Sep 10, 2025 Town Board- Regular

WITH, UM, UH, TRUDY HOLLAND, WHO'S HERE.

UM, SO, UM, UH, I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT WE JUST CAME BACK, UH, ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS, UH, WE NAMED THE STREET IN HONOR AND IN MEMORY OF CLEO OLIVER.

UM, SHE WAS VERY ACTIVE IN THE COMMUNITY.

UH, SHE WAS INVOLVED IN A LOT OF CIVIC, UH, ASSOCIATION.

SHE SHOWED UP AT MANY TOWN BOARD MEETINGS AND MADE A BIG, UH, IMPACT ON, UM, OUR, OUR LIVES.

SO, UM, UH, UH, ABOUT A BLOCK AWAY FROM HERE, THERE'S A STREET CALLED INDIAN TRAIL AND LEATHER STOCKING, AND WE PUT UP A COMMEMORATIVE, UM, SIGN IN HER, UH, HONOR AND HER MEMORY, AND THAT'S WHERE EVERYBODY WAS, UM, BEFORE, BEFORE THIS MEETING.

AND, UM, WE ALSO ARE, UM, STARTING A NEW, UM, UM, INITIATIVE.

UM, I'M WORKING

[ PRESENTATIONS (Maximum 10 minutes each) Greenburgh Chamber of Commerce's First Business of the Month Award - THE WIG OUTLET]

UH, SHE'S THE HEAD OF, UH, THE GREENBERG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE RIVER TOWN'S ROTARY.

UH, OVER THE YEARS, THE TOWN AND DEBORAH BORNSTEIN, OR OVER THE YEARS, UM, THE TOWN, UM, WE'VE ALWAYS HONORED CITIZENS HAVE MADE A REALLY BIG POSITIVE, UH, DIFFERENCE IN THE QUALITY OF, UM, OF OUR LIVES, BUT WE REALLY HAVEN'T DONE ENOUGH TO RECOGNIZE THE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE ALS ALSO GIVEN BACK.

SO, UM, MAYBE BEFORE WE, UM, UM, ANNOUNCED THE WINNER OF, UH, THE, THE FIRST BUSINESS OF THE MONTH AWARD, MAYBE I'D ASK, UM, DEBORAH AND, UH, TRUDY, IF YOU COULD COME UP AND JUST SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT, UH, THIS, UM, NEW INITIATIVE THAT WE HAVE AND WHY IT'S EXCITING.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.

AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE GREENBURG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, IT GIVES ME GREAT PLEASURE TO BE HERE TODAY TO RECOGNIZE AND CELEBRATE ONE OF THE OUTSTANDING MEMBERS OF OUR LOCAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY.

OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES ARE TRULY THE HEART OF GREENBURG.

THEY BRING SERVICES, JOBS, AND SUPPORT TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THEY DESERVE TO BE APPRECIATED AND CELEBRATED FOR THEIR COMMITMENT TO OUR TOWN GREENBURG.

THAT'S WHY WE'VE CREATED THE BUSINESS OF THE MONTH RECOGNITION TO SHINE A SPOTLIGHT ON THOSE WHO GO ABOVE AND BE BEYOND TO OUR COMMUNITY.

TODAY, WE ARE PROUD TO PRESENT THE VERY FIRST BUSINESS OF THE MONTH AWARD TO SOMEONE WHO TRULY EXEMPLIFIES THESE VALUES.

OUR CONGRATULATIONS TO ERICA BRODERICK, OWNER OF THE WG OUTLET IN HARTSDALE.

ERICA, YOUR PASSION FOR WHAT YOU DO, YOUR CARE FOR YOUR CUSTOMERS HAVE CREATED A WELCOMING ENVIRONMENT AT THE WIG OUTLET.

YOU HAVE TOUCHED SO MANY CHILDREN AND ADULTS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

YOU PROVIDE MORE THAN JUST A PRODUCT.

YOU OFFER THEM COMFORT AND CONFIDENCE WHEN THEY NEED IT, AND THAT MAKES A LASTING IMPACT ON THEIR DAILY LIVES.

THANK YOU, ERICA, FOR BEING A SHINY EXAMPLE OF WHAT MAKES OUR LOCAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY SO SPECIAL.

WE APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU DO.

LET'S CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES.

ON BEHALF OF THE GREENBURG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, WE THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT YOU DO, AND WE'RE HONORED TO RECOGNIZE YOU TODAY AS THE FIRST RECIPIENT OF THE BUSINESS OF THE MONTH AWARD.

AMEN.

AND DEBORAH, DO

[00:05:01]

YOU WANNA SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT, UM, UH, THE RIVER TOWNS ROTARY? AND WE'RE REALLY THRILLED THAT YOU'RE PARTNERING WITH, UH, THE TOWN AND THE CHAMBER, THE GREENBERG CHAMBER, UM, SO WE COULD SALUTE, UH, OTHER, AS MANY BUSINESSES AS POSSIBLE.

SO WE'RE PROUD TO SHARE THIS WITH YOU, AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND FORTH EVERY OTHER MONTH.

AND, UH, RIVER TOWNS ROTARY, I'M HERE REPRESENTING RIVER TOWNS ROTARY, WHICH IS A LOCAL CHAPTER, ACTUALLY ONE OF YOUR LOCAL CHAPTERS OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL ROTARY, UH, INTERNATIONAL HAS ABOUT 1.4 MILLION MEMBERS GLOBALLY.

AND WE ARE SERVICE, WE'RE, OUR MOTTO IS SERVICE ABOVE SELF, A SERVICE ORGANIZATION.

WE ARE A GROUP OF VOLUNTEERS THAT COME TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR COMMUNITY IS BEING SERVICED THE WAY IT NEEDS TO BE SERVICED.

WE COME EVERY SINGLE, UM, WEEK TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING MANNED BY OUR FOLKS.

AND LOCAL COMMUNITY IS TRULY ONE OF OUR, UM, PRIMARY OBJECTIVES.

AND LOCAL BUSINESSES ARE THOSE FOLKS THAT WE PARTNER WITH ALL THE TIME.

TWO, IDENTIFY, UH, SCHOOLS IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT NEED HELP, OR ORGANIZATIONS THAT CATER TO, UH, FOLKS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES.

UM, AND WE CAN'T DO IT ALONE WITHOUT OUR BUSINESSES.

SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO BEING HERE NEXT MONTH WITH ANOTHER NOMINATION.

SO NICELY DONE.

IS SHE HERE FROM SHE'S HERE.

YEP, SHE'S RIGHT HERE.

SHE'S RIGHT OVER THERE.

SO, UM, OH, CONGRATULATIONS.

SO I'M REALLY, UH, VERY, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THRILLED, UM, TO PRESENT OUR FIRST BUSINESS OF BUSINESS OF THE MONTH, UM, AWARD, UM, TO ERICA BRODERICK OF THE WIG OUTLET.

THE WIG OUTLET IS, UM, IS LOCATED AT 1 94 SOUTH CENTRAL PARK AVENUE, UM, IN HARTSDALE.

AND, UM, IN CASE ANYBODY'S INTERESTED, THEIR PHONE NUMBER IS (914) 644-9447.

IT'S NOT A COMMERCIAL, BUT I JUST HAPPEN TO MENTION IT .

UM, UM, BUT I, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S SUCH A REALLY GREAT, UM, UH, ORGANIZATION BUSINESS BECAUSE, UM, A COUPLE, UM, MONTHS AGO IN THE SUMMER, I, I MET YOU AND, UM, UM, UH, YOU MENTIONED THAT, UM, YOU WERE ACCEPTING HERE AND DON'T, I DIDN'T DONATE ANYTHING .

UM, BUT, UH, BUT, BUT, BUT, UH, BUT, UM, I WAS REALLY SO MOVED AND TOUCHED, UH, THAT, UH, THE WIG OUTLET NOT ONLY IS A BUSINESS, BUT BASICALLY HAS GIVEN BACK AND BENEFITED CHILDREN WITH HAIR LOSS.

AND YOU'VE REALLY MADE A, A MAJOR, UH, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENCE TO CHILDREN EXPERIENCING MEDICALLY, UH, RELATED HAIR LOSS.

AND I JUST THINK THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SAY THANK YOU TO BUSINESSES LIKE YOURS, THAT NOT ONLY, UM, ARE MAKING MONEY, UH, FOR YOURSELVES, BUT ALSO, UH, DOING SOMETHING THAT IS CHANGING LIVES FOR THE BETTER.

SO, I'LL GIVE YOU THIS AND, AND IF YOU WANNA SAY ANY, ANYTHING ABOUT, UM, YOUR BUSINESS, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE FOR FREE.

HAVE GREAT, THANK YOU.

YOU WANNA SAY, I'LL BE REALLY QUICK BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS WANNA GET OUT HERE BEFORE TONIGHT.

THANK YOU EVERYONE.

HI, MY NAME IS ERICA.

THIS IS ISABEL.

SHE'S MY STORE MANAGER.

UM, REAL QUICK, WE'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR, I'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR 12 YEARS.

THE STORE HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 20 IN THE SAME LOCATION, WHICH I THINK IS REALLY IMPRESSIVE GIVEN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

UM, BUT YES.

AND MR. FINER, THANK YOU SO MUCH, UM, WITH YOUR SUPPORT, WE RAISED A LOT OF MONEY FOR CHILDREN WITH HAIR LOSS, AND WE, AGAIN, THANKS TO YOUR SUPPORT, RECEIVED SO MANY, UH, DONATIONS FOR CHILDREN WITH HAIR LOSS.

IT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST DONATIONS I WAS EVER ABLE TO SEND OUT IN THE 12 YEARS.

UM, AND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REALLY SUPPORT SO MANY CHILDREN.

WE DO NOT TAKE ANY MONEY FROM THE PARENTS FOR THE CHILDREN, AND CHILDREN CAN BE PROCURED WITH A WIG FROM THE AGES OF TWO TO 21 FOR FREE.

AND WE SUPPORT THEM WITH ALL OF THAT.

AND THEN, INCLUDING WE TAKE CARE OF ALL OF OUR FELLOW WOMEN, UM, IN THE AREA.

AND WE ARE NOW TAKING ON SOME GENTLEMEN WHO ARE NEEDING HELP, BUT WE JUST REALLY APPRECIATE THIS.

WE'RE SO HONORED.

UM, THAT, UH, WE STARTED THE HARTSDALE FARMERS MARKET, UM, LAST SATURDAY ON, ON EAST HARTSDALE AVENUE.

THANK YOU, .

AND YOUR STORE MANAGER HAS A, A GREAT REPUTATION.

SO, UH, UH, SHE CANNOT LEAVE.

SHE CAN'T LEAVE EVER.

NEVER.

YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO STAY NOW THAT YOU GOT THE WORD, YOU HAVE TO STAY FOR AT LEAST

[00:10:01]

ANOTHER 40 YEARS.

GOOD.

SO THIS IS REALLY GREAT.

I JUST WANTED TO ALSO MENTION,

[ SUPERVISOR & TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS Liaison Reports (Councilwoman Joy Haber, Councilwoman Ellen Hendrickx, Councilwoman Gina Jackson, Councilman Francis Sheehan) - to be held over to next Town Board Meeting GOOD NEWS... From 2010-2025 the Town earned the highest possible rating from Moody's (Aaa), most recently on 9/9/2025. Less than 1% of communities in the nation have this record of financial stability. From 2008-2024 the Town also earned the highest possible bond rating from Standard & Poors (AAA). To reduce costs, the Town did not seek a rating from Standard & Poors in 2025. Anyone interested in serving on a board or commission should send a resume to the Town Board via Lisa Maria Nero, Town Clerk, 177 Hillside Avenue, Greenburgh, NY 10607. TownClerk@GreenburghNY.gov]

AND IT WAS REALLY, YOU KNOW, GREAT, THERE WAS A STEADY FLOW OF, UM, OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, GOING THERE.

UH, THEY GOT GOOD, UH, REVIEWS AND THE HARTSDALE, UM, MARKET.

THEY'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER VENDOR, UM, SCOTTY'S, UH, THIS WEEK AND POSSIBLY THE PICKLE STORE, UH, WILL BE COMING, BUT WE JUST STARTED IT.

SO IT'S GOING TO GROW AND GET BETTER AND BETTER AND BETTER.

BUT, UM, THIS SATURDAY WE HAVE A FARMER'S MARKET IN HARTSDALE, BUT KOLBY, UH, JENKINS ALSO HAS, UH, THE TIMES OF THE FARM.

THE, THAT'S FROM EIGHT TO THREE.

UM, FREE PARK FOR THE, FOR THE HARTSDALE AND HARTSDALE OKAY.

PARK AND THE FREE PARKING ON PIPELINE ROAD.

BUT THERE'S ANOTHER FARMER'S MARKET.

UM, BEFORE YOU ANNOUNCE THAT, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS PIPELINE WRONG BY THE HARTSDALE TRAIN STATION, SO IT'S FREE PARKING.

SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS CLEAR, RIGHT? THERE'S ANOTHER, UH, MARKET THAT IS STARTING THIS SATURDAY, AND IT'S, UH, THE GREENBERG, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, MARKET THEY'RE HAVING, UM, UH, THE GRAND OPENING SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 13TH FROM 10:00 AM TO 2:00 PM AND THIS IS A REALLY EXCITING, UH, MARKET THAT'S REALLY UNIQUE BECAUSE THE FOOD IS FREE PRODUCE, UH, THE PRODUCE IS FREE.

UM, AND, UH, THE GOAL IS TO HELP FAMILIES THAT NEED PRODUCE, UM, BUT THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT.

UM, SO, UM, COLBY IS ALSO, UM, SEEKING DONATIONS OF BACKPACKS THAT THEY COULD GIVE TO, UH, TO CHILDREN.

UM, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE BACKPACK, NOTEBOOKS, CRAYONS, PENCILS, PENS, MARKERS, AND ASSORTED, UH, SCHOOL SUPPLIES.

AND, UH, THERE'LL BE MUSIC, FACE PAINTING GAMES AND PRIZES.

AND IT'S ELM STREET OFF OF, UH, 90 MANHATTAN AVENUE.

UM, AND THE CO-SPONSORS WERE SENATOR ANDREA STEWART COUSINS BERNSTEIN AND ASSOCIATES, BLACK FARMERS UNITED, UM, UH, UH, JEWEL WILLIAMS, UH, JOHNSON, THE COUNTY LEGISLATOR, TR INSURANCE AGENCY.

DEAR P DEAR, TO BE DIFFERENT IN WESTCHESTER'S, UH, SEASONS GIVES AND ASSEMBLYWOMAN, UM, MARY JANE CHIMPSKY.

SO IT'S A REALLY GREAT MARKET, AND I HOPE, UH, PEOPLE WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT AND, YOU KNOW, AND SPREAD AND SPREAD THE WORD BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, BOTH ARE ENHANCING THE QUALITY OF LIFE, UM, FOR RESIDENTS OF OUR, UM, OUR COMMUNITIES.

AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE, UM, YOU KNOW, BOTH.

SO THAT'S BASICALLY, UM, THE PRESENTATIONS

[ TOWN CLERK COMMENTS]

AND THE TOWN CLERK.

YOU HAVE SOME PRESENTATIONS? UH, YES.

UM, ARE ANY OF MY INTERNS HERE? I HAD INVITED THEM, BUT IT'S, ARE ANY OF MY INTERNS? NO.

THEY MADE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY.

SO WE JUST WANTED TO CELEBRATE THEM AND THE WORK THAT THEY DID, UM, THIS SUMMER.

AND, UM, JUST IN CASE EVERYONE WAS NOT FAMILIAR, UH, THE TOWN CLERK AND THE TOWN SUPERVISOR, UM, HAD DID THEIR IN SUMMER INTERNSHIP FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS, AND IT PROVIDES HANDS-ON EXPERIENCE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

THE INTERNS GAINED PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE AND WORKING IN VARIOUS TOWN DEPARTMENTS, AND, UM, I JUST WANTED TO AGAIN, FOCUS ON THEM.

WE HAD A WONDERFUL TIME WITH 50 STUDENTS THIS YEAR.

UM, AND, UH, WE JUST WANTED TO THANK THE FULLER CENTER, UH, THAT HELPED WITH THE, UH, EV UM, THE EXPERIENCE.

WE WENT OF COURSE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH T-D-Y-C-C, AND OF COURSE MANY OF THE DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT TOOK ON, UH, THE STUDENTS AND UNDER THEIR LEADERSHIP, ESPECIALLY OUR TOWN ATTORNEY, MR. JOE DANKO .

AND, UM, I ALSO WANTED TO, UH, I WAS ALSO ASKED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID A SPECIAL, JUST A READING, AND I DON'T COUNT IT ROBBERY BECAUSE IT WAS SO, SUCH AN AMAZING EVENT THAT WE JUST WENT TO THAT I JUST WANTED TO, UH, READ, UH, THE RESOLUTION IN CASE NO ONE, UH, GOT A CHANCE TO READ IT ONLINE RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AUTHORIZING THE HONORARY COMMEMORATIVE STREET NAMING OF INDIAN TRAIL AT THE INTERSECTION OF BL STOCKING LANE AS CLEO OLIVER WAY SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2025.

WHEREAS THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ADOPTED AN INTERIM COMMEMORATIVE STREET NAMING POLICY ON 20 SEPTEMBER 28TH, 2016, TO HONOR THE REMARKABLE CONTRIBUTIONS AND SERVICES RENDERED TO RESIDENTS OF UNINCORPORATED AREA OF TOWN OF GREENBURG BY THOSE WHO HAVE PASSED, ACKNOWLEDGING THEIR EFFORTS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE SIGNIFICANT ACHIEVEMENTS

[00:15:01]

AND WHEREAS THROUGHOUT IN HISTORY, THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF TOWN OF GREENBURG AND WESTCHESTER COUNTY IN GENERAL, HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE TO BE, HAVE DEDICATED INDIVIDUALS WHO GENEROUSLY SHARED THEIR TIME AND TALENTS TO UPLIFT AND ENRICH OUR COMMUNITY.

AND WHEREAS THROUGHOUT HER CAREER, CLEO OLIVER HAS HELD MANY RESPECTED ROLES, INCLUDING PRESIDENT OF THE HILLSIDE WIND OVER CIVIC ASSOCIATION, BRYCE, CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL OF GREENBURG CIVIC ASSOCIATION, MEMBER OF THE POLICE COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMISSION, AND DISTRICT LEADER AMONGST OTHERS.

AND WHEREAS CLEO OLIVER WAS A LONG TIME VERY VOCAL ADVOCATE FOR THE COMMUNITY AND AGAINST NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO INDIAN TRAIL FREQUENCY, FREQUENTLY APPEARING AT TOWN BOARD MEETINGS AND CONTACTING ELECTED OFFICIALS FORMALLY AND INFORMALLY TO SHARE HER VIEWS AND ENSURE HER VOICE WAS HEARD AND HER VOICE PRODUCED RESULTS SUCH AS THE, I JUST LEARNED THE STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION, WHICH WAS GREAT.

UH, WHEREAS CONTRIBUTIONS SUCH AS THOSE OF CLEO OLIVER SHOULD BE PROPERLY RECOGNIZED AND ACCLAIMED BY THE TOWN OF GREENBURG NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG HEREBY AUTHORIZES THE HONORARY NAMING OF INDIAN TRAIL AT THE INTERSECTION OF LEATHER SOCKING LANE AS CLEO OLIVER WAY AND SHALL SCHEDULE AT THE INSTALLATION OF THE UNVEILING, WHICH HAPPENED THIS EVENING, SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2025 AT 6:30 PM THANK YOU.

UH, WE HAVE SOME PUBLIC HEARINGS.

UM, NEXT,

[ To consider a Local Law which would establish Accessory Dwelling Units in specified Zoning Districts, with related updates to Sections 250-19, 285-5, 285-10, 285-36, 285-38, 285-39 and 285-56 of the Code of the Town of Greenburgh [TB 23-09].]

UH, THE FIRST HEARING IS, UH, TO CONSIDER A LOCAL LAW, WHICH WOULD ESTABLISH ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND SPECIFIED ZONING DISTRICTS WITH RELATED, UM, UPDATES TO SECTION 2 59 50 19, 2 85 DASH FIVE TWO EIGHTY FIVE, TEN TWO EIGHTY FIVE, THIRTY SIX, TWO EIGHTY FIVE, THIRTY EIGHT, TWO EIGHTY FIVE THIRTY NINE, AND 2 85, UH, 56 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.

YOU MEAN YOU OPEN, WE OPEN THE, OPEN A HEARING SECOND.

SUPERVISOR FEER AND TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THE RECORD OF GARY T. KANE, COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION.

THIS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING IS RELATED TO A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, WHICH SEEKS TO REGULATE AND PERMIT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER, IS YOUR MIC ON BECAUSE YOU SOUND VERY LOW.

YEAH, THAT'S ON.

I'LL SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT.

PLEASE, PLEASE.

SURE.

THIS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING IS RELATED TO A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, WHICH SEEKS TO REGULATE AND PERMIT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS OR ADUS IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.

THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING OCCURRED ON JUNE 25TH, 2025, WHICH WAS PROCEEDED BY A LETTER SENT TO ALL RESIDENTS IN THE ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICTS.

AND THAT ACTUALLY LED TO A GOOD TURNOUT.

THE PRESENT VERSION OF THE LOCAL LAW POSTED IN SUPPORT OF TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING HAS TWO SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES FROM THE PRIOR VERSION.

THE FIRST IS THE SUNSET CLAUSE.

THAT ASPECT OF THE LAW NOW HAS A MUCH MORE DETAIL, WHICH CLARIFIES THE PROCESS FOR APPLICATIONS FILED WITHIN THE ONE YEAR PERIOD FOR SUBMISSION ACCEPTANCE, MAKING IT CLEAR THAT THOSE APPLICATIONS WILL CONTINUE TO BE PROCESSED WITH THE CONSERVATIVE PERIOD OF TIME ALLOWED TO COMMENCE AND COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION.

THE SECOND UPDATE IS THAT THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY IS NO LONGER PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS A DU LOCAL LAW IN REFERENCES TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE ONLY APPROVAL PROCESS FOR ANY TYPE OF A DU HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE LOCAL LAW.

THESE TYPES OF CONSIDERATIONS ARE IMPORTANT, BUT THEY'LL BE REVISITED MORE BROADLY AS THE TOWN BOARD DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE AS PART OF THE FORTHCOMING UPDATES TO CHAPTER 2 85, WHICH IS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.

ASIDE FROM THAT, THE LOCAL LAW CONTINUES TO HAVE NUMEROUS CRITERIA, ALL DESIGNED TO ASSURE THAT APPROVED PROJECTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND BROADEN THE HOUSING OPTIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO RESIDENTS IN THE TOWN.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE TOWN BOARD MAY HAVE, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM RESIDENTS.

WHO'S FIRST? MR. WENDELL ORR.

HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE FOR THIS? THREE IN-HOUSE, ONE ONLINE.

AND BEFORE YOU BEGIN, I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE, EACH SPEAKER HAS FIVE MINUTES.

PLEASE SAY YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU LIVE AND THAT, THAT WILL START THE CLOCK.

WE HAVE TIMERS, UH, CLOCKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROOM.

PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL AND STOP, UH, WHEN THE BUZZER GOES OFF SO THAT EVERYBODY MAY HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK.

HAS BEEN, THAT HAS REQUIRED A LOT OF CLARIFICATION, UH, ALONG THE WAY I MISUNDERSTOOD SOMETHING.

FOUR SPEAKERS IN HOUSE.

UH, WENDELL OR, AND I LIVE IN PARKWAY, HOMES ON COLA ROAD.

UM, IT HAS BEEN A, UH, A PROCESS, UH, THAT

[00:20:01]

I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE CHANGE FOR SQUARE FOOTAGE INCLUDED AN EXTERIOR, UH, A DU.

UM, THE CLARIFICATION FOR THAT CAME THROUGH CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HAD, UM, SUBSEQUENTLY PRIOR TO OUR LAST MEETING THAT WAS, UH, THAT WAS CANCELED UNTIL NOW.

SO THAT CLARIFICATION HELPED ME OUT QUITE A BIT.

HAVING THE TOWN REGS ALSO, I ALMOST HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS IN A SENSE, NOT ALMOST, BUT I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS IN A SENSE THAT AN APPLICATION, UM, IN ADVANCE OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE RESTRICTIONS ARE GOING TO BE AND TRYING TO FIT THAT INTO WHAT YOU ARE DOING MIGHT HAVE ASSISTED THE PROCESS OR MIGHT ASSIST THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE PROCESS IN THE, UH, SUNSET APPLICATION.

WHEREAS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO THINKS THEY MAY WANT TO DO THIS CAN APPLY AND GET AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE PRIOR TO GOING THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS AND FINDING THAT IN THAT APPLICATION PROCESS, THEY MISSED SOMETHING OR THEY MISUNDERSTOOD SOMETHING.

UM, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, AS I'M NOW AWARE OF, UH, THAT THIS REGULATION IS GOING TO IMPACT THE ZONING BOARD BEING, UH, ONE OF THEM.

UM, AND ALSO BEING ABLE TO POTENTIALLY GET, UH, SOME FORM OF A, UH, A RESTRICTION CHANGE TO WHAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE IN FULL CAPACITY OF WHAT IS DETAILED HERE IN THE, UH, IN THE TOWN FOR ITS REGULATIONS.

SO HAVING MORE, OR HAVING THINGS THAT ARE RESTRICTED, UM, SOMETIMES HINDERS THE ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO EVEN CONCEIVE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH.

UH, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, HAVING IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS THE ABILITY TO SAY, THIS IS WHAT I'M THINKING ABOUT DOING, AND WHO WOULD I SIT DOWN AND TALK TO? AND FINDING OUT THAT YOU SHOULD MAYBE GO TO THE ZONING BOARD 'CAUSE YOU DON'T MEET THIS REQUIREMENT.

AND THEN GOING TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT SAYING, HEY, EVERYTHING ELSE THAT YOU HAVE HERE LOOKS PRETTY GOOD, BUT YOU MIGHT WANT TO QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT YOUR, YOUR GARAGE SETBACKS ARE RIGHT.

OR THOSE KIND OF THINGS PRIOR TO BEING, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO APPLY AND THEN FINDING OUT, OH, I DON'T MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.

SO THAT, UH, HAVING LESS RESTRICTIONS AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, OPEN COMMUNICATION ABOUT WHAT IT IS THAT SOMEONE IS TRYING TO DO WITHIN THE TOWN AND THEN GETTING CLARIFICATION ON WHAT MIGHT BE RESTRICTED OR MIGHT NOT BE RESTRICTED COULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

UH, GARRETT, WE WOULD NORMALLY DO THE, UH, MEETINGS WITH INDIVIDUALS ALSO, RIGHT? YES.

UH, ANY APPLICANT THAT HAS INTEREST, IF THE A DU LAW'S APPROVED AND SEEKS TO DEVELOP AN A DU SHOULD FEEL WELCOME TO COME TO THE TOWNS DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONSERVATION AND WE WOULD ASSIST THEM IN THE PROCESS.

VERY, I SPOKE ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY, WHICH WAS VERY AMBI, UH, UH, AMBIGUOUS, AND IT LEND ITSELF TO ALL SORTS OF INTERPRETATION OF THE DEFINITION OF A FAMILY.

NEXT WE HAVE WALTER SIMON.

WALTER WALTER, UH, GOOD EVENING SUPERVISOR, FINER MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD.

HER NAME IS WALTER SIMON.

UM, JUST IN TERMS OF FACILITATING THE SMOOTH OPERATION OF HOW WE DO THINGS, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

UH, UH, THIS LAW WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR MANY, MANY MONTHS, IT WOULD HELPFUL THAT WHAT THAT MORE TIME IS GIVEN TO RESIDENTS TO READ THE LAW BEFORE IT'S PUT ON THE AGENDA, UH, SO WE COULD LOOK AT IT AND SEE WHAT CHANGES WERE DONE AND BE ABLE TO OPINE ACCORDINGLY.

WITH THAT SAID, I WAS ABLE TO LOOK AT SOME THINGS THAT I THINK ARE, ARE IMPROVEMENT AND OTHER THINGS I STILL HAVE QUESTION ABOUT.

I SEE THAT WE LIMITED THE MAXIMUM, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 800 FEET, WHICH I THINK IS GOOD BECAUSE, UH, ONE, IF THEY MET THE, THE APPROPRIATE SETBACKS COULD BUILD UNDER THE PREVIOUS A SU A SIZEABLE SECOND DWELLING, WHICH IS DE BASICALLY TWO HOUSES ON THE SAME PROPERTY LINE.

SO I'M GLAD THAT'S DONE.

I'M ALSO

[00:25:01]

I SEE.

THAT WAS TAKEN OUT AND THAT WAS ALSO A GOOD STEP THAT, UH, UH, WE ARE NOT IN THE PROCESS OF DEFINING IN THIS CODE WHAT CONSTITUTE A FAMILY.

SO THAT WAS GOOD.

I THINK THE REMARKS OF, UH, UH, TERRITORY TORY, UH, THE LETTER THAT SHE SENT WAS EXCELLENT.

AND SHE, UH, MADE AN EXCELLENT, UH, DISCUSSION OF THE, THE, THE DRAWBACKS OF THE PREVIOUS, UM, LAW, WHICH I THINK WAS GOOD.

UH, THE ONE THING THAT STILL I HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH IS THE, THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

I KNOW THAT JO JOY HABER RECOMMENDED MAYBE WE SHOULD COMPROMISE AT 7,500 FEET.

WHILE I APPRECIATE A COMPROMISE, A COMPROMISE DOES NOT ALL COMPROMISES DO NOT, IS NOT IN THE BENEFIT OF THE OVERALL ISSUE.

WE KNOW THAT FROM THE, FROM THE WISDOM OF KING SOLOMON, YOU DON'T CUT THE BABY IN HALF AS A COMPROMISE.

SO I THINK, WHEREAS I APPRECIATE THAT COMPROMISE SUGGESTION, IT DOES NOT TALK ABOUT WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF THAT COMPROMISE, WHO WILL BE INCLUDED AND WHO WILL BE EXCLUDED.

AND I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THAT ROUTE, THEN WE SHOULD HAVE AN ANALYSIS.

OKAY, HOW MANY HOUSES WOULD, WOULD BE AFFECTED AND HOW SO, SO I THINK THAT WOULD NEED TO BE DONE FOR IF WE WERE TO GO DOWN THAT ROUTE.

THAT BRINGS ME BACK TO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND HOW THAT GOT INTO THE PROPOSAL TO BEGIN WITH.

BECAUSE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE A VL WAS 5,000 SQUARE FEET, AND IT WAS THE UNDERSTANDING OF MOST, THE MAJORITY OF THE TOWN BOARD THAT THAT WAS THEIR DECISION.

HOWEVER, THAT DECISION ADJUSTMENT WAS MADE WITHOUT COMING BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD.

AND AFTER A MEETING WITH THE, UH, UM, THE LAND USE COMMITTEE AND, AND OTHERS, THAT ADJUSTMENT WAS MADE WITHOUT COMING BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD FOR APPROVAL.

SO IF THAT IS THE WILL OF THE TOWN BOARD, THEN IT SHOULD HAVE COME BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD.

AND AT THAT POINT, THE TOWN BOARD OPINES WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE IN THERE.

SO THE WHOLE GENESIS OF HOW THIS 10,000, UH, UH, MINIMUM GOT IN THERE IS WRONG.

IT SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN THERE TO BEGIN WITH.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UM, THANK YOU.

AND HONOR KIND OF THE MAJORITY VOICE THAT I'VE BEEN HEARING AND REMOVE THE RESTRICTIONS, WHICH TO ME AND SOME OTHERS WHO HAVE SPOKEN, UM, KIND OF REPRESENTED OVER A ZEALOUS ATTEMPT MAYBE TO CONTROL JUST TO SAY, WHO CAN AND CANNOT APPLY FOR ADU.

NEXT WE HAVE LANE COBB.

HI.

GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.

GOOD EVENING TO THE TOWN BOARD SUPERVISOR FINER, UH, LANE COBB LIVE IN TARRYTOWN.

UM, AND I AM THE CO-CHAIR OF THE GREENBERG HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

I DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO THEIR PROPOSED LAW.

AND I, I WISH I HAD ACTUALLY, UM, MY THOUGHT AFTER THE LAST HEARING WAS THAT THE BOARD WOULD'VE DISCUSSED SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, MADE BY RESIDENTS, UM, IN SOME OF THE PREVIOUS HEARINGS.

AND THAT'S WHAT I KIND OF LEFT LA THE LAST HEARING, THINKING, YES, THE BOARD'S GONNA GO AND THEY'RE GONNA TAKE SOME OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY'RE HEARING, AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA KIND OF WEAVE THEM IN AND WE'RE GONNA GET SA REVISION THAT, UM, REALLY SPEAKS TO SOME OF THE MEAT OF THIS MATTER.

AND IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT REALLY DID.

I KNOW, AND I COMMEND THE BOARD FOR MAKING THE CHANGES THAT YOU MADE.

IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

UM, MY HOPE IS THAT AFTER THIS EVENING'S HEARING, UH, THE BOARD WILL TAKE THE INPUT OF THE CITIZENRY TO HEART

[00:30:01]

AND I KNOW THAT WE HAVE OUR REASONS FOR DOING THAT.

UM, UH, I'M SURE THAT IT'S NOT THE CASE THAT YOU WANT TO RESTRICT PEOPLE, RIGHT? IT JUST LOOKS, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT AND IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S NOT A GOOD LOOK, BUT IT'S REAL.

AND I HAVE PREVIOUSLY SAID THIS, AS A MINISTER AND A HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATE, MY ETHICAL LEANING IS TOWARDS, UH, INCLUSIVITY AND CALLING PEOPLE IN AND NOT CALLING PEOPLE OUT.

HOUSING IS HUMAN RIGHT.

I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT IT THAT WAY.

AND SOMETHING LIKE THIS NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT FROM ALL ANGLES, AS MANY POSSIBLE ANGLES AS POSSIBLE, UM, BEFORE IT'S, UM, BEFORE IT'S, IT'S PASSED.

UM, THE OPPORUNITY, THE OPPORTUNITY TO AT LEAST APPLY FOR CREATING, UM, ALTERNATIVE HOUSING OPTIONS HAS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO EVERYBODY.

UM, GREENBERG ALREADY HAS SUFFICIENT ZONING LAWS FOR THE PURPOSES OF PREVENTING OVER BUILDING AND ADDRESSING ISSUES LIKE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING.

AND THOSE ARE VERY REAL ISSUES FOR SURE.

UM, AS WELL AS, UM, CHANGING THE WAY A NEIGHBORHOOD, THE, THE TYPES OF DWELLINGS IN A PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD.

GREENBERG ALREADY HAS THESE RESTRICTIONS, SO I'M WONDERING, UM, WHAT WOULD BE THE HARM IN JUST KIND OF REMOVING THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE A DU LAW, AT LEAST FOR THE FIRST YEAR? BECAUSE AS WE SAID, AFTER THE FIRST YEAR, IT CAN, THE BOARD CAN REVISIT AND MAKE CHANGES AS, UH, IT SEES FIT.

UM, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT PASSING THE LAW THE WAY IT IS WITH THESE RESTRICTIONS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO, UH, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL DEMAND IS.

YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL NEED IS BECAUSE THERE ARE GONNA BE PEOPLE WHO ARE AUTOMATICALLY RESTRICTED FROM APPLYING.

UM, WHAT IF WE TOOK THE RESTRICTIONS OFF AND JUST LET PEOPLE APPLY AND THEN FIND OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY CAN, WHETHER THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THIS OR NOT.

EVERYBODY'S GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SAME REGULATIONS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE.

FOR SURE.

UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A TIME, WE ALL KNOW THIS, RIGHT? HOUSING IS SCARCE, AFFORDABILITY ISSUES, LOOM REALLY LARGE, UH, WITH RESIDENTS.

I JUST URGE THE BOARD TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF ACCESSIBILITY.

UM, WHILE ADUS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, FOR SURE, ADUS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A MEANS TO MANAGING BOTH THE AVAILABILITY ISSUES AND THE SKYROCKETING HOUSING COSTS.

AND SO, UM, THEY'RE ONE OF THE WAYS THAT MUNICIPALITIES CAN HELP ADDRESS BOTH OF THOSE ISSUES.

AND UNLESS YOU DON'T TRUST THE ZONING LAWS THAT ALREADY EXIST, AND I KNOW YOU DO IT, IT MAKES NO SENSE TO PASS THIS LAW, UM, THAT WOULD DISALLOW THE VERY PEOPLE WHO MAY WANT TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR THEIR LOVED ONES FROM EVEN APPLYING FOR IT.

UM, I JUST FEAR YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET A FAIR ASSESSMENT OF THE VALUE OF THE A DU, UM, IF YOU PASS THIS LAW IN ITS CURRENT FORM.

AND I THINK ALSO YOU'LL BE DISENFRANCHISING MANY GREENBERG RESIDENTS WHO REALLY MAY REALLY NEED TO CREATE THIS ALTERNATIVE HOUSING, UM, OR AT LEAST WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO CONSIDER DOING IT.

UM, IT'S JUST KIND OF IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THIS, I THINK, UM, FROM THE BIG PICTURE WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE WEEDS.

UM, BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT A YEAR AND THERE ARE SUFFICIENT SAFEGUARDS TO KEEP IT FROM RUNNING AMUCK.

UH, AND THAT'S KIND OF MY OPINION.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LISTENING AND I APPRECIATE YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO MANAGE THIS ISSUE BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT.

IF WE, IF WE DIDN'T, I JUST HAD A QUESTION, IF WE DID BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WE COULD ALSO POSSIBLY PUT RESTRICTIONS SAYING YOU CAN ONLY HAVE LIKE ONE A DU ON A STREET OR SOMETHING.

SO THIS WAY WE COULD EVALUATE THEN ON THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE PARKING SITUATIONS, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES THAT SOME CRITICS ARE CON, YOU KNOW, ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

IT'S THE PERSON ONLINE IS NEXT.

MY NAME IS CAROL ALLEN.

I LIVE IN HARTSDALE.

AND I'D LIKE TO START BY SAYING, FORGIVE ME IF ANY OF MY COMMENTS ARE OFF BASE BECAUSE OF CHANGES THAT YOU MADE, BUT I PLEASE SPEAK INTO PHONE.

YOU JUST WON'T HEAR.

HEAR BEFORE I ENTERED THE ROOM.

I WAS SAYING, FORGIVE ME IN ADVANCE IF ANY OF MY COMMENTS ARE A LITTLE BIT OFF BASE BECAUSE OF CHANGES THAT WERE MENTIONED BY MR. DUQUE THAT I DID NOT

[00:35:01]

THE MATTER OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PASSAGE OF LEGISLATION TO ALLOW FOR THE BUILDING OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS HAS BEEN BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD SINCE DECEMBER OF 2024.

THIS PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN PROLONGED DUE TO THE LARGE NUMBER OF COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.

THESE COMMENTS HAVE ADDRESSED, AMONG OTHER THINGS THE PROPOSED LOT SIZE RESTRICTIONS AND ITS DISCRIMINATORY EFFECT ON THE LESS AFFLUENT MEMBERS OF TOWN WHO LIVE ON SMALLER LOTS, THE EFFECT OF AN A DU ON MARKET VALUE AND TAXATION, THE DEFINITION OF WHO CONSTITUTES A FAMILY, THE REQUIREMENTS OF RECREATION FEES AND OTHER THINGS.

SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE HAVE BEEN PROPOSED.

ENSURE THAT THE LAW IS WRITTEN AS A ZONING LAW, ELIMINATING LOT SIZE RESTRICTIONS SINCE COVERAGE OF ADDITIONAL GROUND SURFACE IS ADDRESSED BY ZONING LAWS AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENTS.

ELIMINATE LOT SIZE RESTRICTIONS ON AN A DU THAT DOES NOT EXPAND THE FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY.

ALLOW APPROVALS TO BE ISSUED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IF EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE HOUSE ARE NOT REQUIRED AND PLACE PARAMETERS ON PARKING SPACES.

HAS THE BOARD COLLECTIVELY GIVEN ANY CONSIDERATION TO THESE COMMENTS, IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO OBTAIN COMMUNITY INPUT AND TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER REVISIONS TO THE PROPOSED LAW BASED UPON THAT INPUT.

WHY HAS THE ALTERNATIVE VIABLE LIVING COMMITTEE, WHICH EXTENSIVELY STUDIED THE A DU MATTER AND DRAFTED THE ORIGINAL A DU LAW, NOT BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A FORMAL PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD AS OPPOSED TO BEING LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES AS INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS AT HEARINGS OR PUBLIC COMMENTS? THIS IS NOT THE USUAL PROCEDURE THAT WHEN A RECOMMENDATION FROM A TOWN COMMITTEE IS UNDER CONSIDERATION THAT WE DO THAT THEIR EXPERTISE AS THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS SHOULD CERTAINLY HAVE BEEN UTILIZED WHEN CONSIDERING CHANGES TO THE LAW.

DISCUSSION REGARDING THIS PROPOSED LAW IS NOT OF A CONFIDENTIAL NATURE AND SHOULD BE HELD IN OPEN SESSIONS.

THE PUBLIC DOES NOT SEE THAT THE BOARD HAS CONSIDERED AND UTILIZED ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT IS AVAILABLE OR HAS BEEN PUBLICLY PRESENTED TO CRAFT A SOUND BILL THAT WILL SERVE ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF GREENBURG.

I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE PUBLIC THAT YOU HAVE DONE SO.

NEXT, WE NOW HAVE ONLINE HUGH SCHWARTZ, AND THEN AFTER HUGH SCHWARTZ.

JANET LYNN.

I DON'T SEE JANET LYNN MINE.

SHE'S NOT ONLINE.

THEY MIGHT BE TOGETHER.

YOU SCHWARTZ.

IS HE HE'S, HE DOESN'T, IF YOU PUT ON YOUR CAMERA, YOU'LL BE ON CAMERA.

THE PEOPLE ON THE SMALLER LOCKS.

YES, YES.

ALL RIGHT.

SORRY, I'M NOT THERE IN PERSON, BUT, UH, I'M NOT KIND OF UNDER THE WEATHER.

SO I JUST WANTED TO FIRST START WITH THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.

AS CAROL JUST SAID, THE A VL WAS AN OFFICIAL, IS AN OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN, YET IT WAS NEVER GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT, UH, ITS RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD AND, AND EITHER ON THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WORK SESSION, WHICH IS, UH, OUTSIDE OF THE NORMAL PROCEDURE.

AND THE PROPOSAL THAT EL WROTE NEVER GOT TO THE TOWN BOARD.

'CAUSE MYSTERIOUSLY THINGS LIKE THE LOCK SIZE RESTRICTION ENDED UP IN THERE BEFORE IT GOT TO THE TOWN BOARD.

I KNOW THIS FOR A FACT BECAUSE I TALKED TO MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD WHO DIDN'T KNOW THAT, THAT IT WAS DIFFERENT.

UM, OUT GO BACK TO WHAT THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATIVE INTENT MADE YOU.

AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I AND TERRITORY WERE OPPONENTS OF THE A BU WHEN WE STARTED THE PROCESS.

AND IT WAS THROUGH LEARNING THAT WE BECAME SUPPORTERS OF, OF THE A DU, BOTH OF US.

THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT, THE PRIMARY LEGISLATIVE INTENT WAS TO HELP PEOPLE WHO WERE HOUSE POOR, UH, TO RAISE SOME OF THEIR COSTS.

AND OH, BY THE WAY, HOPEFULLY, UH, ALSO OFFER SOME REASONABLY, UH, PRICED LIVING SPACE BECAUSE OF THE SIZE AND THE LOCATION, UH, TO PEOPLE.

BUT THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE WAS TO HELP THE HOMEOWNER.

THAT WAS THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE.

UM, THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

THAT IS WHY YOU DON'T WANT THE LOCK SIZE RESTRICTIONS, BECAUSE THE, THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT THE MOST ARE

[00:40:01]

FOR THE MOST PART.

IT WASN'T, THE OBJECTIVE WAS NOT TO PUT NANNIES IN, IN, IN PEOPLE'S HOUSES.

IT WASN'T TO PUT, YOU KNOW, ADULT CHILDREN IN PEOPLE'S HOUSES.

THAT'S NICE.

IF IT HAPPENS.

IT WAS TO DEFRAY THE HOMEOWNER'S COST.

WELL, I APPRECIATE MS. HABER'S ATTEMPT TO COMPROMISE.

AS WALTER SIMON SAID, NO COMPROMISE WOULD WORK BECAUSE YOU DON'T, YOU HAVEN'T EVEN QUANTIFIED HOW MANY HOUSES IN GREENBURG ARE UNDER 7,500 SQUARE FEET, UH, PROPERTIES.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT ZONES, I'M TALKING ABOUT PROPERTIES.

THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT ARE, AND, UH, WITHOUT THAT QUANTIFICATION, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW, IF YOU CAN SEE THE IMPACT, THERE'S ALSO THIS IDEA, WELL, WE'RE GONNA TEST IT AND WE'LL LOOK AT A YEAR.

WELL, IF YOU DON'T TEST IT, HOW ARE YOU GONNA KNOW? SO IF YOU RESTRICTED TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET AND YOU'RE NOT GONNA KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT OF 5,000 IS, YOU'RE LIMIT BEING THE NUMBER OF A ANYWAY, UH, WITH A CAP.

UM, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THEY WORK ON LOCK SIZE IS AT 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND ABOVE.

UM, THE OTHER THING ABOUT THIS, IT WAS A COMMENT FOR MR. SHEEN SAID, WELL, YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY, UH, SOMETHING THAT YOU'VE GIVEN THEM.

WELL, THIS LAW BY DEFINITION COULD DO THAT BECAUSE SUNSET LEGISLATION.

SO LET'S LEARN ABOUT IT DURING THE SUNSET PERIOD.

FURTHER, THERE'S NO NEED FOR THESE MINIMUMS. WE SPENT SIX MONTHS ON THE A VL LOOKING AT THE LOT SIZES AND MAKING SURE THERE WERE ENOUGH RESTRICTIONS IN IT TO ENSURE THAT IT WOULD BE IN HARMONY, NOT ONLY WITH THE COMMU SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, BUT WITH THE EXISTING HOUSE.

IT HAS TO BE IN CONSTANTLY THE EXISTING HOUSE.

SO, UM, AGAIN, THERE'S NO NEED FOR THIS.

MR. SHEHAN BROUGHT UP, UH, UH, FRONT YARD, UH, PARKING.

UM, THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.

GI GIVEN THE ZONING LAWS, AND IT SPECIFICALLY WAS MENTIONED IN OUR A DL AS TO WHAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD NOT BE IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THAT WOULDN'T, THAT IT WAS ONE OF ONE OF OUR PARAMETERS.

UM, I URGE YOU TO TAKE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES OUT.

I'M GLAD YOU TOOK THE FAMILY OUT.

YOUR DEFINITION OF FAMILY SAYING THAT YOU COULDN'T CHANGE A WORD.

THAT WAS MR. SHEEN'S QUOTE.

AND MR. DANKO WHO, UH, TALKED ABOUT WHAT WASN'T EVEN SURE IF THIS HAD GONE, BEEN AFFIRMED BY, UH, THE APPEALS COURT.

UM, IS THAT WHATEVER DEPARTMENT THAT WAS COURT, NOT COURT APPEALS, THE APPEAL COURT AND FOURTH DEPARTMENT.

AND IT WAS, UM, DIDN'T LOOK 30 SECONDS, FIVE SECONDS.

I, I WILL 30 TURN IT OVER TO DISCUSS THIS WITH, UH, TO JANET.

OR AN A DU, DESPITE THE FACT THAT DECISION WAS LOWERED COURT DECISION AND AS HE MENTIONED, WAS FROM A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT THAN THE ONE THAT COVERED WAS WESTCHESTER.

I HAVE 20 SECONDS LEFT.

IT SAID NO, I SAID 30 SECONDS.

THAT'S OKAY.

NOW IT'S 15.

UM, ANYWAY, THERE WERE SEVERAL DEFINITIONS OF FAMILY.

THIS ONE WAS VERY SPECIFIC AND ACTUALLY FLEW OPPOSITE OF WHAT AN A DUR IS SUPPOSED TO DO BY DEFINITION IN TWO SEPARATE UNITS.

AND YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS A FAMILY UNIT THAT, THAT EATS TOGETHER AND DOES ANYTHING.

THEN WHY BUILD AN A DU? IT MADE NO SENSE.

SO I'M GLAD YOU TOOK IT OUT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.

POINT ON THE WAY YOU DID IT.

THANK YOU MR. DANKO.

AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JAN.

LEMME SEE.

NEXT ON GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS JANET LYNN.

I WANNA ADDRESS THE DISCUSSION IN A PRIOR TOWN BOARD MEETING OF THE PROPOSED DEFINITION OF FAMILY THAT WAS ADDED TO THE DRAFT HQR.

I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT THERE ANYMORE, BUT IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME WHETHER YOU DO ARE PROPOSING TO ADD A DIFFERENT DEFINITION OF FAMILY.

THE DEFINITION, UH, WAS SIGNIFICANT AND WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE FAMILY, UM, UNDER THE A DU LAW WOULD BE GIVEN AN EXPEDITED APPROVAL ON AVAILABLE TO OTHER ADUS.

IN A LETTER TO THE TOWN BOARD AND TOWN COUNCIL, I POINTED OUT THE ABSURDITY OF THE PROPOSED DEFINITION AND PROPOSED LEGAL EFFECT OF THE CASE CITED AS THE SOURCE OF THE DEFINITION AND THE DEFICIENT LEGAL CITATION OF THAT CASE, RATHER THAN ACKNOWLEDGE MY LETTER AND WHAT WAS IT BEST MISTAKES BY THE BOARD AND COUNCIL.

THE BOARD HAS SIMPLY SAID THEY WERE RETHINKING THE DEFINITION.

I WON'T READ MY ENTIRE LETTER.

I WILL JUST SUMMARIZE SOME OF THE KEY POINTS.

AT THE BOARD MEETING.

MR. DANKO SAID THE DEFINITION DERIVED FROM CASE LAW, THAT MIGHT EVEN BE PRESIDENTIAL AS TO THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY

[00:45:01]

AND ACCORDING TO MR. D**O, THAT THE DECISION HAD NOT BEEN REVIEWED ON APPEAL, MR. SHEEN WENT ONE STEP FURTHER.

UM, MR. SHEEN, I'LL, I'LL POINT OUT AS NOT AN ATTORNEY, UM, SAID THAT PERHAPS THE DECISION WAS SO PRESIDENTIAL, NOT EVEN ONE WORD OF THE DEFINITION COULD BE CHANGED EXCEPT THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY AT ISSUE IN THE CASE.

AND, UM, COPIED INTO THE A DU LAW WAS A DEFINITION OF FAMILY FOR A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PURPOSE, WHETHER IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE UNDER THE ZONING LAW.

AND IN THAT CASE, THE ISSUE WAS TO MAKE SURE YOU DIDN'T HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF COLLEGE STUDENTS LIVING IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, SOMETHING THAT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND BE COMPLETELY OPPOSITE TO WHAT WAS RELEVANT TO A DU LAW.

IN FACT, GREENBURG ALREADY HAS A DEFINITION OF FAMILY FOR THE SAME PURPOSE IN ITS ZONING LAW.

AND ITS DEFINITION IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE IN THAT CASE.

UM, AND THE DECISION WAS THAT THE DEFINITION IN THAT CASE IN HENRIETTA, WHICH IS NEIL ROCHESTER, WAS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

SO THEREFORE IT WAS NOT EVEN PRESIDENTIAL AS TO GREENBERG ZONING LAW.

IF IT WAS ACCORDING TO MR. SHEEN, GREENBERG WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE ITS LAW TO BE IDENTICAL TO THE ONE IN THE CASE.

AND TO ADD TO THE MISTAKES THAT WERE BEING MADE, THE DECISION WAS AFFIRMED, UM, BY THE FOURTH DEPARTMENT.

SOMETHING THAT MR. DANKO SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WHEN CITING THE CASE.

AS FOR ITS LACK OF RELEVANCE, UM, TO A DEFINITION UNDER THE A DUR THAT WAS OBVIOUS ON THE FACE OF THE DEFINITION, THE FACTORS RELATING TO WHAT CONSTITUTES A FAMILY UNDER THAT DEFINITION WERE, WERE EXACTLY OPPOSITE TO THE OBJECTIVE OF THE A DUR.

THAT THE OBJECTIVE THERE WAS TO HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY, A DU WAS TO HAVE TWO SEPARATE FAMILIES.

AND SO IN THAT LOT, THEY'D BE SHARING FACILITIES AND ALSO WHETHER THEY HAD LIVED TOGETHER FOR A YEAR BEFORE, WHICH IS BIZARRE WHEN YOU CONSIDER WHETHER WHETHER THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR AN A DU, THE BOTTOM LINE, THE TOWN BOARD AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY SHOULD BE EMBARRASSED TO HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THIS DEFINITION BE PART OF THE A D LAW.

ONE MINUTE.

IT WAS A REQUIRED DEFINITION, BETTER LEGAL CITATION ANALYSIS AND CONSIDERATION RELATIVE TO THE OBJECTIVE.

A DD LAW WAS OBVIOUSLY REQUIRED.

PERHAPS THE ULTIMATE CONCLUSION, DON'T TRY TO HAVE A SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR FAMILY FOR ADUS OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

NOW, THANK YOU.

THERE ARE NO OTHER, UH, ONLINE OR IN PERSON.

I, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF COMMENT.

I WAS MISQUOTED IN THAT REFERENCE MEMO AND I WAS MISQUOTED AGAIN TONIGHT.

UH, PEOPLE SHOULD FEEL FREE TO GO LOOK BACK AT THE PRIOR TRANSCRIPT AND SEE THAT THOSE STATEMENTS THAT WERE JUST MADE IS NOT ACCURATE.

AND I'M NOT GOING TO WEIGH IN ON ANY FURTHER BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA DRIVE UP THESE TRANSCRIPT COSTS, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY WAS ALREADY REMOVED.

SO, ARE WE GONNA CLOSE THE HEARING? I I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ALSO.

UH, COBB THAT GET TO TEST SOMETHING, YOU'VE GOTTA GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE ROOM.

OR THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS MAY AS WELL.

UM, SO I WANNA ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT, UH, MR. SIMON AND MR. SCHWARTZ SAID, WHICH IS THAT WE NEVER DID AN ANALYSIS OF HOW MANY HOMES WOULD BE AFFECTED IF WE, UH, COMPROMISED, UH, AT 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

AND THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT TRUE.

UH, OUR COMMISSIONER DID PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.

AND ACTUALLY, UM, THERE ARE 38% OF THE ONE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE, UH, SIZE BETWEEN 5,000 AND 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

SO THAT'S SIGNIFICANT IN MY VIEW, SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH FOR A COMPROMISE.

I DON'T THINK I'M CUTTING ANYTHING IN HALF.

UH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A, A GOOD PLACE AT LEAST TO START.

UM, BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM SO MANY RESIDENTS THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE NOT REALLY, WE'RE LISTENING, BUT WE'RE NOT REALLY HEARING WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, WHICH IS THAT GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S GONNA BE A SUNSET CLAUSE, BUT I THINK IT'S MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO MAKE SOMETHING MORE PERMISSIVE AFTER YOU'VE MADE IT MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

AND AS I FORGET WHO POINTED OUT, UH, I THINK IT WAS, MAYBE IT WAS LANE,

[00:50:01]

WE'RE NOT GIVING IT MUCH ROOM HERE.

SO WE HAVE ALL THE ZONING IN PLACE TO PROTECT AGAINST PARKING SITUATIONS, UH, UH, PERMEABLE SURFACES.

ALL THE THINGS THAT WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, WE ARE ALREADY PROTECTED IT AGAINST THOSE SITUATIONS.

SO I THINK I WOULD REALLY ASK MY COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD TO THINK AGAIN, UM, ABOUT INSTEAD OF WAITING A YEAR, LET'S, LET'S START WITH SOMETHING THAT'S MORE, UH, PERMISSIVE.

NOW, GIVE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY.

AND IF WE LOOK, IF WE ARE OVERWHELMED WITH APPLICATIONS, WHATEVER, WE CAN PULL IT BACK.

BUT LET'S AT LEAST START FROM A PLACE OF MORE WHERE WE'RE REALLY LISTENING TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING AND WHAT THEY WANT.

'CAUSE THE BENEFIT IS FOR THEM, OKAY? AND WE KNOW FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, THERE'S NOT, THERE'S, THERE HAVE BEEN REALLY NO SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S BEEN AN OVERRUN OF ADUS.

SO I, I, THIS IS REALLY WHAT I WOULD HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WOULD RECONSIDER THIS.

AND, UH, AT LEAST COMPROMISE FOR NOW WITH THE 7,500 SQUARE FOOT, UH, MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR THE, UH, THE, THAT THE NON DETACHED A DU THANK YOU.

I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE, 'CAUSE WE'RE HEARING THE SAME COMMENTS AT EACH OF THE HEARINGS, I WOULD SUGGEST WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN FOR TWO WEEKS.

AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE'LL, UH, FURTHER DISCUSSIONS AMONG OURSELVES AND SEE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.

RIGHT? AND I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

YEAH, I WOULD JUST, THERE WOULD BE A SECOND ROUND IF WE WERE CLOSING TONIGHT.

OH, THAT'S TRUE.

DOES ANYONE WANNA SPEAK AGAIN? OUR TOWN ATTORNEY IS CORRECT.

I I JUST WOULD ALSO WANT TO MENTION THAT, YOU KNOW, I BASICALLY WOULD SUPPORT, UM, A COMPROMISE.

I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT, UH, UH, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE THAT WE HAVE, MAKE IT EVEN NO COMPROMISE.

AND BASICALLY JUST YOU SCHWAR ALLOW ANYBODY TO, UH, APPLY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I, I COULD, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER HAS A BETTER CHANCE OF BEING APPROVED, YOU KNOW, I'LL SUPPORT IT.

ALL RIGHT.

YOUR SCHWARTZ IS BACK.

DO YOU WANNA TURN YOUR CAMERA ON? THERE WE GO.

UH, TWO THINGS.

ONE, ONE, UH, JUST A POINT OF ORDER YOU CAN ANSWER AFTER, AFTER I LEAVE WAS IF YOU CLOSE A HEARING TONIGHT, HOW CAN YOU CHANGE ANY, ANY WORD IN THERE WITHOUT REOPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING? I THINK THE ONLY THING IF YOU CLOSE THE HEARING YOU CAN VOTE ON IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEFORE YOU AND NOTHING ELSE.

I BELIEVE THAT'S THE LAW.

DON'T COMMENT UNTIL AFTERWARDS, AFTER I'M DONE.

PLEASE.

SECOND, UH, AS TO THIS COMPROMISE, UH, THANK YOU JOY FOR A STATISTIC THAT HAS NEVER BEEN MADE PUBLIC BEFORE, BUT THE PUT SQUARE FEET, I STILL DON'T KNOW HOW MANY HUNDRED 7,500 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS THE ISSUE.

AND AGAIN, YOU KEEP SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT TAKING, OKAY, TAKING AWAY, BUT YOU CAN TAKE THE WHOLE LAW AWAY.

SO WHY DON'T WE AT LEAST SAY THAT WE WOULD TAKE FIVE, YOU KNOW, UP TO FIVE, UH, FOR THE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT TO AT LEAST GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT'S LIKE.

YOU'RE NOT GONNA LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING UNDER 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO AND TRYING TO MAKE THINGS A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT.

I DON'T, I DON'T THINK YOUR NUMBERS ARE CORRECT THOUGH.

I THINK YOU MEAN 5,000 CAN CAN'T INTERRUPT 5,000.

OF THE TOWN, AND YET WE WERE NOT GIVEN THAT COURTESY.

THANK YOU JOY.

I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.

BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

THE ONLY THING THAT SOLVES THE PROBLEM IS ACTUALLY TESTING THEM.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING YOU KNOW.

'CAUSE US YOU WON'T KNOW IT ALL FOR A YEAR.

AND THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT THE MOST, WHICH IS WHAT INE SAID.

THIS WHAT WALTER SAID.

THIS WHAT CAROL SAID.

OKAY, WHAT JANET SAID AND WHAT THE COMMUNITY'S BEEN SAYING.

SO THAT COMPROMISE, ALTHOUGH I KNOW WHY YOU'RE DOING IT, I APPRECIATE IT 'CAUSE IT'S HARD TO EVEN GET THAT.

I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR EFFORTS THERE.

THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

'CAUSE IT REALLY DOES NOT ACCOMPLISH WHAT THE, WHAT IT SHOULD BE THE LEGISLATIVE OBJECTIVE OF THIS.

AND YES, WE WERE NOT ALLOWED AS THE A BL TO PRESENT THIS.

LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE, WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES.

WE SHOULD BEEN ABLE TO DO A VERY COMPLETE PRESENTATION.

WE ARE AN OFFICIAL COMMITTEE

[00:55:01]

AND I THINK THAT IS WRONG.

AND BY THE WAY, THE PLANNING BOARD ALSO SUPPORTED OUR RECOMMENDATION SIX TO ONE AT THE TIME.

UH, I I STILL HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES LEFT.

UM, TWO MINUTES AND 38 SECONDS.

38 SECONDS.

I THINK TWO, TWO MINUTES, 38 SECONDS.

UM, AGAIN, THINK ABOUT THAT, THINK ABOUT THE TESTING.

THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN FIND OUT IS BY TESTING.

GET WHAT THE NUMBER IS.

AND AGAIN, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT HOW, WHAT PERCENT ZONING.

I WANNA KNOW WHAT PERCENT OF THE PROPERTIES ARE UNDER 7,500 SQUARE FEET BEFORE YOU CONSIDER THAT COMPROMISE.

THAT NUMBER WAS NOT A FIT.

38% ARE UNDER 10,000.

THAT'S A LOT.

LET'S SAY HALF OF THOSE ARE UNDER 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

THAT MEANS THAT'S STILL 20% OF THE POPULATION AND THAT'S THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT THE MOST.

YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOU KEEP IGNORING THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT, WHICH IS THAT TO RELIEVE SOME FINANCIAL BURDEN FROM HOMEOWNERS FOR A HOUSE POOR RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS OVER 40% OF, OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

AND I'M SURE IT'S NO LESS THAN GREENBURG GIVEN OUR TAX RATES.

SO PLEASE, PLEASE RECONSIDER THAT, RECONSIDER THAT IF YOU'RE GONNA CLOSE THE HEARING, AGAIN, I, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN CAN CHANGE THE WORD OF THIS.

I ALSO AGREE WITH CAROL.

I DID MAKE A SUGGESTION, WHICH WOULD'VE SCREENING LINE THIS COMPLETELY.

BUT IF IT'S INSIDE THE FOOTPRINT AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO ADD ANY MORE PARKING, THEY NEED ALL THE OTHER LOCK SIZE RESTRICTION RESTRICTIONS, UH, OF THOSE SPECIAL PERMITS, WHY NOT LET THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DO IT AND NOT TIE UP THE PLANNING BOARD? WHY NOT FAMILY OR NOT? FRANCIS WAS ON THE RIGHT TRACK WITH THE FAST TRACK.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS A VERY GOOD IDEA, FRANCIS.

IT WAS JUST THE WRONG TARGET.

ONE MINUTE STARTED IN ANYBODY WHO STAYS WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT AND YOU, YOU'VE IGNORED THAT.

YOU DIDN'T EVEN RESPOND TO THAT.

YOU DIDN'T EVEN DISCUSS IT IN IN OPEN SESSION, IN AN OPEN WORK SESSION.

'CAUSE I'VE WATCHED ALL THE OPEN WORK SESSIONS.

YOU HAVEN'T CONSIDERED EVERYTHING THE PUBLIC HAS SAID AND YOU'VE TOTALLY IGNORED BOTH THE A BL AND THE PLANNING BOARD.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THIS TOWN, BUT THAT'S NOT THE WAY I REMEMBER THIS TOWN, TOWN OPERATING, NOT, AND MR. DANKO, I SUGGEST 30 SECONDS READ, READ THE TRANSCRIPT BECAUSE MR. MR. SHEEN DIRECTLY SAID THAT YOU COULDN'T CHANGE AWARD DIDN'T, WASN'T SURE YOU COULD CHANGE THE AWARD.

THAT'S A DIRECT QUOTE.

AND, AND MR AND ALSO MR. NICK, YOU DID SAY IT MIGHT BE PRESENT PRESIDENTIAL AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE APPEAL.

SO THOSE ARE ALL FACTS.

SORRY.

YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE FACTS.

GO READ THE LOOK AT THE TAPE YOURSELF.

AND GOODNIGHT EVERYBODY.

I'LL SEE YOU LATER DURING PUBLIC CONDUCT.

JOE, IS IT IT TRUE THAT I JUST WANNA SAY AGAIN, IT'S NOT ACCURATE.

NO, I'M SAYING IS IT TRUE THAT IF WE CHANGE ONE WORD, NO, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES CANNOT BE MADE AFTER THE RECORD IS CLOSED.

SO THEN THE KEY TERM IS SUBSTANTIAL, RIGHT? BUT IF WE BASICALLY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE WOULD BE THE MINIMUM AND THE SIZE, SO THEN I WOULD NOT SUPPORT, UH, CLOSING THE HEARING.

THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIAL.

YEAH.

SO THEN I WOULD DEFINITELY NOT SUPPORT CLOSING THE HEARING.

ALRIGHT, WOULD ANY I WELL, I WOULD, GO AHEAD.

YOU DIDN'T, UH, I DID.

WE HAD A SECOND, BUT THEN, UH, WE SHOULD ALLOW, JOE, YOU SHOULD, I MEAN, THIS IS GARRETT.

SO WE HAD A MOTION AND A SECOND, BUT THEN WE HAD TO ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE TO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S RIGHT.

SO WE SHOULD HAVE A VOTE.

AYES AND NAYS AT THIS POINT.

FOR WHAT? RIGHT, FOR THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING.

I, BUT GAR GAR HAS IT.

GIVE SOME CLARIFICATION.

SO UNLESS WE WANT TO WITHDRAW THAT MOTION.

WELL, CAN WE HOLD THE MOTION UNTIL WE HEAR FROM THE COMMISSIONER? WELL, NO.

WELL THEN I WANNA, SO THEN LET'S WITHDRAW THE MOTION SO WE CAN HEAR GAR, BUT WHO, WHO, WHO MADE THE SECOND? I DID SO WITHDRAW THE SECOND.

I'LL WITHDRAW MY SECOND.

I WITHDRAW THE MOTION.

IT WAS ACTUALLY ALLEN, I WITHDRAW MY SECOND.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

FIRST OFF OF, OF COURSE THE COMMENTS BY RESIDENTS, UM, ADVOCATING FOR LOWER LOT SIZE, THEY'RE FAIR COMMENTS, THEY'RE RATIONAL, RATIONALLY, THOUGHT OUT COMMENTS.

UH, THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT STATISTICS.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

SO THE STATISTICS ARE AS FOLLOWS, APPROXIMATELY 38% OF THE ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ARE BETWEEN A LOT SIZE OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND 10,000 SQUARE FEET.

THE BREAKDOWN IS AS FOLLOWS, FOR 5,000 TO 7,500 REPRESENTS 15%.

7,500 TO 10,000 IS 23%.

SO THE 23 AND THE 15 GET YOU TO THE 38 UH, PERCENT.

AS FAR AS PROCESS,

[01:00:03]

AND I THINK THAT, UM, THERE'S NO RIGHT ANSWER FOR THE TOWN BOARD.

IT'S, YOU HAVE TO DO ULTIMATELY WHAT YOU FEEL IS CORRECT.

IN TERMS OF PROCESS THOUGH, I JUST DO WANNA REMIND THE TOWN BOARD THAT ON AUGUST 26TH, UH, YOU DID DISCUSS, UM, THIS VERY ISSUE AND, UM, AT A WORK SESSION, AT A WORK SESSION, WORK SESSION, PUBLIC, PUBLIC WORK SESSION, TELEVISED, ARCHIVED.

AND I THINK GENERALLY, UH, PERHAPS OR AT THE CONCLUSION THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE RIGHT NOW.

INDEED, IF YOU HEARD TESTIMONY TONIGHT THAT, UM, GIVES YOU PAUSE AND YOU WANNA SEE AS WAS INDICATED, SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE LOCAL LAW, THEN ABSOLUTELY YOU SHOULD NOT CLOSE.

UM, BUT IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE, THEN, UM, BY EXTENDING THE PUBLIC HEARING, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT, UM, WHAT THAT WOULD SERVE.

SO ULTIMATELY GET AN ENDLESS FEEDBACK LOOP IF YOU'D NEVER CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO, UM, YOU RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE DISCUSS AGAIN IN WORK SESSION.

IT'S, IT'S TOTALLY UP TO WHAT THE BOARD FEELS COMFORTABLE DOING, BUT I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THE BOARD, AUGUST 26 DISCUSSED A LOT OF, UM, THESE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS RAISED BY RESIDENTS.

KNOW, PRETTY ELOQUENTLY, YOU KNOW, TODAY.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

I SAY YOU.

WHAT'S THAT? WHAT DO WE DO? I DUNNO, WHAT DO WE DO? SO SINCE IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A SPLIT, I THINK THE BOARD SHOULD MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHETHER WE SHOULD CLOSE THE HEARING TONIGHT.

AND IF THE DETERMINATION IS YES, THAT IT SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO ALLOWING THE CONTINUATION OF THE SECOND ROUND FOR THOSE REMAINING.

BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, A RESIDENT WOULDN'T KNOW IF THEY'RE ALLOWED A SECOND ROUND OR NOT.

SO WE SHOULD PROBABLY MOVE TO A VOTE ON THAT NOW IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION.

BUT IF WE CLOSE THE HEARING, WE CAN'T MAKE ANY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES.

THAT'S CORRECT.

SO I MEAN, I JUST FEEL, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS SINCE DECEMBER, YOU KNOW, FOR A LONG TIME, FOR MANY, MANY MONTHS.

AND I FEEL THAT IF WE HAD A TOWN BOARD MEETING AND WE DISCUSSED THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND WE REALLY HAD A GOOD GIVE AND TAKE, I FEEL THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE, UH, RESPECTING, UH, THE OPINIONS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE DIFFERENT THOUGHTS AND, YOU KNOW, WE COULD JUST ANALYZE AND WE COULD DISCUSS IT.

AND THEN AFTER THE WORK SESSION, UM, WE COULD PUT, WE COULD HAVE ONE MORE MEETING AND THEN WE CLOSE THE HEARING AND THEN WE COULD HAVE A VOTE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY HAVEN'T HAD, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE, YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING IS TO LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC AND TO GET PUBLIC COMMENTS.

WE'VE GOTTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS.

AND IF WE CLOSE THE HEARING WITHOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT DISCUSSING IT AS A BOARD, YOU KNOW, NOT TODAY, BUT BASICALLY IN A WORK SESSION WHERE THERE COULD BE GIVE AND TAKE, THEN I FEEL THAT THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING IS A CHARADE.

REALLY.

IT'S, IT'S, WE'RE NOT TAKING IT AS SERIOUSLY AS WE SHOULD.

SO I WOULD REALLY STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT WE PUT THIS ON A WORK SESSION, HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION, AND THEN, UM, AT THE NEXT MEETING WE WOULD CLOSE THE HEARING.

YOU KNOW, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'LL WE COULD HAVE, AND THEN WE PUT IT FOR A VOTE IN THE FOLLOWING MEETING WE HAD IT ON, WE HAD A WORK SESSION, WE DISCUSSED THE ISSUES, THE DRAFT THAT WE HAD BEFORE US DENIED AS A RESULT OF THAT WORK SESSION.

AND HERE WE ARE.

AND NOW YOU'RE SAYING, WELL, IF WE HAD A WORK SESSION, BUT WE HAD A WORK SESSION AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND IT WAS PUBLIC AND IT WAS ARCHIVED, BUT WE DIDN'T DISCUSS WE ANYTHING TONIGHT.

WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING TONIGHT THAT WE HAVEN'T HEARD BEFORE.

SO TO HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING AND HEAR THE SAME THING, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW PRODUCTIVE THAT'S GOING TO BE.

WELL, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY PRODUCTIVE TO HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING.

'CAUSE I THINK WE'VE HEARD VERY ELOQUENTLY FROM THE PUBLIC IF THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION AMONGST OURSELVES IN ORDER TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE, THE, THE NUMBERS WE HEARD TONIGHT FROM, FROM THE COMMISSIONER, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED VERY TANGENTIALLY.

WE REALLY HAVEN'T FOCUSED ON THAT AT ALL.

AND I THINK THOSE ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS.

SO I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION TOGETHER.

UM, EVEN IF THAT MEANS KEEPING DOING ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING.

YOU KNOW, AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAYING THINGS THAT THEY'VE SAID BEFORE, BUT SOMETIMES IT TAKES A COUPLE TIMES AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU START REFLECTING ON IT AND YOU SAY, GOSH, THAT WAS A REALLY GOOD POINT.

YOU KNOW, WHEN PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE HOPE WHEN WE STARTED THIS, MY GOAL WAS TO HELP FAMILIES WHO, UH, ARE CASH POOR, YOU KNOW, AND BASICALLY NEED THE EXTRA REVENUE.

AND, YOU KNOW, YOU SCHWARTZ, YOU KNOW, MENTIONED THAT I THINK, YOU

[01:05:01]

AND OTHER PEOPLE MENTIONED IT, YOU KNOW, AS WELL.

SO I FEEL MORE STRONGLY ABOUT THIS NOW, ABOUT, UM, MAKING IT LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN I DID, YOU KNOW, MONTHS AGO.

BUT AGAIN, PAUL, THIS DOESN'T AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY.

NO, I LIVE IN A CONDO PROPERTY.

YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY IS CARVED OUT, RIGHT? NO, BUT SO YOU FEEL REALLY STRONGLY ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHERE YOU LIVE.

YOU FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT ADUS, BUT IT DOESN'T APPLY TO YOU.

WELL, I'M REPRESENTING THE WHOLE TOWN AND I SPEAK TO A LOT OF RESIDENTS IN THE TOWN, AND I SPEAK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE HERE, BECAUSE BASICALLY, UM, THEY, THEY LIVE IN A NICE HOUSE, BUT, YOU KNOW, THEY JUST CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY THE TAXES AND THE ADUS, UH, COULD HELP THEM STAY HERE.

SO, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, SO, YOU KNOW, I'VE SPOKEN TO A LOT OF RESIDENTS AT SUPERMARKETS.

UH, PEOPLE CALL ME ALL THE TIME AND, YOU KNOW, I'M ALSO BASING MY COMMENTS ON, UH, THE FEEDBACK I GET FROM THE ONE-ON-ONE IN, YOU KNOW, INTERACTIONS.

AND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS LAW IS GOING TO CREATE MAY ANY, ANY PROBLEMS. YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT THE FIRST COMMUNITY THAT'S DOING IT.

THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER COMMUNITIES AROUND, UM, THE NATION AND AROUND WESTCHESTER THAT HAVE DONE IT.

AND I HAVEN'T HEARD, YOU KNOW, I'VE WRITTEN TO OTHER VILLAGES AND MUNICIPALITIES AND I'VE SAID, TELL ME THE PROBLEMS. AND, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN RESPONSES OF NEGATIVITY, ANYTHING NEGATIVE ABOUT IT.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE A D IS A GOOD, YOU KNOW, I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S A GOOD, UM, INITIATIVE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GONNA SOLVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROBLEM, BUT IT'S GONNA MAKE IT EASIER FOR SOME PEOPLE TO STAY HERE.

SO, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.

IT BASICALLY IS, YOU KNOW, CAN WE HELP PEOPLE? AND I THINK THE CONCEPT OF ADUS COULD DEFINITELY HELP SOME PEOPLE.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD JUDGE IT BASED ON A PERSONAL MATTER EITHER.

SO I, I BELIEVE THAT ADUS ARE IMPORTANT, AND THIS IS A CONVERSATION WE HAVE ACTUALLY HAD ALL ALONG.

AND WE DECIDED THAT BY HAVING THE SUNSET CLAUSE, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO REVISIT IT IN A YEAR'S TIME.

AND BASED ON, NOT DISCUSSION, NOT FEELINGS, BUT ON HAVING HAD THE EXPERIENCE OF GONE, OF GOING THROUGH CREATING ADUS ACCORDING TO THE LARGER, LARGER FOOTAGE, UM, THIS, THIS BECOMES, UM, SOMETHING THAT MAKE THIS DISCUSSION SOUNDS AS IF IT'S FINAL AND IT'S NOT FINAL.

WE REALLY WANT TO EVALUATE AND SEE AS A TOWN HOW WE CAN POSSIBLY MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

AND THEN FEEL OUR WAY INTO REEVALUATION AT THE END OF THE YEAR.

IT'S HARDER TO PUT SOMETHING BACK IN THE BOX ONCE YOU'VE LET IT OUT.

SO IF WE STARTED OUT WITH THE LESSER ACREAGE, LESSER FOOTAGE, IF WE STARTED OUT WITH THAT AND THEN, UM, AND THEN TRIED TO MAKE THE RESTRICTION FOR, FOR THE GREATER, FOR THE 10,000 FEET, THEN THAT, THAT I THINK WOULD RAISE HUMAN AND CRY AT THAT POINT FAR GREATER THAN NOW.

HOW COULD YOU GIVE SOMETHING AND THEN TAKE IT AWAY? SO THIS JUST SEEMED TO BE A MORE LOGICAL WAY OF HANDLING IT.

AND DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT BOARD MEMBERS ARE INSENSITIVE AND AREN'T HEARING WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING.

I'M HEARING, AND I'M LISTENING TO THIS, AND I'M THINKING THAT IN A YEAR'S TIME, THIS I'D LIKE TO, THE GOAL THAT I HAVE IS MAKING IT HAPPEN, MAKING US MORE, UH, KNOWLEDGEABLE IN REDUCING THAT CRITERIA.

A COMMENT WAS MADE DURING TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING.

IF YOU DON'T TRU TRUST ZONING, BUT THAT'S WHAT RESIDENTS AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE SAYING IS, WE BOUGHT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY ZONE AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE CHANGING THAT ZONE.

OH, YOU'RE GONNA LEAVE THE FACT THAT IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY ZONE, BUT YOU'RE JUST GONNA HAVE TWO DWELLINGS.

AND GINA JACKSON AND I, COUNCIL WILLIAM JACKSON AND I ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE REALLY AFFECTED BY THIS LAW.

I'M WILLING TO GO ALONG WITH SOME TESTS IN THE FIRST YEAR.

UM, AND I THOUGHT THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE WERE APPROACHING

[01:10:01]

TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THIS.

BUT IN A GUARDED WAY, IF YOU SAY THAT YOU CAN DO THIS IN THE FIRST YEAR, BUT WE'LL TAKE IT AWAY IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, AN OBSTACLE, WELL, WHEREVER IT WENT IN, AND IT'S A HARDSHIP FOR THE NEIGHBORS.

'CAUSE THE NEIGHBORS DON'T GET TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY, ALL OF A SUDDEN INSTEAD OF HAVING BACKYARDS THAT YOU CAN LOOK BACK AND FORTH, YOU NOW HAVE A BUILDING THERE.

THAT'S AN IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.

AND THEY DON'T GET A SAY.

THEY CAN SHOW UP IN A PLANNING BOARD MEETING.

THAT'S, BUT, YOU KNOW, AND SAY WHAT IT IS.

BUT THERE'S NO VETO POWER.

THERE'S, IF IT'S GONNA GO UP, IT'S GONNA GO UP.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE I AM, IS I'M WILLING TO TRY SOMETHING, BUT I WANT TO DO IT IN A GUARDED WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT AS BEST WE CAN, PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY ZONE HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY ZONE FEEL TO IT.

AND WE'LL SEE HOW THE PLANNING BOARD HANDLES THIS OVER THE COURSE OF ONE YEAR.

WE HEAR, WELL, IT'S NOT IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT'S A VERY AMBIGUOUS TERM.

IT'S NOT IN THE CHARACTER WHO'S GONNA MAKE THAT DECISION.

PLANNING BOARD'S GONNA MAKE THAT DECISION.

AND SO IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE THE HEARINGS, AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THE SAME THINGS OVER AND AGAIN OVER AGAIN.

UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE.

I WOULD SUGGEST WE, I SUGGEST WE CLOSE THE HEARING 'CAUSE WE HAVE THE WORK SESSION THAT YOU'RE NOW ASKING US TO HAVE.

AND IT PRODUCED THE RESULT THAT WAS TO TONIGHT, THE DOCUMENT THAT'S BEFORE US TONIGHT WAS THE RESULT OF THE TOWN BOARD SAYING, YES, THIS IS WHAT WE CAN AGREE TO.

NOW, APPARENTLY, SOME ARE SAYING NO, JUST IF I MAY, WE'VE HAD SIX HEARINGS, SIX PUBLIC HEARINGS, WE'VE HAD ONE WORK SESSION.

THERE'S NO STRUCTURE INVOLVING.

SO THERE WAS REFINEMENT THAT WE, WE DID SOME, MADE SOME GOOD ADJUSTMENTS.

BUT THAT'S REALLY NOT A, A BALANCE IN MY VIEW.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A WORK SESSION WHERE WE TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE SUBSTANTIALLY ABOUT WHAT WE'VE HEARD AT EVERY HEARING THAT WE HAVE HAD EVERY PUBLIC HEARING.

AND I DON'T, AND, AND I'M NOT SURE WHY I, YOU MENTIONED THE FACT THAT SOMEONE COULD JUST WAKE UP AND FIND, YOU KNOW, A, A A A STRUCTURE IN THE BACKYARD.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 10.

I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, IS THAT WHAT STILL HERE? YEAH.

YOU WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE 20,000, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE 10.

SO THERE'S NO STRUCTURE THAT COULD APPEAR TALKING ABOUT THE EXTERNAL STRUCTURE, EXTERNAL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EXTERNAL OR INTERNAL? EXTERNAL.

EXTERNAL TO YOUR COMMENT YOU MADE ABOUT THE EXTERNAL WOULD BE 20,000.

RIGHT? WE'RE NOT TALKING WE'RE, THAT'S NOT THE, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REDUCING TO, NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REDUCING, I HEARD THAT THEY WANTED TO DO AWAY WITH LOT SIZES.

WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT I, I HAVE NOT, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'VE MENTIONED.

UH, IN TERMS OF, I THINK WE COULD DO ONE AND THEN REVISIT THE OTHER ONE AS A, AGAIN, A COMPROMISE.

UM, BECAUSE YES, HAVING AN EXTERNAL STRUCTURE IS CERTAINLY GONNA BE MORE IMPACTFUL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAN HAVING AN INTERNAL STRUCTURE.

AND THE OTHER REASON TO TAKE A YEAR TO AN ANALYZE THIS AND CONTRARY TO WHAT GETS REPEATED BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING THE SAME THING, THE FACT THAT THERE'S AN IMPERVIOUS, UH, SURFACE REGULATION IN OUR ZONING CODE, AND THAT'S GONNA PREVENT SOMEBODY FROM PAVING OVER THE FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE BECAUSE THERE'S AN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.

WELL, YOU COULD HAVE A LOT OF, LOT SIZE IN THE BACK OF YOUR HOUSE, AND SO YOU'LL MEET THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE YOU JUST BUILD IN THE FRONT.

AND THAT'S NOT, I, I USE THE EXAMPLE, I DON'T WANT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS TO START LOOKING LIKE DOBS BURY ROAD BETWEEN ONE 19 AND A HUNDRED A A HUNDRED B, WHERE THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY NO FRONTAGE THERE.

PERFECTLY LEGAL AT THE TIME, BUT NO FRONTAGE THERE, MCCADA AND CARS PARKED LEFT AND RIGHT, EVEN HOUSES TURNED ON THEIR SIDES.

I'M NOT LOOKING TO SEE THAT HAPPEN.

I THINK IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE VERY DETRIMENTAL TO OUR COMMUNITY.

WE'VE HAD MORE THAN ONE WORK SESSION DISCUSSION.

WE'VE HAD MANY DISCUSSIONS MOST RECENTLY ON, ON AUGUST 20TH.

IS THERE ANYTHING CURRENTLY IN THE ZONING THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THE SCENARIO, WHICH IS NOT A GOOD SCENARIO, I AGREE.

FROM HAPPENING? OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD ADD? WE, WE DID OUR BEST TO, TO ENSURE THAT DRIVEWAYS ARE BUILT IN, CONFORM

[01:15:01]

IN, IN CONSISTENCY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.

THERE, THERE IS SOME CUSTOMIZED LANGUAGE ABOUT FRONT YARDS.

UM, ULTIMATELY, I, I, IT'S PROBABLY NOT PERFECT, BUT, UH, IT DID DEFINITELY TOOK OUR BEST EFFORT TO, UH, BE SENSITIVE TO THAT CONCERN, BUT IT DOESN'T ADDRESS IT.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD STUDY OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT YEAR.

I'M NOT RULING IT OUT, I'M JUST SAYING THAT I THINK IT'S PREMATURE.

I'M SORRY, FRANCIS.

REPEAT.

I SAID I'M NOT RULING IT OUT.

I'M JUST SAYING IT'S PRE PREMATURE.

A REAL THOROUGH ANALYSIS OF, OF THE IMPACTS AND THE NEGATIVES AND THE POSITIVES.

SO I'M GONNA, I HAVE MANY CONVERSATIONS AND YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF, YOU KNOW, MAYBE BEING TOO PASSIONATE OR BEING, UM, LOOKING AT THE SITUATION TO, I WILL SAY THE WORD PASSIONATELY AND WORRYING ABOUT HOW DO WE MAKE SURE IT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

THAT'S JUST THE PERSON I AM.

BECAUSE I, AND I SPOKE ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST WORK SESSION, MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE EQUAL AND FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND THIS IS A, THIS IS SOMETHING TO ME PERSONALLY, AND I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH A, WITH A LOT OF YOU THAT I DON'T FEEL LIKE IS GONNA BE FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD.

I DON'T FEEL THAT WE KEEP SAYING THAT THERE IS A POPULATION THAT WHO NEEDS IT IS GONNA BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S OTHER RESTRICTIONS NOT FROM THE A DU LAW, BUT THERE'S OTHER RESTRICTIONS AS REGARDS TO THE ZONING LAW.

SO MY COMPROMISE TONIGHT WILL BE THIS.

IF WE WANNA TAKE A WORK SESSION, TALK ABOUT IT AGAIN, THEN AFTER THAT, I'M NOT SURE WHAT OTHER NEW INFORMATION'S GONNA COME OUT OF A WORK SESSION.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT COMMENTS WE'RE GONNA HEAR DIFFERENTLY.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT, WHAT CAN WE SAY? I REALLY FEEL LIKE I'M LIVING IN A, IN THE LEAF BLOWER LAW, WHEN I FIRST CAME TO THE BOARD, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE LEAFBLOWER LAW.

AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT IT 10 YEARS BEFORE I GOT ON THE BOARD.

2020 YEARS.

BUT, BUT I WANNA SAY THIS, WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE A COMPROMISE.

WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO THAT'S GOING TO WORK BEST.

AND JUST AS IT WAS SAID HERE, IT IS HARD TO SAY, HEY, BE FREE WITH EVERYTHING AND THEN COME BACK A YEAR AND SAY, HEY, THAT DIDN'T WORK.

NOW WE GOTTA BE RESTRICTIVE.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THE PERSON WHO'S SAYING, I REALLY NEED IT, AND NOW YOU'RE GONNA BE RESTRICTED.

BUT I REALLY, REALLY NEED THAT.

THIS IS SOMETHING, THIS IS ANOTHER LAW THAT AGAIN, IS UNFORTUNATE, IS HOW ARE WE GONNA REALLY MEET THE NEED OF, OF WHAT WE ARE STATING THAT WE NEED TO MEET.

ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO, WHO ARE AS, AS HAS BEEN SAID, CASH POOR HERE MEET PERSONALLY.

I JUST, I, I JUST DON'T SEE HOW IT WOULD WORK FOR SOMEONE WHO'S IN A SMALLER LOT, ONE WHO'S GOING TO HAVE TO CONFORM THEIR HOME TO MEET WHATEVER.

AND SOMEONE SAID TO ME, WELL, GINA, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT YOUR PROBLEM.

THAT IS THE PROBLEM, THE PERSON WHO PUTS IN THE APPLICANT.

BUT THAT'S UNFORTUNATELY EVERYONE, THAT'S NOT HOW MY MIND WORKS, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW MUCH I CARE.

SO IF YOU COME TO ME AND YOU SAY, THIS IS WHAT I NEED, AND THEN I CAN'T MEET THAT NEED, THAT BOTHERS ME.

AND THIS IS WHY I TALK ABOUT TRYING TO BE FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT'S BEING PLACED HERE.

SO LET THE RECORD SHOW I'M IN FAVOR OF THE A-D-U-A-D-U LAW.

I'M IN FAVOR OF WHAT THE CONCEPT IS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO WORK THAT'S GONNA MAKE IT PERFECT.

BECAUSE AGAIN, THERE'S NO LAW THAT'S PERFECT.

AND I SAID THAT BEFORE, BUT AS A COMPROMISE, IF WE WANNA HAVE A CONVERSATION AT A WORK SESSION, I'M OPEN TO IT.

BUT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO CHANGE OUT OF THAT CONVERSATION.

ANOTHER THOUGHT THAT, YOU KNOW, I JUST HAD THAT WE COULD ALSO DISCUSS IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A ONE YEAR SUNSET, BUT LET'S SAY WE APPROVE THIS OCTOBER 1ST, UM, THEN, AND WE SAID AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THE LEGISLATION IS DEAD AND WE HAVE TO RENEW IT OR WHATEVER.

I THINK IT'S GONNA BE VERY, VERY HARD, UH, FOR AN APPLICATION AFTER APPROVAL FOR EVERYTHING TO GET IN PLACE WITHIN ONE YEAR, BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA HAVE, SOMEBODY'S GONNA HAVE TO HIRE, THE ARCHITECTS ARE GONNA COME, HAVE TO COME UP WITH DRAWINGS, THERE'S GONNA BE HEARINGS.

WE TOLD WE ADDRESS PAUL, WE APPROVED IT.

STEP PAUL.

NO, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT, WE DON'T, YOU'RE NOT LISTENING.

NO, YOU'RE NOT READING THE LEGISLATION.

WE PUT THAT IN THIS TIME.

THAT'S A REVISION THAT WE PUT INTO THIS.

NO, ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT I WOULD LIKE MORE TIME.

I I'M THINKING THAT WE SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, MORE TIME SO WE COULD ACT IF WE'RE GONNA EVALUATE THE IMPACTS, YOU KNOW, THE PARKING IMPACTS, THERE'S A LOT OF QUALITY OF LIFE IMPACTS THAT PEOPLE LIKE YOU, YOU KNOW, FRANCIS, HAVE, HAVE, YOU KNOW, HIGHLIGHTED.

AND I JUST, I'M WONDERING IF THE CURRENT LEGISLATION AS WRITTEN GIVES US ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY HAVE A,

[01:20:01]

DO YOU FOLLOW WHAT I'M SAYING? IT'S A GOOD POINT.

I, I I WILL SAY AT AFTER ONE YEAR, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THERE WILL BE A FINISHED A DU WITH SOMEONE LIVING IN IT.

UM, THE ANALYSIS YOU'LL GET IS C, D AND C RECEIVED SIX APPLICATIONS.

UH, THREE ARE ACTIVELY WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.

THREE WERE DEEMED TO NOT MEET THE, THE REQUIREMENTS, THEREFORE, THEY EITHER WITHDREW OR NEVER PURSUED.

THAT'S THE TYPE OF DATA YOU WOULD GET AFTER ONE YEAR, WHICH I THINK IS VALID.

AND I ALSO THINK THAT, UH, WE SHOULD START LOOKING AT THAT DATA, UM, NOT WAIT TILL THE ONE YEAR RUNS OUT.

UH, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL GET THE TOWN BOARD DATA PERHAPS AT THE EIGHT MONTH MARK TO GIVE YOU AN ASSESSMENT.

IT'S BEEN EIGHT MONTHS AND WE'VE FIVE APPLICATIONS.

THREE, LET'S BE CLEAR, RIGHT? THIS REVISION, HAVING HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC SAYS THAT IF YOU PUT THAT APPLICATION IN AND IT'S COMPLETE, THAT BUILDING GRANDFATHER PROCESS, YOU ARE, YOU ARE GOOD.

YES, YES.

EVEN IF THE LAW TOTALLY SUNSETS, YOU CAN CONTINUE TO BUILD AND HAVE YOUR A DU.

NO, BUT THAT IS VERY CLEAR.

THAT IS ALL THAT THOSE PROTECTIONS ARE IN THERE.

BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CRITICAL OF ADUS, THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE REAL IMPACTS ADU ARE GONNA HAVE ON THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

SO WE'RE SAYING AT THE END OF THE YEAR, UH, THE LEGISL, YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATION IS DEAD.

AND THEN WE HAVE TO DECIDE, ARE WE GONNA, UH, MAKE IT LESS RESTRICTIVE, YOU KNOW, MORE RESTRICTIVE OR DO AWAY WITH IT.

BUT THE THING IS, WE'RE NOT, THE DATA IS, I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE DATA, HOW MANY APPLICATIONS THERE ARE.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE DATA, THE IMPACT IT'S HAVING ON NEIGHBORS, ON NEIGHBORHOODS, ON PARKING.

UM, YOU KNOW, ALL THE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE OBJECTED TO ADU HAVE HAD.

AND I FAILED THAT IF WE BASICALLY HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE SAW THE ACTUAL COMPLETED PROJECT, UM, AND THEN, AND THEN WE WENT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND GOT SORT OF A FEEL, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA HAVE REALLY NEGATIVE IMPACTS.

BUT THEN WE COULD SAY TO OTHER PEOPLE, LOOK ON PHEASANT RUN.

THEY, THEY PUT IT HERE, THEY PUT IT THERE, AND NOBODY'S COMPLAINING ON, UM, ON GIBSON AVENUE.

THEY HAVE IT.

NOBODY'S COMPLAINING.

THAT'S WHAT I REALIZE.

THAT'S THE INFORMATION.

WELL, ARE ANY NUMBER OF STATISTICS, NOT JUST WHETHER PEOPLE ARE GONNA COMPLAIN OR NOT, BUT I, I I JUST WANNA CLARIFY WHAT I WAS SAYING.

I JUST WANNA CLARIFY ONE THING.

YOU SAID THAT AFTER A YEAR WE MAY INCREASE, WE MAY DECREASE AND WE MAY DO AWAY WITH ALTOGETHER.

I I THINK THAT WE AS A BOARD, EVERY BOARD MEMBER IS FULLY COMMITTED TO AN A DU LAW WHEN I DON'T EVER, I DON'T IMAGINE IN ANY SCENARIO THAT ADUS IN GREENBURG WOULD GO AWAY.

AND BASED ON OTHER, UM, EXPERIENCES THAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES HAVE HAD, WE HAVE LEARNED SOME THINGS, BUT WE HAVEN'T LEARNED FOR OURSELVES AND OUR OWN EXPERIENCE.

AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE YEAR ALLOWS US TO DO.

OKAY? IT MAY NOT BE PERFECT, BUT ALSO WE ARE SENSITIVE TO WANTING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME SO THAT, YOU KNOW, ALL, DESPITE THE FACT THAT PEOPLE HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT WE'RE NOT LISTENING, WE'VE MADE A LOT OF CHANGES IN THIS LAW BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE ONE CHANGE WE HAVE NOT MADE IS TO CHANGE THE LOT SIZE.

SO LET'S BE CLEAR ON THAT, THAT WE ARE COMMITTED TO ADUS, WE'RE COMMITTED TO LEARNING FROM OUR EXPERIENCE, AND WE'RE COMMITTING TO LOOKING AT THIS SERIOUSLY AND MAKING ANY ADJUSTMENTS THAT MIGHT BE NECESSARY AFTER THE PERIOD THE SUNSET HAS, UM, GOTTEN INTO EFFECT.

WE'LL ALSO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INFORMATION FROM HEARING WHAT'S SAID AT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS WHEN PEOPLE COME IN WITH THEIR APPLICATIONS, EVEN BEFORE THEY PUT A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND.

AND SO WE'LL HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANTS.

AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO HEAR.

SO WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY, OH, WE'RE GONNA BE GIVING THE FINAL CEO BEFORE WE COULD ACTUALLY DO SOME KIND OF ANALYSIS OF THESE IMPACTS.

AT LEAST IN THAT FIRST YEAR, WE COULD HEAR WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY SAYING AT THE PLANNING BOARD AND HOW THE PLANNING BOARD IS, IS CONSIDERING CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

YOU KNOW, ALL OF THAT IS VERY VALUABLE.

OKAY, SO WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO? SO WHAT DO WE, SO, SO ANYBODY COULD FEEL FREE TO MAKE MOTION.

I COULD GIVE SOME SUGGESTIONS IF YOU'D LIKE.

GIVE THE SUGGESTIONS, JOE, PLEASE.

WELL, ONE IS YOU COULD NOT HAVE A MOTION AND LET THE SECOND ROUND OF PUBLIC COMMENT CONTINUE.

[01:25:01]

ANOTHER WOULD BE A CONDITIONED MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN FOR TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY UPON THE CONCLUSION OF THE SECOND ROUND OF TONIGHT'S HEARING.

ANOTHER OPTION IS MOTION TO ADJOURN TONIGHT'S HEARING TO THE OCTOBER 8TH MEETING.

AND THEN IN BETWEEN THAT TIME, WE WILL HAVE A WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS.

AND, AND I ONLY SAY OCTOBER 8TH BECAUSE IT'S THE NEXT MEETING.

THE MOTION COULD BE THE OCTOBER 22ND MEETING OR A LATER TIME.

NO, BUT IN THAT TIME THEN WE CAN HAVE, SO IF WE CLOSE IT BY THAT TIME, WE CAN HAVE THAT, JUST THAT WORK SESSION DISCUSSION.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YOU COULD HAVE A WORK SESSION DISCUSSION PRIOR TO THE 24TH.

THE NEXT ADJOURN DATE.

NEXT ADJOURN DATE.

SO I'LL, I'LL MAKE THE, GO AHEAD.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING TO THE, SO WE NEED TO DETERMINE.

NO, THAT WOULD BE ADJOURN.

I, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE A WORK SESSION IN WANNA A, WHATEVER THAT, WHATEVER JURY IN PUBLIC HEARING.

I WANNA ADJOURN A PUBLIC HEARING.

GO AHEAD, JOE AJOUR MEETING FOR ALL PURPOSES.

UM, NEXT, UH, PUBLIC HEARING IS TO CONSIDER AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND VILLAGE OF EL STATE TO PROVIDE, UH, FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO RESIDENTS OF NORTH ELMSFORD FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR THE YEAR 2025.

BUT WOULD, WOULD IT BE TO THE NEXT MEETING OCTOBER 8TH OR, OR THE NEXT MEETING SEPTEMBER 28TH? I WOULD NEED OCTOBER 8TH.

I WOULD DO IT TILL OCTOBER 8TH.

SO WE CAN HAVE MORE TIME.

I DON'T WANT, I'M NOT GONNA RUSH THIS SECOND.

SO DO YOU WANNA PHRASE IT AGAIN? AND THEN YOU MAY THE MOTION TO ADJOURN THIS HEARING UNTIL MOTION TO ADJOURN THIS HEARING UNTIL OCTOBER 8TH AND TO HAVE A WORK SESSION IN THAT TIME AND HAVE, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A WORK SESSION IN BETWEEN THAT TIME.

I'M GONNA SECOND THAT.

ANYONE WANNA SECOND? I'M GONNA SECOND THAT.

[ To consider an agreement between the Town of Greenburgh and the Village of Elmsford to provide Fire Protection Services to residents of the North Elmsford Fire Protection District for the year 2025 ]

IS THAT A MOTION? IS THAT A MOTION? THERE'S A MOTION.

SO THIS IS A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT CONTRACT, THE TOWN CONTRACTS.

CAN WE PLEASE HAVE QUIET IN THE AUDIENCE PLEASE? THANK YOU.

SO THIS IS A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, UH, BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND FOR THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS OF NORTH ELMSFORD AND WEST ELMSFORD, UH, FOR THE YEAR 2025.

THE, UH, TOWN CONTRACTS WITH VILLAGES THAT ARE NEARBY AREAS OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA THAT ARE NOT, UM, COVERED BY THE CAREER FIRE DISTRICTS, UH, GREENVILLE, HARTSDALE AND FAIRVIEW.

UH, THE PROPOSED, UH, UH, CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR THIS YEAR FOR NORTH ELMSWORTH.

ARE WE DOING BOTH OF THEM AT THE SAME, SAME TIME OR ARE WE JUST OPENING UP WHICH ONE? NORTH? WE'RE DOING NORTH FIRST.

IT FOR ALL PURPOSES OF THE NEXT MEETING.

SO THIS IS THE DEALING WITH THE NORTH ELMSFORD FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.

UH, THE VILLAGES IS, UH, IS SENT US A REQUEST FOR $920,306 AND 99 CENTS.

THAT'S AN INCREASE OF $25,839 AND 61 CENTS FROM THE PRIOR PRI PRIOR YEAR.

UM, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS? DOES ANYBODY HERE FROM THE FIRE, FROM ELMSFORD? RIGHT.

SO WHEN WE WERE SCHEDULING THIS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN WHEN WE HAVE THE MEETING YESTERDAY, I HAD RE RECOMMENDED THAT WE HEAR FROM, NORMALLY THEY DON'T SHOW UP , THEY DON'T HAVE TO.

UH, BUT I THINK IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HEAR FROM, UH, THE, UH, ELMSFORD, THE ELMSFORD, UM, VILLAGE BOARD OR THE FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENTS.

THE FIRE COMPANIES THEMSELVES, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE A SERIOUS ISSUE, UH, IN THAT AREA.

THIS, THIS PARTICULAR FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, NORTH ELM SCHWAR, UH, WE HAVE REGENERON.

IT'S AN AMMA AMAZING, WONDERFUL FACILITY, UM, HAS RESEARCH LABS, BUT ALSO WE HAVE FAIL, WHICH IS BASICALLY A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.

AND THEIR OTHER PROPERTY IN MONTROSE WENT ON FIRE AND CAUSED TREMENDOUS, TREMENDOUS, UM, NEED FOR RE FIRE, FIRE MATIC, UH, RESOURCES.

AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO GET ON THE RECORD, HOW WOULD THOSE ISSUES BE ADDRESSED? OR DO WE LEAVE IT FOR THE NEXT CONTRACT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY OF HOW THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED? UM, SO IF THERE'S NOBODY HERE, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE, UM, WE, UH, KEEP THE RECORD OPEN AND ADJOURN

[01:30:01]

WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO DO THIS AT A WORK SESSION? BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS COULD BE, UH, MORE OF A DISCUSSION.

UM, AND THEN WE COULD ALSO HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, IF, UH, TRANSCRIBED, TRANSCRIBED.

I MEAN THE, THE PEOPLE WHO REALLY WERE INTERESTED IN HEARING ARE, YOU KNOW, THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMPANIES AND, UH, THE VILLAGE OFFICIALS.

WELL, THE, JUST LIKE BEFORE, THERE'S NOTHING TO STOP US FROM HAVING A WORK SESSION BEFORE THE NEXT NO, I'M JUST SAYING MAKE THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING, MAKE THAT THE PUBLIC MAKE THE WORK SESSION, THE PUBLIC HEARING.

YEAH, BECAUSE RIGHT.

ONLY DO THAT.

CAN'T DO THAT.

NO, WE COULD DO ANYTHING WE WANT, BUT YOU KNOW, THE THING IS THAT WAS THE SUPERVISORS SAID THAT.

NO, I'M SAYING WE COULD NO, I'M JUST SAYING WE COULD JUST, RIGHT NOW WE, WE SCHEDULED A HEARING IN THE EVENING.

NOBODY'S, YOU KNOW, NOBODY'S HERE.

UM, SO THE, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY PEOPLE WE REALLY WANT TO HEAR FROM PEOPLE WHO WOULD PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, BE MORE, UH, IT WOULD BE MORE CONVENIENT TO DO IT DURING THE, THE DAYTIME.

I WOULD, I WOULD THINK.

BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S UP TO YOU.

WE NOT, THROUGHOUT THE DAYTIME, IT'S NOT DAYTIME.

IT WOULD NO MATTER WHAT, IT'S THE EVENING, IT'S AFTER FIVE.

RIGHT? RIGHT.

AND I THINK THIS COULD BE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SOME CONCERNS AND I THINK THEY'RE VERY LEGITIMATE.

AND I THINK IT COULD BE, UM, WE MAY WANT TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME, UM, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING TO THEM ABOUT YOUR CONCERNS.

AND I FEEL THAT WE WANT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WHY DON'T WE HAVE A WORK SESSION? WE'LL DO THE SAME THING.

WHY WAS IT ADJOURNED TO OCTOBER 8TH? WHAT'S EIGHTH? OCTOBER 8TH.

OCTOBER 8TH.

AND IN THE MEANTIME, WE'LL INVITE, UH, INVITE THEM, WHOEVER WANTS TO COME FOR THE FORWARD TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH US ABOUT THIS.

YEP.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

WOULD YOU WANT ME TO CONTACT THEM OR WOULD YOU UH, UH, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU GONNA, UH, NO, YOU CAN, YOU CAN DO IT.

WOULD YOU BE, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO ALSO LIKE, HI.

WELL, I GUESS YOU JUST SAID IT.

I COULD TELL THEM THAT WE HAVE SOME TO TALK TO HIM AND I, I'M JUST, I'M JUST SAYING THAT COULD WE, YOU IDENTIFY ALL THE, UM, CONCERNS AND ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE, SO THIS WAY I COULD REACH OUT TO EVERYBODY WHO WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND JUST SAY, THESE ARE THE CONCERNS WE HAVE ABOUT THE, UH, THE PROPOSED CONTRACT.

AND THESE ARE ISSUES AND WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IT AT THIS MEETING.

COULD YOU BE THERE? ALRIGHT, SO I SAID WHAT MY CONCERNS WERE HERE.

I SAID THE SAME CONCERNS YESTERDAY AT THE WORK SESSION.

AND I HAD THE SAME CONCERNS WHEN WE SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I WILL CONTACT THEM IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO REPEAT THEM TO YOU.

I COULD CERTAINLY DO THAT.

BUT I'M GONNA DO THE SAME THING FOR THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH IS THE WEST ELMSFORD FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.

UM, SO WE'RE NOW ONTO THE, YOU WANNA OPEN UP THE NEXT HEARING, PUBLIC HEARING.

SO THE NEXT ONE IS TO CONSIDER AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBERG AND THE VILLAGE OF ELMSFORD TO PROVIDE FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO RESIDENTS OF THE WEST ELMSFORD FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.

UM, AND WE WANNA KNOW IF THERE'S ANYBODY HERE WHO DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

SO THIS IS DIFFERENT SITUATION, RIGHT? THOSE TWO ENTITIES ARE NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR, UM, FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.

UH, SO THIS IS THE, BUT WE CAN DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANNA TREAT THEM THE SAME.

SO THIS IS A, UH, UM, A CONTRACT THAT THE TOWN OF GREENBURG HAS WITH THE VILLAGE OF ELMSFORD FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES IN AN AREA OF THE FIRE OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG THAT IS NOT SERVED BY THE THREE CAREER FIRE DISTRICTS, GREENVILLE, UH, HARTSDALE AND FAIRVIEW.

UH, AND SO WE CONTRACT WITH THE VILLAGE OF ELMSFORD.

THIS IS KNOWN AS THE WEST ELMSFORD FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.

UH, THE, UH, COST FOR PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES OR WHAT THE, UH, THE VILLAGES IS SENDING US THE BILL FOR IS $329,250 AND 73 CENTS.

THAT'S AN INCREASE OF $2,763 AND 80 CENTS FROM LAST YEAR.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PUBLIC HEARING? NOT LISTED.

PROBABLY NOT.

SO YOU WANNA MAKE THE MOTION, ARE YOU, WELL, THIS IS A QUESTION BECAUSE DO WE DO THIS ONE WHICH DOESN'T HAVE THE ISSUE? OR DO WE JUST HOLD THEM OVER AND DEAL WITH THEM TOGETHER, WHICH ALWAYS, WE ALWAYS DEAL WITH THEM TOGETHER.

BUT MAYBE WE SAID IT WAS SEPARATED OUT BECAUSE OF THE PARTICULARS OF HAVING REGENERON.

WELL, NO, THERE'S TWO FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS, RIGHT? ONE HAS THEY AND REGENERON, THE OTHER ONE DOESN'T.

WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND MOVE, UM, WEST ELMSFORD AND THEN WE ADDRESS THE ISSUES WITH NORTH ELMSFORD? I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

I I WAS SAYING THE REASON IT WAS SEPARATED OUT WAS BECAUSE OF THAT.

SO I, RIGHT.

OH, I'M SORRY.

UM, SO IF THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH WEST ELMSFORD,

[01:35:01]

YEAH.

ANYONE? EVERYBODY.

SO WE CLOSE THE HEARING THEN.

SO I WOULD CLOSE THE HEARING.

AND LARRY, YOU'RE LEAVING THE RECORD OPEN VOTING FOR SEVEN DAYS.

CORRECT.

ALL IN FAVOR? SECOND.

WHO WAS THE SECOND? SECOND, SECOND, JOYCE.

SO NEXT HEARING, UM, UM, AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AWAIT WILL, SHOULD BE THE NEXT TWO HEARINGS ARE QUICK TO CONSIDER ONE YEAR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND VILLAGE OF TARRYTOWN FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO UNINCORPORATED GREENBURG RESIDENTS OF THE GLENVILLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR THE YEAR 2024.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

[ To consider an agreement between the Town of Greenburgh and the Village of Elmsford to provide Fire Protection Services to residents of the West Elmsford Fire Protection District for the year 2025 ]

[ To consider a one-year agreement between the Town of Greenburgh and the Village of Tarrytown for Fire Protection Services to Unincorporated Greenburgh residents of the Glenville Fire Protection District for the year 2024]

ALL RIGHT.

SO THIS IS A PROPOSED ONE YEAR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND THE VILLAGE OF TARRYTOWN FOR FIRE PROTECTION ER, UM, SERVICES TO THE GREENVILLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR THE YEAR 2024.

UH, THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH THIS IN THAT WE NEVER RECEIVED THE DATA IN ORDER TO CREATE A CONTRACT IN ORDER TO, UM, APPROVE SOMETHING.

UH, WHEN WE SOUGHT THE DATA, WE RECEIVED OUR, OUR SECRETARY RECEIVED A RESPONSE BACK SAYING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO RENEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT.

AND SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, UH, WE TABLE THIS UNTIL WE ACTUALLY HAVE A, ACTUALLY HAVE A, UH, CONTRACT OR THE, THE DATA NECESSARY TO MAKE A CONTRACT FROM THE VILLAGE OF TARRYTOWN FOR THE YEAR 2024, OR WE RENEGOTIATE IT.

SO I'M MAKING A MOTION THAT WE TABLE IT.

WOULD IT MAKE SECOND? SO, WAIT, LEMME SAY BEFORE, I'M JUST WONDERING WOULD IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO HOLD IT ALL? IS THERE A WAY OF LIKE, HOLDING IT OVER BECAUSE TABLING WELL, WE STILL NEED TO GET THE INFORMATION.

WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION.

BUT I'M SAYING MAYBE IF WE, UH, HELD IT OVER FOR TWO WEEKS, WE DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'RE GONNA GET THE INFORMATION NEED TO HAVE TO GET THEIR INFORMATION.

SO WE SHOULD GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET THEIR INFORMATION TOGETHER.

SO I THINK IF WE TABLE IT, THERE'S ENOUGH TIME IN BETWEEN FOR EVERYONE TO GET THE INFORMATION THAT WE NEED.

DO WE HAVE A VOTE NOW? BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A SECOND.

[ To consider a one-year agreement between the Town of Greenburgh and the Village of Hastings-on-Hudson for Fire Protection Services to Unincorporated Greenburgh residents of the Donald Park Fire Protection District for the year 2024]

ONE MORE VOTE.

THE LAST ONE.

WHAT, UH, TO CONSIDER THIS WAS A HOME RUN, THOUGH , TO CONSIDER A ONE YEAR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND THE VILLAGE OF HASTINGS AND ON HUDSON FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES, UM, TO UNINCORPORATED GREENBURG RESIDENTS OF THE DONALD PARK FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR THE YEAR 2024 .

SO THIS IS A, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

CAROL ALLEN FROM HARTSDALE.

SO THIS IS A, AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND THE VILLAGE OF HASTINGS FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO AN AREA OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, UH, THAT'S NOT SERVED BY THE THREE CAREER FIRE DEPARTMENTS, HARTSDALE, FAIRVIEW, AND GREENVILLE, UH, CALLED DONALD PARK FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.

AND THIS IS FOR THE YEAR 2024.

UH, THE INCREASE ON THIS ONE, IT, WELL, WELL, LET ME TELL YOU.

IN 2023, THE CONTRACT WAS FOR 3 330 6,941.

THERE'S A SLIGHT INCREASE THIS YEAR, UH, TO THREE, UH, 344,937 AND 2024.

UH, WE DO HAVE A CONTRACT.

WE DO HAVE, UH, ALL THE DATA THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO APPROVE THIS.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS? GOT ONE LISTED.

OH, OKAY.

WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN TO US HOW IN THE WORLD WE ARE TRYING TO DO A CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THAT WE'RE GIVEN A YEAR AGO? AND WHAT IS IT THE, IN WHAT INFORMATION YOU NEED IN ORDER TO EXECUTE THAT? SO, DEPENDS ON WHAT THE CONTRACTS BASE THEIR NUMBERS ON.

IF IT'S BASED ON ASSESSED VALUE, THE ROLES ARE GENERALLY THE PRIOR YEAR ON WHICH IT IS BASED.

AND SO SOME, SOME CONTRACTS, LIKE YOU SEE FOR ELMSWORTH, THE WAY THEY'RE DESIGNED IS THEY CAN DO 2025 AND 2025.

THIS HAS NOT BEEN DELAYED.

THIS IS WHEN WE RECEIVED THEIR, THEIR DATA, WE ACT ON IT AND IT'S FOR 2024.

I I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IF SERVICES HAVE ALREADY BEEN RENDERED FOR THAT CALENDAR YEAR, WHICH CLOSED NINE MONTHS AGO, HOW IS THAT BEING DONE IN THE ABSENCE OF A VALLEY CONTRACT?

[01:40:02]

WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK TO THE VILLAGES.

BUT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN HISTORICALLY AND DIFFERENT VILLAGES HAVE DIFFERENT WAYS OF, OF PUTTING FORWARD THEIR CONTRACTS, IT'S A ROLLING, THE AMOUNT THAT WE GAVE LAST TIME THEY USE FOR THAT.

I GUESS CA I HAVE NO IDEA.

BUT THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY SOME OF THESE CONTRACTS WORK.

SO IT'S ALWAYS A YEAR BEHIND IN EFFECT.

SO THE CONTRACT THAT WE SIGNED FOR 23 REALLY IS APPLYING IN THIS YEAR, DEPENDING ON WHAT DATA THEY'RE BASING ON.

SOME LIKE TO ACTUALLY HAVE FINAL NUMBERS BEFORE THEY ACTUALLY PUT THROUGH THEIR CONTRACT.

SOME DON'T, BUT MAYBE WE SHOULD SPEAK TO LIKE THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS AND THE VILLAGES AND SAY, GOING FORWARD, MAYBE WE SHOULD MOVE TOWARDS, UM, HAVING CONTRACTS SIGNED BEFORE THE TERM ENDED.

BECAUSE LET'S SAY WE ALL DECIDED AS A BOARD, OH, WE DECIDED WE DON'T WANT TO, UH, HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THEM.

AND IT'S ALREADY THE END OF 2025 ALMOST.

AND THIS IS FOR 2024.

YOU KNOW, I I WOULD ADVISE THAT YOU WEREN'T, WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT BASED ON PAST PRACTICE AND BASED ON, UM, ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, THEY, THEY WOULD KNOW THAT THIS IS THE USUAL PRACTICE AND THAT WE WORK OUT THE NUMBER AFTERWARDS.

SO, UM, I I DON'T FORESEE IT BEING AN ISSUE.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN, BUT IT IS PRETTY TYPICAL.

WELL, LET ME JUST ASK YOU A QUESTION.

LET'S SAY, IS IT, IS IT JUST TYPICAL GREEN, LET'S SAY THE NUMBERS ARE, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE THEM AS MUCH OF AN INCREASE AS, UM, AS, AS THEY WOULD WANT.

YOU KNOW, I'M TALKING ABOUT IN CONCEPT.

THEY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING THAT THEY COULD DO.

THEY CAN'T SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO SERVE YOU BECAUSE THEY ALREADY SERVE, SERVE THOSE.

SO I'M JUST SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOUR POINT IS VALID AND MAYBE I SHOULD JUST, WE SHOULD SPEAK TO THEM AND SAY, IS THERE A WAY, YOU KNOW, MOVING FORWARD.

MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION? YES.

HOW MANY YEARS HAVE WE, DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF HOW MANY YEARS WE'VE BEEN SIGNING CONTRACTS? NO, BUT MAYBE IT'S, BUT HOLD ON A SECOND.

THIS IS A GOOD POINT.

BUT, AND, AND IN, IN ALL THOSE YEARS, MOST, IF NOT ALL OF THEM, YOU'VE BEEN SUPERVISOR.

UM, HAVE WE HAD ANY ISSUE? NO, WE HAVEN'T.

SO, SO AT THIS POINT, WELL, I AM, I TOTALLY GET DR.

ALLEN'S POINT.

I'M NOT TRYING TO NEGATE THAT.

UM, I THINK IT IS, I DON'T THINK WE CAN INSTITUTE SOMETHING, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS.

I'M SAYING YOU'RE JUST HAVING DISCUSSION.

YOU COULD ALSO SIGN A NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLETE A CONTRACT AFTER THE FACT AS WELL.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THIS IS A STANDARD MUNICIPAL PRACTICE OR JUST A GREENBERG PRACTICE.

I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK.

I'VE WORKED FOR THE TOWN OF GREENBERG .

SO THIS REQUEST CAME FROM, WE HAVE TO REPAY FIRE DISTRICTS AND ALSO, UH, SOME VOLUNTEER.

SO WE'RE IN A UNIQUE SITUATION, GREENBURG.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT, SO WE RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM THE VILLAGE OF HASTINGS ON HUDSON ON JULY 9TH, 2025 FOR THE YEAR 2024.

AND THAT IS THE, THE AMOUNT OF THE CONTRACT THAT THEY EXPECT YOU TO PAY.

AND THE, THE AMOUNT OF THE CONTRACT IS 344,937, WHICH IS I WHAT I READ BEFORE.

LET ME JUST THROW OUT AS THE LAST THING FOR THIS, THE MINIMAL INCREASE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

I HOPE WE WON'T WASTE A LOT OF TIME DEBATING IT.

WE ALREADY DID.

LET'S NOT WASTE ANYMORE .

NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM, SO WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN FOR SEVEN DAYS AND WE LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN FOR SEVEN DAYS.

I WANT TO, UH, MOVE THAT SECOND IN FAVOR.

NOW WE'RE GONNA

[ PUBLIC COMMENT Advanced signup is required. A continuous five-minute limit per speaker will be strictly enforced. The clock will start when a speaker begins speaking and will not be stopped for any reason until the speaker is finished, or five minutes have elapsed, whichever occurs first. Interruptions by Town Board members, the Town Clerk or the public will not be permitted. If a speaker insists on an immediate answer, should an answer be provided, it shall be part of the speaker's five-minute allocation and not be interrupted. There will not be a second five-minute round. Any written comments sent to PublicComment@GreenburghNY.com by 4 PM the day of the hearing will be forwarded to all Town Board members in advance of the meeting for their consideration. Written comments will not be read at the meeting unless the original author is present to do so.]

HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

AND, UH, THEY'LL CALL PEOPLE IN ORDER.

THANK YOU .

AND FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, THERE IS ONLY ONE ROUND, AND AGAIN, IT'S FIVE MINUTES PER PERSON.

I SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE STILL HERE.

SO PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL WHEN THE BUZZER GOES OFF.

THAT IS THE END OF YOUR TIME.

KIDS WHO ARE EIGHT AND FIVE YEARS OLD.

WE FIRST HAVE CINDY COLLINS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

I LIVE IN EAST IRVINGTON.

I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THOSE WHO SUPPORT A SIDEWALK ON TAXI ROAD.

LAST WEEK WHILE I WAS AT THE TAXI ROAD PLAYGROUND WITH MY KIDS, I SAW A YOUNG MAN WALKING A STROLLER ALONG THE SIDE OF THE STREET CLOSEST TO THE PLAYGROUND, A CAR WHIZZED BY HIM, AND THE DRIVER VEERED INTO THE OPPOSING LANE AT THE LAST MOMENT TO AVOID HITTING THE MAN IN HIS STROLLER.

EVERYONE WAS FINE THOUGH.

MAYBE A BIT SHAKEN.

HAD ANOTHER CAR BEEN TRAVELING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION, THIS COULD HAVE BEEN DEADLY.

WE WITNESSED CLOSE ENCOUNTERS LIKE THIS ALL THE TIME ON TAXI TO ROAD, AND IT JUST TAKES A SPLIT SECOND OF A DRIVER GLANCING AT A PHONE OR EVEN SNEEZING.

AND THIS FATHER AND BABY WOULD'VE BEEN KILLED.

I'M PLEADING WITH YOU AS A MOTHER OF TWO YOUNG

[01:45:01]

IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME UNTIL SOMEONE IS KILLED TRYING TO NAVIGATE THESE STREETS.

ACCORDING TO THE GREENBERG POLICE DEPARTMENT, SINCE JUNE, 2009, THERE HAVE BEEN 182 MOTOR VEHICLE CRASHES REPORTED ON TEXT ROAD.

THAT'S MORE THAN ONE A MONTH.

AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE NEAR MISSES.

IN 43 OF THOSE CRASHES, PEOPLE WERE INJURED.

THE JOURNAL OF ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION FOUND THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF A CRASH WAS ALMOST TWO TIMES GREATER ON ROADWAYS WITHOUT SIDEWALKS.

I'VE HEARD FROM NUMEROUS PEOPLE THAT WHILE DRIVING AT THE SPEED LIMIT ON TEXTER, THEY'VE BEEN PASSED ON THE LEFT BY ANOTHER CAR, AND THESE ROADS ARE WINDY AND THERE ARE NO SIGHT LINES.

A 2024 REPORT FROM SMART GROWTH AMERICA FOUND THAT US STREETS ARE DANGEROUS BY DESIGN, PRIORITIZING FAST CARS OVER PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

THIS STUDY TOO IDENTIFIED SIDEWALKS AS KEY TO REVERSING THIS TREND.

FURTHERMORE, TODAY'S SOUPED UP SUVS AND PICKUP TRUCKS ARE MUCH FASTER, HEAVIER, AND FRANKLY MEANER TO THOSE OUTSIDE THE VEHICLE.

AND VIRTUALLY ALL VEHICLES SOLD TODAY ARE SUVS AND PICKUP TRUCKS.

FORD DOESN'T EVEN SELL SEDANS ANYMORE.

THIS IS A BIG REASON WHY THE DEATH TOLL FOR PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS IS AT A 40 YEAR HIGH.

WE NEED SIDEWALKS TO SEPARATE PEDESTRIANS FROM THESE MORE DANGEROUS VEHICLES BEFORE THE RESULT IS DEADLY.

SIDEWALKS ARE BEING FUNDED ACROSS THE COUNTRY AS PART OF A COMPLETE STREETS INITIATIVE, WHICH REDESIGNED ROADS TO BE SAFER FOR EVERYONE, INCLUDING PEDESTRIANS, CYCLISTS, AND DRIVERS.

THESE INCORPORATE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES.

SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? A 2023 JOHNS HOPKINS STUDY FOUND THAT DRIVERS ARE MORE INFLUENCED BY ROADWAY DESIGN CUES SUCH AS SIDEWALKS THAN THEY ARE BY THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT.

SO EVEN THOUGH IRVINGTON RESIDENTS, MYSELF INCLUDED, HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR YEARS TO REDUCE THE SPEED LIMIT ON TAXTER, WHICH I STILL SUPPORT, RESEARCH SUGGESTS THAT CHANGING THE SIGNS DOESN'T SLOW CARS DOWN BUILDING A SIDEWALK DOES.

THIS IS WHY MORE AND MORE SIDEWALKS ARE BEING FUNDED AND BUILT ACROSS THE US THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS IT.

OUR COMMUNITY WANTS AND NEEDS A SIDEWALK ON TAX ROAD.

AS OF THIS MORNING, WE HAD 160 SIGNATURES ON OUR PETITION FOR A SIDEWALK.

SO MANY OF US HERE TONIGHT SUPPORT THE SIDEWALK.

I KNOW FOR SOME RESIDENTS A SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE MAY MEAN ADDED RESPONSIBILITY OR CHANGES TO THEIR PROPERTY.

AND I UNDERSTAND HOW FRUSTRATING THAT MUST FEEL.

I HOPE THE TOWN CAN HELP TAKE ON THE LIABILITY OF THESE SIDEWALKS SINCE TAXI ROAD IS SUCH A HEAVILY TRAFFICKED AREA.

I KNOW RESIDENTS ALSO HAVE CONCERNS OVER FLOODING.

I WANNA THANK THE TOWN FOR WORKING WITH OUR NEIGHBORS AND INCLUDING STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MEASURES IN THE SIDEWALK DISCUSSIONS.

WE KNOW YOU CAN'T PREVENT 200 YEAR STORMS FROM OCCURRING, BUT IF YOU COULD HELP US IN ANY WAY WITH OUR FLOODING ISSUES, THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.

MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD.

IN CLOSING, PLEASE HELP US JOIN SO MANY OTHER TOWNS IN GREENBURG BY MAKING EAST IRVINGTON A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN WALK WITH THEIR CHILDREN OR DOG GO FOR A JOG, WAIT FOR THE SCHOOL BUS AND ACCESS THEIR LOCAL PLAYGROUND SAFELY.

IF THIS SIDEWALK DOESN'T GET BUILT AFTER DOCUMENTED MEETINGS, LOCAL NEWS COVERAGE, YEARS OF TALKING, AND THEN SOMEONE ELSE GETS TRAGICALLY INJURED, WHAT? THEN PLEASE BUILD THIS SIDEWALK.

I I HAVE A QUESTION.

DO YOU THINK THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED THAT PETITION WOULD BE AGREEABLE TO HAVING A SIDEWALK DISTRICT SO THAT THE BURDEN DOESN'T FALL ON THE HOMEOWNER WHO IS ON TAX THE ROAD? DO YOU WANNA EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS? I BELIEVE SO.

WHICH A SIDEWALK IS GOING IN, WE USE THOSE SIDEWALKS.

THE 166 PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THERE.

YEAH, YOU CAN, I GAVE YOU ALL THE PAPERWORK RIGHT THERE.

IT HAS THE PETITION, IT HAS THE DIS I'LL READ, I'LL READ WHAT THE PETITION SAYS.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GONNA SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE SIDEWALK DISTRICT.

YEAH, PROBABLY NOT.

WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CREATE A SIDEWALK DISTRICT.

WE COULD JUST SAY THE TOWN'S GONNA ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY.

UM, AND UH, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A A REFERENDUM.

WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE OUR LOCAL LAW THOUGH, RIGHT? WE COULD JUST CHANGE THE LOCAL LAW AND WE COULD, WE COULD HAVE CRITERIA FOR THE SIDEWALKS THAT ARE CLOSE TO BUS STOPS OR TRAIN STATIONS OR PLAYGROUNDS OR SCHOOLS.

WE COULD SET UP DIFFERENT CRITERIA.

I LIKE YOUR, YOUR SUGGESTION GOING BACK A WHILE TO CREATE SIDEWALK DISTRICTS.

AND I REALLY THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WE AS RESIDENTS, EVEN IF WE DON'T LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD IN

[01:50:01]

WE DON'T STAY RIGHT WITHIN A FEW BLOCKS OF OUR OWN HOME.

SO I THINK WE CAN ALL ANTI UP THE FEW EXTRA DOLLARS THAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR, UH, MAINTENANCE OF THE SIDEWALKS AND, AND THE, THE ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY BESIDES, 'CAUSE THE SIDEWALKS ARE COMMUNITY ASSETS FOR EVERYONE TO USE.

I FORMERLY LIVED IN A CORNER LOT WHERE WE HAD TO TAKE CARE OF THIS, BUT EVERYBODY WALKED TO SCHOOL THROUGH MY, YOU KNOW, ON MY SIDEWALK.

THAT WAS WELL SHOVELED.

BUT IT WOULD'VE BEEN A, IT WOULD'VE BEEN A HELP, YOU KNOW, TO, UM, HAVE A SIDEWALK DISTRICT AND FOR THE REPAIR OF THE SIDEWALK AS WELL.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS AND THAT'S, IT IS A BURDEN FOR, FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE IT CERTAINLY WHO'S NEVER HAD IT BEFORE, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE ELDERLY, ET CETERA.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT TOO.

YEAH, I AGREE WITH PAUL BECAUSE I'VE BEEN PROPOSING THAT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT THERE WOULD BE A SIDEWALK DISTRICT AND IT, I REALLY CAME HOME, UM, VERY SOLIDLY WHEN WE HAD AN ELDERLY COUPLE HERE AND THEY SAID, HOW AM I POSSIBLY GONNA SHOVEL, UH, GREENBERG SANITATION PLOWS PLOWING ONTO THAT SIDEWALK AND EXPECT THEM TO THEN GO OUT AND SHOVEL IT, IT THEN GETS ICY.

HOW DO YOU EXPECT THEM TO GET IT ALL? IT GETS PACKED AND PACKED AND PACKED.

UM, SO I'VE BEEN SAYING, UH, WHAT SUPERVISOR JUST REPEATED FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR.

UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE ON YOUR PETITION ACTUALLY LIVE ON TAXI ROAD.

UH, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD FOR QUITE A LONG TIME.

EVERYBODY WANTS A SIDEWALK UNTIL IT'S IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE BECAUSE OF THE LIABILITY.

AND IF WE COULD ADDRESS THAT PARTICULAR PROBLEM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S GONNA BE A DOWNSIDE IN HAVING SIDEWALKS.

THAT'S GREAT.

BUT WHEN THE TOWN DOES AND SAYS, HEY, IT'S GONNA COST US THIS MUCH TO PUT IN A SIDEWALK, WE SHOULD BE FIGURING OUT, OKAY, NOW HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO MAINTAIN IT? THAT'S RIGHT.

SO THAT WE TAKE THAT INTO A FACTOR.

AND WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT UNTIL NOW.

I THINK WE'RE GONNA START HAVING TO DO THAT.

COULD I JUST ASK FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE? IF MS. COLLINS SPOKE FOR YOU, AND YOU WILL NOT BE SPEAKING DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND SO THE TOWN BOARD COULD GET AN IDEA? RIGHT.

BUT WE WE'RE NOT DISCOURAGING PEOPLE FROM COMMENTING.

NO, NOT AT ALL.

'CAUSE I ALSO FEEL THAT THE PEOPLE HERE WHO ARE SPEAKING, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SHARE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA BE GOING OUT TO BID FOR THE SIDEWALK IN THE SPRING, AND THERE'S SOME PEOPLE IN EAST IRVINGTON WHO ARE SAYING WE DON'T WANT A SIDEWALK.

AND I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT, UH, THAT I'LL BE ABLE TO SHARE, UH, WITH RESIDENTS THE, YOU KNOW, THIS MEETING, UH, SO PEOPLE COULD SEE LIKE YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS.

YOU WERE VERY ELOQUENT.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IF I SHARE WHAT YOU SAID TO PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH THE NEED FOR A SIDEWALK AND MAY PERSUADE THEM TO AT LEAST RECONSIDER THEIR, THEIR OPPOSITION, UH, WE ALSO ARE LOOKING NOT ONLY ON A, FOR A SIDEWALK, UH, NEXT YEAR ON TAX, BUT ALSO ON MOUNTAIN ROAD.

AND, UM, AND YOU KNOW, SO IF WE DO BOTH TAX AND MOUNTAIN ROAD, UM, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY WE SHOULD GO OUT TO BID, SAY IN BY MARCH.

UH, WE SHOULD HAVE OUR SNOW REMOVAL POLICIES, UM, YOU KNOW, COMPLETED BETWEEN NOW AND THE BEGINNING OF, YOU KNOW, THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, WE COULD BE ADDRESSING SOME OF THE DRAINAGE RESIDENTS OF EAST IRVINGTON, YOU KNOW, HAVE HAD.

AND WE COULD START THAT IMMEDIATELY.

UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, MY HOPE IS THAT THE SIDEWALK COULD BE BUILT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIME BY THE SUMMER OF 2026, YOU KNOW, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IS LIKE 30 YEARS TOO LATE.

BUT IT'S, BUT AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, AT LEAST WE'RE GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, I THINK EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD IS COMMITTED TO IT.

YOU KNOW, WE, WE HONORED YOU, UM, YOU KNOW, A FEW YEARS AGO FOR WORKING ON THIS, SO WE CAN'T TAKE AWAY YOUR PROCLAMATION.

WE COULD GIVE YOU A REVISED ONE.

THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING OUT, BUT YOU DIDN'T GET WHAT YOU WANTED.

SO WE'LL HAVE TO, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT.

UM, I KNOW EVERYBODY RAISED THEIR HAND, BUT I DON'T KNOW YOUR NAME.

SO IF I CALL YOUR NAME, JUST SAY YOU WON'T OR WILL OR WON'T SPEAK.

OR YOU COULD BASICALLY JUST SAY, UM, FOR THE SIDEWALK AND MAKE IT ONE MINUTE.

THAT'S FINE TOO.

, PETER DODA DODA.

UH, I'M ON THE DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT OH, SURE.

YOU COULD SPEAK.

OH, OKAY.

YOU WANNA CLOSE THIS PART YET? NO, NO.

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT.

NO, I UNDERSTAND.

AND YOU JOKED ABOUT WORKING ON SOMETHING FOR 30 YEARS.

UH, MY NAME IS, MY NAME IS PETER DUDA.

I'M PRESIDENT OF STEP EDUCATION AND BINO ONE CHILDREN'S CULTURAL CENTER.

UH, WE BROUGHT THE FORMER FIRST UNITARIAN SOCIETY FACILITY AT 25 OLD JACKSON AVENUE FOLLOWING THE HURRICANE IDA FLOOD.

UH,

[01:55:01]

UH, IN 1986, UH, SOMEBODY BOUGHT ST.

ANDREW'S GOLF COURSE AND THEY, UH, ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO, UH, EXPAND AND, AND BUILD THERE AND BUILD TOWNHOUSES.

AND THEY KNEW THEY WERE GONNA INCREASE THE WATER FLOW DOWNHILL TOWARDS OLD JACKSON AVENUE.

SO THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, UH, INITIATED AN SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, CREATED THE SPRAIN DISTRICT, RAI JACKSON DRAINAGE DISTRICT COLLECTED TAXES FROM ALL THE RESIDENTS IN THAT DISTRICT.

UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS A MILLION AND A HALF TO WAS A MILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS.

AND THEY DESIGNED AND WERE SUPPOSED TO BUILD A DIVERSION SYSTEM FOR THE WATER TO GO INTO SPRING LAKE SO IT WOULDN'T FLOOD OLD JACKSON AVENUE.

THAT DIVERSION WAS NEVER BUILT.

IN 2012, THERE WAS ANOTHER PROJECT TO WIDEN AND STRAIGHT IN JACKSON AVENUE AND IN THE DOCUMENT THAT I SAW REGARDING THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO PUT THE WATER DIVERSION IN AT THAT TIME AND STATED THAT IT WAS ALREADY PAID FOR, THAT WAS NEVER BUILT.

AND, UM, WE UNFORTUNATELY WERE FLOODED A SECOND TIME AFTER HURRICANE IDA.

WE GOT A LOT OF VOLUNTEERS TO COME TO REBUILD OUR FACILITY TWO DIFFERENT TIMES.

IT'S ALMOST FULLY RESTORED NOW.

THE ISSUE WE HAVE NOW HOLDING US BACK IS THE, UH, THE WATER SYSTEM.

SO WE HAVE AN ISSUED A PLUMBING PERMIT AND A CONTRACT.

UH, I DON'T THINK WE CAN BECAUSE OF FUNDING.

AND THE PROBLEM IS THAT, UM, I, I PAID FOR THIS WHOLE THING MYSELF ONCE THE WAR WAS DECLARED IN UKRAINE MORTGAGE, THE HOUSE, I'M PAYING THE FIRST MOR THE PRIMARY MORTGAGE ON THE FACILITY.

'CAUSE I KNEW THERE WOULD BE PEOPLE COMING FROM UKRAINE THAT WOULD NEED DAYCARE SERVICES IN ORDER TO SURVIVE HERE IN THIS COUNTRY.

AND, UM, I OPENED A GOFUNDME.

WE TRIED TO GET MONEY FOR THE WATER SYSTEM AND PEOPLE DIDN'T RESPOND.

AND I, I DON'T BLAME THEM BECAUSE BETWEEN, UH, ALL THE UKRAINIAN COMMUNITY, IF YOU'RE GONNA GIVE MONEY TO THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT TO HELP FIGHT THE WAR OR YOU GIVE IT TO A DAYCARE CENTER, IT'S, IT'S A NO BRAINER.

SO WE'RE STUCK BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE.

AFTER THE SECOND FLOOD, I DID, UH, WE, WE HAD A, A PR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN OUR COMMUNITY DO AN ANALYSIS.

AND IN ADDITION TO THE FLOODING THAT'S COMING DOWN FROM THE GOLF COURSE, HE DETERMINED, AND I'M GONNA, I'LL SHOW THIS TO THE BOARD BASED ON TOPOGRAPHICAL DATA THAT HE GOT ONLINE.

HE DID AN ANALYSIS THAT SAID ONE OF THE BIGGER CONTRIBUTORS WAS MOUNT HOPE CEMETERY.

AT WHICH POINT, AND THIS IS FOR THE CROWD TO SEE, IT'S, IT'S A VERY PROFESSIONAL DOCUMENT.

I STARTED GOING TO MOUNT HOPE CEMETERY JUST TO LOOK AROUND AND REALIZE THAT THEY HAD PUT IN SIGNIFICANT NEW DRAINAGE.

AND ALL OF THIS IS FLOWING IN OUR DIRECTION NOW.

THEY HAD ORIGINALLY A, A DRAIN WITH A, A CONCRETE LINE CULVERT BECAUSE WHATEVER'S FLOWING OUTTA THE CEMETERY EXCEEDED THEIR CAPACITY.

SO WHAT THEY DID WAS THEY PUT IN THREE NEW DRAINAGE BASINS AND PIPING TO DIRECT THE FLOW TOWARDS OUR DIRECTION.

IT GOES UNDER THE THROUGHWAY, IT COMES TO US.

NOW, I'M, I'M WATCHING THE CLOCK, SO I HAVE TO TALK FAST.

UH, DEAN OLI WAS A, THE DIRECTOR OF FLOOD MITIGATION FOR WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

HE DETERMINED THAT THE BEST OPTION FOR ADDRESSING THIS WAS A FEMA BUYOUT OF OUR PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN CIRCULATING.

AND IN EARLY MAY, IT WAS READY FOR APPROVAL BY THIS TOWN BOARD.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED.

UM, THERE WAS ONE WORKING SESSION WHERE THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS ASKED OF ME, THERE WAS A SECOND SESSION, WHICH SUPERVISOR FINER, UH, UH, TOLD ME.

AND I TRIED TO ACCESS IT ONLINE BUT COULDN'T SEE IT.

BUT I'M HERE TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE FEMA BUYOUT.

THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 1986.

WE CAN'T FUNCTION IN THIS BUILDING, UH, THE WAY IT IS WITH THE THREAT OF, UH, FLOODING AND ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S KIDS IN THE BUILDING.

SO I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT, AND YOU INDICATED TO ME THAT THE COUNTY HAS AGREED TO, UM, PAY THE LOCAL PORT, UH, SHARE.

SO THERE WOULD BE NO, UH, TOWN FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

UM, DAVID KAVIN, WHO IS THE, UH, K KGA KGA, SORRY.

IT'S ALRIGHT.

HE IS, UH, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY, UH, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING.

[02:00:01]

HE SENT AN EMAIL OUT ON MAY THE 19TH.

I HAVE A COPY AND I THINK I DROPPED IT ON THE FLOOR, SO I DON'T WANNA BE BENDING, LOOKING FOR IT, BUT I DID NOTICE THAT THE TOWN BOARD MEMBERS WERE COPIED ON IT.

AND IN IT HE SAYS WESTCHESTER COUNTY IS WILLING TO PICK UP TO 10%.

THEY ARE WELL-FUNDED.

UH, IT, IT SOUNDED LIKE IT'S A NO-BRAINER.

WE CAN DO THIS, BUT THE TOWN HAS TO APPLY AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AS IT'S SET UP WITH THEIR APPROVALS REQUIRED.

SO CAN I JUST MAKE A SUGGESTION? BECAUSE IF THERE'S NO, FIRST OF ALL, UM, I HAVE MET WITH, YOU KNOW, RICH FAHAN AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A MEETING, YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR.

THERE'S NO CONTRIBUTION, UH, FROM THE TOWN.

AND ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS SUBMIT THE APPLICATION.

WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO, YOU KNOW, COMMIT TO SCHEDULING A WORK SESSION? WE COULD HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE, WE COULD ASK THE COUNTY IF THEY'LL SEND SOMEBODY TO THE, UH, THE WORK SESSION.

THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, COMMIT TO THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AND THEN WE COULD DECIDE, UM, WHETHER TO GO, UH, ALONG WITH THIS.

BECAUSE AGAIN, IT, IT IS A, A PROBLEM, THE FLOODING AND IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE COULD HELP THEM.

AND IT'S ALREADY, IT'S A NOT-FOR-PROFIT.

YOU'RE, YOU'RE, WE, WE, EXCUSE ME, MR. DO THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY WE WERE SUPPOSED TO STICK TO THE FIVE MINUTES.

I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO PUT IT ON A WORK SESSION AND THAT WE SHOULD MOVE TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.

TO ALLOW EVERYONE TO HAVE THEIR OPPORTUNITY TONIGHT.

SO THEN WE CAN MAKE A COMMITMENT, THE BOARD THAT WILL AGREE TO PUT IT ON, UH, YOU KNOW, WORK SESSION, UM, WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.

BUT I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME DOCUMENTATION FROM THE COUNTY THAT THEY'RE PICKING UP THE COST YEAH.

AND THE LIABILITY, BECAUSE THAT WAS A BIG ISSUE TOO.

AND IF YOU CAN, BECAUSE THERE WILL BE ONGOING LIABILITY IN THE REST OF THE, THE COUNTY DIDN'T WANT THE PROPERTY, BUT THEY WANTED THE TOWN TO TAKE THE PROPERTY SO THAT THE LIABILITY WOULD BAIL ON THE TOWN.

AND SO WE HAVE TO FIND OUT WHAT THAT, WHAT THE FACTORS ARE IN THE, OKAY.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

HAVE THE NEXT, SO WE'LL SCHEDULE, WE'LL SCHEDULE IT, SCHEDULE WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU TO GET THE DATA IN ADVANCE.

NEXT, NEXT WE HAVE SWIN.

UM, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE, UH, SIDEWALK THAT'S GONNA BE HOPEFULLY ADDED, UH, LONG TAXTER, UM, I THINK, SO AS A FATHER OF, UH, TWO YOUNG CHILDREN, WE LIVE ON CAYUGA LANE.

UM, I COULD JUST SAY IT'S, UH, WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE ON AN ISLAND, RIGHT? IT'S LIKE ON UNSAFE TO ACTUALLY WALK ANYWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEYOND JUST THE LANE THAT WE'RE ON.

UM, SO IT'S, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE ASK OR, YOU KNOW, THE HOPE THAT WE GET SIDEWALKS ADDED IS JUST ONE PURELY OUTTA SAFETY.

UM, TO ALLOW US TO BASICALLY ENJOY THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE'RE IN, UM, AND IS SAFE ME OR MANNER, UM, TO ALLOW OUR KIDS TO MEET OTHER CHILDREN THAT LIVE MAYBE ACROSS THE STREET, GO DOWN TO, TO THE PLAYGROUND THAT IS LITERALLY ABOUT THREE BLOCKS AWAY.

WHERE AT PRESENT WE ARE FORCED TO DRIVE JUST OUT OF THE FACTOR OF SAFETY.

UM, SO THOSE ARE KIND OF THE KEY THINGS.

I I ALSO, WHAT REALLY STUCK OUT TO ME OR TOUCHED ME WAS I THINK LAST YEAR, SEBASTIAN SAGE CAME AND SPOKE HERE.

UM, HE WAS A YOUNG THIRD GRADER AT THE TIME WHO GOT HIT BY A CAR ON TAXTER AND HAD A RELATIVELY LONG RECOVERY.

LUCKILY HE RECOVERED.

UM, AND HAVING TWO KIDS NOW IN THIRD GRADE, IT JUST TOUCHES HOME.

THEY'D BE LIKE, I HAVE TO TELL THEM, DON'T EVER GO NEAR THE STREET.

IT'S JUST NOT SAFE.

DON'T GO ANYWHERE ON THE STREET.

UM, IT'S REALLY, UH, HAD A NEGATIVE IMPACT I THINK FOR THOSE OF US WHO LIVE THERE.

AND, AND I DO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT IF YOU'RE LIVING ON TAX AND YOU HAVE A SIDEWALK THERE, THOSE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE THINGS THAT ARE OF CONCERN.

BUT IF THE TOWN CAN HELP ADDRESS THOSE, I I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE'D BE MUCH LESS RESISTANCE POTENTIALLY.

UM, SO, UH, YOUR HELP WITH THIS IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.

HOW NOT HAVING A SIDEWALK ON TAXI ROAD HAS, IT'S REALLY IMPACTED MY LIFE AND HOW, UM, I, I THINK IT'S CRUCIAL TO HAVE A SIDEWALK AND IT'S LONG OVERDUE, BUT SCHOOLS, UH, RECENTLY STARTED AND I HAVE BEEN GOING AROUND THE SCHOOL, UM, TALKING ABOUT THIS PUSH FOR A SIDEWALK THAT I'VE BEEN LUCKY ENOUGH TO WORK WITH PAUL ON.

AND SPEAKING OF WHICH, MR. SEBASTIAN SAGE.

HELLO COUNSEL.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME.

UM, I JUST WANTED TO COME HERE.

IT'LL BE REALLY QUICK.

UM, LAST TIME I WAS HERE, SO I MENTIONED IT, BUT I KINDA JUST TALKED ABOUT MY STORY AND

[02:05:01]

AND I'VE GOTTEN A COUPLE SIGNATURES, LIKE 40 TO BE PRECISE AND JUST A COUPLE, IT'S JUST BEEN JUST LIKE A WEEK OF SCHOOL AND I'LL, I WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO KEEP SPREADING, UM, MY PASSION FOR WANTING TO GET A SIDEWALK INSTALLED.

AND YEAH, THAT WAS MOSTLY IT.

I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP AND JUST SHOW THAT LIKE, I, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE A SIDEWALK FOR ALL RESIDENTS OF IRVINGTON, BUT ESPECIALLY, UM, KIDS MY AGE WHO CAN'T REALLY DRIVE YET AND GO TO SCHOOL WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, BUS STOPS HAVING TO WALK TO SCHOOL.

I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR EVERYONE'S SAFETY, ESPECIALLY KIDS MY AGE.

WHEN YOU WERE IN THE ACCIDENT, HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO, COULD YOU TALK ABOUT YOUR INJURIES AND HOW LONG IT TOOK YOU? YEAH, SO AFTER I GOT HIT, I WAS IN THE HOSPITAL FOR TWO WEEKS AND I HAD TO GET SURGERY AND HAD, AND I HAD THREE TITANIUM SCREWS IN MY ELBOW FOR A YEAR, AND THEN A YEAR LATER I HAD 'EM TAKEN OUT.

UM, TOOK A, I WOULD, I'LL SAY AROUND LIKE HALF A YEAR, I, I, UM, HAD TO SPEND SOME TIME AWAY FROM MY SPORTS, AND OBVIOUSLY IT TOOK A LOT OF TIME TO RECOVER.

SO WHOLE PROCESS PROBABLY TOOK AROUND A YEAR TO GET BACK TO WHERE I WAS, UM, HOW TO WEAR CAST FOR A COUPLE MONTHS IN SCHOOL.

AND, UM, YEAH, IT WAS JUST NOT A PLEASANT EXPERIENCE AS A THIRD GRADER.

BUT, UM, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THIS SO THAT NO ONE ELSE CAN EXPERIENCE THAT.

NO ONE WANTS TO HAVE THEIR KIDS TO GO THROUGH WHAT I WENT THROUGH.

SO I THINK IT'S CRUCIAL THAT WE GET INSTALLED.

IT'S BEEN LONG ENOUGH.

I THINK IT'S TIME, UH, WE FINALLY GET INSTALLED.

I COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY AWFUL THAT HAPPENED TO YOU AND CHANNELING ALL YOUR EFFORTS INTO MAKING SOMETHING HAPPEN THAT WILL BE BENEFICIAL FOR OTHER KIDS.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

YEAH, IF YOU COULD GIVE THE TOWN CLERK THE PETITIONS.

AWESOME.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION, YOU CAN EMAIL ME THERE.

NEXT WE HAVE MS. HELEN RUBLE.

I'M HELEN RUBLE, AND I LIVE ON YOU CAN HELEN.

HELEN RUBLE.

AND I LIVE ON WILLOW LANE IN EAST IRVINGTON, AND I, IT'S 36 YEARS AGO.

IN 1989, WE MOVED TO GREENBURG, AND SHORTLY THEREAFTER, I WROTE TO PAUL FINER ABOUT SIDEWALKS.

AND HERE WE ARE.

WELL, 30 YEARS IS BETTER THAN 40 .

YOU WERE, UH, AN, UH, BEGINNING SUPERVISOR AT THAT POINT.

AND WE'VE ALL GOT WHITE HAIR.

AND I WANT TO MENTION THAT IT'S NOT ONLY FOR CHILDREN, BUT ALSO FOR OLDER FOLKS WHO WANNA TAKE A WALK.

I MEAN, I CURRENTLY WALK, BUT I TAKE MY LIFE IN MY HANDS WHEN I DO.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET SIDEWALKS FOR ALL THE FOLKS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO, AND I WANT TO SUPPORT AND COMMEND THE OTHER, UH, CITIZENS WHO'VE SPOKEN AND SUPPORT, AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THEM.

SEPTEMBER, AND I INVITED HIM OUT TO OUR ANNUAL MEETING.

NEIL GRUENSTEIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

HI, I AM NEIL GRUENSTEIN.

I LIVE IN EAST IRVINGTON ON TAXI ROAD.

UH, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT 14 YEARS.

I'M ALSO THE, UH, PRESIDENT OF THE EAST IRVINGTON CIVIC ASSOCIATION.

UM, I'VE BEEN ON THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION ABOUT 10 YEARS, AND THOSE 10 YEARS, LIKE SIDEWALKS COME UP ALMOST AT EVERY ONE OF OUR QUARTERLY MEETINGS.

UM, SO IT'S A TOPIC THAT'S, THAT'S BEEN, UM, AT THE TOP OF OUR LIST FOR A REALLY LONG TIME.

UM, I, I WAS CONTACTED BY, BY GARRETT BACK IN, I WANNA SAY LAST AUGUST OR

[02:10:01]

HE CAME OUT AND PROVIDED A 15 MINUTE, UM, OVERVIEW OF, OF THE PLAN AND WHAT, WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS GONNA, AT THE TIME.

THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT SIDE OF THE STREET THE, UH, SIDEWALK WAS GONNA BE ON, BUT HE BASICALLY LAID OUT THE PLAN FOR THE SIDEWALKS TO GO IN FROM, UM, MOUNTAIN ROAD ALL THE WAY UP TO SHAW LANE.

UM, I'M ON THE OTHER SIDE OF, OF THE SIDEWALK.

UM, BUT IF IT WAS ON MY SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK, I THINK I WOULD STILL SUPPORT IT.

AT THE SAME TIME, PAUL AND I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS, AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME RESIDENTS THAT ARE NOT HAPPY, UM, AND HAVE SOME, SOME VALID CONCERNS.

AND I'VE, I'VE BEEN ON THE PHONE WITH, WITH MORE THAN A FEW OF THEM.

SOME OF THEM I HAVE STEERED OVER TO PAUL.

OTHERS I'VE HAD, I'VE, I'VE INTRODUCED THEM TO, TO GARRETT.

I'M, I'M HAPPY THAT THE CONVERSATIONS HAVE CONTINUED ABOUT, UM, LANDSCAPING CONCERNS, FLOODING CONCERNS, THE, THE, THE, THE SNOW REMOVAL, UM, ISSUES THAT, THAT WE'VE, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT, SO I WON'T BE REDUNDANT, UM, BUT AS, BUT AS AN EAST IRVINGTON RESIDENT, THAT THAT TAKES HIS LIFE INTO HIS OWN HANDS.

EVERY TIME I GO TO GET THE MAIL OR, OR TAKE THE, THE, THE GARBAGE OUT TO THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY, THERE ARE CARS FLYING 50, 60 MILES AN HOUR DOWN TAX ROAD IN WHAT'S NOW A 30 MILE AN HOUR ZONE, AND SHOULD PROBABLY BE A 25 5 MILE AN HOUR ZONE.

I'M ALSO ASSUMING THAT SHOULD, SHOULD WE, UM, BE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING THE SIDEWALKS IN THAT THERE WILL BE SOME, UM, SOME VIEWING OF, OF THE, THE CURRENT CONDITIONS TO SLOW PEOPLE DOWN VIA EITHER SPEED BUMPS OR REDUCING THE, UM, THE, THE, THE SPEED LIMIT FROM, FROM 30 TO 25.

FOR SOME REASON, HALF OF TAXI ROAD IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA IS 25 MILES AN HOUR, AND THEN YOU MAKE THE TURN AROUND WHERE WILLOW IS AND WHERE THE STRAIGHTAWAY IS.

IT'S NOW A 30 MILE AN HOUR, UM, ZONE.

AND AS OTHER PEOPLE HAVE ATTESTED TO, MOST PEOPLE JUST IGNORE THE 30 MILE AN HOUR.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SPEED, AGAIN, NOT MY AREA OF EXPERTISE, BUT I THINK THAT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT AS WELL AS CROSSWALKS, UH, TO, TO MAKE IT IT SAFE.

I'VE SEEN IN DOZENS OF CLOSE CALLS, EITHER WITH, WITH CARS PULLING OUTTA SHAW LANE AND, AND PEOPLE FLYING DOWN TAXI ROAD AT 50 MILES AN HOUR, MORE THAN MY SHARE OF, OF CLOSE CALLS WITH PEOPLE WALKING DOGS, JOGGERS, UM, DEER, UM, AND EVEN, AND EVEN, UH, JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, MY NEIGHBOR'S CAT.

SO IT'S A DANGEROUS PLACE THE PEOPLE OF, OF EAST IRVINGTON AND TEXAS ROAD DESERVE A SAFE PLACE TO LIVE.

AND I'M HOPING YOU SUPPORT IT.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

NEXT IN PERSON WE HAVE IS DR. CAROL ALLEN.

NEXT PERSON WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ONLINE, UM, DURING PUBLIC COMMENT WAS HUGH SCHWARTZ.

I DO NOT KNOW IF HE'S STILL ONLINE.

HE IS.

OKAY, GOOD EVENING.

ONCE AGAIN, CAROL ALLEN FROM HARTSDALE.

I HAVE RECENTLY RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM SEVERAL GREENBERG RESIDENTS REGARDING THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH THE TOWN GOVERNMENT, PARTICULARLY IN REGARDS TO RELEASES OF INFORMATION.

ONE RECENT INFORMATION REQUEST WAS SEEKING THE METHODOLOGY USED TO DETERMINE THE MARKET VALUE OF OUR HOMES THAT IS USED AS THE BASIS FOR DETERMINING OUR TAXES.

THAT INFORMATION HAS NOT YET BEEN PROVIDED.

ANOTHER REQUEST ASKED FOR THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT HAS BEEN SPENT FOR DEFENDING MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD AGAINST ETHICS COMPLAINTS.

THAT REQUEST IS COUPLED WITH A QUERY ABOUT COVERAGE FOR THESE MATTERS BY TOWN INSURANCE.

THAT INFORMATION HAS NOT YET BEEN PROVIDED IN A MANNER TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS RAISED BY THE RESIDENTS.

A THIRD UNANSWERED REQUEST WAS REGARDING THE MEETINGS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL LAST YEAR.

I MADE A SIMPLE REQUEST FOR THE NAMES OF ALL MEMBERS OF TOWN COMMITTEES AND THE EXPIRATION DATES FOR THEIR APPOINTMENTS.

THAT SIMPLE REQUEST WAS UNFULFILLED IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW.

IT IS DISHEARTENING TO HEAR THE COMMENTS SUCH AS WHAT WAS MADE AT YESTERDAY'S WORK SESSION, THAT FOIL RESPONSES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW.

I WOULD EXPECT THAT ALL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION SHOULD BE FULFILLED OPENLY AND HONESTLY, MAINTAINING CONFIDENTIALITY WHEN NEEDED AND NOT SOLELY WITHIN THE STRICT CONFINES AS SPECIFIED BY THE LAW.

UNRESPONSIVENESS OF THE TOWN GOVERNMENT TO RESIDENT REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, WHETHER IN WRITING OR IN PUBLIC SESSIONS, DOES NOT INSTILL CONFIDENCE IN OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES.

IT DOES NOT INSPIRE RESIDENTS TO ASSIST IN THE PROCESS OF BETTERING OUR TOWN THROUGH PARTICIPATION IN COMMITTEES OR PUBLIC

[02:15:01]

MEETINGS.

IT DOES NOT SET AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE FOR OUR YOUTH TO CONSIDER A CAREER IN PUBLIC SERVICE.

IT DOES NOT ENCOURAGE VOTING RESIDENTS TO RETURN OFFICIALS TO THEIR ELECTED POSITIONS.

WE SHOULD NOT NEED TO RESORT TO OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL, LITIGATION AND OUTSIDE AUDITORS IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THE INFORMATION ON HOW OUR TOWN IS BEING RUN.

NEXT WE HAVE HUGH SCHWARTZ ONLINE.

UM, THAT'S UNCONSCIONABLE.

GOOD EVENING AGAIN.

AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR STAYING SO LATE.

WE, IT'S BEEN A LONG MEETING.

I KNOW, UM, THERE WAS A SIMPLE REQUEST, UH, MADE, UH, VIA TWO FOILS AND A REQUEST BY ME PERSONALLY TO TOWN SUPERVISOR WHO HAPPENS TO BE THE CCFO FOR AN ACCOUNTING OF THE TOWN.

LEGAL EXPENSES BY MATTER.

UM, FOR MR. VINCENT TOOMEY FOR THE YEARS 2025, UH, 24 AND 25, THE FOIL WAS ANSWERED WITH HEAVILY REDACTED BILLS, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO GET TO THE NUMBER.

MY REQUEST TO THE ACCOUNTING BY MATTER COULD BE DELIVERED IN A MANNER THAT PROTECTED THE ANONYMITY WHERE NEEDED FOR PERSONNEL MATTERS.

BUT ALL WE GOT WAS A LUMP SUM FOR THE ETHICS CASES OF $91,000, NOT BROKEN OUT BY MATTER, AND NO ESTIMATE OF HOW MUCH IT'S GONNA COST GOING FORWARD.

DOES ANY ONE OF YOU ON THE BOARD KNOW WHAT THIS NUMBER IS? SHOULDN'T THE TOWN BOARD KNOW, SINCE IT'S ALREADY AUTHORIZED 250,000 FOR MR. TOMI AND TONIGHT, UH, TB THREE, UH, WHICH I THINK IS GONNA BE HELD OVER AS, AS I RECALL FROM YESTERDAY'S MEETING, UH, AN ADDITIONAL $50,000.

UM, THE, LET'S DISCUSS THE 91,000 THAT ALREADY THE 91,000.

IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT MR. TOOMEY'S BILLING RATE, WHICH IS QUITE REASONABLE, AT 305 AN HOUR, WHICH TRANSLATE TO 300 HOURS, WORK TO DEFEND, UH, ESSENTIALLY TB ONE, UH, WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN IMPLEMENTED.

UH, JOHANN SNAGS IS STILL ON THE PLANNING BOARD AND WAS DEEMED IN CONFLICT WITH THE ETHICS CODE BY THE ETHICS BOARD COUNCIL IN WRITING, DETERMINED THAT RECUSAL WAS THE PROPER PROCEDURE BY THE ETHICS BOARD, BOTH OPINIONS IGNORED BY THIS BOARD, WHICH IS WHY THE ETHICS BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO MOVE FORWARD TO, UH, PHASE ONE.

UH, I FIND IT, I LISTENED TO MR. SHEEN TALK ABOUT HOW FRIVOLOUS THIS, THIS, THE CASE IN THE ETHICS BOARD IS, WELL, IF IT'S SO FRIVOLOUS, WHY ARE YOU GONNA SPEND OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ON LEGAL FEES? NUMBER ONE, WHEN THIS THING COULD HAVE BEEN SETTLED 10, 10 MONTHS AGO.

AND, UH, IF IT'S FRIVOLOUS, WAS WHY WAS IT PHASE THERE, THERE A PHASE ONE, BUT THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICE CLIFF.

I COULDN'T FIND A BUDGET PIECING TOGETHER INFORMATION OF WHAT THE TOWN IS SPENDING ON OUTSIDE COUNCIL.

I BELIEVE IT'S OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.

THAT'S MY GUESS.

IT'S OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.

YET NOBODY SEEMS TO KNOW, UH, SPECIFICALLY WHAT IT'S BEING SPENT ON OR WHAT THE BUDGET IS FOR THIS YEAR.

UH, THE, THE STEIN VERSUS GREENBERG CASE HAS ALREADY COSTED COUNT OVER A MILLION DOLLARS IN LEGAL FEES, $330,000 TO MR. TOMI, WHO I DON'T THINK IS EVEN ON THE CASE ANYMORE.

HOW MUCH MORE WOULD THAT, THAT COST THE TOWN, OR, OR IS THERE WAY, WAY OF, OF SETTLING IT? ONE LAST COMMENT, MR. SCAN AT YESTERDAY'S MEETING SAYING SOMETHING I COULDN'T BELIEVE.

HE SAID, COUNSEL, TO DEFEND THE TOWN VERSUS EDGE, MARTIN CORPORATION WAS FOR PAUL PERSONALLY.

REALLY, MR. SHEEN INCORPORATION IS THE SINGLE LARGEST RISK TO THIS TOWN.

IT REQUIRES EXPERIENCED COUNSEL THAT KNOWS HOW TO DEAL WITH THIS.

THAT'S NO REFLECTION ON WHAT MR. WHAT MR. DANKO DOES ON A, ON A REGULAR BASIS.

BUT THAT IS NOT HIS AREA OF EXPERTISE.

AND IF, IF THE TOWN LOSES AND, AND MARK BECOMES A VILLAGE, THE IMPACT WOULD BE GREATER THAN ANYTHING WE'VE DISCUSSED TONIGHT.

AND FOR YOU TO SAY THAT, I, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO PUBLICLY APOLOGIZE TO MR. FINER FOR THAT COMMENT THAT YOU MADE YESTERDAY.

REGISTERED TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO JANET LYNN, WHO ALSO

[02:20:01]

HOLD ON.

I CAN'T RIGHT BACK AGAIN.

UM, UH, P AS, AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING ABOUT OUTSIDE COUNSEL FEES, INVO REQUESTS, AND I, I DON'T WANT TO ADDRESS ANY PARTICULAR ATTORNEY'S FEES, BUT I WANT TO ADDRESS KIND OF GENERAL IDEAS.

I'M AN ATTORNEY.

I BILL BY MATTER OF WHAT THE FOIA SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE FEDERAL FEES FOR EACH MATTER.

INSTEAD OF SAYING, OH, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T DO THAT.

AND GIVING REDACTED PAGES, EACH MATTER HAS A SEPARATE BILL.

ALSO, BEFORE I START WORKING ON A PARTICULAR MATTER, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT'S A LITIGATION, I'M ASKED FOR A BUDGET.

AND IF, UM, THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THE BUDGET GOING ALONG, THEN IT GETS REVISED.

THE TOWN, THE TOWN SEEMS TO BE ADDING AMOUNTS LITTLE BY LITTLE.

HAVE THEY GOTTEN A BUDGET FOR OVERALL, FOR THESE MATTERS? IS, IS THERE SOME, UH, IS IT THE TOWN SUPERVISOR, THE BOARD, THE TOWN ATTORNEY, OR SOMEONE ELSE WHO APPROVES THE BUDGET AND OR, AND APPROVES THE BILLS? UM, IS THERE A CONSIDERATION AS A MATTER IS GOING ON? IF IT, IT WOULD BE MORE COST EFFECTIVE TO SETTLE, THEN MIGHT BE CHEAPER THAN PAYING LARGE LEGAL FEES.

FINALLY, AS HUGH POINTED OUT, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND A LINE ITEM FOR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FEES.

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE POINT WHERE IN THE TOWN BUDGET IS THE LINE ITEM THAT SHOWS THAT OUTSIDE COUNSEL COUNSEL FEES PER YEAR? IF THERE IS, I HAVEN'T FAILED.

UH, I JUST HAD A QUESTION FOR JOE.

JOE, YES.

WE SAY IT'S A WASTE OF MONEY YESTERDAY, WE ALL AGREE THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE, HAVE TO BE SPENT.

UH, I HAD GOTTEN AN EMAIL.

I PERSONALLY, AS I MENTIONED YESTERDAY, I THINK THAT SPENDING $91,000 ON VINCENT TOOMEY TO REPRESENT US ON THE, WITH THE BOARD TO REPRESENT SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WITH THE BOARD OF ETHICS IS LIKE TOTALLY A WASTE OF MONEY.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S LIKE AN OBSCENITY PROBABLY.

UM, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S, THERE'S NO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT IT, THERE'S NO VALUE TO THE TAXPAYERS THAT MONEY COULD BE USED BETTER.

LET'S SAY THE ETHICS BOARD, MR. TOOMEY REPRESENTS THE TOWN BOARD, AND, UH, THE ETHICS BOARD FINDS, UM, THAT THE TOWN BOARD ACTED INAPPROPRIATELY.

UH, DO THEY HAVE THE POWER UNDER THE CURRENT LAW TO SANCTION AND TO IMPOSE FINES ON, UM, YOU KNOW, ON THE BOARD, IF THEY, ON THE BOARD MEMBERS, IF THEY FOUND THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS WERE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW, LIKE WHAT'S THE RAM WE'RE SPENDING? WE'LL PROBABLY SPEND OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ON VINCE TOY'S EXPENSES.

AND WHAT'S THE WORST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN, UM, TO THE TOWN BOARD FROM, YOU KNOW, IF THE ETHICS BOARD RULES AGAINST BOARD MEMBERS, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR THE BOARD OF ETHICS, BUT IT'S LAID OUT IN OUR CODE OF ETHICS, THE POWERS THAT THE BOARD OF ETHICS.

I WANNA KNOW WHAT THEY ARE, BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE TELLING ME THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THE, THAT THERE'S, THERE CAN'T BE ANY SANCTIONS.

AND I JUST WANNA KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE OR, OR NOT.

RESPECTFULLY.

I BELIEVE YOU SHOULD ASK THE NO, BUT I'M ASKING YOU, YOU'RE THE TOWN ATTORNEY BECAUSE, WELL, I'M, I'M REPLYING, I'M SAYING RESPECTFULLY, I BELIEVE YOU SHOULD ASK JOE MALARA, WHO'S REPRESENTS THE BOARD OF ETHICS, BECAUSE WE'RE IN A CURRENT CASE AT THIS MOMENT.

AND I FEEL LIKE IF I SPEAK OUTSIDE OF THAT CASE, I'M PROVIDING UNDUE INFLUENCE ON THE BOARD.

AND I BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD BE ANSWERED BY HIM.

BECAUSE IF IT TURNS OUT THAT IT'S NOT A, NOTHING REALLY COULD HAPPEN, THEN WE'RE THROWING OUT A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO VALUE BECAUSE OF THE BOARD OF ETHICS RULES AGAINST THE TOWN BOARD.

THEY'RE GONNA SAY.

SO YOU'RE INCLUDING YOURSELF, YOU SAID THE TOWN BOARD.

ARE YOU INCLUDING YOURSELF? NO, I'M NOT.

I DISAGREE.

SO YOU'RE MEAN THE TOWN COUNCIL? THE TOWN COUNCIL.

I BASICALLY THINK THIS IS THE BIGGEST WASTE OF MONEY SINCE I'VE BEEN TOWN SUPERVISOR.

I JUST, I JUST, I, AS YOU CONTINUE TO SAY, IT WAS A BIG WASTE OF MONEY.

WHY DON'T YOU TELL EVERYONE HOW WE GOT HERE? MM-HMM .

WELL, BASICALLY, WELL, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.

WHY DON'T EXPLAIN THAT.

WE WANTED TO USE OUR TOWN ATTORNEY, BUT WERE PROHIBITED TO USE OUR TOWN ATTORNEY BY THE ETHICS, WHICH IS WHY OH, BY THE ETHICS BOARD.

BY THE ETHICS BOARD PROHIBITED BECAUSE THEY WAS SAID, IT WAS SAID TO US THAT THEY MAY USE HIM AS A WITNESS.

SO AS WE CONTINUE TO PUT OH, THE COMPLAINT JUST A BIT, BECAUSE THE COMPLAINANTS YOU HEARD ABOUT, ONE OF THEM SAID, WE MAY USE THE TOWN ATTORNEY AS A WITNESS, SO YOU CAN'T USE THE TOWN ATTORNEY.

SO IT LEFT US WITH NO ALTERNATIVE TO, TO GET OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO REPRESENT US.

WE WANTED TO USE OUR TOWN ATTORNEY.

THEY PROHIBITED US FROM DOING THAT.

SO WHEN

[02:25:01]

BUT YOU ENABLE THE COMPLAINANTS AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE HOLDING OVER, YOU KNOW, ONE OUTSIDE COUNSEL, I'M GONNA HOLD OVER ANOTHER.

I THINK IF THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT HOW MUCH WE'RE SPENDING ON OUTSIDE COUNSEL, THERE'S A CONCERN ON HOW MUCH WE'RE SPENDING ON OUTSIDE COUNSEL.

WHAT I SAID YESTERDAY IS, YOU HAVE AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING SOLELY YOU, YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN MAKE A DECISION ABOUT THE PETITION.

YOU HAD A CHOICE OF USING THE TOWN ATTORNEY INSTEAD OF SPENDING $200,000, WHICH IS ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.

TWO, I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY, IT'S $300,000 ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT FOR REPRESENTING YOU WHERE YOU COULD HAVE USED THE TOWN ATTORNEY.

THE REST OF US WANTED TO USE THE TOWN ATTORNEY.

AND BY STRATEGY, WHATEVER REASON, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT, OKAY, LET'S SAY WE'RE GONNA CALL THE TOWN ATTORNEY AS A WITNESS.

NOW WE CAN'T USE THEM TO LEAVE US UNGUARDED IN A LEGAL PROCESS.

AND AS I SAID YESTERDAY AT THE WORK SESSION, WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, AND I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE CONCERN ABOUT THIS FORENSIC AUDIT THAT'S COMING UP, BUT WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO IS GET IT TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO BE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

BECAUSE IF WHAT COULD HAPPEN TO US CAN HAPPEN TO ANYONE ON A BOARD WHERE, BECAUSE WE VOTE ON A PARTICULAR RESOLUTION, THIS RESOLUTION BEING TB ONE FROM LAST YEAR, AND INSTEAD OF TO DOING AN ARTICLE 78 LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS DONE IN THE PAST, YOU DISAGREE WITH THE BOARD, TAKE AN ARTICLE 78, TAKE US TO COURT.

ETHICS COMPLAINT AGAINST US FOR DOING THAT, ESSENTIALLY.

THEY CHOSE NOT TO DO THAT.

INSTEAD, THEY CHOOSE, CHOSE TO WEAPONIZE OUR ETHICS BOARD, FILE AN ETHICS COMPLAINT, HAVE OUR TOWN ATTORNEY BE RECUSED.

SO WE CAN'T REPRESENT, YOU KNOW, GET LEGAL COUNSEL UNLESS WE SPEND OUTSIDE COUNSEL MONEY.

THAT'S APPALLING, IF WE WILL, AS PAUL WANTS US TO DO, IS TO HAVE US HIRE OUR OWN ATTORNEYS AT OUR OWN EXPENSE.

WHAT A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD SAY, NO, ACTUALLY, YOU DON'T.

I'M PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH.

DON'T, DON'T, DON'T, DON'T, DON'T INTERRUPT ME.

WHAT WOULD, THAT WOULD SET A PRECEDENT IS THAT AS WE'RE GOING DOWN TONIGHT, WE'RE GONNA GO, I, IIII, IF SOMEBODY DISAGREES WITH WHAT WE VOTE, LET'S NOT DO AN ARTICLE 78.

LET'S TAKE IT TO THE ETHICS BOARD.

LET'S SAY WE'RE GONNA CALL THE TOWN ATTORNEY AS A WITNESS, AND WE NOW HAVE TO DEFEND ALL OF THESE LAWSUITS.

THEY COULD BANKRUPT A MEMBER OF THE BOARD UP HERE.

IT'S WRONG.

OKAY, WELL, FURTHER, LET ME, LET ME JUST SAY SOMETHING.

YEARS AGO, I REMEMBER WHEN I HAD THE FEUDS WITH BOB BERNSTEIN, WHO AT THAT TIME WAS THE HEAD OF THE EDGE RUN COMMUNITY COUNCIL.

HE ALWAYS WOULD MAKE, HE, AND AT THAT TIME, BEFORE DYLAN, UH, THERE WAS THE EDGE RUN COMMUNITY COUNCIL.

THEY WERE ALWAYS MAKING ACCUSATIONS.

SO ONE YEAR THEY WENT TO THE DA.

ONE YEAR THEY WENT TO THE US ATTORNEY.

PEOPLE WOULD COMMENT INTO MY OFFICE OF BRIEF CASES.

THEY SAID, UH, DO YOU WANT A LAWYER? I SAID, NO, I DID NOTHING WRONG.

SO, UH, I HAD, SO I, I SAID, WHY WOULD I NEED A LAWYER? YOU, YOU SPEAK TO ME.

THEY SPOKE TO ME.

UH, AND THEN THEY SAID, YOU'RE RIGHT.

AND THEN THEY, THEY WALKED AWAY.

I, I BELIEVE THIS ETHICS, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS ETHICS INVESTIGATION IS BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE COULD, WHAT I HAD SUGGESTED IS WE WITHDRAW TB ONE, WE BASICALLY ASKED THE ETHICS BOARD TO STRENGTHEN THE ETHICS LAWS.

UH, SO ANY ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE IN TERMS OF CONFLICTS, WE WILL HAVE A STRONGER LAW, AND THEN WE COULD SAVE A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.

AND, AND THE THING, LET'S, LET'S GET, LET'S GET CLARITY HERE.

LET IS NO, YOU ARE, AND I, I, I REALLY TAKE OFFENSE.

YOU DID.

THE REASON THAT TB ONE CAME TO PASS IS BECAUSE WE, WE THOUGHT THAT WE FELT UNIFORMLY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF YOU, THAT THERE WAS A CONTRADICTION AND FURTHER A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN HAVING A 5 0 1 C3 HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT WORK THAT COULD BE THEN JU UH, JUDGED BY THE PLANNING BOARD.

AND MEMBERS OF THIS FIVE, THREE MEMBERS, FOUR MEMBERS OF THIS 5 0 1 C3 WERE ON THE PLANNING BOARD.

AND THEN THEY, THEY SAID SIMPLY THAT THEY COULD, WOULD RECUSE THEMSELVES, BUT IF THEY DID RECUSE THEMSELVES, THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE A QUORUM.

SO IT, IT JUST CONFLICTED IN EVERY WHICH WAY.

ERGO TB ONE, WHICH YOU DISAGREED WITH, THEN WE, WE WERE IMPUGNED BY HAVING AN

[02:30:01]

AND THAT WE, WE DONATE A LOT OF TIME.

YES, WE AS A TOWN BOARD GET SALARIED, BUT WE SPEND A WHOLE LOT MORE TIME THAT WE'RE COMPENSATED FOR.

AND MAYBE YOU DON'T SEE THAT IN JUST THE HOURS AND HOURS THAT WE'RE UP HERE IN ON THIS DAUS OR SITTING IN FRONT OF THE DAUS AT A TABLE FOR HOURS OR SITTING IN OUR, IN OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR HOURS.

WE SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF TIME BEYOND THAT.

UM, SO THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY OFFENSIVE.

AND THEN WE HAVE PEOPLE SPEAKING AND CHERRY PICKING AND RECONSTRUCTING IN WAYS THAT WERE NOT INTENDED AND TAKEN OUTTA CONTEXT TO ACCUSE US OF FURTHER MALFEASANCE.

AND THAT IS SO OBJECTIONABLE.

AND YET WE'RE HERE, WE ARE HERE STILL WORKING AND TRYING HARD BE.

WHY NOT? BECAUSE WE'RE MAKING A FEW CENTS ON THE DOLLAR, BUT BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IN GREENBERG, WE LOVE GREENBERG.

WE ALL WANT TO SEE GREENBERG SUCCESSFUL.

WHY WOULD WE DO ANYTHING TO, TO BE, TO DEFEAT THAT PURPOSE? I REALLY WANNA KNOW WHY PEOPLE WOULD THINK THAT OF US COMPLAINT THAT WAS FILED AGAINST YOU, PAUL, WHO REPRESENTED YOU? THE TOWN ATTORNEY? NO, ME, WE NOBODY, NOBODY SHOWED UP BESIDES ME.

UH, THE LAST ONE I REPRESENTED YOU.

NO, NO, THIS WAS, NO, THIS WAS LIKE 10 YEARS.

UH, THE TOWN ATTORNEY HIMSELF RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS, THE ETHICS CODE NEED TO BE UPDATED.

I'M JUST SAYING THE LAST CASE.

UNDERSTAND.

BUT YOU HAD AN ETHICS COMPLAINT AGAINST YOU.

YOU WERE REPRESENTED BY THE TOWN ATTORNEY.

BUT I DIDN'T.

I DIDN'T.

THAT'S ALL WE ASKED FOR.

I DIDN'T ASK REPRESENTED, DIDN'T ASK THAT.

YOU KNOW, THE THING IS THAT YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR IT.

NO, BECAUSE BASICALLY, LET ME, LET ME SAY SOMETHING THIS NIGHT.

ALL I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS SPENDING A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ON SOMETHING THAT WE ALL THINK IS BASICALLY A TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY.

YOU THINK NOT ALL OF US THINK, WE THINK THIS SPENDING THE MONEY IS A WASTE OF MONEY BECAUSE WE WERE PUT IN THAT POSITION.

EXACTLY.

WE WERE PUT IN THAT POSITION, NOT BECAUSE WE CHOSE TO.

EXACTLY.

WELL, I THINK THAT THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE.

WELL, YOU HAVE TO DO IS THERE IS A BIG NO, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

THE MONEY'S ALREADY SPENT.

WE STILL, THE MONEY IS ALREADY SPENT.

THERE'S MORE MONEY THAT'S GONNA BE SPENDING MONEY.

IT HAS TO BE DEFENDED.

THIS HAS BEEN KICKED DOWN THE ROAD FOR HOW LONG TIME.

SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S VERY DISRESPECTFUL.

ANYWAY, BUT IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE? IS THERE ANOTHER COMMENT? IS THERE ANOTHER PUBLIC? WHERE ARE WE IN THIS MEETING? BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS IS ANYBODY ELSE TO SPEAK? YES, WALTER.

SIMON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, WALTER.

SIMON, LET ME ATTEMPT TO START FROM THE BEGINNING AND MAKE THE RECORD CLEAR.

THIS HOST THING STARTED WITH THE ACTION OF THE TOWN BOARD IN THE, IN, UH, MR. DANKO AND GAR KAIN BROUGHT ISSUES OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHICH IS THE LEGITIMATE RIGHT OF THE TOWN.

SO NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.

SEEING HOW WE HAVE A ETHICS BOARD, AND IF A MEMBER OF A COMMITTEE IS QUESTIONED ABOUT THEIR ETHICS, YOU GO TO THE ETHICS BOARD, THAT'S THE PROPER PROCEDURE.

AND TO INDICATE THE STATE AS YOU DID MR. SHEEN, THAT, UH, UM, MR. SWART SHOULD HAVE FILED A CHAPTER 78.

THAT IS RIDICULOUS, TO JUST IGNORE ALL THE STANDARD PROCEDURES WE HAVE.

AND RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING, GO TO CHAPTER EIGHT.

SO NO, YOU GO TO THE ETHICS BOARD AND HEAR WHAT THE ETHICS BOARD HAVE TO SAY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEIR JOB IS.

THE ETHICS BOARD RULED IN OUR FAVOR.

THE ETHICS BOARD RULED IN AND SAID WE SHOULD PROCEED.

AND COINCIDENTALLY, THE CHAIR OF THE PLAN OF THE ETHICS BOARD WAS NOT REAPPOINTED FINE.

I'M NOT GONNA SAY ANY, UH, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING ON THAT, BUT FINE, YOU, THEN IT CAN, THE RESPONSE OF THE TOWN BOARD WAS TB ONE.

AND AT THE TIME WE REQUESTED TIME AND TIME AGAIN, LET'S SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT THE TB ONE.

[02:35:01]

AND THE RESPONSE WAS, RATHER THAN GO TO TB ONE, LET'S JUST UPDATE, UH, THE ETHICS CODE.

THAT WAS THE SUGGESTION A YEAR AGO.

THAT WAS SUMMARILY REJECTED AT NO TIME.

AND WE ASKED FOR MEETINGS TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

LET'S SIT DOWN AND, AND SEE HOW WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

BECAUSE WE KNOW TO DEVELOP A NEW ETHICS CODE WILL TAKE SOME TIME.

WE KNOW THAT IT'S NOT TO BE DONE OVERNIGHT.

AND BY SITTING DOWN AND SAYING, COME TO SOME AGREEMENT, OKAY, WHILE WE ARE DEVELOPING THIS NEW CODE, LET'S AGREE UPON WHAT ACTIONS YOU WOULD TAKE AND HOW WE WOULD HANDLE IT.

AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WILL FACILITATE THE ADOPTION OF A, OF A NEW CODE WITHOUT OUT CREATING ANY ADDITIONAL CONFLICT ON WHAT WE ARE DOING.

WE HAD SAID THAT A YEAR AGO, NOT ONCE WAS WE EVER INVITED TO SIT DOWN IN A WORK SESSION AND TO FIGURE THAT OUT, NEVER DID.

BUT INSTEAD, RATHER THAN MAKING, RATHER THAN MAKING A CODE, YOU INSISTED UPON GOING TO THE TB ONE, WHICH YOU NEVER, EVER, UH, UH, UH, ENFORCE.

BECAUSE IF YOU DID ENFORCE TB ONE, WHY HAVEN'T, UH, JOHAN BEEN REMOVED FROM THE BOARD? SO YOU NEVER ENFORCED IT.

THE OTHER COMMENT IS THAT IT WAS MADE FOR THE WHOLE TOWN.

YOU KNOW, I KNOW MY, FROM MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, YOU COULD HAVE A LAW AND DEPENDING UPON HOW YOU ENFORCE IT OR DON'T ENFORCE IT, YOU COULD APPLY IT TO CERTAIN PEOPLE.

AND THE ONLY INDIVIDUALS THAT WAS REALLY BEING AFFECTED BY THAT WAS THE COMPLAINANTS.

THEY WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT WERE AFFECTED BY IT.

SO ALL ALONG THIS HAVE BEEN, THERE WAS NO NEED TO SPEND 1 CENT ON THAT.

AND THEN AFTER WE SAW THE REACTION OF THE TOWN, OF COURSE WE COULD START, UH, DOING THE BEST WE CAN TO DEFEND OUR POSITION.

SO THE COMMENT IS THAT ONLY A FEW PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING YES, BECAUSE ONLY A FEW PEOPLE ARE AFFECTED.

THAT'S WHY ONLY A FEW PEOPLE IS, IS CONSTANTLY BRINGING ISSUES UP.

LET'S MOVE THE AGENDA.

VLI WAS INVITED TO WORK SESSION AT, ON AT LEAST ONE OCCASION.

SO THAT IS FALSE.

THERE'S EMAIL RECORDS OF EVIDENCE.

IT'S BEEN SEVERAL TIMES TONIGHT, AND IT'S FALSE.

AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF ETHICS CAN SERVE A 10 YEAR TERM ACCORDING TO OUR LOCAL LAWS.

THERE'S NO WAY OF EXTENDING THAT.

UH, BLAISE SPINI HOPE HE'S DOING WELL, HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO HIM LATELY.

HE SERVED HIS 10 YEAR TERM, AND IT COINCIDENTALLY FELL WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME OF THIS COMPLAINT.

BUT THERE WAS NO WAY OF EXTENDING THAT TERM.

THERE SEEMS TO BE ALSO A BASIC PREMISE THAT THIS WAS A MATTER OF ETHICS AND THIS, THAT, THAT, AND IT IS, IT'S A MATTER.

BUT ETHICALLY SPEAKING, WE FELT THAT THERE MIGHT BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, BUT IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS A GOOD WAKE UP CALL FOR SEVERAL OF OUR BOARDS.

AND IT WASN'T JUST APPLY TO THE ONE.

IN THE ONE INSTANCE, WE, ALL OF US SIGNED OATH AND AGREEMENTS, UM, BECAUSE IT COULD BE IN THE FUTURE THAT ANY ONE OF US, ANY ONE OF, UH, OF THESE IMPORTANT COMMITTEES, INCLUDING THIS COMMITTEE, COULD CREATE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

SO IT DID, IT DEFINITELY APPLIED AS FAR AS MAKING CHANGES TO THE ETHICS LAW.

THAT'S BASICALLY NOT NECESSARY.

THE, AND, AND, AND THE, THE TOWN ATTORNEY HAS SAID IT ON MANY OCCASIONS.

ONE, THE, THE CHANGE TO THE ETHICS LAW, NOT BECAUSE OF THIS EXACTLY, BUT BECAUSE THE ETHICS LAW DOES NEED TO BE UPDATED AND CHANGED.

AND THAT EXISTED BEFORE THIS EVER AROSE.

AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED AND TALKED ABOUT

[02:40:01]

AND IS IN THE WORKS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA SAY, I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY ON THE TOWN BOARD WANTS TO HAVE A STRONG ETHICS LAWS AND WANTS THE TOWN GOVERNMENT TO BE AS ETHICAL AS, UM, YOU KNOW, AS POSSIBLE A MODEL FOR ETHICS.

BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND THERE'S NO REASON WHY EVERYBODY HAS TO BE FIGHTING OR, UH, GOING AFTER EACH OTHER OR SPENDING A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN LEGAL FEES ON A LEGAL BATTLE.

SO WHAT I FEEL THAT WOULD BE THE, THE BEST APPROACH WOULD BE IF, UM, WE BASICALLY SAID WE'RE STARTING FROM SCRATCH TO TODAY'S A, YOU KNOW, A NEW DAY.

WE ARE ASKING THE ETHICS BOARD TO COME UP WITH A STRONGER ETHICS LAW, YOU KNOW, TO ADDRESS ANY CONFLICT OF ISSUE CONFLICTS THAT YOU HAVE.

UM, WE'RE GONNA, UH, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE MR. TOOMEY SPEND, YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME HE SAYS HELLO, YOU KNOW, IT'S A HUNDRED, YOU KNOW, IT'S HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS, YOU KNOW, HE ANSWERS US.

IT'S A, THEY, THEY START CHARGING.

SO THE THING IS, I DON'T, IF WE ALREADY SPENT $91,000, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE $150,000 OR $200,000.

SO WE DON'T NEED HIM FOR THIS.

ALL WE NEED TO DO IS FOCUS ON GOING FORWARD, HAVING A STRONGER ETHICS LAW, AND THAT WILL ADDRESS EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS ON THE BOARD.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD BE FRIENDS WITH, UH, FORMER BOARD MEMBERS, UH, WHO SERVE THE TOWN WITH DISTINCTION.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE TO BE FIGHTING AND FIGHTING AND FIGHTING AND WASTING THE, UH, ETHICS BOARD'S TIME, UH, WHEN THEY COULD BE SPENDING TIME FOCUSING ON STRENGTHENING.

YOU KNOW, THE, YOU, YOU SEEM TO BE WORRIED ABOUT THE ETHICS BOARDS, BUT OUR ETHICS THAT HAVE BEEN CALLED INTO QUESTION, IT'S OUR ETHICS THAT HAVE BEEN CALLED INTO QUESTION.

IT'S NOT SO SIMPLE.

NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO POINT TO ME.

IT'S NOT SO SIMPLE.

I'M, I'M SAYING, I'M NOT SAYING THAT ANYBODY, I SAYING THAT NOBODY ON THE BOARD IS UNETHICAL.

SO LET'S SAY WE ALL AGREE THAT EVERYBODY IS VERY ETHICAL ON THIS BOARD.

IT'S OKAY.

EVERYBODY, UH, WHO SERVES ON VOLUNTEER BOARDS, THEY ALSO ARE, YOU KNOW, ETHICAL.

SO NOBODY DID ANYTHING.

UM, BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO, UH, MESS AROUND WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, TO, TO HAVE PERSONAL GAIN.

YOU KNOW, UH, THE COMMITTEE THAT DEAL WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEIR GOAL WAS CREATING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THEIR, THEIR, THEIR PURPOSE WHEN THEY STARTED THIS WAS TO HELP THE TOWN CONVINCE DEVELOPERS TO BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHICH EVERYBODY FROM THE GOVERNOR, SENATORS, CONGRESSMEN, EVERYBODY SAYS WE NEED TO DO.

SO THEY WERE DOING SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE TOWN, NOT BAD FOR THE TOWN.

SO INSTEAD OF, UH, DISPARAGING THEM AND MAKING THEM YOU, WHY DON'T WE JUST SAY WE'RE ONES LAST YEAR? I MEAN, THE REASON WHY WE HAD AN OBJECTION IS BECAUSE YOU HAD MEMBERS OF THE, BUT IT APPLIED TO THE ZONING BOARD PLANNING BOARD.

US, WE INCLUDED US INTO THIS, THAT THAT WOULD FALL UNDER TB ONE.

UH, THE OBJECTION WAS THAT YOU HAD MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD WHO CREATED A CORPORATION THAT WOULD WORK WITH DEVELOPERS TO DEVELOP THOSE PROPERTIES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR WHATEVER.

GOOD REASON, UH, I'M SORRY, UH, FOR WHATEVER GOOD REASON.

AND THEN THOSE APPLICANTS WHO WERE HELPED BY THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY WOULD THEN COME BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD TO GET APPROVALS.

WELL, CLEARLY THAT'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

NOW, ETHICS BOARD SAYS, WELL, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS RECUSE YOURSELF.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE THREE OR FOUR PEOPLE RECUSING THEMSELVES ON A, ON A PLANNING BOARD, YOU DON'T HAVE, YOU DON'T HAVE A VOTE.

THAT'S WHAT, IT'S WHAT TB WHAT NOW A SUPERVISOR THINKS THAT'S OKAY.

HAVE SOMEBODY SET UP A CORPORATION, WORK WITH DEVELOPERS, AND THEN SIT ON THE BOARD THAT'S GOING TO APPROVE THAT SAME DEVELOPMENT.

ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTED WAS, HAD AN INTEREST IN THAT PROPERTY FOR SOME OTHER DEVELOPMENT, THEY'RE, THEY MIGHT AS WELL NOT EVEN BOTHER BECAUSE THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ALREADY HELPED THIS GET TO THE BOARD.

THEY'RE NOT ON THE BOARD ANYMORE.

I'M JUST CURIOUS, WITHOUT HAVING THAT BASICALLY AUTOMATIC RUBBER STAMP, HOW MUCH, HOW MANY DEVELOPERS HAVE COME IN AND WORKED AND STARTED TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING? THERE'S DEFINITELY A CONFLICT THERE, PAUL.

YOU DON'T SEE IT.

I SEE IT.

THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL SEE IT.

WE'RE NOT WITHDRAWING TB ONE.

TB ONE IS THERE.

YOU WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH DEVELOPERS EVEN BEFORE THERE'S AN APPLICATION.

SO THE ETHICS CODE DOESN'T APPLY.

NONE OF THAT APPLIES.

'CAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE ACTING AS INDIVIDUALS

[02:45:01]

IN THIS CORPORATION, AND THEN THEY COME ONTO THE PLANNING BOARD.

AND NOW, OKAY, I WORKED WITH YOU, YOU KNOW, MAYBE I CAN RECUSE.

AND FRANKLY, RECUSAL IS AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION PLANNING.

UH, ETHICS BOARD SAYS YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO, BUT RECUSAL IS AN INDIVIDUAL DISTINCTION.

WELL, THERE'S, AND I JUST WANT, SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE? WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST? THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS MEMBERS OF A BOARD SETTING UP AN INDIVIDUAL CORPOR A CORPORATION TO WORK WITH OUTSIDE.

IT'S LIKE US SETTING UP A CORPORATION TO HAVE SOMEBODY COME IN WHO'S GONNA PUT UP ADUS, RIGHT? AND WE'RE HELPING THEM WITH ADU, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA BE UP HERE AND BE IMPARTIAL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GONNA DO ADUS.

WELL, I I BASICALLY THINK WE, FIRST OF ALL, SINCE I'VE BEEN SUPERVISOR, DEVELOPERS ALWAYS COME TO ME SAYING, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE INTERESTED IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT, YOU KNOW, I COULD DO TO HELP THEM? SO, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF, UH, SOMETIMES I'LL REACH OUT TO OTHER NOT-FOR-PROFITS IN TERMS OF, UM, UH, HELPING THEM LOOK FOR POTENTIAL FUNDING OR, YOU KNOW, REACHING OUT TO THE STATE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS VERY, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT.

THERE'S A LOT OF BUMPS AND A LOT OF OBSTACLES.

YOU DIDN'T SET UP A COMPANY THOUGH, RIGHT? SET, BUT, YOU KNOW, BUT THE PEOPLE, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT DISTINCTION IS NO, THE THING IS THE NOT-FOR-PROFIT THAT THE FORMER MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD, YOU KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE SET UP.

THEY WERE NOT LOOKING FOR PERSONAL FINANCIAL, YOU KNOW, GAINS.

THEY WERE LOOKING BASICALLY TO HELP, UM, CREATE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN GREENBURG, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ALL SAID IS IMPORTANT.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? EVERY COMMUNITY, INCLUDING GREENBERG, WE REALLY HAVE, WE'VE ALL FAILED BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BUILT ENOUGH AFFORDABLE.

THERE'S A, A SHORTAGE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALL OVER.

WELL, THERE A LOT OF REASONS WELL OVER THE COUNTY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE COULD GET, IF WE COULD GET, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE DEDICATED AND PASSIONATE ABOUT CREATING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, IF THEY'RE GONNA BE WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS AND GIVING THEM RESOURCES AND HELPING THEM, UH, STRATEGIZE, UH, THAT'S GREAT.

I THINK THAT'S POSITIVE.

THAT IS GREAT.

I AM PROUD OF THIS INITIATIVE THAT WE HAVE ALL WORKED TOGETHER TO ACCOMPLISH FROM THE TOWN BOARD ALL THE WAY TO THE TOWN ATTORNEY, ALL THE WAY TO OUR OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, UM, OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE HELPED US TO REALLY PULL THIS INITIATIVE TOGETHER.

ABSOLUTELY.

AND HOW IS IT DOING? AND, AND YOU KNOW, NO ONE, LISTEN, WE WERE NOT IMP IMPUGNING, WE WERE NOT IMPUGNING THE, THE MEMBERS OF, OF THIS, THIS GROUP AND, AND THEIR INTENT, WE NEVER, WE NEVER QUESTIONED THAT THEIR INTENT WASN'T GOOD, BUT MAYBE IT WAS A, A PR PRATFALL THAT THEY JUST DIDN'T THINK ABOUT.

AND WHO'S TO SAY THAT A FUTURE, FUTURE MEMBERS OF THAT BOARD, UM, WHO MIGHT BE PART OF IT, DIDN'T, WOULDN'T HAVE THAT, WOULDN'T HAVE ILL INTENT.

SO WE COULDN'T, WE, WE HAD TO PROTECT OUR TOWN FOR NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE.

WELL, THEN WE'RE NOT GONNA COME TO A RESOLUTION ABOUT THE STRIKE.

CAN WE MOVE ON WITH THE AGENDA, PLEASE? WELL, I'M SAYING 30.

THE LAST THING I'M GONNA SAY IS THAT WE SHOULD DROP, UH, THE, WE SHOULD TELL MR. TOOMEY, WE DON'T WANT HIS SERVICES ANY ANYMORE DEALING WITH TB ONE AND ETHICS INVESTIGATION, AND BASICALLY, SO WE SHOULD LET THE ETHICS BOARD RULE AGAINST US, NEVERMIND, I, THAT WE SHOULD BASICALLY TELL MR. TOY.

WE DON'T WANT HIM TO CONTINUE REPRESENTING HIM, REPEATING THE SAME THING 10 TIMES, NOT YOU'RE REPEATING THE SAME STUFF OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

WE, THIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY, BUT WE'VE ALREADY, WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS.

WE'VE ALREADY SPENT 45 MINUTES HAVING THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT TV.

TV.

WELL, YOU DONT WANNA, DON'T WANNA HEAR IT BECAUSE, NO, IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T WANNA HEAR BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY HEARD IT.

SO HOW MUCH WE, THERE'S NOTHING GOING TO CHANGE TONIGHT.

IT IS NOW 10 27.

YEP.

WE HAVE A MEETING TO CONTINUE.

WE HAVE WORK TO GET DONE.

MM-HMM.

SO CAN WE PLEASE MOVE ON? YES, PLEASE.

WE ALSO MAY HAVE MORE PUBLIC SPEAKERS.

DO WE HAVE MORE PUBLIC SPEAKERS? LISA, COLBY JENKINS.

COLBY, COME PLEASE.

OH, SOUND BOY.

, I'M GONNA KEEP YOU ON.

FRED, FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANT TO JUST, UM, THINK THIS, IF WE COULD JUST HAVE ONE MOMENT OF SILENCE, JUST NO, TOBY, COME ON ONE MOMENT.

CAN I CAN'T, LIKE, I JUST, IT'S JUST, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE, YEAH, YOU USUALLY START OFF BY THANKING GOD, FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANT TO, UH, LET EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY KNOW THAT THE GREENBERG FARMER'S MARKET IS NOW OPENING THIS SATURDAY.

WE WILL BE LAUNCHING OUR, UM, BOOK BAG INITIATIVE THAT WE'VE DONE FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS.

THIS IS OUR THIRD ANNUAL BACKPACK BACK TO SCHOOL BLOCK PARTY STYLE BACKPACK GIVEAWAY.

AND WE ARE ALSO LAUNCHING OUR FEEDING FAMILIES GROWING COMMUNITIES FREE PRODUCE INITIATIVE.

[02:50:01]

BECAUSE YOU ALL BELIEVED IN THE VISION THAT DARE TO BE DIFFERENT HAD FOR THE GREENBERG FARMER'S MARKET, WHICH WAS BIRTHED OUT OF, AND IT BIRTHED OUT OF A PILOT PROGRAM THAT TOOK PLACE RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF THE TOWN HALL.

UM, SO IT'S GONNA START AT 10:00 AM TO 2:00 PM UM, PEOPLE CAN COME AND SIGN UP FOR FREE PRODUCE.

THEY CAN COME SHOP WITH OUR VENDORS, VISIT OUR VENDORS THAT ARE GONNA BE THERE.

WE ARE ALSO ACCEPTING VENDORS.

SO IF YOU WANT TO BECOME A VENDOR AT THE GREENBERG FARMER'S MARKET, WE WILL BE OPEN EVERY SECOND SATURDAY, EVERY FOURTH SATURDAY FROM NOW UNTIL THANKSGIVING.

JOIN US IF YOU DO CRAFTS, IF YOU DO, UH, ANY TYPE OF, UH, UM, OTHER THINGS THAT YOU DO IN TERMS OF YOUR BUSINESS, COME SEE US.

UM, VENDOR BOOTHS ARE GONNA BE $25 AND $30 FOR, UM, REGULAR FOOD VENDORS.

UM, SO WE ARE REALLY MAKING IT AFFORDABLE SO PEOPLE CAN COME AND THEY CAN JOIN US.

UM, I ALSO, UNFORTUNATELY HAD TO COME TONIGHT TO SPEAK TO AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION THAT TRANSPIRED HERE TODAY.

I CAME TO, AS I NORMALLY DO, UM, ME AND MY TEAM TO COME DROP OFF THE FLYERS, MAKE SURE THAT OUR BANNERS ARE UP AND EVERYTHING, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT COLBY JENKINS, THIS IS NOT DARE TO BE DIFFERENT.

THIS IS ALL OF US DOING THIS.

WE HAVE COME TOGETHER TO PUT THIS FARMER'S MARKET TOGETHER.

UM, FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANT TO THANK, I WANT TO THANK OUR, UM, COUNCILWOMAN JOY HABER FOR ALL OF HER HELP THAT SHE HAS DONE BEHIND THE SCENES.

A LOT OF YOU MAY NOT EVEN KNOW OF THE THINGS THAT SHE'S DONE TO HELP BEHIND THE SCENES, MAKING SURE THAT WE WAS ABLE TO GET THE POD SIZING IT UP, ALL TYPES OF STUFF THAT SHE'S DONE.

AND I JUST WANNA PERSONALLY SAY THANK YOU.

I ALSO WANNA THANK PAUL, BUT I ALSO WANNA THANK YOU ALL INDIVIDUALLY AS WELL, BECAUSE IT COULDN'T HAVE BEEN DONE WITHOUT YOU.

ALL RIGHT? WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL, WITHOUT THE RESOLUTION AND ALL OF THESE THINGS TO MAKE IT POSSIBLE, NOT FOR ME, BUT FOR THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.

WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH OUT HERE.

WE KNOW WE SEE THE SITUATION, WE SEE HOW PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING, AND WE ARE MEETING THE NEEDS OF THOSE STRUGGLING FAMILIES, WHETHER THEY HAVE A HIGHER INCOME OR A LOWER INCOME, WE ARE HERE TO SUPPORT THEM.

AND COMING TODAY, TO PUT THE FLYERS HERE, I WAS MET BY AGGRESSION.

I WAS MET BY, UM, A TERRIFYING SITUATION WHERE OUR FLYERS WERE TOSSED OUT OF THE, THE TOWN HALL.

OUR FLYERS WERE RIPPED OFF OF THE FRONT DOOR.

I HAD TO GO TO THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN THE BACK.

I HAD TO SPEAK TO, UM, KRISTA WHO CAME OUT AND, UM, WAS WITH ME WHILE WE WERE TRYING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION.

SECURITY WAS OUT THERE GETTING INVOLVED.

THE, THE DEPUTY CLERK.

AND I WAS ACTUALLY, I GOTTA SAY LIKE, BY WHAT I ENCOUNTERED AND THE WAY THAT I WAS HANDLED AND THE WAY THAT I WAS SPOKEN TO BY OUR TOWN CLERK, WHO'S AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, WHO HANDLED WHAT WE ARE DOING, LIKE IT WENT OVER IT WITH A MINIMUM OF CONCERN.

LIKE WE ALL DIDN'T WORK HARD FOR THIS INITIATIVE.

WE ALL WORKED HARD TO SEE THIS THROUGH TO THE END.

AND YOU KNOW, THIS ATTORNEY DANKO, YOU KNOW THIS, YOU KNOW, AND I WANT THIS ADDRESSED THAT THIS IS, THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

I APPRECIATE IT.

ANYBODY ELSE? UH, YES.

STATE PANEL LAW 1 4 5 0.30 SAYS THAT IT MAKES IT ILLEGAL TO POST AN ADVERTISEMENT OR NOTICE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.

GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS AND OTHER GOVERNMENT CONTROL PROPERTY ARE NON-PUBLIC FORUM REGULATIONS MUST BE REASONABLE AND VIEWPOINT NEUTRAL.

NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO POST AT TOWN HALL.

WELL, THIS IS A SPONSORED EVENT BY THE TOWN.

YOU KNOW, THE FLYER HAS THE LOGO OF THE TOWN.

SENATOR COUSINS AND ASSEMBLYWOMAN AHKI ARE ALSO, UH, COUNTY LEGISLATOR,

[02:55:01]

UH, UH, JEWEL WOOLIE, UH, JEWEL WILLIAMS JOHNSON ALSO, UH, IS A CO-SPONSOR OF THIS.

AND I, AND ALL THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS INDICATED THAT, UH, THESE FLYERS CAN BE, UH, PLACED AT TOWN HALL.

WE'VE, OVER THE YEARS SINCE I'VE BEEN SUPERVISOR, WE'VE, UH, PLACED A LOT OF NOT-FOR-PROFIT FLYERS AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS AT TOWN HALL AND ON THE WINDOWS.

AND I FEEL THIS BUILDING BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

AND I FEEL THAT WE SHOULD DO.

NOW THIS IS REALLY SUCH AN AMAZING, UM, MARKET.

IT'S, UH, THE ONLY MARKET THAT I KNOW OF WHERE THE FOOD IS FREE, WHERE THEY'RE GIVING, UH, UM, AWAY ITEMS, UH, TO PEOPLE WHO ARE LOWER INCOME, WHO BASICALLY CAN'T AFFORD, UH, THE PRODUCE.

UM, SO I THINK THIS IS A WONDERFUL THING, AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD, THE TOWN SHOULD BE DOING EVERYTHING HUMANLY POSSIBLE TO HELP MAKE THIS MARKET A SUCCESS.

BECAUSE THE MORE PEOPLE WHO KNOW ABOUT IT, YOU, NOT EVERY, YOU DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE NEWSPAPERS EVERY SINGLE DAY NOW THAT WE USED TO HAVE WHERE PEOPLE WERE, IT WAS EASY TO GET THE NEWS.

IT'S VERY, VERY HARD, UH, TO INFORM, INFORM PEOPLE, PEOPLE ARE USING THEIR, THEIR, THEIR INTERNET AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WEBSITES, BUT YOU STILL REACHING VERY FEW PEOPLE.

SO IF THESE FLYERS, UH, TOWN HALL COULD HELP EVEN ONE PERSON WHO WOULD NOT NORMALLY KNOW ABOUT THIS, THIS WOULD BE GREAT.

IN FACT, I'M GONNA CONTACT THE POLICE, UM, UH, DEPARTMENT, UH, TONIGHT, AND I'M GONNA ASK IF THEY COULD, UM, PUBLICIZE THE, UH, THE MARKET ON THE DIGITAL BOARDS.

UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I SORT OF FEEL THAT, UM, WHEN PEOPLE ARE DRIVING ON HILLSIDE AVENUE, UM, IF THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S A MARKET AND THEY COULD GET FREE FOOD, IT'S ANOTHER WAY OF REACHING OUT.

BUT I, I FEEL REALLY STRONGLY THAT, UM, THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A TOTALLY APPROPRIATE MARKET TO PUBLICIZE AND TO, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, TO PUT A TOWN HALL.

YOU KNOW, EVEN YESTERDAY, I, I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BELABOR THE POINT.

WE, WE, WE, EVERYBODY AGREES.

I, I DO, I DO WANT TO, BECAUSE YOU SAID THE FOOD IS FREE, BUT YESTERDAY, WHEN THAT WAS RAISED, SOMEBODY SAID NO, THE PRODUCE IS FREE.

IS WHICH IS CORRECT? YEAH.

KOBE UHUH.

OKAY, I GOTTA GO TO THE MIC.

NO, NO.

'CAUSE I WE DIDN'T HEAR YOU.

WE CAN JUST REPEAT IT, RIGHT? OH, CAN SHE HEAR? OKAY.

'CAUSE IS NEED HEAR THE PRODUCE.

THE PRODUCE IS FREE, RIGHT? THE PRODUCE IS FREE, SO I DON'T WANT TO, BUT THE OTHER FOOL, THE OTHER FOOL IS A COST, ANY VENDORS IS A COST, RIGHT? SO WE'LL HAVE DIFFERENT, UM, BOOTH THAT WILL HAVE ITEMS THAT ARE FREE.

SO WE'LL HAVE, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE THING IS CORRECT.

WE'LL HAVE OTHER FOODS THAT WILL BE ALSO, CAN WE MOVE THE AGENDA? YES.

AND I REFUTE THE CHARACTER IN ASSASSINATION.

NO ONE WAS MORTIFIED BACK.

COLBY.

OKAY, WE WAIT.

WE HAD OUR COLBY COLBY'S.

WE DID.

HEADLOCK READ APPOINTMENTS

YOU ALREADY HAD YOUR FIVE MINUTES.

I UNDERSTAND.

I JUST, NICOLE THINK YOU CAN GET ALONG AND HAVE IT.

CAN WE TAKE THIS? THANK YOU.

THERE'S SOMETHING.

NO, THERE ARE MANY SPEAKERS TONIGHT.

WE DID NOT LET ANYONE GO BEYOND FIVE MINUTES.

YEAH, LISA, LISA, CAN WE, WE NEED TO MOVE ON.

WELL, WE'RE STILL NOT DOING NO CHARACTER ASSASSINATION.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED THIS AFTERNOON.

I'M NOT ASKING WHAT HAPPENED THIS AFTERNOON.

KOBE, PLEASE PUT YOUR FLYERS UP.

THE TOWN BOARD IS THE TOWN BOARD SUPPORTS YOUR INITIATIVE, PLEASE, THAT WE DID NOT DISAPPROVE FOR YOU PUTTING YOUR FLYERS UP.

I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT WENT ON.

THERE'S NOTHING IN OUR TOWN CO PREVENTING YOU, PREVENTING YOU FROM PUTTING YOUR FLYERS UP.

WE WILL SEE YOU ON SATURDAY.

ALL THE BEST TO YOU.

OKAY, THANK.

CAN WE MOVE THE AGENDA? YEAH, PLEASE.

[ Appointment of Richard Farley to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board for a term to expire December 31, 2026]

OF ED MCCARTHY TOWN ASSESSED THE FIRST SIX YEAR TERM OF TERM, UH, LIEN MANDATED BY NEW YORK STATE LAW, EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1ST, 2025 TO A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2031.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, UM, APPOINTMENT OF NICHOLAS MCDERMOTT AS PERSONAL MANAGER AT AUGUST 4TH.

EFFECTIVE, UH, JUNE 3RD, 2025.

APPOINTMENT OF RICHARD, UM, UH, FARLEY.

EXCUSE ME.

DID YOU MISS TERRANCE BROSNAN? YOU SKIPPED BRO.

TERRANCE.

HE DID TERRANCE BROSNAN, I'M SORRY, AS CABLE DIRECTOR.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT.

APPOINTMENT OF RICHARD FARLEY TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31ST, 2026.

ENS, UH, TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD FOR A TERM.

APPOINTMENT OF ANGELA

[ Appointment of Angela Methans to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board for term to expire December 31, 2026]

IT'S EXPIRE DECEMBER 31ST, 2026.

AUTHORIZING THE HONORARY TB ONE.

[ TB 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing the Honorary Commemorative Street naming of Saratoga Road at the intersection of Juniper Hill Road and "1st Street" (unlabeled) at the intersection of Saratoga Road leading to the Lee F. Jackson Elementary School, as Millie Ortiz Sheehan Way, and scheduling the installation and unveiling for September 16, 2025, at 6:30 PM]

TB ONE, TB ONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HONORARY COMMEMORATE STREET NAMING OF SARATOGA ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF JUNIPER HILL ROAD AND FIRST STREET, UNLABELED AT THE INTERSECTION OF SARATOGA ROAD LEADING TO THE LEE JACKSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AS MOLEY, UH, ORTS G AND

[03:00:01]

WAY, AND SCHEDULING THE INSTALLATION UNVEILING FOR SEPTEMBER 16TH AT SIX 30, UH, PM I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND.

UM, I AYE, BUT I WANT MY NAME TO BE LISTED LAST SO IT'S NOT A DECIDING VOTE.

UM, UH, RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, UM, SEEKING PROPOSALS FROM FIRMS TO PROVIDE FORENSIC AUDIT SERVICES TO EXAMINE FINANCIAL RECORDS INCLUDING, UH, BANK STATEMENTS, JOURNAL ENTRIES, GENERAL LEDGER, AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ACROSS DEPARTMENTS TO IDENTIFY ANY IRREGULARITIES, DISCREPANCIES AND OR DEVIATIONS FROM BEST ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES FOR THE YEARS 2000, UH, 20 TO 2023.

[ TB 2 - 9/10/2025 Resolution of the Town Board of the Town of Greenburgh establishing a Website Privacy Policy]

TB TWO.

RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ESTABLISHING A WEBSITE PRIVACY, UM, YOU KNOW, POLICY.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE OUT.

I'M HOLDING OVER, UM, TB FOUR.

I'M HOLDING OVER WHILE WE WORK OUT YOUR CONCERNS REGARDING SPECIAL COUNSEL FEES.

THAT'S FINE.

UM, TB FIVE.

[ TB 5 - 9/10/2025 Resolution of the Town Board of the Town of Greenburgh seeking proposals from firms to provide forensic audit services to examine financial records, including bank statements, journal entries, general ledger and other relevant documents across departments, to identify any irregularities, discrepancies and/or deviations from best accounting principles for the years 2020-2023 (Held over from 8/6/2025 Town Board Meeting)]

UH, THE ONLY, UM, CHANGE I HAD WAS I WAS GONNA ASK GOING FORWARD IF WE COULD, UM, ASK, UH, THE AUDITORS, UM, TO ADVISE WHEN THEY COME UP WITH, WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS IF THE NEW CONTROLLER HAS IMPLEMENTED ANY, ANY, UM, ANY, UM, PROBLEMS THAT THEY IDENTIFIED THE 2024 AUDIT'S NOT YET, UM, COMPLETED YET.

SO THAT WOULD JUST BE A FURTHER DELAY.

YOU'VE ALREADY NO, IT'S NOT A DELAY.

I'M JUST ASKING.

YOU'VE ALREADY, I'M, I'M SPEAKING, I'M JUST ASKING, YOU'VE ALREADY DELAYED THIS FROM OCTOBER 6TH I 2025? IT IS, NO, I'M JUST, IF, IF WHEN THEY DO THE, OR IF WHEN THEY GIVE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD, IF THEY COULD INDICATE, UM, WHAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD MEET WITH THE CONTROLLER AND ASK HER, UH, WHAT CHANGES, UM, UH, HAVE BEEN MADE IF THERE WERE ANY.

ALRIGHT, SO, AND WHAT CHANGES WERE NOT MADE IF THERE WERE ANY.

SO PAUL, THERE'S NO SECOND TO YOUR MOTION.

I'M GONNA MAKE THE MOTION WITHOUT ADDING ANY CAVEATS RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG PROPOSING, UH, SEEKING PROPOSALS FROM FIRMS TO PROVIDE FORENSIC AUDIT SERVICES TO EXAMINE FINANCIAL RECORDS INCLUDING BANK STATEMENTS, JOURNAL ENTRIES, GENERAL LEDGER, AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ACROSS DEPARTMENTS TO IDENTIFY ANY IRREGULARITIES, DISCREPANCIES AND OR DEVIATIONS FROM BEST PRACTICE PRINCIPLES FOR THE YEARS 2020 TO 2023.

I'M MAKING THAT MOTION.

[ AT 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing settlement of property damage related Claim, File No.: 33/25C, by Milo Riverso & Michele Riverso for an amount not to exceed $3,029.56]

ATT ONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF PROPERTY DAMAGE RELATED CLAIM FILE NUMBER 33 25 C BY MYA RIVERO AND MICHELLE RIVERO FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 3020 $9 AND 56 CENTS.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND IN FAVOR, AYE.

T TWO RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF PROPERTY DAMAGE RELATED CLAIM FILE NUMBER 2125 C BY KAREN ALQUIST FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 5,000 5 27 13.

[ AT 2 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing settlement of property damage related Claim, File No.: 21/25C, by Karin Almquist for an amount not to exceed $5,527.13]

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TAX TERTIARY SETTLEMENT WITH PETITIONER 40 CEDAR STREET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 CEDAR STREET.

A T THREE

[ AT 3 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing tax certiorari settlement with petitioner 40 Cedar Street LLC for property located at 40 Cedar St. The Town’s share of the refund is $2,639 ±; the County’s share is $18,227±; the No. Yonkers Sewer District’s share is $3,171±; the Dobbs Ferry Union Free School District’s share is $131,337±. Refunds from all sources total $155,373±. ]

THE TOWN SHARE OF THE REFUND IS 2006 THREE NINE.

UH, THE COUNTY SHARE IS 18,000 2 27.

UM, UH, REFUNDS FROM ALL SOURCES TOTAL.

1 5 5 3 7 3.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT.

SECOND ONE FAVOR, AYE.

FOUR RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TAX TERTIARY SETTLEMENT WITH PETITIONER LEWISTON REALTY HOLDINGS REFUNDS FROM ALL SOURCES TOTAL 16,379.

A T

[ AT 4 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing tax certiorari settlement with petitioner Lewiston Realty Holdings, LLC for property located at 80 Grasslands Rd. The Town’s share of the refund is $4,855±; the County’s share is $2,651±; the Saw Mill Valley Sewer District’s share is $398±; the Pocantico Hills Central School District’s share is $7,722±; the N. Elmsford Fire District’s share is $572±; the Consolidated Sewer Mtc. District’s share is $182±. Refunds from all sources total $16,379±. ]

ONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN SUPERVISOR TANON AGREEMENT WITH GENERAL CODE AND EZ DOCKS FOR THE CONTINUED INDEXING AND SCANNING SERVICES OF BUILDING DEPARTMENT RECORDS.

[ BD 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing the Town Supervisor to enter into an agreement with General Code and Ebizdocs, Inc. for the continued indexing and scanning services of building department records]

C ONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED ENC CLOSING NORTHAMPTON DRIVE, UH, BETWEEN SOUTH MANOR DRIVE TO THE DEAD END OF NORTHAMPTON DRIVE ON SATURDAY OCTOBER 4TH FROM 11:00 AM TILL 6:00 PM FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO HOLD A BLOCK PARTY.

[ CL 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing N Hampton Drive (P.O. White Plains, NY), between S Manor Drive to the dead end of N Hampton Drive, on Saturday, October 4, 2025 (Rain Date: Sunday, October 5, 2025), from 11:00 AM until 6:00 PM, for the neighborhood to hold a block party]

RESOLUTION NORTH AUTHORIZING CLOSING WOODS END LANE FROM 28 WOODS END LANE TO WOODS END ROAD ON SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2025.

UH, CE TWO

[ CL 2 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing Woods End Lane, from 28 Woods End Lane to Woods End Road, on Sunday, September 21, 2025 (Rain Date: September 28, 2025), from 2:00 PM until 7:00 PM, for the residents to hold their neighborhood block party]

UM, FROM 2:00 PM TO 7:00 PM FOR THE RESIDENCE TO HOLD THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PARTY.

SEE L THREE RESOLUTION NORTH AUTHORIZING CLOSING OF MIDVALE ROAD BETWEEN OLD COLONY ROAD AND CLUB WAY ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 27TH, UM, FROM FIVE TO 8:00 PM FOR RESIDENTS OF MIDVALE ROAD TILL THE NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PARTY.

RESOLUTION

[ CL 3 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing Midvale Road, between Old Colony Road and Club Way, on Saturday, September 27, 2025 (Rain Date: Sunday, September 28, 2025), from 5:00 PM until 8:00 PM, for the residents of Midvale Road to hold their neighborhood block party]

UH, RESOLUTION NORTH AUTHORIZING CLOSING OF SOUTH ROAD BETWEEN HILLSIDE AVENUE TO LINCOLN PLACE ON SUNDAY, OCTOBER 26TH FROM ONE TO NINE FOR THE PARKWAY GARDEN SOCIAL ACTION COMMITTEE TO TELL THEIR ANNUAL HALL HALLOWEEN PARADE.

SEE FOUR,

[ CL 4 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing of South Road between Hillside Avenue to Lincoln Place on Sunday, October 26, 2025, from 1:00 PM until 9:00 PM, for the Parkway Gardens Social Action Committee to hold their Halloween parade]

[03:05:01]

FIVE RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH AT 8:30 PM TO CONSIDER AN AMENDED SITE PLAN.

[ CL 5 - 9/10/2025 Resolution scheduling a Public Hearing for Wednesday, September 24, 2025, at 8:30 PM, to consider an amended site plan application by Brixmor SPE 6 LLC for Dalewood Shopping Center II [353-371 Central Avenue North, P.O. Hartsdale, NY] & Dalewood Shopping Center III [401-425 Central Avenue North, P. O.Hartsdale, NY] [TB 25-08]]

APPLICATIONS BY BROOKS MOORE FOR DALEWOOD SHOPPING CENTER, UM, CENTRAL AVENUE NORTH PO DALE, NEW YORK, AND DALEWOOD SHOPPING CENTER.

UH, 4 25 CENTRAL AVENUE NORTH.

AND DALE, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND.

CL SIX RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CLOSING OF EDGEMONT ROAD BETWEEN ROUND HILL ROAD AND BARKLEY ROAD.

UH,

[ CL 6 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing (1) Edgemont Road between Round Hill Road and Barclay Road, (2) Barclay Road between Edgemont Place and Glenwood Road, (3) Glenwood Road between Barclay Road and Walbrooke Road, (4) Walbrooke Road between Glenwood Road and Roxbury Road, (5) Roxbury Road between Walbrooke Road and Edgemont Road, and (6) Edgemont Road between Roxbury Road and Edgemont Place for the Edgemont Community Council to hold a Halloween Parade on Sunday, October 26, 2025, from 2:30 PM to 4:30 PM]

BARKLEY ROAD BETWEEN EDGEMONT TYSON, GLENWOOD ROAD, GLENWOOD ROAD BETWEEN BARKLEY ROAD AND WALBROOK ROAD.

WALBROOK ROAD BETWEEN GLENWOOD ROAD AND ROXBURY ROAD.

UM, UH, THE HALLOWEEN PARADE ON OCTOBER 26TH, UH, FROM TWO 30 TO 4:30 PM I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND AGAIN.

C SEVEN RESOLUTION AUTHOR HORIZON CLOSING OF GLENDALE ROAD BETWEEN LONGVIEW DRIVE AND SHERIDAN ROAD.

[ CL 7 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing (1) Glendale Road between Longview Drive and Sheridan Road, (2) Longview Drive between Glendale Road and Clayton Road, (3) Clayton Road between Longview Drive and Sheridan Road, and (4) Sheridan Road between Glendale Road and Clayton Road for the Edgemont Community Council to hold a Halloween Trick-or-Treat event on Friday, October 31, 2025, from 5:00 PM to 9:00 PM]

LONGVIEW DRIVE BETWEEN GLENDALE ROAD AND CLAYTON ROAD.

CLAYTON BETWEEN LONGVIEW DRIVE AND SHERIDAN ROAD AND SHERIDAN ROAD BETWEEN GLENDALE AND CLAYTON ROAD.

OCTOBER 31ST FROM FIVE TO 9:00 PM I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND.

UH, CL EIGHT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CLOSING OF KEMPSTER ROAD BETWEEN COTSWOLD ROAD AND HADDEN ROAD ON SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2025.

[ CL 8 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing Kempster Road between Cotswold Way and Hadden Road, on Sunday, September 21, 2025 (Rain Date: September 28, 2025), from 2:00 PM until 5:00 PM, for the Cotswold Association to hold its fall picnic]

UM, FOR THE COSAL ASSOCIATION TO HOLD THIS FALL PICNIC, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND.

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CLOSE CLOSING OF A HOMEWOOD COURT AT BOTH ITS INTERSECTIONS WITH HOMEWOOD ROAD ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 13TH FOR THE WINDER ROAD ASSOCIATION TO HOLD AS ANNUAL PICNIC.

SEAL, UH, NINE

[ CL 9 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing Homewood Court at both its intersections with Homewood Road, on Saturday, September 13, 2025 (Rain Date: Sunday, September 14, 2025), from 12:00 pm until 3:00 pm, for the Windsor Park Association to hold its annual picnic]

10 RESOLUTION WEATHER AS CLOSING OF SARATOGA ROAD AT INTERSECTION OF JUNIPER HILL ROAD TO SARATOGA ROADS INTERSECTION WITH FIRST STREET UNLABEL, LEAVING TO THE LEE JACKSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ON SEPTEMBER 16TH, 6:00 PM TO 7:00 PM FOR THE HONORARY COMMEMORATIVE, UM, UM, STREET NAMING.

THAT'S FROM 12 THREE DEAL.

UM, YEAH, 12 TO THREE.

UH, CL

[ CL 10 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing closing Saratoga Road at the intersection of Juniper Hill Road to Sartoga Road's intersection with "1st Street" (unlabeled) leading to the Lee F. Jackson Elementary School, on September 16, 2025, 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, for a Honorary Commemorative Street naming]

[ CD 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution of the Town Board of the Town of Greenburgh endorsing the submission of a 2025 New York State Water Infrastructure Improvement (WIIA) grant application through the New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC) and appointing an authorized representative for the project related to the improvement of wastewater infrastructure in the vicinity of 100 & 120 East Hartsdale Avenue]

CD ONE RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ENDORSING THE SUBMISSION OF A 2025 NEW YORK STATE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION THROUGH THE NEW YORK STATE ENVIRONMENTAL FACILITIES CORP.

AND APPOINTING AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PROJECT RELATED TO THE IMPROVEMENT OF WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE VICINITY OF A HUNDRED AND 120 EAST HARTSDALE AVENUE.

RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ENDORSING THE SUBMISSION OF A 2025 WESTCHESTER COUNTY COMPLETE STREET MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM APPLICATION FOR PROJECT KNOWN AS THE EAST WEST HARTSDALE AVENUE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.

CD TWO

[ CD 2 - 9/10/2025 Resolution of the Town Board of the Town of Greenburgh endorsing the submission of a 2025 Westchester County Complete Streets Municipal Assistance Program application for a project known as the East-West Hartsdale Avenue Transportation Improvement Project]

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FISCAL YEAR 2025.

CO ONE

[ CO 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing Fiscal Year 2025 budget transfers]

BUDGET TRANSFERS.

UH, ORDER, UH, CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH AT 8:30 PM THE MATTER OF THE INCREASE AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE FACILITIES OF THE HARTSDALE SOY DISTRICT IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK, AT AN ESTIMATED MAXIMUM COST OF 6,006 $6,500,000.

A AYE.

UH, CO2,

[ CO 2 - 9/10/2025 Order Calling a Public Hearing for Wednesday, September 24, 2025 at 8:30 PM, in the Matter of the Increase and Improvement of the Facilities of the Hartsdale Sewer District in the Town of Greenburgh, Westchester County, New York at an Estimated Maximum Cost of $6,500,000]

I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND IN FAVOR.

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,795 AND 6 CENTS.

UM, CO THREE

[ CO 3 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Amendment in the amount of $6,795.06]

CEO FOUR RESOLUTION APPROVING A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN'S OUTSIDE, UH, B FUND AND THE CAPITAL FUND FOR THE BABBITT COURT FLOOD MITIGATION ELEVATION PROJECT.

RESOLUTION, UH,

[ CO 4 - 9/10/2025 Resolution approving a Budget Amendment to the Town Outside (B) Fund and the Capital Fund for the Babbit Court Flood Mitigation Elevation Project]

FIVE ORDER CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR WHAT? WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH AT 8:30 PM IN THE MATTER OF THE INCREASE IN IMPROVEMENT OF THE FACILITIES OF THE CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT, OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK, AT AN ESTIMATED MAXIMUM COST OF 3 MILLION 647 1 1 7 81.

[ CO 5 - 9/10/2025 Order Calling a Public Hearing for Wednesday, September 24, 2025 at 8:30 PM in the Matter of the Increase and Improvement of the Facilities of the Consolidated Water District in the Town of Greenburgh, Westchester County, New York at an Estimated Maximum Cost of $3,647,117.81]

ONE, UH, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION TO GO OUT TO BID FOR PAPER GOODS, ATHLETIC SUPPLIES, T-SHIRTS, LANDSCAPES, SUPPLIES, GROUND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES, TURF AND LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT, POOL SUPPLIES, PROFESSIONAL TREE SERVICES, TURF FERTILIZATION, ARTS AND CRAFT SUPPLIES AND BUS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES.

[ PR 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing the Town of Greenburgh Department of Parks and Recreation to go out to bid for paper goods, athletic supplies, t-shirts, landscape supplies, grounds maintenance supplies, turf and landscape equipment, pool supplies, professional tree services, turf fertilization, arts and crafts supplies, and bus transportation services]

ONE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GREENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ADD NO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON MAPLE AVENUE AMENDING CHAPTER FOUR 60 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.

PAY OH

[ PO 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution adopting the recommendation of the Greenburgh Police Department to add No Parking restrictions on Maple Street, amending chapter 460 of the Code of the Town of Greenburgh ]

UH, OTTE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GREENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ACCEPT A POLICE TRAFFIC SERVICES GRANT THROUGH NEW YORK STATE GOVERNOR'S TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.

[ PO 2 - 9/10/2025 Resolution adopting the recommendations of the Greenburgh Police Department to accept a Police Traffic Services Grant through New York State Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee]

PO THREE RESOLUTION APPOINTING GINGER HUNTER AS AN ENTRY LEVEL POLICE OFFICER.

[ PO 3 - 9/10/2025 Resolution appointing Ginger Hunter as an entry-level police officer]

P FOUR RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUPERVISOR TO, UM, TO RENEW AND INTERIM MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT WITH THE VILLAGE OF RADLEY, DOBBS ELMSFORD, HASTINGS, IRVINGTON AND TAR TOWN TO CONTINUE THE TOWN, UM, WIDE, UM, UH, SPECIAL WEAPONS AND TACTICS UNIT.

[ PO 4 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing the Supervisor to renew an Inter-Municipal Agreement (IMA) with the Villages of Ardsley, Dobbs Ferry, Elmsford, Hastings-on-Hudson, Irvington and Tarrytown to continue the town-wide Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) Unit]

[03:10:01]

ONE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN SUPERVISOR TO EXECUTE A PAVEMENT AND MILLING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG AND THE OWNERS OF RIO PROPERTY.

ALL IN FAVOR? A AYE, UH, PW

[ PW 1 - 9/10/2025 Resolution authorizing the Town Supervisor to execute a Pavement and Milling Agreement between the Town of Greenburgh and the owners of Real Property located at 89 Marion Avenue, Hartsdale, New York 10530]

LOCATED AT 89 MARION AVENUE HARTSDALE.

I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT SECOND.

UH, PW TWO RESOLUTION AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES, UH, FOR THE EAST HARTSDALE AVENUE SEWER BREAK REPAIR ALTERNATIVE STUDY TO CHARLES MAN JEN ARROW, ENGINEERS AS BEST QUALIFIED AND MOST RESPONSIBLE PROPOSER FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $37,530.

AND, UH, FINALLY,

[ PW 2 - 9/10/2025 Resolution awarding the contract for Professional Consultant Services for the East Hartsdale Avenue sewer break repair alternatives study to Charles A. Manganaro Engineers, P.C., as the best qualified and most responsible proposer, for an amount not to exceed $37,530.00]

I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT.

SECOND IN FAVOR? AYE.

SO IN GIST, UH, OF ALL THESE, UH, RESOLUTIONS, WE ONLY DISAGREE TWICE, WHICH IS PRETTY NO, I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE, WE, WE, UH, WE WERE IN AGREEMENT MORE THAN DISAGREEMENT, WHICH IS REALLY GOOD.

UM, SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN THE MEETING.