[ TOWN OF GREENBURGH OFFICE OF THE TOWN BOARD 177 Hillside Avenue, Greenburgh, NY 10607 Tel: 914-989-1525 Fax: 914-993-1541 https://greenburghny.com/485/Watch-Live-Board-Meetings ]
[00:00:02]
OKAY, WELCOME TO OUR TOWN BOARD MEETING.
UH, TODAY IS TUESDAY, JUNE 16TH.
AND, UM, THIS, UM, A COUPLE, UH, QUICK, UH, THINGS, UM, FRANK MODO, UH, GAVE US AN UPDATE ON, UH, THE EAST
HE SENT THE MEMO TO THE TOWN BOARD.
AND I'M WONDERING IF MAYBE AT THE NEXT, UH, WORK SESSION IN TWO WEEKS, IF, UM, WE COULD ASK FRANK TO GIVE US A MORE DETAILED, UM, REPORT AND ATTEND THE WORK SESSION AND GIVE, GIVE US WITH HIS TEAM, LIKE AN UPDATE ON, HE SAID IT WOULD BE READY IN, IN TWO WEEKS.
IT IS JUST, HE IS JUST TRYING TO PUT EVERYTHING TOGETHER, TOGETHER SO THAT IT'S NOT PIECEMEAL ANNOUNCEMENTS OUT.
HE WANTS TO MAKE SURE WHEN HE MAKES THE ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT IT'S A GOAL THAT, UH, EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE.
UM, SO, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT HE HAD SAID, RIGHT WHEN HE HAD EVERYTHING IN PLACE, HE WOULD LET US KNOW AND HE WOULDN'T HESITATE.
PAUL WANTED ANOTHER UPDATE, SO HE GAVE, WELL, YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK THE PUBLIC WANTS TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE GOT A WRITTEN UPDATE AND THAT'S GOOD.
AND I DID SPEAK TO, UH, FRANK, UM, UH, ABOUT A WEEK AGO ABOUT THIS, AND HE INDICATED THAT, YOU KNOW, IF EVERYTHING GOES RIGHT, WE COULD START THE WORK UP, HOPEFULLY IN THE SUMMER AND IT'LL BE DONE IN THREE MONTHS.
THE SECOND THING IS RELATING TO THE FORENSIC REPORT.
I HAD, UH, SENT THE BOARD A FEW MEMOS, AND I BASICALLY FEEL THAT THE, I'M REALLY THRILLED AS WE ALL ARE, THAT WE HAVE AAA BOND RATING THAT WAS, WAS FIRMED BY MOODY'S, UM, WHICH WILL LOWER OUR BORROWING COSTS.
BUT WE'VE BEEN MAKING THANK YOU CONTROLLER.
IT WAS VERY HARD, EASY FOR YOU.
NO, IT'S EASY BECAUSE WE ARE RUN FISCALLY PRUDENT AND DO A GREAT JOB IN TERMS OF MANAGING OUR RUNNING.
BUT, BUT, BUT NO, PAUL, BUT YOU GOTTA GIVE OFF CREDIT.
NO, SHE DID A TREMENDOUS LOT OF CLEANUP TO GET US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE WITH THIS RATING.
SO YOU GOTTA KEEP CREDIT WITH CREDIT.
NO, I, I EVEN GAVE CREDIT TO HER WHEN, UH, WHEN, WHEN WE, UH, HEARD ABOUT IT ON FRIDAY.
SO I THINK SHE'S DOING A GREAT JOB.
I THINK THAT SHE'S, UM, UH, GIVING US A, A ROADMAP THAT WILL HELP US BE HEALTHY FINANCIALLY.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, I REALLY, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE DON'T TRUST GOVERNMENT.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE NATURE OF, UH, OF, OF, OF PEOPLE'S REACTIONS.
AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD HIRE THE SAME COMPANY THAT, UM, DID THE FORENSIC REPORT, UH, TO, UH, GIVE US A PROGRESS REPORT, UM, AND BASICALLY EVALUATE THE CORRECTION ACTION PLANS THAT WE'VE BEEN, UH, POSTING ON THE WEBSITE.
AND ALSO TO UPDATE THE TWO THOU, UH, THE FORENSIC REPORT TO INCLUDE 2024, 2025 AND IF POSSIBLE, 2026.
AND, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE THAT IN MY 2027 PROPOSED BUDGET.
AND I'M JUST ASKING, UM, THE BOARD, UM, IF WE COULD BASICALLY, UH, REACH OUT TO, AS A BOARD, IF WE COULD TELL THE AUDITORS THAT BY THE END OF THE YEAR AND THE PUBLIC, THAT BY THE END OF THE YEAR WE WANT, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA BE COMMISSIONING THIS, UM, INDEPENDENT, UM, AUDITOR TO, UM, TO REVIEW WHAT WE'VE DONE AND THEN GIVE US A CLEAN BILL OF HEALTH OR SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE NOT DOING EVERYTHING THAT WE SHOULD DO.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT, UH, I THINK IF WE DID THAT, IT'LL REASSURE THE PUBLIC THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT USING THE FORENSIC REPORT FOR POLITICAL REASONS, BUT WE REALLY ARE USING IT AS A ROADMAP TO MAKE, UH, THE TOWN BETTER.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF I AM GONNA INCLUDE IT IN THE BUDGET, AND I'M WONDERING IF ANYBODY ON THE BOARD HAS ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT.
I THINK, I THINK WE WANNA BE CLEAR WHY THE PARENT REPORT WAS, UM, CREATED AND WHY WE, WHY WE CHANNEL THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WHY WE CHANNELED THE PARENT REPORT.
SO I THINK IT'S, SO YOU WANT SPEND A $15,000 TO HAVE HIM.
WHY CAN'T YOU JUST, AFTER YOUR REVIEW AS A CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, AS IN LOOKING AT THE CORRECTIVE PLAN, WORKING WITH KIMBERLY AND SEEING WHAT SHE HAS DONE, WHY CAN'T YOU GIVE THAT REPORT? WHY WOULD WE HAVE TO SPEND ANOTHER 15,000? OKAY.
BECAUSE I, I, I, I GOT AN EMAIL FROM KIMBERLY, UM, YESTERDAY AND SHE SAID, YOU KNOW, THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN, WE'RE ADDRESSING ALL THE ISSUES.
BUT THE THING IS, WE'VE MADE THE BOARD'S MADE SUCH A BIG TO-DO ABOUT THE FORENSIC REPORT THAT I FEEL THAT, UM, IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE HAD AN INDEPENDENT, UH, THE SAME AUDITOR WHO, WHO WAS CRITICAL OF THE, UM, OF THE WAY OF ASPECTS OF, UM, OF THE TOWN FINANCE FINANCIAL SITUATION, LOOK AND THEN SAY INDEPENDENTLY, UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'VE REVIEWED EVERYTHING THAT THE TOWN BOARD HAS DONE, THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS, HAS DONE THAT THE CONTROLLER HAS DONE.
AND I'M REALLY PLEASED THAT THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN HAS BEEN, UM, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSED TO THE
[00:05:01]
LEVEL IT HAS BEEN.ARE YOU, WE DON'T FIND, ARE YOU PLEASED WITH THE ACTIONS THAT WE HAVE? I'M, I'M VERY PLEA.
I, I'VE TOLD PEOPLE THAT THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN.
SO WHAT DO, SO WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE, UM, THE, THE, THE 30 MILLION? WHAT, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? WELL, FIRST ALL I, THAT'S, I, I FEEL VERY PLEASED ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THE TOWN HAS FINANCIAL PROB FINANCIAL PROBLEMS. I THINK THE WELL MANAGED 30 MILLION, THAT'S ALL.
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T, I DON'T, I MEAN, TO CUT YOU OFF, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, I JUST, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD MY QUESTION.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE 30 TO 34 4 MILLION? WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? LIKE, WHAT, WHAT IS, WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO ABOUT THAT? LIKE, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? WHY DO, WHEN YOU TALKING ABOUT 30, THE 30 MILLION, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE QUARTER? NO, NO, WE TALK ABOUT THE 30 MINUTE THAT THE 30 MILLION THAT WE HAVE, THAT WE HAVE A SHORTFALL GONNA DO.
UH, FINANCIALLY WE'RE IN GREAT SHAPE AND WE'RE GONNA DEAL WITH IT IN THE BUDGET.
BUT THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY I WANT, I'M NOT GONNA GET ALL I, I JUST EXACTLY WHAT I'M REFERRING.
ALL I'M ASKING FOR RIGHT NOW, ALL I'M ASKING FOR RIGHT NOW IS FOR AN INDEPENDENT, UH, THE INDEPENDENT AUDITORS TO BASICALLY, UM, GIVE US A PROGRESS REPORT AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT'S WORKING.
THIS IS HOW YOU CAN IMPROVE AND TO UPDATE THE, UM, THE FORENSIC REPORT TO INCLUDE 20 2024 AND 2025, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD SAID WE WERE GONNA DO, UM, AT THE TIME WE APPROVED IT.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT, YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION.
WHEN WE ORIGINALLY DECIDED VOTED TO THE, THE FOUR OF US AGREED IN, I BELIEVE YOU ABS ABSTAINED OR YOU SAID NO, TO PROCEED WITH THE FORENSIC REPORT, IT MADE A CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE PRIOR CONTROLLER AND THE CURRENT CONTROLLER, NUMBER ONE.
SO TO NOW TRY TO UPDATE IT TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL YEARS IS JUST OBFUSCATES THE, THE POINT OF IT, WHICH WAS TO SAY THAT THERE WERE SOME VERY SERIOUS ISSUES PRIOR TO THIS CONTROLLER STARTING.
WELL, NO, YOU'RE THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER.
I'M, BUT, UM, THE, THE, THE POINT IS THAT THE CONTROLLER HAS INSTITUTED CORRECTIVE ACTION.
I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE THAT CORRECTION CORRECTIVE ACTION TIME TO MAKE WHATEVER CORRECTIONS THERE CAN BE, AT LEAST TO CHANGE THE COURSE OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE.
WE, THAT THE, THAT HAVE BEEN DONE WRONG IN THE TOWN, NOT WE.
UM, BUT THE, THE, TO SPEND AN ADDITIONAL $15,000 AT THIS JUNCTURE IS A LITTLE HEAD OF THE GAME.
I THINK WE CAN TRACK EACH OF THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO, TO SECOND WHAT, UH, COUNCILWOMAN JACKSON SAID, EACH OF THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS THAT HAVE PUT IN PLACE, LOOK AT IT AFTER A TIME.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
WE DON'T NEED TO HIRE, UH, THE FORENSIC CONSULTANT TO DETERMINE WHAT THOSE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE AND HOW THEY'RE BEARING FRUIT.
BECAUSE WE ARE, FOR INSTANCE, DOING A BETTER JOB.
WE, THE TOWN, THE TOWN IS DOING A BETTER JOB AT COLLECTING THE BACK TAXES THAT HAVE GONE INTO FORECLOSURE INSTEAD OF LETTING THEM LAY FALLOW SINCE 2013 AND NOT TAKING THAT ACTION.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO, AND I, AND, AND TO, TO SAY THAT IT'S POLITICIZED, IT'S STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THIS IS WHERE THERE WERE PROBLEMS. THIS IS NOW HOW WE'RE FIXING THE PROBLEMS. AND THEN WE CAN LOOK AT IF GIVEN SOME TIME, HOW THOSE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE.
AND LET'S BE CLEAR, THESE, THESE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED WERE EXPOSED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL.
DID YOU VOTED AGAINST THE FORENSIC AUDIT? BECAUSE I WANTED TO GO TO 2024.
YOU VOTED AGAINST THE FORENSIC AUDIT.
THEN ONCE THE AUDIT CAME OUT, YOU TRIED TO HIDE IT ON THE, ON THE, UH, ON THE WEBSITE.
BUT I DISAGREE THAT WE'RE IN GREAT FINANCIAL STATE, AND YOU ARE THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER.
AND, AND FRANKLY, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER.
WE HAVE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S SUCCESSFUL YET, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
AND WE KNOW WHAT THE FORENSIC AUDIT IDENTIFIED THAT THERE WERE ABOUT $29 MILLION IN UNCOLLECTED PROPERTY TAX.
THAT NUMBER IS NOW OVER 34 MILLION.
[00:10:01]
HIRE SOMEBODY AND PAY $15,000, HOW ARE WE GOOD DOING UNCO COLLECTING THE UNCOLLECTED TAXES WHEN IT'S GONE UP ANOTHER 5 MILLION? WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT.I THINK THAT'S IRRESPONSIBLE AND A WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO SAY, LET'S HIRE SOMEBODY TO TELL US WHAT WE COULD EASILY DOCUMENT AND FIND OUT OURSELVES.
SECONDLY, THE FACT THAT WE HAVE AAA BOND RATING DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE'LL HAVE ONE NEXT YEAR.
THERE ARE INDICATORS THAT ARE IN THAT REPORT THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT OUR FUND BALANCES.
AND ONE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT WAS SENT TO THE, UM, TO THE AUDITORS, UH, THE RATING AGENCY RATHER, IS THIS EXTERNALLY.
UH, THE QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU LOOK TO THE 2027 BUDGET AND WHAT ARE THE, SOME OF THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES THE TOWN FACES? AND THIS PARAGRAPH NO ONE CAN BELIEVE IS WE ARE IN GREAT SHAPE.
IT SAYS EXTERNALLY, INFLATIONARY PRESSURES CONTINUE TO DRIVE UP THE COST INTERNALLY.
THE HISTORICAL LACK, LACK OF TAX INCREASES, AND THE CONTINUED USE OF UNRESTRICTED FUND BALANCE APPROPRIATIONS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET HAVE LED TO AN EXCESSIVE RELIANCE ON UNASSIGNED SURPLUS TO ARTIFICIALLY SUPPRESS TAX RATES.
THE TOWN ALSO FACES THE CHALLENGE OF REBUILDING FISCAL RESERVES FOR THE COURTHOUSE AND POLICE STATION.
AND WE KNOW FROM THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN, YOUR PLAN REGARDING THE $32 MILLION THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYMORE FOR THE COURTHOUSE BY YOUR ACTIONS, IS, IS, UM, YOUR PLAN FOR THAT IS TO TAX TO TAXPAYERS AGAIN.
SO YOU'RE TAKING $32 MILLION OFF OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE WITH THIS ARTIFICIALLY DEPRESSING THE TAX RATES USING EXCESSIVE RELIANCE ON UN UNASSIGNED, UH, SURPLUS.
THAT'S WHAT YOU DID WITH THE TAX MONEY, WITH THE COURTHOUSE MONEY.
YOU, YOU PUT IT SO IT'S UNASSIGNED AND IT COULD BE USED.
AND SO I THINK IN ORDER FOR US TO ADDRESS FISCAL PROBLEMS, WE FIRST HAVE TO FACE THE REALITY.
SO THE TOWN COUNCIL ASKED FOR THIS FISCAL AUDIT.
WE NOW HAVE TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT FIXING THE PROBLEM.
AND YOUR FIX IS TAX TO TAXPAYERS AGAIN FOR THE COURTHOUSE.
SECONDLY, THE FIRST ORDER THAT WE DID, RIGHT, HALF THE PROBLEMS, THE PROPERTIES DIDN'T SELL AT ALL.
AND ONE ACTUALLY SOLD, BUT WE HAD TO PULL IT OFF FROM THAT SALE.
WE HAD TO, BASICALLY, WE VOTED FOR IT TOO.
THAT MEETING, WE HAD TO PULL IT BACK BECAUSE IT WAS DEFECTIVE.
NOTICE GOING BACK TO THE DAYS WHEN YOUR FRIEND SLASH ATTORNEY WAS THE PERSON WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO KEEP US FROM HAVING A LARGE AMOUNT OF UNCOLLECTED TS.
AND SO YOU, YOU BASICALLY PRESSURED THE FI PRIOR ATTORNEY COUNTER ATTORNEY TO HIRE SOMEBODY.
WE PAID HIM $497,000, JUST SHY OF A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO MAKE SURE, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T GET INTO A SITUATION LIKE WE WERE BEFORE OF $30 MILLION OF OUTSTANDING PROPERTY TAXES.
AND GUESS WHAT WE GOT FOR A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS THAT WAS PAID TO YOUR BRAND SLASH ATTORNEY, WHO YOU INSISTED THE TOWN ATTORNEYS HIRE.
WE GOT $30 MILLION IN UNLED ATTACK.
IN OTHER WORDS, JOB NON DONATED.
AND IT'S ONLY BECAUSE TOWN ATTORNEY JOE DANKO, EVEN THOUGH HE IS NEW AS BEING A TOWN ATTORNEY, HAD THE, HAD THE, UH, DETERMINATION OF DOING WHAT WAS RIGHT.
AND HE SAID NO, GAVE HIM SIX MONTHS TO, TO PRODUCE THAT DIDN'T WORK, GAVE HIM A YEAR TO PRODUCE.
NEXT THING IS HE BRINGS IN THAT OUTSIDE AGENCY, THIS OUTSIDE AGENCY THAT YOU'RE NOW, NOW APPRAISING, HEY, THIS IS GOING TO HELP US WITH BRINGING, GETTING OUR UNCOLLECTED TAXES.
IF IT WASN'T FOR HIM SAYING, NO, I'M NOT GONNA CONTINUE.
AND IT'S, IT'S IN OUR REPORT TO THE, UM, STATE CONTROLLER AND BEING AGGRESSIVELY PRESSURED BY YOU TO KEEP HIM.
AND HE BROUGHT IN AN OUTSIDE AGENCY.
[00:15:01]
WE ARE NOW START GOING TO START TO BRING DOWN THE UN UH, THE UNCOLLECTED TAXES.AND LET'S BE VERY CLEAR, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT UNCOLLECTED $30 MILLION, WE STILL HAVE TO FUND WHAT WE HAVE TO FUND.
SO IF WE DON'T HAVE IT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PAYING IT, IT MEANS EVERY OTHER TAXPAYER IN THIS TOWN, INCLUDING THE VILLAGERS, PAY MORE EVERY YEAR TO MAKE UP FOR THAT DEFICIT.
BUT YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU'RE PUTTING OUT, HEY, WE'RE DOING A CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN AND EVERYTHING IS GREAT.
EVERYTHING'S UNDER CONTROL, BUT IT'S NOT UNDER CONTROL.
WE STILL HAVE A LOT MORE WORK TO DO AND WE CAN'T PUT OUR HEAD IN THE SAND AND PRETEND LIKE EVERYTHING IS FINE.
LET'S GO ALONG OR MAKE THE STATEMENT AS WE ARE IN GREAT FINANCIAL SITUATION.
A LOT OF THAT MONEY THAT'S IN OUR FUND BALANCE THAT GAVE US THE AAA BOND RATING.
'CAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY LOOK ABOUT AT IS PRETTY MUCH IS WHAT, HOW MUCH DO YOU HAVE? WE HAVE ABOUT 169 MILLION, BUT A LOT OF THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DEDICATED TO DIFFERENT PROJECTS LIKE THE COURTHOUSE.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE WORD ARTIFICIALLY LOWERING THE TAXES, BECAUSE AT SOME POINT THEY'RE GOING, THEY'RE GOING TO BE A RECKONING DAY AND LET'S WORK TOGETHER TO PREVENT IT FROM BEING AS BAD AS IT POSSIBLY COULD.
YOU JUST HIGHLIGHTED, YOU JUST HIGHLIGHTED, UH, WHY WE SHOULD HAVE AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR, UH, THE SAME FIRM, UH, THAT DID THE AUDIT AND CAME UP WITH YOUR, UH, ORIGINAL, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
THEY SHOULD BE, UH, CAREFULLY REVIEWING ALL THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS WE'VE TAKEN.
UH, THEY SHOULD BASICALLY LOOK AT 2024, 2025 AND, AND, UH, UP TO, UH, 2026 SHOULD DO KEEP IT CURRENT.
THEY SHOULD TELL US WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT AND WHAT WE'RE DOING WRONG.
AND I'M NOW LOOKING AT THE FEELINGS OF REPORT AS I, AS YOU KNOW, FOR POLITICAL, UH, PURPOSES.
I WANNA KNOW, UM, UH, IF THERE ARE UNRESOLVED ISSUES.
THERE MAY BE THINGS THAT OCCURRED IN 2024 OR 2025 THAT WE'RE NOT AWARE OF.
AND I THINK IF YOU HAD AN INDEPENDENT PERSON, UM, UH, THE SAME AUDITOR THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERY SINGLE DAY, YOU GO ON THE WEBSITE AND YOU MAKE SURE THAT IT'S POSTED ON THE HOMEPAGE, YOU KNOW, SO THE THING IS, IF WE BASIC, BECAUSE YOU WANT EVERYBODY TO KEEP FOCUSING ON IT, BUT IF WE BASICALLY, UM, IF WE USE THE SAME AUDITOR AND THEY SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THESE ARE THINGS, THESE ARE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THE TOWN HAS GOING FORWARD.
THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE TO WORK ON.
UM, I THINK THAT IT WOULD GIVE US A ROADMAP.
UM, WE ALL RESPECT THE WORK THAT THAT AUDITOR DID, AND I THINK THAT, UH, IT COULD HELP US, UM, UM, HAVE A FANTASTIC, UH, FUTURE, UH, YOU KNOW, GOING FORWARD.
I'M NOT AFRAID OF, OF GETTING CRITICISMS, UM, AND GETTING CONSTRUCTIVE SUGGESTIONS.
I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT WE COULD DO GOING FORWARD.
I THINK KIMBERLY, UM, IS DOING A GREAT JOB AS CONTROLLER.
I THINK SHE WORKS REALLY HARD.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, THERE'S NO GOVERNMENT ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY.
THERE'S NO BUSINESS ANYWHERE IN, IN THE, UH, IN THE WORLD.
AND I FEEL THAT IF I, WE, WE UPDATED A FORENSIC REPORT, GOT THE PROGRESS REPORT, THEY MAY PICK UP THINGS THAT, UH, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT AWARE OF.
AND, AND, AND WE, WE, CAN, WE CAN I JUST POINT OUT, WE, WE ARE A HALF HOUR BEHIND.
OKAY, THEN, THEN THE LAST THING I WANTED TO MENTION, THEN I'LL KEEP PART, UM, UH, THERE'S A RESIDENT WHO'S 89 YEARS OLD.
HE'S DISABLED, AND HE'S ASKED THE TOWN, UH, IF WE COULD PICK UP ON HIS, UM, RECYCLING, UH, ON THE SIDE OF HIS HOUSE BECAUSE HE CAN'T PICK UP COMMINGLES AND, AND PAPER.
AND I HAVE SPOKEN TO RICH FUN BEFORE.
UM, UM, YOU KNOW, HE RETIRED A NUMBER OF MONTHS AGO.
UH, HE, UH, THIS INDIVIDUAL IS, UH, HAVE BEEN VERY INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY.
UH, HE'S WRITTEN MANY, MANY TIMES.
AND IF WE CAN'T GET THIS RESOLVED NOW, I'M WONDERING IF, UM, IN TWO WEEKS WE COULD ALL AGREE TO HAVE, UH, FRANK MODO, UM, COME TO THE BOARD MEETING AND, UM, AND, UH, SEE IF WE COULD HELP OUT.
YOU KNOW, WE SPENT CAN CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION? YEAH.
WHY DON'T YOU, THAT HE'S, THIS IS NOT THE ONLY DISABLED PERSON WHO HAS TROUBLE, BUT IF, IF YOU, IF YOU DO SOMETHING FOR ONE PERSON, WE HAVE, WE HAVE TO DO IT FOR EVERYBODY.
SO WHY DON'T YOU PUT TOGETHER A PLAN SO WE CAN EVALUATE WHAT THE COST WOULD BE AND THEN BASE THE JUDGMENT ON WHAT IS FEASIBLE OR HOW WE CAN POSSIBLY DO THE PICKUP.
BECAUSE WE ALL CARE ABOUT PEOPLE THAT ARE,
[00:20:01]
HAVE, HAVE DISABILITIES.SO TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A COST EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO THAT AND PRESENT IT TO US, WE, WE, IT'S BASICALLY JUST RATHER THAN, RATHER THAN THIS ONE ISSUE JUST THROWING IT OUT.
NO, I'VE BEEN BRINGING THIS UP FOR MONTH.
BUT THE THING IS, BUT, BUT YES, FOR MONTHS WE COULD HAVE PUT TOGETHER THE, THE PLAN IS TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH GARBAGE.
BECAUSE WHEN WE, WITH THE GARBAGE, UH, PICKUP, WE BASICALLY, IF SOMEBODY'S DISABLED, UH, IF SOMEBODY BASICALLY WANTS TO, IF THEY'RE ELDERLY, THEY GET A DOCTOR'S NOTE, WE, UH, WE PICK IT UP ON THE SIDE OF THEIR, THEIR HOUSE WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT FOR, FOR YEARS.
AND IF THEY'RE, THEY GET, IF THEY'RE NOT, IF OTHERWISE THEY HAVE TO PAY, UM, $300, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WE, WE SET THIS UP YEARS AGO, SO ALL WE'RE DOING IS, CAN WE SEE THAT? JUST WITNESS THAT.
I NEVER, I'VE NEVER HEARD THAT, LET US KNOW ABOUT IT.
BUT RATHER THAN JUST THE VERBAL HAVING DOCUMENTATION THAT HEARD THAT BEFORE, NOT FROM RICH, NOT FROM VICTOR, NOT THIS IS SOMETHING NEW.
NO, WE'VE BEEN, WE'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR, WE'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR PROBABLY, WHY DON'T WE, THIS ASK FRANK IF HE COULD COME DOWN.
WELL, HE WOULD KNOW BECAUSE HE, WELL, HE'S NOT HERE IN THE BUILDING, BUT HE, HOW WOULD HE KNOW? HE WASN'T HERE AT THE TIME.
HE WAS, HE'S A DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, A PUBLIC POSITION.
HE WASN'T AT THE TIME, SO, OKAY.
IS THERE ANYTHING, BECAUSE HE IS A COMMISSIONER, BUT CAN WE GET TO THE AGENDA? NO, BUT WE SHUT, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE, I KNOW WE HAVE SOME, AND WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT POLICY IF YOU CAN HELP CREATE SOME POLICY.
NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS DISCUSSION REGARDING ONE LAWRENCE STREET PROJECT.
WE HAVE FIRST DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY, AMANDA MADONNA, WHO REPRESENTS THE PLANNING BOARD IN ATTENDANCE TODAY, AND THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIR DYLAN PINE AS WELL.
AND I JUST WANNA SAY THE CHAIR.
DAVID, CAN I START WITH THIS, THIS DISCUSSION IS ABOUT ONE WARRANT, BUT I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT THERE DOES NEED TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMMUNICATION COORDINATION BETWEEN THE PLANNING BOARD AND TOWN BOARD SO THAT WE COULD, YOU KNOW, EFFECTIVELY HAVE BRAND NEWS PUBLISH HEARINGS, UM, IN THE FUTURE.
SO IT'D BE GOOD TO SCHEDULE THESE FURTHER IN ADVANCE BEFORE A HEARING OPENS.
MOVING ON FROM NOW ON AND PROVIDING MORE COORDINATED MEMOS TO THE BOARD SO YOU'RE FULLY INFORMED OF ALL THE ISSUES AT HAND.
ONE, PROBABLY LIKE THE GAP BETWEEN COMING BACK FROM PLANNING REFERRAL PROCESS, BUT WE'RE MOVING INTO HOCKEY.
SO, SO, UM, SO YOU HEARD THE MEMO, WHICH I TRIED TO CONSOLIDATE WHAT THE MOST RECENT COMMENTS WERE FROM STAFF AND CONSULTANTS AND PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED YET BY PLAN CHANGES OR, UM, COMMENTS.
UM, I DID NOTE AT THE END THAT I HAD DIFFICULTY OPENING THE PLANS THAT WERE RECENTLY SUBMITTED ONLINE.
SO I, YOU KNOW, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT SOME OF THESE WERE ADDRESSED.
UM, BUT THIS WOULD HELP IN, YOU KNOW, HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT IN THE FUTURE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUTSTANDING ISSUES OR CONCERNS.
UM, AND, AND CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? SO I, I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT 16 PAPER COPIES WITH, WITH THEIR APPLICATION.
UM, ARE FIVE OF THOSE PAPER COPIES OKAY, RESERVED FOR THE TOWN BOARD? AND ARE THOSE DISTRIBUTED TO THE TOWN BOARD, OR HOW, HOW DOES THAT PROCESS WORK? THEY SHOULD, AND WE SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT PROCESS MORE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER IS, IS NOT HERE TODAY, SO WE CAN DISCUSS WITH THEM FURTHER.
BUT I BELIEVE ELECTRONIC COPIES ARE SENT OR OKAY.
UM, PAPER COPIES ARE PROBABLY HELPFUL AS WELL FOR EVERYBODY IF, IF YOU'D PREFER TO HAVE IT THAT WAY.
YEAH, I THINK IT'D BE UP TO EACH INDIVIDUAL MEMBER.
SO, UM, THIS IS REALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THIS, YOU KNOW, SYNTHESIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A SYNOPSIS OF WHAT HAPPENED OR THE, THE PART THAT, UM, I AM STILL CURIOUS.
THAT IS, AS YOU SAID, AS YOU NOTED, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S BEEN ADDRESSED OR NOT IN THE REVISED PLANS.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO GET SOME THEM ENGINEERING TO GET COME DOWN AND HELP.
SO THE, I I DID REACH OUT TO THEM, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT, NOT NORMALLY HERE THIS DAY, SO MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN ENOUGH NOTICE FOR THEM, UH, TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS.
BUT IN THE MATERIALS, THERE IS A MEMO OR, OR EMAIL I SHOULD SAY, FROM VINNY FEDERICI IN ENGINEERING.
HE IS, UM, THIS IS THE MOST RECENT COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM ENGINEERING, AND THAT WAS SECOND.
THAT WAS AFTER THEY RECEIVED THE SW.
UM, SO LOOKING AT THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION AND THEY ALSO LOOKED AT THE CUT AND FILL ANALYSIS.
UM, SO THESE ARE THE COMMENTS THAT THEY PROVIDED AFTER THAT REVIEW.
NO, RIGHT OFF THE BAT, I JUST HAVE TROUBLE, YOU KNOW, IN, IN ADDITION TO THIS, WE HAVE LIMITED SPACE.
THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT THAT CAN BE DONE TO,
[00:25:02]
IN ANY WAY AMELIORATE THE TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC PATTERNS THAT EXIST.AND I, I DON'T SEE WHAT MEASURES THEY HAVE NOTED THAT THEY'RE IMPLEMENTING AND WHAT FURTHER THEY COULD IMPLEMENT THAT IS GOING TO MAKE IT ANY BETTER.
AND I THINK IT JUST CONTRIBUTES TO A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION.
SPEAK SPEAKING SORT OF FACTUALLY.
SO WITHIN, WITHIN YOUR PACKAGE SHOULD BE THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION MEMO THAT WE WROTE, UH, WHICH INCLUDED 23 ITEMS FOR THE TOWN BOARD, UM, TO EXPLORE FURTHER, UH, ONE OF, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DATE ON THAT WILL? UH, APRIL 15TH.
APRIL 15TH, UM, OF THIS YEAR, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND I WILL READ THIS AND AND CITE IT IN A SECOND, BUT ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WAS EXPLORE IF THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY TO, TO WIDEN, UH, LAWRENCE, WHICH THEY MEANT LAWRENCE AVENUE.
AND SO, UM, ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF, IF THE APPLICANT HAS, HAS REALLY EXPLORED THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE ITEM THAT I THINK I THINK THEY CAN EXPLORE FURTHER.
UM, TYPICALLY WHEN, WHEN WE ASK QUESTIONS TO AN APPLICANT, UM, OR, OR WRITE A MEMO LIKE THIS, THE APPLICANT IN WRITING WOULD RESPOND TO, TO EACH AND EVERY POINT.
UM, SO IF YOU HAVEN'T RECEIVED RESPONSES TO THESE 23 ITEMS, UM, AT A, AT A MINIMUM, THAT'S, THAT'S A NEXT STEP FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT TO RESPOND TO EACH OF THESE ITEMS AND THEN FOR THE BOARD TO, YOU KNOW, REVIEW THOSE RESPONSES AND, AND DELIBERATE THERE.
WELL, WHERE I'M COMING FROM IS THAT I WAS THERE MANY YEARS AGO WHEN THERE WAS MUCH DISCUSSION PRIOR TO I THINK RIVER COUNTY SQUARE BEING BUILT IN, PROBABLY IN, OUT OF CONCERN FOR RIVERTOWN SQUARES CONSTRUCTION.
AND PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE'S A CULVER AND IT'S LIMITED, AND IF I RECALL IT, IT CAN'T BE WIDENED THAT AREA AS YOU TRANSIT ONTO THE SMALL SELMA RIVER PARKWAY.
SO EVEN IF THE ROAD IS WIDEN, IT HELPS FOR THE TRUCK TRANSIT POTENTIALLY, BUT THE CARS NOW IN A WIDEN ROAD STILL, YOU HAVE TO FUNNEL DOWN TO GET TO THE RIVER SURE.
SO THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY CONCERN.
AND SO, AND SO ULTIMATELY, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE, I THINK IT'D BE WORTHWHILE FOR, FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO ASK THAT QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT DIRECTLY AND, AND ULTIMATELY, UM, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THEIR RESPONSE WILL, WHATEVER THEIR RESPONSE IS, WILL BE ON THE RECORD FOR, FOR THIS SPECIFIC APPLICATION.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW HOW, HOWEVER, WHATEVER DETERMINATION THEY MAKE, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO BE, TO BE PUT TO THE RECORD.
I THINK WE DID ASK THE, THAT QUESTION ABOUT THE WIRE, UH, MANY, YEAH.
WHEN THEY FIRST CAME NO, NO, NO.
WE ASKED YOU THE OTHER NIGHT CAME ANOTHER SIDE.
YEAH, THE OTHER NIGHT WE, WE, THEY MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT WIDENING THE BURDEN THAT WAS SORT OF PUSHED THE SIDE.
AND THEN I THINK YOU AND I AGREE, WE, UH, THERE'S NO OTHER WAY THAT THEY COULD POSSIBLY WE DID.
I HADN'T MENTIONED THE CULVERT SITUATION.
BUT JUST FOR HAVING A TRACTOR TRAILER TRUCK THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM A, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT SIZE TRUCKS OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.
UM, BUT ANYTHING THAT HAS A FLATBED WITH A TURNING, THE TURNING RADIO.
AND THAT'S NEGOTIATING RIGHT ON THIS, UH, ON AMANDA'S MEMO, UM, ONE AND TWO AND THREE ARE ALL ABOUT TRUCK TURNING MOVEMENT.
SO THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A RESPONSE ON APRIL 30TH THAT, TO THESE COMMENTS, IT'S, UM, I TRIED TO PUT 'EM IN SOME KIND OF ORDER SO THAT IT WOULD BE EASY TO FIND, UH, YOU KNOW, RECENT FIRST AND THEN KIND OF A CATEGORY.
SO NUMBER FOUR, THEY AGREED TO COMPLETE A SURVEY.
SO MAYBE EASIER AOR THE ONE RIGHT BEFORE.
SO IT'S NUMBER, NUMBER FOUR ON THE SECOND PAGE OF THAT MEMO, OR THIRD PAGE OF NUMBER FOUR TALKS ABOUT THE WIDENING.
AND THEY RECOMMEND, UM, DETERMINING IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO WIDEN THE TWO LANES THE APPLICANT AGREED TO SURVEY.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED OR PROVIDED AT
[00:30:01]
THIS POINT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS MENTIONED THE OTHER NIGHT.NO, I MEAN, THIS IS FROM APRIL THE 30TH.
BUT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AND SOME CONFUSION SHELLY PUT ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE TRUCKS, UM, WHEN JOY INQUIRED ABOUT HOW BIG THEY WERE.
BUT THEY TURNED OUT TO BE LARGER THAN WE WERE, THAN WE BELIEVED.
IT WAS JUST YES, THEY DID SAY THAT WHAT WAS EVER HAD BEEN SUBMITTED WAS, WAS SMALLER THAN WHAT YES.
WHAT WE WERE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT AT THE TIME.
BUT HOW, SO HOW HAS THIS NOT BEEN RESPONDED TO? THIS IS APRIL 30TH, UH, AND THEY'RE COMING FROM A PUBLIC HEARING, SO, UH, WHY WOULDN'T THEY HAVE ANSWERED THE QUESTION ABOUT WIDENING THE ROAD? SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THEY DID PRODUCE A SURVEY.
IT MIGHT'VE BEEN IN THE MATERIALS THAT I COULDN'T OPEN ON THE LINK.
THE, THE, ONE OF THE LINKS IS NOT WORKING FOR ME.
THE, UM, THE NEWEST SET OF PLANS.
IT'S POSSIBLE IT'S IN THERE AS A SHEET.
WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AND I'LL TAKE THE BOARD UP.
THEY SHOULD, THEY SHOULD GENERALLY PRESENT ANY OF THESE NEW PLAN SHEETS WHEN THEY PRESENT TO THE BOARD.
DO WE HAVE A COPY OF THE FILE THAT YOU CAN OPEN? IT'S ON THE WEBPAGE.
IT'S ON THE, UH, ACTIVE APPLICATIONS.
I CONTINUE TO BE VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE EMPLOYEES WHO DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO, UM, A BUS STOP AT THE, UH, SHOPPING CENTER.
AND THEY, THEY GO AROUND SOMO RIVER ROAD.
THE BUS STOP IS SOMO RIVER ROAD.
THEY HAVE TO GO ON, UH, LAWRENCE AND ACROSS THE SOMO RIVER PARKWAY.
AND I FEEL THAT IF YOU HAVE, UM, THESE, UM, UH, BIG, UH, YOU KNOW, TRUCKS, UH, YOU'RE DRIVING, I THINK SOMEBODY COULD BE SERIOUSLY INJURED OR THERE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT, POSSIBLY A FATALITY.
AND I THINK THAT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALSO NEED, UM, IS A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER THE STORM RIVER PARKWAY.
AND I THINK THAT SOMETHING THE TOWN, UH, SH UH, YOU KNOW, SH SHOULD INSIST ON, AND WE SHOULD BASICALLY, UH, WORK WITH, UM, I SPOKE TO GARRETT, UM, UM, I THINK YESTERDAY, THE DAY LAST WEEK.
UM, AND I SPOKE TO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD PUT PRESSURE ON THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO FUND THE PEDESTRIAN TO HELP, UM, FUND AND SUPPORT THE, UH, THE BUILDING OF PEDESTRIAN, UM, UH, BRIDGE THERE.
OKAY, SO LEMME ASK YOUR QUESTION.
IF YOU, IF, IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, THEN YOU'D BE GOOD WITH THE PROJECT.
YEAH, UH, I, I WOULD FEEL MUCH BETTER ABOUT THE PROJECT.
THERE'S OTHER THINGS I, I, I, I'D LIKE, I I AGREE WITH ALL THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS.
I, YOU KNOW, I FEEL THAT WE NEED, UM, TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO MAKE IT SAFE FOR, UM, FOR THE EMPLOYEES AND PEDESTRIANS TO, AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE CARS WHO TAKE THE BUS AND THEN THEY, UH, THEY WALK ON LAWRENCE AND CROSS, UH, OVER, UH, THE SELMA RIVER PARKWAY.
AND I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE ONLY, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, APPLICATION, UH, THAT IS, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, CLOSE BY.
THERE'S ANOTHER WAREHOUSE PROPOSAL, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, PRETTY, THAT'S AN UNINCORPORATED GREENBURG THAT I THINK IS, UH, HAS BEEN PROPOSED.
UH, SO WE HAVE TWO MAJOR, YOU KNOW, PROJECTS.
UM, AND WHEN YOU, IF ONE BY ITSELF WOULD, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE, IT'S, IT'S AN ISSUE, BUT YOU HAVING TWO, UM, IS, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IS MORE IMPORTANT.
AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I KNOW SOMEBODY WHO WAS INJURED THAT TWO YEAR, PROBABLY TWO YEARS AGO IN HASTINGS.
SO THE, THE, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T GET THESE OPPORTUNITIES OFTEN, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AND IF WE WOULD TIE IT IN FOR SOME CLARITY, GET THIS THROUGH FOR SOME CLARITY, JUST TO GIVE SOME HISTORICAL, UM, HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE ON THIS.
UM, NUMBER ONE, FIRST OF ALL, THE OTHER WAREHOUSE WOULD INDEED CREATE TRAFFIC ON SAWMILL RIVER ROAD.
IT, IT DOES NOT IMPACT THE TURN, THE TURN RADIUS, THE, THE TURNING OF TRUCKS INTO THE LOT.
BUT THE TRUCK, TRUCK TRAFFIC IN AND OF ITSELF IS PROBLEMATIC AND OF CONCERN.
NUMBER TWO, UM, WHY THERE'S NO BEST STOP, JUST TO, JUST TO, UM, TO GIVE CLARITY ON THAT IS THAT WHEN THE DEVELOPERS BUILT RIVERTOWN SQUARE, THERE'S A ROUNDABOUT AND THE RADIUS OF THE ROUNDABOUT, IT'S TOO SMALL TOO, TOO, UH, TOO DIFFICULT FOR BUSES TO NEGOTIATE.
SO THAT'S WHY BUSES CAN'T BE THERE.
NUMBER THREE, UM, WE WERE IN A MEETING WITH THE STATE.
[00:35:01]
ASSEMBLYWOMAN CHINKY WAS THERE.AND, UM, AND SENATOR ANDRE STEWART COUSINS WAS THERE, AND EXECUTIVE GEORGE LAMORE WAS THERE, THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THERE.
IS THIS THE ONE THAT ON SITE MM-HMM
ON THE STREET? NO, THIS, THIS WAS NOT, UM, AND IT WAS, THERE HAD TO HAVE BEEN 15, 20 PEOPLE THERE, MANY OF THE, THE, THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PEOPLE.
AND THEY SAID, NO WAY ARE WE BUILDING THE BRIDGE.
AND, AND THERE'S MANY OTHER FACTORS WHICH, WHICH GET IN THE WAY AT CERTAINLY THE, THE APPLICANT FOR THE LAWRENCE STREET PROJECT CANNOT AFFORD THAT BRIDGE.
SO, AND, BUT HAS AGREED TO SIDEWALKS, NEW SIDEWALKS, UM, WHICH DOESN'T IT, AND, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO NEGATE THE CONCERN.
I HAVE THIS, I HAVE THOSE CONCERNS TOO.
BUT WE JUST HAVE TO PUT THAT PERSPECTIVE AND TO KEEP PUTTING IT OUT THERE WITHOUT THE BACKUP AND THE BACKGROUND, AND KNOWING THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AT THIS JUNCTURE IS, IS VERY SLIM.
AND IT ALSO DOESN'T SOLVE ANY OF THESE OTHER PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE.
IT DOES NOT SOLVE, IT SOLVES A SEPARATE PROBLEM.
JUST LIKE THE TRAFFIC ON SUNIL IS ONE PROBLEM.
THE SPACE ON LAWRENCE STREET IS ANOTHER PROBLEM.
AND THE TRUCK TRAFFIC TO IT, AND THEN THE, AND THE TRAFFIC AND THE PROBLEMS OF PEOPLE CROSSING AND THE BUS STOP ARE YET ANOTHER PROBLEM.
WELL, I DON'T, AND DEAL WITH LAWRENCE STREET PROJECT, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE SEPARATED, BECAUSE I FEEL THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT IMPACT SOME LITTLE RIVER ROAD.
AND MY PERSONAL FAILING IS THAT IF WE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY, WE COULD GET IT DONE AND WE COULD GET, UH, WE COULD GET THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE.
UM, UH, WE CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN.
UM, YOU KNOW, ANYTIME, BUT THE OTHER ISSUES THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE OTHER ISSUES.
AND WE CAN, THERE'S NO POINT IN 20 ON PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE.
IF EVERYTHING ELSE I WANT EVERYTHING STILL, UH OH, OKAY.
I, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING, UH, THAT WAS RECOMMENDED.
BUT I ALSO TO LINK THEM DEFINITELY WHEN THEIR THREE SEPARATE ISSUES IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT I THINK WE'RE GONNA, I THINK THEY, THEY ALL CONTRIBUTE, WELL, THEY ALL CONTRIBUTE TO A PROBLEM.
AND I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THEY CONTRIBUTE TO CONGESTION AT THAT MORE CONGESTION AND MORE AND LESS TRAFFIC SAFETY AND LESS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT THAT JUNCTURE.
BUT THERE ARE THREE SEPARATE ISSUES.
SO WE, AND, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU POSSIBLY LINK THEM.
WELL, THE ONLY REASON I'M SAYING, I FEEL THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE BECAUSE, UH, THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER IS ANDREA STATE.
PLEASANTS REPRESENTS OUR AREA.
AND, UH, I FEEL THAT IF WE, UH, ENCOURAGE HER AND SHE HAS ACCESS TO A LOT OF STATE FUNDS, AND, UM, AND I FEEL THAT IF WE BASICALLY SAY TO HER, THIS IS A REAL COMMITMENT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY WANT.
AND THE VILLAGE OF, LARGELY THE VILLAGE OF DOS FERRY, THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, IF WE ALL MAKE THIS A PRIORITY, I BELIEVE THAT WE'LL BE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING, UM, YOU KNOW, STATE FUNDS.
IT'S POSSIBLE OUR BE THE LAST STEP, NOT THE FIRST STEP.
NO, NO, I WANT, WE HAVE TO GET THE, WE HAVE A, I WANT EVERYTHING HEARING ON THE 24TH OF TWO.
SO YOU'RE GONNA SAY, WE'RE GONNA GET A PEDESTRIAN.
NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA, I'M NOT READY TO APPROVE THE, I'M NOT, I'M NOT PROVE I'M NOT, I'M NOT GONNA VOTE FOR THE PROJECT UNLESS WE GOT THE IN BRIDGE.
THAT'S MY, THAT'S, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DO THAT.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT SUPPORT UNLESS WE BRIDGE, I JUST WANNA SAY THIS BECAUSE YOU DID THIS TWO WEEKS AGO WHEN YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T GONNA SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING UNLESS SOMEBODY POWOW TO A DEMAND THAT YOU MADE, WHICH WOULD NOT ALLOWED.
AND WE HAD TO ACTUALLY OVERRULE YOU VOTE TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO PREVENT BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING AGAIN.
YOU WANTED, YOU WANTED A, A, UH, A BUS FIRE.
AND YOU PUSHED FOR A FIRETRUCK.
YOU PUSHED FOR A FIRETRUCK, AND THEN YOU, YOU IT WENT TO COURT.
AND THE CHURCH WHO YOU WERE DEMANDING TO, TO CONTRIBUTE A FIRETRUCK FOR YOUR VOTE, TOOK YOU TO COURT AND FOUND, THE JUDGE FOUND YOU WERE NOT CREDIBLE UNDER OATH.
YOU KNOW, DON'T HAVE PERSONAL ATTACKS, PLEASE.
[00:40:01]
I, I DIDN'T INTERRUPT YOU.WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS I DIDN INTERRUPT THE PAST SIX MONTHS.
ALL YOU DO IS YOU ALWAYS INSULT.
IS THAT NOT A TRUE STATEMENT? WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THAT NOT A TRUE STATEMENT? I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO PERSONAL ATTACKS.
AND I AM TELLING YOU WHAT'S AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT? AN OFFICIAL COURT DOCUMENT.
YOU OPENED THE DOOR BY DOING THIS DEMAND AGAIN.
I WAS IN, I WAS IN, NONE OF US WERE ON THE BOARD WHEN FORTRESS BIBLE CAME UP AND THE TOWN WAS DEEMED BY THE COURT TO BE ACTING IN BAD FAITH.
WHEN YOU GET DE DETERMINED IN CORP, A BAD FAITH THAT HAS A HISTORY THAT STAYS WITH IT.
AND THAT WAS $6.5 MILLION PLUS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF LEGAL FEES.
'CAUSE YOU DEMANDED A FIRETRUCK FOR YOUR VOTE.
AND, AND THEN DROMO ROAD COMES ALONG AND DROMO ROAD, WHICH I THINK WE COULD HAVE WON.
AND SO HE COULD HAVE YOU, DRMO ROAD COMES ALONG AND THE JUDGE IN THAT CASE SAYS THAT HE'S GOING ALLOW THE JUDGE'S OPINION OF YOU IN THE FORTRESS BIBLE CASE WHERE YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BE A CRIME WITCHES IN DRUMMER ROAD.
AND THAT WOULD THEN TAKE BE TAKEN BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T CREDIBLE UNDER OATH THERE.
AND HE, THE JUDGE IN DRUMMA ROAD ALSO DEEMED BAD FAITH.
AND NOW YOU DID IT AGAIN OVER A SHED THAT YOU DEMANDED A SHED BE TAKEN DOWN BEFORE YOU WOULD EVEN ALLOW A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE APPLICATION.
AND NOW YOU GET HERE TODAY AND YOU'RE SAYING, UNLESS THEY PUT A BRIDGE AND THERE'S A LEGAL QUESTION AS OUT THERE, THAT BRIDGE HAS ANY NEXUS TO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO ON THIS PROPERTY.
WHICH IS NOT HARD TO FIGURE OUT THAT LEGAL ANSWER.
YOU ARE DEMANDING THIS AND YOU'RE DEMANDING THAT JUST WHEN THERE'S A PROCESS, YOU DON'T LIKE THE PROCESS, YOU DON'T LIKE THE APPLICATION, SURE ENOUGH, VOTE NO.
BUT DON'T PUT OUT THERE, WE'RE UP TO ABOUT $20 MILLION OF TAXPAYER MONEY THAT HAS GONE TO, HEY, THIS IS WHAT I DEMAND FOR MY VOTE AND IT'S WRONG.
I WASN'T AT THE TABLE FOR FORTRESS BIBLE.
NONE OF US WERE, BUT YOU, YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS BEEN DEEMED IN BAD FAITH.
BUT I'M NOT GONNA SIT HERE AND LET YOU DO IT SO THAT WHEN THERE'S DEPOSITIONS LATER ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WHY DIDN'T YOU SPEAK UP? WELL, I JUST SPOKE UP.
AND LET ME JUST SAY, OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE ASKED DEVELOPERS TO, UH, CONTRIBUTE.
I THINK, FOR EXAMPLE, THE VILLAGE OF TARRYTOWN, UM, WHEN, UH, THERE WAS A, A LAND USE, UH, APPROVAL, AND THEY GOT A MUNICIPAL BUILDING PAID FOR, UH, BY, UH, BY THE TAXPAYERS AND A POOL BY A DEVELOPER, AND A POOL WAS PAID FOR BY A DEVELOPER THAT WAS IN THE VILLAGE OF TAR.
IT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT EXTORTING.
I'M NOT, LET ME, LET ME SAY SOMETHING.
I, I BASICALLY BELIEVE NEGOTIATION.
WAIT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT I'M SAYING.
I AM SAYING THAT FOR ME, A CONDITION FOR ME, UH, IS FOR A BRIDGE TO BE A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE TO BE PLACED OVER THE SAW MILL RIVER PARKWAY.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE COULD, UH, LOBBY OUR STATE SENATOR, WHO'S THE MOST POWERFUL STATE SENATOR IN NEW YORK STATE, TO HELP US GET THE FUNDING, UH, FOR THE BRIDGE.
BECAUSE BASICALLY IF THE, YOU KNOW, THE SENATOR SHOULD BE WORKING HARD TO HELP OUR COMMUNITIES GET MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE, I DON'T THINK, SHE DON'T THINK, SAY, LEMME, I'M NOT, I'M SAYING THIS IS, I'M LOOKING GOING FORWARD.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THE WHOLE REGION.
AND ALL I'M SAYING IS WE, WE SHOULD REACH OUT TO CONGRESSMAN LATIMER.
WE SHOULD BE REACHING OUT TO SENATOR SCHUMER AND BR WE SHOULD BE REACHING OUT TO SENATOR COUSINS AND ASSEMBLYWOMAN SHAMSKY.
UM, AND WE SHOULD BE SEEING IF WE COULD GET, UH, STATE FUNDS AND OR FEDERAL FUNDS FOR THE BRIDGE AT THE SAME TIME WE COULD BE ASKING THE DEVELOPER TO WORK WITH US TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
UH, HOPEFULLY THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO, UM, CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING TO THIS, THE OTHER WAREHOUSE THAT IS BEING PROPOSED, BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA HAVE AN IMPACT ON, UM, ON SOME OVER ROAD WE COULD POSSIBLY GET, UH, WE COULD HAVE A PACKAGE, UM, OF, UM, OF DEVELOPERS, UM, THE STATE, UH, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, COUNTY, FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS ALL WORKING TO GET THE BRIDGE BECAUSE IF WE GOT THAT PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, IT'S GOING TO, UH, SAVE LIVES.
AND IT'S ALSO GONNA BE, UM, GOOD FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, GOOD FOR THE LOCAL ECONOMY.
IT'S GONNA HELP THAT SHOPPING CENTER.
[00:45:01]
MAY I ASK RECORD? I DON'T WANNA BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY TYPE OF MIS FEES ALL WITH HOW THIS IS HAPPENING.I JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE ON RECORD FOR THAT.
I WOULD, UH, HAVE A BRIDGE OVER THE SAWMILL.
RIVER PARKWAY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE TRUCKS GOING INTO THE PROPERTY IN LAUREN STREET FROM SAWMILL RIVER ROAD, WHICH CAN'T E AND THOSE TRUCKS CAN EVEN GO ON SAW MILL RIVER PARKWAY.
I JUST WANNA TALK ABOUT NO, IT, THEY'RE NOT RELATED.
IT JUST HAPPENS TO BE IN THIS, HOW IS THIS ONE LAWRENCE PROJECT RELATED TO THE BRIDGE? BECAUSE BASICALLY THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT THERE.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS RIGHT NOW, UH, WHO ARE, UH, WALKING ON LAWRENCE, UM, YOU KNOW, ON LAWRENCE STREET.
AND I BASICALLY FEEL THAT THIS, UH, WHOLE PRO WE HAVE TO, AS, AS WAS MENTIONED, LOOK AT, UM, WIDENING, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ROAD MAY, FIGURING OUT A WAY WE CAN MAKE IT SAFER.
UH, THERE SHOULD BE, UM, UM, YOU, YOU ALSO HAVE THE BRI THE, THE BIKE PATH ON THE SOUTH COUNTY IN NORTH COUNTY, UH, YOU KNOW, TRAIL.
UM, SO YOU, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT OF LARGE, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, SCAFFOLDING, YOU KNOW, THERE'S TRUCKS, UH, YOU KNOW, GOING THERE.
AND I FEEL THAT WE HAVE TO, TO ME, WE HAVE TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE, UM, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY REVIEW BEFORE ANY, UH, PROJECT IS, UM, IS APPROVED IN MY OPINION.
OTHERWISE, YOU ARE GONNA REGRET.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A, I THINK THAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE VALID CONCERNS, WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, BUT THEY DON'T, JULY, THOSE PARTICULAR PROPOSALS REALLY DON'T HAVE, I GET, I WANNA GET SOMETHING TO I KNOW, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU WERE ALREADY WARN BY IN A MEETING TO BEING VERY AS NATURALLY AS POSSIBLE, BRING IT BACK IN.
SO, SORRY, I MEAN, IF, IF I MAY, UM, YOU KNOW, NOW THAT YOU HAVE PAPER COPIES OF THE APPLICATION IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT, THAT YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DIG INTO THEM UP TO THIS POINT, I'D ENCOURAGE YOU TO, TO DIG INTO THEM.
I, I WOULD PROBABLY RECOMMEND, UM, IF TIME ALLOWS TO, TO INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME IN AND PRESENT DURING A WORK SESSION ENGINEERING WITH ENGINEERING WITH, WITH, UM, DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY MAGANA.
UM, BUT, BUT REALLY THE APPLICANT IS THE ONE WHO'S IN A POSITION TO ANSWER, ANSWER YOUR, YOUR OUTSTANDING QUESTION.
WELL, WE HAD IQ IN TERMS OF THE TRANSCRIPT.
BUT I WAS GONNA, I WOULD SAY IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, WE SHOULD MAKE IT A PART OF THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OR CONTINUE THOSE DISCUSSIONS DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING ITSELF AND COORDINATE AMONGST OURSELVES IN, IN WORK SESSIONS.
AND THE OTHER THING TOO, WHAT WE'VE DONE SOMETIMES IS YOU CAN CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND PROPOSE A WORK SESSION AFTERWARDS, AFTER YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONTINUE COORDINATE.
THERE'S SO MANY OPEN ISSUES HERE.
I WAS COMFORTABLE CLOSING THAT, BUT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS SCHEDULED.
WE ARE FOR THE, FOR THE 22ND OF JULY.
SO WE, SOME TIME, WE HAVE SOME TIME, SO WE HAVE SOME TIME.
SO I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BIOMED REALTY PROJECT, CORRECT.
I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT MOVE FORWARD.
IT'S QUITE POSSIBLE THAT THEY MIGHT CHANGE COURSE.
UM, I DON'T DISAGREE THAT A PE PUBLIC, UH, PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA.
AND I THINK THAT'S, UH, ADMIRABLE TO PURSUE WITH THE LEGISLATORS.
UM, HOWEVER, I FAIL TO SEE THE NEXUS BETWEEN THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, WHICH IS RELATED TO TRUCK, UH, MOVEMENTS AND SCAFFOLDING STORAGE, UM, AND, AND PEDESTRIAN REQUESTS.
SO I THINK THEY'RE JUST TWO DIFFERENT PATHWAYS.
THE THING IS, I THINK THAT I PROBABLY HAVE THE BEST KNOWLEDGE OF ANYBODY HERE ABOUT THIS AREA, BECAUSE WHEN MY KITCHEN WAS, UH, DEMOLISHED, MY WIFE AND I STAYED AT THE, UH, DOS FERRY HILTON FOR TWO MONTHS.
SO I WAS THERE EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I SAW THE PEDESTRIANS, I SAW PEOPLE WALKING, I SAW NEAR ACCIDENTS, UH, ON THE S SOMO PARKWAY ALMOST EVERY DAY THAT I WAS, I WAS THERE.
NO, BUT NO, BUT I'M SAYING I, I, I, I PERSONALLY OBSERVED IT, MY WIFE PERSONALLY, YOU KNOW, OBSERVED IT.
SO THE THING, SO ALL, ALL I COULD SAY IS THAT, UM, I REALLY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE GIVEN THE HIGHEST PRIORITY, UM, YOU KNOW, ATTENTION BECAUSE YOU, YOU DON'T GET OPPORTUNITIES, UH, OFTEN.
AND IF WE, YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO JUMP ON AN OPPORTUNITY.
AND THE OPPORTUNITY IS, THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL THAT'S VERY, VERY CLOSE BY.
AND WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE, UH, DECISIONS.
[00:50:01]
I SAID, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE TAKEN A LONG TIME IN THE PAST TO, UM, APPROVE APPLICATIONS.AND, AND I BELIEVE THAT IF WE REACH OUT TO STATE LAWMAKERS, OUR STATE SENATOR, ANDREW STEWART, COUSINS, MARY JANE, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, KY UH, THE GOVERNOR, UH, OUR, UH, US, UH, CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES, GEORGE LATIMER, BEFORE WE GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS, THAT'S STEP TWO, NOT STEP ONE.
STEP ONE IS, IS THIS, WE HAVE TO DO STEP ONE IS EVERYTHING AT THE SAME TIME.
WHAT IF THE QUESTION DOESN'T GO THROUGH? YOU'RE, YOU, YOU, YOU WANT IT ANYWAY, SO OBVIOUSLY
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, IF IT DOESN'T GO THROUGH, UH, UH, THEN, THEN WE WILL, UH, HOPEFULLY SENATOR COUSINS WILL COME THROUGH.
UH, SHE WILL AS HOW SHE'S DONE IN THE PAST, LIKE WITH THE WEST DALE AVENUE SIDE.
WELL, YOU KNOW, IF WE, IF WE MAKE A REALLY MAJOR EFFORT, WE WILL GET THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, AND THAT WOULD BE SUCH A FANTASTIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENT FOR THE AREA.
I UNDER THE REST, I'M NOT GONNA THREATEN ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, MORE INFO THEY WANT ON THE PACKET AT HAND OR WOULD YOU LIKE FURTHER TIME TO REVIEW? WE COULD SCHEDULE ANOTHER WORK SESSION.
I WOULD LIKE, I LIKE FURTHER TIME, FURTHER TIME WOULD, I WOULD LIKE ENGINEERING TO COME.
AND I GUESS SINCE WE HAVE, UH, KNOW THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN, I GUESS MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT TOWN BOARD MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS, IF THEY, YOU KNOW, WRITE THEM AND THEN REQUEST A, A, A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM THE APPLICANT, THEN THOSE WRITTEN RESPONSES WOULD BE A PART OF THE RECORD.
AND, AND THAT, AND THAT MIGHT HELP SHORT CIRCUIT A LITTLE BIT THE, THE BACK AND FORTH OF RECEIVING INFORMATION, ABSORBING IT, AND THEN
AND THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO ACTUALLY POST IT IN ADVANCE SO THAT THE PUBLIC WHO ARE SPEAKING COULD TAKE THOSE COMMENTS INTO, LET ME, LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHAT IS STILL OUTSTANDING, THAT THIS IS A BIG PACKET OF INFORMATION'S A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH.
SO REALLY IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHAT IS ACTUALLY SO OUTSTANDING, WHAT HAS ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS OF THE PLANNING BOARD AND WHAT HAS NOT BEEN RIGHT.
SO I THINK THERE'S MORE SORT OF SYNTHESIS THAT HAS TO HAPPEN WITH, WITH THIS.
UM, SO SOME OF THESE POINTS, MOST OF THESE POINTS ARE JUST SUMMARIZED THE OUTSTANDING ISSUES.
UM, IF IT WASN'T A, A MAJOR THING, LIKE IF IT WAS JUST A MINIMAL CHANGE, I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT HERE.
UM, IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT, THAT'S BEEN ADDRESSED, I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT HERE.
UM, REALISTICALLY, I THINK THIS PLUS, UH, COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM ENGINEERING CAN'T JOHN CANNING AND, UH, LOOK AT THE PLANS AGAIN, WOULD PROBABLY BE THE BEST CASE.
SO WE'LL SUPPLEMENT THIS AND YEAH.
WHERE WE, LEMME JUST GET ANOTHER QUESTION.
UM, JU JUST IF, IF, UM, DYLAN, IF YOU, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU FEEL THAT WE SHOULD, YEAH, I MEAN, I, I'D SAY THE THREE AREAS TO REALLY, THE TWO AREAS TO, TO DRILL IN ON IS THE, THE TRAFFIC AND THE TURNING RADIUSES ON, ON LAWRENCE STREET.
UM, AND THEN WHAT WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED AT ALL DURING THIS WORK SESSION, BUT I THINK THE PLANNING BOARD IS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL TO BREAK THE CAP, RIGHT? UM, AND REALLY UNDERSTANDING IT'S, IT'S STILL NOT CLEAR TO THE PLANNING BOARD WHY THE APPLICANT FEELS IT'S NECESSARY TO BREAK THE CAP.
UM, AND SO REALLY, REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHY THEY FEEL THIS IS CRITICAL TO THEIR PROJECT.
UM, AND THEN UNDERSTANDING THE, THE RAMIFICATIONS OF BREAKING THE CAP AND HOW, HOW THE SITE WILL BE, YOU KNOW, RERE RE REMEDIATED, UH, ONCE, ONCE THE FILL IS THEN BROUGHT BACK.
AND BY THE WAY, JUST BECAUSE IT'S ALL INSIDE BASEBALL TO US BREAKING THE CAP OF GOING OVER THE TAX CAP, RIGHT, IT MEANS THAT THERE'S A MEMBRANE THAT'S THERE THAT'S PROTECTING THE, THE CONTAMINATED, THE CONTAMINATED SOIL FROM WHAT'S ABOVE IT.
AND THEY WANT TO BREAK THAT AND THEY WANNA DISRUPT THE SOIL AND POTENTIALLY RELEASE, WELL SUPPOSEDLY HAVE SOME PLAN TO THEN RESEAL IT.
BUT IT'S PARTICULARLY UNUSUAL BECAUSE THEY'RE PROPOSING TAKING OUT, UH, SOIL FROM UNDERNEATH THE CAP AND THEN BRINGING IN LOTS OF FILL.
UM, UH, A TOWN ENGINEER AGREED WITH MY COMMENT THAT IT'S, IT'S PARTICULARLY UNUSUAL TO DO THAT, AND THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT IT'S GONNA EVENTUALLY BE A NET ZERO.
SO WHY, WHY DO IT? RIGHT? UM, AND YOU KNOW, IF I RECALL, THEY REALLY DIDN'T BRING IT UP.
WELL, NO, AND, AND, AND THAT IN THAT MEETING, IN OUR MEETING, THAT WAS JUST TO, TO, TO THE EXTENT THERE WAS A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE LAST CONVERSATION, UH, THE PLANNING BOARD HAD WITH THE APPLICANT AND, AND HOW THE PRESENTATION BEGAN WITH, WITH THE TOWN BOARD.
UM, THERE, THERE WAS DEFINITELY SOME CRITICAL ISSUES THAT WERE GLOSSED OVER LAST WEDNESDAY.
LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION.
UH, GETTING BACK TO, YOU KNOW, MY CONCERN WITH PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, COULD WE INVITE, UH, SENATOR COUSINS, UM, AND, UM, SOMEONE WHEN, UH, CHINKY TO, UH, UPCOMING WORK SESSION WITH THE STATE DOT, UH,
[00:55:01]
AND WE COULD DISCUSS, UH, AND WE CAN INVITE FER AND OR LEY ALSO, WHY DON'T YOU JUMP ON A CALL WITH THEM? WHY DON'T YOU JUST NO, I MEAN, I'M ASKING BECAUSE I WANT PUT, BECAUSE I'VE A CALL AND THEN YOU'VE ALREADY, YOU'VE ALREADY, I WANNA AGGRESSIVELY HAVE, HAVE ALREADY MADE YOUR POINT HERE DURING WORK SESSION.SO NOW YOU TAKE THAT ENERGY AND THAT STICK WITH IT, AND THEN WHAT YOU DO IS YOU CONTACT ALL THE PEOPLE THAT YOU MENTIONED AND SAY, HEY, I WANNA GET TOGETHER WITH MY GOVERNMENT PARTNERS AND I HAVE A SUGGESTION.
THIS IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT.
AND YOU HAVE THAT CONVERSATION I'VE DONE AND THE PAST.
BUT THE THING IS, ALL I'M SAYING IS I WANT TO TRY AND THEN, SO WHAT HAPPENED? YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M NOT GIVING UP UNTIL WE GET THE BRIDGE, RIGHT? UH, SO THE THING IS, I, AND ALL I'M SAYING IS I THINK IT'S SAFETY.
THERE WAS A, I SPOKE TO, I SPOKE TO, I SPOKE TO THE, I REMEMBER WHEN WE HAD THAT ACCIDENT A FEW YEARS AGO, I MADE A COMMITMENT THAT I'M GONNA WORK REALLY HARD TO GET THAT BRIDGE.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE GET TAKE AWAY FROM YOU.
BUT WE JUST GAVE YOU A SUGGESTION.
WE, WE, YOUR POINT, I, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY BECAUSE YOU SAID THIS IS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY, A HIGH PRIORITY, YOU SAID HIGHEST PRIORITY HOLE, UH, ROAD SIDEWALK.
SO AFTER, AFTER A SIDEWALK AND AFTER FLOODING OR BEFORE FLOODING, IT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAN FLOODING.
I HAVE A LOT OF HIGH PRIORITIES.
BUT WHICH IS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY? IS IT THE BRIDGE WHICH MAY HAVE NO NEXUS TO THIS PRO PROJECT? OR IF YOU'RE ASKING OUR, OUR, OUR LEADERS, THE MAJORITY LEADER AND SO FORTH WHO WORK REALLY HARD FOR US, UM, THAT, HEY, I WANT YOU TO FUNNEL A LOT OF MONEY.
DO YOU WANT IT TO GO TO THE BRIDGE OR DO YOU WANT IT TO DRESS WEDDING? WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? I WANT SEE WHAT OUR BEST CHANCES ARE OF, UH, GETTING FUNDING.
I MEAN, I'M PLEASED THAT SENATOR GILAND, SHE, SHE'S, UH, PUT IN, UH, FUNDING $2.5 MILLION FOR THE SOL RIVER, UM, UH, FLOOD CONTROL INITIATIVE.
WE, WE GOT A COMMITMENT FROM HER, UH, $1.5 MILLION FOR EAST TAR DAILY AVENUE FOR, UH, FOR LINING, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, PIPES.
SHE, UH, SHE, THAT'S BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
SO YOU KNOW WHAT, WE HAVE A US SENATOR WHO'S WORKING REALLY HARD GOOD TO GET US, UH, $4 MILLION.
UH, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I EXPECT THE SAME, UH, RESULTS FROM OUR CONGRESSMAN AND STATE SENATORS AND ASSEMBLY, UH, WOMAN.
AND I THINK THAT IF WE ALL WORK TOGETHER, WE'LL SEE IF WE COULD IDENTIFY FUNDING SOURCES START NATION SESSION.
DID YOU ASK INSTEAD OF FUNDING THOSE PROJECTS THAT THEY SHOULD REALLY, SHE SHOULD REALLY BE FUNDING THE BRIDGE? DID YOU MENTION THE BRIDGE? NO, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING THAT RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE OF THE APPLICATION, I, AND BECAUSE OF ITS PROXIMITY TO SELMA RIVER PARK, IT'S LIKE, AND, AND IT'S, IT IS SO CLOSE TO, UM, UH, TO THE, UH, TO THE PARKWAY.
YOU KNOW, IT'S, UH, IT'S A COUPLE SECONDS WALK ALMOST.
UM, UH, YOU KNOW, I SORT OF FEEL THAT THIS IS A FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN.
AND I DID MAKE A COMMITMENT TO THE FAMILY AND NEIGHBORS, UM, AFTER THE PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENT THERE THAT I WAS GONNA WORK ON, JUST LIKE WE WORKED ON THE TAXI ROAD, UH, YOU KNOW, SIDEWALK IN GOVERNMENT, THERE COULD BE A PROBLEM.
AND, UH, AND IT DOESN'T, YOU DON'T GET RESULTS IMMEDIATELY, BUT YOU WORK AND WORK AND WORK AND WORK UNTIL YOU GET RESULTS.
SO WE HAD, UH, ON TAX ERO, WE HAD A, UH, A STUDENT WHO TOLD US THAT, SORRY, I'M SORRY.
AND WE, AND THEN WE GOT, WE'RE GETTING RESULTS SHUT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE NOTE, I JUST WANNA, ANY QUESTIONS? UM, YES, WE'LL FOLLOW UP.
OH, ACTUALLY, YEAH, THIS IS GREAT.
I GUESS IN THE ABSENCE OF COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE, WHO SHOULD COLLECT THE QUESTIONS THAT THE TOWN BOARD HAS AND THEN ROUTE THEM TO THE, OH, BACK NEXT WEEK DOCUMENT.
I, I DIDN'T THINK GETTING THEM THE APPLICANT SOONER THAN LATER IS I DO OUR BEST TO GET HIM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
ALRIGHT, CAN WE MOVE ON? THANK YOU.
THE NEXT THING IS, UM, UM, PROPOSED RULES FOR TOWN BOARD MEETINGS.
I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE COULD HOLD OFF AFTER TO THE PRIMARY, BECAUSE I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT, UM, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RULES FOR TOWN BOARD MEETINGS, UH, THIS, UH, PRIMARY IS BASICALLY A REFERENDUM ON TOWN BOARD IN, IN SOME WAYS.
AND I FEEL THAT BY WHEN, UH, THE RULES SHOULD BE DIFFERENT, ANNA PERRY, WHEN THE RULES SHOULD BE D YOU KNOW, HE SHOULD HAVE, UM, THE OPPORTUNITY TO WILL BE PRIMARY.
NO, BUT I, I, BOARD MEETING IS ON WEDNESDAY.
NO, BUT I, I BASICALLY, I'M ASKING, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS ASPECTS OF OUR PROPOSED RULES WE'RE NOT RULES BECAUSE OF THE ELECTION.
I'M JUST SAYING IF I'M THE TOWN SUPERVISOR, SO WE'RE GONNA STOP TOWN BUSINESS BECAUSE OF AN ELECTION.
NO, WE DO, I DON'T THINK'S SEPARATE.
THAT'S SEPARATE AND APART CHANGE.
I DON'T, WE SHOULD CHANGE RULES UNTIL AFTER THE PRIMARY CITY TALKING
[01:00:02]
M TALKING ABOUT THESE RULES SINCE FEBRUARY, YOU KNOW WHAT CAN, LIKE THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW.THESE ARE STILL THE SAME FIVE PEOPLE.
WE'RE GONNA BE SITTING AT THE TABLE THE REST OF THE YEAR.
ALL I'M ASKING IS IF THE PUBLIC, UH, ALLOWS MY APPROACH, THEN I SHOULD HAVE MORE INPUT AS TO THE RULES OF THE BOARD.
WHAT RULE DO YOU NOT LIKE? WELL, THE FIR THE FIRST RULE IS I BASICALLY FEEL THAT, UM, AS TOWN SUPERVISOR, I'M NOT GONNA, I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TELLING ME WHAT I COULD SAY.
UH, NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT THE CONTENT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WE HAVE BEEN OVER THIS A MILLION TIMES.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A TIME LIMIT OF SPEAKING.
AND THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMUNITY, WHICH YOU SAW.
THEY SENT A LETTER, THEY SPOKE AT IN PUBLIC THAT WE ARE NOT FOLLOWING, UH, DECORUM.
WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING PROPER PROCEDURE FOR THEM TO HAVE THEIR TIME TO SPEAK.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING THIS BECAUSE, AND THE OTHER RULE THAT I'D LIKE TO CHANGE IS I, I FAILED THE LAND USE.
DID YOU HEAR? I SAID THE LAND USE COMMITTEE USE COMMITTEE SHOULD COME, WE DON'T RESPOND.
THE LAND USE COMMITTEE SHOULD BE AN OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD.
AND, AND, AND BASICALLY NO, WE, THE TOWN SUPERVISOR SHOULD BE ABLE, ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL MEETINGS OF TOWN.
REALLY? THAT IS A VERY SEPARATE ISSUE FROM NOT, I JUST WANNA BE SEPARATE.
YOU AS A SUPERVISOR SHOULD KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT LAND USE MEETING BECAUSE YOU MEET AND THE THE STAFF IN PERSON, WHAT YOU DON'T DO, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY I MEET WITH WHEN I, I'M NOT ALLOWED TO ATTEND THE, AND YOU HAVE A STATE JOB.
DO YOU HAVE SAME JOB AND YOU'RE THERE FOR THREE HOURS? WHY CAN'T I HAVE THEM BE ATTENDING RATHER THAN WHY YOU TALKING ABOUT WHAT I'M, YOU'RE, YOU'RE A STATE EMPLOYEE, SO SO ARE YOU.
PLEASE, YOU'RE SPENDING THREE HOURS, PLEASE ON FRIDAYS AND MEETINGS.
THE ONLY I WANT IS YOU DON'T SPEAK WELL, YOU, IF YOU'RE A MEMBER AND YOU DON'T ATTEND THE MEETINGS, AND I SHOULD BE THE SECOND MEMBER.
THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH LAND USE.
THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LAND USE MEETING SUPERVISOR.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH RULES FOR OUR, OUR MEETINGS THAT WE ARE ALL AT.
RIGHT? SO ARE WE AGREEING THAT THIS WILL, IF EVERYONE HAS REVIEWED THIS AND WE ARE AGREEING, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON IT AT OUR NEXT TOWN BOARD, BOARD MEETING.
THE WAY IT'S THE WAY IT'S BEEN WRITTEN.
UH, AND, UH, SOME EDITS, EDITS BY THAT, UH, DEPUTY TO ATTORNEY, HOW TO PUT IT, YOU KNOW, QUITE FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PASSING THESE RULES, WHICH THE SUPERVISOR IS NOT GONNA FOLLOW.
SO WE'RE BASICALLY LIMITING OURSELVES.
THE ONE RULE THAT I THINK WE MUST HAVE IS YOU DON'T SPEAK OVER SOMEBODY AND YOU CERTAINLY DON'T SPEAK OVER IT TO BE LOUDER AND LOUDER AND LOUDER WHILE SOMEBODY IS SPEAKING.
IF WE HAD THAT, I THINK WE WOULD'VE DECOR.
IS THAT CALLED ROBERT ROSE? IT WOULD.
I, WELL, THERE'S ONE OTHER ISSUE.
I THINK WE GET STUCK IN A CYCLE SOMETIMES REPEATING THE SAME ITEM OVER AND OVER, AND THEN WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WAITING LONG HOURS.
YEAH, AND I'M NOT NECESSARILY SAYING TIME LIMIT SHOULD BE STRICTLY ENFORCED IF YOU WANT THAT PASSED.
I JUST THINK SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO LOOK TO THE PUBLIC IN THE AUDIENCE AND KNOW IT'S, THIS IS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND, AND MOVE THE MEETING ALONG.
AND AGAIN, THAT COULD BE DONE VIA MOTION AS WELL.
UM, MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
I WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST GIVE THIS A CHANCE TO, TO SEE IF IT WORKS, IF IT HELPS KEEP OUR MEETINGS MORE ORDERLY.
IF IT, IF IT DOESN'T, AS, AS FRANCIS MENTIONED, YOU DON'T THINK THAT EVERYONE'S GONNA ADHERE TO THE RULES.
WE'LL SEE THAT, BUT AT LEAST IT GIVES US, UH, UH, WE ARE BEING RESPONSIVE TO THE PUBLIC.
IT GIVES US A MECHANISM TO HAVE SOME MORE ORDER AND DECORUM.
DO YOU WANNA DO IT ON A TRIAL PERIOD? THAT'S AN OPTION.
WHY DON'T WE JUST PASS IT AND WE CAN CHANGE IT IF WE NEED TO CHANGE IT.
BUT THEN WE'RE BOUND TO IT AND THEN WE ARE BREAKING THE RULES.
IF WE TRY TO DO WHAT, WHAT THE SUPERVISOR'S GONNA DO, HE'S GONNA SAY, YOU'RE SUPPRESSING MY FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
I SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY WHAT I WANNA SAY AS LONG AS I WANNA SAY IT, AS OFTEN AS I WANT TO SAY IT.
UM, BUT HE'LL BE ON THE RECORD AS DOING THAT AND WE'LL BE ON THE RECORD AS ADHERING TO OUR RULES.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
BUT WHAT HE WILL THEN BE DOING IS PUTTING OUT HIS FAULT.
SO HIS FICTION AS FICTION THAT'S ON MAKING, MAKING NO, IT'S NOT, BUT IT HURTS US.
SO THEN YOU WANNA CONTINUE HAVING THE, THE DISAGREE.
WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT SOMEBODY IS SPEAKING.
I'LL, I'LL WAIT UNTIL YOU THAT WHAT I, WHAT I WAS SAYING IS HE WILL PUT OUT THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE LAND USE MEETING, WHICH IS PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE, TOTALLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS.
[01:05:01]
IT'S ONLY BECAUSE HE DOESN'T LEAD WITH THE PEOPLE.DEPARTMENTS THAT, WELL HE DO SOLVE THEM HIMSELF.
YOU DON'T NEED, YOU'RE OBSESSED.
WITH INSULTING, SEE, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO STOP AFTER I'M DONE, THEN YOU COULD SAY, YES, I DO ACTUALLY MEET IN PERSON WITH THE CHIEF.
EVEN THOUGH YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T.
NOW I REALLY, YOU DON'T ME WITH THIS, YOU KNOW, YOU, I ACTUALLY MEET WITH THIS PERSON.
YOU CAN ACTUALLY SAY THAT IF IT WAS TRUE.
AS OPPOSED TO SAYING I COMMUNICATED WITH THEM, WHICH MEANS JUST SEND THEM EMAIL.
I JUST WANT, I'M JUST MAKING MY POINT HERE IS THAT WHEN YOU PUT THOSE THINGS OUT THAT ARE FALSE TO ME IT'S LIKE FINGERNAILS ON A CHALKBOARD.
I CANNOT SIT THERE AND KNOW THAT YOU ARE LYING TO THE PUBLIC AND KNOWING YOU ALL AND NOT RESPOND.
BUT WITH THESE RULES, YOU GO LAST.
AND I CAN'T RESPOND TO THE FACT, OH, THAT'S, JOEY WANTED THAT.
NO, THE LAST THREE MINUTE, THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL, IT'S NOT IN THERE.
THE ORDER I DON'T THINK IS IN THERE NOW.
AND WE DIDN'T THINK THE ORDER IN, BUT HE, BUT HE'S NOW SAYING HE'S GONNA GO LAST.
OH, I'LL GO SECOND TO LIST IF YOU WANT.
IT'S, IT'S, THERE NEEDS TO BE, THERE SHOULD BE A LETTER.
BUT LIKE WE HAD BEFORE, WE HAD A VERY GOOD, WE HAD DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS, BUT WE HAD A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING WHERE NO ONE REALLY SPOKE OVER TO EACH OTHER.
I MEAN, YOU KEPT REPEATING OVER AND OVER ABOUT THE BRIDGE.
AND, AND EVEN WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT HOW YOU WERE GETTING US INTO SERIOUS, SERIOUS FINANCIAL JEOPARDY AS A PROJECT THAT WE MAY NOT WANT BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOOD FOR A LOT OF OTHER REASONS, THEY COULD EASILY GO TO COURT AND SAY, LOOK, HE DID IT AGAIN AND REALLY PUT US IN JEOPARDY OF HAVING A PROJECT THAT WE MAY HAVE TO GO FORWARD WITH AS A SETTLEMENT.
BECAUSE YOU JUST PUT US IN A TERRIBLE POSITION AND YOU REPEATED IT TWO TIMES.
YOU SAID IT ONCE AND YOU REPEATED IT TWO TIMES.
HOW YOU ARE GOING TO, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD VOTE FOR THIS IF THEY, YOU GET THE BRIDGE, THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR US TO BE PAID FOR BY THE STATE.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE IT'S YOUR VOTE.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IT WAS YOUR VOTE IN FORTRESS BIBLE, $6.5 MILLION PLUS A MILLION DOLLARS.
AND PAUL, PAUL, THE FACT THAT I'M STATING FACTS, YOU JUST OBSESSED WITH FINDING EVERY DAY.
YOU, YOU INSULTING AND INSULTING.
AND WE, NOW, WE GET BACK, I JUST WANNA GO ON, ON THE RECORD PUBLICLY THAT I WILL VOTE FOR THESE RULES FOR OUR, FOR, FOR US TO FILE THESE RULES.
UM, AND I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY BIDEN RIGHT NOW, AND I'LL GO ON RECORD AND I DON'T MIND TRYING IT WITHOUT VOTING FOR IT FIRST AND SEE IF IT WORKS BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA VOTE FOR SOMEBODY AND THEN RESCIND IT THE NEXT MEETING.
BUT IF THAT NEXT TO ME IS SO RULE, WE DON'T VOTE ON IT.
SO WHY DON'T WE ALL AGREE ON IMPLEMENTING, I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW THE FIVE MINUTE RULE AND ALL THAT.
AND, AND AFTER A COUPLE FOLLOW WHAT FOLLOW WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING AND TRY IT FOR A COUPLE MEETINGS AND IF IT WORKS, AND WE WILL AGREE INFORMALLY TO, TO TEST IT OUT.
AND IF IT WORKS, THEN WE COULD, UH, PASS A, A RULE A A, A MORE FORMAL RULE BECAUSE I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD LIKE TO AVOID THE BICKERING AND THE INSULTS AND ALL THAT.
AND I THINK ANYTHING THAT COULD IMPROVE THE, UH, THE WAY MEETINGS ARE RUN IS, YOU KNOW, IS BETTER.
BUT I THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE A, A TRIAL PERIOD, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DONE AS A RESOLUTION.
WE COULD ALL AGREE AND WE'LL SEE IF ANYBODY BREAKS THE RULES.
AND UH, I'M GONNA COMPLY WITH, UH, UM, WITH THIS, WITH EVERYTHING THAT EVERYBODY'S RECOMMENDING.
EXCEPT THEN THE PARLIAMENTARIAN CANNOT ENFORCE RULES THAT WE HAVE NOT ACTUALLY, WELL, WE ALL AGREE.
IF WE ALL CAN YOU SAY THAT I I I AGREE WITH THAT.
I, I WOULD SAY AGREE WITH WHAT JOYCE SAID.
I AGREE WITH THE FACT THAT THE PARLIAMENTARIAN DOESN'T REALLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THE RULES.
BUT IF YOU DID PUT A SUNSET PROVISION SAYING THIS IS IN PLACE FOR TWO TO THREE MEETINGS AND LESS EXTENDED BY THE TOWN BOARD, THAT'S GOOD.
THEN YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE TO RESCIND AFTER THE FACT.
HAVE YOU DO THAT, THAT GOOD? IS EVERYONE IN FAVOR OF THAT? I WOULD DO THAT.
THAT THE SUNSET RULE IS AS SOON AS IT'S VIOLATED, RIGHT? BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA WAIT THREE MEETINGS WHERE I CAN'T RESPOND TO, TO THINGS THAT HE'S SAYING THAT ARE NOT TRUE.
YOU'LL HAVE A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL PERIOD.
AND THEN, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW IF I'M GONNA SAY SOMETHING THAT'S NOT TRUE BECAUSE I I DON'T LIKE, AND SO, SO YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU'RE, AGAIN, YOU'RE INSULTING ME.
I'M, I'M, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY POINT.
I DON'T THINK YOU DON'T GET A REBUTTAL FOR REBUTTAL.
IT'S A, IT'S FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL AND THEN IT'S, THAT'S IT KIND OF WHAT WE AT THE PLANNING BOARD TELL THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS THAT IF THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, THAT THEY CAN SUBMIT CORRESPONDENCE OR YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT AT A FUTURE MEETING.
[01:10:01]
ME ASK, LEMME JUST ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE REBUTTAL BECAUSE LET'S SAY I SPEAK AND THEN FRANCIS SAYS YOU'RE A LIAR.JUST LIKE HE SAID TWO SECONDS AGO, I SHOULD THEN, AND HE SPENDS THREE MINUTES REBUTTING, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO, UH, RESPOND TO ANY PERSONAL
YOUR THEN YOU MIGHT AS WELL THEN THAT'S COURSE REALLY WHATS THE POINT? RESPOND INSERT AT A DIFFERENT TIME BECAUSE THE PURPOSE IS TO THE MEETING WRONG.
RIGHT? NOT ONLY THE, THE PROBLEM IS IF SOMEBODY'S CALLING ME A LIAR AFTER THAT, THEN I BASICALLY, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS RIGHT, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYBODY SHOULD BE MAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS AT MEETINGS, THEN I THINK I SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M NOT A LIAR BECAUSE OTHERWISE HE HAS THE LAST WORD.
SO I THE OTHER SUGGESTION, YOU TAKE IT OUTSIDE.
SO THE OTHER SUGGESTION, THE OTHER SUGGESTION IS, SINCE THE ONLY ONE ON THE BOARD WHO WOULD CALL ME, UH, NAMES IS FRANCIS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HE, HE'S DONE CONSTANTLY.
WHY? WHY DON'T, WHY DON'T, WHY, WHY, WHY DOESN'T FRANCIS GET THE LIST? UM, WHY, WHY, WHY DON'T THEY CALL ME BEFORE FRANCIS AND THEN FRANCIS COULD ALWAYS REBUT AND THEN THERE'S NO REBUTTAL TIME FOR ANYBODY AND THEN THAT SOLVES, THIS IS GONNA TAKE MY REBUTTAL TIME.
NO, I'M SAYING, SO WE DON'T GET, SO WE DON'T GET TO REBUTTAL.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY, I I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE NO REBUTTAL TIME.
I THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REBUTT.
WHY WOULD WE JUST GIVE VERSUS THE REBUTTAL TIME? OKAY, THEN, THEN ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT IF THERE SHOULD BE TWO, UM, IF YOU WANT TO GIVE SOMEBODY A REBUTTAL AND THAT THE PERSON WHO'S DOING A REBUTTAL IS MAKING A PERSONAL ATTACK ON IT SAYS A PERSONAL, WELL, WE SAID SOMETHING THIS WHOLE MEETING, THESE CALLING ME LIARS AND EVERYTHING.
SO THAT, THAT'S NOT SAYING HE'S NOT BEING FRIENDLY.
YOU KNOW, HE'S BASICALLY SAYING, YOU'RE A LIAR.
YOU DID THIS WRONG, YOU DID THAT WRONG.
YOU KNOW IT, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO A GRANDSTAND AND, AND MAKE EVERYBODY THINK I'M DOING THINGS WRONG WHEN IT'S NOT EVEN TRUE.
UM, SO THE THING IS, UM, SO I'M SAYING THAT I SHOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO REBUT IT.
HOW ABOUT WE JUST LET, JUST LET ME DO THIS.
I SAID THAT YOU LIE BECAUSE A JUDGE STOP ALREADY.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FORBES BIBLE, WHICH WAS ON 1998.
DO YOU, DO YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE JUDGE SAID THAT YOU ARE NOT, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU, I'M NOT GONNA CUT, I'M NOT GONNA CUT.
I DON'T WANNA, I DON'T WANNA GET INTO, BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING I'M CALLING YOU A LIAR BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT, WELL, YOU DON'T, I'M NOT GONNA RESPOND TO, TO YOUR, YOUR CREDIT FACT SOMETHING ELSE.
SIX AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS, SIX AND A HALF MILLION.
HOW I STOP GOING, TELL ME THIS, IF THIS IS NOT TRUE, YOU COULD, YOU COULD, AND I, AND I'LL, I'LL STOP YOU.
SAY YES OR NO, WHETHER OR NOT THIS, I'M NOT ANSWERING YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE A JUDGE.
IN THE FORTRESS BIBLE CASE, AFTER YOU TESTIFIED UNDER OATH, DEEMED YOUR TESTIMONY NOT TO BE CREDIBLE, DID NOT FIND THAT YOU WERE TRUTHFUL, FOUND THAT YOU ACTED IN BAD FAITH IN ASKING FOR THE CONTRACT.
WHY DON'T YOU, IS ANY OF THAT, WHY DON'T YOU STOP? WHY DON'T YOU STOP ANY OF THAT? NOT, I'M NOT RESPONDING TO YOU EXACTLY.
I DON'T RESPOND TO YOU IF IT'S TRUTH BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT, IS DISGUSTING OR THE WAY YOU ACT.
AND YOU'LL SEE HOW THE PUBLIC REACTS, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'LL BE VERY, I MAKE A MOTION.
I MAKE A MOTION FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING PERSONAL MATTERS INVOLVING SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS AND TO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE FOR VARIOUS MATTERS.