[00:00:01]
TO OUR TOWN BOARD, UH, UH, WORK SESSION.UM, IT'S, UH, DECEMBER 22ND AND IT'S 6 0 9, UH, PM AND THIS IS OUR PRE-HOLIDAY, UH, WORK SESSION INSTEAD OF PRE-HOLIDAY PARTY.
UM, AND WE'RE GONNA START WITH, UM, DISCUSSION OF THE 62 MAIN STREET AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, UNIT PROJECT.
UM, SO DIANA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION? YES.
EVENING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, UH, DIANA COLAB OF THE FIRM OF BELL BEO, BONNE AND WEINGART AND WISE AND WHITAKER.
UM, HERE FOR WILDER BALTER PARTNERS, THE DEVELOPERS OF 62 MAIN STREET AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT.
UH, THE PRINCIPAL OF BILL BALTER IS HERE TONIGHT AS WELL.
UH, MARK, UH, WEINGARTEN, WHO WAS, UH, HERE LAST TIME ON NOVEMBER 17TH, UM, IS NOT ABLE TO JOIN TONIGHT.
UM, HE HAD A PRIOR COMMITMENT, UM, BUT WE'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH THIS WITH YOU TONIGHT.
UM, AS YOU KNOW, THIS WAS BEFORE YOU AND PRESENTED TO YOU ON THE 17TH.
UH, WENT THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE PROJECT AND WHY, UH, WE ARE SEEKING THE, THE PILOT AGREEMENT.
UH, IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, UM, AT THE Y M C A SITE IN TARRYTOWN.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE WORKED, UH, UH, DILIGENTLY WITH TIM, UH, AND WITH YOUR ASSESSOR EDIE MCCARTHY TO REACH AN AGREEMENT, UH, ON, ON THE NUMBERS AND HOW, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE, UH, WOULD MAKE SENSE HERE.
UH, WE INCLUDED THAT 99, UM, UH, PERIOD OF AFFORDABILITY THAT I KNOW HAS BEEN SO IMPORTANT TO THE BOARD IN THE PAST.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALSO REACHED OUT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THEY, UH, THEY SUPPORTED.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY THOUGHT THAT WE HAD COVERED ALL OF, UH, THE ISSUES THAT, UM, MAY BE, UH, SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD OR ANY, ANY CONCERNS THAT THE BOARD MIGHT HAVE HAD.
UM, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, BACK AT THE DECEMBER 17TH MEETING, UH, WHICH WE HAD EXPECTED TO BE ON, UH, WE SAW THAT WE WOULD, THE MATTER WAS NOT HEARD.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE EXPRESSED PREVIOUSLY, THERE IS A TIME SENSITIVITY TO THIS MATTER, UH, BECAUSE, UM, OF STATE FINANCING, UM, UH, FOR THE PROJECT, IT'D BE BECAUSE IT ISN'T, UH, A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECT.
AND SO WE REALLY, YOU KNOW, WE HAD HOPED THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ACTION BY THE BOARD PRIOR TO THE END OF YEAR.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT, UH, IT IS THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT, WHAT THOUGHTS YOU HAD ON THE PILOT AND WHAT YOUR, UH, CONCERNS, IF ANY, WERE THAT WE CAN ADDRESS TONIGHT.
HOW MANY UNITS ARE THERE? 109.
WE GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 40% OF A M I UP TO 80%, AND WE AVERAGE UNDER 60%.
WE ARE ALSO REHOUSING ALL OF THE MEN IN THE Y WHO LIVE THERE NOW, WHO IN GENERAL MAKE MUCH CLOSER TO 20 OR 30% OF A M I TO WHERE WE HAVE FIGURED OUT A WAY TO KEEP ALL OF THEM THERE.
AND IS THIS IN PERPETUITY, THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING? 99 YEARS? 99 YEARS.
AND, UM, WHICH IS NOT THE REQUIREMENT OF THE STATE, BUT IT'S, UH, THE COUNTY HAS A 50 YEAR REQUIREMENT, AND YOU GUYS HAD ASKED US TO DO IT FOR 99 YEARS, WHICH WE HAVE DONE BEFORE DOING THAT IN PEAK SKILL AS WELL RIGHT NOW.
THE OTHER THING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT IS IT'S, UM, IT'S GENERALLY A SENIOR DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE WE'RE REHOUSING THE EXISTING MEN WHO LIVED THERE WERE ACTUALLY ADMITTED 80% SENIOR, SO THAT WE DON'T MISS ANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE NOW WHO ARE UNDER 55 YEARS OF AGE.
SO THE, JUST TO EXPLAIN THE AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE 17TH, UH, NORMALLY GOES OUT ON A FRIDAY OR A SATURDAY.
UH, THE, THE AGENDA WAS HELD UP FOR THERE TO BE A RESOLUTION TILL SUNDAY, I THINK, ALMOST INTO THE EVENING, IF NOT LATE AFTERNOON.
AND BY THEN, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THERE WAS A STILL A LOT WORK BEING DONE APPARENTLY ON, ON IT.
THAT'S WHY IT WAS TAKEN OFF, IS THAT WE, THERE WAS JUST, THERE WASN'T A RESOLUTION AT THE TIME.
AND SO, UM, BUT I THINK EDEDIE HAD EXPLAINED TO US WHAT THAT, UH, THERE'S SOME DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WHAT SHE HAD CALCULATED AND WHAT YOU HAD CALCULATED.
AS IT GETS VERY CONFUSING AND APPARENTLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, WE'RE AT THE TAIL END OF THIS THING, SO NO ONE WANTS TO HOLD YOU UP AND DOING YOUR PROJECT.
WHAT OUR, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS, YOU KNOW, YOU SAID THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN EDEDIE AND TIM AND YOURSELF ON THE NUMBERS, BUT, UH, THE ASSESSOR HAS TOLD US THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S THE NUMBERS AREN'T HER NUMBERS, THEY'RE WHAT WE'RE TOLD
[00:05:01]
THAT, UH, WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD AGREE TO, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE AGREEING TO.IS THAT CORRECT? DD DIANA? YES.
UM, DIANA, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE TOWN BOARD THE PRESENTATION OF THE PILOT? I BELIEVE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, TIM, THAT THEY DO HAVE A COPY OF IT, BUT I THINK THAT THE, UM, GARAGE DISCOUNT OR YEAH, THE PARKING GARAGE DISCOUNT.
PERHAPS YOU CAN ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.
DIANA, DO YOU WANT ME TO DO IT? YEAH.
I THINK YOU'D BE BETTER TO DO THAT.
SO THE DEVELOPMENT, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE ELEMENTS.
I I'LL GO INTO AS MUCH DETAIL AS YOU WANT, BUT I'LL TRY TO DO LESS IS MORE.
UM, IT'S 109 UNIT DEVELOPMENT, UH, WHERE CURRENTLY THE Y IS.
THE Y CURRENTLY HAS 48 IS A 48 ROOM, S R O, UH, ESSENTIALLY DORM ROOM WITH, BEHIND THAT THE EXISTING Y FACILITY, WE'RE PRESERVING THE FOUR STORY BUILDING IN THE FRONT, BUILDING A, A NEW PORTION OF THE BUILDING IN THE BACK, AND THEN DOING AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE FRONT BUILDING SO THEY CAN SAVE THE EXISTING FORESTRY BUILDING AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
WELL, IN THE BEGINNING, WE, WE DO A LOT OF WORK WITH STAKEHOLDERS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET CONSENSUS FOR OUR DEVELOPMENTS.
AND WE'VE DONE ABOUT 20 PROJECTS MORE, 24, 25 PROJECTS IN WESTCHESTER.
SORT OF THE ONLY WAY THAT THINGS GET DONE WITHOUT IT BEING AWFUL IS TO TRY TO BUILD CONSENSUS.
SO IN THAT PROCESS, WE MET WITH THE LOCAL MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION.
AND THE IDEA WE CAME TOGETHER WITH THAT I THINK WAS A REALLY GOOD IDEA, IS TO PUT A LEVEL OF PUBLIC PARKING IN THE BUILDING THAT A LOT, BECAUSE THIS BUILDING IS RIGHT IN THEIR DOWNTOWN, OBVIOUSLY ON MAIN STREET, AND THERE IT IS ADJACENT TO AN EXISTING PARKING LOT.
SO SINCE THEY HAVE SUCH PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE, UM, PARKING, UM, THE IDEA OF PUTTING PARKING HERE, UH, WORK, THE WAY THAT, UM, THE PARKING IS GETTING DONE IS WE'RE PAYING TO BUILD THE PARKING.
AND THEN DURING THE LIFE OF THE BONDS OF THAT PARKING OF THE LIFE OF THE BONDS ON THE WHOLE PROJECT, WHICH INCLUDES THE PARKING, UH, WE'VE SOUGHT A PILOT AGREEMENT TO REDUCE THE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS, UM, TO REDUCE THE TAXES IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON THE BONDS.
SO THAT'S WHY THE TERM OF THE PILOT IS 30 YEARS.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE TERM OF THE BONDS ARE.
SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S, UH, TO ALLOW THE PARKING TO, UH, BE BUILT AND THEN WE'RE GIVING THE PARKING ON, WE'RE BUILDING IT AND THEN TURNING IT OVER TO THE VILLAGE WHO WILL, UH, MANAGE THE PARKING, GET THE REVENUE FROM THE PARKING.
AND WE'RE AGREEING AS A PART OF OUR PROJECT TO, UH, HAVE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS DURING THE TERM OF THE PILOT.
AND EVEN AFTER THE PILOT IS OVER, WE HAVE THE LONG TERM FOREVER STRUCTURAL, UH, RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENDING IN THE BUILDING.
SO IT'S, THIS IS A PROJECT WHEN IT STARTED, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN A YEAR AGO, HAD NO ZONING IN PLACE.
WE BUILT A CONSENSUS NECESSARY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
WE HAD A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH WITH THE TOWN, I'M SORRY, THE VILLAGE, EXCUSE ME.
UM, AND WE GOT TO THE PLACE WHERE WE GOT THE ZONING IN PLACE.
UH, WE CREATED A NEW FLOATING ZONE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
AND WE GOT THROUGH THE SPR PROCESS, AND WE GOT OUR APPROVALS IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR.
UH, AS A PART OF THAT, THE VILLAGE BOARD ENDORSED THE CONCEPT OF THIS PILOT, BUT OF COURSE, THEY'RE NOT THE GOVERNING, THEY'RE NOT THE GRANTING AGENCY YOUR TOWN IS.
WE ALSO GOT THE, UH, DIANA SAID THE, UM, SCHOOL BOARD, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ALSO TO SUPPORT THIS.
SO YOU GUYS, BECAUSE IT'S IN YOUR TOWN AND YOU WERE THE ONES GRANTING IT, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.
SO AS FAR AS THE PARKING LOT'S CONCERNED, WE REDUCED THE, THE PILOT PAYMENT IS AN ESTIMATION OF WHAT THE TAXES WOULD'VE BEEN WITHOUT A PILOT FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT, MINUS WHAT THE DEBT SERVICE WOULD'VE BEEN ON THE GARAGE.
AND THAT IS ESSENTIALLY HOW WE ARRIVE AT THE PAYMENT.
SO WE DID TALK TO ED ABOUT THIS A BUNCH, AND I THINK WE GOT TO A PLACE WHERE WE WERE PRETTY CLOSE.
AND THEN WHAT GOT ADDED TO THIS WAS THE IDEA OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE.
AND THAT'S BEEN THE THING WE'VE STARTED GOING BACK AND FORTH ON.
AND FRANKLY, AT THIS POINT, MY, YOU KNOW, MY, WHERE I AM ON THIS PROJECT, WE ARE IN A, WE ARE IN ABSOLUTE UNCHARTED TERRITORY WITH THE NEW YORK STATE BUDGET.
UM, WE ALREADY HAVE OUR FUNDING FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY DONE ON THIS.
THE BOARD OF LEGISLATORS HAS PASSED IT.
THE LAST STEP, REALLY, OTHER THAN THE STATE FUNDING, WHICH THIS WOULD CLOSE IN THEORY IN MARCH, THE LAST STEP IS THIS PILOT.
I AM CONCERNED, AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT BLACK AND WHITE.
'CAUSE I CAN'T TELL YOU IF YOU GUYS DON'T PASS THIS PILOT, YOU KNOW, THIS WEEK OR NEXT WEEK THAT THIS PROJECT DIES.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT I'VE HAD TWO MEETINGS WITH H C R, THE HOUSING GROUP THAT FUNDS THIS.
AND I'VE SAID THAT I EXPECT THE PILOT TO HAPPEN BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
[00:10:01]
DOESN'T, THE PROJECT DIES, BUT I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE, IT JUST, NONE OF US SHOULD BE TAKING THE CHANCE.IT'S A GREAT PROJECT, WE SHOULD MAKE IT HAPPEN.
WELL, MY FIRST COMMENT IS, CAN YOU DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING LIKE THIS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA? AND MY SECOND COMMENT IS, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE WAS AN AWFUL LOT OF WORK THAT WENT INTO THIS.
YOU KNOW, YOU CAME BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD IN NOVEMBER.
UH, WHEN, WHEN DID YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH, WITH OUR STAFF REGARDING OUR ROLE IN A PILOT? OH, I DON'T THINK, I THINK WE DID WAIT QUITE A WHILE.
AND I THINK THE, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY IN HINDSIGHT A MISTAKE, BUT YOUR PIECE OF THE TAXES HERE IS I THINK ONE POINT HALF OR 2% OF THE TOTAL TAX BILL.
CURRENTLY, THE PROJECT'S TAX EXEMPT PAYS NO TAXES WHATSOEVER.
AND THIS IS MOSTLY A SENIOR DEVELOPMENT AND WILL, IT HAS ALL STUDIOS IN ONE BEDROOMS AND BASICALLY ZERO OR ONE OR TWO KIDS AT THE ABSOLUTE MOST.
SO WHILE I TOTALLY AGREE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE COME BEFORE YOU, UH, PRIOR JUST AT, TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF IT FROM A PRACTICAL MATTER, THIS IS SORT OF AN ALL GOOD THING.
I DON'T THINK IT HAS A LOT OF BAD, UM, AND I THINK THE REVENUE, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, IS A LOT MORE THAN YOU'RE GETTING NOW ON IT.
SO, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, BILL.
I'M SORRY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, WHAT ARE YOU ASKING THE TOWN BOARD FOR TONIGHT? THE, TO APPROVE THE SCHEDULE OF THE PILOT AND THEN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, THE WAY THAT IT WAS PRESENTED, I THINK AT THIS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE AWARE OF.
I THINK AT THIS POINT, I'M NOT EXACTLY WHERE THE NUMBER, I THINK THAT YOU HAD SAID THAT YOU WANTED THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHERS, AND THAT, TO YOU, THAT MEANT IT WAS ABOUT $13,000 A YEAR ON TOP OF WHAT? THE PILOT PAYMENT.
AS I SAID A MINUTE AGO, AT THIS POINT, I'M SO NERVOUS ABOUT SPOOKING THE STATE THAT I, IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS, FINE.
I JUST WANT THEN, THEN THERE'S REALLY NO ISSUES.
RE THE ISSUE WOULD BE A RESOLUTION, YOU KNOW, EITHER ADOPTED BY THE END OF THE YEAR OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO SEND UP TO THE STATE.
EDIE WAS THAT SMILE, MEANING THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE SATISFIED.
SO WHAT I AM, YES, FRANCIS, IT WAS, WHAT I AM SATISFIED ABOUT IS THE PRESENTATION THAT WE DISCUSSED, UM, AND THE PILOT AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE THAT THE TOWN BOARD IS AWARE OF IS EXACTLY WHAT, WHAT BILL IS PRESENTING TONIGHT.
YOU SHOULD MARK THAT DOWN ON THE TIME.
UM, BUT, UM, I THINK THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
SO WE HAVE TO MEMORIALIZE THAT INTO A RESOLUTION AND PASS IT.
ARE, ARE, ARE WE GONNA HAVE A ANOTHER, UM, WORK SESSION NEXT TUESDAY? UH, I, I, I'M
I DIDN'T HAVE A CRUISE, BUT IF I DID, I'D CANCEL IT.
SO I'LL CANCEL MY VACATION TO MY LIVING ROOM.
YOU KNOW, IT IT, IT'S SAD TO SAY THAT WHEN WE STARTED DOING ZOOMS, UH, PAUL, YOU PUT OUT A FLOW CHART OF YOUR TRAVEL PLANS, IF YOU REMEMBER, AND IT HAD AN ARROW GOING FROM YOUR LIVING ROOM TO YOUR DINING ROOM TO TO THE BEDROOM, TO THE KITCHEN.
AND HERE WE ARE NOW IN DECEMBER, AND THAT'S BASICALLY THE SAME TRAVEL PLAN, BUT IT'LL GET BETTER.
THERE'S A LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.
IT'S, WE JUST HAVE TO BE PATIENT.
SO WHY DON'T WE, WELL, SO THAT'S, SO I THINK WE'RE ALL ON, HAVE A MEETING IN THE MINES HERE AND WE CAN HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING NEXT TUESDAY AND WE'LL MEMORIALIZE WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT AND THAT'LL BE IT.
SO NEXT ON THE LIST IS, UM, PROBABLY GONNA UNION CONCERNS FROM TEAMSTERS RE LEWIS MASTERS HOLDING PROJECT.
SO, UM, UH, DO YOU HAVE A VER DOMINIC IS HERE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UH, SPEAK? YES, PLEASE.
UH, THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD FOR A LOT, GIVING ME A FEW MINUTES ON, UH, UH, THIS PROJECT.
UM, I KIND OF WANT TO TAKE MY UNION HAT OFF FOR A MINUTE, 'CAUSE A LOT OF TIME OR SEPARATE MY, THE UNION CONCERNS VERSUS, UH, A RESIDENT OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG'S CONCERNS.
UH, 'CAUSE A LOT OF TIMES WHEN PEOPLE HEAR UNION CONCERNS,
[00:15:01]
THEY THINK THERE'S AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE OR SOMETHING BEHIND.WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO THERE IS NOT.
I'M SPEAKING AS A RESIDENT OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
UM, AND YOU KNOW WHAT? SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE UNION, UH, WE DO A LOT OF GOOD WORK FOR THE PEOPLE.
UM, SO WHETHER PEOPLE BELIEVE THERE'S AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE TO WHAT WE DO, LOOK, WE'RE FIGHTING FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS TO PROVIDE THEM CAREERS, A CAREER PATH, UM, IN SOCIETY.
UM, SO IF THEY CONSIDER THAT AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE, GUILTY AS CHARGED.
BUT, UM, TAKING THAT HAT OFF FOR TONIGHT, RIGHT NOW, UM, I THINK YOU'RE PREACHING TO THE CONVERTED
I KNOW THE NEW YORK STATE, D E C, THEY HAVE CERTAIN STORM WATER PROTECTION PLANS, WHICH I BELIEVE ARE ADOPTED BY THE TOWN.
UM, WHICH STATE IN THEM THAT MATERIAL ON CERTAIN ON SITES, UM, SHOULD BE REMOVED PROMPTLY.
UM, AND FOR GOOD CAUSE I MEAN, IT'S TO PROTECT THE STORMWATER.
UM, AND AS WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THIS MEETING, WITH THE MELTING OF SNOW, POSSIBLE RAIN, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT OF RUNOFF ON THAT SITE.
AND THERE IS STEEL DEBRIS, ALL KINDS OF DEBRIS FROM THE DEMO OF THAT BUILDING JUST LAYING ON THE BLACKTOP, WHICH IT SHOULDN'T BE.
IT SHOULD BE REMOVED PROMPTLY, AS IT SAYS IN THE NEW YORK STATE D E C, WHICH IT'S NOT BEING DONE.
UM, AND THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THROUGH PEOPLE THAT I'VE HEARD FROM, IT'S DUE TO FINANCIAL INTERESTS, UH, TO NOT REMOVE IT RIGHT NOW AND WAIT TILL THE NEW YEAR.
UM, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU HIRE PEOPLE THAT DO NOT LIVE LOCALLY.
THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE COMMUNITY.
THEY DON'T CARE THAT POSSIBLY ASBESTOS FROM THAT BUILDING IS IN THAT STEEL THAT'S GONNA RUN OFF NOW INTO THE STORMWATER.
UM, YOU KNOW, PUTTING MY UNION HAT BACK ON, WE'VE DEALT WITH THESE PEOPLE ON NUMEROUS PROJECTS.
WE HAVE LAWSUITS AGAINST THEM, WHICH IS WELL DOCUMENTED BECAUSE OF THEIR FAILURE TO CARE ABOUT THE THINGS THEY DO OR THE CONTRACTS THEY SIGN.
UM, SO AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THOSE CONCERNS AGAIN, NOT AS A A UNION REP, BUT AS A RESIDENT OF GREENBERG, I REALLY FEEL FEAR FOR THE, THE WATER IN OUR TOWN, UH, SHOULD ALL THIS DEBRIS LEAK INTO OUR STORMWATER BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PROPERLY TAKING IT AWAY PROMPTLY.
UM, I'M WONDERING IF STEVE
HOW ARE YOU? UH, I, THE ONLY THING I COULD DO IS HAVE THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT GO OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE THE, THE STORM WATER, UM, ISSUES ARE, ARE LOOKED AT.
UM, MY INSPECTOR WAS OUT THERE YESTERDAY ON ANOTHER ISSUE, UM, AND HE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT THEY WERE DOING, UM, THAT HE FELT THAT WAS ILLEGAL, UM, AT THIS TIME.
BUT, UM, BUT SURE, WE CAN SEND SOMEBODY OUT FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, UH, STORMWATER, UH, UM, CONDITIONS ARE MET.
UM, AND WHATEVER PROTECTION THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE UP IS UP.
UM, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY LAW, THERE'S NO TOWN LAW THAT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO REMOVE THE DEBRIS IMMEDIATELY FROM SITE.
A LOT OF DEMOLITION PROJECTS THAT GO ALONG, UM, ARE DEFINITELY DO STOCKPILE FOR DAYS, POSSIBLY A COUPLE WEEKS AT A TIME UNTIL THEY HAVE, UH, COMPLETED THEIR PROCESS AND THEN THEY GET THEIR EQUIPMENT IN TO TAKE IT OUT.
UM, BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, UH, I MAY HAVE TO, UH, UH, CONSULT WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ON THAT TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER D E C LAWS THAT, UH, THAT THEY, UH, ARE NOT ABIDING BY.
WOULD WE, WOULD, UH, IT BE POSSIBLE, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR DOMINIC AND, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU AND MAYBE A REPRESENTATIVE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE COMPANY, UM, YOU KNOW, TO SORT OF LIKE MEET, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, DOMINIC, UM, AND OTHER RESIDENTS HAVE CONCERNS.
COULD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE EVEN IF THERE'S NO LAW, MAYBE THE COMPANY WOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, RECEPTIVE AND BE A GOOD, YOU KNOW, A GOOD NEIGHBOR.
UM, AND IF THERE ARE VIOLATIONS, OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, CORRECTED.
I GOT HAVE GOTTEN A FEW COMPLAINTS, YOU KNOW, FROM RESIDENTS, BUT YEAH.
BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY DID EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO, UM, HELP THE SUPERMARKET AND IT WAS, IT COULD HAVE BEEN A MORE CONTROVERSIAL PROJECT, SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE EVERYBODY WORKING, YOU KNOW, TOGETHER AND, YOU KNOW, HAVING A DIALOGUE.
AND I, I REALLY FEEL THAT IF WE MEET AND I'D BE HAPPY TO PARTICIPATE IN A MEETING THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO RESOLVE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE, ALL THE, I HAVE NO, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.
UM, BUT I THINK I NEED TO CONSULT WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
[00:20:02]
RICH, DOES ANYBODY IN TOMORROW WE CAN GET THEM OUT.YEAH, SO I'LL, I'LL, I GRABBED ONE OF THEM BEFORE, BUT, UM, WE'LL HAVE THEM OUT THERE.
I THINK THE ISSUE THAT DOMINIC'S TALKING ABOUT IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE, UH, THE STATE'S MS FOUR PERMIT.
SO WITH STORMWATER, SO, WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE THEM TAKE A LOOK AT THE SITE TOMORROW.
AND LIKE I SAID, MY, MY ONLY CONCERN IS, AGAIN, I, I KNOW THEM FROM PREVIOUS HISTORY AND I KNOW THAT THEY TRY TO SNEAK BY AND EVERYTHING.
AND MY CONCERN WITH THE PITCH OF THAT PROPERTY, THAT IF THERE IS SOME CHEMICALS IN THAT STEEL THAT THEY'RE TAKING DOWN, THAT IT'S GONNA FALL DOWN INTO THE STORMWATER.
BY THE WAY, O OFF NOTE, DOMINIC, YOU GUYS DID A JUST GREAT JOB DURING THE LAST STORM.
LISTEN, IF YOU COULD TELL OUR FELLOW TEAMSTERS TO MAYBE TURN THE BLADE THE OTHER WAY, NEXT TIME THEY COME DOWN MY BLOCK,
I THINK THEY DO THAT ON PURPOSE TO YOUR HOUSE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WHAT YOU DO.
DONE MY FOLLOW IN 40 YEARS, UH, YOU'LL BE ELIGIBLE FOR A SNOW ANGELS TO CLEAR THE SNOW FROM YOUR DROVE
I GOT MY KIDS FOR THAT RIGHT NOW.
NEXT I'VE GOT SOMETHING FOR YOU,
NEXT WE HAVE, UH, THE TRAFFIC, UH, SAFETY, UH, YOU KNOW, COMMITTEE.
UM, UH, THEY, UM, LUCAS CAME UP WITH SOME, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, I THINK FRANCIS, YOU RECOMMENDED AN ADDITIONAL, UH, RESIDENT OF, UM, FAIRVIEW.
UH, I THINK WE SHOULD ALSO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE AND TAXI ROAD FROM YEAH.
EAST IRVINGTON AND, UM, AND MAYBE THE HASTINGS, YOU KNOW, NEAR JACKSON AVENUE.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, THEN I THINK WE WOULD BE, UH, YOU KNOW, GOOD TO GO.
I'M JUST SORT OF WONDERING IF WE SHOULD WITH FAIRVIEW, UM, YOU KNOW, SUCH A LARGE AREA.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE ONE 19 CORRIDOR, UH, YOU HAVE, UH, PARKWAY GARDENS, PARKWAY HOMES, YOU KNOW, I'M WONDERING IF THERE SHOULD BE REPRESENTATION FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM A COUPLE, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT SECTIONS ON, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY AREAS WHERE THERE'S, UM, WELL, THEY DID ADD A SECOND ONE.
DO YOU THINK THAT'S ENOUGH FOR, AND NO, YOU KNOW, WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW BIG YOU WANNA MAKE THE COMMITTEE.
NO, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY WHATEVER THE COM, THE
UH, TAXI TO ROAD IS, IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT.
THEY, THEY'VE ALREADY AGREED TO NINE A IN NORTH THE NORTH ELMSFORD AREA.
AND, UH, THE SECOND ONE IN FAIRVIEW, ANYBODY FROM THE COMMITTEE HERE.
OH, AND ALSO MAYBE THE PAIN, YOU KNOW, LIKE PAIN NORTH ELMSFORD PROBABLY WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, WORTHWHILE BECAUSE WELL, THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I SAID.
UM, WE HAVE A DISCUSSION, BATTERY ELECTRICITY STORAGE SYSTEMS. UM, UM, YOU KNOW, WALTER SENT US A, A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING BOARD EARLIER TODAY.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO START OFF WITH SOME THOUGHTS THAT YOU HAVE AND THEN BOARD MEMBERS AND THE COMMUNITY COULD WEIGH IN C A C, WALTER? WELL, YOU'RE MUTED.
SORRY TO MUTE HIMSELF, I THINK.
UM, THE MEMO I SENT THIS MORNING, UH, IT WAS VERY, UH, IT WAS SOMETHING WE HAD TO DO, UH, OVER THE WEEKEND BECAUSE WE JUST FOUND OUT THAT, UH, UH, THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONAL, UH, STORAGE BATTERIES, FACILITIES BEING PROPOSED.
AND THE REAL ISSUE IS NOT THAT, UH, THERE'S OPPOSITION TO THE TECHNOLOGY BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT IS WHERE, UH, THE TECHNOLOGY IS MOVING TO ADDRESS GLOBAL WARMING AND TO, UH, DECREASE OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOSSIL FUEL.
[00:25:01]
NO PROBLEM WITH THE TECHNOLOGY AS SUCH, THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WE HAVE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE APPROPRIATE CODES IN PLACE TO REGULATE IT PROPERLY.SO THE TOWN COULD BE ASSURED THAT THEY'RE MOVING THROUGH THIS TECHNOLOGY WITH, UH, DELIBERATELY AND WITH COMMON SENSE, AND THAT WE HAVE TAKEN IN ALL THE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AS A TOWN EMBRACING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY.
SO THAT IS OUR, UH, BASIC POINT, AND THE FACT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE APPROPRIATE CODES, AND THAT'S WHY WE DIFFER WITH THE BUILDINGS, UH, INSPECTORS INTERPRETATION THAT, UH, THAT, UH, YOU COULD DO IT ON THE SPECIAL PERMIT.
AND WE TAKE, UH, UH, MAKE STRAIGHT DIFFERENCE WITH THAT OPINION.
AND, UH, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE CODES, YOU KNOW, YOU, IT CLEARLY DOES NOT COVER THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT NOT TO LET THAT OPINION STAND.
AND THAT SHOULD, UH, BE, UH, THAT DECISION SHOULD BE CHALLENGED BY THE TOWN BOARD, BECAUSE AS I INDICATED IN THE LETTER, YOU ARE THE LEAD AGENCY HERE, AND I THINK IT'S UP TO THE, AND, AND YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SPECIAL PERMIT, SO YOU BECOME THE OBVIOUS, UH, UH, UH, ENTITY TO CHALLENGE THAT CODE.
SO THAT IS THE, THE TWO KEY THINGS IS THAT, THAT, THAT CODE INTERPRETATION SHOULD NOT STAND.
YOU NEED A LAW TO REGULATE IT.
WE ARE NOT, UH, HOLDING OUR HEADS IN THE SAND AND TRYING TO IGNORE, UH, NEW IMPORTANT TECHNOLOGY.
AND, AND IN THAT VEIN, WE THINK IN ORDER TO TAKE THE TIME TO COME UP WITH A WELL STRUCTURED LAW THAT WILL ALLOW ALTERNATE TECHNOLOGY IN OUR TOWN, AND IT THE SAME WAY DOING IT IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY, YOU NEED TO PUT A MORATORIUM ON THIS.
SO YOU COULD TAKE THE TIME, DRAW UP A PROPER, UH, UH, UH, CODE, AND THEN GO FORWARD WITH THE TECHNOLOGY.
MR. BERNSTEIN, YOU HAVE COMMENTS, YOU'RE UNMUTED.
UH, I AGREE WITH, UM, WITH WHAT, UH, WALTER SAID.
UH, I THINK THAT THIS IS, UM, BASED ON THE PLANNING BOARD'S, UH, DECEMBER 7TH ANALYSIS, A REPORT TO THE BOARD, UH, THAT THIS IS A MATTER THAT SHOULD BE, UH, APPEALED OR REFERRED TO THE ZONING BOARD FOR A DETERMINATION.
UH, I DON'T, UH, NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT OF A MORATORIUM, UH, BECAUSE, UH, I THINK FOR ONE THING, IF YOU APPEAL, UH, OR, UH, IF YOU APPEAL THE MATTER TO THE ZONING BOARD, THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC STAY OF ALL FURTHER APPLICATIONS OR ANY APPLICATIONS, UH, FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT ON THAT GROUND UNTIL THE ZONING BOARD MAKES ITS DETERMINATION.
UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE THE ZONING BOARD TO, TO DO THIS.
UH, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, LENO AND I HAVE, UH, HAVE A HISTORY ON ON THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE TO DO.
BUT, UH, AT THE SAME TIME, THE THE TOWN BOARD THEN WORK, UM, TOWARD DEVELOPING AN APPROPRIATE, UH, CODE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE TECHNOLOGY, UH, WHERE IT SHOULD BE CITED, WHAT CONDITIONS BE IMPOSED, UH, IN TERMS OF BUFFERS AND, AND THE VARIOUS OTHER THINGS THAT YOU AND OTHERS HAVE POINTED OUT ARE, ARE NECESSARY TO, UH, ALLOW THE SIGHTING OF TYPES OF FACILITIES, NOT JUST BATTERY, BUT ALSO SOLAR AND, AND, UH, AND WIND.
UM, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATION, SHOULD
UH, I HAVE AN OPEN MIND ON IT.
[00:30:01]
I WOULD RATHER SEE, UH, UH, UM, SOME CLOSE ANALYSIS OF, UH, WHAT AN APPROPRIATE RESTRICTION SHOULD LOOK LIKE FOR THIS.I WOULD WANNA LOOK AT WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE DOING, UH, TO REGULATE THIS.
IN MANY WAYS, I WOULD SAY THIS IS A ANALOG TO WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MID NINETIES WHEN CELL PHONE ANTENNAS, UH, WERE BEING PROPOSED AND THE TOWN, UM, PUT TOGETHER, UH, WITHIN LEGAL LIMITS, UH, A VERY COMPREHENSIVE CELL PHONE LAW THAT WE STILL LIVE WITH TODAY.
UH, WHICH DIFFERENTIATES, I MIGHT POINT OUT BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONS, UH, WHICH ARE BY PERMIT AND, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL LOCATIONS, WHICH ARE AS OF RIGHT.
BUT I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S WHAT WE DO HERE, BUT I'M SAYING THAT, THAT THAT'S AN ANALOGOUS SITUATION, UH, THE ADVENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGY AND A NEED TO, UH, ADDRESS IT PROPERLY.
UH, AND, UH, AT THE SAME TIME, UH, GET THE, UH, EXISTING INTERPRETATION, UM, IN THE NOVEMBER 12TH, APPEALED TO THE ZONING BOARD, UH, WHICH WILL PUT A, A HOLD ON ANY APPLICATIONS WHILE NEW LEGISLATION IS DEVELOPED.
UM, YOU KNOW, MIKE OR TERRY PAUL, MAY I SAY SOMETHING? PLEASE? DO YOU WANNA SAY ANYTHING, PAUL? SURE.
THE, THE REASON FOR THE MORATORIUM ACTUALLY, UH, GOES BEYOND, UH, RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THE REASON THAT WE, UH, WALTER AND I, UH, RECOMMENDED THE MORATORIUM WAS BECAUSE YOU NOW HAVE TWO POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS COMING IN, IN COMMERCIAL ZONES, WHICH ARE NOT CLEARLY NOT COVERED BY WHAT WOULD BE APPEALED TO THE ZONING BOARDS.
SO YOU REALLY NEED TO DO BOTH.
UM, AND THE, THE REASON WHY IT'S PROBLEMATIC IN A COMMERCIAL AREA, TAKE FOR EXAMPLE, THE, UH, POTENTIAL APPLICATION AT MIDWAY, MIDWAY WHERE THEY WANNA PUT THAT, UH, BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY IS ACTUALLY CLOSER TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA THAN WHAT THEY WANNA DO AT NORWOOD.
SO WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT WHERE WE WANNA PUT THESE BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES, WHICH ARE THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE, THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT IT, BUT WE NEED TO DO IT ON A COMPREHENSIVE BASIS ACROSS ALL ZONES, NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL.
SO THE APPEAL TO THE ZONING BOARD ACTUALLY DOES NOT IMPACT THOSE TWO POTENTIALLY NEW APPLICATIONS.
TWO, IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING A MORATORIUM, JUST A DETAIL, YOU DON'T WANT TO THROW OUT THE BABY WITH THE BATH WATER EITHER.
PEOPLE ARE PUTTING STORAGE FOR BATTERY STORAGE IN THEIR HOMES.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER THE MOR MORATORIUM IS, IF WE DO THAT, IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE PEOPLE FROM PUTTING THOSE BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES IN IN THEIR HOUSES.
WE NEED TO HAVE SOME KIND OF PARAMETER FOR THAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD DO.
I JUST HAD A QUESTION, A CLARIFICATION QUESTION.
UM, RIGHT NOW, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A REQUEST BY SOME PEOPLE, UH, TO APPEAL THE RULING UNDER, UH, THE, UH, THE STATE LAW.
UH, TIM IS A TOWN BOARD THE ONLY, UH, ENTITY THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO APPEAL.
AND IF THE TOWN BOARD CHOOSES NOT TO APPEAL, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO CAN APPEAL INSTEAD? YES, THERE ARE OTHER AGENCIES OF THE TOWN AND BOARDS THAT ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPEAL.
WELL, WHO PLANNING BOARD, FOR EXAMPLE? UM, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT AGENCIES LIKE THE C A C, BUT THEY'RE ALL OUTLINED IN THE STATUTE.
AND WHAT ABOUT, WHAT ABOUT CITIZENS? I THINK THERE'S SOME AMBIGUITY THERE.
I'M NOT SURE IF A CITIZEN CAN DO THAT, BUT I'M CERTAIN THAT OTHER BOARDS AND AGENCIES CAN.
UM, UH, MR. SUPERVISOR, YOU ASKED IF THE C A C WANTED TO COMMENT AND MAKE YES, MAKE A SHORT COMMENT AT THIS TIME.
AND THEN I THINK THE CHAIR, UH, UH, TERRITORY MAY SAY SOMETHING THAT, UM, THE C A C, UM, IS IN FAVOR OF GREEN ENERGY.
UM, SOME OF WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED IS MORE GREEN GREENER THAN OTHER THAN WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED SO FAR.
BUT THE C A C IS IN FAVOR IN CONCEPT OF GREEN ENERGY, AND OUR VIEWS ARE CONSISTENT WITH, UH, CHAIRMAN SIMON.
UM, AND AGAIN, CONSISTENT, CONSISTENT WITH WHAT, UH, CHAIRMAN SIMON SAID, THE ISSUE IS TO DO IT IN THE RIGHT WAY AND TO DO IT SAFELY.
UM, THE DECEMBER FOUR REPORT OF THE C A
[00:35:01]
C, WHICH IS IN FRONT OF THE BOARD, UH, UH, IDENTIFIES THE EXTENT THAT WE COULD AT THIS TIME, UH, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES.UH, THE DECEMBER 10 REPORT OF THE C A C EXPRESSES THE VIEW THAT, BASED ON THE REPORT THAT, UH, UH, THE DECEMBER FOUR C A C REPORT, UH, WITH RESPECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES WITH RESPECT.
AND THE, UH, DECEMBER 7TH PLANNING A BOARD, UM, REPORT SAYING THAT THERE'S JUST TOO MANY OPEN QUESTIONS HERE.
AND BASED ON THE PUBLIC RECORD AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, ABOUT A WEEK AGO, UH, THE C A C JUST DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT THE STATUTORY STANDARD OF HAVING, UH, MEETING A DETERMINATION, THAT QUOTE, THERE WILL BE NO, THE STATUTE SAYS THERE WILL BE NO SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
JUST DON'T BELIEVE AT THIS POINT IN TIME THAT CAN BE MADE.
THEREFORE, THE C A C DOESN'T BELIEVE AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THERE COULD BE A, UH, UM, A REASONABLE DETERMINATION THAT A NEC COULD BE ISSUED.
AND THE C A C BELIEVES THAT UNDER THE STATUTE, WHICH SAYS IF THERE MAY BE THE POTENTIAL FOR AT LEAST ONE, THIS MAY BE THE POTENTIAL FOR AT LEAST ONE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
UM, WE, UM, UH, BELIEVE THAT, UH, THE SUGGESTION OF THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, THAT THERE BE A MORE TERM IS QUITE RATIONAL.
UH, WE AGREE WITH WHAT VICE CHAIRMAN, UH, UM, UH, SCHWARTZ JUST SAID THAT, UM, THE ISSUE ON NO WORD, WHICH WAS CITING IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE, UM, IS NOT ADDRESSED AT ALL BY THE TWO NEW, AND I'M NOT SURE THEIR APPLICATIONS, THEY MAY BE APPLICATIONS TO BE, OR THERE MAY BE APPLICATIONS.
IT WASN'T QUITE CLEAR FROM WHAT THE C S C HAS SEEN SO FAR, WHERE THERE'S ACTUAL APPLICATIONS IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE MIXED, UH, USE DISTRICT.
THEY HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT RULES.
AND, UM, UM, UH, WE BELIEVE IT'S QUITE RATIONAL FOR THE TOWN TO HOPEFULLY SUPPORT THESE GREEN ENERGY INITIATIVES AND CONCEPT.
BUT TO LET'S FIND OUT WHAT WE'RE DOING AND BE SURE WE DO IT IN THE RIGHT WAY AND DO IT SAFELY.
AND LOOK AT THE GALAXY OF, UH, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE FACILITIES, UH, SOLAR FARMS AND WIND TURBINES.
UM, THERE IS A, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF COMPLEXITIES.
UH, AS MR. BERNSTEIN SAID, UH, UM, THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT RULES FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL, AND IF IT'S NON-RESIDENTIAL, THERE MAY BE SPECIAL BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS.
UH, SO, 'CAUSE WE HAVE NON-RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT ESSENTIALLY BACK UP INTO, UM, RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
AND THEN, LIKE SOMEONE POINTED OUT WHO, UM, THE ONES THAT POTENTIALLY PROPOSED TO CENTRAL AVENUE WERE ACTUALLY CLOSER TO HOUSES THAN THE ONE IN OLDLAND.
AND THEN THERE WERE JUST VERY COM COMPLEX TECHNOLOGY INVOLVED HERE ABOUT THESE, UH, UM, UH, LITHIUM ION BATTERIES AND ISSUES OF, UH, UH, RUNAWAY THERMAL, UH, FIRES, WHICH APPARENTLY YOU DON'T REALLY PUT OUT BUT KEEP BURNING, BUT YOU PUT A LOT OF WATER AROUND THEM SO OTHER THINGS DON'T CATCH ON FIRE.
AND TESLA IN ITS OWN, UH, IN ITS OWN PUBLICATIONS ABOUT THESE BATTERIES SAY THAT, THAT THE PEOPLE THAT WERE WORKING ON THIS HAVE TO HAVE FULL P P E AND HAVE TO HAVE SELF, UH, BREATHING APPARATUS SO THEY DON'T BREED THE FUMES AND CIVILIANS DOWNSTREAM HAVE TO, UH, PROTECTIONS HAVE TO BE MADE FOR THEM.
UM, AND THE C A C IS NOT AT ALL SUGGESTING THERE CANNOT BE ANCESTORS TO THIS.
THE C A C SUPPORTS GREEN ENERGY, BUT THE C AGENCY JUST DOESN'T THINK THE TOWN AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, IS THERE.
AND IT'S NOT THE FAULT OF THE TOWN.
UH, THESE ARE NEW TECHNOLOGIES.
WE NEED SOME OUTSIDE HELP IN TERMS OF NYSERDA AND IN TERMS OF AN EXPERT.
WE JUST WANT TO DO IT RIGHTLY AND CAREFULLY.
AND THEN I, I HAD A, A QUESTION, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR TIM, UM, WOULD ONE OPTION BE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF PEOPLE HAVE APPLICATIONS TO HAVE, SAY, A MORATORIUM ON, UM, APPROVALS? UM, UH, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR, AND MOST PEOPLE ARE SORT OF OPEN-MINDED TO THE, YOU KNOW, THE CONCEPT, THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY AGAINST IT, BUT THEY HAVE CONCERNS RELATING TO FIRE SOME ENVIRONMENTAL,
[00:40:01]
UH, POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, HEALTH ISSUES.UM, THEY WOULD FEEL, YOU KNOW, MORE REASSURED IF, YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME EXPERTS WHO COULD TELL US EXACTLY WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS ARE AND IS SORT OF FAIL RATHER THAN RUSHING AND MAKING A DECISION.
IF WE HAD, SAY, A MORATORIUM ON APPROVALS, UH, THE APPLICATION PROCESSES COULD STILL BE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE STILL COULD BE FILED, BUT THE APPLICANTS WOULD THEN, UM, YOU KNOW, BE PUT ON NOTICE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO GUARANTEES AND TOWN IS GONNA BE, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKING SOME MODIFICATIONS, YOU KNOW, TO THE, YOU KNOW, TO THE LAWS.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M SORT OF WONDERING, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THIS, YOU KNOW, I I I WOULD FEEL THAT WE WOULD BE ADDRESSING ALL THE MAJOR CONCERNS PEOPLE HAVE.
NOBODY WANTS TO RUSH THIS AND NOBODY WANTS TO, AND PEOPLE REALLY DON'T WANNA STOP THE TECHNOLOGY IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA BE IMPORTANT FOR, UM, FOR SUSTAINABILITY.
OH, MR. MR. SUPERVISOR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I DON'T WANNA, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REPORT THAT THE C A C HAS LOOKED AT THIS ISSUE IN ANOTHER CONTEXT, UH, IN CONDUCTION WITH THE, UH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF C, D, AND C AND, UM, REPORT THAT IN NOVEMBER OF 2019, THE NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS DRIVE-IN VERSUS TOWN OF BROOKING AND AFFIRMED THE LONGSTANDING NEW YORK, LONGSTANDING NEW YORK RULE, THAT WHERE ZONING LAWS AMENDED AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR LAND USE.
BUT BEFORE A DECISION IS RENDERED ON THE APPLICATION, THE AMENDED LAW APPLIES TO THE APPLICATION APPROVED.
SO, UH, THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS TO THAT, BUT THE BASIC RULE THAT'S BEEN LONGSTANDING IN NEW YORK, AND IT WAS AFFIRMED LAST YEAR, NOVEMBER, 2019, NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, NEW YORK'S HIGHEST COURT CASE CALLED ROCKY POINT DRIVE IN VERSUS TOWN OF BROOK DRIVE, THAT IS, IS NOT THE LAW AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION.
IT IS AT THE TIME THE LAW, AT THE TIME OF THE APPROVAL, AND YOU, THE MORATORIUM YOU HAVE SUGGESTED, AND OF COURSE THIS IS ALL UP TO THE TOWN ATTORNEY, BUT IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE MORATORIUM THAT YOU SUGGESTED WOULD GIVE FAIR NOTICE TO PEOPLE, UM, THAT THE TOWN IS STUDYING THIS, UH, AND STUDYING TO LOOK TO BE FAVORABLE.
BUT THERE WELL MAY WELL BE, UH, CONDITIONS, UH, AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE TO BE SATISFIED.
YEAH, BECAUSE I'M, I WROTE, UM, OR I, I, I DRAFTED A LETTER, UH, TO THE HEAD OF NYSERDA, AND I THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE GREAT IF NYSERDA WOULD ATTEND, UH, THE TOWN BOARD, UH, PUBLIC HEARING, UM, ON JANUARY 13TH.
I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD FIND A CONSULTANT WHO COULD RESPOND TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED, YOU KNOW, AT THE LAST MEETING RELATING TO, UH, FIRE AND ENVIRONMENTAL, YOU KNOW, ISSUES.
SO THIS WAY IF WE DID A MORATORIUM AND WE REALLY GOT EXPERTS, WE'RE NOT TELLING THEM WHAT TO SAY.
BUT IF WE GOT EXPERTS TO, UH, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS, THEN NOBODY COULD SAY WE'RE RAMMING SOMETHING THROUGH AND THEN WE'RE NOT DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
AND, YOU KNOW, TO ME, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S SAFE AND UP FOR WORKS AND WE COULD COME UP WITH A, SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY COULD, I THINK WE COULD REACH A CONSENSUS, BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL THAT ANYBODY'S TRYING TO BE AN OBSTRUCTIONIST ON US.
PAUL, JUST TO, JUST TO ADDRESS YOUR, YOUR QUESTION THOUGH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S CERTAINLY A TOPIC THAT'S WORTHY OF DISCUSSION.
'CAUSE I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS THERE ARE, THERE ARE CERTAIN TIME CONTINGENCIES HERE WITH RESPECT TO, TO FINANCING.
I THINK CERTAINLY WITH THE EQUALS BATTERY STORAGE APPLICANT, THEY, THEY'VE MADE THAT CLEAR.
UM, I MEAN, TO THE EXTENT THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT'S A CONCERN FOR THE BOARD, FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU MAY NOT HAVE THAT PROJECT.
HAVING SAID THAT, THE BOARD CAN CERTAINLY DISCUSS SOME OF THE ACTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD ALSO REACH OUT TO OUR STATE LAWMAKERS.
UH, WE COULD ASK THEM IF THEY WOULD, YOU KNOW, WE COULD TELL THEM THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, OBJECTING, BUT WE BASICALLY WANT TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
AND THERE'S, SINCE I'VE BEEN TOWN SUPERVISOR, THERE'S PRACTICALLY NO PROJECTS THAT HAVE GOTTEN APPROVED WITHIN A COUPLE MONTHS.
UM, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING ALWAYS TAKES TIME.
THERE'S ALWAYS A REVIEW PROCESS.
AND I FEEL THAT IF THE PUBLIC FEELS THAT WE'RE REALLY DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE, THEY'LL HAVE MORE CONFIDENCE IN, YOU KNOW, IN THE PROCESS.
YOU KNOW, AND BOB, WAS WAS, WAS BOB QUESTIONING THE LEGALITY OF THE MORATORIUM OR JUST THE NECESSITY OF THE MORATORIUM? UM, I, UH, IF I MIGHT, UM, I WAS, UH, QUESTIONING BOTH, BUT I WAS ALSO LEARNING NEW
[00:45:01]
INFORMATION AS I WAS LISTENING TO YOU GUYS, I WAS NOT AWARE THAT THERE ARE APPLICATIONS, UM, UH, PENDING OR ABOUT TO BE FILED, UH, IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE MIXED USE ZONE.UM, THERE ARE TWO OF 'EM, BOB.
UH, AND NO ONE'S SHARED IT WITH ME, SO, UH, I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, THAT
BUT YOU, YOU HAVEN'T SHARED IT AND IT'S NEWS TO ME.
I, I SENT IT TO COLIN MCCARTHY, UH, OVER THE WEEKEND.
OKAY, I'LL, OKAY, I'LL, I'LL CHECK WITH COLIN.
HE, HE HASN'T SHARED IT, BUT THE, THE REASON IT'S IMPORTANT IS TO KNOW, UH, ON WHAT BASIS ARE THEY, WOULD THEY BE FILING THE APPLICATION? ARE THEY FILING IT BECAUSE THEY CONTEND THAT IT'S A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE? NO, NO, NO.
NO, IT, IT'S VERY STRANGE IN THE MIX.
THIS IS GETTING INTO THE SUB DETAILS.
I KNOW THE BOARD WANTS TO GO THROUGH THIS, BUT IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE MIXED USE DISTRICT, AS I'M SURE YOU KNOW, BOB
THE STANDARD STATUTE, THERE'S CERTAIN PROHIBITED USES UNDER, UH, 29.1 2, 85 DASH 29.1.
UM, UM, THE STATEMENT OF PROHIBITED USES ARE COLLOQUIALLY PUT.
IF IT AIN'T ALLOWED, IT'S PROHIBITED.
THAT'S THE LEAD IN TO THE PROHIBITED USE SECTION.
UH, E I THINK IT'S, UM, UM, SUBSECTION E IF IT AIN'T ALLOWED, IT AIN'T SPECIFIED.
IT AIN'T, IT AIN'T, WHAT IS THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS? IT'S PROHIBITED USE.
NOW YOU CAN READ THE MIXED USE DISTRICT HAS A BUNCH, A BUNCH OF PERMITTED USES.
I DON'T THINK A FAIR READING OF ANY OF THOSE WOULD SAY ANY OF 'EM OR EVEN A COUSIN OF BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE FACILITIES.
BUT ALL I'M ALL THE, ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT THE POINT THAT VICE CHAIRMAN SCHWARTZ MADE IS CORRECT, IN MY OPINION, THAT WE GOT DIFFERENT ZONES WITH DIFFERENT RULES AND WHAT THE SUPERVISORS IS PROPOSING SEEMS TO THE C A C EMILY RATIONAL AND HAS NO HARM IN IT.
BUT I, I WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER KEN JONES' QUESTION, AND KEN'S QUESTION AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS, DO I HAVE A LEGAL PROBLEM WITH THE MORATORIUM? CORRECT? AND THE ANSWER IS, UM, IF AN APPLICANT HAS FILED AN APPLICATION WHICH HE OR SHE BELIEVES IS AS OF RIGHT, AND THE TOWN SEEKS TO IMPOSE A MORATORIUM, WHICH COULD, UH, RESULT IN THE LAW BEING CHANGED, THAT COULD CREATE A LEGAL PROBLEM.
BECAUSE THE ROCKY POINT DECISION DOESN'T APPLY TO THE SO-CALLED SPECIAL FACTS EXCEPTION, WHICH IS WHEN AN APPLICANT FILES AN APPLICATION AS OF RIGHT, AND THEN THE, UH, MUNICIPALITY MOVES, THE GOALPOST, CHANGES THE LAW.
AND SO IN THAT SITUATION, UM, A MORATORIUM COULD RESULT IN A LEGAL PROBLEM.
AND SO, NO, IT DIDN'T SAY, IT'S NOT TO FILE THE APPLICATION AS A RIGHT.
IT'S ENTITLED TO A PERMIT AS A RIGHT.
THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.
I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR DISTINCTION, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND HOW LITIGATION WORKS.
BUT QUESTION, I KNOW YOU DO, I RAISE IS NOT KNOWING WHAT THE, UM, APPLICATION OR WOULD BE APPLICATION WAS SEEKING TO DO.
UM, UH, I AM FAMILIAR WITH LITIGATION INCLUDING LITIGATION AGAINST THE TOWN WHERE, UH, THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION, UM, AT WHICH THE APPLICANT BELIEVES IS AS OF RIGHT, UM, COULD GIVE RISE TO A CLAIM THAT A MORATORIUM THAT'S PROPOSED IS UNLAWFUL.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS RAISING.
AND AND THAT'S A, BOB TO ME JUST REINFORCES THE NEED FOR SPEED IN WHAT CHAIRMAN SIMON RECOMMENDED AND WHAT THE SUPERVISOR IS TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT THERE'S ALWAYS THE LITIGATION RISK AND THE SOONER YOU GET IT ON THE BOOKS, THAT CUTS OFF THE LITIGATION ROOMS, I THINK.
SO I WOULD JUST COMMENT, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU AT ALL.
I DON'T THINK IT IS A WIN UP, BUT IF YOU WANNA BE SURE AND CUT IT OFF, DO, DO WHAT CHAIRMAN SIMON SUPERVISOR BEEN TALKING ABOUT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
I JUST WANNA MENTION, UH, BOB, I, I, I JUST EMAILED YOU, UH, THE CORRESPONDENCE I HAD WITH, UH, COLIN MCCARTHY, AND
[00:50:01]
WE TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED, UM, A MEETING, UH, THE TOWN BOARD DISCUSSION ON JANUARY 19TH AT, UM, YOU KNOW, TO DISCUSS THE CENTRAL AVENUE, UM, YOU KNOW, PROPO, UH, PROPOSALS.BUT NOW, WHERE, LET ME, LET ME TRY TO BE MORE PRECISE.
THERE'S BEEN TALK OF AN APPEAL OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE, TO THE ZONING BOARD, WHICH WOULD HAVE THE IMMEDIATE EFFECT OF STAYING THE CURRENT APPLICATION.
AND THERE'S BEEN TALK OF A, UM, UH, A A A A MORATORIUM, WHICH, UH, BASED ON PAST PRACTICE, UM, WOULD REQUIRE NOTICE, UH, LEGISLATION, A PUBLIC HEARING, AND A NUMBER OF STEPS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN BEFORE IT COULD BE ENACTED, RIGHT? WHEREAS THE MOTHER HAS A TIME FUSE ON IT, IT MUST BE FILED WITHIN 60 DAYS, UH, OF THAT, UH, NOVEMBER 12TH DECISION.
AND, UH, YOU ASKED THE TOWN ATTORNEY ABOUT TOWN LAW, STATE LAW CONCERNING THESE APPEALS.
UM, BUT YOU DIDN'T ASK HIM ABOUT GREENBERG'S OWN TOWN CODE, WHICH GOES BEYOND STATE LAW.
UM, AND, UH, THE GREENBERG TOWN CODE, UH, PROVISION, UM, LET SEE IF I CAN FIND IT HERE, HERE IT IS, UH, SECTION ONE SECOND, SECTION 2 85 DASH 48 A.
UM, UH, IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT FOR INTERPRETATIONS, UH, ON AN APPEAL, UM, FROM AN ORDER REQUIREMENT DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL OR ON A REQUEST MADE BY AN OFFICIAL BOARD OR AGENCY OF THE TOWN, THE BOARD OF APPEALS SHALL HAVE THE POWER AND AUTHORITY TO DECIDE ANY QUESTION INVOLVING THE INTERPRETATION OF ANY PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER.
UM, THE REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT ANY ONE OF YOU OR ALL OF YOU, BE IT THE TOWN BOARD, ANY MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD, ANY MEMBER OF THE C A C, ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD, ALL TOWN OFFICIALS, ANY ONE OF YOU COULD GET THIS PROCESS IN MOTION SO THAT THE ONE APPLICATION YOU DO HAVE ON FILE CAN BE HELD IN ABEYANCE WHILE YOU GET AN INTERPRETATION FROM THE Z B A AT THE SAME TIME YOU CAN GET THE GEARS IN MOTION FOR A MORATORIUM, BUT THAT IS GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME.
YOU GOTTA DRAFT IT, YOU GOTTA GIVE NOTICE OF IT, YOU GOTTA HAVE PUBLIC HEARING ON IT.
AND THAT COULD TAKE, UH, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST A MONTH OR TWO, UM, BEFORE YOU'RE THERE.
AND I DON'T KNOW, UH, I WILL LOOK AT WHAT, UH, THE, THE THING IS YOU SET UP WITH COLIN AND LOOK AT THAT, THE PROPOSED APPLICATION TO SEE, UH, WHAT, UH, UH, BASIS THE APPLICANT WOULD BE SEEKING TO INVOKE.
BUT, UH, UH, AT THE VERY OUTSET, I WOULD WANT AN OPINION FROM THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AS TO WHETHER HE THINKS THAT IS A PERMITTED USE UNDER THE CODE.
WELL, I JUST WANNA SAY, CAN I PIGGYBACK ON SOMETHING THAT, UH, BOB SAID? UH, UH, I TOTALLY AGREE THAT THE MOST EFFECTIVE THING TO DO IS TO, UH, UH, APPEAL THAT DECISION, WHICH IN ITSELF WILL DELAY THE PROCESS AND WHICH WILL GIVE US TIME TO WRITE AN APPROPRIATE LAW.
UH, I'M, UM, SO THAT'S ONE THING AS TO, AS TO WHO HAS THE, UH, THE RIGHT TO FILE AN APPEAL.
I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO A DISCUSSION OF WHETHER OR NOT I'M AN OFFICER OR, OR A MEMBER OF THE C H C, THE OFFICER AS A PHYSICIAN THAT, UH, UH, WHETHER OR NOT I'M AN OFFICER OR NOT, I WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES FILE A PEN APPEAL ON MY OWN.
THIS WILL BE SOMETHING THAT IF WE ARE GOING TO FILE AN APPEAL, IT'LL BE SOMETHING THAT AS A PLANNING BOARD, AS A BOARD, WE DECIDE THAT'S THE CORRECT, EVEN THOUGH I SUPPORT THAT.
BUT I WILL NOT GO FORWARD WITH THAT IF I'M UNABLE TO CONVINCE THE PLANNING BOARD TO SUPPORT THAT AND THE PLANNING BOARD AS A BOARD, UH, FILED.
I THINK WE HAVE AS A PLANNING BOARD, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT.
HOWEVER, I THINK THE TOWN BOARD IS THE PROPER AUTHORITY TO STEP UP AND BECAUSE THEY ARE THE LEAD AGENCY
[00:55:01]
TO DO THAT, AND THEN A BOARD TO, UH, UH, A COMMITTEE TO WRITE THE LAW, I THINK THAT'S THE PROPER WAY OF MOVING FORWARD.AND WE WILL, WE WILL, UH, NOT RUN INTO THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF, OF, UH, OF, UM, AN APPLICANT FILING AND THEN WE CHANGE THE CODE.
WE COULD BYPASS THAT BY JUST, UH, UH, UM, APPEALING THE DECISION AND GIVE US TIME TO WRITE THE, THIS CODE.
THE REASON YOU NEED THE APPEAL IS VERY SIMPLE.
WE DO NOT HAVE A LAW ON THE BOOKS THAT ADDRESS ADDRESSES THESE TYPE OF FACILITIES.
NOTHING IN OUR CODE WAS WRITTEN WAS THE TIME THESE, THESE KINDS OF FACILITIES WERE ANTICIPATED.
THAT'S WHY YOU NEED TO APPEAL THE CURRENT DECISION.
YOU NEED NEED THAT BECAUSE IT'S IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND YOU NEED THE MORATORIUM.
I, I AGREE WITH WHAT BOB SAID 100% ON THAT.
CAN I ASK WHETHER THE PLANNING BOARD HAS TIME BETWEEN NOW AND THE DEADLINE OF JANUARY 11TH TO WILL YOU ON JANUARY? I AM SORRY.
I DID, WASN'T ABLE TO HEAR THAT.
WE MEET ON JANUARY, JANUARY 6TH, BOB, THE NEXT MEETING, JANUARY 6TH.
OKAY, SO, SO THE PLANNING BOARD COULD, COULD DECIDE TO DO THE APPEAL AS A BOARD, UM, WITHIN THE ALLOTTED TIME COULD BREAKS PRE, IT BREAKS PRECEDENCE ON OUR BOARD.
UH, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT BEING GOING TO BE BROUGHT UP IF THE TOWN BOARD DECIDES NOT TO DO IT.
UH, WALTER AND I DO BELIEVE THAT, UH, IT REALLY IS A TOWN BOARD THAT SHOULD DO IT FOR THE REASONS THAT THE LEAD AGENCY, AND THEY ARE THE ONES ACTUALLY THAT DETERMINE THE SPECIAL PERMIT IN THIS CASE.
SO WOULD SEEM THAT THEY'RE THE ONES WITH THE JURISDICTION IN THIS PROJECT TO BEGIN WITH, AND WOULD BE THE MORE APPROPRIATE BOARD.
WE WERE JUST ASKED TO OPINE ON THE SITE PLAN OR RESIDENTS WHO LIVE NEAR THE PROPOSAL, BUT ALSO, UH, APPEAL IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO
I'M SORRY, PAUL, WOULD YOU SAY THAT AGAIN PLEASE? A RESIDENT WHO LIVES NEAR, UH, THE CO NEAR THE COUNTRY CLUB, WHO'S IMPACTED BY IT, WHO HAS CONCERNS, IF ANYBODY DOES, THEY ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL, I THINK FOR $500.
THEY DO COST THEM $500 FOR AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDENT TO APPEAL, AND THEY ALSO HAVE THE ADDITIONAL, UH, BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING TO THE Z B A THAT THEY ARE AGGRIEVED AND, AND, UH, UH, THAT IS A BURDEN THAT, UM, IS WHY, UH, THAT, AND THE $500 IS, IS WHY GREENBERG HAS A STORY OF HAVING CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS UNDERTAKE THESE CHALLENGES BECAUSE, UH, EVEN THOUGH TOWN OFFICIALS, UH, AND THE GREENBERG CODE IS VERY GENEROUS IN ALLOWING TOWN OFFICIALS TO BRING THESE ACTIONS TO THE Z B A, THEY DON'T.
AND SO THE RESULT IS THAT RESIDENTS HAVE TO BECOME ADVERSARIAL, UH, TO THE TOWN AND BRING THOSE ACTIONS AND INCUR COSTS AND TIME AND, AND, AND EXPENSE.
AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATE.
THAT'S WHY, UH, WE ENCOURAGE TOWN OFFICIALS TO, UM, EXERCISE THE, THE, THE, UH, UH, RESPONSIBILITIES GIVEN THEM UNDER THE CODE IF THEY BELIEVE THAT A BILLING INSPECTOR'S DECISION IS WRONG AND SHOULD BE INTERPRETED BY THE, UH, Z B A, UM, THE RULE IS THERE FOR A REASON.
UM, UH, BUT IF YOU DON'T DO IT, YOU KNOW, I, I SUPPOSE, UH, WE'LL GET LUCKY IN RESIDENTS WHERE CIVIC ASSOCIATION COULD COME FORWARD, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WILL, THEY MIGHT, RIGHT? SO LEMME JUST BE VERY CLEAR.
I'VE ALWAYS TAKEN THE POSITION THAT IN ORDER TO HAVE A MORATORIUM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN TO COME OUT OF THAT MORATORIUM.
IT HAS TO BE WELL THOUGHT OUT.
AND BY THE TIME YOU DO THAT, YOU WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A LOCAL LAW IN PLACE.
TIM HAS SHARED WITH US A DOCUMENT, NEW YORK'S NEW YORK BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM GUIDEBOOK FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, WHICH HAS A MODEL LAW THAT WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US OR NOT.
UH, SO THE IDEA OF DOING A MORATORIUM JUST ADDS TOO MUCH EXTRA BURDEN THAT, UH, I DON'T SEE IS, IS NECESSARY.
I ALSO DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO FILE
[01:00:01]
AN INTERPRETATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S POSITION.THE 60 DAY REQUIREMENT IS WHEN YOU HAD CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE.
I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY EASY FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO SHOW THAT WE HAD CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE, IF NOT ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, UM, OF WHAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION WAS, UH, THAT THE PUBLIC IN THEIR MEMO, IN THE MEMO MAY NOT HAVE HAD.
SO IT VERY WELL MAY BE THAT WE ARE TIME BARRED FROM OUR ASKING FOR, I DON'T BELIEVE, UNLIKE THE PLANNING BOARD, THE TOWN BOARD MEMBER, ANY ONE OF YOU COULD DO THIS, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S APPLICABLE EITHER, BECAUSE OUR ETHICS CODE PREVENTS A INDIVIDUAL TOWN BOARD MEMBER FROM GOING AND ADVOCATING BEFORE A PLANNING BOARD OR THE ZONING BOARD REGARDING A PARTICULAR, UM, APPLICATION OR A PROPERTY IN WHICH HE OR SHE DOES NOT HAVE AN INTEREST.
SO I I, IT, IT'S A VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE, HAVING THE TOWN BOARD DO THIS FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS THAT DOES NOT PREVENT ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO DO THAT AND FILING AN INTERPRETATION FROM DOING THAT.
AND SO I, YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS LIKE TO, I DON'T, I DON'T NECESSARILY SAY WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR, BUT I DO SAY WHAT I THINK.
AND YOU KNOW, THO THOSE ARE MY POSITIONS ON BOTH OF THOSE MAJOR ISSUES.
AND, YOU KNOW, I DID HAVE A, A SIMILAR, UH, CONCERN ABOUT OUR ETHICS LAW.
I MEAN, OVER THE YEARS I'VE, UH, YOU KNOW, SPOKEN OUT SAYING, I THOUGHT THAT TOWN BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, I DISAGREED WITH THE ASPECT OF THE, UH, ETHICS LAW THAT SAYS WE CAN'T GET INVOLVED.
AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, AND SPEAK UP ON PLANNING OR ZONING BOARD MATTERS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, MY OPINION OF THE ETHICS LAW IS THAT, UM, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO, UH, ADVOCATE FOR OR AGAINST, UM, ANY POSITION BEFORE THE ZONING OR, OR PLANNING BOARD.
SO, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A CONCERN IF WE, UH, IF WE DO APPEAL WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE IN VIOLATION OF THE TOWN'S ETHICS LIST BECAUSE WE'VE
IT DOESN'T SAY THE PLANNING BOARD, IT DOESN'T SAY THE ZONING BOARD.
AND AS YOU WELL KNOW FOR PEOPLE WHO KNOW HISTORY, A MEMBER OF THE ZONING BOARD FILED AN INTERPRETATION OF THE CHAIR, ACTUALLY FILED AN, UH, AN INTERPRETATION REQUEST FOR AN INTERPRETATION, AND THE ZONING BOARD DECIDED IT, INCLUDING THAT PERSON VOTING ON THE INTERPRETATION.
UH, BUT THE, THE ETHICS CODE IS SPECIFIC TO THE TOWN BOARD, UH, SHALL NOT PARTICIPATE.
AND THERE'S NO WAY TO FILE AN INTERPRETATION WITHOUT BEING AN ADVOCATE, BECAUSE AS YOU SAID, IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE POSITION IS THE BUILDING INSPECTOR IS CORRECT, WHEN YOU'RE TAKING A POSITION, YOU'RE TAKING POSITION.
IT'S, IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST TOO MESSY.
WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE.
UM, SO FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, HOW DO WE GO ABOUT DOING THAT BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THE BALL GETS ROLLING FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD THAN IT IS NOW? WELL, I'M ONLY SEEING THIS MODEL ORDINANCE WHILE WE'RE ON ZOOM.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE FIRST THING WE SHOULD DO IS TO READ IT AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT IT APPLIES TO US.
UH, I THINK THAT THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOMEBODY PUTTING, UH, WHAT THEY CALL A POWER WALL ON THE SIDE OF THEIR HOUSE, UH, VERSUS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THESE, YOU KNOW, MEGAWATT FACILITIES.
I DON'T THINK YOU WANT TO TREAT THEM ALL AS IF, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE, THESE ARE DANGEROUS AND YOU NEED TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, CONCRETE WALLS SEPARATING THEM.
MATTER OF FACT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW PEOPLE WHO HAVE 250 GALLON PROPANE TANKS UNDER EXTREMELY HIGH PRESSURE SITTING RIGHT NEXT TO THEIR STRUCTURE.
RIGHT? UM, SO I WOULDN'T, I, I WOULD, I WOULDN'T WANT TO SAY THAT SOMEBODY PUTTING A BATTERY PACK.
YOU KNOW, IT'S SO HAZARDOUS THAT WE CAN'T ALLOW IT IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
'CAUSE FRANKLY THAT'S THE WAY IT'S GOING.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS SOMETHING WITH THAT.
BUT LEMME, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF.
YOU STILL, DID YOU STILL HAVE SOMETHING WANNA SAY, FRANCIS? I'M SORRY.
AND NO ONE, IMAGINE, IMAGINE SOMEBODY SAYING, I'M GONNA BUILD A HOUSE AND I'M GOING TO PUT A GARAGE.
SO INSTEAD OF HAVING A STANDALONE GARAGE, I'M GONNA BUILD A GARAGE SO THE CAR CAN GO IN THERE.
SO IT'S 22 GALLONS OF GASOLINE
[01:05:01]
IN THE BACK OF THE, IN THE GAS TANK CAN SIT UNDERNEATH THE BEDROOM OF A HOUSE, RIGHT? SO THERE ARE HAZARDS, THERE ARE DEFINITELY HAZARDS.IT'S HOW DO YOU MITIGATE THEM? AND SO LOOKING AT THIS MODEL LAW, YOU KNOW, MAY GIVE US SOME IDEAS OF HOW, FIRST OF ALL, HOW MUCH OF A HAZARD IS THERE FOR THESE, FOR THESE PACKS? AND, AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ONES THAT, THAT ARE JUST GO ON THE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE, ONE OR TWO CELLS BASICALLY, UM, PANELS RATHER THAT, YOU KNOW, TAKE THE PLACE OF A GENERATOR.
GENERATORS AREN'T ALL THAT SAFE EITHER, RIGHT? PARTICULARLY THE ONES THAT YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE GAS STATION AND GET GASOLINE, BRING IT BACK IN YOUR CAR, TAKE IT OUT OF YOUR CAR, AND THEN POUR IT WITHOUT SPILLING IT TO GET IT INTO THE GENERATOR, GENERALLY IN THE DARK SO THAT YOU CAN GET YOUR GENERATOR GOING.
BUT THE QUESTION IS, IF WE DID A, IF MAY I, MAY I, PAUL, MAY I SAY SOMETHING? I'M, I'M SORRY, FRIENDS.
I JUST WANNA LEAVE IT AS, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I DON'T CARE ABOUT SAFETY, RIGHT? BECAUSE I'M GIVING YOU ALL OF THESE EXAMPLES THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW OF THINGS THAT ARE HAZARDOUS AND IT'S HOW DO WE MITIGATE THEM? SOME WE DON'T, RIGHT? WE DON'T DO YOU KNOW MUCH TO MITIGATE FOR THESE? I AGREE.
WE SHOULD TAKE A LOOK AND SEE WHAT IS IT THAT WE CAN DO, UM, IF WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY.
UH, BUT I DON'T WANT ALL OF A SUDDEN, EVERY TIME WE HEAR NOW A BATTERY PACK THAT WE DON'T WANT THAT.
AND AS AN EXAMPLE, AS WHEN WE DID THE SITE VISIT, SOMEBODY MADE A GOOD POINT.
DIFFERENT SCALE OF COURSE, IS THAT IF PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED, BUT THE LITHIUM ION BATTERIES, RIGHT? WHEN THEY GO ON A GOLF COURSE, UH, GOLF CART, FOR THOSE WHO GO ON GOLF CARTS, THEY'RE SITTING ON ONE, RIGHT? THEY'RE ACTUALLY SITTING ON ONE IF SOMETHING WERE TO, TO EXPLODE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE SITTING ON IT.
AGAIN, IT'S ALL HOW WE MITIGATE IT.
BUT I I, I JUST DON'T WANT TO TURN LITHIUM ION BATTERIES INTO THE VILLAGES HERE IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG BECAUSE, UM, WELL, I THINK YOU GET MY POINT ANYWAY.
I WANNA, OKAY, FIRST OFF, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS WHAT HAS BEEN SAID.
I THINK THAT THIS IS NOW BEING MOVED AND THERE ARE MANY MORE ISSUES IN THIS BESIDES HAVING THE CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF THE, OF THE RISKS OF THE BATTERIES.
AND I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, FRANCIS.
THAT'S WHY I WOULD NEVER HAVE AN OUTSIDE GENERATOR.
THE IDEA OF STORING GASOLINE AND POURING IT IN AND HOOKING IT UP SEEMED VERY DANGEROUS TO ME.
SO I THINK YES, THERE IS DANGER IN EVERYTHING.
I THINK THE ISSUE BECAME ONE OF, WE ARE NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT KNOWLEDGEABLE IN HANDLING THIS TECHNOLOGY AND HAVING OUR, OUR RESPONDERS BE IN A POSITION WHERE THEY ARE SAFE WHEN THEY DO IT.
BUT THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES IN TERMS OF THE ENVIRONMENT WITH THIS.
THESE BATTERIES, IF THEY LEAK, ARE LEAKING A CHEMICAL, THERE ARE ISSUES OF NOISE IN TERMS OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
IF YOU'RE BACKING UP YOUR HOME ON THIS, WHERE DO WE PUT THEM? I THINK BECOMES A BIGGER ISSUE.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE, AND WE NEED TO REALLY HAVE THE TIME TO CRAFT THE LAW THAT TAKES ALL OF THE STANDARDS FROM THE PERSON WHO HAS SOMETHING IN THEIR PRIVATE HOUSE TO SOMETHING WHERE, WHAT I THINK IS BEING SUGGESTED ON CENTRAL AVENUE, WHICH IS TOTALLY ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY.
'CAUSE THEY ARE ACTUALLY USING SOLAR PANELS TO FEED INTO THEIR BATTERIES.
THERE ARE NOT AS MANY BATTERIES.
AND THEN THERE IS A COMPLETE COMMERCIAL APPLICATION THAT'S A BATTERY FARM PULLING FROM CON ED.
THOSE ARE THREE TOTALLY DIFFERENTLY SCALED APPLICATIONS.
SO I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT ALLURE, WE ARE LOOKING AT MUCH MORE THAN JUST THE SAFETY ISSUES.
WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT THE DECOMMISSIONING ISSUES.
WE ARE LOOKING AT LIABILITY ISSUES.
THERE'S A GREAT DEAL HERE THAT NEEDS TO BE ANALYZED BEYOND THE SAFETY ISSUE.
AND I THINK ANYONE WHO HAS, HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS, HAS BEEN LOOKING AT ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
AND THE LOCATION IS A BIG ISSUE BECAUSE THERE IS NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THESE BATTERIES AT THE, AS THEY ARE CRAFTED CURRENTLY, THAT MAY CHANGE 10 YEARS FROM NOW.
SO I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE A TIMEFRAME THAT WE CAN SAFELY CRAFT A LAW.
AND IF A MORATORIUM IS HOW WE ATTAIN THAT, WE NEED TO DO IT.
BECAUSE OTHERWISE, IF WE DO NOT STOP THIS, OR IN SOME WAY INDICATE THAT AS A TOWN WE ARE NOT READY TO GO FORWARD WITH HAVING THESE TYPES OF APPLICATIONS COME INTO OUR TOWN, WE WILL BE ENDING UP HAVING THEM CITED, HAVING A PRECEDENT,
[01:10:01]
AND THEN WE WILL HAVE NO CONTROL.SO I THINK WHAT WE HAVE TO DECIDE IS HOW DO WE GET OURSELVES, THE WIGGLE ROOM TO CRAFT A LEGISLATION THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF OUR TOWN, THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR TOWN IN TERMS OF HOW WE, HOW WE PROTECT OUR, OUR COMMUNITY, HOW WE HAVE THE BEST USE OF THE LAND IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY'S INTERESTS.
BECAUSE AS A COMMUNITY AND AS A TOWN AND LEGISLATURES, I THINK OUR INTEREST HAS TO ALWAYS BE IN TERMS OF A LITTLE BIT PAROCHIAL, WHAT'S THE BEST FOR GREENBERG.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN, AND BY THE WAY, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO PLACING THESE BATTERIES, IT'S JUST I WANTED, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THEY WILL BE PLACED AND IN WHAT NUMBERS.
AND I BASICALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF THE, I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF.
I SORT OF AGREE WITH TER TERRY.
I THINK THE MORATORIUM CONCEPT MAKES, YOU KNOW, FOR ME, YOU THE MOST SENSE BECAUSE I FEEL THAT IF WE, THAT THERE ARE DEFINITELY LEGITIMATE ISSUES THAT HAVE TO BE STUDIED.
AND I FEEL THAT THE PUBLIC, EVERYONE I SPOKE TO PRACTICALLY, NOBODY HAS, YOU KNOW, AS STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE TECHNOLOGY OR, OR THE USE.
BUT THEY HAVE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS AND THEY WANT, YOU KNOW, AN ANSWER, YOU KNOW, ANSWERS TO THEM.
I FEEL IF WE DID A MORATORIUM, WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING, LISTEN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT AGAINST THIS.
WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, NECESSARILY FOR IT.
WE'RE BASICALLY GONNA STUDY, WE'RE GONNA GET, MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE'VE COME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, A, A RESPONSE AND FINALIZE THE DETAILS THAT WE'RE PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT WE'RE ANSWERING, UH, QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS PEOPLE HAVE.
IF IT'S A THREE MONTH, UM, OR SIX MONTH, UH, YOU KNOW, MORATORIUM, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, OVERWHELMINGLY, YOU KNOW, LONG.
I THINK WE COULD ALL, WE COULD WORK WITH THE APPLICANTS, UH, WE COULD WORK WITH, UH, CIVIC LEADERS AND I THINK WE COULD COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WILL MAKE SENSE AND WE'LL BE GOOD, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, GOOD FOR THE TOWN IF WE GO INTO THIS WHERE WE'RE ALL WORKING TOGETHER, JUST LIKE WE DID WITH BRIGHTVIEW, YOU KNOW, WE, I MEAN, EVERYBODY WORKED TOGETHER AND WE REACHED A CONSENSUS.
AND I FEEL THE SAME THING WITH THIS.
I THINK YOU HAVE SORT THE SAME DYNAMICS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THE APP, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT PROBABLY KNOWS THAT THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A FINAL DECISION ON THIS IN THREE MONTHS, OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA, IT'S GONNA TAKE A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE TIME.
AND IF WE LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA DELAY FOR THE SAKE OF DELAYING, BUT WE'RE REALLY GONNA TRY GETTING ANSWERS AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT, THAT WORKS NICELY FOR THE TOWN.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
AND WE COULD INVOLVE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO LIVE NEAR THE NORWOOD COUNTRY CLUB.
WE COULD INVOLVE THE E C C, WE COULD INVOLVE EVERYBODY.
THE CITY, THE, UH, THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL WILL INVOLVE EVERYBODY AND WE'LL, WE'LL COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S GOOD.
AND I AGREE THAT WE NEED TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF ALL OF THESE ISSUES.
AND AS, AS LONG AS THE MORATORIUM IS LEGAL, I WOULD SUPPORT IT.
I QUESTION, UM, BOB RAISED SOME ISSUES IN TERMS OF THE TIMELINE FOR PUTTING A MORATORIUM IN PLACE.
UH, I WOULD ASK, UH, TIM OR PAUL OR, OR ANYONE DOES THAT, THE TIMELINE THAT BOB ESTIMATED, IS THAT REASONABLE? DO YOU, DO YOU ALSO AGREE THAT YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT FOR SEVERAL WEEKS, IF NOT MONTHS TO PUT IT IN PLACE? IS THAT, THAT'S ACCURATE.
AND THE COUNTY WEIGHS IN ON MORATORIUMS. SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, SEND IT THE LOCAL LAW TO PROPOSED LOCAL LAW TO THE COUNTY SO THAT THEY CAN WEIGH IN.
SO THERE'S A LOT INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, IT'S ALSO WORTHWHILE, BECAUSE I FOLLOW UP ON MY QUESTION, GETTING THE COUNTY INVOLVED, YOU KNOW, ALSO MAKES SOME SENSE BECAUSE THIS, THIS IS TECHNOLOGY THAT'S GOING TO IMPA BE HAPPENING ALL OVER.
UH, NOT ONLY GREENBURG, BUT ALL OVER THE COUNTY.
AND THE THING IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAD WARREN GRODEN AT THE LAST, UM, MEETING TALKING ABOUT, UH, HIS CONCERNS ABOUT FIRE PROTECTION.
UH, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.
SO THE COUNTY MAY HAVE CONNECTIONS WITH, UM, WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY EXPERTS IN, UM, IN FIRE SAFETY, WHO MAY BE ABLE TO GET US, UH, REALLY GOOD ACCURATE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF RESPONDING TO ENVIRONMENTAL, YOU KNOW, ISSUES.
MAYBE THERE'S NO ENVIRONMENTAL, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS.
BUT I, I FEEL THE MORE PEOPLE WE INVOLVE IN THIS,
[01:15:01]
I THINK, I THINK THE BETTER.AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GOING OUT TRYING TO STOP SOMETHING.
WE'RE GOING OUT TRYING TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND GET THE, GET THE INFORMATION AND COME UP WITH A LAW THAT, UM, IS SAFE, UH, HEALTHY AND, UH, ENVIRONMENTALLY CORRECT.
SO, SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM IF IT TAKES A LITTLE LONGER BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE DETERMINED TO APPROVE ANYTHING UNTIL WE GET THE ANSWERS ANYWAY.
THE PRO THE, THE THING RIGHT NOW IS VERY SI SIMPLE.
I DIDN'T FINISH UP WHAT I WAS SAYING, SO LET ME JUST FINISH UP THAT.
SO WE KNOW THE MORE TERMS WILL TAKE WHATEVER, ONE MONTH, TWO MONTHS.
THE QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE EAGLE BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY IN THE INTERIM? WHAT HAPPENS THROUGH THAT APPLICATION? WELL, I'M NOT GONNA APPROVE ANY APPLICATION.
I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, NOT FOR THE BOARD.
I AM NOT GONNA VOTE FOR, UH, ANY LIKE, NEC OR ANYTHING UNTIL I HAVE ANSWERS TO, UM, UH, THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, I FEEL THAT THERE ARE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE I SAY I'M IN SUPPORT OR AGAINST THIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, I'VE DONE MY DUE DILIGENCE.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN, AND YOU KNOW, I, WHEN I WAS AT THE NORWOOD, UM, UM, COUNTRY CLUB, YOU KNOW, MEETING AND YOU KNOW, FRANCIS AND DIANA, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, WE, WE WERE THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE RESIDENTS THAT I SPOKE TO LIVED NEAR THERE.
UM, THEY WERE NOT NECESSARILY AGAINST US.
UM, YOU KNOW, THEY BASICALLY, AND YOU CORRECT ME, YOU KNOW, IF I, IF MY INTERPRETATION WAS, WAS WRONG, BUT EVERYONE I SPOKE TO LIVES NEAR THERE, THEY BASICALLY ARE WORRIED THAT THE COUNTRY CLUB IS GONNA BE FULL OF HOUSES.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK PEOPLE HAVE, I FEEL THAT IF PEOPLE, IF WE, IF THEY KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT IT'S GONNA BE SAFE ENVIRONMENTALLY CORRECT, I THINK THAT, UH, THEY DON'T WANT US TO BE OBSTRUCTIONISTS.
AND FRANCIS AND DIANA, I MEAN, WOULD YOU SAY THAT WAS ACCURATE? THAT'S ACCURATE, YEAH.
SOME WERE ACTUALLY VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF IT GOING IN BECAUSE, AND, UH, AND WANTED TO KNOW WHEN, YOU KNOW, BUT THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAD THEIR CONCERNS TOO AND ABOUT.
A LOT OF OTHER ISSUES THAT DID HAVE NOT BEEN DISCUSSED TONIGHT TOO, RIGHT? LIKE, THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE WHO SAID THAT THEY WANTED AN UNDERGROUND, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE NO, THEY WANT THE LINES, THEY WANTED THE WIRES UNDERGROUND, RIGHT? RIGHT.
SO I MEAN, THE, THERE'S IT, THERE'S, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IF WE DID A MORATORIUM, YOU KNOW, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE REALLY WORKING ON, UH, TIGHTENING UP THE LANGUAGE, YOU KNOW, WE COULD BASICALLY PUT IN SOME, SOME TYPE OF CONDITIONS THAT YOU, THAT CAME UP.
THE WIRES ARE ACTUALLY IN ELMSFORD.
NOT, NOT IN, NOT, NO, I'M TALKING NO, BUT THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, IF, IF EVERYBODY BASICALLY IS WORKING TOGETHER, YOU KNOW, WE COULD BE WORKING WITH THE VILLAGE OF ELMSFORD ALSO, UM, PAUL, PAUL, IT COMES DOWN TO THE FACT, AS IT, AS BOB POINTED OUT, AND I THINK I'VE POINTED OUT A COUPLE TIMES, UM, WE DON'T HAVE A LAW THAT ADDRESSES THESE, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA WORK ON.
AND, AND NO, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS TO MOVE, WHAT I'M SAYING IS AS AN ACTION STEP, A FIRST ACTION STEP IS I DO THINK THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE APPEALED TO THE, UH, BUILDING, UH, TO THE ZONING BOARD.
THIS NORWOOD, UM, THE LAW ACTUALLY, OUR CODE SAYS THAT YOUR BOARD HAS A RIGHT TO DO THAT.
DOESN'T SAY IT DOESN'T, IT'S JUST THE OPPOSITE OF THAT.
NUMBER TWO, I THINK AT THE SAME TIME, WE NEED TO GET AN OPINION FROM, UH, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR.
I'M SORRY, WHICH YOU, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT WHICH CODE? THE ETHICS CODE OR THE, NO, THE TOWN CODE.
THE TOWN CODE SAYS THAT A BOARD, ANY BOARD CAN, CAN APPEAL, APPEAL THE, THE, THE INTERPRETATION OF A BUILDING INSPECTOR.
WHETHER THAT'S, I DON'T, YOU PROBABLY HAVE TO GET A RULING, FRANCIS FROM THE A
YOU I UNDERSTAND THAT PROBLEM.
OKAY? AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THAT.
THE SECOND PART IS, I THINK YOU NEED TO GET A RULING FROM THE BUILDING INSPECTOR EARLY ON ABOUT THESE OTHER APPLIC POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS ON CENTRAL AVENUE TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THAT WHAT, FIRST OF ALL, ON WHAT BASIS THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE, THEY'RE OKAY.
[01:20:01]
OR THEY NEED TO USE VARIANCE.BECAUSE IF WE KNEW THAT HE SAID NO, THERE ISN'T ANYTHING IN THE LAW THAT ALLOWS FOR THIS ON CENTRAL AVENUE, WELL THAT THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY SO MUCH ABOUT A MORATORIUM, OKAY? IF YOU RULED THE OTHER WAY, YOU DO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT A MORATORIUM ABOUT DOING SOMETHING QUICKLY, PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE QUICKLY, OR AT LEAST, OR APPEAL THAT DECISION IF HE MAKES THAT DECISION.
SO THOSE TWO, TWO PIECES OF INFORMATION HAVE TO BE THERE.
AND ONE LAST THING, FRANCIS, THERE ISN'T A REAL GOOD ANALOGY BETWEEN A PROPANE TANK, A GAS TANK, AND THE BATTERIES FOR ONE, FOR ONE MAJOR REASON.
IT ISN'T THAT THESE MAY BE MORE DANGEROUS, SO PROBABLY LESS DANGEROUS.
WE JUST DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
AND ALSO, AS I SAID, IN A MORATORIUM, YOU WOULD CLEARLY HAVE TO PRECLUDE THE BATTERY PACKS ARE ON THE SIDE OF HOUSES.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, 80 MEGAWATTS OF STORAGE.
IT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE FROM ONE, YOU KNOW, ONE TESLA CAR, OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE HAVING A, A FIELD OF GAS.
YOU WOULDN'T WANNA PUT THAT IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA EITHER, RIGHT? SO, THANK YOU.
UM, CAN I SPEAK BRIEFLY ON THIS? UH, I DO WANNA ADDRESS TWO POINTS.
ONE, UH, THE ETHICS CODE, UH, SAYS NO MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD SHALL PARTICIPATE AS AN ADVOCATE BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD OR ZONING BOARD FOR OR AGAINST ANY APPLICATION.
UH, AND AN APPEAL OF A BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION IS NOT AN APPLICATION FOR ANY KIND OF APPROVAL BY A BOARD.
UM, IT IS NOT SEEKING A VARIANCE.
IT IS NOT SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
IT IS MERELY SEEKING AN INTERPRETATION OF YOUR OWN LAW.
IT IS NOT ADVOCATING FOR OR AGAINST THE EAGLE APPLICATION.
IT IS SIMPLY ASKING WHETHER BUILDING INSPECTOR'S INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW IS CORRECT.
UH, SO THE ETHICS PROVISION, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, FRANCIS DOES NOT APPLY.
AND YOU DO READ THESE THINGS TOGETHER WITH OTHER PORTIONS OF THE TOWN CODE, INCLUDING THE ONE THAT SAYS THAT ANY TOWN BOARD MEMBER, UH, CAN REFER TO THE, UH, UH, A DISPUTE LIKE THIS TO THE, UH, ZONING BOARD FOR ITS INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE LAW IS.
SO I DON'T THINK, I'M NOT BUYING THAT.
THERE'S AN ETHICAL PROBLEM HERE.
HOWEVER, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE THAT FRANCIS SAID, AND I WOULD ASK THAT THE BOARD BE CANDID WITH THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS.
FRANCIS SAID THAT IF A TOWN BOARD MEMBER WERE TO, UM, FILE THIS APPEAL, THEY MIGHT, HE OR SHE MIGHT BE HELD TO BE ON CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF, UH, THE, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S OPINION WELL BEFORE THE NOVEMBER 12TH DATE WHEN IT WAS ISSUED.
WELL, THAT RAISES THE QUESTION, A VERY SERIOUS QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THE TOWN BOARD KNEW ABOUT, UH, THIS APPLICATION AND KNEW THAT IT WAS, UH, UH, GOING TO BE COMING IN AS A SPECIAL PERMIT, AS A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE LONG BEFORE THE APPLICATION WAS EVEN FILED, WHICH GIVES RISE TO AN ARGUMENT OR COULD GIVE RISE TO AN ARGUMENT BY THE APPLICANT THAT THEY WERE MISLED INTO THINKING THAT THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE USE.
AND THAT THAT'S WHY THE TOWN BOARD MEMBERS ARE RELUCTANT TO ASK THE ZONING BOARD TO DO THE RIGHT THING, WHICH IS TO ASK THEM WHAT THE LAW IS.
UM, THAT'S TROUBLING, AND I WOULD LIKE, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF THE TOWN BOARD WERE CANDID ABOUT THAT.
UM, BECAUSE THAT MAY, UH, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE ZONE, THE PLANNING BOARD DIDN'T KNOW THAT.
UM, BUT THERE IS SOMETHING VERY PECULIAR ABOUT THIS APPLICATION, UH, THAT'S BEEN TROUBLING ME, AND THAT IS THAT IT'S FILED ON SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2020, BUT IT ATTACHES A LETTER WRITTEN TO TIM LEWIS ON NOVEMBER 25TH, 2019, UM, IN WHICH THE LETTER FROM COUNSEL EXPLAINS TO TIM WHY THEIR PROPOSED USE COMES WITHIN THE SPECIAL PERMIT RULES FOR A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE IN GREENBURG.
AND WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER TIM RESPONDED, OR MAYBE HE ACQUIESCED, MAYBE THIS WAS, HAS BEEN DISCUSSED OR THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION, UH, WITH FRANCIS AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BUILDING LAND USE COMMITTEE, UH, FOR MONTHS BEFORE THIS APPLICATION WAS FILED.
UH, AND THAT MAYBE THAT'S THE RELUCTANCE, UM, ON THE PART OF TOWN OFFICIALS TO APPEAL WHAT SEEMS TO BE AN OBVIOUS THING TO APPEAL.
[01:25:01]
BUT WE SHOULD KNOW THAT OBVIOUSLY THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW THAT.I THINK THE PLANNING BOARD DOESN'T KNOW THOSE FACTS.
THEY'RE NOT PRECLUDED AND THEY FOLLOW THE 60 DAY RULE.
I SHOULD ALSO POINT OUT, UH, THAT THE 60 DAY RULE IS A MATTER OF STATE STATUTE, AND THERE'S NOTHING THERE ABOUT CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE.
IT'S EXPRESS NOTICE, IT REQUIRES FRANCIS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LAW, IT REQUIRES THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DETERMINATION, UH, THE CLOCK STOP A STARTS TICKING THE 60 DAYS WHEN THE INTERPRETATION THAT HE GAVE IS FILED IN HIS OFFICE.
IT HAS TO BE TIMESTAMPED IN HIS OFFICE.
NOW, UH, I ASKED TWO WEEKS AGO FOR A COPY OF THAT FILE, STAMPED COPY OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION.
I ASKED HIM DIRECTLY, I ALSO QUOTED THE STATUTE, WHICH SAYS IT'S A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO EVEN FOIL IT.
OKAY? SO THAT TELLS ME THAT THERE'S MORE GOING ON HERE THAN MAYBE WE KNOW, AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WE GO FORWARD.
IF YOU WERE CANDID AND TOLD US WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT, HOW MUCH KNOWLEDGE DID YOU HAVE OF THIS? UM, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO BE MISTAKEN AS TO THE LAW, AND NOW WE GET THE LAW CLEARED UP.
IT, IT'S CLEAR WHEN THE STATUTE BEGINS TO RUN, BUT, YOU KNOW, UH, TELLING US THAT, UH, YOU HAVE HAD CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF THIS AND THAT, THAT MIGHT BAR YOU FROM, FROM SEEKING AN INTERPRETATION THAT'S TROUBLING TO THE REST OF US.
SO COULD YOU CLEAR THAT UP FOR US? RIGHT.
SO THERE, THERE'S NO CONSPIRACY GOING ON HERE.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE DRAMATIC, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, PLEASE BE CANDID WITH US.
I DIDN'T HAVE TO SAY WHAT I JUST SAID BEFORE I SAID IT ON PURPOSE, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE ACCESS TO THE FILE, RIGHT? AND MAYBE YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION MAKES IT SO THAT CLARIFICATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR A CLARIFYING WHAT HE MEANT, IS THAT REALLY HIS INTERPRETATION? OR IS IT WHEN HE, THERE WAS A CHECKOFF BOX ON AN E A F THAT'S IN THE FILE.
WE BEING BOARD MEMBERS MAY HAVE ACCESS, AND I DIDN'T, BUT THAT'S WHY I USE CONSTRUCTIVE.
UM, WE COULD HAVE SEEN IF WE LOOKED AT THE FILE THAT IT WAS CHECKED OFF EARLIER THAN THAT, THAT THERE WAS NO ISSUE WITH THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SAW.
AND THAT, THAT LETTER IS BASICALLY JUST A CLARIFICATION OF THAT INITIAL INTERPRETATION THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR MADE.
THESE ARE WHY I DON'T WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO BE IN, YOU KNOW, TO BE THE ONE WHO APPEALS, BECAUSE YOU DON'T NEED ALL OF THIS BACK AND FORTH WITH THE TOWN BOARD AS TO WHEN DID YOU KNOW, WHAT, DID YOU KNOW WHAT ACTS, WHAT DOCUMENTS DID YOU HAVE ACCESS TO? SOMEBODY ELSE IS IN A BETTER POSITION TO SAY NO THE FIRST TIME THE PUBLIC COULD POSSIBLY HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS WAS, AND THEN PICK A DATE AND THEN TAKE YOUR 60 DAYS FROM THERE.
YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT WE'RE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON, ON WHETHER OR NOT THE TOWN BOARD SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T TELLS YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN ISSUE HERE WITH THE TOWN BOARD DOING THIS AND, AND IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE FOR A CLEAN RECORD, BUT THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO SMOKING GUN HERE.
IT'S JUST THAT THERE ARE DOCUMENTS IN THE FILE WHERE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR MADE THE INTERPRETATION THAT HE MADE EARLIER IN CHECKING OFF A BOX, SO TO SPEAK.
AND THEN HE HAD CLARIFIED WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT WAS, WHAT HE MEANT WHEN HE DID THAT.
AND I, AND THE BUILDING INSPECTOR COULD DO, UM, EXPLAIN IT.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SUCH, SO MANY ISSUES THAT WE STILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A SHORT THING, YOU KNOW, BOB, YOU EVEN EMAILED ME.
OH, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS THAT I SAID I, I DON'T KNOW.
YOU NEVER KNOW HOW THESE THINGS GO, BUT YOU KNOW, BUT AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD HAS TO MOVE ON BECAUSE WE HAVE ABOUT A DOZEN PEOPLE WAITING FOR, UH, AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TOPIC THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD START AT 6 45.
OKAY? I THINK WE WAIT UNTIL JANUARY 6TH TO SEE WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD'S GONNA DO.
UM, BECAUSE THIS ISSUE REALLY DOES NEED TO BE CLARIFIED, AND IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THE, THE TOWN BOARD, UM, IS NOT GOING TO ACT.
I, OKAY, I THINK WE'RE GETTING THE MESSAGE, AND I AGREE WITH YOU ON THE, UH, INTERPRETATION
[01:30:01]
OF THE DECISION, BUT THERE STILL REMAINS THE OUTSTANDING ISSUE THAT WE HAVE MORE APPLICATIONS PERHAPS COMING IN AND WE DO NEED TO CRAFT A LORE.SO I, WELL, THERE ARE REALLY TWO ISSUES THAT WE STILL HAVE THE OPEN ISSUE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF STARTING A MORATORIUM SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THE SPACE TO CRAFT, UH, GOOD LAW FOR THE INTERESTS OF GREENBURG.
AND I GUESS THE QUESTION ON THAT IS, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, GONE OFF AND LOOKED AT THE TWO, 'CAUSE THEY'RE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES HERE TONIGHT.
WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THE ISSUE OF THE INTERPRETATION OF THE UTILITY LAW, BUT WE STILL HAVE THE OUTSTANDING ISSUE THAT WE HAVE NEW APPLICATIONS COMING IN.
CAN WE HAVE A MORATORIUM SO THAT WE HAVE THE WIGGLE ROOM TO CRAFT A GOOD LAW FOR GREENBERG? AND ALSO TO LET ANY POTENTIAL APPLICANTS REALIZE THAT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF CONSIDERING A LAW.
COULD WE JUST MAYBE HEAR FROM THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND JUST SEE IF THERE'D BE ANY INTEREST IN THE MORATORIUM OR, UM, IF ANYBODY WOULD PREFER DOING THE APPEAL, BECAUSE THIS WAY WE COULD JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, UNLESS YOU WANT TO, UH, HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSS, YOU KNOW, REFLECT ON IT AND NOT, NOT, UH, NOT, UH, MAKE A ANY DECISION TONIGHT.
I MEAN, WE COULD THINK ABOUT IT.
WE'RE MEETING NEXT WEEK ANYWAY.
UM, AND AGAIN, THE, THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, HAS A MEETING ON, UH, JANUARY 6TH.
THEN THE PLANNING BOARD HAS THE ABILITY OF, UM, OF MAKING THE APPEAL THEMSELVES IF THEY WANT AT THAT TIME, LEGAL ISSUES WITH MORATORIUMS. I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH THE BOARD THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
OKAY, SO WHY DON'T WE THEN MOVE ON AND WE COULD, YOU KNOW, UH, AGAIN, IF THE PLANNING BOARD WANTS TO THINK ABOUT WHETHER THEY WANNA APPEALED AND THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD, BUT MEAN, I PERSONALLY, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD, GINA.
SORRY, I JUST, I PERSONALLY WOULD NEED MORE INFORMATION.
UNFORTUNATELY, I WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND THE WALKTHROUGH ON SATURDAY.
UM, SO BEFORE I MAKE ANY DECISION, WHICH IS WHY I'VE BEEN QUIET, I JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT I CONTINUE TO DO THE RESEARCH THAT I DID PRIOR TO THIS, PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
SO I'M GONNA, I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DECISION THIS EVENING.
BUT I SUGGEST BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT WEEK, EVERYBODY LOOK AT THE ERDA.
IT HAS A DECEMBER, 2020 PUBLICATION DATE ON IT.
IT'S A MODEL LAW, JUST SKIMMING.
UH, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AND SEE WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO, UH, TO ACTUALLY GO THROUGH AND MAKE IT MORE SPECIFIC TO GREENBURG.
I'M SORRY, DIANA, I, I THINK I CUT YOU OFF.
WELL, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY ON THE MORATORIUM ISSUE, WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT, AT THAT BECAUSE WE DID HAVE A MORATORIUM A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO AND, AND THE PROCESS OF THAT WHOLE PROCESS JUST TO GET IT, UH, MAY NOT, MAY NOT SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS RIGHT NOW EITHER.
YEAH, I, I, I, THEY'RE JUST MORE TROUBLE THAN THERE WERE.
FRANCIS, CAN YOU SHARE WITH US THE NICE ERDA THING OR SHOULD WE FOIL IT FROM YOU? NO, NO, NO, NO.
I, IF I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS IN MY HEAD TO SAY, BUT I THINK I DID, IS THAT WE SHARE IT AND EVERYBODY READ IT BY THE NEXT, NEXT, UH, MEETING.
UH, TIM, ACTUALLY, MIKE MUTED.
SHOULD WE MOVE ON TO ANOTHER ISSUE NOW, MIKE, I THINK MIKE SIEGEL HAS SOMETHING TO SAY AND HE DOESN'T REALIZE HE'S MUTED.
IT'S, IT IS REFERRED THE, THE, UH, THE SORT, UH, GUIDE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ON, ON BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE.
SO REFERRED TO IN THE DECEMBER FOUR C C REPORT.
IF YOU DON'T HAVE A COPY OF IT, I'LL SEND IT TO YOU.
IF YOU GO TO GOOGLE, IT'LL TAKE YOU ABOUT 30 SECONDS TO GET IT.
UH, BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT, I'LL SEND IT TO YOU.
THE QUESTION I ASK IS, UM, FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO PLEASE THINK ABOUT BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT WEEK, AND FOR THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO THINK ABOUT BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT WEEK, IS THERE IS A PRACTICAL PROBLEM.
AND THE PRACTICAL PROBLEM IS WE NEED TO HAVE SOME MECHANISM THAT PUTS POTENTIAL APPLICANTS ON NOTICE.
THAT, I MEAN, I SENSE THERE'S A, UH, DIFFERENT WAYS OF APPROACHING IT, BUT I SENSE THAT THERE'S A CONSENSUS AMONG THE TOWN BOARD MEMBERS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING HE'S LOOKING AT DIFFERENT WAYS OF HOW THEY WOULD LOOK AT IT.
I SENSE THERE'S A GENERAL CONSENSUS THAT, UH, IT IS, IT IS SOMETHING TO BE LOOKED AT, UH, ASSUMING THAT'S RIGHT AND ASSUMING THAT, UH, THERE ARE ISSUES OR I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE WITH REGARD TO MORATORIUM.
[01:35:01]
UH, AND, UH, AND I GUESS EVERYONE IS SAYING IT TAKES SOME TIME TO DO IT.IT WOULD TAKE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, I GUESS, UM, WHICH IS A MONTH.
UM, WHAT DO WE DO IN THE, THE TOWN BOARD AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY POLICE? THINK ABOUT WHAT DO WE DO IN THE INTERIM? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE CENSUS, IS IT NEEDS STUDYING IT, WE HAVE THIS PROBLEM THAT'S GOTTA GET SOLVED, BUT WHAT CAN WE DO TO PROTECT OURSELVES SO THAT WE GET A RATIONAL ANSWER THAT EVERYONE, NO ONE SEEMS TO BE AGAINST THESE TYPE OF FACILITIES.
UM, IT'S NOT THE CAC IS, BUT HOW DO WE GET A RATIONAL ANSWERS TO WHAT'S SUITABLE, UH, TO PUT HERE? AND HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE PUT A KIND OF A, A YELLOW LIGHT SOMEPLACE, YOU KNOW, NOT A RED LIGHT THAT SAYS WE'RE GONNA WARM, BUT JUST A YELLOW LIGHT THAT SAYS, HEY, WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, WE'RE STUTTERING THIS, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WORKS FOR THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, UM, YOU KNOW, IN OUR 28 DISTRICTS.
AND, UM, UM, I WOULD APPRECIATE THE TOWN BOARD AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY COULD PLEASE THINK ABOUT THAT.
THAT'LL BE THE INTENT AS WE GET TOGETHER AND DISCUSS THIS PROJECT.
THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN JACKSON.
OKAY, SO WHAT'S THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA? UH, WE ADDED THIS IN JUST NOW.
UH, GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER 2 0 2 0.83.
READ THE SENIOR AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES EXEMPTION ANNUAL RENEWALS.
EDIE, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT? WE'LL HAVE A, WE'LL HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR NEXT WEEK, EDIE.
CAN YOU SEE ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
THIS IS BASICALLY JUST, UH, A DIRECTIVE FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE ALLOWING MUNICIPALITIES TO OPT INTO, UM, DIRECTING THE ASSESSMENT DEPARTMENT, NOTIFYING OR JUST TO ALLOWING THE SENIOR CITIZENS AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES WHO RECEIVED AN EXEMPTION ON THE 2020 ASSESSMENT ROLE, PARTIAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION ON THE 2020 ASSESSMENT ROLE TO JUST APPLY IT TO THE 2021.
NORMALLY, NORMALLY WHAT HAPPENS HERE IS THAT THE ASSESSMENT DEPARTMENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SENDING OUT A RENEWAL APPLICATION SOMETIME IN JANUARY FOR THE MAY DEADLINE, MAY, 2021 DEADLINE.
AND THE SENIORS AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES HAVE TO RESPOND WITH THEIR TAX RETURNS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS, AND MOST OF THEM DRIVE INTO TOWN HALL.
UM, SOME OF THEM MAKE IT TO THE POST OFFICE, BUT, UM, SO THIS IS EXEMPTING THAT PROCESS FOR THE 2021 ASSESSMENT ROLE.
I, I JUST THINK IT'S A GREAT, YEAH, AND, AND IT'S AMAZING THAT IN THE TIME OF THE MEETING, THIS, THIS RESOLUTION JUST WAS PREPARED
SO IT'S ALL, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ALL SET.
IT IS ALL SET FOR NEXT WEDNESDAY, UH, NEXT TUESDAY.
UH, DO YOU WANT TO TALK THOUGH? THERE ARE SOME, THERE'S AN EXCEPTION.
THERE'S AN EXCEPTION FOR THE AUTOMATIC, AND THAT'S IF YOU BELIEVE THAT, UH, THERE'S BEEN A SALE OR THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGE, UH, THEN YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT KICK IN THIS AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.
AND I HAVE THE RIGHT, UM, AND OBLIGATION TO OTHER TAXPAYERS TO MAKE SURE.
SO IF THERE'S ANY APPREHENSION, I WILL NOTIFY THAT TAXPAYER AND THEY WILL HAVE TO SEND IN THEIR RENEWAL APPLICATION.
THIS, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES PRECLUDES ANYBODY ELSE WHO IS OR THINKS THEY MAY BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE THE SENIOR PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION OR THE, OR THE PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES EXEMPTION.
SO IF YOU THINK THAT YOU FALL WITHIN THAT CATEGORY, PLEASE CALL THE ASSESSMENT DEPARTMENT AT NINE EIGHT NINE ONE FIVE TWO ZERO.
UM, THE BEST TIME TO DO THAT IS NOW BETWEEN DECEMBER AND JANUARY.
SO WE CAN TELL YOU, WE CAN WALK YOU THROUGH THE PROCESS.
OKAY, AIDEN, NEXT, UH, A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL ISSUES INVOLVING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS, CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS, LEGAL ADVICE.
AND WILL NOT BE COMING BACK THIS EVENING AND WILL NOT BE COMING BACK.
UH, BEFORE WE DO, UH, LET'S, UH, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING ON A SPECIAL MEETING ON, UH, DECEMBER 29TH
[01:40:02]
AT 6:00 PM IN ORDER TO VOTE ON ANY RESOLUTIONS THAT MAY BE BEFORE US.NOW WE CAN,
WHAT? HAVE A WONDERFUL, EVERYONE, HAVE A WONDERFUL HOLIDAY.
OKAY? ALL HOLIDAY TO EVERYBODY.