PATTERSON TOWN BOARD MEETING

PUBLIC HEARING

PUTNAM LAKE PARK DISTRICT

PATTERSON RECREATION CENTER

65 FRONT STREET

PATTERSON, NEW YORK 12563

JANUARY 18, 2012

MINUTES

PRESENT: MICHAEL GRIFFIN, SUPERVISOR

KEVIN BURNS, COUNCILMAN

CHARLES W. COOK, DEPUTY SUPERVISOR

ROBERT MCCARTHY, COUNCILMAN

GINNY NACERINO, COUNCILWOMAN

DONALD M. ROSSI, TOWN COUNSEL

ANTOINETTE KOPECK, TOWN CLERK

Salute to the Flag and Roll Call.

Supervisor Griffin called the Public Hearing to order at 7:30 p.m. with 150 in attendance.

PUTNAM LAKE PARK DISTRICT

Mr. Griffin stated good evening, thank you all for coming out tonight. The sole item on the agenda for tonight’s meeting is the discussion, presentation and question and answers relative to the Putnam Lake Park District.

Mr. Donald Rossi, Town Counsel read the following Legal Notice:

Mr. Griffin stated please note we have exits on both sides of the building. For people that are standing in the back, there are still some chairs up front and if you prefer to sit in the back there are some chairs on the rack so help yourself. At this time, I would ask the Town Planner, Rich Williams to give us a brief Power Point Presentation and then we will open the floor up for questions and answers.

Mr. Rich Williams stated thank you all for coming. My name is Rich Williams and I am the Town Planner in the Town of Patterson. My department prepared a report that is on the website if anyone would like to see it. It took a little more in depth look at the petition that was submitted concerning the Park District. I will run a few slides first and then talk about what the process is. We prepared an independent budget within my department and then looked at some of the issues that needed to be addressed by the Town Board.

The first step in forming a Park District was the submission of a petition which was submitted to the Town Clerk. The petition needs to be signed by the owners of taxable real property, owning at least one half of the assessed value within the District. It also needs to be signed by resident owners owning taxable real property that own at least one half of the total assessed valuation of the residence. Once the Town receives a petition, then it goes to the Town Clerk who verifies those signatures that are on the petition and takes a look at whether they are owners or resident owners. She categorizes them and sends that on to the Town Assessor who then assigns the assessed values to each of those signatures as well as develops the total assessed value for all the properties within the boundaries within the proposed District.

The fourth step is to hold a Public Hearing once the petition is validated and to hear your comments and concerns about moving forward with this petition. I could tell you at this time we have certified that at least 51% of the assessed value within the District equal at least 51%. That creates a valid petition that we can go forward with.

The fifth step, the Town Board has to adopt what is called an order or a resolution to approve the District or to modify the District. Either adding properties or taking properties out or it has the option of denying the District if it is not in the best interest of the community to move forward. There are four criteria that the Town Board needs to look at. It needs to certify that the petition has been signed as required by law, that it is in everyone’s best interest to create the District that all the properties that are benefited have been included in the District and all the properties in the proposed District will be benefited. If the Town Board finds that it is not the case, it triggers the possibility of a second Public Hearing. That Public Hearing needs to be held within not less than 15 days and no more than 25 days after the resolution accepting the District.

The petition that was submitted by the Committee to form the Park District, it set up the frame work for what the Park District is going to do. It did so in very general terms. Very specifically, the purpose of the proposed District is to manage, maintain and improve the proposed Park District properties. That really is what the Town Board needs to look at. That is the mandate for what is going forward with this. Also, along with the petition the Committee to form the Park District they came up with a five year budget and a scope of what they were accepting would be accomplished by the Park District. They were looking to operate the beaches that were currently now owned and operated by the Putnam Lake Community Council. They wanted to initially open two beaches and expand the number of beaches that were going to be open to the residents of the District. They wanted to add some exercise areas, cement gaming tables and play equipment. They also wanted to see improvements made to the lake. They were proposing to retain a limnologist, develop a water fowl plan, education and implement the recommendations of the limnologist in the report that he would prepare. They were also looking at improving the parklands, removing dead trees, low brush and vines. They wanted to create some walking trails, some picnic areas with garbage receptacles, benches, tables and grills. The cost to the average homeowner is forty-seven cents per thousand of assessed value. The average assessed value of a single-family home comes from my department. What you see up there wasn’t part of the petition but factoring in the forty-seven cents per thousand the cost to the average property owner is just under $100.00 within the District. As I said, the Committee who formed the Park District submitted a budget along with other documents that they provided. My department actually looked at that and we did our own independent budget to see where our numbers would come out compared to theirs. We looked at the beach maintenance, beach equipment, personnel and we have some administrative costs for the Town to maintain the District. We added a fifteen percent contingency within our budget. Then we added in the lake improvements of $25,000.00 that was proposed by the Committee. We came up with just over $130,000.00 for the annual operation of the District. That is compared to some of the documents that the Park District Committee proposed for the first year of operation of $130,900.00. I think we were in the same ballpark, but having said that, we did take a look at some of the numbers and pushed back doing some of the improvements that the Park District Committee was proposing because of limitations within the budget. The .47 per thousand, the revenue generated annually by the Park District would be about $130,000.00. That was the budget we tried to stay within. The question I keep hearing is “when is this all going to take effect”. If this were to go forward and the Town Board finds it appropriate to create the District, then the first time we would be able to submit a budget as part of the budget process the Town has to follow would be the 2012 Tentative Budget and the people that would be included in the District would see that charge on their Town and County tax bill in 2013. There are a lot of other steps that everyone needs to be aware of if this is going forward. One of the more critical steps that the Town is going to have to take is we will have to amend one of the laws we have in our Code book. Chapter 115 “Parks”, which right now provides for the administration and oversight of a current Park District. We will have to add another section and that will lay out the rules and regulations of how the Putnam Lake Park District will be managed and handled. It will create the Park Advisory Board or Committee and it would detail who would be on that Committee. It is a very critical step for the Community to be aware of in the future should this petition go forward.

The Town Board will then need to create a Park Advisory Board who will than start to look at the rules and regulations for operating the beaches, park lands, boats on the lake, etc. We will have to have some discussions with the Putnam Lake Community Council who currently owns the park land. We will have to see how they progress. If the Park District does go forward in my opinion it doesn’t become operational until 2013. Another question that I heard repeatedly “is the forty-seven cents per thousand locked in for the first five years”. It is not locked in for the first five years. That is something that was put on the table by the Park Committee who did this. I think everyone is cognizant of the fact that we are in very lean times and this is a very lean budget for operating a Park District and managing the lake. I’m sure the Town Board will be reluctant to increase this amount but it is subject for reevaluation every year by the Town Board during the budget process. Depending on what the community wants, it can go up or down.

In the report I submitted to the Town Board, one of the items we looked at are all the properties that are benefitted within the District and are all the properties in the District actually benefitted by the proposed District. The petition actually identified the 13 maps of Putnam Lake. All the portions of land that are on those 13 maps are what constitute the boundaries of the District. I have heard about these 13 maps since I was a boy. In reality there are actually 19 subdivision maps that were filed that created the Putnam Lake subdivision. There are 15 maps in the State of New York and that is where we have a discrepancy on whether or not the properties are benefitted or included in the petition.

Here is how the 15 maps which are the principle maps creating the Putnam Lake subdivision in New York lay out. For example; Plum Island was its own individual subdivision map that was filed with the Putnam County Clerk. That was not listed within the petition that was submitted. There were two other Putnam Lake subdivision maps that were not included on the list of the 13 maps provided on the petition. One of them is the 11^th map, map A which is properties within the State of Connecticut but there are four or five properties that are in New York on that map. It is my recommendation that these get added back in. Mohawk Trail is its own subdivision map that was not part of the original 13 maps. Then there is an interesting little area in Putnam Lake off of Gates Drive which originally were two lots, which were held out separate from the original Putnam Lake maps owned by someone different than the Times Mirror Corporation that are not actually included in the petition. It is my recommendation to the Town Board that they add all these properties in. There are also two properties that I realized were part of the petition that probably should come out. One is back by Hazel Drive. The situation is the petition says any portion of a lot that is in Putnam Lake or was part of the original Putnam Lake 13 maps should be included, this lot and the original subdivision lot included this lot right here (pointing to the screen). Subsequently the owners of this lot purchased this and merged the two lots so that would than include all of this land which is really outside of Putnam Lake in the proposed District. That one should be coming out. The other property is the Putnam Lake Market, which is basically just a commercial piece of property. I don’t think it would have a substantial benefit being in the Park District. I am recommending that the Putnam Lake Market be taken out. It actually increases the total assessed value of the District and would increase the revenue by about $1,000.00.

That is a very brief overview going through things very quickly. Now we are here to hear what you have to say.

Mr. Griffin stated thank you Rich. The way this is going to work is we are going to ask anyone who has any questions or concerns please come up to the podium and give your name and address for the record and ask your question. We will make an attempt to answer it.

Mr. Chris Lawlor, Utica Road stated a lot of people haven’t been asked whether they wanted to vote on this. Since these properties have not been asked that are not in question on this, how does this referendum or whatever you want to call it, how does this go forward when other people haven’t been asked whether they want to make it a Park District or not. Where do we go from here. Do we hold it or do we go forward.

Mr. Griffin stated the few properties that were identified as not having been in the Park District and recommended for inclusion and a couple of properties that were recommended to be taken out don’t materially change or dramatically change the numbers so there is no net effect on whether they meet the criteria or not.

Mr. Williams stated the short answer to your question is we would have to have a second Public Hearing and notify those property owners that we will have a second Public Hearing to discuss putting those properties in or out of the District.

Mr. Lawlor stated since I was never asked and I’m part of the PLCC and I probably didn’t want to be asked, but they should have gone to every household. I was never asked, so how does that work in that referendum. My property is at the back end of the lake and I was disqualified from either signing or not signing.

Mr. Rossi stated the matters before the Town Board pursuant to a petition that was circulated and the provisions of the Town law that govern this mandate that if a certain number of people sign the petition the Town Board has to consider it.

Mr. Lawlor stated was it a certain number of particular people that signed it or a certain number of people that lived within the District. This should be a good answer.

Mr. Rossi stated it is the number of people who are in the District.

Mr. Lawlor stated my vote doesn’t count even though I am on the Board, my vote doesn’t count.

Mr. Rossi stated I will say this, your vote would have counted if you signed it but also that is the reason we are having this Public Hearing. If you are not in favor of the District, this is the time for you to express that to the Board.

Mr. Lawlor stated even if I was in favor of it, you don’t know because you never came to my house and knocked on my door.

Mr. Rossi stated remember that the Town Board did not circulate the petition. This Board didn’t have anything really to do with circulating it. It was presented to us. Not only could you voice your opposition tonight to the District, you could also voice your support. That is the purpose for the Public Hearing when a matter comes before the Town Board in this fashion.

Ms. Pat Ploeger, Lake Shore Drive stated I have two issues, can I address them both at the same time or do you want me to come back for the second one. Maybe I can be clever and combine them both. On the plan on page 6, it states that and I quote “on November 16, 2011 the Town Assessor determined that the petition has been signed by owners of property aggregating at least one-half, not 51% by the way, of the assessed valuation of all taxable real property. The Assessor’s final valuation of that property came to $277,971.00 as you just saw. The Assessor stated on page 4 of the petition validation that the percentage of property values of owner’s signatures obtained for petition out of the total assessment value for all of the petition parcels is calculated at 57.87 or 58%. So, while 21% less than the 73% that the committee claimed to have gathered, the petition did achieve its goal of 51% or as the Assessor’s Office puts it at least 50%. However, on several occasions the Town has also stipulated that in addition to the support of the owners of the property aggregating at least one-half of the assessed valuation, the petition would have to be signed by the owners of 51% of the number of properties. This requirement was needed so that a single owner of a large valuable property would not be able to control the outcome of the petition. I believe a Costco was the example given. The petition validation sets the total number of taxable properties or parcels at 1,707. 51% according to my math of 1,707 is 871. Did the petition meet its burden in this respect and by what number. I don’t know if you have the answer to that, but this is something that never appeared on any of the plans or the Assessor’s valuation. But more important, what data base, and this will resonate with those who have carried political petitions for your own parties in the past, what data base did the Town use to verify that the petition was actually signed by the owner and not by someone else. Can anyone answer those questions. I have had several personal experiences, and I’m sure those of you at the table who have carried petitions have experienced similar where you go up to a house and you ask for Mrs. Smith and Mr. Smith, they are both in your party and they are going to sign the petition but Mrs. Smith isn’t home. Her husband says “I will sign the petition for her because I sign her name all the time”. Now in this case that is a moot point, because he would be signing as the owner, but let’s say you went up to a house and said is Tom in and a guy named Tom comes to the door and its Tom Junior. who does not own the house, he just lives there and he says yes, I’m Tom I’ll sign the petition. How do we know that the petition was signed by the actual owner.

Mr. Rossi stated I will answer both. With regard to the first question Pat, there is no requirement in the law for the number of parcels being used as a qualifier for the legitimacy of the petition. It is based on assessed valuation. The example you gave is correct. The law is very logical in the way it provides for this. It says that and we have been using the word qualifiers. The first qualifier is 51%, the owners of 51% of the assessed valuation of all taxable real property in the District must sign the petition. It has been determined and certified by the Assessor that it was the case with this petition. The second qualifier in order to protect against exactly the type of example that you gave, one landowner who owns a significant amount of property and might live in San Francisco, it provides that the owners of 51% of the property in the proposed District owned by resident owners must sign the petition. So it is a check and balance. In my office using an example of this table, if this is the Town’s three lots with resident owners cannot be dictated to by the owner of the balance of the property. Two out of three of those resident owners also have to sign the petition. In answer to the first question, there is no qualifier for number of lots versus number of lots in the District. Assessed value total and assessed value of resident owner is what dictates.

Ms. Ploeger stated than we were miss led.

Mr. Rossi stated excuse me.

Ms. Ploeger stated we were misled and I’m not the only one who heard this on at least two occasions.

Mr. Rossi stated I can only tell you what I understand the state of the law to be. Again a task of this significance obviously has a lot of factors that goes into it but again the law says that the petition, this is on the second question as far as the identities of persons signing the petition. The law says that the petition has to be, and I don’t want to speak out of turn, but basically the petitions have to be verified in the same manner as a petition that would be used in connection with an election law process. At the end of each page of the petition, there is a certification by the person who supervised the signatures and saw the signatures that they were in fact the people signing. Now, the Town in reviewing it and this review was done primarily by the Town Clerk’s office, went painstakingly through the petitions to eliminate duplicate signatures, to eliminate signatures of people who may not clearly have owned a parcel. There were instances where someone signed for a particular parcel but that person’s name was not on the deed and many of the signatures were eliminated because it was not readily apparent that it was the person. The petition review process was very diligent, in my opinion, resulted in a number of properties not being counted in the petition totals with the results that for both qualifiers the 51% was exceeded.

Ms. Ploeger stated thank you Don. My second issue, I am one of maybe 25 or 30 homeowners whose backyards have “lakefront”. None of us really does. We have our backyards which abut park lands and then the lake. In the proposed plan there was a concept of a walkway encircling the lake, which would in effect go from here to that table from my deck where I sit on a summer afternoon or evening with people walking by. When I brought this up to the Town at a meeting in October we were told there is a possibility that the Town may be able to sell us the portion of the park lands that abuts our property to preserve our quiet enjoyment. Is this indeed a fact. Can the park lands property be chopped up and then how do you reconcile this with the wishes of those people who want a walkway around the lake.

Mr. Williams stated as I pointed out earlier the petition laid out a very generic frame work for what the Park District, if it goes forward, needs to do. Whether there will be a walking trail around the lake is something that will have to be evaluated by a lot of individuals including the Town Engineer, Park Advisory Board and the Town Board and perhaps myself to see if it is feasible, how it will be laid out, whether it can encompass the whole perimeter of the lake, and I have my reservations. I think a walking trail can eventually be made over substantial proportions of the park land. That being said, my non-legal opinion is if the Park District acquires the land it would be virtually impossible for us to sell portions of that land off. Don you can correct me if I’m wrong, I think it would take an act of the State Legislature for us to actually divest our rights within park lands.

Mr. Rossi stated I freely admit I don’t know the answer to the question. The property would be part of the overall District. Pat the concern that you raised is something that is a very legitimate concern and while the formation of the Park Advisory Board has not really been planned out, I think it is the type of thing that is important to potentially have a letter or email to the Board so they are aware of these issues when and if the time comes to lay out the walk way.

Ms. Ploeger stated this would be very important. There are some beautiful properties on South Lake. I know one of the owners is here. I’m sure he wouldn’t want to have people walking through the backyard that he so meticulously upkeeps. There are people on both sides of Lake Shore, Haviland Drive and some of the smaller streets that come off Lake Shore, so you would be impacting a great number of people. Thank you.

Mr. Mark Armon, Lafayette Road stated should this District be formed and the whole thing goes through, how much is the Town of Patterson prepared to purchase this privately owned land for.

Mr. Rossi stated there has been no discussion of any purchase price. It might be putting the cart before the horse. There are a number of methods whereby the Town could become the owner which includes a voluntary transfer, a condemnation proceeding through the Town’s Eminent Domain powers or it could involve an old deed provision that is probably not a viable alternative in any event. Personally I have not heard any numbers. The voluntary conveyance would probably be preferable from the Town’s point of view. It would also result in a lesser charge in connection with the budgetary issues that would confront the District.

Mr. Armon stated just a follow up, hypothetically speaking 51% of the assessed value of my community signed a petition to turn my house and land to a Park District, would I have to move. Am I in any danger of losing my personal property. My community could just form a petition and turn my house into a Park District, correct.

Mr. Griffin stated I think what you are talking about is Eminent Domain. If the Town decided to make the park a lot bigger which included your property, there is provision in the law that says we could Eminent Domain your property. The Supreme Court has held that up even to go so far to say that a Government Entity could take your property and give it to another private citizen or private entity.

Mr. Armon stated so I am in danger of losing my house to a Park District should 51% of the community sign a petition.

Mr. Griffin stated it is highly unlikely, but I am not going to say it couldn’t happen. The decision would have to be to expand the Park District because right now the Park District provisions don’t involve taking anyone’s house away from them.

Mr. Armon stated currently there is no Park District so we wouldn’t be expanding a Park District. This is sort of my house first or the lake front property first but we are not expanding the Park District currently with the current proposal, correct.

Mr. Griffin stated the current proposal is the only thing we can really discuss. If we were to reconfigure as Rich Williams said before, put properties in and take properties out, we have to notify those property owners and then we have to have a second Public Hearing. The only thing the Town can act on is what the people signed the petition for. That at the present time did not include taking anyone’s house away from them.

Mr. Armon stated just to follow up, do you feel that the Town of Patterson would make a good management resource for Putnam Lake.

Mr. Griffin stated do I feel that way.

Mr. Armon stated yes, or anyone that would like to answer.

Mr. Griffin stated I would answer it the best way I could put it, we would assemble a Park Advisory Board and then we would listen to what they would have to say very carefully. We do the same thing over on Maple Avenue with Veterans Park. There is a Board that sits right now. They advise us and we have two Councilmember’s that are adjuncts to that Board and we listen very carefully to what they have to say. We work with them to develop budgets and improvement programs and project out the financial aspects of it.

Mr. Armon stated what is the current budget of that Park District.

Mr. Griffin stated I think it is about $80,000.00 give or take.

Mr. Armon stated thank you.

Ms. Lisette Kubie, Kendal Drive stated I want to talk about the properties that are on the 13 maps that are located in the State of Connecticut. My first question is did any of the signers of the petition live in Connecticut. Correct me if I am wrong, if the Park District goes through you guys aren’t going to be able to tax the people that live in Connecticut. Will they just be allowed access and have all the benefits without having to pay for it just by sheer luck. Did anyone in Connecticut sign and have there been any discussions about how if anything can you make them pay.

Mr. Williams stated within the same law, we can’t look at signatures outside of the State of New York and outside of the proposed District which can’t extend outside of the State of New York. There are provisions where we could look at those people who live in Connecticut who may have deeded lake rights and have rights to use the lake and to set up policies, administrative costs for them to continue to use the lake and the park lands. Essentially we could set up a fee schedule for out of District users.

Ms. Tracey Deets, Dayton Road stated if this petition moves forward we will have a few thousand people that have access to our beaches and park lands at any given time. I would like to know how the Town plans on managing this when and if we are only having two open beaches. The Board of Health only allows 150 people or so on the beaches. Are people going to be turned away, who is going to regulate that and manage this. I would also like to know how influential the Park Advisory Board will actually be in the decision making process.

Mr. Griffin stated in answer to your last question, we listen very carefully to what the Park Advisory Board asks us. We very rarely tell them no. We often work with them on the budgets and frequently tell them we are not going to increase the budgets to the extent that they would like. Right now we are currently working on a long time capital plan with the park which may involve borrowing money to make major improvements. As far as the Board goes, the Town Board listens very carefully to the Park Advisory Board. The other question I will defer to the Planner or the Attorney.

Mr. Rossi stated I’m passing the ball to Rich because I think it is more planning than legal. My editorial comment is I don’t know if this necessarily will result in increased usage because all of the people that are in this District would already have access rights to the lake based on their deeds.

Mr. Williams stated yes, there are limits as to how many people can use the beach. Yes, we are going to have to monitor that. There are considerations within both budgets to modify the beach area to expand it, not significantly but somewhat. Exactly how we are going to monitor that, I’m not sure that is going to be a function of the Park Advisory Board and the rules and regulations when we set them up. It is going to have to be enforced. If we see that the beaches are consistently over crowded, we are going to have to make provisions to open one of the other beaches up. If that does become the case where we find that there is a substantial increase in the usage and we need to expand the beaches or add new beaches, the Town is probably in a better position right now to do that because we have the ability to go out and borrow money and use the weight of the Town to get better rates to borrow money and make any sort of capital improvements. All costs come back to the District.

Mr. Ed Garrity, Fulton Drive stated I want to go on record saying I’m not in favor or against involving anything tonight. All I want is to deal with Putnam Lake. The Town has owned the bottom of the lake for 100 years and nothing has been done. They owned the dam and nothing has been done. As far as the last young lady stated, I think her name is Sue, you contradicted yourself from what you said at the last meeting. That is one thing. The Town Board reports that service options will be delayed. What will be the time frame for all completed as what was promised for the Park District presentations. How many years, 10, 20, 50 or 100. I went around the lake today and there are 73 culvert crossings and there are 2 detention ponds, there is a major dam, how are you going to do a walk around the lake, give me a break. I have been in heavy highway construction for 32 years of my life, I know what is involved in that. I know how much it costs. There is no way you are going to do a walk around that lake. I’m not asking for any answers here today, maybe someone should start doing some homework here instead of just figuring out that you are going to raise peoples taxes. Don’t even use the lake. There are a lot of old people over here who can’t afford their taxes raised. You have owned the lake for 100 years, do something with the bottom.

Mr. Anthony Cioppa, Lake Shore Drive stated I have some concerns with the cost of compliance. The PLCC currently does a lot of work for very cheap. They do it on a very slim budget just because there are not a lot of members. I did some research just on permitting for the D.E.P., D.E.C. and other state agencies that are approximately hundreds of thousands of dollars to set up this District. From other lake districts just from doing dredging, some beach work, permitting for the dam and so forth. That is just permitting fees and other associated fees. I don’t know if that was brought into the budget. I have concerns about the budget skyrocketing just to be compliant with New York State, the County, the Health Department and other agencies. As soon as you create something government wise all the other agencies come in and it might be a bear to manage. I hope that was looked into.

Mr. Drew Allard, Camden Road stated a gentlemen brought up private property. I think that the decision that you guys have today is about change or keeping the status quo. It is my understanding, but you can all correct me when I’m done, that these park lands that we are talking about were granted to the PLCC and they have fiduciary duty to their neighbors the residents of Putnam Lake to keep, maintain and improve the parks and other property for the residents and inhabitants of Putnam Lake. I think right now what we have is a failure to live up to that fiduciary obligation. In order to use the beach you have to pay $180.00 per year. It’s not even just the residents because non-residents are allowed to join the PLCC and use the beaches to the exclusion of Putnam Lake residents. That is from the deed (inaudible). This is not property, in my opinion that is (inaudible). There are covenants that run with that land and those covenants have not been lived up with. The PLCC failed in its obligation also under that same document not to sell, transfer or encumber the park lands. As we all went through a couple of years ago with the cell tower deal. That was supposedly a lease, but it was a lease in name only because there was no way for the landlord, the PLCC in that case to terminate the lease once it had begun. The park lands are abandoned, they are overgrown and there is no maintenance, no improvements that have been done and no plans to maintain and improve them in any different way other than to let them keep going and to keep the two beaches out of seven that are there. I live off of Fairfield Drive and Fairfield beach is there and has been closed and is overgrown. There are no plans to do any improvements at all. I think that the Park District it while may need some work and all (inaudible). You made a choice between either keeping it a big green blob, if anyone looked on Google maps and looked down on the satellite picture there is a big green blob. I don’t see how we are going to do anything to improve this situation. I think it is a drain on the property values and certainly some of the park lands around my house are a negative impact on the quality of life. That is the choice right there.

Mr. John Byrne, Sullivan Drive stated Mike I would like to ask you, you had stated before that you may be looking at procuring loans. How is this going to affect our taxes in the near future.

Mr. Griffin stated it can affect it in one or two ways. It can either add to your tax burden to cover the cost of the loans or we can take it away from the operating budget to pay for the loans, which means less will get done that was on the original plan.

Mr. Burns stated based on the original plan that was provided through the petition.

Mr. Griffin stated there is one thing that needs to be clear and I don’t want to skew this one way or the other, the Town Board or any future Board is not obligated to maintain the .47.

Mr. Byrne stated I understand that completely but the people that signed this petition were guaranteed that it wouldn’t increase for five years. Earlier this evening the Board has stated that there is no guarantee so next year it could go up and the following year after that it could go up and the year after that in order to properly provide what the community wants based on the advisory committee that will be put into effect, correct. Whether or not you are going to listen to what they have to say or say no, we can’t do that because the public does not want that because they don’t want their taxes to go up. A lot of these things that were currently stated in the petition, may or may not ever come to fruition based on what the tax rate may become in the future. In my mind that was like a disillusionment where things were not really stated correctly because it can go up next year, correct.

Mr. Griffin stated sure.

Mr. Byrne stated absolutely, thank you.

Ms. Laura Byrne, Sullivan Drive stated I have several questions. The beaches were raised and I know it was represented, I’ve spoken to people that weren’t quite sure they signed and they felt misinformed. It wasn’t exactly what they thought. It was said that the fence was going to be taken down and you can go to the beach whenever you want. They will be open and they will be free to use. Of course, in the budget it does say there are hours to the beaches, 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., I believe during the week , 7:00 p.m. on Saturday and 5:00 p.m. on Sunday. I would imagine there are laws that it needs to be fenced in. I’m not sure but if there are hours that means there is going to be barriers or a fence up. Does that mean you are not allowed on the beach after those hours or would it be “swim at your own risk”, will it be locked after those hours. The two beaches that we would have access to it would only be within the parameter of those hours that we could use the beach area. Is it true the fences would remain and who will patrol it. If the Connecticut people don’t want to join to go to the beach, then they don’t have to pay anything. They have free access to the park lands and the water. Who would patrol, who would make sure any kids from Connecticut can’t come out. If these park lands look so wonderful, I could imagine all the kids that will gather and hang out and drink and smoke and do whatever they do when they find a place to hang out and hide because we have trouble with that as it is now. We battle against vagrants and vandals because kids like to hang out. That is either way you vote. That is a universal issue. Questions and questions go through my head. I think the beach thing is a big thing. I feel it is misrepresented to people. Anyone want to address that.

Mr. Griffin stated in terms of the fences I would be disinclined to take them down for the same reason we fenced in Club Court Park. It’s not to keep people out as much as it is for safety and protection of the kids using the beaches.

Ms. Byrne stated so the beaches would be locked when lifeguards are not on duty. Anyone can go whenever they want.

Mr. Griffin stated I’m not going that far to say that.

Ms. Byrne stated okay.

Mr. Griffin stated I don’t know exactly how that will be managed at this point. I don’t think a decision is necessarily been made but lifeguards will not be on duty 24-7. There is a schedule laid out in the operation plan that details when lifeguards will be at the beaches. That is when swimming will be permitted. After that I would defer to the Town Attorney on swim at your own risk. I’m not sure that is entirely…….

Ms. Byrne stated people signed this petition thinking that they could go and use it whenever they want. Also, I have spoken to people that have told me that. This is another thing I didn’t even think coming here. If 500 people signed a petition, and I’m just making up a number, very often there are two signatories in a household. They said a husband and wife could sign but only one house is represented as house value. So if you have 800 signatures that can’t represent 800 houses because a lot of those are husband and wife. Wouldn’t that make the property a lot less. That should be considerably less in the residential value because the properties would be duplicated with the double signatures.

Mr. Griffin stated that is not how the petition was certified. The Assessor and the Town Clerk verified the signatures. If both you and John signed the petition it would still only count for one house and the assessed value of that house.

Ms. Byrne stated it is very hard for me to imagine that barely the 51% of signatures, if there was barely 51% of signatures that would make the home property owning ownership of that property less because a lot of those signatures were husband and wife. Wouldn’t that make only 600 homes or 500 homes because there were dual signatures. Do you know what I mean.

Mr. Griffin stated I know what you are saying but what I am saying is the way the Town Clerk’s Office and the Assessor looked at the petition……

Ms. Byrne stated so we have to trust that it was their best shot.

Mr. Griffin stated if you can’t trust Antoinette Kopeck, I don’t know who you can trust.

Ms. Byrne stated no, no, no, absolutely. I know Antoinette since I’ve moved here and I am a big fan of hers, it doesn’t mean that mistakes can’t be made. I make mistakes every day. It started not to make sense to me if the signatories really could duplicate a property.

Mr. Kevin Burns stated at the end of the day its water under the bridge at this point. The petition has been verified. What I think you need to speak to is if you have reservations, if you feel there was misrepresentation of ………

Ms. Byrne stated I’ve spoken to people that have signed not realizing. Somebody said “oh no, I just signed it and they are looking into it”. I said, “no, it means a lot more than that”.

Some people signed not quite knowing what the impact was.

Mr. Burns stated I think what is helpful here tonight is that people focus on what reservations you have about what is going to happen in the District. If you felt a critical aspect of this was to have the beaches open 24-7 and if they were not going to be open 24-7 you would not be in favor of that, those are the types of things we need to hear tonight.

Ms. Byrne stated right now it is private property, it’s a private organization. Anyone in the District can join and is limited to the funds that it incorporates. It’s been misunderstood for years. I misunderstood too, assuming that the water was the PLCC’s job. If you were a member, the water condition fell on us. We were all wrong. The water never fell on us. It is an orphan, the lake itself is an orphan. It has no monetary income to help it. I think it would much more serve our community if it was a Water District and a very small amount of money would be assessed to each homeowner. It could be $35.00 or $50.00 to create a Water Quality District. All the money could go to keep and maintain the health of the lake. Should it be a swimming pool, absolutely not, but it certainly could be healthy. I don’t think the people who blocked it up to create the lake or saw that it was going to slowing start to choke to death, it has become shallow and creates weeds and it is suffocating. It’s the lake itself that really needs help. In the past, the PLCC has used their funds to try to help the lake. That was a drain of our funds thinking that it was our obligation or our responsibility and yes it is our love. We love that lake and I think it is a gorgeous lake, it is beautiful. It is coughing and choking and it needs help. A Water Quality District would ensure that my taxes don’t go sky high. It would ensure only the people who are interested in using the park lands could join. Our funds could solely go on the park lands. It would help the private lake association greatly if the lake was healthy and happy and then the people who wanted to use it, if more joined, we open more beaches. We are only able to open the amount of beaches to the revenue we take in. If more people join, we can open a third beach. We can open a fourth beach. I think that is a misunderstanding in our community that needs to be rectified. There is a large group here but there are so many people in that community that don’t know either side of the details or if they are right or wrong or what is real or imagined on either side. I wish there was a way to communicate the exact truth of what is happening and let people vote on it. They just don’t know what is going on. Thank you.

Mr. Alan Burnsworth, Hudson Drive stated to be quite honest I feel like an outsider because I just moved in about five years ago. To a certain degree I am looking at this from an outsider’s point of view. I want to lend my support to this measure that it does become a Park District for a couple of reasons. Number one, the lady who just mentioned before that the PLCC only has so much funds to do so much, well that is kind of exactly the point. Because if there is only a certain number that join, it is clear that they can only do so much. I’m a real estate agent. I have my license in both New York and Connecticut, so I sell homes on both sides. Well, let me be precise, I sell homes on the Connecticut side. When I try to bring them over to see the lake they say “oh my goodness, lake property, that is wonderful”. Except the fact of the matter is, 90% of the real estate that is on sale on the Putnam Lake side the values continue to fall and it’s gotten so bad that some of the signs are actually starting to deteriorate. I have a property two doors down from me that has been on the market for four years. New Fairfield, their property values have not declined nearly as much as ours and even though they have declined, they haven’t declined nearly as much. Their properties are on the market on average of six to nine months. Our properties are on the market for nearly two years. There is a reason for that. I am concerned about the property values that we have. If you are concerned about money, $99.00, seriously. $99.00, I know it is taxes, I understand it is taxes and no one likes taxes. Everyone raises the taxes.

Mr. Burns stated everyone can have a chance to talk. If you want to talk come up to the microphone.

Mr. Burnsworth stated this is what else I know, I know I am over weight and I can stop going to McDonald’s for $7.00 a day. How fast will I cover $99.00 so I can improve the value of my property so that when my daughter comes over and she goes “wow a lake”, but you can’t swim in that lake. The concept that teenagers are going to come and smoke and drink and party at the lake because it looks better, seriously! The reasons communities do better is because people care about their entire community. The entire community not just my backyard. It is an entire community and if you want everyone’s property value to go up, I advise you to possibility go to a place like Columbia, Maryland where I moved from and even though it ticked me off sometimes when they told me what I could and could not do sometimes with my property, the fact of the matter is their property values continue to climb even though everyone else’s are going down. They continue to climb, the assessments continue to go down and yet somehow amazingly the property looks beautiful and they continue to expand.

Audience member spoke but unable to transcribe.

Mr. Burnsworth stated excuse me, I may very well be a Yuppie but you know what I know is that I move forward. We move forward and all I see since I’ve been here is that there is no one in this area that wants to move forward. You are going to be left behind. There are nearly two hundred homes in a two mile radius of my place on Hudson Drive that are in distress on the New York and Connecticut side. Why is that, because they can’t afford to pay. They’re underwater. The reason they are underwater is because the property values continue to go down.

Audience member stated high taxes.

Mr. Burnsworth stated high taxes is absolutely part of it. You are absolutely right. The only way you will ever get out from under high taxes is when you can finally increase the property values. For crying out loud, you cannot stay in 1950. In 1950 a loaf of bread cost .10. It doesn’t cost .10 anymore. If you want to share the community but from what I am hearing here you get a few people who say I don’t want a walkway by my thing, except for the fact when I drive by I have to dodge dog walkers that are walking around the lake anyway. How about we get them off of the walkway. No, I don’t care I like the dog walkers, I train dogs. If you have someone walking a dog on the walk as opposed to in the street, I don’t understand the difference except you just want to find something small to blow up and possibility create a whole mess that really doesn’t make any sense. My girlfriend who has lived here for seven years has had that house for 17 years and said to me I am wasting my time coming here but I had to put my voice in. I lend my support to this, I will do everything I can to help pass it. I think as a whole as a community to improve our homes, our property values, to improve the community that we live in and enjoy being around that community. The whole community, the entire community not just the little tiny piece of land because right now you drive around that land and to be honest it is an embarrassment. I think this lake has a tremendous opportunity, I think we have a tremendous opportunity to make a beautiful piece of land for people to enjoy their property. I also think that when we improve the lake and it begins to look better that the people around the lake will improve their homes and maybe the people behind them will improve their homes. There is an advantage of keeping up with the Jones’s sometimes. I think it will be a benefit for all of us overall.

Mr. Mike Turnyansky, East Branch Road stated I am a 20 year member of the PLCC. I have a couple of questions regarding the signatures, not to dispute it but for clarification because I heard a number of 58% mentioned. Approximately how many signatures were disqualified.

Mr. Rossi stated let me take a second to look.

Mr. Turnyansky stated while he is checking on that I will ask the question relating to that. If the 58% I heard mentioned earlier when Pat Ploeger was up here, if that is in fact a meaningful number as opposed to the 73%, the point I’m on is 58% isn’t 2/3 it’s not some type of super majority, it is yes, it exceeds 50% but it’s not an overwhelming percentage of the total population within Putnam Lake. That is why I am asking the question. The next point I am going to make is directed specifically at the Town Board because I understand that this is now in your hands. I might be mistaken about that but given that there are two new Board members, I am not sure how knowledgeable the Board is to be able to make a decision about this in the short term given the two new Board members need to come up to speed become knowledgeable to make an educated decision. We have been living with Putnam Lake here and the Community Council for 80 years or whatever. There is no reason to rush into this decision now. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Waiting another six to twelve months to get all the questions answered that are being asked here tonight is very important. Once you go to a Park District there is no going back and you are taking the property rights of property owners.

Mr. Rossi stated I am going off an October 12^th memo that was done shortly after the petition was submitted. There were a total of unverified and duplicate signatures of 147.

Mr. Turnyansky stated 147. What is the 58%, please.

Mr. Rossi stated out of a total signatures of 1,023 that were on the petition.

Mr. Turnyansky stated so 15% approximately give or take round numbers.

Mr. Rossi stated it says 14.36.

Mr. Turnyansky stated I’m pretty close. What is the 58%.

Mr. Rossi stated bear with me again. Owners of 58% of the assessed valuation in the proposed district signed the petition.

Mr. Turnyansky stated 58% not 2/3 not 73 or very high percentage. Something just over 50% which is why I am cautioning the Town Board particularly the two new members to take the necessary time to explore everything here because if you approve this, we are stuck with it. I have my own reservations about the budget. I think it is significantly understated. I believe it calls for one full-time person for five months during the year, some part-time people. You are not going to get the work done for that type of money without volunteers and you will not have the volunteers for three to five years if you go to a Park District. What is going to happen is the volunteer is going to say, “why should I be bothered doing this, that’s why I am paying these taxes now. I could only imagine with all the tree work being done and all the landscaping being done someone is going to get injured. The person who gets injured, who are they going to go after, the poor volunteer. You are not going to get the volunteers you need. If this budget is premised on a lot of volunteer effort, it is flawed to begin with. Also, I would question where are the maintenance vehicles that would be needed and a trailer. There are any number of things in the budget that need to be addressed. If, and I know this might sound a little silly, but if the Town Council goes ahead with this, I would like to see some type of two tiered, two step fees put in place or taxes. One, an initiation fee for all those people who have not been members of the PLCC for the past number of years, whatever “X” is. That probably won’t fly. But I would encourage the Town Council to explore that. A lot of the people in the PLCC and the community have put in time and money of their own and we will be given a free ride and they haven’t done anything. Regarding property owners who don’t care of the park lands appearance next to their property. All they have to do is contact the PLCC Board and ask them, “this is something I would like to do on some of the park lands, may I do this”. Then you have a discussion with the Board and things can be worked out. The last thing, clearly I am not in support of the Park District, but the other thing I am concerned about is the Town’s ability to manage a lake when we have a small pond in the Town park which many times during the summer is weed choked and has scum on it, just like Putnam Lake does. So, if the Town can’t take care of a little pond, how are you going to manage a lake and the many individual parcels around the lake. Mike you also mentioned that it was an $80,000.00 budget approximately give or take for the Town park. We are talking $50,000.00 more here for $130,000.00. The Town park is basically a lawn. It does have a pond in it, that is $80,000.00 that is taking care of a pond and cutting grass. That is not the situation in Putnam Lake. The last item, the two ball fields that the Town is responsible for, one in the Park District and one at the dump. In my opinion, the Town has not taken proper care of them in the past. Those ball fields have been redone more than once in the time that I have been living here and the Memorial Field is taken care of by a dedicated group of people who maintain that at their own expense both in time and money. I don’t know how the Town can do any of this stuff. Until these types of concerns and issues are addressed, I think it would be foolish of the Town Board to make a decision in the short term other than to postpone any decision making. Thank you.

Mr. Huey Courtney, Barnard Road stated I will try and keep it brief. I too would like to question the validity of the petition. The Park District committee “were wearing save the lake “T” shirts”. Everyone wants to save the lake, we all want to save the lake. A lot of people thought, yeah sure let’s save the lake, sign the petition you will save the lake. They were mislead and misrepresented. It was mostly outside the market and they went door to door and they didn’t get the right person they were looking for anyway. Yes, the lake needs work, yes the PLCC does a great job with volunteer’s that help all the time to keep the children safe that swim there. My kids swim there and they have a great time. They don’t come home green, it’s not a green blob. They don’t come home sick, they are just fine. Thank you very much.

Ms. Carmel Cassidy, Slater Road stated I have two concerns and questions. One item that hasn’t been brought up that I think is very important is security of this new Park District. Who is responsible, it is a very large area and this is a very large young community here that like to go in the lake. I want to know who is going to be in charge of security and who is paying for it. The question of volunteers, as we all now know the lake is a total volunteer, it does all the work. What we raise in fees is basically to pay lifeguards but most of the work is done by volunteers. My understanding is there is a liability issue with volunteers in Town park land. Could you verify that for me. If this did go to a Park District, where would the volunteer issue come in and who would be liable for any incidents or accidents to those volunteers.

Mr. Rossi stated I will speak to it because I checked directly with the Town’s coverage and volunteers are covered under the Town’s liability policies. If the volunteer caused an issue they would be covered.

Mr. Griffin stated there are two possibilities with the security. One is to continue to count on the Sheriff’s Department and State Police. The other thing that we have done successfully in several communities and on this side of Town is a block neighborhood watch where you organize residents to go out and keep an eye on things. That is one other possibility.

Mr. Paul Daria, Palmyra Road stated I don’t know if I am the oldest one here, but I know we have been here since 1945 and 1946 when we moved up here permanently. I was privy with the Putnam Lake Community Council having mucho volunteers. But that was a summer community at that point. I have to congratulate all the work the PLCC members did all these years and have done the best that they can with what they had. Now we have come into another section or time frame when we are advancing into the Putnam Lake community where it will become a Town park. I know they have been limited in their budget and they can’t take care of all eight beaches that we had there and they had to eliminate a few of them. It’s not their fault and everything has gotten more expensive over the years and it looks like it will get more expensive. I have a feeling that this Town park is where we can increase the value of our property, yes but increase the looks of the lake, yes also and now not only with our tax money that we will be putting into it at a very reasonable figure, if I have a house that is worth $200,000.00 it’s $100.00 or so. So what is happening here is we are getting dollars in that can do more work. I believe that work that can be done can be done more easily. I don’t know about you but every community that I know when a Town has something they always have volunteers. I am in favor of the Town Park and if my taxes go up and my value goes up, I am in favor of that also. I know the PLCC ran by volunteers but we will run by volunteers also and there will be more of them. Besides that, we have two areas, we have people who are representing the lake itself and we have a Town Board who has experience with government. That is necessary at this particular time to make us go over the transition that is about to happen. I’m all in favor of it and right now there will be a time when each one of us in this community will benefit. Yes, the lake can be looking a little bit better and the water can be taken care of better also. That is what I feel you will be able to do because you do have grants. Is that possible that it could come in like that so we could improve and have extra money over and above what is collected in taxes. Am I right in assuming that.

Mr. Griffin stated yes. There are grant opportunities. There aren’t as many as there used to be but there are some through the D.E.C. and other entities. They will be pursued in all opportunities.

Mr. Daria stated thank you very much.

Ms. Barbara See, Batavia Road stated when this was first presented, my thinking was the budget from the Park District would be given to the Town Board. The Town Board would do it’s due diligence to come up with a budget that would cover the cost of what was needed for a Park District. In order for Rich to keep the budget at what was presented, .47 per thousand, I believe a lot of things were cut. One, which is important and it has been brought up, is equipment. We need a vehicle to get around, a lawn mower, weed whacker, the cost of the garbage cans is over $400.00 a piece. Three would be $1,300.00. I don’t even know if you can get a lawn mower for the $1,000.00 that has been put in for equipment. This is huge. Then we have the vortex, the sedimentation ponds, I don’t know that a schedule has been set up for maintenance yet at this point. The one sedimentation pond by the cove off of South Lake Shore, is full. I walk by it every day and nothing is being taken care of about that. That equipment is necessary or we would have to pay the Highway Department to come on a regular basis and also depending on how our storms are. The playground equipment is a little over $2,000.00 a piece, I believe, maybe close to $3,000.00. Does that include all the safety stuff you need on the bottom so when the kids fall off the swings they are not breaking their arms and legs. I don’t know if this is a state mandate for playgrounds. I know safety things are put into place in playgrounds. Does the cost of that swing set include those safety measures. Bonds are huge. It said that the grants are far between so then we have bonds. Does anyone know what a basic term is on a bond for something like this. Is it five or ten years. There is a pond in my cousin’s community that got dredged and she was hit with $500.00 a year in taxes just for that dredging and then they didn’t do anything about the sedimentation that caused it. Now it is a field and she was still paying the money to pay off this bond. This is a big number. You have an average of 260 households that use port-o-johns that use them. Two on Warren and one on Jackson. There were times you couldn’t go near them. You had to stay on the other side of the beach if it was an active week or a function that went on. The budget allows for one on each. Now you are going to have 1000 households who are going to be able to use the beaches and only have one port-a-john that is not going to cut it. Two port-a-johns aren’t going to cut it. The services are very important. It’s not that I’m against a Park District. I’m not. I know something needs to happen but I am against things not being represented in total. I feel like everyone gets a little smoke screened and let’s get everyone in and it’s only going to be $100.00, that is only one year. It’s not going to be like that the second, third or fourth year. It’s going to keep going up. Thank you.

Mr. Robert Lichtenberger, Haviland Drive stated I think the Board has to consider some very big options tonight. I think we have a very divided community. We have a community that has grown since the 1920’s. I think a lot of people have become disenfranchised with the current organization for a multitude of reasons, personal, quality of life and many other ways.

I personally talked to a lot of people and they don’t join or support the PLCC because the lake is green. They don’t want to support a green lake. I think if the lake was healthy people would come back. I think the PLCC has the ability to do things. They have proven that over the past, whether it be good or bad or if everyone agrees or not. I think our own Town Planner pointed out to you and the budget that it is far short of dollars to move forward. In his own budget that he presented on line and to you he recommended a higher dollar amount like .65 per thousand and that would be a more realistic option. I think what we are seeing here tonight with .47 is year one. That was to convince our seniors and people with limited funds to sign the petition. It is too short on dollars. You are sitting here telling us that for $99.00 we are going to have the most beautiful lake in five years. Not that you are saying that, but the reality is a similar community like Lake Carmel, the average home there is paying $300.00 to $600.00 a year in property taxes for the Park District. They are 4,700 homes and we are 1,300 in Putnam Lake. I think you guys have a real tough decision. I know you have to accept it at the .47 level because you can’t change because the petition limits you. I think that is a good cause to say we need to re-think this. There is a lot to be done in Putnam Lake, there is a dedicated group of people that are willing to move forward with the community support. If the community doesn’t support it, it doesn’t move forward. I think if you accept this Park District based on .47 there will be a massive backlash when people do not see the services that they are least minimally required. No way can two beaches handle a full community of residents. There would be a minimum of three to four beaches to open in year one. I think our Town Planner would agree it is a short side. There are lot of things that need to be relooked. People have talked about lawn mowers. Who cares about lawn mowers, but there is reality here to accomplish the things that have been asked for or promoted to the people to sign the petition that is unrealistic in the first 25 years at this dollar amount. We can talk about grants, bonds and those are all great things if we get them. There is no guarantee in today’s environment that a grant is possible. You just said that they are few and far between. The fact is our lake has been entitled to grants all along. There has been no restrictions on that. I really think you guys really need to think about this. .47 to accept this and then turn around and give people the reality in one or two years would be a real disservice to our community. I am the first person that wants something done for our lake. I have fought for our lake for many, many years and I am tired. Something has to happen for our lake, I just don’t know if this is it. I think everyone should get together and come back with a more realistic plan and our community can really move forward and thrive.

Mr. Bill Pauley, Taylor Road stated I am just going to try to stick to facts here and not emotions. I heard some people say the lake is green, ok, the park lands are a little messy, I’ll give you that, but what people do not seem to take into consideration is that the lake bed belongs to the city of Patterson. On the budget there, all I saw was the people who live in the 13 or 19 maps being taxed but you know what, we talk about shared responsibility the Board members here who live in the Town of Patterson but do not live in Putnam Lake are entitled to fish in that lake. They are entitled to boat in that lake. If you live on Front Street you can boat in that lake. I don’t see them taking any financial responsibility. The greenness of the lake is everyone’s issue. If you live on Couch Road, you know what, you should be sharing some of the financial obligations, because that is your lake. It is easy for Board Members to say yes or no because their taxes won’t be raised unless they live in Putnam Lake, but they are benefiting without paying for the lake. The lake belongs to everyone. Everyone gets very emotional but park land and lake are two separate issues. Currently I see a lot of people in the Town of Patterson who will benefit from people living in Putnam Lake getting taxed for an existing obligation. Right now everyone in the Town of Patterson is responsible for cleaning up that lake but we are only putting it on the people who live in Putnam Lake. My question is, is it true that under this proposal you are going to basically take away property that belongs to people with existing lake rights, tax us to take care of what is basically already the Town’s existing obligation.

Mr. Griffin stated I would certainly take issue with your statement that everyone is entitled to use Putnam Lake. That in fact, is not the case. We own the lake bottom, but I live on Old Route 22 and I do not have deeded lake rights. Legally I’m not allowed to go…….

Mr. Pauley stated I do believe and I could be wrong that with public access anyone who lives in the Town of Patterson can go onto the lake they can just not go on to existing PLCC property, so therefore the lake belongs to everyone and the PLCC property belongs to PLCC members. People are confusing messy park lands with a green lake. The green lake, I believe, belongs to all of us.

Mr. Rich Williams stated if I could address that, with all due respect Sir, that is absolutely not the case. Putnam Lake was created in1930 by the Times Mirror Holding Corporation. The only people that actually have rights to use the lake even the public access points are the people who have deeded lake rights that were part of the original subdivision 19 maps both in the State of New York and the State of Connecticut. People on the west side of Route 22 which is usually the dividing line or even East Branch Road don’t have any rights to go into Putnam Lake and put a boat on that lake or go swimming.

Mr. Griffin stated if anyone has a questions, please come up to the microphone we need your name and address for the record.

Ms. Enza Daria, Palmyra Road stated I have been living in the lake for 48 years. I can see the difference in the lake and how it deteriorated. My beach across the street is Fairfield beach and it’s a disgrace. My grandchildren could not walk in there, it is ridiculous. We walk down at the dam. They said kids come down to the lake and party. They are already down there partying. The kids have been hanging around there for years. They are drinking beer and they even had a mattress there. Come on, give me a break. They wanted to make a Park District for 25 years. They are putting too much fear into the people. It’s making me very upset. The lake is a disgrace. I’m in favor of the park and I don’t mind paying the tax. If you pay the increase in taxes and it makes the place better you are going to be the one that benefits. Thank you.

Ms. Adrianne Kavelle, Inwood Road stated I think you have one thing you have to decide. Do you want the status quo or do you want something better. The PLCC people have told us, at least one woman did, if we fix up those beaches we might get people there drinking. So let’s just leave them the way they are, right. Horrible and ugly. They have not been able to maintain the beaches the way they are supposed to. Again, do we want to keep it the way it is and let the PLCC control it or do we want to try something new, something that will benefit all the people in Putnam Lake. By the way, Putnam Lake is in the Town of Patterson, let’s not forget that.

Ms. Marsha Thompson, Lake Shore Drive stated my house is on the water or what used to be the water. My backyard is now all filled in from the run off coming down from Connecticut. There is now one of the holding ponds in my yard that is not cleaned out and it looks like hell. The Town doesn’t take care of it. When we had the last storm the bridge washed out in front of my house. They repaired the bridge but the holding pond still has rocks laying there and it’s a mess. If that is an example of how the Town is going to take care of the park lands and the lake, I don’t want a part of it. I am not against a Park District. I am all for a Park District because I would love to see everyone pay, but I am against this flawed application. I would like to see you take a step back and do it right. Do it for the right amount of money, have your applications for your grants in place, have a program set up as to what you plan to do and when you plan to do it, not this wish list that has been submitted. This wish list can’t happen. The kids in this neighborhood will destroy everything you put in the lake. The PLCC is having a hard time keeping the picnic benches, the BBQ grills that are already in the closed beaches. The closed beaches are open for picnics and having a BBQ. They are not open for swimming but they are open for pleasure but the hoodlums around the lake that their parents don’t seem to pay attention to are at 2:00 a.m. tossing everything into the lake. What do you think is going to happen to all this exercise equipment and checker board table. What do you think is going to happen to all of this. Seriously, think about it. Before you make the decision, all of you people here who are not from Putnam Lake go over there and walk around the lake. Go over and sit on the beaches. Ginny you have been to many affairs over there, you know what it is like. Take a look at our community. It is one of the best communities in this Town. I have news for you, when something goes on in the Town of Patterson, we have a Christmas parade our whole community comes in. They all show up. When Patterson Town has a Christmas tree lighting you have 30 people, you can count them on two hands. I’m serious. This community you are getting ready to vote on and change their life on deserves their undivided attention before you make the decision. I give due diligence of what these Park District people have done, they have shown us that they are capable of doing things that need to be done, however the budget is flawed. The promises are flawed. There are a lot of senior citizens in this lake that a lot of people I know cook dinners for every night because they don’t have money for food and they can’t eat if we don’t do it. There is a lot people don’t know. I am a member of several organizations and there are several ladies in the lake that cook dinners for seniors every night. So, before you start adding these flawed taxes for one year for $94.00 or $97.00 or whatever you are going to do, think about that. Get to know our community before you make a decision.

Mr. Griffin stated I think more than a few Board members know more than a few things about the lake. We’ve been involved with this process for many years. I’m not sure what response you are looking for.

Mr. Paul Santucci, Barnard Road stated the reason we choose to live where we live is because of the lake. My daughter saw that lake and literally was as happy as a kid could ever be because she had a lake that she could go to and play in and swim in. She is on the swim team. She has never come home sick from being in that lake. Now, take Lake Tonetta where they brought in carp to deal with the weeds, which I heard rumors that it might be a possibility in our lake to remediate the weeds. You can’t swim in that lake once it gets warm. I have seen kids come out of there and they get sick. They have an ear infection or eye infection and they say it is safe to swim in that lake. I don’t want to see that happen to Putnam Lake. I love that lake. I am a member of the PLCC maintenance crew. I put a lot of time and effort into maintaining the spaces that are there. It would be nice if we could clean up everything but as so many people have already said, there are only so many funds that we have available because people don’t want to get involved. People don’t want to put the money into the PLCC. No, let’s go and do this wonderful Park District and with everything that I’m hearing tonight and everything I’ve read on line, I believe you really do need to step back and look at it. There isn’t enough money to be had. I’m a union electrician and with the economy and the way things are, I am unemployed. I’m struggling to keep my house afloat. If you add another $200.00 a year to my taxes for the first year and then it goes up to $500.00, it will make it very difficult for me to maintain a household in Putnam Lake. There are a lot of things if people would just give of themselves that could be done in Putnam Lake without making it a Park District. I would much rather it be turned into a Water Maintenance Quality District and leave the lands alone. I don’t think this can be done as easily as what has been proposed. My question to you, what provisions have been made for the swim team. Is that going to perpetuate or is that going to go by the wayside because we don’t have enough funds for a coach or enough funds for the swim suits or whatever. As of right now, being a member of the PLCC I put in funds for the coach which I understand the coaches volunteer their time. The money goes towards the lifeguards. Another question, if we are going to have hours on the beaches are you going to lock them, lock the gates. As of right now we have been told that we shouldn’t put locks on the gates because what if someone is in there swimming at their own risk and is drowning. You are then hindering the fire department from gaining access to the beach.

Mr. Griffin stated in response to the question regarding the swim team, many of the recreational programs in Patterson you pay to use them. If you want to sign your child up for flag football there is a fee associated. The swim team can be managed in exactly the same way. As far as locking the beaches go, that is a question I would defer to the Attorney’s, the Sheriff’s Department, the State Police and the other emergency responders to see what the best course of action would be.

Mr. Joey McNealy, South Lake Drive stated I am one of the property owners that are adjacent to park land as my backyard. I have a question for the legal department. A lot of the property owners have a parcel of our structures that sit on park property or maybe a septic tank or drainage that was grandfathered in over the past years. What are you going to do about those issues that we have deals with the PLCC. I have an easement with them for part of my deck. If the Town all of a sudden takes care of those park lands, how does that affect my legal standing with the PLCC on property rights.

Mr. Rossi stated if you are utilizing any of the PLCC properties and it is pursuant to agreements that run with the land or easements that run with the land, if eventually the Town takes the land over those would follow the land. If you are talking about something you actually have rights by way of an easement they would run with the land. As far as historical rights, drainage ditches that have been there without any moralization over the years it is kind of a case by case basis to take a look at what the facts are. It will be looked at when the titled is transferred, if in fact it is.

Mr. McNealy stated the other question I have is the way this petition was put about, the walk way and the benches, clearly from your budget you are stating that you won’t be able to do that or you would have to go through a couple of hurdles to get that done and also the increase of the budget over the years. I think it is important to present all of those facts again to the community so they can reassess their commitment to this petition with the honest facts as opposed to a wish list. As a lot of people said, they signed a petition thinking one thing and things have changed. I think people’s minds may have changed so I think it is only fair to present to the community another petition with the stated new facts that are going to be reality as opposed to some which was presented to begin with. The other thing I wanted to mention is someone said something about property rights, how our property rights are going down because of the lake. Property rights are going down because of the house that sits on the property not because of the lake.

Mr. Griffin stated I think he was talking about the value.

Mr. McNealy stated property value, that’s what I mean, I’m sorry. Putnam Lake is mainly just little fishing shacks, one bedroom shacks that people have built on top of them. I believe that the lake needs to stay as a natural resource as it is. People say the lake is dying. I watch eagles fish, the eagles are not thinking it is dying. I see ducks fishing. We have a fresh water otter in our lake. I want to make sure that if you change the nature of the lake you don’t ruin the beauty of the natural lake and turn it into Carmel lake. Lake Carmel is a sanitized cement over sterile park. I didn’t move to Putnam Lake 25 years ago to live in a park. I moved there to live in nature. When you change the park lands you will change the nature surrounding it and the wildlife that comes to it. From my point of view that diminishes my property values.

Ms. Lizette Kubie, Kendal Drive stated a question about more processes. Rich mentioned the option of Eminent Domain and he said if this becomes a route that has to be pursued in order to create the Park District that it would incur a significant amount of money and a significant amount of time. I would like to know has the Board discussed how much money they are willing to spend on an Eminent Domain proceeding. Do they have any idea how long this might take and who ends of paying for the legal fees involved if a Eminent Domain process is undertaken.

Mr. Griffin stated Counselor do you have any idea of the length of time.

Mr. Rossi stated the Eminent Domain proceeding only occurs if agreement can’t be reached.

Ms. Kubie stated agreed.

Mr. Rossi stated on a conveyance of the property. Hope springs eternal.

Ms. Kubie stated I’m trying to inform myself here. If it doesn’t happen.

Mr. Rossi stated if it does not happen and the Town determines that it will proceed with an Eminent Domain proceeding, an offer is made to the PLCC, if it rejected a case goes forward which involves valuation of the property to come up with a fair amount in the proceeding which proceeds to a potential litigation and battle of experts as to what the value is.

Ms. Kubie stated who pays those lawyers.

Mr. Rossi stated the cost of the District are assessed against the properties within the District. That is who pays for it.

Ms. Kubie stated so the people on the map would end up paying the legal fees involved if they had to be undertaken.

Mr. Rossi stated that is right and which leads to the conclusion that if the Town asks to have the property conveyed….

Ms. Kubie stated it wouldn’t be in our best interest. I’m already there, I got you. I was just wondering what would be your impetuous for going forward with that, dare I say, hostile way of going. Is there a point where the Town might back off from that or has there even been a discussion.

Mr. Rossi stated the Town always sits in a legislature capacity. It makes decisions as they are confronted with issues.

Ms. Kubie stated my take away is it really would not be in the best interest of the PLCC to fight the Eminent Domain because ultimately it is going to cost the people the cost of the legal fees. Correct.

Mr. Rossi stated essentially yes, but that might not be the only interest of the PLCC.

Ms. Kubie stated thank you.

Ms. Cathy Monroe, Lake Shore Drive stated I am a newbie and I have been to a few meetings the past couple of years. I moved up here 2.5 years ago but I purchased the property 6.5 years ago. Ever since we bought the property, we were PLCC members. I want to say it is a great organization that they have their heart in the right places, that they too, I think, make sure that the lake is at its best potential. However, because not everyone that should be members were not members. Meaning the PLCC was deficit in wanting to clean up the lake. Another group of people this past year or so decided to come up with something and they came up with something. Everyone has the same end result in this whole project that everyone has been involved in the past couple of years. It is a great thing, whether we need to do carp, dredge who knows what. That is why we need to have the funds available to find the right people to do these tests and what have you for the lake and for everyone around the lake that it incorporates. I believe, when I first was a member of the PLCC and we are talking about funds here, membership was $150.00 6.5 years ago. It is now almost $200.00. Yes, prices will increase. $100.00 right now, it’s 50% less than what we are paying right now as a PLCC member. I don’t know if everyone is a member here, everyone should be around Putnam Lake. Obviously they are not. For $100.00 for me, I’m saving $100.00 for a year. Yes, I do see and I’m sure everyone here including the Board realizes that eventually prices will get higher and higher as the years go by and expenses are incurred that aren’t thought of but that is a fact of life. The PLCC started at my rate of $150.00. Again, it went up and it is inevitable because you need to have your expenses covered and things do occur. People do volunteer, yes, I’m sure there will be a lot of people who will volunteer and fortunately they will be covered on the park land. There should be no problem with this but I understand people have personal issues. It was mentioned about senior citizens. Their fee, if they were members was approximately 50% of what PLCC charged me. Right now they would be paying another $10.00 or $15.00 a year. So, it’s not much. Yes, they probably are on a limited income and I’m thankful that there are people out there that are helping their neighbors. That is what we are supposed to do as a community. We are the Putnam Lake Community people, we are supposed to help each other. If I knew my neighbor needed a meal, I would have them over all the time. Again, I am new so I don’t know what the needs are of my local neighbors. If we all knew what we could do to help, I’m sure if it is in our control we would do that. I know I’m speaking for everyone here and I hope everyone has it in their heart that they would be a nice human individual to help out and reach out to your neighbors. As the Town Board, you are volunteering your time to a certain degree for us. The bottom line is, as the women before we was asking about this time table what would happen if the Eminent Domain happened and possible legalities that are going on, if everything goes forward and there is no problem with anything, what would be the time table. Would the taxes be implemented in June or September of this year.

Mr. Griffin stated no it would be January of next year.

Ms. Monroe stated is the PLCC operating their swim team this summer.

Mr. Griffin stated I don’t have an answer for that. Step by step in the process, the Town Board will in all likelihood be required to have another Public Hearing. If by March 1, 2012 the Town Board decides that we are going to move forward and create the District, then it will go on the tax rolls. There is a window of opportunity by which we have to have this into the County and filed with the State before it can get on the tax bill. The earliest anyone will see it is in 2013. It is unlikely that the Town will be in a position to operate or do much of anything this year because there will be no funding and that would create a whole set of problems itself. The only way we could fund it this year would be to do some sort of a loan or borrowing and that takes more money away from the budget for future years.

Ms. Monroe stated another thing that I heard tonight is maintenance and machinery. I’m sure the Town has their own equipment and maybe you would have to purchase another weedwacker or two because you need more people or extend personnel’s hours because now they would have another piece of property that is pretty large to take off. I do want to mention, someone has said that the PLCC do regular maintenance. I remember the first year that I was here there was a big tree that had fallen down by Hudson Beach. They said if anyone wants to take any firewood, please do so. It is still there. Huge, huge tree. I know it is an eye sore, but I just wanted to put that out there. Hopefully the PLCC will pick it up and do something with it. I don’t know, I don’t know if they have the means to do something for that large where as the Town would. If the Town could do it, please pick up that big old tree. Thank you.

Mr. Williams stated let me address a couple of issues that has come up a couple of times within the budget that we prepared for the Town. The lawn mowing and edging services was going to be contracted out. It was between $6,000.00 and $7,000.00. We weren’t proposing to buy lawn mowers to do that work. There was also $2,000.00 in that budget for tree removal, uprooting or whatever you needed to do out there.

Ms. Marguerite Shorte, Haviland Drive stated I just wanted to say we came to Putnam Lake 36 years ago and we moved here because we fell in love with the lake. It was beautiful and the park land as well. We were members for over 30 years of the PLCC but now we have come to the conclusion that the Park District is the only way to improve the lake and the park land. I live right across the street from the lake. The property has deteriorated so it affects my property value but it is also sad to see. We all love this lake and we want to see improvements and I would be happy if we just see improvements every year. It doesn’t have to be everything at one time. I would be happy to see gradual improvements as long as we are in a positive move rather than a stall or negative one. I think we would all benefit. Right now I pay $190.00 for the PLCC membership and if you break that down into thousands, I actually pay .82 per thousand right now, so .47 would actually be good for me. Although I would pay more. Jerry and I would be glad to pay more.

Mr. Bill Sutton, Marion Road stated I am for the Park District. I have only been here about 11 years and they talk about the lake as if it was this great asset. It is no longer an asset. I am a member of the PLCC for all that time and maybe I’m a city kid but I have never stubbed a toe in that water and it’s only gotten greener since I been here. The area around the lake is deplorable. It’s not an asset, it is a definite negative in my opinion. As far as the taxes, basically it has been said already we pay $190.00. You would have to triple the .47 before it becomes crazy. You are not going to do that in the first or second year. You are Elected Officials so if you triple or quadruple that money there could be repercussions we would be able to vote you out. My wife volunteers more than I do with the PLCC. She is a timer on the swim team. My daughter hasn’t swam on the swim team in six years. I think some of the members have taken this a little personal. They do a great job but as members have told me their membership is not increasing. They have done everything and they can’t get any more people in. I think it’s the right thing to do. Putnam Lake Community Council is not going to be able to do what is necessary. It’s just physically and financially impossible for them and I think this is the right way to go.

Ms. Pat Ploeger stated I have a questions that someone asked and the question and an objection was raised by Mr. Allard saying that the Park District will be for the deeded lake rights people and currently the PLCC allows people outside the deeded lake rights area of the 13 maps or 19 maps, whatever to pay membership and swim at the beaches. Does the Town have the legal authority to expand the Park District beyond the 19 maps.

Mr. Griffin stated yes.

Ms. Ploeger stated to Quail Ridge to Brimstone to East Branch to Haviland Hollow, the Town has the authority. I’m not saying it’s going to do it.

Mr. Griffin stated there are limitations and it would have to be voted on. There is a whole process that has to be followed. We can’t just arbitrally decide we are going to take the Park District and go here there or anywhere else or expand it to the entire Town. There is a whole process that has to be followed and there are a whole series of checks and balances and hurdles to be met before the Park District or any other District can be expanded.

Ms. Ploeger stated it certainly would be a way of reducing the tax burden if you spread it out over more people and more property.

Mr. Griffin stated there is always an economy of scale potential that could be realized by considering other properties.

Ms. Ploeger stated I’m still hung up on this insurance thing. Don you said that volunteers would be covered by the Town’s liability policy. If they injure themselves they can go after the Town’s liability.

Mr. Rossi stated no, no, no, they are covered by the Town’s policy in the event they cause any damage or problems faulty work that leads to someone being injured they would be covered. The volunteer is not covered under the Town’s medical insurance policies. If someone volunteers and they are injured assuming it is not from some other cause, then their recourse would be with their own medical coverage.

Ms. Ploeger stated I’m talking workers compensation. I know there was an issue with the Town Park a few months ago that was brought before the Town Board regarding a volunteer who came in to substitute for the regular employee, the guy who gets a house instead of a salary. The Town, and I don’t know if you ever settled it and that is why I am asking the question, was informed that it really had to cover that substitute for your regular employee who I assume was covered by workman’s compensation even though he didn’t get paid, if he hurts himself. I’m just saying if a volunteer goes out with a chain saw or whatever and hurts himself or herself how are they taken care of.

Mr. Rossi stated they would be covered by their own medical policy. The obligation to carry someone on the Town’s workers compensation policy has to do with whether or not that person is an employee. The determination as to whether that person is an employee has a lot to do with does the Town control their hours and all sorts of factors that are looked at. The type of volunteer work that I believe we are talking about here a group of people come to rake leaves on a Saturday morning they certainly would not be consider employee’s of the Town. They would not be covered by workers comp.

Ms. Ploeger stated just curious, how do the fire departments handle a fireman who is injured. They have a special kind of insurance.

Mr. Griffin stated they are covered by workers compensation policy that the Town has taken.

Ms. Ploeger stated the Town takes out for them as part of their budget.

Mr. Griffin stated yes.

Ms. Ploeger stated in the Town Planner’s budget the maintenance worker senior laborer gets $15.00 an hour. The junior laborer, his adolescent helper the initial budget referred to them gets $7.50 an hour. I see no mention of any kind of mandatory tax or insurance. Am I overlooking something Rich. The same thing with the lifeguards. They are getting $15.00 an hour with insurance and taxes included.

Mr. Williams stated no.

Ms. Ploeger stated the Town is absolved from paying them because they are part time. I thought everyone had to have workers compensation.

Mr. Williams stated the FICA workers comp was not included within the budget I did. I didn’t have those numbers. Whether that means the $15.00 an hour was really $12.00 an hour, I will leave that up to the Comptroller who handles all that. Those were the numbers she gave me to include in the budget.

Ms. Ploeger stated I noticed at the Town Park this summer there was a sign saying stickers are for permits for parking and you put them on your car to go to the Town Park like we get for recycle permits regardless of where we live in Town. How much are the stickers for the Town Park and how are you going to work it for our Park District especially since a lot of people may walk to the beach. Are you going to have I.D. tags, will you charge for them. There may be an extra charge and I’m assuming there will be for some kind of I.D.

Mr. Griffin stated there is no fee. If you come in you get issued the I.D. for free.

Ms. Ploeger stated so we would get an I.D. that we would bring to the beach with us.

Mr. Griffin stated there would have to be some form of identification and it would have to be up to the lifeguard or someone to monitor.

Ms. Ploeger stated an unpaid volunteer with no workers compensation.

Mr. Griffin stated in anything that you do there is always going to be an “what if” factor and this isn’t a perfect plan. I have been the Supervisor for the Town for 18 years and so far this facility was a fly by the seat of our pants experiment that is ongoing. It’s getting better. You can see we put in air conditioning and redid the floor. Nothing that we are going to do here, especially being that we are government, is ever going to be perfect first time out, second time out and it’s going to take a lot of years to get all the kinks and the bugs and work this out. We can come together as a community to try and stay focused on a goal of saving Putnam Lake and improving the water quality and the quality alike for all the residents. We don’t have a perfect plan or have all the answers. The best we can do is listen to what the people are telling us they would like us to do and then try to make it work. As a Town Board member who doesn’t live in Putnam Lake I would like to agree with what Marsha said here tonight. Putnam Lake is an amazing community. People in Putnam Lake will come together to help neighbors and come out and support the community. I am a member of the VFW and we marched in a thunderstorm one year for Memorial Day and I looked at John King and we were standing there with aluminum flag poles and I said I didn’t do anything this stupid in Vietnam. Yet, when we got down to the monument there had to be 150 people out there to honor what Memorial Day was all about. It’s an amazing community. In my personal opinion, if we all focus on what needs to be done over there, we can make some major improvements and we can do a lot of good things. I would just hope that we all come together with one focus which is what is in the best interest of making Putnam Lake better and we all make every effort to accomplish that and how we get there is important, but the fact that we have to get there is where we really need to stay focused. I would hope that no matter what your feelings are tonight and what your opinions are that whenever the final decision comes down we all need to pull together. When I was in the service, I came home I can’t begin to tell you the things that were said to me at San Francisco airport, etc. and I am so happy to see that regardless of what we think of the military mission and the politicians who sent them to wherever they went, that we honor the service of the troops. Let’s honor what is important with Putnam Lake and what needs to get accomplished and see if we can all come together with a plan and make that work. I think that is what this Town Board really is truly about. I hope we can all manage that.

Ms. Adrianne Kavelle stated that is very well spoken Mike. I agree with everything you said.

Mr. Griffin stated thank you.

Ms. Kavelle stated I just want to make one more point is all I am hearing tonight is a lot of fear mongering from a very vocal minority. We had a lot of people who wanted a Park District, they are interested. All I hear are people saying how difficult it is going to be, how awful it is going to be, other people are going to come out from other areas and do terrible things. Why don’t we just try it. Let’s try it, that’s all.

Ms. Laurie Byrnes stated Club Court is a constant issue of vandalization. Club Court is a small children’s park and they turn over their port-a-johns all the time. There is horrible writing in the gazebo. That is a fact of life. That goes on all the time. You create it and they will come in to rip it apart. There is garbage all around the edges. The PLCC members aren’t doing that, that is the community or people that drive through the community and figure it is a good place to dump their stuff. We will be paying to take that away. It’s harder to sell a house on our side of the lake, not because of the lake but because Connecticut taxes are a lot cheaper than our taxes. Now we are going to raise our taxes even more. Connecticut are on the same lake we are. The lake is beautiful. Connecticut is a different state, they charge less, people go there and they get a house for a lot less property taxes. People are giving up their private right. They don’t realize that it is private property. It is an extension of your own backyard. They choose to be locked out. You are not locked out of it if you are member. It’s an extension of your own yard. You go and you picnic and you have guests and you can pretty much do many things as long as it’s not hurtful to someone else. It’s your own private property. It’s the lake itself that needs help and we haven’t even talked about anything that is going to be done for the lake in this Park District thing. They are going to have a lake report and then maybe something. That is not even, I don’t know, what monies in that or what’s going to go on with that. It’s all about the property. Senior citizens, it would be less except for the majority of senior citizens don’t join, they can’t join, and they don’t go to the lake. There tax is mandatory. They’ll all be mandatory to pay up if it is a Park District. Right now they can choose to if they want. Anyone can choose to if they want. Nobody is excluded. That is the reality of it. Water does need help, absolutely. Our lake needs help. I’m for a Water Quality District.

Ms. Kim Morris, Batavia Road stated I moved here about 13 years ago into a fixer-upper and it’s still a fixer-upper. You need a plan, you need time and you need money. It’s been a painful process with my house. I moved here from Lake Carmel which is a Park District. I believe in it. I believe it is what we need and I believe it will work. My question is on the working together when the Advisory Board works with you if a decision is made that many of the residents don’t agree with, what is the process.

Mr. Griffin stated at the end of the day the decisions will be made by the Town Board.

Ms. Morris stated if the residents ban together and let you know that we don’t agree on something the Advisory Board is recommending, we have a voice.

Mr. Griffin stated absolutely.

Ms. Morris stated great, thank you.

Mr. Griffin stated believe me, everyone on this Town Board is very sensitive to the people in this Town. The only thing that I can tell you is sometimes we have to look a little further out then the next election. Sometime we have to look out to the next generation. At the end of the day, I think this is a very good Board and I think everyone here is very concerned of what the issues are and what your concerns are. We will listen. I will be here for four more years and I promise you that my door is always open and you can come up to Town Hall and come in and talk to me. You can get anyone of us or email us.

Ms. Dede Lifgrin, Chair the Park District Committee stated I have to say this has been a long time in coming. The Park District Drive actually began in 2007 with the cell tower. Like many residents, I couldn’t believe one was going up on the lake. It was actually the reasons behind the drastic decision that start the Park District in motion. Even as members we didn’t know how bad things were. That may have been my fault. We found out there was no money going into the lake and we thought there was all those years. It was because there was no money available, not because the PLCC chose not to help the water. There just wasn’t any available. There wasn’t any plan, not enough money for the park land and the membership was open to the whole Town because there wasn’t enough members within Putnam Lake. The biggest shock was that most of our residents couldn’t use the park land or the lake because they weren’t members. We figured there had to be a way to include everyone and to fix the problems without cell towers. Like all the other lakes around, a Park District was a way and with that we submitted the petition and the community agreed. As New York State dictates, four things were supposed to be determined in order for the District to be enacted. One, we have met all petition requirements and the Town has already verified that fact. Two, every property would be benefited from the improvements and services of this District. They may take longer than we thought. Any District can be made for any price but it is better to wait for improvements than not be able to have any because there is no money. Even the critics would have to admit that they would be benefited by living near a cleaner lake with the community park that would increase their property values. Three, all the properties with original lake rights will be benefitted and are within the boundaries of the District. Four, it is not only in the best interest of Putnam Lake to create the District, but it is also in the interest of the Town of Patterson to have Putnam Lake improved. We are confident that the entire Board will vote to enact this District because we have met every legal requirement, but also because it just makes sense. This is not about one individual or one group or two sides, it is about what is best for everyone in Putnam Lake. My one question tonight is about the park land property. The community also requested in the petition that the title to the park land be willing transferred by the PLCC for the District or the Town use Eminent Domain to take it. I would like to publicly ask the PLCC Board tonight since many of them are present, please go along with the petition and what the community wants. Should the District be enacted, transfer title so that the District can be done in a quick and positive way. As a non-profit organization you were given the park land specifically to protect it for every property owner. Using Eminent Domain is totally unnecessary and will only cause more division and take money from those property owners for legal fees. Not transferring the property could only be view as keeping and protecting the park land from the community instead of for it. Additionally we ask that the assets be included in the transfer because almost every Putnam Lake resident has been a member at one time or another. Their stay may have been for years or one season. Their dues and the work they did combined with generations that all contributed to the total PLCC assets.

The current Board should consider that the total accumulation they now control is from the sum of everyone in the community. Transferring these assets along with the property will better provide for the purpose they were contributed for. Of course, it would save the District the unnecessary cost of replacing them. The majority of all property owners have spoken to this petition, but our records even show the majority of PLCC members also signed the petition for a District. It is not wrong to say that as much as the PLCC has volunteered and worked and wanted it to happen, it just can’t provide for community if most of the community is not part of it. It cannot maintain a lake without funds and it cannot stop an over grown park land with only member volunteer’s. The community has chosen a Park District only because it will offer more, not for the work you tried to do. Finally at the risk of sounding a little corny, despite the opposition tonight we are still seeing democracy at its best. What we have accomplished through the petition is the clearest statement ever gathered to find out what residents in Putnam Lake want. It was a monumental task to create a District in these financial times attempting to contact every homeowner. More people in Putnam Lake signed this petition than voted in the last Town election. For years we have been told of the apathy that people in Putnam Lake don’t want to pay and they don’t care. That is not true, they just want a different way. I hope the Town Board will hear the petition loud and clear and I hope the PLCC will transfer the property so that the District can start and help the community.

Mr. Joe Francise, Cornwall Court stated I have been here 12 years and recently committed to staying here for a really long time. We are going to do some work on our house. We have been putting it off and I have two little girls and I love this place. I love the community and what it has to offer. One of the big selling points for me was when I bought my house was the deck and the lake. Being a Boy Scout, Eagle Scout, going swimming and fishing and doing everything you can in nature it was a huge selling point for me. My lowest point last year here in Putnam Lake was when I discovered how bad the lake was. We signed up with the PLCC as a family. When I went down to Warren Lake with them and I saw I couldn’t ever see my toes in three inches of water, I told them to get out of the water. My daughter had an ear infection within twenty-four hours. I just wanted to voice how I feel. I think we need some kind of change. We could nitpick this thing to death. How long is going to be too long is how I feel about it. It has been a slow deterioration since I moved here. I noticed that deterioration after about three years and it started to really drop dramatically. The lake turned green earlier in the summer. I will vote for some kind of change to happen.

Mr. Paul Santucci, Barnard Road stated you all keep mentioning that there is going to be an Advisory Committee for the lake. Who exactly is going to be on that Advisory Committee. We as Town residents are we going to be eligible to be members of that Advisory Committee or do you have to be a specialist.

Mr. Griffin stated absolutely. I am recommending and I hope the Board will go along with it a seven member committee that would essentially be the Advisory Board to the Town Board where they would review the budgets, review what projects need to get done, what programs would be best for the lake and to oversee the water quality improvements and some of the other programs that go on there and to work with the Town Board to be our eyes and ears and tell us what the community wants us to do.

Mr. Santucci stated you mentioned the water quality. Has anyone even considered what a water quality study is going to run.

Mr. Griffin stated there is $32,000.00 in this budget for that purpose.

Mrs. Nacerino stated $25,000.00.

Mr. Santucci stated honestly I think you are far undermined.

Mr. Williams stated can I do a water quality study for $25,000.00, yes, absolutely I can but I am going to get $25,000.00 worth data and results. If I had $100,000.00 I could do something much more. Now having said all that, there is a Dr. Ryan who lives in Putnam Lake who has been an extensive amount of work on Putnam Lake. He is associated with SUNY Purchase and perhaps there is something we can do for $25,000.00 to get more bang for our buck by working with Dr. Ryan and assisting him in his endeavors. That is something we will have to look at. Specifics we don’t have because we haven’t gone down that road yet.

Mr. Santucci stated I think we can all agree that we have to do something for the lake. Like everyone else being subject to this economic down turn, I’m just afraid of seeing my taxes go through the roof and I think everyone else is. I think it is wonderful the idea of a Park District but just try and remember these are real people. Everyone has their limits.

Mr. Griffin stated I would like to thank everyone for coming out tonight expressing your opinions. It is appreciated. I think the Board will take a lot of viewpoints away from this tonight and like I said earlier I do believe there will be one more Public Hearing because there are some properties that should be added and some that should come out. Those steps will be taken.

Mr. Chris Lawlor, Utica Road stated can the next meeting be a little bit more publicized by the Town. I know it was sent out a few months ago, but one little sign in front of the VFW, you know. Newspapers, the Journal it’s not in there.

Mr. Williams stated we mailed 1,700 notices out. Everyone got an individual invitation to be here.

Ms. Hazel Martinez, Slater Road stated I know two senior citizens who signed the petition and they want to take their signature back. Can they do it and how.

Mr. Burns stated at this point we are past the petition process. We can’t do that. The petition has already been approved and we are at the stage where we are considering information for the District.

Ms. Martinez stated the PLCC gave seniors a discount on their membership. There is nothing about that in the petition for the park.

Ms. Burns stated ok, that’s a good point.

Ms. Dede Lifgren stated is the second hearing in the paper.

Mr. Burns stated we haven’t set it yet.

Mr. Griffin stated it will be legally noticed in the newspaper and we will make every effort to get the word out as best we can. We will not be doing another mailer however.

Ms. Lifgren stated that has to be within 15 days.

Mr. Griffin stated not less than 15, no more than 25.

Mr. Rossi stated after the determination is made on the petition. It’s not 15 to 25 days from tonight. It’s after the Board adopts it’s resolution when it sets the second Public Hearing.

Ms. Lifgren stated so the decision for the District is going to happen after the second hearing.

Mr. Rossi stated it has to happen simultaneously with the resolution setting the second Public Hearing.

Ms. Lifgren stated will that be done at a Town Board meeting.

Mr. Rossi stated yes.

There being no further business, Mr. Burns made a motion to close the Public Hearing at 10:20 p.m.

Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All in favor. Aye. Carried.

Respectfully Submitted,

__________________________

Antoinette Kopeck, Town Clerk