own and maintain a home and property. From her perspective, these two things are not the same. She doesn’t think the board should look at them in the same way. TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 10 of 15 After further discussion, the hearing was left open at 7:30 to be continued at the September 15 meeting. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. HIGHWAY/DPW DEPARTMENT No report. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The monthly department report is on the town website. The Cornell Design Connect Team responded favorably to the town’s application to work on a site development plan for the North Street neighborhood. The South Hill Rec Way extension is moving along. A county tourism grant application being prepared to fund studies for the first two miles of train extension east of Burns Road. COUNTY BRIEFING Mike Lane reported the county’s grant application process for community grants using the ARPA funding is expected to start the first of the year. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS Proposed Local Law to Exceed the Tax Cap Levy - Supv Leifer set a public hearing on a proposed local to law to exceed the tax levy cap for September 15, 6:05 p.m. The text of the proposed local law follows: Section 1. Legislative Intent: It is the intent of this local law to override the limit on the amount of real property taxes that may be levied by the Town of Dryden, County of Tompkins pursuant to General Municipal Law §3-c, and to allow the Town of Dryden, County of Tompkins to adopt a town budget for (a) town purposes, (b) fire protection districts, and (c) any other special or improvement district, and Town improvements provided pursuant to Town Law Article 12 - C, governed by the Town Board for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2023 and ending December 31, 2023 that requires a real property tax levy in excess of the “tax levy limit” as defined by General Municipal Law §3-c. Section 2. Authority: This local law is adopted pursuant to subdivision 5 of General Municipal Law §3-c, which expressly authorizes the Town Board to override the tax levy limit by the adoption of a local law approved by vote of at least sixty percent (60%) of the Town Board. Section 3. Tax Levy Limit Override: The Town Board of the Town of Dryden, County of Tompkins is hereby authorized to adopt a budget for the fiscal year 2023 that requires a real property tax levy in excess of the limit specified in General Municipal Law §3-c. Section 4. Severability: If any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, or part of this Local Law or the application thereof to any person, firm or corporation, or circumstance, shall be adjusted by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unconstitutional, such order or judgment shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder thereof, but shall be confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, or part of this Local TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 11 of 15 Law or in its application to the person, individual, firm or corporation or circumstance, directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment or order shall be rendered. Section 5. Effective date: This local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Town of Ithaca Sewer Agreements – The town has two agreements with the Town of Ithaca for sewage from two districts that travels through town of Ithaca pipes. The agreements provide a formula for payment to the town of Ithaca for that usage. The new rate is about 2% prior to the rate in the previous agreements. RESOLUTION #126 (2022) – APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH TOWN OF ITHACA – SEWER DISTRICT #1 Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves an agreement with the Town of Ithaca for usage of its sewage pipes by Sewer District #1 for a term ending June 31, 2027, and authorizes the Town Supervisor to execute the same on behalf of the district. 2nd Cl Skaley Roll Call Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes Supv Leifer Yes RESOLUTION #127 (2022) – APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH TOWN OF ITHACA – PEREGRINE HOLLOW SEWER DISTRICT Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves an agreement with the Town of Ithaca for usage of its sewage pipes by Peregrine Hollow Sewer District for a term ending June 31, 2027, and authorizes the Town Supervisor to ex ecute the same on behalf of the district. 2nd Cl Lamb Roll Call Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes Supv Leifer Yes Safe Streets & Roads Safety Action Plan – R Burger explained this is a combined effort by several municipalities, including the City of Ithaca. This is a grant program that is funded with one billion dollars this year, and it is a multi-year program. In order to get realistic expectation of construction numbers, you have to have a safety action plan. This year the group is submitting a combined application to prepare safety action plans for the various towns and city. Once projects are identified they will be able to apply for various construction grants in subsequent year. The town’s share of the local match for this is expected to be $25,000 or less. If more municipalities join the group, the town’s share will be less. RESOLUTION #128 (2022) - TO PARTNER ON FEDERAL SAFE STREETS AND ROADS FOR ALL PLANNING GRANT OPPORTUNITY TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 12 of 15 Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: WHEREAS, in 2022, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law established the new Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) federal grant program, with up to one billion dollars appropriated in FY22, and with a local match of 20% of the project cost; and WHEREAS, local municipalities are eligible to apply for funding to create a detailed transportation safety “Action Plan”, either individually or in collaboration with other municipalities; and WHEREAS, the FY22 Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) available here: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=340385), states that applications with multiple municipalities partnering to create a plan will be more competitive for funding than applications from a single municipality; and WHEREAS, successful creation of an Action Plan in this grant cycle would make t he partnering municipalities eligible to apply for implementation grants in future years of this grant program, either individually or in collaboration; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has agreed to be the “Lead Applicant” on this planning grant application, with multiple neighboring municipalities expressing interest in applying as “Joint Applicants”, including the following in alphabetical order: • Town of Caroline • Town of Danby • Town of Dryden • Town of Ithaca • Town of Lansing • Village of Cayuga Heights • Village of Lansing WHEREAS, the role of the City of Ithaca as Lead Applicant will be to complete the online application on behalf of all partnering municipalities for FY22 funding, with an application due date of September 15, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is presenting a resolution to its Common Council, requesting a budget to fund the study in whole at $750,000, to be eventually reimbursed 80% by the grant, with individual municipalities reimbursing the City of Ithaca for its share of the 20% lo cal match. The Town of Dryden share of the local match is not to exceed $25,000; then be it RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden agrees to partner with the City of Ithaca and other neighboring municipalities to jointly apply for the SS4A planning grant oppo rtunity to create an Action Plan that covers both regional and municipality-specific transportation safety problems, as well as presents detailed regional and municipality -specific solutions; and RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden agrees to reimburse the City of Ithaca for its share of the 20% local match ($150,000 total local match for a $750,000 total project cost), specifically that the Town of Dryden will reimburse the City of Ithaca an amount not to exceed $25,000. 2nd Cl Vargas-Mendez Roll Call Vote Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 13 of 15 Supv Leifer Yes Variance Application Process – R Burger explained that when variance applications dealing with subdivisions come to the ZBA (i.e., to reduce the frontage required on a lot) they may table it in order to get a recommendation from the Planning Board. He would like to set a policy where he can immediately refer those matters to the Planning Board prior to the ZBA hearing, so they can be handled in one meeting. RESOLUTION #129 (2022) – REFER CERTAIN MATTERS TO PLANNING BOARD PRIOR TO ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING Cl Skaley offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: WHEREAS, there are on occasion applications for area variances from the requirements of the Town of Dryden’s subdivision law; and WHEREAS, Section 270-15.5 of the Town Code allows the Town Board, by resolution, to provide for the referral of any matter or class of matters to the Planning Board before final action is taken thereon, and the Town Board may stipulate that final action shall not be taken until the Planning Board has had an opportunity to submit a report on such matter or class of matters. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that all applications for area variances concerning subdivision requirements shall be referred to the Planning Board before final action is taken thereon by the Zoning Board. Final action by the Zoning Board shall not be taken until either the Planning Board has submitted its report, or after thirty days from the Planning Board’s receipt of such referral, whichever is earlier; and be it further RESOLVED that this resolution shall remain in effect until rescinded by action of the Town Board. 2nd Cl Vargas-Mendez Roll Call Vote Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes Supv Leifer Yes Proposed Local Law to Establish Community Choice Aggregation - Last week there was a presentation from Climate Smart Communities Task Force, and this is the local law they were referring to. A template from NYSERDA was modified to suit the town of Dryden. This will lay the foundation for the town to explore CCA. The CSCTF working group is meeting with various companies to see what is right for Dryden. This is the enabling law. It is just being studied; they are not necessarily pursuing it yet. The proposed local law is attached. The public hearing was set for September 15 at 6:10 p.m. Dryden Fiber Bonding – There will be a resolution on September 8 for bonding for the fiber project. It will be subject to permissive referendum. Volunteer Board Application – An application was received from Leslie Debo, with the Rec Commission being her first choice. RESOLUTION #130 (2022) – APPOINT DRYC MEMBER – DEBO Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 14 of 15 RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby appoints Leslie Debo to the Dryden Youth and Recreation Commission for a term to expire December 31, 2023. 2nd Cl Skaley Roll Call Vote Cl Sparling Yes Cl Vargas-Mendez Yes Cl Skaley Yes Cl Lamb Yes Supv Leifer Yes ADVISORY BOARD UPDATES Planning Board – The board spent time talking about the Design Connect application. They discussed a site plan review that will be coming before the ZBA. It involves moving an expanding business (Math in Motion) out of the home and establishing a front at 2012 Dryden Road and they waived full site plan review. Freese Road Bridge Update – Cl Lamb has talked with Ben Werner of Barton & Loguidice about the design for a single lane bridge. It will have a dual-use space for bicycle and pedestrian traffic on one side. Ag Advisory Committee - Did not meet in July. Recreation & Youth Commission – did not meet in July. Conservation Board – Discussion centered around identifying the root of the perceived problem of stormwater law enforcement. They plan to have a meeting with Dave Sprout to determine the problem and how specifically the Conservation Board can help. Climate Smart Communities Task Force – A lot of the meeting focused on CCA. There is the potential to reach silver certification for a climate smart community by January. Dryden High School may be getting an EV charging station. Our planning intern helped get a New York installation grant to cover 90% of the $7,000 cost leaving $700 remaining. The high school members of the task force were confident they could fund raise for the balance. So it would be at no cost to the school Safety & Preparedness – They did not have a quorum. Those present discussed the document that Ellie is preparing regarding shelters in the town. There were questions that the board may need to be involved in. They are trying to find out what other efforts or information exists regarding shelters in the town and who the committee should talk to. Nikki Koekebacker said they need shelter contacts. A lot of changes happened during the pandemic. They are trying to combine questions that FEMA, CERT, Red Cross, and the town would like answered. They are updating information and determining what they need to know. The only shelter approved by the Red Cross is the high school. Broadband Committee – They are meeting tomorrow. The next thing the board will be approving is the bond resolution on September 8. Rail Trail Task Force – Some members will be attending the broadband meeting tomorrow. There needs to be some communication between the committees. There is a lot of interest in the Game Farm Road crossing plan. Consensus in the committee is that it cannot be delayed another year because there is an immediate safety situation. There is not a lot of TB 8-18-22 D R A F T Page 15 of 15 interest in an elaborate crossing design. They have a working group coming together for a meeting in early September. M Lane noted that Cornell will be moving additional ball fields to Game Farm Road. Affordable & Workforce Housing Committee – They met with Lynn Truame of INHS and discussed a lot of the issues that they confront, some of the barriers and constraints they have, and the number of applications they can put forward in a given year. They need to have a 9% tax credit as a way of financing their operations. The committee tried to encourage them to look more seriously in Dryden. Mike Murphy did a considerable proposal for them to loo k at and gave them several options. JS has been working with them in terms of Varna. They work negotiating for one site that didn’t work out. The committee will begin meeting on the first Wednesday of the month on September 7. Chip Ray and the county’s new housing planner, Eliot Benman, will sit in. Still in the process of getting a handle on all the issues. Hopes to summarize them in the coming months and give the board a sense of what the possibilities might be moving forward. CL Skaley reported that NYS DOT is in middle of resurfacing Route 366 and putting in new storm drains. Sidewalk construction on the south side of the road will take place in September. CITIZENS PRIVILEGE None Cl Sparling will not be present for the September 8 meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bambi L. Avery Town Clerk C&F: 2785410.2 Disclaimer: The primary objective of this document is to assist municipalities in drafting a Local Law to facilitate the creation of Community Choice Aggregation programs in New York State. The following information should not be a substitute for legal advice from an attorney familiar with local requirements. LOCAL LAW NO. [#]-2016 A LOCAL LAW TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION (ENERGY) PROGRAM IN THE [Town of Dryden] Be it enacted by the [Town Board] of the [Town of Dryden] as follows: The Code of the [ Town of Dryden] is hereby amended by adding a new Chapter [#], entitled “COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION (ENERGY) PROGRAM,” to read as follows: §1. Legislative Findings; Intent and Purpose; Authority. A. It is the intent of both the [Town of Dryden ] (“Municipality”) and the State of New York to reduce costs and provide cost certainty for the purpose of economic development, to promote deeper penetration of energy efficiency and renewable energy resources such as wind and solar, and wider deployment of distributed energy resources as well as to examine the retail energy markets and increase participation of and benefits for Eligible Consumers in those markets. Among the policies and models that may offer benefits in New York is Community Choice Aggregation (“CCA”), which allows local governments to determine the default supplier of electricity and natural gas on behalf of Eligible Consumers. B. The purpose of CCA is to allow participating local governments to procure energy supply service for Eligible Consumers, who will have the opportunity to opt out of the procurement, while maintaining transmission and distribution service from the existing Distribution Utility. This Chapter establishes a program (“CCA Program”) that will allow the Municipality and other local governments to work together through a shared purchasing model to put out for bid the total amount of natural gas and/or electricity being purchased by Eligible Consumers within the jurisdictional boundaries of participating municipalities. Eligible consumers will have the opportunity to have more control to lower their overall energy costs, to spur clean energy innovation and investment, to improve customer choice and value, and to protect the environment; thereby, fulfilling the purposes of this Chapter and fulfilling an important public purpose. C. The Municipality is authorized to implement this CCA Program pursuant to Section 10(1)(ii)(a)(12) of the New York Municipal Home Rule Law; and State of New York Public Service Commission Case No. 14-M-0224, Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to Enable Community Choice Aggregation Programs (issued April 21, 2016) as may be amended, including subsequent orders of the Public Service Commission (PSC) issued in connection with or related to Case No. 14-M-0224, to the extent that orders related to Case No. 14-M-0224 enable actions by the Municipality. D. This Chapter shall be known and may be cited as the COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION (ENERGY) PROGRAM Law of the Municipality. 2 §2. Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter, and unless otherwise expressly stated or unless the context otherwise requires, the terms in this Chapter shall have the meanings employed in the State of New York Public Service Commission’s Uniform Business Practices or, if not so defined there, as indicated below: A. AGGREGATED DATA shall mean aggregated and anonymized information including the number of consumers by service class, the aggregated peak demand (kW) (for electricity) by month for the past 12 months, by service class to the extent possible, and the aggregated energy (kWh) for electricity or volumetric consumption for gas by month for the past 12 months by service class. B. CCA ADMINISTRATOR shall mean [The Town of Dryden or third party CCA Administrator] duly authorized to put out for bid the total amount of electricity and/or natural gas being purchased by Participating Consumers. CCA Administrator is responsible for Program organization, administration, procurement, and communications, unless otherwise specified. C. CUSTOMER SPECIFIC DATA shall mean customer specific information, personal data and utility data for all consumers in the municipality eligible for opt-out treatment based on the terms of PSC CCA Order and the CCA program design including the customer of record’s name, mailing address, telephone number, account number, and primary language, if available, and any customer-specific alternate billing name, address, and phone number. D. DATA SECURITY AGREEMENT shall mean an agreement between the Distribution Utility and the Municipality that obligates each party to meet, collectively, (i) all national, state and local laws, regulations or other government standards relating to the protection of information that identifies or can be used to identify an individual Eligible Consumer with respect to the CCA Administrator or its representative’s processing of confidential utility information; (ii) the Distribution Utility’s internal requirements and procedures relating to the protection of information that identifies or can be used to identify individual Eligible Consumer with respect to the CCA Administrator or its representative’s processing of confidential utility information; and (iii) the PSC CCA Order and PSC rules, regulations and guidelines relating to confidential data. E. DEFAULT SERVICE shall mean supply service provided by the Distribution Utility to consumers who are not currently receiving service from an energy service company (ESCO). Eligible Consumers within the Municipality that receive Default Service, and have not opted out, will be enrolled in the Program as of the Effective Date. F. DISTRIBUTED ENERGY RESOURCES (DER) shall mean local renewable energy projects, shared renewables like community solar, energy efficiency, demand response, energy management, energy storage, microgrid projects and other innovative Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) initiatives that optimize system benefits, target and address load pockets/profile within the CCA’s zone, and reduce cost of service for Participating Consumers. 3 G. DISTRIBUTION UTILITY shall mean owner or controller of the means of distribution of the natural gas or electricity that is regulated by the Public Service Commission. H. ELIGIBLE CONSUMERS shall mean eligible customers of electricity and/or natural gas who receive Default Service from the Distribution Utility as of the Effective Date, or New Consumers that subsequently become eligible to participate in the Program, at one or more locations within the geographic boundaries of the Municipality, except those consumers who receive Default Service and have requested not to have their account information shared by the Distribution Utility. For the avoidance of doubt, all Eligible Consumers must reside or be otherwise located at one or more locations within the geographic boundaries of the Municipality, as such boundaries exist on the effective date of the ESA. I. ESCO or ENERGY SERVICES COMPANY mean an entity duly authorized to conduct business in the State of New York as an ESCO. J. NEW CONSUMERS shall mean consumers of electricity that become Eligible Consumers after the effective date of the ESA, including those that opt in or move into Municipality. K. PARTICIPATING CONSUMERS shall mean Eligible Consumers enrolled in the Program, either because they are consumers who receive Default Service from the Distribution Utility as of the Effective Date and have not opted out, or are New Consumers. L. PROGRAM ORGANIZER shall mean the group responsible for initiating and organizing the CCA. This group will typically secure buy-in from local governments and engage in preliminary outreach and education around CCA. The Program Organizer may be a non- profit organization, local government, or other third party. The Program Organizer and the CCA Administrator may be the same. M. PSC CCA ORDER shall mean the PSC’s Order Authorizing Framework for Community Choice Aggregation Opt-Out Program, issued on April 21, 2016 in Case 14-M-0224, “Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to Enable Community Choice Aggregation Programs.” N. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION or PSC shall mean New York State Public Service Commission. O. SUPPLIERS shall mean ESCOs that procure electric power and natural gas for Eligible Consumers in connection with this Chapter or, alternatively, generators of electricity and natural gas or other entities who procure and resell electricity or natural gas. §3. Establishment of a Community Choice Aggregation (Energy) Program. A. A Community Choice Aggregation (Energy) Program is hereby established by the Municipality, whereby the Municipality may implement a CCA Program to the full extent permitted by the PSC CCA Order, as set forth more fully herein. B. The Municipality may act as aggregator or broker for the sale of electric supply, gas supply, or both to Eligible Consumers and may enter into contracts with one or more Suppliers for energy supply and other services on behalf of Eligible Consumers. 4 C. The Municipality may enter into agreements and contracts with other municipalities, non- profits, consultants, and/or other third parties to i) develop and implement the CCA Program, ii) act as CCA Administrator, and/or iii) develop offers of opt-in distributed energy resources (DER) products and services to Participating Consumers, including opportunities to participate in local renewable energy projects, shared solar, energy efficiency, microgrids, storage, demand response, energy management, and other innovative Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) initiatives and objectives designed to optimize system benefits, target and address load pockets/profile within the CCA zone, and reduce costs for CCA customers. D. The operation and ownership of the utility service shall remain with the Distribution Utility. The Municipality’s participation in a CCA Program constitutes neither the purchase of a public utility system, nor the furnishing of utility service. The Municipality shall not take over any part of the electric or gas transmission or distribution system and will not furnish any type of utility service, but will instead negotiate with Suppliers on behalf of Participating Consumers. §4. Eligibility. A. All consumers within the Municipality, including residential and non-residential, regardless of size, shall be eligible to participate in the CCA Program. B. All consumers that are members of [NYSEG Electric Opt-Out Service Classes SC 1 Residential Service, and SC 6 General Service; and NYSEG Gas Opt-Out Service Classes SC 1 Residential Service, and SC 2 General Service. ] shall be enrolled on an opt-out basis except for consumers i) that are already taking service from an ESCO, ii) that have placed a freeze or block on their account, or iii) for whom inclusion in the CCA Program will interfere with a choice the customer has already made to take service pursuant to a special rate. Those consumers may be enrolled on an opt-in basis. Drafting Note: The Municipality may elect to apply opt-out treatment to a more limited class of consumers, to only allow certain classes of consumers to opt in, or both. C. New Consumers shall be enrolled on an opt-out basis. Drafting Note: Municipality may determine whether Eligible Consumers who move into a municipality which is participating in a CCA should be enrolled on an opt-in or opt-out basis. If a Municipality chooses to enroll these consumers on an opt-out basis, it must mail them an opt-out letter consistent with the discussion below providing an opt-out period of at least 30 days before the customer is enrolled. Pursuant to the PSC CCA Order, for those low-income customers whose energy bills are paid by a social services organization, the social services organization shall be the one to opt out on their behalf. §5. Opt-Out Process. A. An opt-out letter, printed on municipal letterhead, shall be mailed to Eligible Consumers at least 30 days prior to customer enrollment. The opt-out letter shall include information on the CCA Program and the contract signed with the selected ESCO including specific 5 details on rates, services, contract term, cancellation fee, and methods for opting-out of the CCA Program. The letter shall explain that consumers that do not opt-out will be enrolled in ESCO service under the contract terms and that information on those consumers, including energy usage data and APP status, will be provided to the ESCO. B. All consumers shall have the option to opt-out of the CCA Program at any time without penalty. Drafting note: According to the PSC CCA Order, CCA customers must be permitted to cancel CCA service any time before the end of the third billing cycle of the new contract period without penalty or other charges. Therefore, the Municipality may authorize a fee for cancelation of service after the third billing cycle. C. Termination fees shall not be charged to consumers that cancel their CCA service as a result of moving out of the premises served. §6. Customer Service. Participating Consumers shall be provided customer service including a toll-free telephone number available during normal business hours (9:00 A.M.- 5:00 P.M. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday) to resolve concerns, answer questions, and transact business with respect to the service received from the Supplier. §7. Data Protection Requirements. A. The Municipality may request Aggregated Data and Customer Specific Data from the Distribution Utility provided, however, that the request for Customer Specific Data is limited to only those Eligible Consumers who did not opt-out once the initial opt-out period has closed. B. Customer Specific Data shall be protected in a manner compliant with, collectively, (i) all national, state and local laws, regulations or other government standards relating to the protection of information that identifies or can be used to identify an individual that apply with respect to the Municipality or its representative’s processing of confidential utility information; (ii) the utility’s internal requirements and procedures relating to the protection of information that identifies or can be used to identify an individual that apply with respect to the Municipality or its representative’s processing of confidential utility information; and (iii) the PSC CCA Order and PSC rules, regulations and guidelines relating to confidential data. C. The Municipality must enter into a Data Security Agreement with the Distribution Utility for the purpose of protecting customer data. §8. CCA Advisory Group. A. A CCA Advisory Group is hereby established to develop and review CCA related proposals, act as the Municipality’s agent in awarding said proposals, and forward information regarding such awards to the Town of Dryden Board for ratification. 6 B. Membership to the CCA Advisory Group shall include Loren Sparling, Dryden Town Councilperson; John Kiefer, Dryden Planning Board Chairperson; Alice Green, Dryden Climate Smart Coordinator; and Marie McRae, Dryden Climate Smart Task Force member. §9. Administration Fee. The Municipality may collect, or cause to be collected, funds from customer payments to pay for administrative costs associated with running the CCA program. §10. Reporting. A. Annual reports shall be filed with the Town Board of the Municipality by March 31 of each year and cover the previous calendar year. B. Annual reports shall include, at a minimum: number of consumers served; number of consumers cancelling during the year; number of complaints received; commodity prices paid; value-added services provided during the year (e.g. installation of DER or other clean energy services); and administrative costs collected. The first report shall also include the number of consumers who opted-out in response to the initial opt-out letter or letters. C. If a CCA supply contract will expire less than one year following the filing of the annual report, the report must identify current plans for soliciting a new contract, negotiating an extension, or ending the CCA program. §11. Effective Date. This Local Law shall be effective immediately upon passage. §12. Severability. The invalidity or unenforceability of any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, provision, or phrase of the aforementioned sections, as declared by the valid judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, provision, or phrase, which shall remain in full force and effect.