[00:00:01]
UH, TARA[ Town of Greenburgh Work Session of the Greenburgh Town Board Agenda: Tuesday – May 25, 2021 – 6:00 P.M. (Please note that, although the Work Session Agenda is shared with the public prior to each Work Session, the Agenda may be revised at any point up to the start of the meeting as well as during the meeting, if necessary.) (All Work Sessions are Televised Live on Cablevision Channel 76, Verizon 35 and are streamed live. Work Sessions and Town Board Meetings will be aired each Friday, Saturday and Sunday starting at 7:02am and 4:45pm. Each segment will run for approximately 6 to 7 hours, depending upon the length of the two meetings.)]
TOWN BOARD, UH, WORK SESSION.TODAY IS, UM, MAY 25TH AT 6:16 PM AND WE'RE GONNA START BY, UM, DISCUSSING, UM, UM, AT AN OPEN MEETING, UM, A DEVELOPMENT FROM, UM, THE DEVELOPERS OF, UM, THE ELMWOOD, UM, COUNTRY CLUB.
UM, AND NOW I'LL TURN IT OVER, UH, TO GARRETT.
RETAIN NOW, COMMISSIONER OF PLANNING.
FINER, GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD.
THIS SUBJECT MATTER IS THE ELMWOOD COUNTRY FORMER ELMWOOD COUNTRY CLUB.
DISCUSSION, AND, UM, AS YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT IS MAKING, UH, SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND PROCESS WISE.
WHERE WE LEFT OFF, THE TOWN BOARD HAD CONCLUDED WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE D E I S PROCESS RECEIVED A LOT OF GOOD COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND INVOLVED AGENCIES, AND THE TOWN BOARD ASKED A LOT OF EXCELLENT QUESTIONS AS WELL.
AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENTLY WORKING ON RESPONSES TO ALL THOSE INQUIRIES, AND THAT WOULD, THOSE RESPONSES WILL COMPRISE WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE F E I S OR FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT.
AND IN SPEAKING WITH THE APPLICANT, UM, THEY, THEY HAD A FEW KEY AREAS WHERE THEY, THEY, THEY, THE APPLICANT FEELS THAT IT CAN BE VERY RESPONSIVE TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS HEARD, AND SOME OF THOSE, UH, UPDATES WOULD ACTUALLY CONSTITUTE, UH, BASICALLY A VARIATION ON THE, UH, ALTERNATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN STUDIED.
SO IT WAS ACTUALLY MY RECOMMENDATION.
I HAD RECOMMENDED THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, COME IN AT A WORK SESSION, UH, EXPLAIN TO THE TOWN BOARD, SO TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON GENERAL PROGRESS, BUT ALSO FOCUS IN ON SOME OF THE KEY AREAS WHERE THE APPLICANT FEELS IT CAN BE RESPONSIVE.
AND I JUST FELT THAT IT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, THAT MADE A LOT OF SENSE SO THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, A THE TOWN BOARD WAS AWARE AND THAT, UM, THE, A APPLICANT WOULD HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF DIRECTION AS IT REALLY WORKS ON FINALIZING ITS DRAFT F E I S.
UH, SO IN A MOMENT I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO, UH, DAVID STEINMETZ AND, AND THE RIDGEWOOD TEAM.
UM, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT PROCESS-WISE, UH, THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, AT THE, UH, WITH, WITH A PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE F E I S IF THE TOWN BOARD SO CHOOSES.
SO, UH, THERE, THERE WILL BE THAT OPPORTUNITY.
UH, BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS, UH, TURN IT OVER TO MR. STEINMETZ.
THANK YOU, MR. SUPERVISOR MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD, DAVID STEINMETZ FROM THE LAW FIRM OF ZAIN AND STEINMETZ.
I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER'S EXPLANATION.
WE ARE HERE FOR A WORK SESSION PRESENTATION ABOUT THIS, UH, NEW POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE THAT HAS EVOLVED AS A RESULT OF, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT, TOWN BOARD COMMENT.
AND I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO JONATHAN REBO, OUR CLIENT, TO TAKE US THROUGH A, UH, HOPEFULLY A BRIEF AND, UH, POINTED EXPLANATION OF WHERE WE ARE.
AND, UH, AND THE BOARD FOR HAVING US TONIGHT.
UM, AS, AS THE LAST, AS DAVID AND GARRETT HAVE BOTH SAID, UM, I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY, ANYTHING MISCONSTRUED.
WE PLAN ON ANSWERING ALL OF THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE AND, UH, THAT WE'VE RECEIVED.
WE'LL BE RESPONDING IN WRITTEN FORM AS REQUIRED IN OUR F E I SS, BUT I WANTED TO, UM, COME TONIGHT BEFORE YOU TO REALLY, UM, AFTER HEARING THE COMMENTS AND SEEING, HEARING AND SEEING THE COMMENTS, WE THINK THAT THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE THAT IS WHAT I CALL THE WIN-WIN ALTERNATIVE.
AND IF I CAN, I'M GONNA SHARE MY SCREEN IN A SECOND.
UM, SO WHAT, WHAT I CALL THE WIN-WIN ALTERNATIVE, WHICH IS A RESPONSE THAT WE HAVE, UM, THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER THAT TALKS ABOUT, UM, REALLY FIVE THINGS THAT WE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
UM, THESE WERE THE, WHAT I, THE TOP REQUESTS FROM THE BOARD, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE COMMISSIONS, NEIGHBORHOODS, DEVELOPERS, AGENCIES, UM, AND NUMBER ONE.
AND, AND, AND THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE.
WE PLAN TO STUDY, AND NOT ONLY STUDY, BUT WE THINK IS ONE THAT SOLVES, UM, AND ANSWERS A LOT OF THE CONCERN OF ALL OF THE INTERESTED PARTIES.
UM, FIRST AND FOREMOST, UH, WE WILL BE WILLING, UM, IN THIS ALTERNATIVE TO GO TO FULL TAXES.
SO FEE, FULL FEE SIMPLE TAXES, NOT A CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP REGIME, BUT A FEE SIMPLE REGIME PAYING A HUNDRED PERCENT OF TAXES.
UM, THE SECOND THING THAT WE WILL BE CONTINUING TO PUSH FORWARD, UH, IS THE NEW PARK.
UH, WE BELIEVE, AND WE'VE HEARD FROM MULTIPLE, UH, MULTIPLE GROUPS, FROM THE LITTLE LEAGUE TO THE CRICKET CLUB, UM, TO YOUR OWN COMMISSIONER.
UM, AND WE BELIEVE THIS IS A ONCE IN A GENERATION OPPORTUNITY TO EX NOT ONLY, UM, EXPAND THE PARK, BUT TO EXPAND AND PROGRAM THE PARK.
UM, THIS REALLY, THE SECOND BIG DIFFERENCE IS, UH, WE, WE WILL BE PROPOSING THAT THERE BE NO AGE RESTRICTION ON THE COMMUNITY, NO ACTIVE ADULT, SO THAT THERE CAN BE SCHOOL AGE FAMILIES.
[00:05:01]
UM, HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY WANT SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN, AND WE'RE WILLING TO, TO PIVOT TO THAT FORM OF, UH, THAT FORM OF OWNER.I GUESS IT WOULD BE FORM OF OWNERSHIP.
UM, JONATHAN, BEFORE YOU CONTINUE, SINCE YOU'RE THE ONE SHARING, COULD YOU ACTUALLY BRING IN THE MARGINS BECAUSE IT'S UNREADABLE ON CABLE, UM, YOU HAVE A, IN OTHER WORDS, EXPAND THAT, ZOOM BETTER, OR WHERE, WHICH DIRECTION? MR. I WANT, I WANT THE DOCUMENT TO BE BASICALLY EDGE TO EDGE AS OPPOSED TO ALL THIS GRAY SPACE ON THE SIDE.
I THINK YOU'RE GOOD THERE, JONATHAN.
THAT SHOULD, THAT SHOULD WORK.
YEAH, I THINK YOU WENT JUST A LITTLE TOO FAR.
THERE'S A FIVE SECOND DELAY, SO JUST BEAR WITH ME.
UM, SO THAT WAS SO BIG ON MY SCREEN.
SO I WAS FULL, I WENT THROUGH THE FULL TAXES CONTINUATION OF OUR, OF OUR BELIEF ON THE NEW PARK.
UM, I WAS AT THE, THE SCHOOL AGE FAMILY, SO NO ACTIVE ADULT RESTRICTION.
UM, WE HEARD THIS, WE HEARD THE NO ACTIVE ADULT RESTRICTION IN ACTUALLY TWO FORMS, BOTH FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS AS WELL AS, UM, THE ABILITY TO, TO PROPERLY, UM, RESTRICT AND ALL THE THINGS THAT COME WITH THAT.
ALL OF THE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, UH, ON, UH, ON THE ACT OF ADULT RESTRICTION.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOTTA BE A WIN IN A WIN-WIN IN THERE FOR US, IN MY OPINION.
SO TO CONTINUE WITH THE 175 TOWN HOMES, WHICH WE THINK, UH, ACCOMPLISHES THE OPEN SPACE, UH, TO HAVE OUR COMMUNITY SURROUNDED BY PASSIVE OPEN SPACE, SIMILAR TO WHAT, UM, THE RESIDENTS WERE USED TO WHEN THERE WAS A, UH, A GOLF COURSE THERE.
UM, TWO THINGS WE HEARD AND WE SPENT A BUNCH OF TIME TALKING ABOUT, UM, UH, D O T IN, I BELIEVE AT THE END OF ONE OF OUR HEARINGS RECENTLY.
THERE WERE REALLY TWO COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, ABOUT TRAFFIC THAT THEY WERE IN SUPPORT OF.
UM, ONE WAS THE NEW ENTRANCE TO BROOK PARK, WHICH ALLEVIATES, UM, ALLEVIATES A LOT OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND WAITING AT THE SPRAIN ENTRANCE AND EXIT TO THE, UH, EAST OF OUR SITE.
AND THEN THE SECOND THING, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT, WHICH IS A LITTLE NEW, IS THAT WE GOT A COMMENT ABOUT, UM, THE ALIGNMENT OF OUR SECONDARY DRIVEWAY, WHICH WE HAD ALIGNED WITH WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE.
BUT WE'LL ALSO BE PRESENTING A RESTRICTION, UM, FOR A RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT CONFIGURATION SO THAT SOMEBODY TRAVELING, UM, FROM THE WEST TO THE EAST CAN'T MAKE A LEFT INTO THAT, UH, INTO THAT DRIVEWAY.
BE RESTRICTED AS RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT.
UM, SO AS DAVID SAID, SORRY, AS DAVID SAID, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S SHORT AND SWEET.
WE WANTED TO COME HERE TODAY AND TALK ABOUT THAT.
UM, THERE'S ONE OTHER THING THAT I DIDN'T HAVE ON MY SHEET, BUT I WANT THE BOARD TO KNOW.
THERE HAVE BEEN COMMENTS ABOUT, UM, FUTURE APPRENTICESHIPS AS WE BUILD AND DEVELOP OUR PROJECT.
UM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE LOVE AND, AND, AND LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, WORKING WITH THE TOWN, EITHER IN, IN JOB POSTINGS OR APPRENTICESHIP POSTINGS.
HOWEVER WE CAN, UH, ALL WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE, TO MAKE THAT WORK AS WELL FOR, FOR RESIDENTS AND, UH, NEIGHBORS TO, TO LEARN AT, UH, TO LEARN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
SO I'M HAPPY TO, UH, I'M HAPPY TO FIELD ANY, YEAH.
I HAVE A QUESTION IN TERMS OF, UH, THE TAXES.
UM, UM, UH, TOWNHOUSES GENERALLY ARE NOT TAXED AS, UM, YOU KNOW, AS, UM, FULL, FULL TAXES.
UH, WHAT'S TO PREVENT, UM, UM, FUTURE HOMEOWNERS TO GO TO COURT AND TO CHALLENGE THE, UM, TAX STRUCTURE THAT WE AGREE? WOULD THERE, WOULD IT, WE HAVE LIKE A PILOT OR SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT, UH, SO THIS WOULD BE BINDING.
SO, SO, MR. SUPERVISOR, THE BEST ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS, WHILE THIS STRUCTURE MAY APPEAR TO LOOK LIKE WHAT YOU'RE CALLING A TOWNHOUSE, AS THE TOWN ATTORNEY WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU, THIS WILL BE A CONVEYANCE OF FEE.
THIS IS A CONVEYANCE BY DEEDED JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER HOUSE IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
SO THE TAX STATUS OF THIS PROPERTY WILL BE EXACTLY THE SAME AS ANY OTHER SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS COULD TRY TO BECOME CONDOMINIUMS, THAT, THAT, THAT'S A, THAT'S THEIR PROBLEM AND THEIR ISSUE, UH, THIS, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOING TO BE A FEE SIMPLE, ABSOLUTE CONVEYANCE THAT WILL BE QUITE CLEAR FROM THE DEEDS.
IT'LL BE QUITE CLEAR FROM THE DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
THERE'S A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
[00:10:01]
'CAUSE AS JONATHAN EXPLAINED, THERE'S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE IS CARED FOR, UH, MAINTAINED AND INSURED BY THE H O A.IT'S, IT IS EQUIVALENT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
IT'S NO DIFFERENT FROM, UM, ANY ONE OF YOU WHO OWNS YOUR OWN HOME, YOU RECEIVED A DEEDED OF FEE.
AND THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, MANY PEOPLE, UM, DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS, WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH MY NOTES ON THE HEARINGS, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT, UH, THE NUMBERS, UH, THE DENSITY, AND WOULD YOU BE OPEN IN THE COMING, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WEEKS TO REVIEWING THE DENSITY AND, UH, PERHAPS, UM, REDUCING THE NUMBERS, UM, IF THAT'S WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO GET, YOU KNOW, MAXIMUM COMMUNITY SUPPORT.
SO, JONATHAN, I'M GONNA, JONATHAN, I'M GONNA TAKE A QUICK INITIAL ANSWER AND YOU CAN FOLLOW IN BEHIND ME, PLEASE.
UM, WE, WE'VE, WE APPRECIATE THE QUESTION.
WE'VE, WE'VE HEARD THIS QUESTION AND, AND WE'VE ANTICIPATED THIS, AND THIS IS WHAT I THINK WE'RE GONNA SHARE.
YOU'RE GONNA READ THIS IN DETAIL BASED UPON THE DATA THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE YOU IN THE F E I S, THE PROPERTY AS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY YIELDS MORE TRAFFIC AND VEHICULAR MOVEMENT.
AND WE'LL LET YOUR CONSULTANTS REVIEW THAT AND CONFIRM THAT THAN WHAT THIS PROPOSAL WOULD OTHERWISE, UM, PRESENT IN FRONT OF YOU.
SO WE ACTUALLY THINK, AS JONATHAN INDICATED, AND I THINK HE DID IT POLITELY AND, AND DIRECTLY, UM, IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A WIN-WIN, THE TOWN HAS ASKED FOR A NUMBER OF THINGS.
AND, UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS PROCESS, THE THE DEVELOPER RIDGEWOOD, UM, HAS OBJECTED TO FEE SIMPLE ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP, UH, FOR THE BETTER PART OF THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.
HOWEVER, BASED UPON THE ENCOURAGEMENT FROM YOUR BOARD AND YOUR STAFF AND THE PUBLIC, UH, JONATHAN HAS CAPITULATED ON THAT, ON ELIMINATING THE AGE RESTRICTION AND STILL KEEPING A FULLY PROGRAMMED PARK.
SO, MR. SUPERVISOR, THE MOST HONEST AND DIRECT ANSWER IS IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE A WIN-WIN, UH, RIDGEWOOD IS REQUESTING THAT THE DENSITY REMAIN AT A NUMBER THAT WE BELIEVE THE DATA SHOWS WE CAN SATISFACTORILY MITIGATE ALL OF THE POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE SECRET PROCESS.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GONNA REVIEW WHEN YOU REVIEW OUR F E I S.
SO I HAD PREVIOUSLY ASKED A QUESTION, AND I DIDN'T ACTUALLY GET AN ANSWER TO IT, IS THAT OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF MAKING MONEY, CAPITALISM, YOU KNOW, MORE POWER TO YOU GO FOR IT.
BUT THERE MUST BE SOME NUMBER PROFIT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO MAKE OUT OF THIS, THIS SITE, WHICH REALLY DRIVES A NUMBER, RIGHT? AND IT'S NOT SO MUCH AS TO HOW MUCH YOU CAN FIT ONTO THE PROPERTY, IT'S WHETHER OR NOT THERE YOU CAN MAKE A REASONABLE RETURN OR EVEN BETTER THAN REASONABLE RETURN WITHOUT NECESSARILY MAKING A KILLING AT THE EXPENSE OF DENSITY THAT, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY FLIES IN THE FACE OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
NOW, YOU'RE GONNA COUNTER THAT BY SAYING, BUT LOOK AT ALL THE GOOD THINGS WE'RE DOING THAT'S IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, BUT IT JUST SEEMS THERE'S STILL THIS IMBALANCE DEALING WITH THE DENSITY.
AND WHEN WE, WHEN WE, WHEN WE ASKED, WHEN I ASKED MY QUESTION, IT WASN'T ANSWERED AND IT REVERTED TO, BUT YOU'LL SEE THAT WE CAN MANAGE TRAFFIC, RIGHT? IT'S NOT REALLY THE SAME THING WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO GET A HANDLE, PARTICULARLY ON DENSITY.
UM, AND, AND SO I'M, I'M HOPING COUNCILMAN CHI, I I'M HOPING THAT, I'D LOVE TO, I'D LOVE TO ADDRESS THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT IS, UH, FAIR OR CORRECT TO BE TALKING ABOUT MY ECONOMICS OF, UH, UH, OF THE DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? WHAT I BOUGHT IT FOR, WHAT I SOLD IT FOR IS MY, IS MY, YOU KNOW, IS IS THE BUSINESS THAT I'M IN.
IF YOU THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK I'M ACQUIESCING ON THE AMOUNT OF TAXES THAT I'M PAYING.
I THINK I'M GIVING THE COMMUNITY A ONCE IN A LIFE, ONCE IN A GENERATION OPPORTUNITY TO, FOR RUM BROOK PARK.
IF, IF THE TOWN WOULD RATHER ME JUST PAY MY TRAFFIC FEE AND OR MY RECREATION FEE, THAT'S FINE TOO.
I MEAN, I THINK I AM GIVING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT TO THE COMMUNITY IN EXCHANGE FOR 170, YOU KNOW, FOR A REQUEST OF 175 TOWNHOME UNITS.
IF, IF THE COMMUNITY WANTS 119 SINGLE FAMILIES WITH NONE OF THESE BENEFITS, THEN I'LL
[00:15:01]
GO BACK TO MY ZONING COMPLIANT PLAN.BUT FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO BE ASKED HOW THAT, HOW MUCH MONEY I'M IN ESSENCE MAKING OR SHOULD MAKE BY DOING A DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK THIS IS A REALLY, REALLY GREAT PROPOSAL FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR ME.
I'M NOT GONNA, YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK YOU FROZE IS IS TRULY A WIN-WIN.
YOU FROZE FOR THE LAST 20 SECONDS, JUST SO YOU KNOW, YOU'RE BACK.
MY, OKAY, SO I, I, MY POINT IS I THINK THIS IS A WIN-WIN FOR THE COMMUNITY AND I, AND, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO BE TALKING ABOUT DOLLARS AND CENTS AS IT RELATES TO MY S AM I FROZEN OR SORRY.
I'M ALWAYS HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THE ASPECTS OF MY DEVELOPMENT AND MY PROPOSAL.
I'M GONNA ADD ONE FINAL COMMENT BEHIND JONATHAN'S, 'CAUSE I THINK HE REALLY HIT IT ALL.
UM, THERE IS A RATHER COMPREHENSIVE FISCAL ANALYSIS THAT YOU ALL KNOW IS IN THE D E I SS.
WE GOT QUESTIONS ABOUT IT THAT WILL BE ANSWERED IN THE F E I S.
THE 175 UNITS ALSO TRANSLATES INTO ECONOMICS FOR THE, FOR THE LARGER COMMUNITY IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS.
AND WE HOPE THAT THAT'S ANALYZED, UH, BY THE TOWN BOARD AS LEAD AGENCY, BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN, WE THINK IT WILL SHOW THAT WE ARE MITIGATING THE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE AND CREATING A NET POSITIVE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
WELL, THAT GETS TO BE THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
AND YOU, YOU KNOW, HAVING A RIGHT TO EARN A REASONABLE RETURN ON YOUR INVESTMENT.
UM, BUT I'M NOT GONNA ASK THE QUESTION A THIRD TIME.
I'M, AND I'M NOT EVEN ASKING YOU TO DISCLOSE A NUMBER, BUT I'M JUST ASKING YOU, UH, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION DENSITY AS A MAJOR ISSUE HERE, AND WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS IN YOUR HEAD, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A KILLING AND YOU CAN'T REDUCE THE DEBT IN CITY IF THAT'S THE CASE, AND YOU CAN MAKE THE CASE THAT I CAN'T GET A REASONABLE RETURN ON MY INVESTMENT, YOU KNOW, SO BE IT.
UH, YOU KNOW, JUST STAY WITH YOUR NUMBER, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OTHERWISE ANYTHING LESS, YOU CAN'T MAKE A REASONABLE RETURN.
AND I'M SURE AT SOME POINT
WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE DISCUSSION TO BE HAVING.
I THINK THE APPROPRIATE DISCUSSION TO BE HAVING IS THE MERITS OF WHAT, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
IF YOU WANNA, IF, IF THE BOARD WANTS TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT DENSITY AND HOW THAT WILL AFFECT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT I AM PROPOSING TO DO OR BRING TO THE TABLE, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
RIGHT? I'VE, I THINK YOUR NUMBER ONE ISSUE HAS BEEN TAXES.
AND THERE IS A, THERE IS A DIRECT CORRELATION TO THE AMOUNT OF TAXES BEING PAID BY A FUTURE HOMEOWNER TO THE VALUE OF THE UNIT, OF THE TOWNHOUSE UNIT THAT WOULD BE SOLD.
THE MORE TAXES, THE LOWER THE VALUE OF THE UNIT, RIGHT? SO I THINK THAT BY ACQUIESCING AND GIVING FEE, SIMPLE TAXES AS AN EXAMPLE, RIGHT? IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS RELATED TO THE DENSITY.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE GOING WELL BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO, WE'D BE REQUIRED TO PAY IF WE JUST SAID WE'LL PAY OUR, UM, WE'LL PAY OUR RECREATION FEE.
I MEAN, IT GOES WELL BEYOND THE 14 ACRES OF LAND AND THE PROGRAMMING OF IT.
SO I THINK ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE OFFERING IS COMMENSURATE WITH THE DENSITY THAT WE ARE, THAT WE ARE REQUESTING.
IF WE WANNA HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE TAXES AND THE PARK, THEN I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DENSITY.
UM, WHAT I ALSO, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
I WAS JUST GONNA RE-ASK IF, UH, IF, UH, YOU COULD GIVE US SORT OF LIKE A PROPOSED TIMETABLE, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN, YOU KNOW, WOULD YOU LIKE US TO SORT OF MAKE A DECISION BY? AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, MAYBE GARRETT COULD DISCUSS, UM, WHAT THE, UH, SEEK A REVIEW PROCESS, YOU KNOW, LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW AND THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT.
ERIC, DO YOU WANNA ANSWER THAT OR DO YOU WANT US TO ANSWER THAT? YEAH, SURE.
UM, THE NEXT STEP IS NOT FOR THE, UH, TOWN BOARD TO, TO MAKE A DECISION.
THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS WILL BE THE APPLICANT WILL SUBMIT A, A DRAFT F E
[00:20:01]
I S TO THE TOWN FOR REVIEW.UH, WE, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY CHAZEN IS, HAS BEEN WORKING HARD ON THE PROJECT ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN.
UH, WE'LL REVIEW IT, WE WILL SHARE THAT WITH THE TOWN BOARD, UH, MAKE UPDATES AND ULTIMATELY THAT, THAT F E I S, UH, WILL, WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC TO READ.
UM, AT A POINT AFTER THAT, THE TOWN BOARD WILL, UH, AS WELL AS OTHER INVOLVED AGENCIES, UM, MAKE WHAT'S KNOWN AS, UH, THEIR FINDINGS.
AND IN THAT FINDINGS, THAT'S REALLY WHEN, NOW THAT YOU HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE RESPONSES, THE APPLICANT AND THE F E I S, THAT YOU CAN MAKE THE BEST INFORMED DECISION ON, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS DEEMED THE BEST ALTERNATIVE, UH, FOR THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND, AND THIS PORTION OF THE TOWN.
SO, UM, PROCESS WISE, YEAH, NOT AN IMMINENT DECISION, BUT YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE RESPONSES IN THE F E I S AND ALL THE DATA ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
AND, UH, ULTIMATELY A DECISION WOULD BE, UH, RENDERED VIA FINDINGS AFTER THAT, WHICH WILL REALLY DRIVE WHAT, WHAT'S GONNA COME IN.
AND, UH, AS THE FINAL PROPOSAL, WE EXPECT TO HAVE THAT F E I S SUPERVISOR INTO YOU AND THE TOWN BOARD.
UM, AND YOUR CONSULTANT SHORTLY, AS STAFF HAD ASKED US TO, AS GARRETT SAID, HE ASKED US TO COME TO THIS WORK SESSION, UH, BECAUSE WE HAD INDICATED TO HIM THAT WE WERE WORKING ON A, A RESPONSIVE ALTERNATIVE PROMPTED BY THE COMMENTS FROM YOUR BOARD AND THE PUBLIC.
SO NOW THAT THIS MEETING WILL BE, UM, ULTIMATELY CONCLUDED, WE WILL FINALIZE THE F E I S AND THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO YOU, UM, BY J M C HOPEFULLY IN THE COMING WEEKS.
WOULD IT MAKE SENSE, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT TO, UM, YOU KNOW, SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC THE, THE OPTIONS.
ONE OPTION IS THE TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, THE APPLICANT SAID WAS ONE POSSIBILITY.
THE OTHER IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS WITH THE PARKLAND AND BASICALLY HAVE SORT OF LIKE A, A NEUTRAL, UM, YOU KNOW, MAILING SENT OUT AT SOME POINT TO ALL THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN THAT AREA AND JUST SAY, THIS IS OPTION ONE, THIS IS OPTION TWO.
YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW, PLEASE REVIEW BOTH AND GIVE US THE FEEDBACK BECAUSE I FEEL WE WOULD THEN, UM, GET THE BENEFIT OF HEARING FROM PEOPLE WHO NORMALLY DON'T SPEAK OUT ON MEETINGS AND THEY COULD REVIEW IT.
THEY, YOU KNOW, WE COULD HAVE A WEBSITE, WE COULD, UH, PEOPLE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, THE, THE VARIOUS OPTIONS, AND THEN WE'LL GET THE TOWN BOARD, WE'LL GET A REAL GOOD SENSE WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS THINKING.
MR. FINER, I THINK YOU'VE GOTTEN A GREAT SENSE WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS, HAS THOUGHT.
I MEAN, WE'VE, WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE YEARS OF, OF MEETINGS.
UH, WE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS ON OUR D E I S WHERE YOU SAW PEOPLE THAT YOU'VE PROBABLY NEVER SEEN BEFORE COME OUT SPEC SPECIFICALLY IN SUPPORT OF, OF THE PARK.
UM, I THINK YOU'LL SEE, AS YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER, I THINK WE MIGHT BE UP TO SEVEN OR EIGHT DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES THAT WE WERE ASKED TO STUDY BY, BY NEIGHBORS AND, AND, UH, AND YOURSELVES AND, AND THE OTHER, AND THE OTHER GROUPS.
UM, SO I, I THINK WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO, AND DAVID CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, OR, OR, OR JIM RYAN, UM, IS, IS SUBMIT OUR F E I S WITH ALL OF OUR ALTERNATIVES IN THERE AND THEN CONTINUE DOWN THE PROCESS WITH, WITH YOU.
UM, AND OBVIOUSLY, AND, AND GARRETT AND, AND TIM, UM, IN THE PROCESS THAT'S, THAT'S SET FORTH BY, UH, BY THE REGULATIONS.
YEAH, I, I, I AGREE WITH THAT, JONATHAN AND PAUL, THE BEST ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS RATHER THAN, UM, THAN, THAN KIND OF DUMBING IT DOWN FOR THE COMMUNITY, WHICH WE DON'T THINK IS FAIR, THE SECRET PROCESS OUTLINES EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO TO MAKE SURE THE COMMUNITY FULLY UNDERSTANDS OUR ANSWERS.
SO WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE THEM WITH THAT OPPORTUNITY TO SEE ALL THAT INFORMATION, INCLUDING THE OTHER FIVE ALTERNATIVES THAT YOU AND THE COMMITTEE YOU FORMED ASKED US TO SCOPE AND STUDY.
SO, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.
IT'S ALL GOING TO BE ANSWERED.
IT'S ALL GONNA BE PACKAGED AND SUBMITTED TO THE TOWN, AND YOU AS THE LEAD AGENCY WILL ACCEPT IT AS COMPLETE.
AND THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S LIKELY, THOUGH IT'S NOT, MAN, BY MANDATED BY CCRA, YOU MAY CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, THAT'S UP TO YOU.
UM, SO THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST WAY, UH, FOR US TO, TO DO THIS.
REMEMBER AT THE, AT, AT YOUR REQUEST, UM, JONATHAN MET WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS, I GUESS THREE, THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO AT THE OUTSET OF ALL OF THIS.
SO, UM, IT'S NOT LIKE BY ANY MEANS, RIDGEWOOD, UM, HAS AVOIDED THE PUBLIC.
THEY'VE ACTUALLY ENGAGED QUITE EXTENSIVELY WITH THE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS, THE RECREATIONAL GROUPS, THE LITTLE LEAGUE, ET CETERA, AS WELL AS BOTH SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS, SCREEN SHARING.
COULD YOU SCROLL DOWN BECAUSE I THINK PEOPLE HAVE READ ONE, TWO, AND THREE PLENTY.
[00:25:01]
NO, THE TOP OF FOUR.AND THEN AT SOME POINT, JUST SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UH, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE BELOW IT.
I SUGGESTED WHAT I, WHAT I SUGGESTED BEFORE WAS, BECAUSE THIS IS TO, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE FEEDBACK I GOT, UM, YOU KNOW, MONTHS AGO WAS, UH, THE FACT THAT THE, WAS THE TAXES.
AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE SAYING THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE IDEA THAT, UM, UH, THE TAXES WOULD NOT BE AS HIGH AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
I FEEL THAT RIGHT NOW, UM, THE TAXES IS NOT GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE ANYMORE.
TO ME, THE ISSUE THAT PEOPLE ARE GONNA HAVE IS PROBABLY TRAFFIC AND DENSITY, THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
UM, AND I FEEL THAT, UM, KEEPING PEOPLE INFORMED, LETTING THEM PEOPLE KNOW THAT, UM, THAT YOU DIDN'T LISTEN TO A MAJOR, YOU KNOW, CONCERN, UH, ONE OF THE MAJOR CONTROVERSIES IS, YOU KNOW, IS NOT A CONTROVERSY ANYMORE BECAUSE YOU WERE RESPONSIVE.
YOU'RE NOT, THEY'RE GONNA BE PAYING FULL TAXES.
SO, YOU KNOW, PE THE RESPONSE FROM THE COMMUNITY COULD BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE YOU MADE CHANGES ALREADY.
AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK THAT IT'S ALWAYS WORTHWHILE LETTING PEOPLE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND, AND, AND MR. FINER, WE, WE HOPE TO SCREAM THAT FROM THE ROOFTOPS, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE THINK WE, WE HEARD THEM LOUD AND CLEAR AND IS REALLY HOW WE DEVELOP THESE, THESE FIVE POINTS, BECAUSE THESE ARE THE THINGS WE PROBABLY HEARD LOUDEST AND MOST.
AND THAT'S WHY WE, UH, WANTED TO ADDRESS THEM IN THIS MANNER AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU WERE AWARE, UM, THAT WE WERE BEING RESPONSIVE AND, AND THAT TO EXPECT, WE WANTED YOU TO BE ABLE TO KNOW, TO EXPECT THIS IN OUR F E I SS YOU AND THE BOARD, UM, AND, AND THE PUBLIC OBVIOUSLY ON TELEVISION, THAT TO EXPECT THIS IN OUR F E I S, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ALL THE PUBLIC TO, TO VIEW AND READ
UH, I, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT, UM, I'M, I'M, I'M REALLY GRATEFUL THAT YOU, IT APPEAR TO IN FACT, HAVE LISTENED, UH, TO ALL THE COMMENTS, AND THAT THAT'S CLEAR BY, YOU KNOW, THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE MADE, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH REGARD TO PAYING FULL TAXES, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPING THE PARKS, UH, YOU LISTEN TO THE, THE, UH, THE SCHOOLS AND ARE NOW ACCEPTING CHILDREN.
UM, I, I LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU ARE OPEN TO, UH, THE APPRENTICESHIP IDEA, UH, HIRING LOCALLY AND, UH, MINORITY AND WOMEN BUSINESS ENTERPRISES.
UM, AND ALSO, UH, THE TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS THAT YOU'VE HIGHLIGHTED THIS EVENING.
UM, I, I WAS WONDERING THOUGH, UM, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, YOUR PROJECTED, UM, COST FOR THE CONDOMINIUM UNITS IS RIGHT AROUND, YOU KNOW, 800, $900,000.
AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER ANY, UH, AFFORDABLE UNITS, UH, IN THE MIX? UM, WE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE OPEN TO, OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE OPEN TO HAVING THAT, UH, THAT CONVERSATION, MR. JONES.
I MEAN, WE'D HAVE TO TALK ABOUT HOW TO DO IT AS FAR AS THE UNIT TYPES, LOCATIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT IT IS, UH, IT IS ABSOLUTELY ON THE TABLE FOR, FOR DISCUSSION.
I THINK THAT'S, IM, UM, ANOTHER ONE OF THE, YOU KNOW, SORT OF THE, THE THINGS THAT DOES AFFECT THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT ALL OF THESE THINGS GET TALKED ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AS A WHOLE.
AND, AND I THINK THERE'S ANSWERS FOR, I THINK THERE'S ANSWERS FOR EVERYTHING.
UM, ONCE YOU SEE THE DATA FROM THE F E THAT WILL PRESENT IN THE F E I S AND THEN, AND THEN CAN MOVE TO, TO, YOU KNOW, THE REAL SPECIFICS OF, OF THAT CONVERSATION.
IS, IS THAT ONE OF THE THINGS, ONE OF THE AREAS YOU'LL ADDRESS IN THE F E I SS? OR IS THAT GONNA BE SUBSEQUENT? DAVID? I THINK THAT'S SUBSEQUENT, RIGHT? YEAH, I, I, I THINK THE BEST, THE MO THE MOST ACCURATE ANSWER IS I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING WHERE WE WERE SPECIFICALLY, UM, REQUESTED TO ADDRESS THAT.
I, I COULD DEFER TO JIM RYAN AND, AND, AND JAMES CARIS, IF THERE IS AN ANSWER, UH, OR SECTION IN THE F E I S THAT'S GOING TO ADDRESS IT.
I THINK THAT SOUNDS COUNCILMAN JONES, LIKE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN AND SHOULD ADDRESS SEPARATELY WITH THE BOARD, BECAUSE IT PROBABLY GOES TO SOME OF THE, UH, THINGS THAT JONATHAN IS ABLE TO OFFER.
AND, UM, DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE TOWN'S REQUEST IS, IT MIGHT ALTER WHAT JONATHAN IS ABLE TO O OFFER.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD'S CLEAR.
'CAUSE THE PUBLIC MAY NOT KNOW WHAT YOU DO.
AND THAT IS TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS IS A P U D UNDER THE TOWN'S FORMULATION,
[00:30:01]
UNDER THE ZONING CODE, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE P U D.THAT'S WHY THERE IS NONE PROPOSED.
UM, SO THIS WOULD BE ASKING JONATHAN TO ENTERTAIN SOMETHING ABOVE AND BEYOND.
AND I WANT TO CORRECT ONE OTHER THING.
COUNCILMAN JONES INADVERTENTLY USE THE PHRASE CONDOMINIUM UNITS, AND WE ALL HAVE TO GET USED TO THE FACT THAT UNDER THE NEW ALTERNATIVE, UH, THEY ARE NO LONGER CONDOMINIUM UNITS, THEY'RE NOW TOWNHOUSE UNITS, UH, FEE SIMPLE TOWNHOUSE UNITS IS WHAT, UH, THAT ALTERNATIVE WOULD YIELD.
I JUST, WE'RE WE'RE ALL, WE'RE ALL DOING IT AND WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL.
I DON'T WANT THE PUBLIC TO COME AWAY SAYING, BUT THEY, AT THE END, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT CONDOMINIUMS. SURE.
THANK YOU COUNCILMAN JONES, FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THE, THE VARIOUS ISSUES THAT RIDGEWOOD HAS TAKEN QUITE SERIOUSLY AND ADDRESSED, UM, TONIGHT.
AND, AND APPRECIATE YOU ACKNOWLEDGING THAT PUBLICLY.
I'M VERY IMPRESSED, UH, WITH YOUR APPARENT ABILITY TO LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC AND RESPOND.
SO, MR. SUPERVISOR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, UNLESS YOU HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, WE HAVE OUR WORK TO DO.
UM, WE'VE TOLD JIM RYAN THAT HE AND HIS STAFF CANNOT GO TO SLEEP TONIGHT UNTIL THEY FINISH THE F E I S
SO, UM, WE'RE, UH, WE'RE READY TO, TO, TO GET GOING.
JUST ONE QUICK NOTE ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UH, THAT IS SOMETHING TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE F E I S, UH, AS A PRODUCT OF, AT A MINIMUM, THE COUNTY COMMENTS.
AND I KNOW I, I'VE ECHOED THAT, UH, QUESTION BEFORE, BUT, UH, SO THAT, THAT WILL BE FORTHCOMING IN THE F E I S.
ALSO, COULD YOU MAYBE COMMENT ON, UH, THE COST OF, YOU KNOW, TO PER WHAT YOU ESTIMATE THE PURCHASE PRICES WOULD BE OF, OF A REGULAR UNIT? RIGHT.
I MEAN, I, I THINK, UH, MR. JONES HAD IT RIGHT, THEY'RE EIGHT, $900,000 UNITS.
I MEAN, THE MARKET IS GOING STRONG AND WE'D LIKE TO GET IN THE, IN THE GROUND SOON, UM, IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THAT.
BUT I THINK THAT'S STILL AN ACCURATE, UH, THAT'S STILL AN ACCURATE STATEMENT.
AND, UH, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE TAXES WOULD BE, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR THE TOWN AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS FIRE DISTRICT? UM, I DO NOT, I I WILL BE SURE WE, WE DETAIL THAT FOR YOU, BUT I, WE DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THAT AT MY FINGERTIPS RIGHT NOW.
I JUST BROUGHT MY, UH, MY ONE PAGE, UH, DOCUMENT FOR TONIGHT.
TIM OR JAMES, UNLESS YOU KNOW THAT NUMBER.
OTHERWISE I WOULD, I WOULD, I DON'T WANNA MISSPEAK ON THAT EITHER.
WE CAN GO INTO THAT DETAIL THIS EVENING, UM, IF, IF, IF THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKE.
OTHERWISE, IT IS CONTAINED IN A TABLE IN THE MEMO THAT WAS SUBMITTED LAST WEEK.
I, I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE, UH, UH, INTERESTING INFORMATION THE PUBLIC EVERY DAY.
IF I COULD SHARE MY SCREEN AGAIN, AND I HAVE THAT ONE AVAILABLE TOO.
YES, IT'S TABLE THREE, THAT MEMO.
ARE YOU LOOKING AT THIS ONE? YES.
YOU'RE SHARING, YOU'RE ON THE BEGINNING OF THE YES.
MR. SHEEN, IS THAT COMING UP ON THE TELEVISION PROPERLY? UH, COULD YOU TAKE, COULD YOU, UH, SPREAD OUT, GET RID OF THAT RIGHT COLUMN? THE QUICK ONES ON? YEAH, YEAH, THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S A LITTLE TAB THAT, UM, OH, I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN.
AND THEN IF YOU CAN USE THAT SPACE TO MAKE IT BIGGER.
WE DON'T HAVE HD PUBLIC ACCESS, WHICH IS THE PROBLEM, RIGHT?
AH, SO IT'S VERY GOOD IF THAT'S, BUT IT MIGHT BE CUTTING OFF THE LAST, IS IT CUTTING OFF? IT IS, IT'S CUTTING OFF THE NET.
JUST MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT, NOW IT'S TOO SMALL.
CAN YOU DO SOMETHING? I'M COMING.
JONATHAN, COULD YOU SUMMARIZE? SO, UM, WHAT WE, I I GUESS WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT, UM, THE NET FISCAL IMPACT IS PROBABLY THE BEST, UH, IS THE BEST NUMBER, OR DO YOU WANT TO TALK GROSS, MR. FINER, UH, THE ONE THAT MAKES THE TALENT, UM,
UM, AND I CAN SCROLL BACK UP, BUT I GOT IT SO ZOOMED IN ON MY SCREEN.
I'M TALKING ABOUT, I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN, SAY, FOR UNINCORPORATED GREENBURG, THE TAXES AND, UM, AND, UM, SURE.
FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND THE FIRE DISTRICTS.
WELL, SO WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE THAT.
UNINCORPORATED NET FISCAL IS 326,000 PER YEAR.
UM, THE PER YEAR, THE FAIRVIEW IS 3 81.
[00:35:02]
UH, WE CAN SKIP THE COUNTY.AND THEN THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE 6 75 FOR GREENBURG CENTRAL AND 327 FOR ELMSFORD.
AND THOSE ARE ALL NET FISCAL BENEFITS.
THE LEFT COLUMN IS THE, IS THE GROSS DOLLARS BRINGING IN OVER $4 MILLION OF GROSS, UH, OF GROSS TAX RECEIPTS.
UM, WHY WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, WHY IS THE NUMBER DIFFERENT FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND IT? THE NUMBER BETWEEN THE GROSS AND THE NET, RIGHT? UM, BECAUSE WE'RE REQUIRED, REQUIRED IN THE ANALYSIS TO NET OUT THE SERVICED COSTS, SO THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A COST SCHOOL IS A GREAT EXAMPLE.
THERE IS A COST TO SEND A STUDENT TO THE GREENBERG CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SO BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF KIDS THAT COULD, UH, THAT COULD GO TO THE SCHOOL, WE, UH, THERE'S A DETAILED, UH, THERE'S A DETAILED NUMBER PER STUDENT, AND THAT'S THE CALCULATION OF THE COST OF SENDING THAT CA OF THAT CHILD TO SCHOOL.
SO IT'S 1.6 MILLION OF GROSS DOLLARS, 945,000 OF COST FOR THOSE CHILDREN, AND THEN NETTING $675,000.
SO FOR SAY, UNINCORPORATED GREENBERG, WE WOULD BE GETTING LIKE $800,000 OVER $800,000 A YEAR IN TAXES, HOWEVER, RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, SOME COSTS LIKE SANITATION, UM, POLICE AND OTHER
UM, SANITATION SEWER AND THINGS LIKE THAT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, DEPEND ON HOW WE SET IT UP.
BUT, UM, BUT POLICE IS A GREAT, GREAT EXAMPLE.
'CAUSE POLICE DOESN'T HAVE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM LIKE THE FAIRVIEW FIRE DOES, RIGHT? SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, AFTER WE PROVIDE ALL THE SERVICES, UH, WE'RE MA WE'RE COMING OUT $326,000 AHEAD.
THAT'S WHAT OUR ANALYSIS SHOWS.
JONATHAN, JUST REMIND THE PUBLIC WHAT THE, WHAT YOUR PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY PAYING IN TOTAL TAX DOLLARS SO THAT YOU CAN JUXTAPOSE THAT WITH THE NET BENEFIT.
DO WE HAVE IT FURTHER UP, JANE? I THINK WE PAY, IT'S OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD NOW.
I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY DAVID.
I THINK IT'S TWO, IT'S BETWEEN TWO 50, BETWEEN 2 50, 2 50 AND 300 I THINK IT IS.
I THINK IT'S JUST, IT HAS A TWO, BUT I THINK IT'S CLOSER TO 300,000.
SO WE, WE OBVI, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S GROSS.
THAT'S, IF I SCROLL DOWN AND SORRY IF I'M MAKING ANYONE ON TELEVISION NAUSEOUS, BUT, UM, IT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S COMPARED IF YOU TAKE THIS LINE ITEM HERE THAT'S $4 MILLION IS GOING UP, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THAT 12, 13 TIMES? YEAH.
SO IS WHAT I, THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION.
ANOTHER, ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, IF, UM, WE WENT WITH THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE, THE SINGLE FAMILY IS WITHOUT THE PARKLAND AND ALL THAT, WHAT WOULD THE TAX IMPLICATIONS BE FOR THAT OPTION? UM, I DON'T, THIS IS, UM, THIS FORM, RIGHT? THIS IS THE, THE MEMO WE SUBMITTED BASED UPON THIS ALTERNATIVE SO THAT YOUR TEAM COULD ANALYZE THAT.
UM, I DON'T HAVE THAT, JAMES, DO WE HAVE THAT'S NOT IN HERE, RIGHT? UH, CORRECT.
THAT'S NOT IN THIS MEMO, BUT IT IS CONTAINED IN THE D E I S.
IT'S IN THE D E I S AND MR. SUPERVISOR, WHEN WE COME BACK FOR THE F E I SS PRESENTATION, WE, WE'LL MAKE SURE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, BUT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT NUMBER IN THE PAST.
IT, IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED IN WRITING.
UM, AND JUST SO EVERYBODY'S AWARE, ALL SIX OR SEVEN ALTERNATIVES, UM, HAD A, WERE WERE SUBJECT TO A CHART AND ANALYTICAL CHART THAT GAVE THE GROSS AND NET FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
UH, BUT IT'S PRETTY, MY RECOLLECTION IS IT PROBABLY SHOULD BE PRETTY MUCH THE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY CLOSE, WOULDN'T YOU THINK? YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, NO, WE ACTUALLY THINK THIS CREATES MORE, MORE REVENUE BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA SELL THE, YOU KNOW, WE THINK THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY AND THE TOWNHOUSE SELLS FOR IN THE BALLPARK OF A SIMILAR PRICE.
AND OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE, YOU WILL HAVE LESS SERVICES, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT EXPONENTIAL.
SO WE THINK THE NET, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE NET FISCAL BENEFIT OF THIS IS, IS HIGHER THAN THE NET FISCAL BENEFIT OF THE, THE ZONING COMPLIANT PLAN.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE BUILDING PERMIT FEES WOULD BE FOR THIS? UH, I, I DO NOT.
A LOT OF MONEY, A LOT OF MONEY ALONG WITH INSPECTION FEES, ET CETERA.
THERE, THERE'S, THAT'S ALL CONTAINED IN THE FISCAL AND, AND ANALYTICAL SECTION OF THE D I S THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S AN AWFUL LOT OF FEES THAT HAVE TO BE PAID TO THE TOWN IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT.
AS, AS YOU, WELL, WAIT, WE DIDN'T SEEK A WA WE DIDN'T SEEK A WA, JONATHAN 3.1 MILLION GROSS
[00:40:01]
REVENUE FROM THE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THANK YOU.WHICH, WHICH IN THAT IF THERE WAS A, A LAND DONATION, THAT NUMBER WOULD CONCEIVABLY GO DOWN.
BUT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ALSO ARE, I GUESS THERE'S TWO ISSUES THAT PEOPLE HAVE.
USUALLY IT'S THE TAXES AND THE SECOND IS AND THE REVENUE.
THE SECOND IS QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
AND THAT ALL THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED BY THE BOARD IN THE COMING WEEKS AND MONTHS.
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THAT CONVERSATION.
WELL, I THINK THIS IS REALLY VERY, VERY HELPFUL AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU TOOK THE TIME TO, UM, MEET WITH US TONIGHT AND, AND WE APPRECIATE YOU HAVING US.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO COMING BACK WITH THE F A I S IN SHORT ORDER, AND, UH, APPRECIATE THE TIME.
SO WE WILL LET YOU, WE KNOW YOU HAVE A LONG AGENDA OF OTHER ITEMS AND, UH, WE WILL SEE YOU ALL VERY SOON.
HAVE A NICE, UH, MEMORIAL DAY WEEK.
YOU TOO, MR. ENJOY THE HOLIDAY.
UH, PAUL, I WAS HOPING WE COULD TAKE THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OUT OF ORDER AHEAD OF BLOWERS, ONLY BECAUSE THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES ATTORNEY JOHN SAVAGE, HAS ANOTHER MEETING, I BELIEVE AT SEVEN O'CLOCK.
SO I SEE BISHOP PRESTON AND MS. WALTON AS WELL.
I'M, I'M HERE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM, UH, BISHOP PRESTON, UH, RAJU ABRAHAM, BRIAN SWEENEY, AS WELL AS, UH, TERRY WALTON TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT, UH, MAY ARISE.
A QUESTION I HAVE IS, AND THE LAST TIME IT WAS THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATE ACTION BY THE BOARD, WHICH WE ESSENTIALLY DID IN ORDER TO GET THE BANK TO, UM, PROVIDE FINANCING.
'CAUSE NOW THEY HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH SOME WORDING AND, UH, AND A DEEDED.
AND SO THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED.
UH, BUT THERE'S LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN ADDED TO THIS CORRECTION DEEDED THAT CHANGES FOREVER.
UH, BUT I'VE, I'VE KNOWN LOW INCOME HOUSING TO BE, UH, AND I'M, I, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S ADDED TO IT.
AND IF IT IS ADDED TO IT, I REALLY THINK THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION AT A TOWN BOARD MEETING WHERE THE PE PUBLIC CAN LOOK AT IT, COMMENT ABOUT IT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT ANSWER IS, BUT I DO KNOW THE WRONG ANSWER IS FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO PASS SOMETHING CALLED THE CORRECTION DEEDED, WHICH SEEMS TO TALK ABOUT 80% OF A M I IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CALL LOW INCOME HOUSING.
BUT THEN THROW IN THE ADDED LANGUAGE THAT THE, UH, 80% OF A M I IS ESTABLISHED AT THE MOMENT.
SOMEBODY FIRST ENTERS A UNIT OF LOW INCOME HOUSING AND AFTER THAT POINT IS FOREVER QUALIFIED TO STAY IN LOW INCOME, EVEN IF THEY ARE IN $170,000 OR WIN THE LOTTERY AND HAVE A MILLION DOLLARS.
AND IT'S IN PERPETUITY SO THAT NO ONE, ONCE SOMEBODY QUALIFIES, THEY CAN STAY THERE FOREVER REGARDLESS OF HOW WEALTHY THEY BECOME.
AND I DOUBT IF THE BANK IS REQUIRING THAT.
SO, IN ORDER TO GIVE YOU FUNDING.
AND SO MY QUESTION IS, ONE IS WHY IS IT IN THERE? YOU'RE GONNA SAY, WELL, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, BUT YOU'RE ASKING US TO CODIFY THAT AND MAKE THAT POLICY TOWN POLICY THAT LOW INCOME HOUSING MEANS THAT QUALIFICATION FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING MEANS AT ONE POINT IN IN YOUR LIFE, YOU MET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR IT WHEN YOU ENTER THE UNIT.
AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT YOU GET INCREASES AND INCREASES.
AND SO YOU BASICALLY HAVE SOMEBODY WHO COULD BE WEALTHY TAKING UP A LOW INCOME UNIT
[00:45:01]
FROM SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T MAKE VERY MUCH MONEY.AND THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH HOUSING WE CAN HAVE IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH, IT'S A FINITE NUMBER.
AND TO TAKE LOW INCOME HOUSING OFF THE MARKET, SO TO SPEAK, AND NOT HAVE IT AVAILABLE, UH, TO ME IS, IS, IS DISTURBING.
AND WHEN I THINK THE NUMBER WAS APPROXIMATELY 20% OF THE PEOPLE IN A PARTICULAR UNIT IN A PARTICULAR BUILDING ARE DON'T QUALIFY.
AND WITH THIS LANGUAGE, THEY WILL ALWAYS QUALIFY REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH MONEY THEY MAKE.
WELL, MR. SHEEN, I, BUT MY QUESTION IS, WHY, WHY IS THAT IN THERE IN ORDER FOR YOU TO GET FINANCING? WELL, IT'S IN THERE BECAUSE IT'S SIMPLY, UH, PUTTING, UH, IN WRITING WHAT HAS EXISTED FOR 50 YEARS IN TERMS OF THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ENTRY INTO PUBLIC HOUSING.
IT'S NOT CHANGING A THING, ONE THING, IT'S JUST CLARIFYING WHAT'S BEEN IN PLACE AS REQUIRED BY HUD OR AS ALLOWED BY HUD FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS, UH, FOR PUBLIC HOUSING.
AND THIS JUST NOT WITH GREENBERG, BUT FOR, YOU KNOW, MOST PUBLIC HOUSING NATIONALLY.
AND I'LL STEP BACK AND I'LL, UH, DEFER TO MS. WALTON, UH, WHO CERTAINLY HAS, UM, MUCH EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA.
LET ME JUST, YOUR, YOUR STATEMENT IS EXACTLY CORRECT THAT I AGREE WITH IT.
IT'S WHAT'S BEEN ALLOWED FOR 50 YEARS FOR ENTRY INTO LOW INCOME HOUSING.
IT'S WHAT HAPPENS 10, 15 YEARS LATER.
SOMEBODY HAS A VERY, VERY PRESTIGIOUS AND A HIGH SALARY JOB.
THEY STILL QUALIFY FOR THE TAKING UP A UNIT OF LOW INCOME HOUSING IF WE AGREE TO THIS LANGUAGE.
WELL, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, MR. SHEEN.
THE YOU CANNOT JUST KICK SOMEONE OUT OF PUBLIC HOUSING JUST BECAUSE THEY, THEY HAVE INCREASES IN INCOME.
BUT AGAIN, I'LL DEFER TO MS. WALTON ON THAT.
AND IF IT IS THE LAW, WE DON'T NEED TO PUT IT INTO OUR DOCUMENT.
IF IT'S THE LAW, WELL, WELL, MAYBE WE, MAYBE, UH, WE HAVE TO PUT IN THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HAPPENING.
I MEAN, WE COULD ALWAYS, UM, ASK FOR A CHANGE IN THE FEDERAL, YOU KNOW, LAWS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IN RECENT MONTHS HAS BEEN CRITICIZED FOR, UH, FOR ACTIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY LAW RATHER THAN, UM, YOU KNOW, INITIATIVES THAT THEY'RE SOLELY TAKING.
THEY JUST, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, THE LEGAL FORMS THAT THEY HAVE, THESE ARE FORMS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REQUIRES THE CERTIFICATION.
WE WERE CRITICIZED, UM, A COUPLE MONTHS AGO THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE TENANT POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE BEEN EVICTED BECAUSE THEY, UM, THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTATION, BUT THEN WHEN THEY DID, UM, THERE'S NO EVICTION.
UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE HOUSING AUTHORITY JUST HAS TO DO WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES, RIGHT? SO I HAVEN'T SEEN THE FEDERAL LAW THAT STATES THAT THIS IS THE REQUIREMENT THAT ONCE YOU QUALIFY FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING, THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO STAY IN THAT UNIT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.
I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT FEDERAL LAW.
AND, AND SO I, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT HOPEFULLY BY TOMORROW NIGHT, UH, SO THAT WE CAN SEE THAT THAT IS THE LAW.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE, BECAUSE I THINK, UH, WE WOULD, YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE ENOUGH LOW INCOME HOUSING THAT WAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE CONSTANTLY HAVING PEOPLE GROW OUT OF THE QUAL THE, UH, THE UNIT.
AND THEY MAY WANT TO STAY THERE.
AND I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE A, AN EVICTION JUST BECAUSE YOU GO OVER, BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME TIME PERIOD IF YOU'RE CONSTANTLY OVER.
WELL, THAT MEANS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A BLIP.
YOU JUST, YOU JUST HAPPEN TO GO OVER BY 2% OR 5%, OR EVEN A HUNDRED PERCENT.
BUT IF IT'S A BLIP FOR ONE YEAR, THAT'S ONE THING.
BUT IF IT'S A BLIP AND YOU'RE CONSTANTLY INCREASING MORE AND MORE AND MORE WHAT'S BEING ASKED OF US, WHICH WAS, FIRST OF ALL, THIS WAS SOLD AS IT WAS PUBLIC HOUSING, IT'S NOT GONNA BE PUBLIC HOUSING ANYMORE.
AND WE GAVE A TAX EXEMPTION, A TAX EXEMPTION BASED ON THE UNITS BEING LOW INCOME.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE TREATED THIS DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPERTIES BECAUSE IT'S THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
BUT NOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO SAY, OKAY, YES, THE, WE GAVE A TAX EXEMPTION.
[00:50:01]
SO IN OTHER WORDS, TAXPAYERS ARE SUBSIDIZING THIS, OKAY? IT'S NOT GOING TO BE, UH, PUBLIC HOUSING ANYMORE.BUT WE, WE STILL WANT YOU TO SUBSIDIZE PEOPLE WHO GO OVER INCOME.
YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO THROW THEM OUT.
NO ONE'S LOOKING TO THROW PEOPLE OUT, YOU KNOW, AS, AS A MOMENT'S NOTICE.
BUT I NEED TO SEE SOME FEDERAL LAW THAT SAYS THAT THIS WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO PUT IN HERE, WHICH IS A LINE IN A DOCUMENT.
NOW, IF I DIDN'T HAPPEN TO READ THIS STUFF, I WOULDN'T HAVE NOTICED THIS LINE IN A DOCUMENT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT MENTIONED IN THE HEADING, IT'S NOT MENTIONED ANYWHERE ELSE.
IT'S MENTIONED IN THE, IN THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, IN A LINE THAT YOU CAN JUST EASILY PASS OVER.
AND MY WHOLE PURPOSE OF HAVING THIS DISCUSSION IS IF WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS AND PUT INTO OUR DOCUMENTS, AND THIS IS NOT JUST ONE BUILDING.
IF YOU DO IT FOR ONE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO IT FOR ALL, UH, PUT INTO OUR DOCUMENTS THAT A LOW INCOME HOUSING MEANS YOUR INCOME AT THE TIME YOU ENTER A AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT'S IT, THAT'S YOUR STANDARD.
UH, THEN THAT'S NOT THE, THAT'S NOT WHAT I BELIEVED THE HOUSING AUTHOR'S MISSION WAS, WHICH IS ANOTHER THING IS I WOULD LIKE TO ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT IS THE, UH, THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES' MISSION, BECAUSE IT'S OBVIOUSLY CHANGED, AND UNDERSTANDABLY, IT'S CHANGED BECAUSE OF HUD.
UM, BUT WHAT IS IT? BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE PEOPLE WHO ARE OVER INCOME HAVE OTHER ALTERNATIVES LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOUSING, RIGHT? THAT, THAT THEY COULD ACTUALLY, UM, ESSENTIALLY ACQUIRE AND OWN.
I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE, SHOULD BE AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE OVER INCOME, RIGHT? AND, AND THAT WOULD THEN FREE UP A UNIT FOR SOMEBODY WHO REALLY NEEDS IT, BECAUSE THEY DON'T MAKE MUCH MONEY.
MS. WALTON, YOU'RE ON MUTE, TERRY.
OH, I WAS HOPING YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT.
WE MIGHT HAVE TO REPEAT ALL THAT AGO.
UM, GEEZ, I GUESS I NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO BEGIN.
SO LET ME, LET ME, LET ME GIVE YOU A, SOMETHING THAT'S PRESCRIPTIVE.
WHEN I STARTED, UH, WORKING IN PUBLIC HOUSING, UH, MR. SHEEN, 30 YEARS AGO, MY INTRODUCTION WAS TO PUBLIC HOUSING.
BACK THEN, WE HAD WHAT WAS CALLED A FIVE H PROGRAM.
IT WAS A HOME OWNERSHIP PROGRAM WHERE WE WOULD TAKE PUBLIC HOUSING, SCATTERED SITES, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND, UH, DO AN INVENTORY REMOVAL, A DISPOSITION, AND STAMP THEM FIRST AND FOREMOST TO THE RESIDENTS WHO WERE LIVING IN THE HOMES.
AND THEN SECONDARILY TO OTHER PEOPLE IN PUBLIC HOUSING WHO WERE NOT LIVING IN HOMES, BUT WERE, UH, SOMEHOW PREPARED OR THOUGHT THEY WERE PREPARED TO PURCHASE A HOME.
AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE'D GO OUT INTO THE MARKET SPACE TO AFFORDABLE FAMILIES.
AND THEN ANYONE AFTER THAT, WE HAD A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS.
ONE IN PARTICULAR, A LADY, I CALLED HER, HER, HER NICKNAME WAS KAT.
SHE MADE A, HER HUSBAND MADE QUITE A BIT OF MONEY, AND I COULDN'T, I ASKED KAT KATT, WHY, WHY DON'T YOU WANNA LIVE HERE? IN WHAT WAS CALLED THE JEFFRIES HOMES AT THAT POINT IN TIME AND YOUNG BOYS INCORPORATED WERE THEIR, UH, BIG GANG GROUP IN DETROIT, MICHIGAN.
AND I SAID, WHY DON'T YOU TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS FIVE H PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE? YOU GUYS CERTAINLY QUALIFY WITH YOUR INCOME LEVELS.
LONG CONVERSATION MADE SURE SHE SAID, TERRY, I DON'T WANNA MOVE OUTTA WHERE I AM BECAUSE THIS IS A SAFETY NET.
SHE SAID, IF MY HUSBAND LOSES HIS JOB AND HE COULD LOSE HIS JOB, UM, AND I OWN A HOME, OR I'M IN A HOME OR ANYWHERE ELSE, THEN I'M GONNA BECOME HOMELESS.
BUT IF MY HUSBAND LOSES HIS JOB AND I'M HERE, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A HOME.
AND THAT WAS AN IMMEDIATE PARADIGM SHIFT.
NOW, AS A YOUNG WOMAN, FRESH OUTTA COLLEGE AND EVERYTHING BACK THEN, I THOUGHT, GOSH, BET ON YOURSELF.
BUT AS I'VE TRAVERSED THIS INDUSTRY AND DIFFERENT PLACES THROUGH THE YEARS AND DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY, WHAT I HAVE LEARNED IS THAT PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN PUBLIC HOUSING, EVEN WHEN THEY BEGIN TO MAKE MONEY, DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE SENSE OF SAFETY AND SECURITY
[00:55:01]
TO MOVE OUT AND MOVE AWAY FROM WHAT THAT TYPE OF A, OF A SUBSIDY CAN PROVIDE FOR THEM.SO WHILE WE MAY SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU GOT A GREAT JOB.
IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO GET OUT, MOVE ON, MAKE THIS RESOURCE AVAILABLE TO SOMEONE ELSE.
I THINK WHAT THEIR REALITY IS, IS THAT EVERY DAY I AM ONE DAY POTENTIALLY AWAY FROM BEING HOMELESS, THAT AT ANY TIME MY JOB CAN BE TAKEN FROM ME.
AND IF IT'S TAKEN FROM ME, I KNOW THAT I CAN AT LEAST PROVIDE HOUSING FOR MY FAMILY.
AND IT'S HARD, REALLY, IS TO GET PEOPLE TO A PLACE WHERE THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE, THEY FEEL SAFE, AND THEY FEEL SECURE THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY MOVE OUT.
NOW, WE GET A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE ALL THE TIME AND ALL THESE SITUATIONS THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH CONVINCE, PUT 'EM THROUGH FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PROGRAMS, I THINK ALL THOSE THINGS ARE CRITICAL AND NECESSARY.
I THINK EVERY MUNICIPALITY OUGHT TO HAVE HOUSING AVAILABLE.
SOMEONE'S, UH, PHONE IS REALLY, REALLY
UH, SOMEBODY'S PHONE IS SOMEBODY'S, UH, NOT MUTED.
SECOND DEVICE IF YOU COULD UNMUTE AND, UH, I'LL GO AROUND AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE ELSE IS MUTED.
CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME NOW? YES.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IN MOST COMMUNITIES WHERE YOU'VE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH AND BLESSED ENOUGH THAT YOUR PROPERTY VALUES ARE RAISING, INCOMES ARE GOING UP.
WESTCHESTER IS ONE OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE PLACES TO LIVE IN THE COUNTRY.
UM, YOU GET THIS MISSING MIDDLE OF PEOPLE.
SO YOU HAVE THE VERY, VERY POOR, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE STABLE, STABLE IN JOBS, STABLE IN INCOME.
AND THEN THERE'S THIS MIDDLE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE, THEY'RE CLIMBING, BUT THEY'RE REALLY NOT STABLE ENOUGH TO GO INTO TRUE MARKET RATE HOUSING.
AND SO THEY END UP STUCK IN WHAT IS AVAILABLE TO THEM.
NOW, OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOESN'T PROVIDE SUBSIDIES FOR THAT MISSING MIDDLE OF PEOPLE.
YOUR HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY HAS A VERY SLIM AMOUNT OF SUBSIDY AVAILABLE FOR THAT MISSING MIDDLE.
THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THE MISSING MIDDLE IS SERVED, AND THAT'S THE WORKFORCE GROUP, IS THROUGH LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES WHO PUT SUBSIDIES IN PLACE TO HELP OFFSET THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING FOR THAT GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS.
SO THOSE ARE THOSE PEOPLE WHO FALL BETWEEN 80 AND ABOUT 120% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
EVEN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AT THAT 80%, THEY END UP NOT ABLE TO AFFORD THOSE PRODUCTS THAT PEOPLE PUT OUT THERE INTO THE MARKETPLACE.
SO WE'VE GOT THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE, UH, MR. SHEEN, AND I THINK YOU ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
WHEN I'M LISTENING TO YOU, I HEAR YOU SAYING, YOU KNOW, HEY, YOU GUYS AT 80 TO ONE 20, GET OUTTA THE WAY.
LET THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AT 30 HAVE THESE UNITS.
BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AT THE 80, THE ONE 20, THEY SAY, WELL, WHERE DO I GO? WHERE IS THERE FOR ME TO GO? I WANNA BE IN, IN GREENBERG.
THIS IS WHERE MY CHILDREN HAVE GONE TO SCHOOL AND ARE GOING TO SCHOOL.
WHERE WILL I GO? AND WE DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT.
AND SO WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS THAT GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO STAY IN THE HOUSING THAT IS THERE, AND HOPEFULLY THEIR INCOME WILL BECOME MORE STABLE FOR THEM.
HOPEFULLY THEY'LL BECOME MORE BRAVE AND MORE CONFIDENT IN THEIR ABILITY TO MOVE OUT, AND THEY WILL MOVE ON.
AND WHEN THEY DO FINALLY MOVE ON, THAT UNIT THAT THEY WERE, ARE NOW CURRENTLY OCCUPYING WILL BECOME AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AT OR BELOW 60% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
IN THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, BECAUSE THIS PROJECT IS FUNDED BY LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS, IT ACTUALLY SERVES BY MANDATE A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BELOW WHAT THE TOP LEVEL OF PUBLIC AFFORDABILITY IS.
NOW, YOU ALSO ASKED A QUESTION, WHERE IS IT WRITTEN THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO NOT EVICT PEOPLE ONCE THEY REACH A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL? AND LET'S SAY EVEN FOR A SUSTAINED PERIOD OF TIME, IF YOU GO TO THE CFRS, THE CODE OF FEDERAL
[01:00:01]
REGULATIONS, AND YOU PICK UP NINE 60 DASH 2 61 THERE, THEY BEGIN TO DISCUSS THE RESTRICTIONS ON EVICTING FAMILIES BASED ON INCOME FROM LOW INCOME PUBLIC HOUSING.AND I THINK THE REASON WHY IT'S THERE IS FOR THE VERY THING THAT I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT AS I STARTED THIS, WHICH IS OFTENTIMES PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN PUBLIC HOUSING, WHO HAVE JOBS, WHO ARE CLIMBING A LADDER UP, AREN'T STABLE ON THOSE LADDERS.
AND SO IF THEY SLIP A COUPLE OF STEPS ON THE LADDER, THEY DON'T, THEY'RE NOT HOMELESS.
BECAUSE SEE, IF I SLIP ON A LADDER IN MY HOUSE, I'M IN TROUBLE.
I'M, I'M, I'M JUST IN TROUBLE.
BUT IF I'M IN PUBLIC HOUSING, I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO SLIP ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE LADDER.
BUT IF I JUST SLIP HALFWAY DOWN THE MEASURE THAT I'VE CLIMBED, I'M IN TROUBLE UNLESS I'M IN PUBLIC HOUSING.
AND I THINK, I THINK MR. SHEEN, THAT THAT IS REALLY WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE PSYCHE, IN THE MINDSET, IN THE COMFORT LEVEL OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY LIVING IN PUBLIC HOUSING.
I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THOSE FAMILIES WHO ARE IN, UH, GREENBERG'S PUBLIC HOUSING PERSONALLY, AND SOME WANNA BE ABLE TO GO, BUT THEY SAY, TERRY, WHERE AM I GONNA GO? AND I, AND I, I DON'T WANNA PUT, GET IN TROUBLE BY MENTIONING PLACES, BUT THERE'S CERTAIN CITIES AND PLACES WHERE THEY PERCEIVE THAT THEY'D BE ABLE TO AFFORD.
THEY DON'T WANNA GO TO THOSE PLACES.
I DON'T WANT MY KIDS IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM.
WHERE, WHERE, WHERE ELSE AM I GONNA GO? THEY WANNA BE IN GREENBURG.
AND SO THE BEST THING THAT WE COULD DO IS FIND A PRODUCT, FIND A SUBSIDY, A MECHANISM THAT CAN HOUSE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THAT MODERATE INCOME LEVEL.
WHAT'S THE NUMBER IN FRONT OF, OF C F R? IT'S 24 C F R 9 6 0 2 6 1.
I ACTUALLY HAVE IT UP AND I DON'T KNOW, I ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH SHARING MY SCREEN.
UM, BUT THE CORNELL LAW SCHOOL HAS, UH, IS, IS ONE OF THOSE LOCATIONS THAT WE GO TO OFTEN.
BUT WHAT IT SAYS IS PA UH, UM, PHAS MAY EVICT OR TERMINATE THE TENANCY OF FAMILIES WHO ARE OVER INCOME, SUBJECT TO PARAGRAPH B OF THIS SECTION.
AND PARAGRAPH B SAYS, UNLESS IT IS REQUIRED TO DO SO BY THE LOCAL LAW, A P H A MAY NOT EVICT OR TERMINATE THE TENDENCY OF A FAMILY SOLELY BECAUSE THE FAMILY IS OVER THE INCOME LIMIT FOR PUBLIC HOUSING.
IF THE FAMILY HAS A VALID CONTRACT FOR PARTICIPATION IN AN F SS S PROGRAM UNDER 24, UH, THAT'S THE C F R ALSO PART 9 84, A PUBLIC, UH, HOUSING, UH, A P H A MAY NOT EVICT A FAMILY FOR BEING OVER THE INCOME LIMIT.
SO EVEN IF BY LAW, YOU CAN'T EVICT THEM FOR BEING OVER THE INCOME LIMIT FOR PUBLIC HOUSING, IF YOU'RE CURRENTLY RECEIVING THE EARNED INCOME DISALLOWANCE PROVIDED.
SO WHAT HUD DID DO FOR US IS IF FAMILY IS PART OF WHAT'S CALLED A FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM THAT I, ME, THAT I MENTIONED, WHEN THEY BEGIN TO MAKE MORE MONEY, WE CAN COLLECT WHAT WOULD BE OVER FOR RENT.
WE CAN COLLECT THAT FOR THEM AND PUT IT IN AN ESCROW ACCOUNT, UH, FOR FIVE YEARS, I THINK IS WHAT IT IS.
AND THEN HELP THEM TO HOPEFULLY PURCHASE A HOME, GO BACK TO SCHOOL, GET AN EDUCATION, PURCHASE A CAR FOR MOBILITY SO THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, GET TO PLACES, UM, THAT MAY HAVE BETTER HOUSING, BUT DON'T THAT LACK MASS TRANSPORTATION OR GET BACK AND FORTH TO SOME PURSUIT OF SOME HIGHER EDUCATION.
SO I, I, I THINK HUD WANTS, AND WE WANT, AND YOU WANT FAMILIES TO BE ABLE TO MOVE UP AND MOVE OUT AND MOVE ON, BUT HOW DO YOU DO THAT RESPONSIBLY AND RESPONSIBLY AND NOT JUST KICK PEOPLE OUT BECAUSE WE DECIDED, OH, YOU'RE STABLE.
WE DETERMINE THAT YOU'VE HAD THAT JOB LONG ENOUGH, YOU'RE STABLE ENOUGH, AND SO NOW IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO GO OUT AND TAKE A CHANCE.
I THINK THAT THEREIN LIES KIND OF THE RUB IN TERMS OF, UM, US BEING RESPONSIBLE IN THESE POSITIONS THAT WE'RE IN.
SO, I, I, I'M SAYING, I GUESS ALL OF THIS TO YOU TO SAY, I REALLY DO UNDERSTAND, AND I REALLY DON'T, UM, DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE FEELING AND SAYING, I'M JUST SUGGESTING TO YOU THAT TO PUT MYSELF IN THE MINDSET AND IN THE PLACE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE SERVE, I'M FORCED TO ACKNOWLEDGE
[01:05:01]
WHAT THEY FEEL, WHAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING, AND AS A PUBLIC SERVANT, UM, BE RESPONSIVE TO THAT.SO, AND I WANT YOU TO HAVE COMFORT IN THAT THIS STOCK THAT WE ARE REDEVELOPING, THAT SORELY NEEDS IT RIGHT NOW, WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL DOES MOVE OUT, IT IMMEDIATELY BECOMES AVAILABLE TO A HOUSEHOLD, UH, WHO IS AT OR BELOW 60% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
SO MAYBE THAT'S ANSWERED SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS, RIGHT? BUT JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS.
ONE IS I THINK THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY'RE NOT STABLE.
MANY PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY WE LEARNED, YOU KNOW, FROM THIS PANDEMIC ARE ONLY A FEW PAYCHECKS FROM NOT HAVING A HOUSE, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S LOW INCOME OR NOT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE STANDARD FOR SOMEBODY FEELING STABLE? WHEN WE WERE, WE WERE CHATTING ABOUT THIS BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TOLD ABOUT SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY MAKES $170,000 AND ONE OF THESE LOW INCOME UNITS, AND YOU KNOW, AND IF, AND IF THEY'RE A CORRECTION OFFICER OR, OR, OR THEY HAVE SOME JOB, YOU KNOW, THAT, I MEAN, AT WHAT POINT ARE THEY STABLE? MY OBJECTION IS THERE'S NO TIME PERIOD ON THIS.
THIS IS IN PERPETUITY WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED FOR.
IT SAYS, THE TERM LOW INCOME HOUSING SHALL MEAN HOUSING FOR PERSONS WHO AT THE TIME OF INITIAL OCCUPANCY OF A UNIT, PROBABLY WHEN THEY'RE MAKING THE LEAST AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THEIR LIVES, DO NOT HAVE INCOMES IN EXCESS OF 80% IN THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME, WHICH MEANS YEAR AFTER YEAR, THEY WILL QUALIFY FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEIR ACTUAL SALARY IS, PREVENTING SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY IS DESPERATELY IN NEED OF FINDING HOUSING BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD ANYTHING OTHER THAN LOW INCOME HOUSING FROM THAT UNIT.
AND THAT'S, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THROW SOMEBODY OUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NICE INFLAMMATORY LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE USING, THROW SOMEBODY OUT BECAUSE, BECAUSE THEY GO A BLIP OVER.
BUT AT SOME POINT THERE'S GOTTA BE SOMETHING BETWEEN, YOU DON'T THROW THEM OUT BECAUSE OF A YEAR OR TWO, THEY JUST HAPPENED TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE WORKED ON A PROJECT AND IT PUT THEM OVER, AND NOW IT PUTS 'EM OUT OF HOUSING.
YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT WE SHOULD NOT EVER ALLOW.
BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME TIME LIMIT BETWEEN THAT AND IN PERPETUITY WHERE WE COULD AGREE THAT, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO MOVE ON.
AND, AND WHAT YOU READ IN THE CFR SAYS, UNLESS THERE'S SOME LOCAL LAW STATING OTHERWISE.
AND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO, TO CODIFY HERE IS THE OPPOSITE, IS THAT UNLESS THE, UH, THE, YOU WANT THE LOCAL US TO ACTUALLY ADOPT THAT, THERE IS NO LOCAL LAW THAT STATES OTHERWISE.
I PROBABLY DIDN'T WORD THAT CORRECTLY.
UH, BUT MY BOTTOM LINE, BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE BURIED IN A DOCUMENT, THEN HAVE NO, NO REAL DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.
THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.
AND ALL OF A SUDDEN LATER WHEN IT COMES TO THE NEXT BUILDING AND THE NEXT BUILDING, IT'S, WELL, THIS IS WHAT THEY DID BEFORE TOWN BOARD.
WHERE IS YOUR TRANSPARENCY? AND SO THIS IS MY ATTEMPT AT HAVING SOME TRANSPARENCY OF WHAT'S HAPPENING, BECAUSE I ALWAYS THOUGHT IN, IN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, EVERYONE QUALIFIED FOR LOW INCOME.
THIS WOULD MAKE IT SO THAT EVERYONE WOULD CONTINUE TO QUALIFY FOR LOW INCOME, WHETHER THEY'RE LOW INCOME OR NOT.
I I'M JUST, JUST ONE MORE TIME.
I JUST, I WANNA MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, 'CAUSE I KNOW HOW THIS IS GONNA BE SPIN SPUN BECAUSE I'M IN A POLITICAL WORLD, UH, THAT I'M OPPOSED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING OF ALL OPPOSED TO LOW INCOME, COMPLETELY THE OPPOSITE.
WHAT I'M ARGUING HERE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BEST WE CAN, TO MAKE SURE THAT LOW INCOME HOUSING IS AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LOW INCOME AND NOT NEEDLESSLY TAKEN AND USED BY SOMEBODY NO LONGER ANYWHERE NEAR LOW INCOME SALARIES.
AND THAT, AND THAT'S, THAT'S SOUTHERN, I GUESS I DON'T SEE, I GUESS I'M READING THE LANGUAGE YOU HAVE RIGHT HERE.
RIGHT? AND I'M, I'M STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND THE INTERPRETATION THAT YOU'RE GETTING FROM IT.
WHAT I READ IN THE RED, AND I, AND I READ ALL OF IT, THE BLACK, THE RED, AND THEN THE BLACK, RIGHT? SURE.
WHAT, WHAT I READ IT SAYING IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO, IN PERPETUITY KEEP THIS LAND FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AT OR BELOW AREA MEDIAN'S INCOME, 80% OF AREA MEDIAN'S
[01:10:01]
INCOME.SO WHAT, WHAT I READ IT SAYING IS THAT WHAT CAN'T SOMEHOW DECIDE, I DON'T KNOW, FIVE YEARS IN, 10 YEARS IN THAT, OH MY GOD, THE PROPERTY IS WORTH A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS.
LET'S THROW THESE PEOPLE OFF AND NOW USE THE PROPERTY FOR LUXURY HOUSING.
I READ IT JUST THE OPPOSITE OF THE WAY YOU READ IT.
WHAT IT'S SAYING IS THAT THAT LAND WILL BE USED FOR PEOPLE WHO MEET WHAT IS A PUBLIC HOUSING CRITERIA FOR LOW INCOME AT OR BELOW 80% OF THE AREA'S MEDIAN INCOME.
NOW, IN FACT, WHILE THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS ARE ON, IT IS GONNA HAVE TO BE USED FOR PEOPLE AT OR BELOW 60% OF THE ARYAN MEDIAN'S INCOME.
BUT IT'S SAYING RETAIN IT FOR 80% OR BELOW.
THAT'S HOW, THAT'S WHAT I'M READING IN THIS.
SO I GUESS I'M UNCLEAR WHAT YOU ARE READING, AND IF THERE ARE LAWS THAT YOU WANNA PASS, LIKE IF THIS MUNICIPALITY DECIDES THAT OF ITS OWN VOLITION, IT WANTS TO PASS SOME KIND OF LAWS AROUND, UM, WAYS TO EVICT PEOPLE WHO MEET CERTAIN INCOME CRITERIA THAT'S COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THIS, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING LIKE THIS.
THAT IS YOU GUYS DECIDING AS A MUNICIPALITY THAT YOU WANT TO ENACT SOME TYPE OF LAWS FOR ANY, ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO THAT IF PEOPLE BEGIN TO EXCEED A CERTAIN NUMBER OR A CERTAIN LEVEL, THEN THE JUDGES HAVE A MECHANISM TO, UM, FORCE AND ALLOW FOR EVICTIONS.
BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, OFTENTIMES PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITIES ATTEMPT TO BEGIN TO EVICT, UM, RESIDENTS.
JUDGES DON'T EVEN, THEY WON'T EVEN LET YOU, THEY, I MEAN, IT'S JUST SO DIFFICULT, AND ESPECIALLY IN WESTCHESTER, MORE THAN IN SOME OF THE OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT I HAVE BEEN IN.
BUT, BUT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M READING HERE.
SO, UM, BUT, BUT, BUT I DO THINK THAT IF YOU GUYS WANNA TAKE ON TO, ANYWAYS, IN, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, IF YOU WANTED TO TAKE ON THIS CHALLENGE OF, UM, HOW TO CAUSE PEOPLE TO MOVE ON, MOVE UP AND MOVE OUT, I, I THINK YOU CAN DO THAT BY LAW AND THAT YOUR LAWYERS WOULD HAVE TO TELL YOU HOW TO DO THAT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT, BUT CLEARLY I THINK IT'S AVAILABLE TO BE DONE BASED UPON THE WAY THE CFRS ARE WRITTEN.
SO SOMEBODY'S DOING IT SOMEWHERE.
BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS, IS THAT THE C I'M SORRY, WERE YOU DONE? I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT.
BUT I, I THOUGHT I HEARD SOMEBODY ELSE.
HOW ARE YOU? I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO ARE YOU, ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU SEE WHERE IT'S OTHER LINE AND IT SAYS AT THE TIME OF INITIAL OCCUPANCY OF A UNIT, SO ARE YOU SAYING, ARE YOU SAYING AT, I'M SORRY, I SEE IT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, RIGHT? UHHUH,
SO YOU'RE SAYING ONCE THEY, AT THE INITIAL TIME, WHEN THEY COME IN THE BUILD, WHEN THEY COME INTO THE APARTMENT, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE RE-CERTIFIED AGAIN? WELL, NO.
SO WHAT THAT'S SAYING IS THAT IN ORDER FOR YOU TO MOVE INTO A UNIT, SO THAT'S YOUR INITIAL OCCUPANCY, YOU HAVE TO BE AT OR BELOW 80% OF AREA MEDIAN'S INCOME.
ALL THE SUBSIDIES THAT I KNOW OF REQUIRE THAT YOU DO, THAT YOU RE-CERTIFY YOURSELF ANNUALLY.
SOME ARE BI-ANNUAL, WHICH JUST DEPENDS.
BUT YOU HAVE TO DO SOME FORM OF AN INCOME RE-CERTIFICATION.
WHAT IT'S NOT REQUIRING, WHAT IT'S NOT SAYING IS WHAT MR. SHEEN IS SAYING.
HE WANTS IT SOMEHOW TO SAY, UM, BUT AT SOME INCOME RECERTIFICATION, IF YOU EXCEED THIS NUMBER, THEN YOU'VE GOTTA GET OUT AND YOU'VE GOTTA GO.
WELL, AND, AND I'M SAYING THAT THAT SHOULDN'T BE RUNNING WITH THE LAND.
THAT SHOULD BE AS IT'S WRITTEN IN THE CFRS, WHICH IS, UM, IF YOU GUYS WANNA ENACT SOME POLICY, SOME LAW, SOME KIND OF A REGULATION OR STATUTE OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD THEN CAUSE, UH, RESIDENTS OR COMPEL THEM TO MOVE AND LEAVE OR, OR, OR GIVE JUDGES, UH, SOME TYPE OF A STICK OR BITE TO CAUSE THEM TO MOVE AND LEAVE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL CAN DO.
BUT THIS SAYS YOU CAN'T MOVE INTO THAT UNIT.
WE COULD NOT TAKE THIS LAND OR TAKE THOSE UNITS AND THEN OCCUPY THEM AS LUXURY MARKET RATE HOUSING AT SOME POINT IN THIS PROCESS.
AND THIS RIGHT HERE IS, IS GONNA RUN WITH THE LAND EVEN LONGER THAN I THINK THE TAX CREDITS RUN WITH THE LAND.
IS THAT, AND JOHN IS ON, HE'S A LAWYER.
[01:15:02]
JOHN HAD TO STEP UP FOR ANOTHER MEETING.SO, SO, SO, SO, SO WITH MY, WHAT, WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE DATA IS THAT HOUSING TO PURCHASE A HOME IN GREENBURG TODAY IS ON HER, IT IT, NO ONE CAN DO IT.
NONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE ARE SERVING CAN DO THAT.
NO MATTER HOW HARD I MIGHT WANNA DO A HOME OWNERSHIP PROGRAM FOR THEM, THEY CANNOT.
THIS IS A PIECE OF LAND RIGHT NOW THAT THE ATTEMPT IS, OR PARCELS OF LAND, THAT THE ATTEMPT IS TO PRESERVE LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY.
THAT IS WHAT THE ATTEMPT IS, THE PRESERVATION OF LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY AND THAT AFFORDABILITY BEING FOR PEOPLE AT OR BELOW 80% OF AREA MEDIAN
SO I, I THINK IF EVERYONE AGREES TO THAT NOW, THEN THE NEXT THING IS HOW DO YOU COMPEL PEOPLE WHO STARTED OUT POOR, SOME OF THEM VERY POOR, UM, WHO ARE MAKING THEIR WAY UP THE LADDER TO, UM, HAVE ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, BRAVERY ENOUGH, UM, UH, I, I GUESS, UH, SELF-ASSURANCE THAT, THAT THEY FEEL SELF-ACTUALIZED ENOUGH THAT THEY CAN MOVE OUT AND DO SOMETHING ELSE.
AND I THINK THOSE, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SOCIAL ISSUES, SOCIAL PROGRAMS, THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE DOING TO TRY TO HELP THOSE PEOPLE AND COMPEL THOSE PEOPLE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, I, THE, THE QUESTION IS DO WE PRESERVE THIS, THESE PLOTS OF LAND FOR LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY? BECAUSE IF NOT, THEN, THEN THEY PROBABLY FALL TO EVERYTHING ELSE IN GREENBURG, WHICH IS WHO CAN AFFORD TO LIVE THERE ANYMORE, RIGHT? BUT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO STAY THERE FOR ALL THIS TIME WITHOUT THIS LANGUAGE.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IS ASKING US TO ADD THIS LANGUAGE AT THE TIME OF INITIAL OCCUPANCY, THE UNIT'S AT, AND THEY GIVE THE ADDRESS.
AND THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE THIS IS A REVERTED CLAUSE.
THE GREENBERG SCHOOL DISTRICT GAVE THIS LAND TO THE TOWN AND MADE UPON THE EXPRESS CONDITION THAT SAID LAND IS TO BE USED EXCLUSIVELY, EXCLUSIVELY, NOT 80% OF THE UNITS, BUT EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ERECTING AND MAINTAINING THEREON LOW INCOME HOUSING, LOW INCOME HOUSING.
THERE'S THAT DEFINITION THAT'S DOWN HERE IN QUOTES.
AND THAT IN THE EVENT THAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY SHALL NOT USE OR DISCONTINUE FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER, SEND LAND FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING, RIGHT? THE TOWN, IT COMES BACK TO THE TOWN.
SO WHAT IS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY ASKING US TO DO? THEY'RE ASKING US TO DETERMINE, TO DEEM LOW INCOME HOUSING, TO BE ANYONE WHO, WHEN THEY INITIALLY CAME INTO THE UNIT TO BE LOW INCOME, SO THAT THEY DON'T, THIS VERTA CLAUSE DOESN'T KICK IN.
THAT'S WHAT THE BANK IS WORRIED ABOUT, IS THAT THE TOWN MAY KICK IN THIS RETA CLAUSE BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE OVER INCOME, UH, IN THE UNITS.
OTHERWISE, THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WOULDN'T BE ASKING US TO DO THIS.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE IT FULLY TAX EXEMPT, EVEN THOUGH FROM WHAT WE, WE'VE BEEN TOLD ABOUT 20% OF THE UNITS ARE NOT BEING USED FOR LOW INCOME.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM SUBSIDIZING LOW INCOME HOUSING.
WHAT THIS IS, THIS, WHAT THIS IS DOING IS TO SAY HOUSING AUTHORITY, LOW INCOME FOR THIS PARTICULAR UNIT IS ANYONE WHO PREVIOUSLY QUALIFIED FOR IT.
SO I READ IT COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
AND I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET SOME KIND OF A BRIEF AS TO WHAT THIS ACTUALLY MEANS.
I BELIEVE MY INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT IS THAT IN ORDER FOR THIS VERTA CLAUSE NOT TO KICK IN, BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE, IT'S NOT EXCLUSIVELY BEING USED FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING AS LOW INCOME HOUSING IS TYPICALLY DEFINED.
BUT IF WE DEFINE IT AS ANYONE WHO PREVIOUSLY HAD WAS UNDER 80% WHEN THEY MOVED IN, THAT'S OKAY.
THE ROBERTA CLAUSE DOESN'T KICK IT.
AND I, AGAIN, IT'S A POLITICAL WORLD.
MY WORDS ARE GONNA BE TWISTED.
I'M NOT LOOKING FOR THIS PROPERTY TO REVERT BACK TO THE TOWN.
I WANT IT TO BE USED FOR LOW INCOME, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WHERE'S JOHN? I MEAN, SO I, WHAT I, WHAT I, WHAT I CAN'T DO, UH, MR. SHEEN IS JOHN HAS BEEN DEALING WITH, UM, THE LAWYERS FOR EVERYONE ELSE.
EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN LAWYERS.
MR. SAVAGE IS THE LAWYER FOR THE G H A.
[01:20:01]
ALL THE LAWYERS ARE INSISTENT ON THIS LANGUAGE.WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE INTENT IS TO, UM, TO USE THIS PROPERTY AS NOT ONLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 80% OR BELOW AIR MEDIAN INCOME, BUT FOR LITECH HOUSEHOLDS AT SOME POINT.
SO EVEN AS WE HAVE FAMILIES WHO ARE ABOVE, AND WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF FAMILIES WHO ARE ABOVE, ABOVE THE 60% A M I NUMBER, WE WANNA BE ABLE TO HOUSE THEM BECAUSE WE HAVE COMMITMENTS.
THE, THE TOWN HAD COMMITMENTS TO THOSE PEOPLE LONG BEFORE I CAME TO THE TABLE.
SO WE MADE PROMISES AND WE MADE COMMITMENTS TO ALL THE HOUSEHOLDS WHO WERE THERE, THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE FORCIBLY DISPLACED, AND THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THIS HOUSING ONCE THIS HOUSING WAS REDEVELOPED.
WELL, ONCE ANY, ANYONE WHO IS OVER INCOME MOVES OUT, THEN IMMEDIATELY THAT UNIT IS ONLY ELIGIBLE TO SOMEONE WHO IS 60% AREA MEDIAN INCOME OR BELOW.
NOW, THIS LANGUAGE THAT'S BEING POINTED OUT HERE, I GUESS MAYBE IT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT IN TO TOTAL CONTEXT INSTEAD OF JUST THE BLURB OR THE PARAGRAPH IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND IT.
AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE JOHN IS.
I CAN TELL YOU, MS. WALTON, CAN I JUST JUMP IN FOR A SECOND? PLEASE, PLEASE.
YEAH, I, I, I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU THAT IT'S NOT THE LAWYERS THAT ARE REQUIRING THIS, IT'S THE LENDERS FOR THE REHABILITATION PROJECT.
THEY WILL NOT MAKE THE LOAN WITH THAT LANGUAGE UNLESS THAT LANGUAGE IS SUBORDINATE.
MEANING IF THE PROPERTY REVERTS BACK TO THE TOWN, THE TOWN IS COMMITTED TO ALLOWING THE UNITS TO CONTINUE TO BE USED AS LIKE HOUSING, RIGHT? SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT THE LAWYERS AND THE PROPERTY'S NOT GONNA BE USED FOR, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT.
BUT THEY NEED THAT LANGUAGE, OR WE CAN'T DO THE DEAL.
NOW, THE WAY I READ THE, THE FEDERAL REGISTER, THE TOWN BOARD WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT ITS OWN LOCAL LAW.
THE TOWN BOARD, NOT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY THAT SAYS THAT WHAT IF YOU'RE OVER INCOME, YOU GOTTA GET OUT OF SOME AMOUNT.
SO THE TOWN BOARD WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THEIR DETERMINATION THAT THEY WANNA DO THAT, AND THAT WOULD BE IMPOSED AGAINST THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
BUT IN THE SHORT TERM, IF THE, IF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY'S GONNA GET THIS FINANCING, THE TOWN BOARD HAS TO ADOPT THAT LANGUAGE, THEN THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME, MR. LEWIS, THAT WHAT THE, WHAT, SO WHAT THE BANKERS ARE SAYING IS, BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER FUNDING IS BASED UPON MAINTAINING AND PRESERVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THIS LAND COULDN'T, CANNOT REVERT BACK TO THE CITY.
AND THEN THE CITY DECIDE WE'RE GONNA USE THIS FOR LUXURY HOUSING OR SOME OTHER USE THAT MAY NOR TO SOME GREATER BENEFIT, UH, FINANCIAL BENEFIT.
SO THAT, THAT THERE MAKES SENSE TO ME, MR. LEWIS.
YEAH, BUT MR. SHEEN'S CONCERN IS, MAYBE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
MR. SHEEN'S CONCERN IS RIGHT NOW, HE CAN'T CONSCIOUSLY SAY THAT THE PROPERTY IS BEING USED AS IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE USED BECAUSE IT'S, SOME PEOPLE ARE LIVING THERE AND THEY'RE IN VIOLATION.
BUT IT IS, WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A LOCAL LAW.
ALRIGHT, SO IF WE DON'T HAVE, FIRST OF ALL, TIM, YOU'RE CONFLATING TWO COMMENTS.
JOHN SAVAGE TOLD US THE BANKS COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT THE, UM, THE, UH, AT THE FIRST OWNERSHIP.
WHAT THEY CARED ABOUT IS THAT WE DECLARED LOW INCOME TO BE A, UH, UP TO 80% OF THE A M I.
THAT'S THE CRITICAL STATEMENT.
YOU'RE NODDING YOUR HEAD CORRECTLY.
THE SECOND STATEMENT IS WHAT, UH, US JUST DETERMINING THAT LOW INCOME STILL ONLY IS DETERMINED AT THAT BEGINNING PART.
AND JOHN SAVAGE SAID, YOU KNOW, THE BANKS AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE EVERYBODY TO BE LOW INCOME IN THERE.
THAT THAT'S BASICALLY A POLICY THING SEPARATE FROM THE LENDERS, IT'S THE LENDERS WHO WANT US.
AND I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM STATING THAT THE DEFINITION OF LOW INCOME IS UP TO 80% OF A M I.
IT'S THAT EXTRA LANGUAGE THAT WAS ADDED IN THERE.
IT WAS THE O AND IF THE BANKS SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT DOESN'T MATTER TO US.
WHAT WE CARE ABOUT IS UP TO 80% OF THE A M I, THEN WHY DON'T WE GO WITH THAT? PARTICULARLY LET THEM RELY ON US NOT HAVING ADOPTED A, A LOCAL LOOK.
BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING, WE'RE SPINNING OUR WHEELS HERE A BIT.
I'M NOT THE LAWYERS, YOU KNOW, THEY KEEP ALL OF THIS STUFF TOGETHER FROM ALL OVER AND IT'S GOTTA BE CONSISTENCY WITH TWO B TO NINE C AND THEY DO THAT KIND OF STUFF.
COULD YOU, COULD YOU HEAR ME? BUT, BUT I UNDERSTAND PUBLIC HOUSING.
BUT I WAS GIVING YOU, I, I GOTTA TELL YOU, I WAS GIVING, COULD YOU HEAR ME
[01:25:01]
IN YOUR ABSENCE, UH, LAST WEEK, KAI, CAN I JUST SAY SOMETHING? THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, WE ALL, THE QUESTION IS, IF WE DON'T, WE BASICALLY HAVE AN ULTIMATUM.IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION, THIS DEVELOPMENT MAY NOT BE RENOVATED.
ISN'T THAT'S TRUE, RIGHT? WELL, THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
SO THE QUESTION IS, SO THE QUE AND BASICALLY, WHEN DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION? JOHN TOLD ME HE NEEDS A DECISION BY JUNE 3RD.
OKAY? SO WE HAVE ONE WEEK TO MAKE A DECISION.
SO BASICALLY MY FEELING IS NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, THERE'S POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, NEGATIVES.
BUT I BASICALLY, I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF.
I FEEL THAT THE RENOVATIONS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY SITES IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I SEE THE CONDITIONS.
UH, I, I'M AVERAGING TWO, THREE TIMES A WEEK GOING INTO SEEING THE, YOU KNOW, APARTMENTS.
I FEEL THAT THEY, I, I FEEL WE DESPERATELY NEED TO RENOVATE, UH, UH, THE HOUSING STOCK THAT WE HAVE.
AND I FEEL THAT IF THE HOUSING STOCK IS NOT RENOVATED, I FEEL IT'S GONNA DETERIORATE.
AND THE REPUTATION, YOU KNOW, I I, I DON'T FEEL PEOPLE SHOULD BE LIVING LIKE IN A THIRD CLASS, YOU KNOW, ENVIRONMENT.
I, I THINK WHAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IS DOING, UPGRADING PEOPLE'S QUALITY OF LIFE AND LIVING CONDITIONS IS IMPORTANT.
SO IF WE HAVE, LIKE, UH, IF WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, I WOULD, I WOULD WANT TO GO WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE RENOVATIONS.
AND I, AND I FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, IF, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHAT FRANCIS IS SAYING, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA RISK THE, THE RENOVATIONS.
HEY, BUT YOU SEE, THERE'S NO BUT THERE, PAUL, RIGHT? BECAUSE I'M WITH YOU.
YOU KNOW, MAYBE BECAUSE I KNOW HOW THIS IS GONNA BE SPUN IN MY COMMENTS TONIGHT.
LET'S REMEMBER THAT WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THE BOARD, MEMBERS OF THE, UH, RESIDENTS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY REACHED OUT TO THE BOARD AND SAID, WE ARE IN TERRIBLE CONDITION.
THIS IS 2007 TERRIBLE CON CONDITIONS.
SO I WENT AND I PHOTOGRAPHED THE CONDITIONS AND PUBLISHED APIC A, A BOOKLET OF THE, OF, OF THE, A DRAFT ACTUALLY, OF THE, OF THAT WHAT I FOUND, WHICH WAS, WHICH FRANKLY WAS ATROCIOUS.
UH, AND I DIDN'T MAKE IT PUBLIC, BUT I MADE IT AVAILABLE TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
AND I SAID, I'M NOT GONNA PUBLISH IT FOR 60 DAYS.
AND IN THOSE 60 DAYS, THEY FIXED ALL THE ISSUES THAT WERE IN THERE.
SO IT'S NOT THAT I'M ANTI, I'M NOT SAYING HAVE GOOD WORKING CONDITIONS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, PAUL, BUT I'M SAYING, BUT I JUST WANNA, I JUST WANNA FINISH, I JUST, LET ME JUST PULL PAUL, PAUL, JUST LET ME FINISH.
SO IT'S NOT, WHAT I'M PROPOSING IS NOT, DON'T HAVE THEM GET THEIR FINANCING.
THE BANK SAID THAT ALL THEY NEED FOR THE FINANCING TO GO THROUGH IS FOR US TO SAY THAT LOW INCOME IS 80% UP TO 80% OF A M I I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM DOING THAT.
BUT THEY'VE ADDED IN A SECOND KICKER INTO THAT, WHICH APPARENTLY ISN'T NEEDED NOW THAT WE'VE LEARNED ABOUT C F R, BECAUSE IF THAT'S THE LAW, THAT'S THE LAW.
BUT THAT, WHY DON'T WE, WHY DON'T WE WORDSMITH THAT DOCUMENT, FRANCIS, SO THAT IT WILL FIT WHAT THE BANK NEEDS.
AND THAT WOULD LEAVE A LEAVE, UH, AN OPENING FOR THE TOWN TO MAKE A SUCH LAW THAT IF YOU STAY IN HOUSING, UM, X AMOUNT OF YEARS AFTER YOU HAVE EXCEEDED, UM, THE, UM, UH, INCOME LEVELS, THEN, THEN YOU COULD PUT THAT IN PLACE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK THERE'S AN URGENCY THAT WE, UH, WE GET THIS, UH, UH, UH, WORDED WHEREIN THE BANK IS ACCEPTING TO IT SO THAT THE FINANCING CAN MOVE FORWARD.
AND, AND, UH, AND BUT, BUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE TOWN THAT WOULD NOT, UH, HANDCUFF THE TOWN IN ANY WAY OF ANY FUTURE PROJECTS, UM, AND, AND TO DISPLACE SOMEBODY RIGHT NOW, I, I THINK WOULD BE ATROCIOUS.
IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE, UM, UH, IT, IT WILL BE SPITTING THE EYE OF THE TOWN BOARD TO FORCE THE HOUSING TO FORCE SOME PEOPLE OUT RIGHT NOW.
UH, SO, SO WE, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE SOME, UH, SOME, SOME CONSIDERATION, UH, IN THAT.
AND LET'S WORK THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND LOOK AT WHAT WE CAN DO IN THE FUTURE, UH, BECAUSE THESE PROJECTS ARE IN, IN DISMAL CONDITION.
AND I WOULDN'T, I, I WOULDN'T WANT TO LIVE IN THEM.
THAT'S WHY I'M FIGHTING SO HARD TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS, NOT JUST FOR THEM NOW, BUT EVEN MOVING FORWARD, WE WANT SOMETHING THAT REPRESENTS THE TOWN AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL AND NOT TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S GARNISH,
[01:30:01]
UH, LOOKED UPON AS SOMETHING DETRIMENTAL TO THE TOWN.SO, SO WHY DON'T WE, WHY CAN'T WE, UH, TOMORROW, UH, UH, STAY UP TONIGHT, UH, AND WORDSMITH THAT WITH THE, WITH THE ATTORNEY, UH, JOHN SAVAGE HAD TO GO AND, UH, TO A MEETING WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD AND ON THIS, ON THE SAME ISSUE OF, OF THE RIVERA.
SO, UM, SO, SO WE NEED TO DO THIS EXPEDITIOUSLY AND, AND WORK THROUGH IT.
I, I THINK, UH, ALL, ALL THIS LONG DISCUSSION IS BECOMING MORE CONFUSING THAN IT IS ACCOMPLISHING THE GOAL THAT WE NEED TO MEET FOR, UH, THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE BANK.
SO, SO I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT.
MS. WALTON, THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR PERSPECTIVE, FOR INFORMING AND EDUCATING WITH RESPECT TO THE LACK OF STABILITY AND INSECURITY THAT THE MAJORITY OF AFRICAN AMERICANS IN THIS COUNTRY EXPERIENCE WITH RESPECT TO HOUSING THAT ISSUE, THAT ISSUE IS NOT OFTEN DEALT WITH AT A LEVEL OF HONESTY, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T RECOGNIZE IT.
YOU ARE SO INFORMATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL AND EVERY POINT, I'VE JUST LISTENED TO YOUR PRESENTATION.
I WAS HANGING ON EVERY WORD OF IT BECAUSE IT IS THE REALITY OF THE HOUSING EXPERIENCE OF MOST AFRICAN AMERICANS.
AND LET ADD, LET ME ADD REAL QUICKLY THAT I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD NOW FOR, UH, OVER 20 YEARS.
AND WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROGRAMS TO INCENTIVIZE THE RESIDENTS THAT, UH, THAT QUALIFY, NOT JUST THE ONES THAT ARE OVER INCOME, BUT EVEN THOSE THAT ARE STILL WITHIN THE INCOME LEVELS TO, UH, TO PURCHASE THEIR OWN HO OWN HOMES.
AND IN THE, IN THE COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, WHITE PLAINS OR SURROUNDING AREAS.
AND THE ONLY WAY WE WERE ABLE TO DO IT WITH SIX UNITS IS, IS BY A TAX CREDIT PROGRAM THAT WAS, THAT WAS, UH, THAT WAS DONE THROUGH HOUSING FOR SIX FAMILIES BY THEIR OWN HOME.
AND, BUT THAT IS A VERY, VERY SCARCE PRODUCT.
UH, THAT, AND AS THE TOWN BOARD, NO, THERE IS NOT A WORK.
THERE IS, UH, VERY LITTLE WORKFORCE HOUSING IN THE AREA.
AND THERE IS NO, NO, NO, NO INCENTIVE FOR THE TOWN BOARD OR ANYBODY ELSE SEEMINGLY TO BUILD, UH, WORKFORCE HOUSING WHERE PEOPLE COULD AFFORD, UH, THE HOUSING THAT, THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT NOW OVER AT WHERE THE GOLF COURSE IS.
I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY IN HOUSING CAN, CAN AFFORD A MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE.
I, AND, AND THAT'S NOWHERE FOR THEM TO GO.
SO WE'VE GOT TO WORK THROUGH THIS RIGHT NOW, AND I THINK THE URGENCY REALLY FORCES US TO LOOK AT THIS WITH, WITH AN EYE OF COMPASSION AND, AND AN EYE OF URGENT NEED.
BISHOP, CAN I, CAN I JUST OFFER THIS, THAT, UM, THAT WE DO? WHAT JUST, I, I JUST KINDA WANNA PULL THIS ALL TOGETHER, EVEN FROM MY BRAIN THAT I, I THINK, I THINK THAT ALL OF US ARE ALIGNED IN SPIRIT AND IN SOUL.
WE WANNA SERVE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE IN OUR POPULATION.
AND WE ALSO DON'T WANT TO BE SO CRUEL AS TO JUST THROW PEOPLE OUT, YOU KNOW, OF THEIR HOUSING BECAUSE WE ARE MAKING THESE JUDGMENT CALLS ON WHEN THEY'RE READY, WHEN THEY'RE NOT READY.
I THINK WE'RE ALL TOTALLY ALIGNED.
I THINK WE'RE CAUGHT UP RIGHT NOW ON SOME LANGUAGE, UM, ON SOME PAPER THAT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET TO THAT.
AND THEN I ALSO THINK THAT YOU'VE GOT THIS OPPORTUNITY AS A CITY TO PASS, TO PREPARE, WRITE, DRAFT SOME TYPE OF LEGISLATION OR STATUTE OR SOMETHING, OR LAW, AND THEN GET THAT PASSED MOVING FORWARD SO THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN COMPEL WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU WANT TO COMPEL.
BUT FOR THIS PROJECT AND FOR UNITS, WHICH ABSOLUTELY ARE SOME OF, SOME OF THE WORST THAT I'VE SEEN INSIDE, UM, YOU, YOU, YOU NEED TO GET COMFORTABLE WITH THIS LANGUAGE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
SO IF WE CAN GET THE LAWYERS LOOKING AT THAT AND FIGURING OUT WHAT THAT LANGUAGE COULD BE AND SHOULD BE, I, I, I JUST THINK THAT THAT'S PROBABLY OUR, OUR BEST WAY FORWARD.
'CAUSE 'CAUSE WE COULD BEAT ON THIS THING FOREVER.
AND THE TRUTH IS, WE ALL REALLY ARE IN SOME SENSE SAYING THE SAME THING.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT, I, I JUST ALSO THINK THAT, I REMEMBER, UM, SHORTLY AFTER I GOT ELECTED, UH, MAYBE A FEW YEARS AFTER WE BUILT THE HOUSING ACROSS FROM, UH, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, WARREN O OLD TERRYTOWN OFF OLD TARRYTOWN ROAD ACROSS FROM SAM WILKINS, UH, TERRY HILL COMPLEX, AND IT WAS OWNERSHIP.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ONE OF, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY COULD DO IS MAKE A MAJOR EFFORT
[01:35:01]
TO CREATE AFFORDABLE, YOU KNOW, MAKING, WORKING WITH THE GREENBERG HOUSING AUTHORITY IN THE COMING YEARS, UM, SEEING IF WE COULD BUILD, UM, A WORKFORCE HOUSING OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, UM, AND, UM, GEARING IT TO, UM, UH, TO PEOPLE WHO ALREADY LIVE IN THE EXISTING, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, HOUSING AUTHORITY, MAYBE A, A STEP UP PROGRAM.AND WE CAN MEET WITH, UH, CONGRESSMAN MONDAY JONES, UM, AND WE COULD ASK HIM IF HE COULD, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH THE TOWN ON, UH, COMING UP WITH AN INITIATIVE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COMMON FRANCIS IS SAYING IS, YOU KNOW, IS VERY VALID.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU, I'M NOT REALLY, YOU KNOW, CRITICAL.
I'M, I'M JUST SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE ALL WORK TOGETHER PAST THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, AT THE BOARD MEETING, LET THE PROJECT MOVE FORWARD, AND THEN WE, WE COULD REALLY WORK HARD TO, UM, CREATE REAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, UH, FOR PEOPLE WHO EXIST, UM, AND WHO LIVE IN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
UM, AND WE CAN, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANNA MOVE BECAUSE THEY HAVE FRIENDS, UH, THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE, THE AREA, THEY LIKE THE AREA.
BUT IF WE COULD CREATE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, UM, WITHIN, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOODS THAT PEOPLE, UH, YOU KNOW, ENJOY LIVING AT, UH, WHERE THEY COULD MAINTAIN THEIR FRIENDS, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT, UH, THIS COULD BE A WIN-WIN AND IT COULD BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA BE SAYING THE CONGRESSMAN ON ON MEMORIAL DAY, HE'S GONNA BE, UM, AT THE HARTSDALE MEMORIAL DAY PARADE.
I'LL SPEAK TO HIM, YOU KNOW, THEN WE COULD ALL SPEAK TO HIM AND WE COULD, UM, WE COULD WORK TOGETHER.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT GREENBERG HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH GREENBERG HEIGHTS, L L C.
WHAT, WHAT IS THAT RELATIONSHIP? WE, WE SHOULD PROBABLY GET THE LAWYERS ON TO ANSWER A TECHNICAL QUESTION LIKE THAT.
AND JOHN IS OFF RIGHT NOW, SO, SO DOES THAT MEAN THERE'S GONNA BE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE FEEDBACK ON THAT? BECAUSE THERE IS SOME REGULATORY AGREEMENT THAT THERE ARE REGULATORY AGREEMENTS, THEY'RE MANAGING MEMBER, THE, THE GREENBERG HOUSING AUTHORITY IS THE MANAGING MEMBER OF THE L L C THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, BUT IF YOU WANNA GET DEEP INTO THE TECHNICALITIES OF HOW THOSE ENTITIES ARE SET UP AND THAT THEN YOU REALLY, YOU KNOW, ONE, I THINK, I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR IN A FORUM LIKE THIS TO DEAL WITH SOMETHING THAT TECHNICAL AND COMPLEX, BUT ALSO TO HAVE THE LAWYERS TO ANSWER THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS.
BUT LEMME JUST SAY THIS, THE L L C IS SOLELY OWNED BY, AND THE MANAGING MEMBER IS THE GREENBERG HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM REQUIRES THAT THESE ENTITIES BE SET UP SO THAT THEY CAN TAKE THOSE CREDITS.
WHY IT'S SET UP THAT WAY, MS. YOUNG, I DON'T KNOW.
I JUST KNOW THAT FOR THE PAST, UH, SINCE 1995 WAS WHEN I DID MY FIRST TAX CREDIT DEAL, WE HAVE HAD TO HAVE THESE, UM, LLCS THAT ARE SET UP AND INSIDE OF THE L L C IS A MANAGING MEMBER, A BENEFICIAL MEMBER.
AND THEN THERE CAN BE OTHER MEMBERS IF WE HAD PRIVATE DEVELOPERS.
SO, I'M JUST GONNA INTERRUPT FOR A SECOND.
THERE ARE NO, THERE ARE NO HOLD ON, ON THIS DEAL.
THERE ARE NO PRIVATE DEVELOPERS IN THAT ENTITY SITS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THEN THE, UM, THE INVESTOR MEMBERS WHO ARE THE BENEFICIAL MEMBERS.
I JUST WANNA FINISH MY STATEMENT.
'CAUSE ACTUALLY YOU HAD INTERRUPTED WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY.
I THOUGHT YOU ASKED ME A QUESTION.
BUT THE, THE WHO ARE ALL THE ENTITIES THAT ARE PARTS OF THE L L C IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY ARE, SO MS. YOUNG, I, I, WE HAVE THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS.
IT'S JUST THAT IN THIS MEETING, IT REALLY WASN'T DESIGNED TO HAVE THOSE TYPE OF QUESTIONS ADDRESSED.
I MEAN, IF YOU WANNA RAISE THAT QUESTION FOR TOMORROW'S MEETING, YOU KNOW, IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION, THEN YOU KNOW, WE WILL ANSWER IT PUBLICLY OR DAY.
WELL, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS FOR LEWIS THAT I WOULD, THAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN.
AGAIN, IT'S NOT BEING INTERRUPTED, BUT IF, IF, IF THE TOWN IS EXPECTED TO UNDERSTAND THESE COMPLEX, COMPLEX, UM, DOCUMENT IN ONE WEEK, WHEN IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND THE DETAILS? WHEN WILL THAT HAPPEN? WELL, WE'VE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS PREVIOUSLY, SO WE'VE, WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT MANY, MANY TIMES.
I KNOW YOU MAY NOT HAVE BEEN A PART OF IT,
[01:40:01]
BUT WE, WE DISCUSSED THE, THE STRUCTURE OF THESE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES.SO I, I, I JUST WANNA BE RESPECTFUL BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANNA OPEN THIS UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE WE HAD A SPECIFIC DISCUSSION ABOUT NOT DOING THAT AT THIS PARTICULAR MEETING.
THAT'S WHY I'M REALLY JUST TRYING NOT TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD.
BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION EITHER TOMORROW OR EVEN OFFLINE IF YOU WANT.
YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE GREAT, BECAUSE I SIMPLY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SOME QUESTIONS ARE ADDRESSED, BUT OTHERS ARE NOT.
I I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND WHEN I SEE REGULATORY AGREEMENT, THAT HAS TO BE PART OF A COMMITMENT THAT IS TO BE DETERMINED BY NEXT WEEK.
AND, AND THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHO THE ENTITIES ARE AND WHAT IS THAT REGULATORY AGREEMENT, AND SOME PEOPLE GET TO HAVE THE FLOOR AND BE ANSWERED.
YET EVERY TIME I HAVE A, A QUESTION, THERE'S INTERRUPTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO YES, I WOULD VERY, VERY MUCH LIKE TO HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS THIS.
SO I PROMISE TO CALL YOU TOMORROW AFTER SPEAKING TO MR. SAVAGE AND PERHAPS MR. SWEENEY.
AND I WOULD PROMISE YOU THAT WE WOULD SIT DOWN AND EXPLAIN THE STRUCTURE TO YOU TOMORROW.
SO, WHAT'S THE RESOLUTION OF THIS? WELL, PAUL, I THINK I'M GONNA SPEAK TO MR. SAVAGE AND SEE IF HE'LL SPEAK TO THE LENDERS TO SEE IF WE CAN ADD OR REMOVE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE CONFRONTING.
BUT I DON'T WANNA, YOU KNOW, I WANNA SPEAK TO HIM FIRST BECAUSE I KNOW THAT HE WAS VERY
UM, SO THE NEXT WE HAVE THE LEAF BLOWER LANDSCAPING, UM, YOU KNOW, NOISE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO ASK, UM, UM, UH, TIM, YOU KNOW, COULD WE COME UP WITH A, A PROPOSED, UH, YOU KNOW, LAW WHERE SIMILAR TO, I THINK THE LAST MEETING WE HAD, THERE WAS SORT OF A CONSENSUS, AND YOU COULD CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD TRY LIKE A ONE YEAR, UM, YOU KNOW, TEST WHERE, YOU KNOW, I HAD DRAFTED SOMETHING A WHILE WHERE IT'D BE FOUR DAYS AND GIVE FOUR DAYS, NO THREE DAYS.
AND WE COULD EVEN, AND MAYBE WE COULD JUST HAVE A PROPOSED LOCAL LAW THAT WE COULD SUBMIT, UM, YOU KNOW, TO, TO THE PUBLIC WITH AN, AN, AN EDUCATION COMPONENT WHERE WE WOULD REACH OUT TO LANDSCAPERS, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE THEM TO USE, UM, YOU KNOW, LESS NOISY, UM, EQUIPMENT.
YOU KNOW, I WOULD EVEN BE OPEN TO, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVING SOME SORT OF MODIFICATION, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING SOME INCENTIVES THAT PEOPLE WOULD WANT TO, UM, USE SAY LESS NOISY, UH, ELECTRIC BLOWERS, YOU KNOW, FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
NOW I'M JUST TRYING, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, ON THEIR HOMES, EVEN DURING THE, THE DAYS THAT THEY CAN'T DO IT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVE A LIMITED TIME, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE BOARD BASICALLY WANTS.
IF WE START WITH A COMPROMISE, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GONNA BE PERFECT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD WORK OFF THAT EVERY YEAR.
PAUL, THIS IS SO TOWN STAFF COULD DEFINITELY DRAFT SOMETHING.
I JUST WANNA SAY SOMETHING AT THIS POINT, IN ALL DUE RESPECT TO, TO PAUL AND TO THE PROCESS AND
I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANT TO REACH A COMPROMISE, BUT I REALLY THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION, OPEN TO A PUBLIC HEARING, BECAUSE I, WE'LL DO THAT.
I'M ALMOST, I'M, I'M LIKE ALMOST CERTAIN THAT THERE WILL BE A LOT OF RESIDENTS IN THIS TOWN WHO WOULD DISAGREE TO BEING, HAVING TO WAKE UP TO LEAF BLOWERS, THE SOUND OF BUZZ SAWS ON WEEKENDS TO ONLY TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE PEACE DURING THE WEEK.
THERE HAS TO BE A COMPROMISE THAT ACCOMMODATES EVERYONE'S NEEDS, RIGHT? IT'S ALMOST, THE PROBLEM IS, THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WHATEVER YOU PROPOSE, NOBODY LIKES, YOU HAVE THE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE, AND YOU HAVE PEOPLE DO LIKE, SO I'M JUST SAYING
[01:45:01]
WE WOULD DEFINITELY HA RIGHT NOW I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE HAVE A DRAFT THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD WE DO THAT, WHERE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO AT LEAST MAKE SOME PROGRESS WHERE IT'S BETTER THAN NOW? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M BIKING AROUND THE TOWN, WHICH I'M DOING LIKE EVERY DAY, YOU KNOW, I, I PROBABLY LOST HALF MY HEARING.IN FACT, I COULDN'T EVEN HEAR YOUR, YOUR COMMENT.
I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU LIKED MY IDEA.
SO, BECAUSE I, MY HEARING HAS GONE
IT'S, AND, AND YOU HAVE STREETS, UH, LIKE TODAY I WAS ON RE AND PARKWAY AND I WAS ON SOUTH AND NORTH ROAD, AND THE LEAF BLOWERS WERE GOING, IT'S NOT ONLY ONE HOUSE, IT'S LIKE HOUSES AFTER HOUSES AFTER HOUSES, YOU KNOW, THERE'S LANDSCAPING AND IT IS JUST LOUD.
SO ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT IF WE COULD COME UP WITH, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE DAYS THAT I WANT, BUT IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST SOME DAYS WHERE IT'S, EVERYBODY KNOWS IT'S QUIET.
I THINK THAT'S A, LIKE, EASIER BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY COMPLAINS AND PLEASE SHOW UP, INSTEAD OF SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GIVING YOU A TICKET OR WHATEVER, WE COULD SAY, WE'RE GIVING YOU A WARNING DEAL WITH THE NEXT THING.
YOU KNOW, I'M NOT THAT, THAT'S, IT'S, IT'S EASY TO ENFORCE BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE, MOST COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE THESE LAWS, NOBODY'S REALLY ENFORCING IT THAT GOOD.
BUT THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITIES SUCH AS SCARSDALE, FOR EXAMPLE, DALE BRONXVILLE, I'M NOT SURE IT'S IN ONE OF THE PAPERS THAT BANNED LEAF BLOWERS ON THE WEEKENDS ALTOGETHER, THAT DEMONSTRATES RESPECT FOR EVERY CULTURE WHO, WHO, UM, OBSERVES THE WEEKENDS AS A, A, A, A, A SACRED DAY, A RELIGIOUS DAY, THOSE WHO OBSERVE SATURDAYS AND THOSE WHO OBSERVE SUNDAYS AND ALL DUE RESPECT TO, TO RESIDENTS, THEY, THEY, YOU KNOW, TO THROW ALL OF THE NOISE ONTO THE WEEKENDS IS INSANE.
RIGHT? BUT, AND IT, IT, THAT, THAT DOES NOT REPRESENT A COMPROMISE, RIGHT? WHAT YOU, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE'D DRAFT SOMETHING BASED ON THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT FROM THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING.
IT WAS CIRCULATE TO THE TOWN BOARD MEMBERS AND DISCUSS IT AND WAIT TO SEE WHEN WE HAVE A FINAL PRODUCT THAT WE THINK WE CAN HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON.
NOT EVERYBODY'S GONNA AGREE WITH IT, WE UNDERSTAND, RIGHT? BUT IT'S THE BOARD'S DECISION AS TO WHAT THEY THINK IS THE BEST COMPROMISE.
I HOPE THE BOARD DOESN'T MAKE A DECISION AS INSANE AS THROWING ALL THE NOISE ONTO THE WEEKEND.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, THERE'S ALSO, THERE'S ALSO OTHER ALTERNATIVES.
ONE OF THE OPTIONS COULD BE, UH, SAYING, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR THE, THAT ONE YEAR TEST PERIOD AT, UH, NO LEAF BLOWERS BEFORE ONE O'CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON.
WHY YOU, ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS THAT PEOPLE BASICALLY WANNA SLEEP LATER ON A SATURDAY OR SUNDAY, AND THEY DON'T WANNA BE WOKEN UP.
SO IF WE BASICALLY SAY IT'S GONNA BE ONE O'CLOCK TO FIVE THAT YOU CAN DO IT, A ONE O'CLOCK TO SIX THAT YOU COULD DO IT THIS WAY.
WE'RE GIVING PEOPLE, WE NEED THE LEAF BLOWERS BECAUSE THEY JUST CAN'T AFFORD A LANDSCAPER WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UM, UM, TO GET THEIR GARDENING AND LANDSCAPING DONE.
BUT I, WHAT I WAS THINKING IS YOU HAVE A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE LANDSCAPERS.
THEY FEEL THAT THEY CAN'T DO THE WORK WITHOUT THE LEAF BLOWERS.
YOU HAVE ANOTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO BASICALLY ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE NOISE.
UM, SO I THINK THAT, UM, UM, THAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT LIKE SOME COMPROMISE.
AND THEN THE LAST PART IS REALLY EDUCATION.
UM, YEAH, WELL, I REMEMBER SPEAKING TO LANDSCAPERS AND YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER MY FATHER, I REMEMBER MY FATHER GROWING UP OUT HERE, RAKING LEAVES BEFORE THERE WAS ANY SUCH THING AS A LEAF BLOWER.
AND IT WAS EXCELLENT EXERCISE, AND IT ALSO ALLOWED FOR A VERY CLEAN AND NEAT YARD.
PAUL, I, I JUST HOPE THAT THE THINKING THAT GOES INTO THIS PLAN IS ONE THAT TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE INTRUSIVE NOISE OF LEAF BLOWERS.
FIRST OF ALL, THERE ARE NO LEAVES DURING THE SUMMERTIME.
WHAT PEOPLE ARE DOING IS BLOWING DIRT TO SCULPT THEIR LAWNS IN THEIR GARDENS.
AND SO IT, IT, IT'S, IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE THAT LEAF BLOWERS SHOULD, UH, UH, IT'S, IT'S A, IS A REMEDY FOR LEAVES WHEN THERE, THE SEASONS WHEN THERE ARE LEAVES.
AND I JUST HOPE THAT ALL THESE POINTS OF THING IS CONSIDERATION AND THAT IT, THAT THE DECISION IS NOT TO DUMP
[01:50:01]
THE NOISE ONTO THE WEEKENDS.I THINK THAT WOULD BE JUST OUTRAGEOUSLY INSENSITIVE AND INSANE.
AND I HOPE THAT THAT'S NOT THE DECISION THAT THIS TOWN COMES UP WITH.
SO TIM, COULD YOU COME UP WITH LIKE A FIRST DRAFT? YES.
AND COULD WE DO IT LIKE FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR THE NEXT MEETING, YOU KNOW, TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING, WE WOULD SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
WE, WE COULD SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING WITH, YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA NEED THE INPUT OF THE BOARD AT SOME POINT.
SO, BUT WE WILL TRY TO AT LEAST
UH, DOES ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER HAVE ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS IN TERMS OF COMP, POSSIBLE COMPROMISES THAT YOU THINK MINE COULD WORK FOR? LIKE A ONE YEAR TRIAL, AS I SUGGESTED A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, THAT WE DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE GARBAGE PICKUP.
Y'ALL HEARD, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD FOR CAN CHAT? YEAH, WE HEARD YOU, YOU, YOU SAID THERE'S SOMETHING IN DOSS FERRY AND WE, WE MIGHT WANNA
I SAID, WHAT I SUGGESTED IS WHAT I SUGGESTED MONTHS AGO THAT WE DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE GARP PICKUP WHERE WE HAVE ALTERNATE DAYS.
THE ADVANTAGE OF THAT IS THEN THE LANDSCAPERS AS OPPOSED TO DOING WEDNESDAYS, UH, FOR EVERYBODY.
IT LANDSCAPERS THE, THE COST OF HAVING A LANDSCAPER ON A WEDNESDAY WHEN THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH THEY CAN DO, AND IT'S ONLY LIMITED TO WEDNESDAYS.
BUT IF YOU, WE USE THE, THE AREAS THAT ARE USED FOR SANITATION, OF COURSE THEY'D HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THOSE ARE.
UH, IT COULD VARY DEPENDING ON WHAT AREA OF THE TOWN THEY'RE IN.
SO THE LANDSCAPERS COULD ACTUALLY DO WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO FIT IN ALL THE CUSTOMERS ON, ON SOLELY ON WEDNESDAYS, UH, WHICH IS VERY UNLIKELY, WHICH MEANS IT'S GONNA BECOME PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE TO USE A LANDSCAPE.
SO TIM, YOU'RE GONNA WRITE THE DEFINITIVE LAW SO THAT UH, EVERYBODY WILL BE HAPPY.
HAVE A LOT OF INPUT FROM TOWN BOARD MEMBERS THOUGH.
IF EVERYBODY COULD THE BISHOP LIKE THAT, THEN EVERYBODY BE HAPPY PART GOT ME.
I THINK THE SIMPLEST, UH, THING IS, I SHOULD GET OUT OF MEMO TO LOGAN PLACE SAYING TOWN HALL IS OPEN ON JUNE 1ST, WHICH WE ALL AGREED, UH, THAT MASKS SHOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, REQUIRED, UM, DEPARTMENT HEAD PEOPLE COULD, UM, WOULD HAVE TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS, UH, TO, UM, SPEAK TO, UM, YOU KNOW, DEPARTMENT HEADS, YOU KNOW, AND ENTER, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDINGS.
UM, AND IT WOULD BE UP TO THE DEPARTMENT HEAD TO DECIDE, UM, WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO REQUIRE VACCINATIONS OR, OR, OR, OR, YOU KNOW, OR, OR WHATEVER.
BUT EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE TO WEAR MASKS.
I THINK THAT'S LIKE THE SIMPLEST, UH, THING BECAUSE IF WE REQUIRE VACCINATIONS FOR EVERYBODY, THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SECURITY PEOPLE DOING IT.
AND IF, UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF IT GETS BUSY AND THEY DON'T DO IT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, TOUGHER.
BUT THE DEPARTMENT HEADS SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY OF SAYING, ASKING EVERYBODY IF THEY HAVE, IF THEY WANT, ASK THEM FOR A VACCINATION CARD.
AND I'M WONDERING IF THAT'S SOMETHING EVERYBODY COULD LIVE WITH.
THE, THE, THE ONLY COMPLICATION I SEE IS THAT IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT EARLY VOTING IS GOING TO COINCIDE WITH US REOPENING, WHICH IS GOING TO COINCIDE WITH, UH, LEADING UP TO TAX DAY GRIEVANCE DAY.
UH, SO THE ASSESSOR IS GOING TO GET QUITE A FEW PEOPLE COMING IN, AND WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE THE VOTERS.
NOW, I DON'T EXPECT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF LINES THAT WE HAD IN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE, BUT IT JUST ADDS ANOTHER COMPLEXITY TO IT AS FAR AS HOW OPERATIONALLY, WHERE DO
[01:55:01]
THE PEOPLE STAGE THAT ARE WAITING TO SEE THE ASSESSOR? IS THAT IN THE LOBBY? UH, WHERE, WHERE, WHERE DO THE MACHINES GO? DO THEY, AND I, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S GONNA BE A WALKTHROUGH THAT'LL WORK SOME OF THAT OUT.UH, BUT WE, WE DO HAVE SOME LOGISTICAL ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE RESOLVED, UH, RATHER THAN WAIT FOR JUNE 1ST.
WELL, JUNE 1ST IS LIKE NEXT WEEK.
SO I KNOW
AND YOU KNOW, I'M SAYING WHAT IF WE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE LIKE THE SIMPLEST THING FOR, UH, JUNE 1ST, AND THEN WE, WE CAN SAY EFFECTIVE JUNE 1ST, ALL, YOU KNOW, EMPLOYEES ARE BACK AT TOWN HALL, EFFECTIVE JUNE 1ST.
PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO THE BUILDING, BUT HAVE TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS, PEOPLE HAVE TO WEAR MASKS.
UH, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD HAS A DISCRETION OF, UM, INCREASING, UH, THE, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPOINTMENTS.
SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO HAVE TWO APPOINTMENTS, UH, AT A TIME OR YOU KNOW, ONE, YOU KNOW THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT THAT MANY, YOU KNOW, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WOULD USE THEIR JUDGMENT AND DECIDE WHAT WORKS BEST FOR THEIR DEPARTMENT.
WELL, THE MAIN, THE MAIN ONE IS GOING TO BE THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE BECAUSE LEADING UP TO JUNE 15TH, WHICH IS GRIEVANCE DAY, WHICH I'M SURE THE ASSESSOR WILL COMMENT ABOUT LATER ON WHEN WE DO A GENDER REVIEW, UM, THERE'S GONNA BE A STEADY FLOW COMING IN AND PROBABLY ALSO FOR, FOR, UM, EARLY VOTING.
AND SO WE, WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE, THERE'S SOME KIND OF A COORDINATION.
THE LOBBY IS CURRENTLY USED TO TAKING TEMPERATURES AND THE HAND SANITIZER, UH, WE NEED NEED, UH, SOMEBODY THAT'S GOING TO THEN DIRECT PEOPLE WHETHER THEY'RE VOTING OR GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSOR.
AND IT, IT'S, IT'S WHEN THAT BACKS UP, RIGHT? UH, YOU CAN MAKE APPOINTMENTS, BUT PEOPLE TEND TO SHOW UP EARLY.
WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE PEOPLE WHO SHOW UP EARLY? IT'S JUST THE LOGISTICS, YOU KNOW, WE JUST HAVE TO WORK THAT OUT.
UH, FRANCIS, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED, HOW ABOUT, OH, SORRY.
HAVE CONSIDERED, UM, HAVING A SYSTEM WHEREIN IF EVERYONE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AN APPOINTMENT, MAYBE 10 MINUTES BEFORE THE APPOINTMENT, THEY'LL SEND A TEXT OR DURING THE CALL, SAY, SAY, UH, ENTER THE BUILDING AT THIS TIME TO ELIMINATE THE, UH, CONGESTION, SOME, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE, THOSE LINES.
BECAUSE I DO, I DO, UM, AGREE WITH YOU THAT, THAT IT COULD BE, UH, BECOME VERY CONGESTED IN THAT, IN THE VEGETABLE AREA THERE.
SO IF YOU HAD SOME KIND OF SYSTEM WHERE YOU, AND YOU COULD MAKE YOUR APPOINTMENT, YOU GET THERE EARLY AS YOU WANT TO, BUT JUST STAY IN YOUR CAR UNTIL SOMEONE TEXT YOU OR CALL YOU.
YEAH, I WANNA, I APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT.
BISHOP PRESTON, I JUST DON'T WANT YOU TO MAKE IT BECAUSE I JUST TOLD YOUNG THAT, YOU KNOW, SHE SHOULD NOT BE MAKING COMMENTS AND I DON'T WANT HER TO THINK THAT I'M GIVING YOU PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.
I JUST WANT THE BOARD TO REALLY INTERACT SO THAT I'M CONSISTENT, BUT THAT'S A GOOD POSSIBLE SUGGESTION.
SO LET'S YOU KNOW, WHY DON'T WE ALLOW THE EMPLOYEES, EMPLOYEES BACK ON JUNE 1ST AND THEN WE ALLOW THE PUBLIC COME BACK AFTER ELECTION DAY, OPEN UP FOR THE PUBLIC AFTER ELECTION DAY SUGGESTION? OH, YOU MEAN, UH, UH NOT ELECTION DAY, YOU MEAN PRIMARY DAY.
WE COULD SAY THAT MAKES, THAT MAKES SENSE.
I CAN'T TAKE THE CREDIT FROM IT.
ONE OF OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS, UH, SAID THAT, SO, RIGHT.
IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WANTS TO MEET WITH SOMEBODY, COULD THEY BASICALLY BRING THE PERSON, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE, YOU KNOW, IN THE BUILDING IF THEY, IF THEY FEEL THE PERSON HAS A LEGITIMATE ISSUE AND THEY COULD HANDLE IT? I, I, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.
UH, IF, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD FEELS THAT, UM, IT'S SERVING, UH, THE DEPARTMENT, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY HAS A REAL MAJOR CAN, AND MOST, MOST PEOPLE AREN'T GONNA DO IT, BUT THERE MAY BE TIMES WHEN SOMEBODY, UM, ONCE WHERE THEY, WHERE THE DEPARTMENT HEAD FEELS THEY COULD MANAGE IT.
SO, SO, SO, SO PAUL, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S BEEN HAPPENING FOR THE PAST YEAR.
SO IT, IT REALLY IS HELPFUL AND I THINK VERY WISE TO ASK PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN THERE FOR THE PAST YEAR AND WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING IN AND AROUND THE LOBBY AND OBSERVING HOW IT'S, IT'S BEEN WORKING.
[02:00:01]
SO THE LOBBY, THE BUILDING HAS BEEN OPEN TO THE PUBLIC ONLY TO, UP, UP TO THE LOBBY.WHEN PEOPLE COME IN, UM, THEY GENERALLY USE THE BOXES THAT DEPARTMENTS HAVE SET UP, WHICH IS WHICH, WHICH, WHICH WAS AN EXCELLENT IDEA.
THEY CAN GO TO THOSE BOXES AND OBTAIN ANY FORMS THAT THEY MIGHT NEED FROM A PARTICULAR DEPARTMENT.
HOWEVER, IF THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, THEY, UM, THEY ALWAYS TELL CORY WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE THERE FOR, AND HE WILL, UM, EITHER DIRECT THEM TO THE BOX IF THEY NEED A FORM, OR HE WILL CALL THAT DEPARTMENT AND ASK THEM TO SEND SOMEONE DOWN.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, OR, OR, OR I WOULD DO THAT.
FOR EXAMPLE, A WOMAN CAME IN TODAY AND, AND SHE HAD A LETTER FROM THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE AND SHE NEEDED SOME, SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
I WENT TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, SPOKE TO ONE OF THE STAFF, AND SHE SAID, SHE SAID, OH, I WROTE THIS LETTER, GREAT.
AND SHE WENT DOWN TO THE, TO THE LOBBY AND CONSULTED WITH THE WOMAN AND RESOLVED THE ISSUE.
THAT'S HOW THINGS HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY SMOOTHLY FOR THE PAST YEAR.
UM, WHEN SOMEONE HAS A QUESTION FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, CORY WILL CALL UPSTAIRS, SPEAK WITH, WITH, UH, WITH SOMEONE THERE.
THEY WILL COME DOWN AND THEY WILL ADDRESS THE PERSON'S PROBLEM OR ISSUE.
IT'S BEEN WORKING VERY SMOOTHLY.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO COMPLICATE THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE OVER THE PAST YEAR.
SO UNTIL YOU DECIDE THAT YOU WANT TO LIKE OPEN THE FLOODGATES AND LET PEOPLE GO WALKING THROUGH THE BUILDING, I THINK THAT THIS PROCEDURE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE WHERE PEOPLE COME IN, THEY WILL ASK, YOU KNOW, A QUESTION TO COREY.
COREY EITHER SAYS, OKAY, THE FORMS THAT YOU NEED, OR IN THOSE BOXES THERE, OR YES, I WILL CALL UPSTAIRS TO THAT DEPARTMENT AND INVARIABLY SOMEBODY COMES DOWN TO THE LOBBY AND GREETS THE RESIDENT AND ADDRESSES THEIR ISSUES.
SO I JUST WANT TO SHARE WITH EVERYONE HOW IT'S BEEN WORKING WELL HERE.
UH, SO WHAT SHOULD WE DO? WELL, WE COULD, I THINK, UH, IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH EDEDIE, I THINK THERE'S POTENTIALLY 1600 PEOPLE WHO POTENTIALLY, BUT THAT'S NOT GONNA BE THAT NUMBER.
UM, WHO MAY, MAY DO SOMETHING FOR TAX GRIEVANCE DAY.
AND UH, AT SOME POINT I'LL ASK EDIE JUST TO EXPLAIN IT, BECAUSE IF ANYONE IS CONCERNED THAT THEIR TAXES ARE TOO HIGH, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
UM, BUT IT'S A LIMITED TIME ONLY IT ENDS, UM, ON, UH, THE 15TH OF, OF JUNE.
AND PEOPLE WILL LIKELY BE SHOWING UP ON TAX GRIEVANCE DAY, WHICH IS THE 15TH OF JUNE, THAT, UH, THERE WILL BE AN UNUSUAL AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC COMING INTO TOWN HALL.
SOME OF IT, SOME OF IT, UH, CAN BE DONE ON ZOOM, BUT SOME OF IT, UH, PEOPLE CHOOSE TO DO IT IN PERSON FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND WE CAN'T DENY THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY.
AT THE SAME TIME, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GO EARLY VOTE, AND WE CAN'T DE DEPRIVE THEM OF THE OPPORTUNITY FOR DOING THAT.
AND THE QUESTION IS DELAY EARLY VOTING.
I DIDN'T INTERRUPT YOU, JUDITH.
AND SO THE, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE EARLY VOTING AND GRIEVANCE JUST, JUST, THAT'S THE WAY THE CALENDAR WORKS.
WE DON'T MAKE THESE THINGS UP.
AT THE SAME TIME ALL CONVERGING IN THE LOBBY, AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE SAYING WE ARE OPENING IT UP AND YOU KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, EVEN THOUGH YOU, YOU SAY YOU NEED TO HAVE AN APPOINTMENT, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SHOW UP AND SAY, HOW DO I GET AN APPOINTMENT?
SO LET'S THINK THIS LOGICALLY.
AND SO I THINK WE MAY, I I, JUDITH, PLEASE.
THE, SO I, I THINK THE, THE WAY THAT WE DEAL WITH THIS IS NOT TO UNNECESSARILY COMPLICATE IT, KNOWING
[02:05:01]
AND PREDICT AND HAVING SOME PREDICTABILITY HERE AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, UM, BY HAVING EVERYTHING OPEN AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAD PREVIOUSLY SPOKEN ABOUT HAVING CUBICLES IN THE AUDITORIUM SET UP FOR THE DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, WHICH MAY STILL BE A, UH, UH, SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD DO.UM, AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, THE VOTING MACHINES.
BUT I'M, I'M DONE TO, SO, SO DURING EARLY VOTING OR EARLY VOTING, THE, THE, THE GRIEVANCE PERIOD IS IF, IF I'M NOT, IF I'M NOT PER UH, UH, WRONG IS FROM SIX ONE TO SIX 15.
EARLY VOTING STARTS ON THE 12TH, WHICH IS A SATURDAY.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, 12TH AND 13TH, MONDAY AND TUESDAY 14TH, AND FIGURE.
SO WE'RE BASICALLY TALKING ABOUT TWO DAYS THAT MAY BE POTENTIALLY IMPACTED BY, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, NUMBERS OF PEOPLE COMING IN THERE.
WE ALSO HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT FACT THAT THIS IS NOT A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND WE'RE NOT LIKELY TO HAVE A THOUSAND PEOPLE A DAY COMING INTO TOWN HALL.
NOW, THE, THE LAST, UM, UH, TIME THAT THIS OCCURRED, UH, THERE WAS ALSO GRIEVANCE DAY AND THINGS WORKED OUT VERY SMOOTHLY.
UH, IT, IT, WE, DIDI WORKED IT OUT SO THAT, UM, RESIDENTS FOR GRIEVING CAME IN, UM, ONE ENTRANCE AND WENT OUT ANOTHER ENTRANCE.
I'M SURE SHE CAN SPEAK TO THIS BETTER THAN I CAN, BUT THINGS FLOWED VERY SMOOTHLY.
I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD ANTICIPATE THERE BEING A MAJOR, UM, UM, BALLOON EFFECT OF THESE TWO OCCURRENCES HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME.
AND KEEPING IN MIND THAT WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT TWO DAYS WHERE THERE MAY BE, UM, MORE THAN THE USUAL, UH, NUMBERS OF PEOPLE COMING INTO THE LOBBY.
SO I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE AS FACTUAL INFORMATION TO CONSIDER WHEN COMING UP WITH A, A PLAN FOR THE LOBBY.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DAYS OF POTENTIAL, MORE THAN USUAL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE IN THE LOBBY.
SO HOW DO WE HANDLE THOSE TWO DAYS? THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS IS NOT A MOUNTAIN AND IT'S NOT A MOLE HILL.
WHAT IS COOPER ROOM? YOU GUYS DON'T YOU GUYS DOING A WALKTHROUGH? I THINK, I THINK THAT THE EVENING, I'M SORRY.
AREN'T YOU GUYS, AREN'T WE SCHEDULING A WALKTHROUGH? YES.
THE WALKTHROUGH, THE WALKTHROUGH IS ON JUNE 10TH AND DURING THAT TIME, UM, WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FOR TIM WILL BE WITH US, UH, D P W.
THOSE ARE THE TWO MAIN DEPARTMENTS, UM, THAT, UH, ARE, YOU KNOW, RAISE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY AND, UM, UH, ORGANIZATION.
AND WE WILL ALSO ASK CHIEF TO SEND A REPRESENTATIVE TO THAT WALKTHROUGH.
'CAUSE THE, THE LAST EARLY VOTING WE HAD THE PRESENCE OF OUR OFFICERS JUST, UM, UH, REALLY HELPED TO, UH, UH, CREATE AN, AN ATMOSPHERE AND AN ENVIRONMENT OF, OF CALM AND ORGANIZATION.
SO, UM, CHIEF, I'LL SEND YOU THE EMAIL CHIEF ABOUT THE WALKTHROUGH.
SO CAN I SUGGEST, CAN I SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE THE WALKTHROUGH EARLIER AND WE DO THE WALKTHROUGH SOONER? AND WHAT I'M JUST, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT WE TAKE A LOOK AT, IF WE OPEN UP TOWN HALL AND WE ALSO CONSIDER GRIEVANCE DAY AND EARLY VOTING WEEK, WHY CAN'T WE DO THE WALKTHROUGH SOONER? SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE, AFTER DOING OUR WALKTHROUGH, WE DETERMINE THIS, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE WHEN TO OPEN AND HOW TO OPEN OUR PARTICIPANT.
WE CAN DO THE WALKTHROUGH EARLIER.
I, I JUST THINK THAT IT, IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING.
BECAUSE AGAIN, AGAIN, WE'RE BASICALLY TALKING ABOUT TWO IMPACT DAYS, MONDAY THE 14TH AND TUESDAY THE 15TH MM-HMM.
[02:10:01]
TO HANDLING, UM, MANAGING, UM, MORE THAN USUAL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE.BUT IF YOU'D LIKE FOR US TO REQUEST AN EARLIER DATE FOR WALKTHROUGH, UM, TOMORROW, YOU AND I CAN EMAIL EACH OTHER BACK AND FORTH AND FIND OUT DID YOU WANT TO ATTEND THE WALKTHROUGH? IF YES, IF MY SCHEDULE PERMITS DURING THE DAY, OF COURSE I WILL.
SO I'LL, I'LL, UM, SEND YOU A, UH, AN EMAIL TOMORROW AND WE'LL WORK THAT OUT WITH THE, UH, UM, BOARD OF ELECTIONS.
SO, JUST FOR THE EMPLOYEES, SHOULD I SENT A MEMO TO ALL THE EMPLOYEES SAYING EFFECTIVE JUNE 1ST, ALL EMPLOYEES, UM, MUST, UH, WORKING AT TOWN HALL OR IN BUILDINGS, UM, MUST WORK, YOU KNOW, COME TO WORK.
AND WE WERE, AND THIS IS STEP, UH, STEP ONE IN THE REOPENING PLAN.
AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO, WE COULD, YOU KNOW, NEXT WEEK OR THE WEEK AFTER, WE COULD BASICALLY DECIDE WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH, UH, WITH THE, UH, WITH, YOU KNOW, THE VISITORS.
SO I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST SAY ALL EMPLOYEES ARE, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, AND, YOU KNOW, THE TYPICAL THINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO SIGN, CLOCK IN AND ALL THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL NOW EFFECTIVE JUNE 1ST.
THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THAT PART OF IT.
UH, LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.
UM, SHOULD A DEPARTMENT HAD TO HAVE DISCRETION IF THEY WANT, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF EMPLOYEE FEEL, I'LL SAY UNCOMFORTABLE, UM, YOU KNOW, BEING WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE, SHOULD EMPLOYEES HAVE, SHOULD THE DEPARTMENT HAVE BE ABLE TO PROVIDE EMPLOYEES WITH OPTIONS TO WORK DIFFERENT HOURS AT TOWN HALL? UH, SO, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY SOMEBODY WANT, THEY WANTED, IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WANTS TO HAVE A SHIFT AND SAY, UH, YOU KNOW, WE COULD HAVE A SAY, UH, SOMEBODY COMES IN AT SEVEN O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, UH, AND LEAVES SAY AT TWO, AND THEN THEY COULD BE ANOTHER SHIFT AT TWO O'CLOCK TO, YOU KNOW, SAY NO, WHATEVER IT IS.
I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A STANDARD AND, UH, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE NINE DIFFERENT POLICIES.
WELL, YEAH, I'M JUST SAYING A STANDARD WOULD BE LETTING DEPARTMENT HEADS BASICALLY HAVE DISCRETION TO LET PEOPLE, UM, UM, WORK WHEN, UH, AT, AT DIFFERENT HOURS.
IF SOMEBODY PUTS IN AN EIGHT HOUR DAY, I DON'T REALLY CARE IF THEY'RE WORKING, UH, YOU KNOW, AT SEVEN IN THE MORNING OR AT AT NOON OR AT 6:00 PM IN FACT, THERE'S ADVANTAGES.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD, IF WE HAD FLEX TIME, WE, WE WOULD'VE A BUILDING EVEN AFTER THE PANDEMIC OPEN TO THE PUBLIC LONGER HOURS AT NO EXTRA COST TO THE TAXPAYERS.
I AGREE THAT THERE SHOULD JUST BE ONE STANDARD, BUT WE SHOULD LEAVE.
WE SHOULD HAVE, IF, IF THE TOWN SAYS YES, WE ARE FULLY OPEN, BUT LEAVE IT TO THE, TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, THAT'S WHY THEIR DEPARTMENT HEADS LET THEM, EXCUSE ME, LET THEM, LET THEM, UH, RUN THEIR DEPARTMENT.
IF THEY COULD DO THE FLEX HOUR THEN AND ALLOW THEIR SCHEDULES TO ACCOMMODATE AND THEN MAKE, AND THEY'LL WORK IN THE EIGHT HOURS A DAY REQUIRED, WHETHER THEY COME IN EARLY OR STAY LATE.
I THINK THAT SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE.
AND IT'S AT THE DISCRETION AT THE, UM, DEPARTMENT HEAD.
I KNOW, TIM, YOU AND I HAD NUMEROUS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME, SO I THINK AT THAT POINT, THIS IS THE PART, WE HAVE ONE, THE TOWN BOARD SAYS THIS IS THE POLICY AND THAT THE DISCRETION OF THE, OF THE, OF THE, OF THE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT, AND AS LONG AS THEY'RE MEETING THE GOALS, THEN WE SHOULDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE.
WE SHOULDN'T, BUT IT WILL LET LEAVE IT AT THE DEPARTMENT OF HEAD DISCRETION.
WE ARE SAYING WE'RE OPENING TOWN HALL.
YOU GUYS GOT, YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT IT TAKES TO GET THE WORK DONE.
I CAN'T THINK, I CAN'T SEE HOW THE BOARD WOULD BE ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW TO, HOW TO RUN YOUR DEPARTMENT.
I MEAN, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE GUIDE YOU ON, BUT AS FAR AS THAT, THE WORK AND MAKING SURE THAT YOU'RE FULLY STAFFED AND THE WORK IS GETTING DONE, AND IF Y'ALL DOING IT IN A MANNER OF YOU HAVE, UM, ADJUSTED SCHEDULES, YOU THAT.
AND SO LONG AS WE COMPLY WITH COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS, YOU HAVE UNIONS WITH AGREEMENTS, THEN THAT'S FINE.
SO HOW WILL THE PUBLIC, HOW WILL THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT THESE FLEX HOURS ARE SO THAT THEY WILL HAVE SOME CONFIDENCE
[02:15:02]
WHEN THEY THEY SHOW UP THAT SOMEBODY'S GONNA BE THERE? OR IS THAT WE'RE, WE'RE SOLELY RELYING ON THEY HAVE TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT IN ADVANCE, AND IF SO, WHAT, WHAT IS THE MAGIC NUMBER FOR EACH DEPARTMENT, FOR EACH PERSON TO CALL FOR EACH DEPARTMENT THAT, THAT CALL WILL BE ANSWERED AND THE APPOINTMENTS BE, BE TRACKED.RIGHT NOW WE'RE SAYING, WELL, THE PUBLIC CAN MAKE AN APPOINTMENT, BUT I BET THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PUBLIC WOULDN'T KNOW WHO TO CALL IN A PARTICULAR DEPARTMENT OR, OR WHICH DEPARTMENT TO CALL.
SO I GUESS, SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WHEN YOU SAY THAT.
SO, AS FAR AS IF I'M A CUS IF I'M A RESIDENT AND I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING ASSESSMENTS, AND I'M GONNA CALL THE ASSESSMENTS, WHEN I SAY STAGGERED SCHEDULES, THERE SHOULD BE STAGGERED SCHEDULES WHERE THERE'S COVERAGE.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT THERE'S NO COVERAGE THERE, THERE SHOULD ALWAYS BE COVERAGE DURING THE OPEN HOURS, TOWN HALLS OPEN FROM NINE TO FIVE.
THERE SHOULD BE MANDATORY COVERAGE DURING THAT PERIOD.
SO WHETHER YOU HAVE SOMEBODY COMING IN AT SEVEN AND WORKING AT THREE, OR YOU HAVE SOMEBODY COMING AT NINE THAT'S WORKING AT FIVE, AT LEAST YOU MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS COVERAGE DURING PUBLIC HOURS.
NOW AS FAR AS YOUR QUESTION RELATED TO THE TELEPHONE NUMBER OR WHO FOR, FOR THEM WHO TO CONTACT? WE, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE COVERAGE BECAUSE THEY WOULD'VE CALLED THAT SAME NUMBER THAT THEY NORMALLY CALL, THEY HAVE TO CALL THE TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE.
THEY HAVE THAT NUMBER TO CALL THE TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE.
THERE'S SOMEONE ALWAYS THERE TO ANSWER THAT PHONE BECAUSE THE SCHEDULES WILL ALLOW THAT.
THE SAME, THE SAME WITH ANYONE I KNOW.
I, I'VE BEEN DRINKING GINGER ALL DAY, ALL DAY.
UH, JUDY, THANK YOU SO MUCH AND IT'S NOT WORKING, BUT I'M TRYING.
BUT NO, THAT'S LOT OF LOZENGES.
MAYBE I'VE TRIED EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN GUYS.
I I REALLY HAVE, UM, CHICKEN SOUP I'VE TRIED, BUT LET JUST GET, BUT I JUST THINK THAT IF WE REALLY HAVE, I THINK THIS IS REALLY, THIS IS REALLY GONNA WORK EVERYONE, IF WE JUST HAVE, IF WE HAVE STAGGERED SCHEDULES, ENSURING THAT EVERY THERE IS COVERAGE DURING PUBLIC HOURS, WHICH WE SAY TOWN HALLS OPEN FROM NINE TO FIVE, THEN WE STILL BUSINESS AS USUAL.
IF, IF, IF TIM SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M GOING TO HAVE MY ADMINS ONE COMES IN EARLY, ONE COMES IN LATE, OR WHATEVER THE CASE BE, THAT'S FINE, AS LONG AS THEIR COVERAGE IN THE WORK IS GETTING DONE.
I WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER GIVING, UM, THE C D C GUIDELINES TO EVERYONE SO EVERYONE'S ON THE SAME PAGE BECAUSE THE MASK MANDATE IS NO LONGER MANDATED IF YOU'RE WEARING, I MEAN IF YOU'RE VACCINATED.
SO I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF EVERYONE HAS THE SAME BASELINE TO WORK FROM.
EVERYONE DOES, WE'VE ALREADY DISTRIBUTED A DOCUMENT THAT LAYS THAT OUT FOR ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS.
IS THAT FOR THE PUBLIC ALSO SO WE COULD KNOW HOW TO CONDUCT OURSELVES? I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S POSTED ON THE WEBSITE OR NOT.
MILAGROS, IS IT POSTED ON THE WEBSITE? IT'S POSTED ON THE ENTRANCE TO TOWN HALL THAT MASKS ARE REQUIRED? YES.
AND I, I ASK THAT I, I HOPE THAT THE BOARD WILL SUPPORT THAT MANDATE.
UM, WHEN PEOPLE ASK ME DO THEY HAVE TO WEAR A MASK WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY COME IN THERE TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE FOR WHATEVER REASON, I TELL THEM, YES, I SAID, THIS IS A MUNICIPAL BUILDING AND THIS PARTICULAR MUNICIPALITY HAS MANDATED MASK WEARING, AND UNTIL THEY HAVE DECIDED TO LIFT THAT REQUIREMENT, MASS FROM, UH, ARE REQUIRED.
WHEN YOU COME INTO THIS BUILDING AND REQUIRED OF US WHEN WE INTERACT WITH YOU, I, I THINK THAT'S REALLY SAFE, UM, APPROACH RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE, WE DON'T KNOW THIS VIRUS.
WE CAN, WE ONLY HAVE SOME SPECULATIONS AS TO HOW IT BEHAVED AND IN A MUNICIPAL BUILDING, WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHO'S COMING IN AND WALKING AROUND WHO WE'RE INTERFACING WITH.
AND, UM, I I I JUST HOPE THAT WE DO NOT START SOME KIND OF A SLIDING SCALE RIGHT NOW OR ANYTIME SOON WITH REGARDS TO MASK WEARING, UH, REGULATIONS.
SO, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, SO THE TOWN HAS A UNIVERSAL MASK MANDATE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS NOT, WHICH IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE C D C.
I JUST WANTED, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
WELL, UM, UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW WHAT TASHA, WHETHER IT'S IN LINE WITH C D C OR NOT, THE TOWN COULD BE PERCEIVED AS TAKING A HIGHER GROUND THAN C I ABSOLUTELY AGREE.
I TO REQUIRE TO REQUIRE MASK WEARING AND THAT'S HOW I PERCEIVE IT.
I PERCEIVE US RIGHT NOW AS TAKING A HIGHER GROUND THAN
[02:20:01]
WHAT MAY BE BANTERED BACK AND FORTH, UM, UH, IN IN THE MEDIA OR THROUGH THE C D C.THE C D C WAS NEVER 100% MADAM CLERK.
I JUST WANTED TO, I JUST NEEDED CLARITY IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I JUST WANTED THE CLARITY BECAUSE, BECAUSE I HEARD C D C GUIDELINES, SO I JUST WANTED THE CLARITY.
SO I JUST WANNA STAY ON POINT AND, AND FOLLOW THE AGENDA.
PAUL, DO YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED? UM, OKAY, SO WHY DON'T I JUST, SO WHAT, SO I'M GONNA, LET ME JUST WRITE IT SO THIS WAY EVERYBODY, UH, COULD YOU JUST DICTATE SOMETHING THAT I COULD JUST WRITE SO THIS WAY NOBODY WILL SAY I'M DOING ANYTHING WRONG.
WELL, HEY, WELL I HAVE A SUGGESTION.
YOU WANT TO WRITE SOMETHING AND THEN CIRCULATE IT TO THE BOARD AND THEN THEY CAN EDIT IT BEFORE YOU SAID IT.
I MEAN, WE, YOU KNOW, WE KEEP SAYING WE'RE GONNA DO THAT.
SO, I MEAN, WHAT IF I JUST SAY ALL EMPLOYEES, UM, WHO WORK AT TOWN HALL MUST WORK AT TOWN HALL BEGINNING JUNE 1ST.
IS THERE ANY, AND IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, LIKE ALL EMPLOYEES, UM, WORKING AT TOWN HALL, UM, MUST, UM, UH, RESUME WORKING AT TOWN? WELL, ON, UM, JUNE 1ST, YOU ALREADY PUT SOMETHING IN ABOUT THE MASKS.
NO, BUT THIS, THIS IS, NOW I SAID THIS IS NOT A NEWS FLASH.
THIS IS BASICALLY, UH, FOR THE EMPLOYEES.
I SAID WE WERE THINKING WE WERE PLANNING TO DO THAT, BUT NOW THIS IS, THIS IS IT.
DO, DOES DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE, UM, UM, DISCRETION IF THERE'S LIKE MAJOR MEDICAL ILLNESSES? WELL, WE HAVE DISCRETION NOW THAT WE EXERCISE.
I THINK THAT SHOULD GO THROUGH HR.
YEAH, I'LL SAY IF THERE'S, I AGREE, RIGHT? AGREE.
I THOUGHT HR ALREADY OPINED ON IT.
SO, SO WHY? YES, I I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE DOING THIS.
WE'RE REALLY, WE'VE NEVER HAD THIS DISCUSSION WE'RE PAST.
IF THERE ARE MAJOR MEDICAL, UM, ISSUES, UM, UH, UH, UH, PLEASE, UH, CONTACT, UH, GROSS CROSS HUMAN RESOURCES.
CONSULT YOUR DEPARTMENT, HEAD AND HUMAN RESOURCES.
HUMAN RESOURCES AND YOUR DEPARTMENT HEAD.
IT'S GONNA BE, IT'S MY, IT'S MY POSITION.
GREENBERG THE MAJORITY OR NOT IS HUMAN RESOURCES SHOULD BE MAKING THE CALL BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE EACH DEPARTMENT HAVING A DIFFERENT STANDARD FOR WHO CAN, WHO CAN, UH, GET A WAIVER.
THERE SHOULD BE, THERE SHOULD BE A STANDARD, I'LL SAY HUMAN RESOURCES WILL MAKE THE ULTIMATE CALL.
I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA MUTE, UH, WIN'S MIC BEFORE SHE ANSWERS
PAUL, DON'T FORGET TO PUT IN ABOUT THE MA ABOUT THE MASK POLICY IF YOU'RE GOING TO SEND THAT OUT.
SO WHAT, WHAT, SO WHAT, I'M NOT SENDING THIS OUT TO THE PUBLIC.
ARE ARE EMPLOYEES GOING TO WEAR MASKS WHEN THEY'RE WORKING WITH OTHERS? ARE THEY, OR, AND WHEN THEY'RE WORKING ALONE, THEY DON'T NEED TO HAVE A MASK OR ARE THEY NOT WEARING MASKS? WHAT, WHAT'S THE POLICY? DO THEY EMPLOYEE? UM, IS IT, IF I MAY, UM, IS IT THE DEPARTMENTS IN TOWN HALL, THEY'RE DIRECTING THEIR EMPLOYEES? UM, AS FAR AS THE MASK WEARING, RIGHT.
SO A LOT OF THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE CUBICLES AND THAT SORT OF THING IN THE PUBLIC SPACES AT TOWN HALL IF EMPLOYEES WERE TO, AND, AND I, I, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY MORE TALKING ABOUT IS IN OUR PUBLIC SPACES.
UM, WHEN EMPLOYEES LEAVE THEIR DEPARTMENTS, THEY SHOULD BE WEARING MASKS.
THAT'S WHAT I MEANT, GRO OKAY, THAT'S FINE.
SO BEFORE YOU SEND THAT OUT, PAUL, WE SHOULD READ AND MORGO SHOULD READ IT JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT WE HAVE EVERYTHING.
I I DO HAVE, I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
FOR EXAMPLE, UM, IF YOU HAVE AN EMPLOYEE IN YOUR DEPARTMENT WHO FOR WHATEVER REASON, DOES NOT BELIEVE IN BEING VACCINATED WHILE EVERYBODY ELSE IS VACCINATED, UM, I, I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE EVERYBODY, ALL THE VACCINATED ONES ARE, ARE NERVOUS ABOUT THE ONE WHO IS NOT WILLING TO BE VACCINATED IN, IN WHICH CASE EVERYBODY IS BEING ASKED TO WEAR A MASK.
UM, I'M, I'M, THAT'S, THAT'S IN, IN, IN MY DEPARTMENT.
UM, UH, WHEN WE ALL COME, ARE IN THERE TOGETHER, I'M ASKING, REQUIRING EVERYONE TO WEAR A MASK
[02:25:01]
WHEN WE ARE IN THE COMMON SPACE TOGETHER, BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE PARTICULAR PERSON WHO IS UNWILLING FOR WHATEVER PERSONAL REASON TO BE VACCINATED.AND, UM, SO PAUL, YOU KNOW, I AND THE BOARD, YOU MIGHT WANNA THINK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE, UM, IT'S A PROTECTION MA AND, AND MILAGROS, YOU KNOW, IT'S A PROTECTION ISSUE FOR, FOR EVERYBODY ELSE.
AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS VIRUS BEHAVES.
SO FOR THE, FOR THE, THE ONE WHO IS NOT WILLING TO BE VACCINATED, UM, YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS HOW THAT MAY IMPACT THE, UM, UH, THE REST OF THE OFFICE.
SO CAN WE DISCUSS THAT AS A PERSONNEL ISSUE TOMORROW WITH MIL AB? ABSOLUTELY.
I'M JUST ASKING THAT THIS BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
WELL, WE DID AND THE, UH, THE TOWN ATTORNEYS OPINED ON THIS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR HIM TO SAY, SAY HIS OPINION AT THE MOMENT.
OKAY, SO CLASS A, WHAT ABOUT JUST SAYING ALL EMPLOYEES WORKING AT TOWN HALL MUST RESUME WORKING AT TOWN HALL ON JUNE 1ST.
IF THERE ARE MAJOR MEDICAL CONCERNS, PLEASE CONSULT HUMAN RESOURCES ANNUAL DEPARTMENT HEAD AND THERE ARE PUBLIC SPACES, EMPLOYEES MUST WEAR A MASKS.
I DON'T SAY ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT.
ANYBODY HAVE A PROBLEM? NOBODY'S SAYING ANYTHING.
I THOUGHT WE PUT OUT A DOCUMENT ABOUT THIS, BUT I DID TOO.
I THOUGHT I THOUGHT SO TOO, BUT YEAH, BUT THIS IS
YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING MORE.
UNLESS, UNLESS YOU'RE GONNA PUT ON THE TOP TOP OF IT.
REMINDER THAT YOU CAN SEND OUT THE EMAIL THAT YOU SENT OUT THE LAST TIME.
RIGHT? THIS IS NOT A G LIST REMINDER.
ALL EMPLOYEES WORKING AT TOWN HALL MUST RESUME WORKING AT TOWN HALL ON JU FIRST, BUT THERE ARE MANY AGENT GOLD CONCERNS.
PLEASE CONSULT HUMAN RESOURCES AND DEPARTMENT HAD NARROW ALL IN OUR PUBLIC SPACES.
EMPLOYEES MUST WEAR MASKS THEN EVERYTHING.
NOBODY COULD SAY THEY WEREN'T REMINDED.
I WAS SUGGESTING, PAUL, THAT YOU USE THE INITIAL YOU SENT OUT SINCE WE ALL AGREED ON IT AND THEN YOU SENT THAT OUT.
JUST, JUST ANOTHER REMINDER, THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN, ALREADY LOOKED AT IT.
YOU JUST, I DON'T REMEMBER, UH, THAT WAY, IN THAT WAY.
I AGREE WITH GINA BECAUSE THAT WAY YOU AVOID CONFLICTING LANGUAGE.
UNLESS
UM, SO I HAD PUT TOGETHER A DOCUMENT THAT I WAS JUST KIND OF WAITING JUST TO MAKE SURE, WHICH COVERS ALL OF THIS INFORMATION.
I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SEND THAT OUT TO ALL OF THE TOWN HALL, WHICH ADDRESSES ALL OF THAT.
SO THEN, YES, SO THEN I I WON'T SEND THAT OUT.
ANYTHING, RIGHT? YEAH, I DON'T RECALL.
DOES IT, IT I DON'T THINK IT DOES.
IF SOMEBODY HAS, UH, A MEDICAL REASON, THEY SHOULD NOT WAIT FOR JUNE 1ST TO SHOW UP, UH, WITH THAT REASON FOR WHY THEY CAN'T COME BACK OR SEND A NOTE IN ON JUNE 1ST.
IF ANYBODY HAS, YOU KNOW, SUCH A CONDITION THAT THEY SHOULD PROVIDE THAT TO US, UH, THIS WEEK SO THAT, UH, HR CAN ACTUALLY EVALUATE IT IN, IN TIME FOR JUNE 1ST.
EV EVERYBODY IN TOWN HALL KNOWS JUNE 1ST IS COMING.
I MEAN, WELL THE NUMBER OF NOTICES ABOUT THIS, UH, ARE CAN'T BE, CAN'T BE IGNORED.
RIGHT? SO IN PROTECTING PEOPLE'S, UH, PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION, UM, WE MAY HAVE HAD EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE COME FORWARD WITH INFORMATION AND WE'RE REVIEWING SOME OF THAT INFORMATION.
AND SO PEOPLE KNOW, EMPLOYEES KNOW, RIGHT? IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A BUILDING.
ARE WE DONE? OKAY, SO, UH, UH, I'M NOT GONNA SEND ANYTHING IN
[02:30:01]
RIGHT? OR YOU COULD, IF YOU'RE JUST ITCHING TO SEND AN EMAIL 'CAUSE YOU HAVEN'T SENT ONE, YOU KNOW, IN THE LAST FIVE MINUTES, YOU COULD ALWAYS SEND A EMAIL REMINDING PEOPLE TO READ THEIR PREVIOUS EMAILS REGARDING, YOU KNOW, THIS TOPIC, TOPIC.ALRIGHT, SO THE NEXT IS AGENDA REVIEW.
WELL, LET ME REARRANGE THINGS HERE A LITTLE BIT SINCE WE'RE A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER.
I DID LOOK UP THAT C F R STATEMENT.
IT'S NOT WHAT IT WAS PURPORTED TO BE.
UH, WHERE TO GO? HOLD ON, I GOT UNC CHAIR.
YOUR DAUGHTER DOESN'T STOP RUNNING AROUND HERE.
I'M GONNA STOP CALLING THE POLICE.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT MUTED, JOAN.
IS YOUR HUSBAND? I'LL HAVE JOAN.
ACTUALLY, WE PROBABLY SHOULD PUT AN ANNOUNCEMENT ON HERE REGARDING GRIEVANCE DAY.
SO WE HAVE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, MOMENT OF SILENCE.
WE'RE WORKING ON JULY AND AUGUST DATES.
WE'RE NOT SURE ABOUT THOSE YET, BUT WE'RE WORKING ON THEM.
THIS IS THE, UH, NOTICE OF TOWN HALL REOPENING.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF TIMING ON THESE PRESENTATIONS? PAUL? THEY, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ONE
YEAH, THE TOURETTE IS LIKE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, THE ANOTHER ONE WITH, UH, ANISHA'S LIKE 5, 5, 10 MINUTES.
AND JAYNA, YOU'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT JUNETEENTH.
YEAH, SO WE ARE CELEBRATING, UM, THIS YEAR'S JUNETEENTH ON FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 18TH.
WE WILL START AT TOWN HALL AND THEN WE WILL TAKE A MOTORCADE DOWN TO THE, UM, WEB FIELD, PRESSER FIELD, UM, AND THEN WE WILL HAVE A EVENING OF FAMILY TOGETHERNESS.
WE JUST WANNA CELEBRATE WHAT JUNETEENTH IS AND ALSO HAVE A FAMILY FUN NIGHT OUT AS WELL.
SO WE HOPE PEOPLE COME OUT AND CELEBRATE US.
AND, UH, TOWN CLERK, IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, THIS IS WHERE YOU WOULD DO IT.
HOW ABOUT TALKING ABOUT THE EARLY VOTING, FRANCIS? YES.
TOMORROW I WILL MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT EARLY VOTING AND, UM, I'LL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS WITH JOE ESE TO POST THIS AND THAT.
THAT'LL BE MY ANNOUNCE MY ANNOUNCEMENTS ABOUT EARLY VOTING AND WHERE PEOPLE CAN FIND THE INFORMATION.
UH, THEN WE HAVE THE REOPENING OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONT UH, CON, UH, CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF THE EXTENSION OF FEDOR SEWER DISTRICT.
THIS WAS DONE, UH, BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORS, UH, DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THE F MORE SEWER DISTRICT WAS, AND NOW IT'S IN THE VICINITY OF 700 AND WA 7 0 1 DODGE BURY ROAD.
YOU KNOW, THE FORMER, FORMER FRANK'S AREA, FRANK'S NURSERY AND OR CHELSEA.
NOW, I GUESS, UH, THIS MEETING, THIS HEARING WILL NOT BE CLOSED TOMORROW NIGHT.
[02:35:01]
ENGINEER AND, UM, D P W IN GENERAL, THEY'RE, THEY'VE ASKED THE APPLICANT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THAT ADDIT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUEST ON THE RECORD DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.RICH, DID YOU WANNA SAY ANYTHING MORE ABOUT THAT? NO, I THINK THAT COVERS IT.
OKAY, THEN WE HAVE, SO THERE'S ONE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN THERE'S PUBLIC COMMENTS APPOINTING JAMES PEON TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT.
SO WE MAY NEED A SPECIAL MEETING NEXT TUESDAY.
THIS IS, UH, VILLAGE OF ARDSLEY, UM, IS PUTTING UP A HIGHWAY GARAGE AND THEY NEED US TO, UH, MODIFY THE EASEMENT THAT WE HAVE.
WE HAVE A PERPETUAL EASEMENT GOING THROUGH THAT, THE PROPERTY THAT THEY PURCHASED.
AND SO WE'RE REDIRECTING THE EASEMENT TO GO AROUND THEIR BUILDING.
AND TB THREE FRANCIS, I'D LIKE TO PUT OVER UNTIL JUNE 9TH.
A COUPLE OF ISSUES THAT WE HAVE TO WORK OUT.
UH, WE DID SPEAK TO MR. CATONA TODAY, AND HE'S FINE WITH THE, UM, THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST.
AND WE HAVE OUR HUMANE SOCIETY OF WESTCHESTER.
WE USE NEW ROCHELLE HUMANE SOCIETY THREE YEAR CONTRACT.
SO CL ONE IS A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE, UH, PROPOSED BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, LOCAL LAW.
AND JUST A QUICK UPDATES ARE THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE LOCAL LAW AND HAD A COUPLE GOOD DISCUSSIONS.
AND, UM, IS, IS IS SET TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON JUNE 2ND.
SO WE WILL CERTAINLY POST THAT AS WELL AS THE DRAFT LOCAL LAW ON THE WEBSITE.
AND, UM, YEAH, WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC AND HEARING COMMENTS.
AND THAT WILL BE JUNE 9TH, THE PUBLIC HEARING, I SHOULD SAY.
UH, JERRY OR JOHN? I'M, I'M HERE.
A RESOLUTION ALSO AUTHORIZING US TO IMPLEMENT A POLICY THAT BANS SMOKING AND VAPING OF ANY KIND IN ALL TOWN OWNED PARKS.
I JUST WANNA SHARE WITH THE TOWN BOARD AND PUBLIC THAT FOR, UH, THE LAST COUPLE, FOR MANY YEARS NOW, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT, UH, EXPANDING OUR NO, UH, SMOKING POLICY FROM, UH, ISOLATED AREAS LIKE PLAYGROUNDS AND ATHLETIC FIELDS AND AROUND THE POOL, UH, TO THE ENTIRE, UH, PARK THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PARK SYSTEM WITH THE RECENT, UH, STATE LEGISLATION OF, UH, UH, LEGALIZING, UH, RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, UM, THE FACT THAT IT IS A NARCOTIC, WE BAN ALCOHOL IN IT.
UH, WE HAD A, A SPIRITED, WE HAD A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION WITH THE PARK AND REC ADVISORY BOARD EARLIER IN THE MONTH, AND THEY ENDORSED ANONYMOUSLY MY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE SORT OF FOLLOW SUIT LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN NEW YORK CITY THAT BE BANNING, UH, SMOKING AND VAPING OF ANY KIND, UH, THROUGHOUT ALL TOWN OWNED PARKS.
AND THE SECOND ONE IS, YEAH, THAT, THAT'S JUST A, UH, $9,000 GRANT THAT WE HAVE WITH THE COUNTY, UH, FOR PROVIDING TRANSPORTATION FOR, UH, SENIORS.
IT'S PAPERWORK THAT WE GO THROUGH AND WE FOLLOW CERTAIN CRITERIA AND WE GET REIMBURSED, UH, YOU KNOW, PARTIAL HELP, UH, PAY FOR OUR DRIVERS OF, UH, LIKE 9,000, $3,304.
WE DO THE WORK AND THEY PARTIALLY OFFSET THAT COST.
SO THE PW ONE IS, IS, UH, THE RESULT OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, UH, DOING INSPECTION AT THE
[02:40:01]
NATURE CENTER, UH, WHICH REQUIRES US TO HARD WIRE, UH, CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS.UH, I THINK FIVE IN TOTAL THROUGH THE BUILDING.
THIS IS A THREE STORY BUILDING, UM, THAT IS A PLACE OF ASSEMBLY.
UM, THERE IS A SCHOOL TYPE ACTIVITIES THERE WITH, UH, YOUNG CHILDREN.
UM, E D T IS THE, UH, THE, UH, EXISTING, UH, PROPRIETOR OF THE SYSTEM OUT THERE.
SO, UH, THE COST IS 9,000 OR NOT TO EXCEED $9,977 75 CENTS.
THE SECOND, UH, RESOLUTION IS, UH, VERY IMPORTANT TO US AT THIS POINT.
THIS IS, UH, REGARDING OUR 2021 CONTRACT FOR MILLING AND RESURFACING OF VARIOUS STREETS IN THE TOWN.
I WANNA SPELL OUT THAT THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE PROCESS THAT, UH, WE HAVE DONE, UH, THE LAST TWO MONTHS IN TOWN.
THIS IS A MILLING AND PAVING WHERE WE MILL DOWN A PORTION OF THE ROAD AND THEN RESURFACE IT WITH A NEW ASPHALT.
THE PROCESS THAT'S NOT COMPLETED YET THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE TOWN IS A RECLAMATION WHERE WE GROUND UP THE EXISTING ROAD, UH, SHOT OILS INTO IT, COMPACTED IT.
IT'S NOW PROBABLY SET FOR A MONTH, AND I BELIEVE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO WE'RE GONNA BE GOING AND SEALING THESE ROADS OR FINISHING THEM.
AND THERE ARE SOME, WHICH, UH, RESIDENTS HAVE NOTED, UH, MANHOLE COVERS OR DEPRESSIONS THAT WE HAVE TO CORRECT, AND THAT'S ALL GONNA BE DONE.
SO THIS IS A DIFFERENT PROCESS.
THIS IS, UH, WE'RE HOPING YOU, WE AWARD IT TO MONTESANO BROTHERS.
THEY HAVE DONE WORK IN THE TOWN BEFORE.
UH, THEY'VE BEEN A, A GREAT HELP IN TOWN.
AND THIS IS, UH, NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT THERE WITH THE ALTERNATES NOT TO EXCEED THE ADDITIONAL CONTRACTING WORK.
BEFORE YOU GO, BEFORE YOU GO TO PW TWO, HERE'S A SOFTBALL QUESTION.
UH, WHY DON'T WE ALWAYS USE THE CHEAPER ALTERNATIVE RATHER THAN DOING THE, UH, THE SURFACING THAT WE'RE DOING HERE, WHICH IS THE ACTUAL MILL AT RESURFACING OF STREET? WHY, WHY DON'T WE JUST USE THE OTHER METHOD FOR ALL THE STREETS? GREAT.
THE, UH, AS SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN, THIS TRAIN THAT GOES THROUGH WHEN THEY DO THE RECLAMATION WORK DOES NOT WOR WORK WELL AROUND, UH, TURNS SMALLER STREETS CANNOT USE IT ON CUL-DE-SACS.
UM, AND IT DOES NOT MAKE, OBVIOUSLY, TURNING RACES AS, UH, I SAID EARLIER.
SO IT WORKS WELL ON LONG STRETCHES.
FOR INSTANCE, WE DID TAX THE ROAD CCO ROAD, WORTHINGTON ROAD, AND WE PLAN TO USE IT AGAIN NEXT YEAR IF WE GET FUNDING, UM, DIFFERENT METHODS FOR DIFFERENT, UH, APPLICATIONS.
MY SCREEN WENT A LITTLE CRAZY THERE.
PW THREE IS A DESIGN OF A, A NEW DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
UH, THIS IS OFF STONE AVENUE AND LINCOLN.
UM, WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS A PRIVATE DRAIN THAT HAS FAILED RUNNING THROUGH THREE PRIVATE PROPERTIES CONVEYING TOWN WATER.
UM, SO WE HAVE, UH, DOLF FELD UNDER THEIR NEW, UH, THEIR NEW NAME, DESIGNING THIS SYSTEM THROUGH THE PROCESS.
UH, CAL MURRAY, WHO'S ONE OF THE 10 ENGINEERS AND, UH, DOLF DISCOVERED THAT THE PITCH OF THIS PIPE IS SO SEVERE THAT IT COULD CHARGE, IT COULD REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM AT THE BASE WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT DISCHARGE AND SURCHARGE AND CREATE OTHER PROBLEMS. SO WE REALLY HAVE TO HAVE THE ENGINEER DO, UM, A BIGGER LOOK AT THE AREA TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH WATER IS GONNA BE FLOWING THROUGH THESE PIPES.
AND THIS, THIS WON'T EXCEED THE $5,000.
WELL, THIS, THIS WILL BE TAKING A PIPE THAT'S GOING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OVER WHICH WE HAVE NO CONTROL AND DIVERTING IT AROUND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SO THAT IT WILL BE ON TOWN PROPERTY AND WE COULD HAVE ACCESS TO IT WHENEVER WE WANT.
AND THEN WE'RE GONNA ABANDON THE OTHER PIPE IN PLACE AND THERE'LL BE, UH, SURVEYS AND AS-BUILTS TO DOCUMENT THAT.
DID WE EVER FIGURE OUT HOW THAT HAPPENED? THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE AN EASEMENT FOR A PIPE WITH, WITH, UH, MUNICIPAL USE, WHAT WE SEE A LOT, UH, IS THAT THERE ARE STREAMS OR, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST STREAM BEDS THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT IN THEIR YARDS ANYMORE.
SO THEY TAKE IT UPON THEMSELVES TO PIPE IT.
UH, IT, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE YEARS IT'S, IT'S, IT'S HAPPENED THROUGHOUT THE TOWN AND THERE'S EVIDENCE TO THAT.
[02:45:01]
IF BRIAN SIMMONS IS ON, I THINK HE IS.I'LL LET HIM HANDLE THAT ONE, BRIAN.
UM, SO THERE'S AN EXISTING BRIDGE, UH, CULVERT THAT'S CROSSING THE BRONX RIVER ON CEMETERY ROAD.
UH, IT'S BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS.
THE CONDITION OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE.
BRIAN, ARE YOU AT YOUR COMPUTER? CAN YOU PULL UP THAT, THAT, UH, DIAGRAM THAT WAS VERY CONVINCING THAT IT'S PARTLY IN THE TOWN AND PART, PARTLY IN, UH, WHITE PLAINS.
OTHERWISE YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO.
NOW YOU CAN FRANCIS, NOT ONLY IS HE AT HIS DESK, BUT HE, HE DOESN'T SIT DOWN.
HE'S GOT ONE OF THESE STANDING DESKS, SO HE'S BEEN STANDING THE HOME.
YEAH, IT MAKES THE REST OF US LOOK REALLY BAD.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO FIRST IS I WILL SHARE, THIS IS AN ATLAS MAP FROM 1929.
SO, SO THERE'S AN EXISTING CULVERT BRIDGE.
IT CONNECTS THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS AND THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
IT GOES ACROSS CEMETERY ROAD, WHICH THEN CONTINUES ON TO BECOME OLD TAR TOWN ROAD.
NOW THE EXISTING BRIDGE IS, IS SEVERELY DETERIORATED.
UH, THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS HAS TAKEN THE LEAD AND THEY'VE CONTRACTED WITH A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN FIRM.
UH, THE NAME OF THAT FIRM IS W SS P CELLS.
THEY'RE THE SAME CONSULTANT THAT WE ACTUALLY, UH, USED THAT THE TOWN USED AND CONTRACTED WITH TO REPLACE THE FISHER LANE BRIDGE BACK IN 2011.
UH, THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN FIRM IS, IS ON BOARD TO PROVIDE DESIGN CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES, UM, AND, UH, TO REPLACE THE CULVERT, UH, THE PROJECTED COSTS OF THE REPLACEMENT ARE $170,000 FOR THE ENGINEERING DESIGN, UH, AND EMERGENCY STABILIZATION.
AND THE, UH, PROJECT WAS BID AND THE, THE LOWEST BID CAME BACK AT $600,000 FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION.
SO THIS RESOLUTION THAT'S BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD IS TO AUTHORIZE AN I M A, AN INTER, AN INTER INTER MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS AND THE TOWN TO SHARE THE COST OF THIS RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
SO THIS RIGHT HERE IS AN ATLAS MAP THAT'S FROM, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, FROM 1929.
UH, IT SHOWS THE, THAT THIS RED LINE, AND I'M GONNA TRY AND ZOOM IN NOW, I THINK I SHOULD BE ABLE WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, YOU SAID THE LOWEST BID WAS 600,000.
WHAT WAS THE NEXT LOWEST BIDDERS? THE NEXT LOWEST BIDDER, JUST, I GET THIS RIGHT, 700 AND SOMETHING.
THE NEXT LOWEST BIDDER WAS $771,500.
SO IN THE DIFFERENCE OF $171,500 BETWEEN THE BIDS.
SO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT'S ON THIS AGENDA IS ONE, THERE HAS BEEN A, THERE'S BEEN A DISPUTE SINCE LAST SUMMER AS TO, IS THIS ACTUALLY THIS BRIDGE ACTUALLY IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, BUT THERE WAS NO BEATS AND BOUNDS THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS THAT IT'S IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
AND WHY WOULD WE SPEND ALMOST $400,000 IF IT'S IN WHITE PLAINS? UH, WHAT BRIAN WAS ABLE TO DO IS DEFINE A MAP, WHICH FAIRLY CONVINCINGLY CONVINCINGLY SHOWS THAT YES, IT IS IN FACT HALF IN, UH, WHITE PLAINS AND HALF IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
WHAT MADE IT EVEN MORE SUSPICIOUS LAST SUMMER IS THAT THE DEFINITION WAS MODIFIED AS TO WHAT A BRIDGE IS TO INCLUDE THE ACCESS ROAD.
AND YES, THERE'S NO DOUBT THE ACCESS ROAD IS IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
SO IT WAS, IT LOOKED LIKE SOMEBODY HAD PLAYED WITH THE DEFINITION OF WHAT A BRIDGE IS SO THAT IT WOULD INCLUDE THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
BUT I THINK WHAT BRIAN HAS DONE IN HIS RESEARCH HAS FOUND, UH, A MAP THAT SHOWS THE RIVER AND SHOWS THE BRIDGE AND IT'S FAIRLY CONVINCING WITHOUT HAVING SOMEBODY DO MEETS AND BOUNDS, UH, THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S PART OF OUR PROBLEM.
I'M SORRY, THE MAP, THE MAP THAT BRIAN FOUND DOES SHOW THE MEETS AND BOUNDS GO, DOESN'T IT GO THAT GO TO THE MIDDLE OF THE RIVER? SO, RIGHT, SO, SO THIS MAP RIGHT HERE IS, IT'S, IT WAS PRODUCED FOR THE, THE BRONX PARKWAY COMMISSION.
IT WAS A SURVEY JUST IN SEPTEMBER OF 1914.
[02:50:01]
UH, THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE ALONG THE BRONX RIVER, IT PROVIDES THE MEETS AND BOUNDS TO THE CENTER OF THE RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF WHERE THE BRIDGE IS BECAUSE THAT'S CONSIDERED A, UH, IT IS A RIGHT OF WAY AND THERE'S NOT A NECESSARILY A PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER THERE.IT DOESN'T SHOW THE MEETS AND BOUNDS DIRECTLY THROUGH THERE.
BUT WHAT IT DOES SHOW IS THAT NORTH OF THE, THE BRIDGE AND SOUTH OF THE BRIDGE, IT PROVIDES THE MEETS AND BOUNDS DIRECTLY TO THE CENTER OF THE RIVER.
AND THAT COMBINED WITH THE ATLAS MAP THAT WE'RE ABLE TO SHOW THAT SHOWS THE TOWN BOUNDARY AND THE CITY BOUNDARY BEING ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIVER, UM, I THINK WE CAN CONFIDENTLY SAY THAT, UM, OR WE BELIEVE BASED ON THIS INFORMATION THAT THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN MUNICIPALITIES WOULD BE RIGHT DOWN THE, THE CENTER OF THE BRIDGE.
YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT EVEN IF WE HIRED A SURVEYOR, THEY MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE ACTUAL MEETS AND BOUNDS, WHICH SOUNDS AMAZING, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S GOTTA HAVE SOME, BUT BECAUSE OF THE DATA AND PERHAPS THE BRI THE RIVER ITSELF, THAT THEY MAY NOT ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO MAKE IT THAT DETERMINATION.
SO WHY BOTHER SPENDING THE MONEY TO DO THAT? THAT IS TRUE.
THERE WAS A PROPOSAL THAT WAS, UM, THAT WAS RECEIVED FROM A SURVEYOR, RIGHT? BUT THERE, THERE WAS NO GUARANTEE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE MEETINGS AND FOR, FOR THAT BOUNDARY GOING ACROSS THE, THE BRIDGE.
I THINK THAT'S THIS DRAWING RIGHT HERE.
IS IT? WHERE IS IT? I'M NOT SURE IF YOU COULD SEE MY MOUSE.
THE, SO IT SHOWS THE, THE, THE BOUNDARY LINE TO THE CENTER OF THE, THE RIVER, AND THEN IT SHOWS THE CROSSING, WHICH IS, YOU CAN SEE THIS, UM, LITTLE RECTANGLE RIGHT HERE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT THE TWO ABUTMENTS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE BRIDGE AND THEN THE BRIDGE CROSSING ITSELF, OR CULVER CROSSING, I SHOULD SAY, GOING UP AND THEN CONTINUING ONTO OLD TERRYTOWN ROAD.
AND THEN JUST, UH, EAST OF THAT POINT, THERE'S THEN ALSO A TUNNEL THAT CEMETERY ROAD TRAVELS UNDERNEATH.
AND YOU HAVE THE METRO NORTH RAILROAD TRACKS THAT, THAT TRAVEL OVER TOP.
IS ANYONE ELSE SAYING HIS MOUSE? I I DON'T SEE A MOUSE.
NO, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE FAIRLY CONFIDENT THAT IT'S AT LEAST PARTIALLY IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, THIS BRIDGE.
OR MAY, CAN YOU SEE THIS MAP? IS THIS THE MAP THAT I'M SHOWING THE ONE YES.
SO THIS IS THE MAP THAT I WAS REFERRING TO.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT SHOWS THAT THE, THE PROPERTIES, THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ALONG THE BRONX RIVER THAT SHOWS THE, UM, THE MEETS AND BOUNDS GOING TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIVER.
NOW NOTICE TO CONSIDER IS, SO THIS IS A, UH, A MAP OR SURVEY FROM 1914, AND THIS DOES SHOW, UM, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU COULD SEE THESE RECTANGLES NOW THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE ONE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT? RIGHT.
SO, SO THIS FIRST RECTANGLE, UH, THE ONE THAT'S SHOWN RIGHT ALONG THE RIVER, THAT ONE REPRESENTS THE, THE CULVERT AND THEN THE ONE THAT'S JUST BENEATH THAT, SO THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, UH, GOING BASED ON THE DIRECTIONS.
IT WOULD BE TO THE EAST OF THAT, UH, CULVERT.
THERE'S A TUNNEL, AN EXISTING TUNNEL.
SO CEMETERY ROAD TRAVELS UNDERNEATH THE METRO NORTH RAILROAD TRACKS THROUGH, AND THAT'S THE SECOND RECTANGLE THAT YOU SEE THERE.
UM, BUT IT'S THE ONE THAT YOUR CURSOR IS RIGHT THERE.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S IN QUESTION RIGHT NOW, CORRECT? YEAH.
SO THAT, THAT'S REPRESENTS THE, THE, THE CEMETERY ROAD BRIDGE, THE ONE THAT'S IN NEED OF REPAIR.
AND THE ONE THING I SAID, SO, SO THE, THE BRIDGE HAS BEEN IN 1914, THE ABUTMENTS RIGHT, AREN'T GONNA CHANGE THE, THE, THE COURSE OF THE RIVER MAY CHANGE OVER TIME AS WATER FLOWS THROUGH AND EROSION PLACE, BUT THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL ABUTMENTS THEMSELVES.
SO THIS MAP SHOWS THE, THE BRIDGES BEING IN PLACE BACK IN 1914 AND IT SHOWS THE, THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH AS BEING TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE RIVER.
UM, BASED ON THIS INFORMATION AND BASED ON THE, THE OTHER ATLAS MAPS THAT ARE AVAILABLE SUCH AS THIS ONE, WHICH IS FROM 1929, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER ATLAS MAP THAT WAS FROM 1881 I BELIEVE.
UH, THEY ALL SHOW THE, THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS AND THE TOWN GOING, UH, YOU KNOW, ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE BRONX RIVER AND THEN UNDERNEATH THE, THE BRIDGE ABOVE IT,
[02:55:03]
RIGHT? SO THE REASON WHY WE'RE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON THIS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO PARTIALLY OWN THAT BRIDGE BECAUSE IT'S $385,000 AND THAT'S JUST OUR SHARE.IT'S A MUCH BIGGER PROJECT, BUT THEY BY PLAINS IS TALKING ABOUT SHUTTING DOWN ACCESS THROUGH THIS BECAUSE IT'S BECOMING MORE AND MORE DANGEROUS.
AND LASTLY, AND THE ONLY REASON WHY THIS IS BOLDED, THIS WAS WHAT WE DETERMINED TODAY AND IT'S NOT ON AGENDA QUICK YET.
SO WE'LL HAVE, UH, THIS ADDED TO AGENDA QUICK, UM, BY TOMORROW.
SO I THINK PAUL IS OTHERWISE OCCUPIED.
DOES ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER WANT TO MAKE A MOTION FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION? WHOSE DEPUTY? DEPUTY? I THINK IT'S KEN, RIGHT? UH, I MOVE THAT WE GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS AND WHAT ELSE? LEGAL MATTERS.
CLIENT UPDATE AND WHAT FRANCIS ATTORNEY CLIENT UPDATE ON, OUT, OUT ON OUTSTANDING ISSUES AND THE PERSONNEL, UH, MATTERS INVOLVING CERTAIN IN INDIVIDUALS.
AND WE WILL NOT BE COMING BACK INTO A PUBLIC PROCEED.