[00:00:01]
UH, TO OUR TOWN, UH, BOARD MEETING.UH, TODAY IS, UH, MAY, UH, 26TH.
AND, UH, AND IT'S A LITTLE AFTER FIVE 30.
UM, AND THE FIRST, UM, ISSUE IS, UH, THE SOCIAL MEDIA, UH, POLICY MODERATOR.
I, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE, UH, APPOINT, UH, TOWN ATTORNEY JOE DANKO TO THAT POSITION AT LEAST, UM, UNTIL WE FURTHER EXPLORE OUR OPTIONS.
WE, WE SHOULD HAVE SOMEONE MONITOR FOR THE TIME BEING AND WE HATE TO ADD ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES ONTO THE TOWN ATTORNEY AND THE DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY.
UM, IT REALLY, IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
UH, IT'S ALWAYS GONNA GO BACK TO THE TOWN ATTORNEYS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WHAT THE OPINION IS IS LEGAL OR NOT LEGAL ANYWAY, SO IT MAKES SENSE.
HAS HE ACCEPTED THAT ROLE? HE SAID HE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO IT.
HATE TO DO IT WHILE HE'S NOT HERE.
YOU WANNA DO IT NEXT WEEK? I GUESS.
UM, NEXT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT WE'LL DO IT FORMALLY, UH, FRANK, RELATING TO A HUNDRED EAST DALE AVENUE.
UM, FRANK, UH, MODO SENT THE BOARD, UM, AN EMAIL.
IT SAYS, DPW CONTINUES TO ACTIVELY EVALUATE AND PURSUE THE FEASIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVE REPAIR APPROACHES TO THE SEWER EMERGENCY AT A HUNDRED EAST TAR AVENUE.
AS DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD LAST WEEK, DPW ALSO WANTS TO MANAGE RESIDENT EXPECTATIONS.
RECENT HIGH RESOLUTION SEWER INSPECTIONS HAVE PROVIDED IMPORTANT NEW INFORMATION REGARDING THE DAMAGE, UM, SEWER LINE AND SURROUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE.
WELL, THESE ONE SECOND FINDINGS MAY, UH, SUPPORT REPAIR IN PLACE.
THERE ARE ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT, UH, REQUIRE FURTHER REVIEW AND EVALUATION BEFORE A FINAL REPAIR METHOD CAN BE DETERMINED.
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE WATER DEPARTMENT ENGINEERS, EMERGENCY CONTRACTORS, UTILITY COMPANIES, AND SEEKING PILE SPECIALISTS TO FURTHER EVALUATE ACCESS STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS AND OVERALL PROJECT FEASIBILITY.
DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDING UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE, ADDITIONAL IN INVESTIGATION REMAINS NECESSARY.
DPW IS AGGRESSIVELY PURSUING WALL OPTIONS TO ENSURE THE SAFEST, MOST COST EFFECTIVE AND TECHNICALLY A FEASIBLE SOLUTION, UM, IS SELECTED.
DPW WILL, UH, CONTINUE TO KEEP THE TOWN BOARD INFORMED AS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, ARE FINALIZED.
SO I THINK AT THE LAST MEETING, UH, WE S SAID THAT FRANK WOULD, UM, DO A, A SECOND, UM, PRESENTATION, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH HIS TEAM, UH, NEXT WEEK.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD, UM, HAVE THAT AS A, A DISCUSSION BECAUSE RESIDENTS REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S ON LINE.
WASN'T THAT YOUR REQUEST? BUT IT WAS REALLY WHEN HE HAS THE INFORMATION AND HE WILL GET THE INFORMATION AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE AND LET US KNOW WHEN HE CAN MAKE THE REPORT.
I THINK ANYONE WHO IS FOLLOWING THE AGENDA, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO BE RESPECTFUL FOR THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, THOSE WHO ARE FOLLOWING THE AGENDA, I THINK IT APPEARS WE HAVE WENT OFF TRACK.
SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW ON THE TOPIC IS NOT ON THE AGENDA, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW IS A HUNDRED EAST HARTSDALE AND AN UPDATE THAT THE COMMISSIONER MODO PROVIDED TO THE TOWN SUPERVISOR AND TO THE TOWN BOARD.
UM, BUT ALSO WANNA NOTE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER MODO WAS HERE LAST WEEK, DID GIVE A PRESENTATION ONCE HE HAD MORE OF, ONCE HE HAD MORE OF AN UPDATE, HE WAS GONNA COME BACK AND PRESENT, UM, TO EVERYONE, UM, ON THE WORK SESSION.
SO MORE TO COME, UH, THERE ARE MORE CONVERSATIONS BEING HAD, BUT HE WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE GAVE A DEFINITIVE, UM, UH, RESPONSE OR UPDATE WHEN, WHEN IT'S AVAILABLE.
I JUST WANNA KNOW IF, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WERE, YOU KNOW, CALLING ME AND THEY WANTED TO KNOW, UM, IF IT STILL SEEMS LIKELY THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO DO THE LESS EXPENSIVE, UM, YOU KNOW, OPTION.
I MEAN, IS THERE A CHANCE THAT, YOU KNOW, IS MR. MODO, UM, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER, IS HE AVAILABLE, YOU KNOW, NOW? OR COULD WE GET HIM ON THE PHONE? NO, I JUST, I JUST, I THINK IT'S, I THINK JUST AS WE, JUST DETAILS DESCRIBED, I THINK IT'S BEST.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD PUT OUT INFORMATION IF WE DON'T HAVE FULL INFORMATION TO GIVE OUT.
AND THAT'S WHAT FRUSTRATES, UM, THE RESIDENTS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, INFORMATION DOES CHANGE.
SO UNTIL WE HAVE A CONCRETE INFORMATION AND HE'S WILLING AND HE CAN COME IN AND GIVE US THAT REPORT, HE ALREADY STATED LAST WEEK THAT HE WOULD, SO WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHAT INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE IS CORRECT AND TRUE TO FORM.
HE ALSO SAID HE WANTED TO MANAGE EXPECTATIONS, AND THAT'S WHY HE SAID THAT HE NEEDED TO THE END OF THE WEEK TO DETERMINE, UM, SOME MORE ISSUES THAT, YOU KNOW, COULD COMPROMISE THIS.
YOU PUT OUT A GB LIST ANNOUNCEMENTS SAYING, HEY, WE MAY HAVE A BETTER WAY OF DOING THAT.
THAT WASN'T THE PURPOSE OF MANAGING EXPECTATIONS.
SO RIGHT NOW, BASED ON, UH, LAST WEEK,
[00:05:01]
UH, THERE ARE COMPLICATIONS AND THEY'RE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THEM, BUT I DON'T WANT TO KEEP RAISING EXPECTATIONS BECAUSE A YEAR AGO YOU SAID THIS WAS GONNA BE DONE IN APRIL OF 2025.WE NEED TO GET INFORMATION OUT THAT'S ACCURATE.
AND WHEN HE KNOWS THIS IS A GO, HE WILL TELL ALL OF US.
UM, SHALL WE GET BACK TO THE AGENDA? WELL, SO REGARDING THE AGENDA, I WAS JUST SAYING MAYBE WE CAN HAVE THIS IN THE RULES DISCUSSION.
IF THERE'S AN ITEM THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED, MAYBE WE WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE FORMAL AGENDA AS WE HAVE IT, AND THEN IF THERE'S ANOTHER ITEM, A NEW BUSINESS ITEM, WHATEVER.
SO, I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOU.
I DID WANT TO, YOU KNOW, POINT OUT THE RULES THAT YOU ALL AGREED TO AND, YOU KNOW, FOLLOWING AGENDA REVIEW IS IMPORTANT.
IT'S BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC 'CAUSE THESE BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC 'CAUSE THEY SEE WHAT'S POSTED AND THEY CAN FOLLOW ALONG MM-HMM
AND I DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY THAT A RECITATION OF A LETTER THAT WAS RECEIVED, UM, IS GONNA BE BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC.
FIRST OF ALL, I'M THE TOWN SUPERVISOR AND I, AND I HEARD WHAT HAPPENED, UH, YOU KNOW, LAST WEEK MR. BARBIDO SAID THAT HE WOULD PRESENT THE COMMUNITY WITH, UM, WITH AN UPDATE IN WRITING.
AND, UH, WE ALSO SAID THAT THERE'D BE A FOLLOW UP MEETING.
SO IT'S NOT YOUR PLACE TO TELL ME IF I COULD TALK OR NOT.
UM, BUT NEXT, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M GONNA, I DON'T THINK SO.
I, I'M GONNA JUST SAY, I'M GONNA ASK TOWN SUPERVISOR EXPRESS MYSELF AS I ALWAYS DO, AND NOBODY'S GONNA TELL ME NOT TO.
SO THE NEXT ITEM, THE, YOU GONNA FOLLOW THE RULES, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, NEXT ITEM, YOU ALSO HAVE TO BE FACTUALLY CORRECT.
WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT MR. BUR COMMISSIONER MARDO SAID YOU WANTED HIM TO APPEAR TODAY.
HE SAID HE NEEDED TIME TO GO THROUGH THE, YOU KNOW, THE DATA, WHAT'S COMING IN.
THERE'S ALSO AN ANALYSIS, AND HE DOESN'T WANT TO RAISE PEOPLE'S EXPECTATION PREMATURELY YET.
YOU PUT OUT A GB LIST SAYING, HEY, THERE MIGHT BE A BETTER WAY, THERE MIGHT BE A BETTER WAY.
BUT THAT CONCLUSION HAS NOT BEEN REACHED YET TO SAY EXACT, EXACT WORDS THAT HE GAVE US.
HE GAVE, I, I TOOK IT WORD FOR WORD FROM, UH, UH, THE WRITTEN LETTER THAT, UH, EMAIL THAT HE SENT TO EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD.
I DIDN'T, UM, I DIDN'T, UM, AND NEVER IT SAYS HE WAS GONNA APPEAR TODAY.
NO, THE LIST, NO, WHEN PUT IT ON THE GB LIST.
I TOOK A WORD FOR WORD FROM THE PRESENTATION THAT HE, UM, HE THAT FROM THE EMAIL THAT HE SENT TO THE TOWN BOARD, JUST LIKE TODAY, I, I'M USING, UM, EVERY, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T, UM, CHANGED THE WORDING.
I READ HIS LETTER AND, UH, WHEN I POSTED IT ON THE WEBSITE LAST WEEK, I BASICALLY POSTED WHAT, WHAT I READ.
BUT YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE MADE THE POINT.
SO THE NEXT ITEM IS, UH, THE FOIL.
I, I, I HAVE TO ADDRESS SOMETHING, PLEASE.
YOU INSULTED OUR DEPUTY ATTORNEY AND I, IT WAS TOTALLY UNCALLED FOR.
YOU THINK? I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU TOLD THAT.
YOU INSULTED HER, AND I THINK YOU SHOULD APOLOGIZE TO HER.
UH, FOUR OH OH, CLEARLY 3 0 3.
THIS IS AN, SHE'S AN EMPLOYEE, SO I DON'T, YEAH, I GAVE, UH, I GAVE THE TOWN ATTORNEY, UM, THE INFORMATION THAT, UM, WAS REQUESTED.
SO BASICALLY, UM, SO DID YOU TURN OVER YOUR PHONE? I, I, I GAVE HIM THE INFORMATION.
OH, BY THE WAY, DID YOU, UH, RESPOND TO, UH, JUDITH BE'S, UH, REQUEST FOR THE EXACT SAME INFORMATION? UM, UH, SHE WANTED ALL THE EMAILS, UM, UM, EXACTLY WHAT SHE TOOK A WORD FOR WORD.
SO WHATEVER REGULATIONS ARE, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS A FOIL APPEAL.
THIS IS SERIOUS BECAUSE THE LAST TIME SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENED, AND JUDITH, BE, PLEASE DON'T TALK ME ASKING FOR SUZANNE BERG.
DON'T EMAILS FROM YOU AND, UH, TELL ME WHEN YOU'RE, EVERYTHING SUZANNE, TRY TO CONTROL YOURSELF, BUT TELL ME WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED.
YOU KNOW WHAT I, I GAVE, WE HAVE A FO I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR, BECAUSE IF WE GET FINED, LIKE WE WERE IN THE PAST, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T PROPERLY HANDLE A FOIL APPEAL, $37,000 OF TAXPAYER MONEY, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN.
THIS FOR APPEAL HAS BEEN ON THE AGENDA WEEK AFTER WEEK AFTER WEEK, AFTER WEEK.
I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU'RE, YOU'RE SMILING ABOUT THAT.
BECAUSE YOU DOING THE SAME THING WEEK AFTER WEEK.
THOSE, UH, PAUL, COULD YOU CONTROL YOURSELF? WE'RE NOT GONNA SPEAK OVER ITSELF YOURSELF.
WE'RE NOT GONNA SPEAK OVER ITSELF.
WHAT IS THIS KINDERGARTEN
WHAT IS THIS SCHOOL? UH, YOU ARE VIOLATING THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW AND SOME POINT, AND I THINK WE'RE AT IT BECAUSE WE SEE YOUR, YOUR ATTITUDE.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WRITE A REPORT FROM THE BOARD STATING THAT YOU REFUSED TO DO WHAT WAS SAID
[00:10:01]
IN THAT.DID YOU TURN OVER THAT? JOE DENKO SAT HERE.
OUR TOWN ATTORNEY SAT HERE LAST TIME WHEN THIS WAS ON THE AGENDA.
AND THIS IS GOING ON FOR OVER A MONTH, MAYBE MORE.
AND WHAT THE PERSON WHO FILED THAT WANTED TO FIND OUT IS, DO YOU HAVE TOWN RELATED MESSAGES ON YOUR PHONE? THAT'S ALL HE WAS ASKING.
AND YOU SAID NO, BUT HE DIDN'T ACCEPT THAT HE WANTED THE IT OR SOMEBODY TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THAT.
I BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU WOULD, AND NOW WE'RE HERE ANOTHER TWO WEEKS LATER AND YOU'RE SAYING, I I, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT? I MEAN, WE JUST CAN'T KEEP PLAYING WITH THIS.
SO THE STATUS UPDATE I HAVE AS OF THE LAST SEVERAL EMAILS WAS THAT YOU WERE REQUEST, MR. SUPERVISOR WAS REQUESTING, UM, PHONE NUMBERS TO SEARCH AS YOU DIDN'T KNOW, HAVE THEM LABELED.
JUST LET ME FINISH ONE SECOND.
TALKING ONE AT A TIME IS BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC.
UM, SO THE LAST EMAILS I HAVE WAS THAT A COUPLE PHONE NUMBERS WERE PROVIDED TO YOU, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY FOLLOW UP INDICATING WHETHER YOU SEARCHED FOR THOSE NUMBERS OR NOT.
AND I, I, AND I RESPONDED, WELL, I DON'T HAVE AN EMAIL.
WELL, I, I GAVE IT TO JOE DANKO WHO'S ON VACATION.
UM, SO YOU DIDN'T SEND IT TO OUR DEPUTY WHILE HE'S ON VACATION? I GAVE IT TO JOE DANKO.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, BASICALLY, SO MAYBE YOU FORWARD IT OVER TO, BASICALLY WE JUST FORWARD TO THE LEAK TO, TO AMANDA.
SO I'LL GET, I'LL GET IT TO YOU TOMORROW SO WE CAN, YOU CAN FORWARD IT.
I THINK I, I MIGHT HAVE, I'M NOT SURE, BUT I, SO WHAT WAS THE RESULT? WHAT WAS THE RESULTS OF YOUR SEARCH? THERE WAS NOT, THERE WAS NOTHING.
AND I, ANOTHER THING THAT I ALSO DID IS I EMAILED EVERYBODY WHO, UM, WAS ON, YOU KNOW, WHO I EMAILED EVERYBODY AND I ASKED THEM TO SEARCH THEIR OWN RECORDS TO MAKE SURE THAT I DIDN'T MISS ANYTHING.
SO THAT EMAIL SHOULD BE PART OF RECORD WHAT YOU'RE RELEASING RECORD.
AND YOU KNOW, I, THAT'S WHY YOU DIDN'T WANT SAY THAT.
AND I'M SURE THAT YOU'RE GONNA DO THE SAME THING WITH JUDITH IL'S REQUESTS, BECAUSE BASICALLY SHE'S ASKING FOR YOUR PHONES.
WELL, A PHONE, UH, PHONE RECORDS.
AND SHE WANTS THE SAME ACCESS BECAUSE SHE'S MADE A REQUEST FOR, UM, INFORMATION.
ALL THE EMAILS YOU SENT TO MY OPPONENT TO, UM, TO SUSAN.
WELL, RESPECTFULLY, MR. SUPERVISOR, I'M, I'M JUST POINTING OUT THE RULES AS DEPARTMENT TO STEVE.
SO I'M SURE THAT YOU'RE GONNA FOLLOW THE SAME RULES THAT, THAT YOU'RE ASKING ME TO.
AND I'M JUST TELLING YOU, BECAUSE ARE YOU DONE, WE HAVE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST THAT HAS TO BE COMPLIED WITH, JUST LIKE YOU'RE ASKING ME TO COMPLY WITH IT.
AND IF I COMPLI WITH IT THE WAY YOU ARE COMPLYING WITH THIS, WE WOULD BE FINE BY THE COURT.
YOU KNOW WHAT? WELL, EVERYTHING YOU, SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, SO RIGHT NOW YOU'RE SAYING THAT WITH YOUR PERSONAL PHONES, YOUR, YOU DID A SEARCH, WHICH IS NOT GONNA BE ACCEPTABLE.
WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY TWO WEEKS AGO? IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR SOMEBODY.
NO, I'M, I'M FOR OUR IT NOT US IT PERSON TO JUST TO CHECK YOUR PHONE.
TO CHECK YOUR PHONE TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT WHAT YOU SAID IS TRUE.
WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE AN ARGUMENT RIGHT NOW.
SO LET'S GO ONTO AGENDA REVIEW.
NO, I'M NOT GONNA, I'M, I'M RESPONDING TO YOU.
WE NEED TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE.
SO, UM, YOU JUST STATED THAT ALTHOUGH I DON'T HAVE THE EMAIL IN FRONT OF ME FROM YOU THAT YOU HAD FORWARDED TO JOE DANKO.
UM, YOU JUST STATED THAT YOU DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING REGARDING THOSE PHONE NUMBERS.
SO AN AFFIDAVIT WAS SUBMITTED.
I DID, I SIGNED AN AFFIDAVIT AND I GAVE IT TO JOE.
I BELIEVE THE AFFIDAVIT WAS REGARDING YOUR EMAILS.
NO, I, I GAVE JOE AN AFFIDAVIT.
WHY, WHY DON'T WE WAIT NEW AFFIDAVIT? LET ASK A QUESTION.
HOW MANY AFFIDAVITS, HOW MANY AFFIDAVITS DID YOU SIGN? I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO, LET ME SAY.
SO THEY WERE AN AFFIDAVIT, THEY WERE AFFIRMATIONS.
I JUST, I'M NOT GONNA RIGHT NOW.
I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO AN ARGUMENT.
SO, SO BASICALLY, UH, ALL I'M ASKING IS JOE DANKO IS GONNA BE BACK NEXT WEEK.
LET'S DISCUSS IT NEXT WEEK WHEN JOE'S, JOE'S HERE.
AND I WILL SPEAK TO JOE WHEN HE COMES BACK AND I'LL MAKE SURE THAT I'M, I'M IN COMPLIANCE AND THAT ALL THE RULES THAT THE BOARD WANTS OF ME WILL APPLY TO EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SAME FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST, UH, BEING MADE, UH, FOR THE, I THINK JUDITH'S WORDING WAS EXACTLY THE SAME AS, UM, AS, UM, UH, YOU, UH, MR. LAFAYETTE'S, YOU KNOW, WORDING.
SHE, SHE TOOK IT WORD FOR WORD AND YOU ASKED FOR EXTRA TIME BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE THE INFORMATION, WHICH IS FINE.
BUT THE THING IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE THING IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A POLICY AND WE'LL FIND OUT, UH, PERSONAL PHONES SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD SHOULD TURN OVER THEIR PERSONAL PHONES, UM, TO OUR, UM, UM, WHAT WAS HIS TOWN PHONE? I'M SORRY, I'M NOT FOLLOWING DEPARTMENT.
HOW THIS IS STILL RELATABLE TO THE AGENDA ITEM.
I, I JUST WANT ONE, ONE SIMPLE QUESTION.
DID YOU DO, YOU'RE TRYING TO SET A FIGHT? OKAY.
[00:15:01]
NO RESPONSE.DID YOU DO ONE AFFIRMATION OR DID YOU DO TWO? THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.
BUT IF YOU DID ONE AFFIRMATION IT ON AN ATTORNEY.
SO YOU, YOU DON'T REMEMBER THE, THE, YOU DON'T REMEMBER IF YOU DID ONE AFFIRMATION OR TWO AFFIRMATIONS? WHAT? THE TOWN ATTORNEY HAS IT.
I'M NOT GETTING INTO A DEBATE.
WE'RE NOT DOING, ARE WE DOING, UM, NO, WE, THAT'S REALLY NOT WHAT'S NEXT ON THE AGENDA.
WE, WE HAVE THE RULES AND PROCEDURES, WHICH IS REALLY JUST SEPARATE, A SEPARATE ITEM, NOT PART OF AGENDA REVIEW, BECAUSE THERE'S AGENDA REVIEW AND, UH, OUR DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY PRINTED IT OUT AND REDLINED THE AREA WHERE WE WANT TO, UM, BOLSTER OUR RULES TO MAKE OUR MEETINGS, UH, MORE CIVIL.
I DIDN'T GET A COPY GONE TO ONE OF THE RED LINE.
DOES IT SAY, I KNOW, I DON'T, THE, DOES IT SAY ANYWHERE IN HERE THAT YOU CAN'T TALK OVER SOMEBODY ELSE? IT DOES.
UH, WELL, THAT I THOUGHT THAT WAS IN OUR EXISTING RULES.
I THINK THAT IS IN OUR EXISTING RULES.
DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE, DID YOU FIND IT? AMANDA GAVE ME A COPY.
THERE'S PAGE THREE HAS THE FIRST RED LINE, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK, RIGHT? REGARDS TO THE FIVE MINUTE, THE PERIOD FOR MM-HMM
SO IN FACT, WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING OUR RESIDENTS CONSTITUENTS TO ADHERE TO RULES.
AND WE SHOULD ALSO ADHERE TO RULES OURSELVES.
OF, OF CIVILITY AND OF, UM, RESPECT FOR EVERYONE'S TIME IS WHAT IT WAS.
I TALKING TO MIKE, BECAUSE YOU'RE VERY LOW.
'CAUSE I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.
I SAID, OH NO, IT'S, IT'S ON IT YOU JUST FACING.
I SAID IN EFFECT, WE ASK OUR RESIDENTS, OUR CONSTITUENTS TO ADHERE TO CERTAIN TIME CONSTRAINTS AND RULES AND RIGHTS AND CIVILITY.
AND THIS INSTITUTES SIMILAR KIND OF CIVILITY AND RULE FOR EACH OF US.
SO IN J WHAT IF SOMEBODY GETS UP AND SAYS, YOU KNOW, BLANK DEPARTMENT IS DOING A HORRIBLE JOB AND THEY REALLY NEED TO IMPROVE ACCORDING TO THIS, WE CAN'T RESPOND.
WHAT, WHAT DO, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? IN J IN J IT SAYS TOWN BOARD MEMBERS.
SO PRIME MINISTER
GENERALLY WE NEED SOMETHING THAT DEALS WITH, YOU KNOW, A REBUTTAL AS WELL FUNCTION, THE FUNCTIONING OF THE TOWN.
I, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT BECAUSE WHAT YOU MAY THINK IS, UH, UH, WORTHY OF RESPONSE.
UH, I MAY DISAGREE WITH OR VICE VERSA.
AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD SAY, UM, I THINK, UH, JOY MENTIONED A FEW DAYS AGO, A WEEK OR TWO, A FEW WEEKS AGO, UM, THAT EVERY, I SHOULD BE THE LAST ONE TO RESPOND.
UM, AND EVERYBODY, UH, ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS, UM, WOULD GO FIRST AND THEY COULD RESPOND AFTER EVERYBODY FINISHES SPEAKING DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
I COULD LIVE WITH THAT IF THE BOARD WANTS THAT.
BUT, BUT LET'S GO TO NUMBER FIVE.
THAT, UH, WHICH IS NOT REDLINED, BUT NEEDS TO BE EMPHASIZED.
SUPERVISORS SHALL PRESIDE AT ALL MEETINGS.
THE TOWN SUPERVISOR SHALL, SHALL PRESIDE AT ALL MEETINGS OF THE BOARD, SERVE AS CHAIR AND PRESERVE ORDER AND DECORUM.
NO PERSONAL ATTACKS ON ANY INDIVIDUAL WHICH SHALL BE PERMITTED.
I THINK THOSE RULES HAVE ALREADY BEEN BROKEN.
UH, NO ONE SHALL BE PERMITTED TO ENGAGE IN BEHAVIOR, WHICH DISRUPTS THE FORMALITY OF A BOARD MEETING, WHICH IS WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING.
UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHALL ONLY SPEAK WHEN, WHEN RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR.
THIS IS AT THE, UM, WELL, YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AT THE TOWN BOARD.
SO THAT'S JUST DONE BY SIGNUP.
UM, THE CHAIR'S INACTION OR DENIAL OF A PERSON REQUESTING AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK OR ALLOWANCE OF A SPEAKER TO DEVIATE FROM THIS RULE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO APPEAL BY THE BOARD.
SO, IN OTHER WORDS, MR. YOUR SUPERVISOR, YOU DON'T GET TO MAKE ALL, ALL THE RULES AND CHANGE THEM AT EACH MEETING AND DECIDE WHAT YOU KNOW, IT, WE WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING WHAT WE'VE ALREADY SET FORTH AS BEING OUR RULE.
SO THIS IS IN ADDITION TO THE, THE RED LINE PARTS.
AND WE HAD SUGGESTED THAT JOE DANKO BE THE ONE THAT HANDLES THE, UH, PRESERVING ORDER IN DECOR.
AND YOU SAID, NO, I'M THE SUPERVISOR.
I'M GOING IT CHAIR THE MEETING.
[00:20:01]
IT DEPENDS WHAT YOU WANT.SO I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE PARLIAMENTARIAN, SO FORGIVE ME IF I OVER STEPPED.
BUT THAT'S THE WHOLE PROPER WAY TO DO THINGS THOUGH.
TO HAVE THE PARLIAMENTARIAN OVER IT.
SO WHY WOULD YOU DIDN'T OVERSTEP? WELL, NO, NO, NOT AT ALL.
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE WORK SESSIONS AND THE TOWN BOARD MEETINGS.
I THINK OUR MEETINGS ARE OVER ACROSS THE BOARD.
IT'S CLEAR THAT THAT'S WHAT WE NEED IN PLACE.
WELL THEN WE NEED TO CHANGE NUMBER FIVE.
BUT JUST TO GET BACK TO, AND, AND THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES THAT, UM, RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED BEYOND THEIR TIMEFRAME AND AS TO SPEAK.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO, WHICH HE HAS DONE.
SO WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT AS WELL.
SO THERE'S SOME SAMPLE LANGUAGE IN SECTION O MM-HMM
UNDER 12 ABOUT, UH, REBUTTAL PERIOD.
AS WELL AS, UM, CARVE OUT FOR ADDITIONAL TIME AS WARRANTED, AS ADDRESSED BY MOTION OF THE BOARD.
DO YOU WANT TO INCLUDE THAT ELSEWHERE? SO I THINK THAT WOULD ADDRESS WHAT, UM, FRANCIS WAS MENTIONING.
WELL, WE DON'T HAVE, THERE'S NO, THERE ARE NO OTHER CHANGES THAT WERE SUGGESTED, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO AMEND NUMBER FIVE OR IF WE ARE AMENDING NUMBER FIVE, BECAUSE YOU DID SAY THAT YOU WOULD DO THAT WHEN WE FIRST DID THESE RULES, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING.
SO IF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO GIVE UP THAT ROLE AND HAVE THE PARLIAMENTARIAN DO THAT, THAT'S FINE.
WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE SOMEONE MAINTAIN ORDER IN DECORUM.
BECAUSE BASICALLY IT DOESN'T MATTER.
I BASICALLY FEEL THAT PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO SPEAK AND EXPRESS THEMSELVES AT BOARD MEETINGS.
I, I, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU CONSIDER, YOU MAY CONSIDER SOMETHING AN APPROPRIATE FOR, FOR, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT RESIDENTS, IF THEY WANT TO BE CRITICAL OF THE BOARD, I THINK THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT CONTENT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ORDER ORDERLINESS OF THE MEETING.
WELL, THIS IS THE TOWN BOARD THAT'S CREATING THE PROBLEMS MORE THAN THE PUBLIC.
NO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE RESPONSE.
THE BOARD HAS BEEN DOING THE BICKERING, NOT THE, NOT THE PUBLIC WITH YOU BLAME IT.
YOU KNOW WHAT THE THING IS? UH, I COULD RULE EVERYBODY OUT OF ORDER OR BECAUSE I ON THE BOARD, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN, UH, BECAUSE YOU'RE THE SUPERVISOR, BECAUSE YOU'VE BASICALLY BEEN INSULTING, UH, UH, TRYING TO HUMILIATE, MAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS.
AND I THINK THE PUBLIC DOESN'T LIKE IT.
WHAT, WHAT EXAMPLES ARE THERE? YOU KNOW WHAT, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS WATCH ANY BOARD MEETING, BUT I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO A FIGHT.
YOU KNOW, THE THING IS, ALL I'M SAYING CAN'T THROW DOWN THE GET PROCESS IN PLACE.
ALL I'M SAYING IS I'M NOT GONNA PICK A FIGHT.
THE BOARD'S ACTING MUCH WORSE THAN ANY OF THE CITIZENS.
I I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE TO CHANGE THE RULES THEN, THEN LET'S VOTE TO CHANGE THE RULES.
TRYING TO IMPLEMENT PARLIAMENTARIAN IS GOING TO RUN THE MEETING.
SO, NUMBER FIVE, BEGINNING OF NUMBER FIVE CHANGED TO PARLIAMENTARY.
AND WE MUST ALL AGREE TO RESPECT THAT.
AND RESPECT THE PARLIAMENTARIAN.
UM, I'M GONNA HAVE TO TAKE SOME TIME TO UPDATE THIS CHAT, LIKE THIS SECTION.
THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS, AMANDA.
AND THE PARLIAMENTARIAN CAN BE OVERRULED.
HOW, HOW DOES THAT WORK? UM, I'M NOT SO SURE.
WELL,
ARE WE TO THE AGENDA YET? OKAY, SO I HAVE A QUESTION.
[00:25:01]
RECOGNIZING MAY, 2026 AT A LS AWARENESS MONTH.WHY ONLY MAY, 2026? WHY NOT IT JUST BE MAY? NO, NO.
SO ARE WE UNDERSTAND? SO FOR FUTURE MAYS, SO WE COULD DO IT THIS WAY.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WE COULD SAY PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MAY AS A LS AWARENESS, AWARENESS MONTH 2026.
SO THAT WE KNOW IT'S FOR THIS.
WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT EVERY YEAR.
NO, WE DO, BUT WE'RE JUST SAYING THIS IS THIS YEAR'S AWARENESS, UH, YOU KNOW, PROCLAMATION, JUST TO DATE IT THAT WAY.
WELL, BUT HOW ABOUT WE'RE SAYING JESS, THAT WE'RE MAKING A STATEMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HONOR IT EVERY MAY.
ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU MEANT? YEAH.
I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE 2020.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT'S COME UP.
BUT I MEAN, IF WE DO A PROCLAMATION, BUT I'M JUST SAYING WE MAKE A STAND IN EVERY MAY WE RECOGNIZE A LS OH, WE CAN.
BUT, UH, PAUL HAD CONTACTED SOMEONE ABOUT THIS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS CAME UP.
AND UH, SO PAUL, WHAT, WHAT WAS THIS MOSQUITO, WHAT WAS THE HISTORY? SO IT SOMETIMES, UH, ORGANIZATION JUST, CAN I ASK MY QUESTION? SORRY.
SO WHEN YOU SPOKE TO THE PERSON, WERE THEY TRYING TO DO THIS GOING FORWARD? OR WERE THEY JUST ONLY WANTING TO RECOGNIZE 2026? I THINK THEY GAVE US A DRAFT, UH, PROCLAMATION.
SO WHAT, WHO WAS THE WE, WHO WAS THE, WHO GAVE WHO? I SOMETIMES PEOPLE, UH, WILL WRITE TO ME AND ASK FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, ASK THE PRO PROCLAMATION.
THERE'S USUALLY A FROM AN ORGANIZATION OR JUST ON THE EMAIL ITSELF? THERE'S A FROM YEAH, BUT I'LL LOOK FOR IT.
SO WE NEED MORE CLARIFICATION.
SO THEN, SO GOING FORWARD, SO THEN, 'CAUSE THEN I'M GONNA EXPAND THIS EVEN MORE.
'CAUSE THEN WE HAVE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE MONTH, THEN WE HAVE, UM, ALL OF ALL, ALL THE MONTHS, ALL OF THE EVENTS.
SO I THINK AT SOME POINT MAYBE THAT GREENBERG RECOGNIZES ALL OF THE DIFFERENT MONTHS AND MAYBE WE GOT THAT GOING FORWARD.
THIS, THIS PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZES IT FOR 2026.
SO, BUT THEN SO IS THIS, I'M SORRY.
SO IS IT NOT GONNA BE A LS WE DON'T KNOW YET.
NOT IN GENERAL IS MAY DESIGNATED AS A LS MONTH.
I'M SURE THAT THAT IS A NATIONAL AWARENESS MONTH.
JUST LIKE OCTOBER IS THE NATIONAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH, YOU KNOW.
IT WOULD BE A LOT TO KEEP UP WITH.
NO, THAT'S WHY I JUST AND THERE'LL BE MULTIPLE YES.
WE DIDN'T DO THEM LAST TIME, ARE WE? WELL, PAUL READ MINE.
SO WHAT A W AND, AND DALE AVENUE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I JUST WANNA BE NO, BUT THERE'S A LOT.
I MEAN, I JUST, IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS.
I MEAN THERE'S, WE JUST HAVE SO MUCH GOING AND, AND BY THE WAY, MAY IS OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A LS MONTH.
THAT'S WHY MAYBE WE COULD EACH JUST DO A QUICK UPDATE ON A, ON A COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVEN'T REPORTED ON RECENTLY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
'CAUSE I KNOW THE OTHER'S MUCH MORE INVOLVED IN THE DEPARTMENT'S WORK.
THE, UM, WELL, I'LL DO ALL MY COMMITTEES.
TB FOUR RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD, OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG CAPPING THE ANNUAL HEALTH INSURANCE BUYOUT AMOUNTS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS IMMEDIATELY.
AND PURSUANT CAPPING THE BUYOUT AMOUNTS FOR WELL EMPLOYEES.
I LOOKED ON THE, UM, AGENDA AND IT JUST HAS THE HEADLINE.
IT DOESN'T HAVE THE, UH, DOLLAR AMOUNT ON, UH, ON THE AGENDA.
WE HAVEN'T HAD THE DISCUSSION OF THE, OF A RESOLUTION YET.
WE HAVE TO TAKE MORE TIME TO DO THAT.
IT'S, IT'S MUCH MORE COMPLICATED THAN JUST SIMPLY SAYING, WHY DON'T WE JUST DO WHAT DEER PARK HAS DONE AND BE IT FOR ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS.
BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT, UH, WELL, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS BESIDES THE PEOPLE SITTING AT THIS TABLE.
AND I THINK THAT, HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO THE JUDGES ABOUT THIS? THEM, THE JUDGES, FOR INSTANCE, HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO THE JUDGES? WE REALLY, I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO.
BUT THE TOWN BOARD IS, THE TOWN BOARD IS MAKING INSURANCE
BUT WE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ELECTED OFFICIALS, THE CONVERSATION, PAUL NEEDS TO BE WITH ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, NOT WITH JUST US.
AND I, AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE IT'S BEING TARGETED, BUT YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT YOUR, YOUR WHOLE POPULATION THAT YOU'RE TRYING, THAT YOU'RE AFFECTING.
SO THOSE CONVERSATIONS NEEDS TO BE HAD.
WELL, YOU COULD ALSO, UH, AS A SIGN OF GOOD FAITH, SAY, UH, WE'RE, UH, ELIMINATING IT FOR TOWN BOARD MEMBERS.
WHAT IS YOUR SIGN OF GOOD FAITH IN THIS? WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR SIGN OF GOOD FAITH IN THIS? MY IS I'M HIGHLIGHTING THE FACT THAT THIS IS A, A, A MONEY.
YOU DON'T PAY IN ANYTHING FOR YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE MONEY.
BUT HE ALSO DOESN'T PAY IN ANYTHING FOR IT.
ANYTHING YOU DON'T PAY ANYTHING IN, WHICH IS, WHICH BY THE WAY, IS AN ERROR.
YOU DON'T PAY ANYTHING INTO IT.
[00:30:01]
AND YOU'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING $20,000 OR LESS OR LESS.BUT YOU, YOU ARE COSTING THE TAXPAYERS $43,000 BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T TAKEN, YOU DON'T TAKE THE BUYOUT.
WELL, ONE OF MY PROPOSALS WOULD BE THAT IF THERE'S ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL WHO HAS ANOTHER GOVERNMENT PAID INSURANCE, THAT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO TAKE THE BUYOUT INSTEAD OF DOUBLE DIPPING BY HAVING FULL FAMILY COVERAGE FROM THE TOWN AT $43,000.
AND ALSO HAVING ANOTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITY PAYING FOR THAT HEALTH INSURANCE.
BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
THE OTHER IS THAT WE HAVE TO STANDARDIZE AND FIX HOW THE BUYOUT IS CALCULATED.
'CAUSE IT'S BEING CALCULATED INCORRECTLY.
AND THAT CAN SAVE A LOT OF MONEY.
A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY.
AND SO THERE ARE PROPOSALS AND IF WE COULD AGREE ON THOSE, WE COULD ACTUALLY MOVE THIS THING FORWARD.
UM, IF I CAN PULL UP, YOU KNOW, FROM A PRIOR RESOLUTION, PRIOR RESOLUTION, BUT YOUR THING IS BASICALLY JUST RETALIATION AGAINST PEOPLE.
WELL, IT DOESN'T ONLY AFFECT US.
IT ALSO AFFECTS THE TOWN CLERK.
IT ALSO AFFECTS THE TAX RECEIVER RECEIVER.
BUT I KNOW YOU'RE TARGETING US BECAUSE WE DON'T SUPPORT YOU.
AND THE REASON WE NO, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A MONEY GRIP.
SO TO I'M NOT DONE PAUL, PAUL, DONE.
IT'S A MON MONEY GRAB BY US WHO, SOME OF US ARE GETTING $20,000, SOME OF US ARE GETTING $9,000.
AND SOMEHOW IF YOU DON'T TAKE THE BUYOUT, YOU ARE A HERO TO THE TAXPAYER.
THE OTHER THING THAT I REALIZE IS THAT THE TEAMSTERS DON'T HAVE A BUYOUT OPTION.
SO WE SHOULD OFFER TO THE TEAMSTERS A BUYOUT OPTION BECAUSE IF THEY TAKE THE BUYOUT, WE WILL NOT BE PAYING THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE TEAMSTERS.
NOW IT WOULD BE THEIR OPTION TO DO THAT.
BUT WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THAT IN THEIR CONTRACT.
WE HAVE IT IN THE CONTRACT FOR PBA.
WE HAVE IT IN THE CONTRACT FOR CSEA.
WE DO NOT HAVE IN THE CONTRACT FOR TEAMSTERS.
I HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO FIGURE OUT WHY.
BUT THAT WOULD BE A SUBSTANTIAL SAVINGS IF SOME PEOPLE WOULD TAKE THE BUYOUT INSTEAD OF LIKE YOU TAKING THE FULL COST OF $43,000.
SO THIS PROVES THE POINT THAT THERE'S A LOT MORE TO DIVE INTO HERE AND MORE INFORMATION THAT HAS TO BE DISCOVERED AND ASSESSED BEFORE WE MAKE PASS ANY KIND OF RESOLUTION.
ONE, COULD WE PUT IT ON THE AGENDA? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE KEEP SAYING WE'RE GONNA
WE'RE TRYING TO FIX A PROBLEM YOU CREATED.
SO LET'S, LET'S WHERE, WHERE THAT, HOLD ON A SECOND.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A COMPLEX ISSUE THAT IT, IT, AND, AND IT'S BEEN THE, THE COST OF OUR INSURANCE HAVE BEEN ESCALATING SINCE 2018.
SO EIGHT YEARS LATER YOU'RE JUST RECOGNIZING IT AS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, WE ARE TRYING TO FIX THAT.
WE, WE ACCEPT THAT IT IS A PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT, LOOK A, AT A SOLUTION FOR.
BUT WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING ON THAT SOLUTION, PAUL.
IT'S, IT'S NOT A A, A SNAP THING.
LIKE JUST DO THIS, JUST DO THAT.
'CAUSE THE SOLUTION WOULD NOT BE JUST FOR THE, FOR THE ELECTEDS TO NOT TAKE THE BUYOUT.
THERE'S A WHOLE OTHER POPULATION MM-HMM
OF BUYOUTS THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS IN SOME WAY THAT THAT WILL ACTUALLY SAVE MONEY AS WELL.
SO THIS IS A, A BROADER ISSUE THAN JUST FOUR PEOPLE.
LET ME, LET ME JUST ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION.
THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES RELATING TO HEALTH INSURANCE AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS PEOPLE MAKE.
YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING HAS TO BE LOOKED AT MM-HMM
SO THE QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S LIKE THE NEXT STEP? BECAUSE IF WE SAY WE'RE GONNA HAVE, SAY OUR INSURANCE COMPANY DO, UM, UH, THEIR INSURANCE BROKERS, YOU KNOW, DO, UM, AN ANALYSIS OF WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING, UM, UH, RELATING TO EVERY ASPECT OF, YOU KNOW, HEALTH, YOU KNOW, INSURANCE, THAT, THAT, THAT'S A PO THAT WOULD BE A POSITIVE STEP.
IF WE WOULD GIVE OURSELVES A TIMETABLE AND SAY, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHEN, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A FOLLOW UP DISCUSSION.
[00:35:01]
HAVE A COMP COMPARISONS, WE WANT TO HAVE ANALYSIS, WE WANT TO SEE WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING.THEN I WOULD, I THEN PEOPLE THEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S, NOBODY WOULD SAY, OH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS BEING DONE, UM, FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.
BUT WE BASICALLY WANT TO CORRECT A PROBLEM THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED AND WE WANT TO TAKE ACTION AND WE DON'T WANT TO KEEP, UH, DELAYING THE ACTION.
SO IF, IF YOU WANT TO SAY, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'LL ASK THE STATE CONTROL THE TOWN CONTROLLER TO REACH OUT TO, UM, OUR IN INSURANCE BROKERS, UH, TO, I'M NOT SURE DO ANALYSIS WHO THAT GOES UNDER WHOSE JURISDICTION IS TOO, OR ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? NO, I'M SAYING WE SHOULD, NO, IT, IF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICE, IF WE WANNA REACH OUT TO THE STATE, STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE'S, WHO'S GONNA BE DOING THAT RESEARCH, THAT'S, AND THERE'S SOME, HIS OFFICE CAN DO THAT.
NO, BUT, AND I MAY, I'M SAYING I'M NOT, IT'S NOT NEGATIVE EITHER.
IT'S, IT'S, WELL, HOW HAS IT BEEN HANDLED IN THE PAST EVERYBODY ELSE HAS.
AND, AND WE, WE CAN'T JUST LOOK AT THE PREMIUMS THAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES PAY.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT.
WHAT KIND OF INSURANCES ARE THEY? WHAT KIND OF, UM, BUY-INS ARE THEY GIVING TO EACH OF THE MUNICIPALITIES? SO IT'S A MUCH MORE COMPLEX SITUATION.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, AS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, I HOPE THAT YOU FIND OUT AND YOU CAN PRE PRESENT THAT TO US, AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD FROM THERE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN DO YOU THINK YOU CAN DO THAT? WELL, WELL, I'M ASKING.
I WILL, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, WORK ON THAT.
DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH ME REACHING OUT TO OUR INSURANCE BROKERS? YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE CONTROL? WELL, YOU GOTTA RUN THE NUMBERS.
PAUL, YOU GOTTA, YOU GOTTA SIT AND GO RUN THE REPORTS AND RUN THE NUMBERS.
YOU GOTTA LOOK AT THE NUMBERS.
BECAUSE YOU GOTTA KNOW WHAT, YOU GOTTA HAVE INFORMATION TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
YOU JUST CAN'T CALL AND SAY, IS THIS TOO MUCH? YOU NEED TO KNOW.
NO, I'M, YOU HAVE TO HAVE CON YOU HAVE TO HAVE INFORMATION TO PROVIDE TO THEM SO THEY CAN HAVE, SO YOU CAN GET AN ANSWER.
YOU CAN'T JUST PICK UP THE PHONE AND SAY, DOES THIS WORK? THAT'S WHAT I'M, THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I'M, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.
BUT THE THING IS, I, ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WHAT I WOULD'VE LIKED IS FOR THE BOARD TO SAY, WE'RE GONNA PUT THIS BACK ON THE AGENDA.
GIVE A DATE CER, YOU KNOW, LIKE CERTAIN, BUT, BUT THAT'S THE POINT OF, THAT'S THE POINT OF RESEARCH, RIGHT? YEAH.
BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA GET THAT RESEARCH.
AND YOU KNOW IT BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T, YOU TRIED, I THINK DAVID MCKAY WILSON TRIED.
YOU'RE COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGES.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY THE, THE BUYOUT SAVES THE TAXPAYERS.
OF COURSE, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE THRESHOLDS ARE REGARDING DOING THE BUYOUT.
THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT VARIABLES.
IF YOU CAN FIND FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES HOW MUCH THEY'RE SAVING, WHICH I DOUBT THEY'RE GONNA GIVE TELL YOU.
'CAUSE MAYBE IT'S NOT MUCH WITH A VERY LOW THRESHOLD.
IF YOU COULD FIND OUT THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
HOWEVER, YOU HAVE SENT US NUMEROUS EMAILS STATING JUST EACH ONE OF THEM PARAPHRASED A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UH, TO US IT WAS $18,000 LAST YEAR.
IT'S GOING TO KEEP GOING UP BECAUSE HEALTHCARE IS INCREASING.
IF WE PUT A CAP $18,000, NO EMPLOYEE WHO IS RELYING ON THE BENEFIT WOULD BE HURT.
NEW EMPLOYEES FOR NEW EMPLOYEES.
THE BUYOUT WOULD BE IN LINE WITH WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING.
GREENBERG IS A LOAN IN GIVING EXCESSIVE BUYOUTS FOR EMPLOYEES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS.
WE NEED TO DISCUSS AT TUESDAY'S WORK SESSION.
IS THAT YOUR PROPOSAL? WELL, MY PROPOSAL IS FIRST, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT RIGHT NOW, IMMEDIATELY WE SHOULD PUT A CAP, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE'RE, WHILE WE'RE DOING THE FURTHER, UM, WHILE WE'RE DOING SORT OF THE FURTHER ANALYSIS.
SO'S OPPOSED, THAT'S PROPOSED, RIGHT? NO, BUT I'M SAYING, I'M SAYING WE SHOULD SAY IMMEDIATELY EFFECTIVE TODAY, IT'S 18.
YOU KNOW, WE COULD SAY WHILE WE'RE, IF THE BOARD'S NOT READY TO DO ANYTHING MORE, AT LEAST THEN THERE'S A, A MAXIMUM CAP.
AND THEN BASICALLY WE SHOULD, UM, UM, UH, ALL WORK TOGETHER AND REVIEW THE ELECTED OFFICIALS FINE.
UH, WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.
UM, WE SHOULD, UH, DO A COMPARISON.
YOU JUST ADDED SOMETHING ELSE IN THERE.
ALL, ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS GET, DO SOMETHING THAT WE ALL COULD AGREE WITH AND DO THAT IMMEDIATELY.
WE, WHILE WE'RE, UM, UM, PROCRASTINATING ON, YOU KNOW, THE WHO'S PROCRAST WE'RE WORKING.
NO, I'M SAYING THIS IS US WORKING TOGETHER.
SO LET'S SAY, SO LET'S SAY YOU TO INTERRUPT $18,000 CAP.
IT'S, IT'S, RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO CAP.
SO IT'S A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
SO ANYTHING THAT'S A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION WHERE THERE'S PROGRESS IS BETTER THAN US, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL BICKERING AND DISAGREEING WITH EACH OTHER AND NOTHING'S GETTING DONE.
SO I FEEL THAT IF THE BOARD WOULD WANT TO SAY THAT, UM, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY THERE'S A $18,000 CAP, UH, FOR EVERYBODY.
AND THE BOARD, WE CAN'T SAY IT FOR EVERYBODY BECAUSE OF THE CSEA NE, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T SAY
[00:40:01]
THAT FOR CSEA.SO WHAT IF WE SAID, UH, 18,000 FOR, UH, IMMEDIATELY ON A TEMPORARY BASIS WHILE WE'RE DOING THE FOLLOW UP RESEARCH? UH, IT IS 18,000, UM, UH, FOR, UH, ELECTED OFFICIALS AND MANAGEMENT.
UH, SO WE CAN'T EVEN DO MANAGEMENT.
WE CAN'T DO MANAGEMENT, NO, WAIT.
THIS IS WHAT I BROUGHT UP ACTUALLY A LITTLE WHILE AGO.
WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROCESS IS TO SEPARATE OUT HOW MANAGEMENT, IF THEY ARE IN ALSO IN AGREEMENT.
AND WE THINK WE NEED TO BRING THEM INTO THAT CONVERSATION.
THE, THAT WE HAVE TO BRING THEM INTO THE CON.
NOT TELL THEM THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
HAVE A DEPARTMENT HEAD MEETING OR WHAT, WHATEVER IT IS, AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO, BUT WE CAN'T.
THERE MUST BE SOMETHING, A LOCAL LAW, WHATEVER IT IS THAT TIED THE MANAGEMENT REIMBURSEMENT TO WHAT CSEA GETS.
WE CAN'T JUST, IT WAS NOT KNOWING WHAT THAT IS.
CAN'T JUST, I THINK AMANDA, IT WAS ALWAYS, IT WAS NOT, IT WAS ALWAYS BASICALLY THAT, UH, AN INFORMAL POLICY.
WELL, THAT'S, THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY HAS SOMETHING TO SAY.
CAN, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK? SO REGARDLESS, UM, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO INSTITUTE IT IMMEDIATELY AS JUST THE FIVE OF YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ELECTED OFFICIALS.
AND THERE'S POTENTIAL ISSUES, UM, INPUTTING IT IMMEDIATELY, IMMEDIATELY FOR JUSTICES OR OTHER PARTIES.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE TOWN BOARD HEREBY A CAPS THE ANNUAL HEALTHCARE INSURANCE COSTS TO THE TOWN FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR A BUYOUT AT THE CURRENT BUYOUT COSTS.
RA UH, RATES EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
B CAPPING HEALTH INSURANCE BUYOUT AMOUNTS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES DURING THE NEXT ROUND OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING NEGOTIATIONS.
C REQUIRE DE NOVO FAMILY PLAN ELIGIBILITY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
I KNOW THEY DO THAT NOW, BUT IT, I PUT IT IN THERE ANYWAY.
YOU HAVE TO SHOW, YOU HAVE OTHER INSURANCE.
DI HEARD YOU IMMEDIATELY BASE BUYOUT AMOUNTS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING ELECTED OFFICIALS ON THE NET COST TO THE TOWN AFTER DEDUCTING ANY PERCENTAGE THE EMPLOYEE OR OFFICIAL WOULD BE REQUIRED TO CONTRIBUTE BY CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION AND TO DO SO IN THE MOST EXPEDITIOUS MANNER THAT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH TOWN AND UNION RULES.
I THINK THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT LAST SECTION THAT OUR TOWN ATTORNEY HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER THAT I'VE CHECKED WITH THE TOWN WITH THE DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY, UHHUH
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT'S NOT HOW WE'RE PROCESSING IT.
WE'RE NOT HOW, IT'S NOT HOW WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S NOT HOW WE'RE COSTING RIGHT NOW.
IF SOMEBODY GETS, AND WE'RE NOT GONNA GO BACKWARDS, BUT RIGHT NOW, ACCORDING TO THE CSEA CONTRACT, IF LET'S, INSTEAD OF USING PAUL'S 43,000 THAT HE'S COSTING, LET'S MAKE IT 40,000.
RIGHT NOW, SOMEBODY WHO HAS 40,000 MIGHT HAVE A 15% PAY IN THEMSELVES.
INSTEAD OF DOING THE, DOING THE, UM, BUYOUT 50 50 ON $40,000 MM-HMM
WHICH IS CURRENTLY GOING ON, IT REALLY SHOULD BE ON THE, WHAT DID I SAY? 15%, 50, 85%.
AND SO JUST DOING THAT, AND I DON'T SEE WHY WE CAN'T DO THAT ACROSS THE BOARD.
UM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE CONTRACT SAYS.
SO IF THERE WAS A MISCALCULATION BEFORE, LET'S NOT CONTINUE THE MISCALCULATION AND THAT'LL HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL SAVINGS WITH OUR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS.
THE OTHER ASPECT THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, WHICH I THINK WOULD ALSO HELP, UH, IS TO DO IT NOT HAVE IT BE A TIERED BUYOUT, BUT A SINGLE BASED ON THE, THE SINGLE, UM, FAMILY, THE SINGLE PLAN RATHER THAN THE FAMILY PLAN.
SO WE COULD DO THAT AFFECTS THE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS.
BUT THAT WE COULD ONLY RIGHT NOW DO FOR US MM-HMM
THE ELECTED OFFICIALS MM-HMM
WE COULD NOT DO THAT FOR CSEA BECAUSE CSEA CLEARLY STATES FAMILY OR, UH, SINGLE.
SO, BUT THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT IF WE SET THE EXAMPLE RIGHT, WE CAN DO IN NEGOTIATIONS LATER ON.
UM, JUST LIKE WE DID WITH THE A DU, WHAT ABOUT PUTTING LIKE A SUNSET CLAUSE ON, ON, ON THIS AND BASICALLY SAYING WHILE WE'RE DOING THE RESEARCH, WHICH WE ALL JUST TALKED ABOUT, UM, THAT THIS PO YOU KNOW, YOUR PROPOSED AMENDMENT, WHICH IS SOME PROGRESS, BUT
[00:45:01]
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL FEEL IT'S NOT ENOUGH.UM, UM, YOU KNOW, WOULD EXPIRE AT BY THE END OF THE YEAR AND AT THE END OF THE YEAR, UH, THE TOWN BOARD WILL, UM, REVIEW THAT DOESN'T AMAZING.
WE, WE, WE'LL HAVE, WE WILL, WE'LL BASICALLY TRY GETTING, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING, THIS HAS TO BE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST, SO WE CAN'T DO IT NOW BECAUSE WHEN A CONTRACT NO, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IF, IS THERE A WAY WE COULD PUT LIKE A, SOME SORT OF SUNSET, SUNSET PROVISION ON YOUR AMENDMENT? AND THIS WAY WE COULD LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT THIS IS PROBABLY NOT GOOD ENOUGH, BUT IT'S, IT'S AT LEAST SOMETHING BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
BECAUSE I SORT OF FEEL WHAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT IS, IS TO SEE THAT WE'RE NOT JUST, UM, WE, WE CAN'T SUNSET IT UNTIL WE'VE HAD THE CSEA NEGOTIATE RENEGOTIATION.
HAS BE A SUNSET CLAUSE IS NOT APPLICABLE.
HERE'S NOT A LOCAL I'M ASKING.
AND IT WOULDN'T EVEN, LET ME BE CLEAR, I HAVEN'T COSTED THIS OUT, BUT THIS IS GOING TO SAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY.
YOUR PROPOSAL OF JUST THE FOUR OF US WOULD COST THE TOWN $60.
WELL, WELL YOUR PROPOSAL, LET'S BE CLEAR, BECAUSE YOU SAID MAYBE IT'S NOT ENOUGH.
I'M TELLING YOU, REAL BUYOUT, UM, CHANGES.
YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THE TOWN'S DEBT BY $60,000.
LET ME ASK A QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE CAN'T GET THE BUYOUT.
YOU JUST GET, YOU DIDN'T, UH, SHARE YOUR, YOUR DRIFT.
YOU DIDN'T SHARE YOUR DRIFT WITH US UNTIL LIKE A SECOND AGO.
SO THE QUESTION IS, COULD YOU, UH, LET ME READ THIS LETTER.
NO, BUT COULD YOU BASICALLY, WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, MAKING COMMITMENTS, WHY DON'T LET, LET'S CIRCULATE IT.
WHY DON'T YOU BASICALLY, UH, EMAIL EVERYBODY.
I COULD BASICALLY SPEAK TO PEOPLE WHO, UM, UM, HAVE EXPERTISE IN, UM, UH, IN, YOU KNOW, FINANCE.
AND I'LL GET THEIR THOUGHTS AND THEN I'LL CUT, WE'LL, WE CAN PUT IT ON, UH, NEXT WEEK FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
BECAUSE I SORT OF FEEL THIS WAY.
WE'RE NOT JUST JUMPING INTO SOMETHING AND I DON'T WANT TO JUST BE IMPULSIVE AND JUST SAY, OH, YOU KNOW WHAT? I LIKE IT OR I DON'T LIKE IT.
I WANT TO BASICALLY, UH, REALLY THINK IT THROUGH AND, UM, AND ANALYZE IT.
AND THEN WELL, WE NEED TO SEE ON PAPER.
INITIALLY, WE THOUGHT THERE WAS GONNA BE A RUSH WITH THIS BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THE CHECKS WERE GOING OUT IN JUNE.
SO THEN, BUT I WANNA BE CLEAR, BUT I, I, BUT I, I WANNA BE CLEAR, WHEN YOU SAY IF IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH, YOUR PROPOSAL, WHICH ONLY AFFECTS THREE PEOPLE, WOULD, OH, NO, I'M SORRY.
WOULD THAT WOULD BE, UM, UH,
I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY JUDGES ARE TAKING THE BUYOUT.
NOW, JOEY SAID SHE WOULDN'T TAKE THE INSURANCE, BUT WOULD INCREASE THE COST.
WHAT OUR, WHAT I'M PROPOSING, WHICH YOU ARE NOT SURE IS GOOD ENOUGH, WOULD DRAMATICALLY CHANGE.
AND FIRST OF ALL, FIX, FIX HOW THE BUYOUT IS PAID OUT.
OKAY, WELL, WHY DON'T YOU SEND IT TO US.
AND SO WE'LL REVIEW AND THEN WE'LL PUT IT ON AND THEN WE'LL PUT IT ON FOR NEXT WEEK.
THAT'S PROGRESS, RIGHT? SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE REST OF THE AGENDA.
AGENDA TO THE, AMANDA, DID WE GET THE, DID WE GET THE INSURANCE NUMBERS? DO YOU KNOW? I, THEY WERE GOING TO JOE, I KNOW WHO HE'S, SO WE DID NOT GET THE INSURANCE AMOUNTS YET.
HOWEVER, UM, OUR BROKER HAD INDICATED THAT THE COVERAGE WOULD BE FOR THAT CLAUSE THAT WAS REFERENCED.
UM, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE COVERAGE TO FRIENDS, BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE AMOUNTS YET.
IN, IN ANY CASE, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT THIS GO AHEAD.
BUT IF IT HAS TO BE AMENDED, THEN SURE.
SO WE HAVE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
[00:50:01]
IT SAYS THAT THE MEETS AND BOUNDS ARE ATTACHED, BUT I DON'T SEE THEM.WHICH ONE IS THIS FOR THE, UH, ALIENATION? IT SAYS ATTACHED MEETS AND BOUNDS, BUT, SO I BELIEVE, UM, HOLLY HAD JUST PROVIDED AN UPDATED DRAFT.
THE LOBBYIST HAD REQUESTED A SMALL AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE A 25 YEAR LEASE TO SPECIFY HOW LONG THE SOLAR LEASE WAS FOR.
BUT THE MEETS AND BOUNDS ARE, THE MIDTERM BOUNDS ARE INCLUDED IN THE WHAT'S BEING POSTED.
DO YOU KNOW WITH C TWO IF THE APPLICANT, UH, GOT, I, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LIKE MONTHS AGO.
UH, THIS IS, UH, RELATING TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN APPLICATION BY ONE LAUREN, ODDLY.
UM, AS IT RELATES TO THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 110,000 SQUARE FOOT CONTRACTOR STORAGE YARD FOR SCAFFOLDING BUSINESS AND UNRELATED OFF STREET PARKING AREAS FOR SEPARATE CARGO TRUCK STORAGE LOCATED AT ONE LAUREN STREET.
UH, DO YOU KNOW IF, UH, THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, REACHED OUT TO, UH, THE VILLAGE OF LEY BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS, IT'S ON PRETTY CLOSE ON THE BORDER OF ARDSLEY.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE VILLAGE IS, UM, IS KEPT INFORMED AND WE ENCOURAGE THEIR, UM, THEIR REVIEW.
AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THE TRAFFIC ISSUE IS WHAT, WHAT THAT DETERMINATION IS.
SORRY, IS THIS C TWO? THAT'S WHAT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS ABOUT.
RIGHT? YOU KNOW, I'M ALSO WONDERING, UM, OH, PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'RE JUST SCHEDULING PUBLIC HEARING, HAVING, I WASN'T READING IT.
I WOULD ASK COMMISSIONER DUQUE TO UPDATE, UH, THE BOARD REGARDING NOTICE TO THE VILLAGE.
IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN IT WAS BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD PREVIOUSLY, THAT NO NOTICE HAD BEEN GIVEN TO THE VILLAGE.
THEY, WELL, THEY HAD NOT REACHED OUT.
AND SO IT WAS NOT REQUIRED AT THAT TIME.
IF, UH, I THINK THEY SHOULD ALSO BE MADE, IF THERE'S NO NOTICE, THEN I, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD HOLD THIS OVER.
IT WAS THE SCHEDULING THAT WAS THE PLANNING BOARD.
THAT'S NOT THE THE NO, I'M, NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT IF YOU WHAT'S THAT? THEY WERE ALL WORK SESSION, SO OH, THEY WERE WORK SESSIONS WITHOUT NOTICE WORK SESSION.
JUST THE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS, UH, STRAIGHTENING US OUT HERE.
SO TO BE SPECIFIC, WHEN IT IS SCHEDULED FOR A WORK SESSION, A NOTICE IS NOT REQUIRED.
UM, IT'S BEEN A COMPLAINT MADE BY SEVERAL RESIDENTS AND, UH, INTERESTED PARTIES AS THEY'VE SHOWN UP TO ZBA MEETINGS AFTER IT'S BEEN BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.
UM, YOU KNOW, WONDERING WHY THEY DIDN'T GET NOTICE WHEN IT WAS BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.
IT'S BECAUSE IT'S NOT REQUIRED BY LAW.
UM, IT'S NOT REQUIRED IN THE CODE.
BUT THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD CHAIR WHO'S PRESENT AND, UH, STAFF ARE WORKING ON, UM, INCORPORATING POTENTIAL NOTICE CLAUSE FOR WORK SESSIONS FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.
I'M, I'M WONDERING IF, UM, WE SHOULD, UM, INVITE, UM, THE APPLICANT TO A PUBLIC MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD, UH, WORK SESSION, MAYBE NEXT, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THE HEARING.
SO THIS WAY PEOPLE COULD, UM, I MEAN, THE HEARING'S GONNA BE JUNE 10TH, BUT I THINK IF WE, UM, IF WE HAD A DISCUSSION, UM, WITH THE APPLICANT AT A PUB, YOU KNOW, AT A PUBLIC, UM, YOU KNOW, WORK SESSION, THEN IT WILL ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO, UM, ATTEND OUR HEARING AND, AND SPEAK OUT AND GIVE US THEIR, THEIR THOUGHTS.
WELL, EVEN IF WE MAKE THE, THE VILLAGE AWARE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE AGENDA ITEM ON THE PUBLIC FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, THEY CAN COME ATTEND PUBLIC HEARING.
BUT TO ME, THE PRESENTATION NOTHING OFFICIAL AT A WORK SESSION.
TO ME, I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO, UM, HAVE A WORK SESSION DISCUSSION.
BECAUSE IF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, IF WE LET YOU KNOW THE VILLAGE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD A PRESENTATION BEFORE THE HEARING, THEN PEOPLE COULD MAKE, UM, MORE EDUCATED, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, COMMENTS.
YOU KNOW, IT GIVES PEOPLE TIME TO REFLECT BEFORE THE HEARING ON, YOU KNOW, ON THE PLUSES OR MINUSES OF, OF THIS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.
I MEAN, IT, IF TAKES A HALF HOUR, 45 MINUTES, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH PROVIDING PEOPLE WITH, YOU KNOW, MORE INFORMATION.
AND EVERY TIME YOU HAVE, THIS IS HOW WOULD THEY HAVE MORE INFORMATION THAN, THAN THEY WOULD AT GET DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IN THE COMMENTS THAT THEY RESPONSE THEN THEY COULD THINK ABOUT IT.
IT'S BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
RIGHT NOW PEOPLE ARE GONNA GO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, MORE COLD BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ADVANCE INFORMATION.
I'M JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING THAT LOGIC.
NO, I'M JUST SAYING THAT I FAILED.
THAT IF WE HAD, IF WE INVITED THE APPLICANT TO MEET AT WORK SESSION NEXT WEEK, THEY MAKE A PRESENTATION AND THEN THE FOLLOWING WEEK, UM, SO WE HAVE OUR COMMISSIONER GARY, TO, I'M SORRY, PAUL, WE HAVE OUR COMMISSIONER GARY TO CAIN THAT CAN COME AND SPEAK AND GIVE US WELL, AND REALISTICALLY, WHEN YOU HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED
[00:55:01]
TO CLOSE IT IN ONE EVENING.IF YOU HAVE OUTPOURING OF COMMENTS AND, UM, CONCERNS FROM THE PUBLIC OR THE VILLAGE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HOLD IT OVER AND, YOU KNOW, CONTINUE TO ENGAGE TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES.
WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE DONE THAT AND ADJOURNED AND ADJOURNED AND ADJOURNED UNTIL WE WERE SATISFIED WE HAD ALL THE INFORMATION.
I, I'D ALSO WANT TO ASK HIM ABOUT THE, UM, AUSTIN, UM, AVENUE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WAREHOUSE, UM, UH, THAT IMPACTS, YOU KNOW, CLEARWOOD.
UM, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M GETTING A BUNCH OF, YOU KNOW, CALLS FROM THAT, THAT'S IMPACTING, THAT'S FROM YONKERS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT, UM, PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW THAT THE TOWN IS, UM, GOING TO TRY HARD TO FIGHT FOR THE, UH, THE QUALITY OF LIFE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE IN, UM, YOU KNOW, WHO LIVE ON THE BORDER OF YONKERS, UM, YOU KNOW, HALF RELATING TO THAT WAREHOUSE.
UH, I'VE BEEN LISTENING AND THE VILLAGES HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF THE, UH, ONE LAWRENCE STREET, UH, APPLICATION THERE.
AND, UH, WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO.
I KNOW THEY OFFICIALLY WILL GET A NOTICE FOR THE HEARING, UM, BUT I'LL REFRESH THEM WITH THE PLANS TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THEM, UH, FOR IN ADVANCE, WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN, UH, ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT, OR WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO TRANSITION TO THE YONKERS PROJECT? THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
SO THERE'S THE WAREHOUSE PROPOSAL IN THE CITY OF YONKERS AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION SENT TWO LETTERS, UH, TO, UH, THE YONKERS ZONING BOARD, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, EXPRESSING COMMENTS AND CONCERNS ABOUT THAT PROJECT.
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT'S STILL, OF COURSE, BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD THERE AND THAT THEY'VE HIRED A PLANNING CONSULTANT TO REVIEW ALL THE COMMENTS THAT THE, THE, THE CITY'S HEARD FROM ALL RESIDENTS AND, AND COMMENTS LIKE THE ONES I SENT IN.
SO, UM, WAITING TO HEAR BACK ON A RESPONSE, BUT I WILL CHECK IN WITH THE APPLICANT TEAM AND THE CITY OF YONKERS AND LOOK TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO THE TOWN BOARD.
BUT WE DID RAISE MANY TRAFFIC, UH, UM, LAND DISTURBANCE CONCERNS, UH, OPEN SPACE CONCERNS, HILL HILLSIDE PRESERVATION CONCERNS.
UM, ALL OF THAT WAS, UM, DETAILED, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
WHILE, WHILE YOU'RE ON, COULD YOU GIVE US LIKE A LITTLE UPDATE ON C3, THE RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING, UM, TO CONSIDER A LOCAL LAW RELATING TO BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM PILOT PROGRAM.
SO THAT ONE IS MORE OF A, UH, I THINK IT'S TAXATION BASED AS OPPOSED TO LAND USE AND I, I WAS NOT THE AUTHOR OF THAT.
IT, IT, IT DEALS WITH DOING PILOT PROGRAMS. YEAH.
AND I APOLOGIZE I'M NOT
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES, WHICH LE WIDENS OUT BEING PILOT.
SO THAT WOULD BE OUR ASSESSOR WOULD, THAT WOULD BE THE ASSESSOR, WHICH I'M SURE SHE'LL BE HAPPY TO EXPLAIN IN DETAIL AT THE PUBLIC HEARING
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF GARRETT? LEMME JUST SEE.
UH, YOU HAVE THE, UH, $200,000 AWARD RELATING TO, UH, THE CD, UH, BG GRANT RELATING TO THE DOVES AREA, UH, ROAD SIDEWALK.
UM, DO YOU WANT TO JUST GIVE PEOPLE A BRIEF UPDATE ON THAT? WHO DO YOU WANT? YOU STILL ON? YES, I'M STILL ON.
SO THAT RESOLUTION, UM, IS, IS IS ACCEPTING A $200,000 GRANT FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT.
AND, UH, I, I PUT IN THAT RESOLUTION, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE GRATITUDE THAT THE TOWN OF GREENBURG EXPRESSES TO THE COUNTY.
THIS IS ACTUALLY THE SECOND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT.
UH, SO IN TOTAL, UH, WHEN ALL SAID AND DONE, THE TOWN WILL HAVE RECEIVED $400,000 OF DIRECT, UH, NO MATCH CONSTRUCTION FUNDING FROM THE COUNTY.
AND WHEN THAT, THAT, THAT WAS COMBINED WITH 1 MILLION IN FEDERAL, WHICH COVERS, UH, WELL OVER 90% OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, MUCH THANKS TO WESTCHESTER COUNTY.
AND, UH, THAT'S THROUGH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
AND JUST IN GENERAL ON THE SIDEWALK, WE ARE REALLY IN THE FINAL STAGES, I'D SAY, UH, PERCENTAGE WISE OVER, OVER OVER 95%.
AND, UM, THE JOBS NEARING COMPLETION.
AND THEN CONED, WE'LL DO A FINAL PAVE ON THE ROAD.
AND, UH, JOBS FERRY ROAD WILL BE LOOKING MUCH DIFFERENT THAN IT DID A YEAR AGO AND MUCH, UH, MORE ATTUNED TO THE, THE PEDESTRIAN.
[01:00:01]
THAT'S GREAT.AND, UH, THE FINAL THING, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S REALLY YOU WERE THE P PUBLIC WORKS, UM, THE, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, ON ALEY ROAD AND FORT HILLS THERE, LIKE ANY ESTIMATE WHEN IT'S GONNA BE ACTUALLY INSTALLED.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT THE RED LIGHT CAMERAS, UM, IF ANYBODY KNOWS, BECAUSE WE KEEP, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR LIKE YEARS, THE RED LIGHT CAMERAS ON EAST HARTSDALE AVENUE, AND IF THERE'S LIKE ANY UPDATE ON ON THAT AS TO THE INSTALLATION, I, I KNOW THAT THE PROJECT GOAL IS TO START AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER THE SCHOOL, UH, SEMESTER ENDS THERE IN EDGEMONT.
SO I THINK WHAT WE'LL HAVE TO DO IS CHECK WITH, WITH DPW AND ENGINEERING STAFF TO SEE IF THEY HAVE A, UH, A START DATE THERE.
BUT THOSE TWO RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE ON, UH, ARE FOR TWO SEPARATE, UH, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE CONSENTING TO EASEMENTS TO, UH, SLIVERS OF LAND THAT WILL HELP FACILITATE THE PROJECT AND ALSO ON THE RESOLUTION.
WE EXPRESS, UM, MAJOR GRATITUDE FOR THEM FOR BEING A PARTNER IN THIS PROCESS.
AND THERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THAT WAS HELD OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN UNTIL THE RESIDENTS WHO WERE VERY GENEROUSLY, UM, BASICALLY ALLOWING US TO HAVE AN EASEMENT ON THEIR PROPERTY, UH, SO THAT WE CAN INSTALL THIS, THE TRAFFIC LIGHT, UM, UNTIL THEY WERE COMFORTABLE WITH THE WORDING OF THE AGREEMENT.
AND, UH, THANK YOU GARRETT FOR NEGOTIATING THAT FOR US AND MAKING THAT HAPPEN.
THIS, THIS, THIS IS NOT ABOUT DOES THE LIGHT GO IN OR NOT GO IN? IT'S, IT'S DEALING WITH THE EASEMENT.
THIRD ONE WAS ALREADY APPROVED.
YEAH, WE ALREADY DID THE OTHER ONE THAT THAT OWNER WAS OKAY WITH THE, UH, AGREEMENT.
ARE WE GOOD? HERE'S THE, UH, JOE DANKO, YOU KNOW, COUPLE WEEKS AGO SAID, UH, THE TARRYTOWN UM, THE GLENVILLE FIRE DISTRICT CONTRACT, HE SAID, UH, WE WOULD BE MAKING PROGRESS WITHIN TWO WEEKS.
WELL ACTUALLY IT'S UH, TWO WEEKS FROM WHEN HE SPOKE TO THEIR COUNSEL, WHICH WAS FRIDAY.
SO I EXPECT THAT THEY'LL BE SUBMITTING CORRESPONDENCE AS, UH, DISCUSSED ON FRIDAY WHEN HE'S BACK.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE, OR MAYBE THE BOARD COULD, UM, AGREE THAT WE AS A BOARD COULD REACH, MEET WITH THE, UH, THE DISTRICT AND THEN ALL OF US COULD, UH, COULD TRY RESOLVING, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS, I MEAN THE LAST TIME THEY GOT PAID WAS 2023 AND, UM, THE FIRE DISTRICT AND THE SERVICES HAVE BEEN RENDERED.
AND I JUST SORT OF FEEL THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL OF US HAVE TO ACCEPT, UM, EQUAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR, FOR THE DELAYS.
AND I THINK THAT IF WE ALL MET WITH TARRYTOWN AND WE ALL SAT IN ONE ROOM, THEN WE COULD GET THIS THING RESOLVED.
SO RESPECTFULLY, IS THIS AN, A NEW BUSINESS ITEM AS WAS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED BY THE TIME NO, I'M JUST, I JUST FIND THAT IT'S VERY AGGRAVATING THAT YOU, YOU HAVE A CONTRACT.
WELL, I, I'M PUTTING BACK TO WHAT WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER THAT WHEN YOU WANTED TO BRING UP SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, I THINK I'VE BEEN BRINGING THIS UP, I'VE BEEN EMAILING THE BOARD EVERY SINGLE, EVERY COUPLE DAYS.
NO, BUT I'VE BEEN GLAD YOU'RE HEARING, I'M GLAD YOU'RE SAYING WE ALL, UM, TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS.
MAYBE MAYBE SOMEBODY'S WRITING YOUR EMAILS FOR YOU.
BECAUSE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT I DO NOT SUPPORT VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS.
'CAUSE MY SON IS A PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTER WHO USED TO BE A VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER.
AND WHO TRAINS THOSE VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AT THE FIRE ACADEMY? OKAY, SO LET'S
THAT'S, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU THINK THAT'S THE WAY TO WIN A CAMPAIGN, BUT YOU CAN'T KEEP PUTTING OUT LIES.
EVERY OTHER VILLAGE CONTRACT, FIRE PROTECTION CONTRACT GOES VERY SMOOTHLY.
THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH TARRYTOWN, NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
WE GOT THE BILL, WE GOT THE BILL FOR IT LAST OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER, AND THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THAT.
AND THEN THEY SENT US SOMETHING THIS YEAR AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY WAS WORKING ON IT.
NOW I INTEND TO JUMP BACK INTO THIS THING TO SEE IF WE CAN STRAIGHTEN THIS OUT, BUT IT'S GONNA TAKE A MEETING OF MINES.
I'M NOT GONNA GET THROUGH WHY THERE WAS AN ISSUE AT TARRYTOWN.
DON'T NEED TO DO THAT PUBLICLY.
BUT THERE WAS AN ISSUE AND THERE WAS AN ISSUE THAT CAUSED THEM NOT TO PROVIDE A BILL UNTIL LAST NOVEMBER.
AND YOU HAVE BEEN IN THE NEWSPAPERS WRITING
[01:05:01]
ABOUT WE SHOULD PAY THE BILL.AND IF YOU RECALL FROM PRIOR YE PRIOR YEARS, NOW YOU'VE BEEN SAYING WE SHOULD PAY THE BILL.
AND I WOULD SIT HERE AND SAY, WHAT BILL? BECAUSE THERE WAS NO BILL, BUT YOU AS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER WANTED US TO PAY A BILL THAT WE DID NOT GET.
AND THAT I THINK MISLED THE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN TARRYTOWN TO THINK, OH, THEY MUST HAVE HAD A BILL.
AND WE ARE NOT PAYING, WE'RE WILLFULLY NOT PAYING A BILL THAT WE GOT IN, IN, WHEN IN REALITY WE NEVER GOT THE BILL.
SO WHEN I SAY TO YOU, WHAT BILL, YOU DIDN'T GO AND THEN LOOK AND SEE, OH, THERE MUST BE A BILL.
HEY, HERE'S THE BILL, PAY IT NOW.
YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT IF YOU THOUGHT THERE WAS A BILL AFTER WE KEEP SAYING WHAT BILL, THERE WERE SO MANY EMAILS BACK AND FORTH AND FROM FROM TERRYTOWN WE COULDN'T PAY IT.
IT WAS CLEAR WE COULDN'T PAY IT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PAY.
AND ONCE WE FINALLY DID GET IT A TOTAL, IT WAS INCORRECT.
ARE YOU, HAVE YOU BEEN FOLLOWING THE PROCESS? YES, I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THE PROCESS.
WELL THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.
SO ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT EVERYONE ON THE TOWN BOARD SIT DOWN THAT WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH.
WHAT WILL THAT VILLAGE TOWN, IF THE COUNCILS ARE WORKING IT OUT, WHAT CAN WE, WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO? THAT'S NO, I'M SAYING, I'M SAYING I, WHAT I WOULD'VE LIKED, AND, AND THIS IS WHAT SOME OF THE FIREFIGHTERS SAID IS I THINK FIREFIGHTERS HAVE, DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS.
THIS, LEMME SAY THIS IS WHAT I'M PROPOSING.
I'M PROPOSING THAT TO MOVE THIS THING, YOU KNOW, ALONG, BECAUSE THE GOAL IS NOT A FIGHT.
THE GOAL IS TO GET A CONTRACT.
I SORT OF FEEL THAT ALL OF US SHOULD, SHOULD ARRANGE LIKE A, COULD BE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION IF YOU WANT, OR A PUBLIC WHATEVER YOU WANT.
UM, UH, BASICALLY A SIT DOWN MEETING WITH THE FIRE DE DEPARTMENT AND YOU KNOW, THE TOWN BOARD AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
WE SIT IN A ROOM AND UM, AND THEN, UH, WE UM, WE SEE IF WE COULD RESOLVE ANY OF THE DIFFERENCES.
AND IF WE CAN'T RESOLVE ANYTHING AND WE NEED MORE INFORMATION, WE BASICALLY SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, WE'RE GONNA ADJOURN THIS FOR NEXT WEEK OR TWO WEEKS.
BUT THE THING IS, TO ME THAT'S, I JUST FIND WE'RE DOING THAT.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHATS HAPPENING.
WE HAVEN'T HAD IT IF WE, IF WE MEET AS A QUORUM, AND I SAID, I'M GOING AND I'VE ALREADY, I MET WITH JOE, WE WENT OVER THE LATEST SUBMISSION, BUT HE, HE HE'S ENTITLED TO HAVE A VACATION.
SOMETHING HAPPENED WHILE I WAS ON VACATION.
UH, BUT HE'S NOT, BUT HE WILL GET BACK AT SOME POINT.
I'VE DECIDED, YOU KNOW, TO JUMP BACK INTO THIS THING, UH, 'CAUSE I THINK THEY'RE SERIOUS NOW, UM, AND WORK THIS OUT, BUT NO ONE WANTS TO, IF YOU WANNA HAVE A DISCUSSION AS TO HOW WE GOT HERE IN PUBLIC, PAUL, YOU DO THAT.
I'M NOT GONNA DO THAT TO THE VILLAGE OF TARRYTOWN.
ALL I'M SAYING IS LET'S FORGET ABOUT THE PAST.
UH, LET'S JUST LOOK AT THE, LET'S JUST LOOK AT THE FUTURE.
AND ALL I'M SAYING IS I FIND JUST IN CONCEPT, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF NOT HAVING CONTRACTS.
YOU KNOW, THAT, YOU KNOW THAT A CONTRACT EXPIRED IN 2023.
BUT YOU HAVE 24 5 6 HISTORY OF IT AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN PAID FOR FOR SERVICES.
NO, NO, I'M JUST SAYING ALL I'M JUST SAYING KNOW THE HISTORY OF GET WHEN DID WE GET THE BILL? NO, YOU SAY CONTRACTS FROM 2020.
LEMME JUST SAY, ALL I'M SAYING IS I FEEL THAT IN THE FUTURE, IN THE FUTURE, UM, GOING FORWARD THAT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CONTRACT, YOU KNOW, IS, HAS EXPIRED, THAT WE HAVE JOINT MEETINGS WITH THE, WITH ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD.
I'M SORRY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME? CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THE INVOICING PROCESS, PLEASE? WELL, I'M, I FAIL THAT IF THE BOARD BASICALLY NO, NO, NO.
NOW, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THE CURRENT PROCESS WHEN WE PAY THE, THESE CONTRACTS? WELL, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE PROCESS TO ME PLEASE? WELL, I DO YOU, YOU KNOW THE PROCESS? NO, NO, I'M ASKING IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN IT TO ME PLEASE.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE VILLAGE IS TELLING US HOW MUCH THEY FAIL IS OWED AND THEN WE HAVE THAT AS A BOARD.
WE REVIEW IT AND THEN WE DECIDE AND WHAT PART OF, BUT LET ME, LET ME JUST SAY SOMETHING.
ALL I'M SAYING GOING, THIS IS NOT A FIGHT.
ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT EXPLAIN IT TO ALL, ALL I'M ASKING FOR IS WITH ALL THE FIRE DISTRICTS, I FEEL THAT, UM, IN THE FUTURE, UM, IF AFTER A CONTRACT EXPIRED, UM, WE SHOULD AS A BOARD, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO PARTICIPATE, YOU KNOW, IF I WANNA PARTICIPATE, IF YOU WANNA PARTICIPATE ANYBODY, WE SHOULD SIT DOWN WITH THE FIRE DISTRICTS AND UM, AND THEN BASICALLY SAY, THIS IS WHY WE NEED, THIS IS WHY IT'S BEEN DELAYED.
BECAUSE I'VE SPOKEN TO THE FIREFIGHTERS FOR LIKE TWO YEARS ALREADY.
AND YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN SAYING, OH, YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
SO PAUL, CAN YOU, AND DID YOU EXPLAIN TO THEM THAT THEY, THEY HAVE
[01:10:01]
THE TAR TOWER HAS NOT SUBMITTED US A BILL.DID YOU SAY THAT TO THEM? I SAID TO THEM THAT I, I, NO, WHAT I WOULD LIKE IS FOR EVERYBODY TO MEET.
ARE YOU PURPOSELY IGNORING WHAT WAS BEING SAID THAT WE DID NOT RECEIVE THE PROPER INFORMATION TO PAY THE BILL? WELL, THAT'S IT.
THAT'S, THEY DIDN'T THE BILL, THEY CLAIMED THAT THEY, THEY WERE NOT AWARE.
AND IT'S NOT A MATTER, IT'S WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT TO THAT THE FIREFIGHTERS WOULDN'T BE AWARE OF THAT.
ONLY THE, THE VILLAGE OF ADMINISTRATOR OR THE, BUT I, I'VE, I'VE REACHED OUT TO FIRE COMPANY, BUT, BUT ALL I'M SAYING IS IF WE CAN'T GET THIS RESOLVED, THIS IS, IF WE CAN'T GET THIS RESOLVED, IT NOT BE RESOLVED NEXT WEEK, IT'S NOT.
IF YOU COULD JUST WAIT UNTIL MR. DANKO IS BACK AND HE'S ABLE TO SUBMIT HIS CORRESPONDENCE AS ANTICIPATED WITH THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL FOR TERRYTOWN.
UM, IT ALSO IS PREMATURE AND, UM, I JUST WANNA POINT THE TOWN BOARD BACK TO THEIR AGENDA AS YOU SEEM TO GO OFF THE RAILS A BIT.
UM, BUT IF YOU, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS FOR HOLLY'S BENEFIT, IF YOU WANNA INCLUDE SOMETHING FOR NEW BUSINESS AND, AND SET FORTH GROUND RULES FOR THAT, I JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO THANK YOU, TO FOLLOW EVERYTHING AND, AND ALSO HAVE INFORMATION ON THE SPOT, YOU KNOW.
BUT I HAVE BEEN EMAILING IT AND YOU GOT THE EMAILS RIGHT? I HAVE, DURING THE PAST WEEK, I RESPONDED THAT MR. DANKO IS AWAY AND THAT HE WOULD RESPOND WITHIN THE TWO WEEKS AS HE DISCUSSED WITH SHALL WE MOVE, SHALL WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH, UM, A MOTION FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSES OF DISCUSSING PERSONNEL MATTERS INVOLVING SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS AND TO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE ON VARIOUS MATTERS? FIVE.
DOES ANYONE GET ONE A SECOND? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT'S THAT? I JUST MADE A MOTION, I MOTION FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING PERSONNEL MATTERS INVOLVING SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS AND TO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE ON VARIOUS MATTERS.
IS THAT, DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? YES.
AND PAUL, STOP MISLEADING THE FIREFIGHTERS IN TARRYTOWN.