PATTERSON TOWN BOARD MEETING
PATTERSON TOWN HALL
1142 ROUTE 311
PATTERSON, NY 12563
JANUARY 27, 2010
MINUTES
PRESENT: MICHAEL GRIFFIN, SUPERVISOR
KEVIN BURNS, COUNCILMAN
JOSEPH CAPASSO, COUNCILMAN
GINNY NACERINO, COUNCILWOMAN
EDMOND O’CONNOR, DEPUTY SUPERVISOR
ANTOINETTE KOPECK, TOWN CLERK
TIMOTHY CURTISS, TOWN COUNSEL
Salute to the Flag and Roll Call.
Supervisor Griffin called the Patterson Town Board meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with 25 in attendance.
WASTE ZERO PRESENTATION
Mr. Michael LaPorte, Regional Sales Manager for Waste Zero stated Mr. Farrell contacted me a couple months ago regarding our particular program. I prepared a power point presentation for all the Council Members. I would like to go through the presentation and then afterwards go to questions and answers.
Mr. Griffin stated pass it around and let the people in the audience take a look at it quick, or if they want to follow along.
Mr. LaPorte stated we have been working with municipalities for the last 19 years showing the towns and municipalities how they are going to recycle better, increase the recycling and reduce the MSW (municipal solid waste) and generating a revenue stream from it. As we go through the presentation we will see how we are going to achieve those goals.
We have been working with and the EPA and just about every Government Body. When you have the EPA saying that our Pay-As-You-Throw Program, (PAYT) results are staggering, it is something that we are very proud of. You never hear of the EPA backing any one program. They have to be pretty much neutral. They’ve documented that our PAYT does achieve some staggering results. We are truly a PAYT program.
Mr. Griffin stated why don’t you explain exactly what PAYT is. You keep using the term.
Mr. LaPorte stated I apologize, I will. I know Councilman Burns has been aware of the program. What PAYT does is achieve your recycling goals that the State has mandated, reducing your trash and generating a revenue stream from garbage bag sales. We consider it more than a usage fee and it is trash metering. As you went back in the 1900’s, you didn’t have electric metering, gas metering, it was basically free. You never were sure how they were going to gather any money from it. This is truly what the PAYT program is “trash metering” with garbage bags. They are going to be sold through your retailers, if any ordinance was accepted. It would be an Ordinance that would have to be mandated to use these bags.
There are many different types of programs. Ours is the “bag” program. There are some other ways of metering, such as a sticker program, but they don’t achieve the goals that are mandated by the State. You have to have a 35% recycling rate by the year 2012 and a diversion rate. Just by what you are currently doing now, you are never going to meet those goals. Through education, it has helped.
About 30 years ago, we were at 1,100 pounds per person, per capita, on trash. The landfills are getting full and they were stockpiled. With some education the landfills have gotten down to 900 pounds per person, per capita. With our PAYT reduction and education, on average you are about 500 pounds per person, per capita. You really are reducing the amount that’s going to your incinerators and landfills. There is also some revenue, not only from the bag sales, but from the reduction on your tipping fees.
If you “Google” “PAYT”, our company comes up. There are some quotes there from State Regulators, local people and also from customers of ours that have said that they’ve been able to achieve and actually over achieve their recycling rates that the State has mandated.
If you went to the slide “Where are we?” and you saw the gentleman in a hole, I think every municipality could probably say that they are. You continually dig and dig into that hole and you are really getting nowhere. Again, through education the recycling rates haven’t gone up to where you need to exceed the requirements.
Again, we are treating this as “trash metering”. You only pay for what you use. We are talking about “garbage bags”. If you are a very good recycler and you don’t use a lot of bags you are not going to be paying for those. So, it is truly a user fee. Depending on what you would like to do with that revenue that is generated and the tipping savings, that’s something that the Council and the Government can decide.
We would work very closely on a consultant basis at no charge to the municipality and describe how we would like to help educate the Town. If there was a decision that we were going to put some flyers in backpacks or articles in the paper that would be taken upon us for any financial responsibility. What would happen is we would set up a program that would be beneficial for the Town residents and the governing body. We would sit down with you and decide how you wanted to proceed. We are totally a turn-key system. You decide what retailers you want to participate in the program, we would work with them on setting up a credit reference distribution, work on any fiduciary accounts, and work on making sure that the retailer never ever runs out of garbage bags.
There are some other programs that are out there that are achieving around 23% to 24% recycling diversion on trash. We are at 43%. People are going to do a better job at composting; they are going to do a much better job at recycling. So the recyclables will go up, not at a 43% one to one but probably about 15% to 17% on your recycling rate. Your garbage rate will reduce to 43%. People are going to do a much better job with items that are going into Salvation Army.
One thing that we want you to understand is that when doing the program there is no financial obligation from the municipality. We incur all costs. Actually, in one of our old programs, a couple years ago, we would actually ask the municipality to buy one months supply of bags. What we are finding in this economic time is that you don’t have that month’s revenue to be able to do so. What we have guaranteed is a program called the Revenue Sharing Program. What we are going to do is manufacture the bags, work with the retailers, make sure the retailers never run out of bags, ensure that the quality of bags are consistent, try and use as much recycling material in our bags because we are also responsible for doing the right thing. At the end of every month we are going to reconcile your account and then send you or wire you a check back to your account.
What we are finding is that everybody has to do a much better job in recycling and watching what they are actually going to be putting in their garbage. Right now we are working with 270 different communities that are clients of ours mostly here in the Northeast because of the tipping fees being so expensive. If you go out to the Midwest the land is plentiful and the tipping fees are $26.00 to $27.00 a ton. Rhode Island actually has their own landfill and are $32.00 but again they are really concerned about meeting the goals set by the government.
(Speaker referring to document in Presentation Report)
We have about 7 to 9 different communities in New York that are working with us. It seems that Massachusetts really has embraced this program. We are having over 100 different municipalities working with us. The average is around 450 pounds per capita, per person. And the average of when you are up in the 700 to 800 pounds we truly have met the 43% and some areas have exceeded 50%. Just recently the city of Concord, New Hampshire was on USA Today asking about the program. They have been doing it for about 90 days and they have reached 52% on reduction on their trash. That’s a great job in endorsing the program.
Some people are thinking if I have a bag and I have to buy a bag and I don’t really want to, I’m just going to throw my trash out the window. What we are finding is that people in the town are taking pride in their town and they are actually policing the program themselves. If they find that somebody is doing some illegal dumping they are willing to go through the trash and pick out hopefully an old utility bill and report them back to the police or whoever. So that the Town is clean and stays clean. We have found, again, on average the townspeople have said that the town has never been as clean since they’ve done this program.
I truly believe that once we go through the questions and answers, it’s easy to understand how the program works. It is quickly implemented. It takes about 60 days from the acceptance and the approval from the Council to get the program up and running. We manufacture the bags right in the United States, down in South Carolina. We have a warehouse in Chicopee, Massachusetts that would actually make sure that we never run out of material. One last important thing, of the 270 communities, no one has ever started our program and stopped. Actually what they’ve said is that we wish they started sooner due to the fact they are finding reduction and the revenue. If I can, if we went to the program savings calculator on the last page (speaker referring to document in Presentation report), Mr. Farrell actually gave me some information on the population and the households and the tonnage that is generated from the Town of Patterson. The population is saying 11,349; households are at 3,646, current tonnage at 4,372. If you took those numbers and divided them into each other, the pounds per capita, per person is 770 pounds, actually not that bad. We have seen some in 800 and 900 pounds. If you took your 43% reduction, the Predicted Metering Tonnage would be at 2,711 which would give you an estimated revenue of $316,000.00, which we would guarantee for the first year and every year after that. It would actually get the Town to 478 pounds per capita, per person, which is a good number. If anybody wants to, please interrupt me if you have any questions on the figures. If you look where it says Estimated Metering Revenue of $484,000.00 that is if all the numbers were correct and we were able to get to the right tonnage reduction, you would actually see a revenue of $484,000.00. Conservatively you would see for the first year $316,000.00 from the sale of the bags. What is also truly a savings is the diversion, which we would see 1,661 tons diverted from your normal waste. At $98.22 a ton, that would give you a savings of $163,178.00. Just alone by the diversion of the 43%, you would save $163,000.00 tipping fees that would not have to go out of town. You would also have to consider if your municipality was transporting that to the transfer station or a landfill. It would be a lot less runs going out of town. You would probably be able to get more runs on your recycling so you would see your garbage routes go down and you would probably see your recycling rates go up by one or two routes. The person that is on the garbage side would eventually come over to the recycling side. Again, Mr. Farrell was talking to me about what he wanted to see what the revenue would be generating, what the implication of how the program would be implemented and the tipping fee was something that he really wanted to concentrate on. Does anybody have any questions on the financials.
Nanci Kalbfell stated I’m just curious I’m not familiar with the program. Are we paying for recycling and waste or just one or the other.
Mr. Laporte stated on the recycling you are getting charged nothing for your recycling, that’s a wash. When the market turns around, you would start to see some credits back from the recycling. You are paying right now for your trash in your taxes. This would be a way of generating a revenue from the reduction of your trash. Instead of buying a Hefty or Glad bag, you would buy this bag at the same retailers.
Nanci Kalbfell stated the way I estimated it, we pay about $2.50 per garbage pail per week. How much would these bags cost.
Mr. LaPorte stated good question. From the estimation of the revenue that we are talking about, we actually have 2 size bags, a 35 gallon bag and a 14 gallon bag. On the 35 gallon, again nothing is set in stone, this is just something that we have come about, is $2.00 a bag for the large and $1.00 for the small. On the recommendations of Mr. Farrell we are looking at 1.5 ml thickness on the bag, where your Hefty or Glad bag is 0.9. You would actually get double the thickness and would be able to put about 30 to 35 pounds in that bag. Essentially you would just be switching over from a Glad or Hefty bag to this particular bag. It would be colored, your Town color, it would have your Town Seal on it and it would have any verbiage of recycling that you would like on it or “the bag must be tied” or whatever you would like on that, “made in the U.S.A.” .
Nanci Kalbfell stated so we don’t use our garbage pails anymore.
Mr. LaPorte stated no you still…
Nanci Kalbfell stated you still can put them in the pail.
Mr. LaPorte stated you probably want to because of rodents.
Nanci Kalbfell stated animals. Thank you.
Mr. Griffin stated where does the 1600 tons go.
Mr. LaPorte stated some are going to be going to recycling. Others are going to be donated to Salvation Army or Big Brothers and Big Sisters. You are not going to be generating as much because you are going to be doing a better job recycling.
Mr. Griffin stated who is picking up the recycling.
Mr. LaPorte stated who is picking it up now for you.
Mr. Griffin stated the Town is.
Mr. Laporte stated so that would be the same.
Mr. Griffin stated we are going to continue to charge the taxpayers the general expense that we are charging them, we are going to reduce the taxes by the tonnage that is going to get reduced but now we are going to be out picking up much more recycling. Where does that go. Are we taking it or are you taking that.
Mr. LaPorte stated no that would go to your same…
Mr. Griffin stated we would have to continue dealing with our suppliers, we have to continue to dispose of the recyclables.
Mr. LaPorte stated right. When that market, would hopefully change, you’d start to see an increase. From what I’ve been reading in the last month or two, it has started to take a turn.
Mr. Griffin stated there is not much money in recyclables. Cardboard yes, newspaper some, certain metals yes, plastic and cans there is no money there.
Mr. LaPorte stated the only thing is that if you look at the diversion from paying $98.22 to say nothing.
Mr. Griffin stated you keep saying nothing, our recyclables do not disappear for nothing.
Mr. LaPorte stated you have to pay to get rid of your recyclables.
Mr. Griffin stated we pay to get rid of some of it, and some of it is a wash and some of it we sometimes make a little money, sometimes we don’t. We still have to handle it all, we still have to find someplace to get rid of this stuff. If it is in bags now, are we going to have to take it to a (MURF). Or are we going to have to slit the bags and put it into the recyclables ourselves.
Mr. LaPorte stated no your recyclables will continue to go into your recyclable cans. This would just replace your garbage bag. Only the items of garbage should be going into this bag.
Mr. Griffin stated you don’t have recycling bags.
Mr. LaPorte stated we do but once it goes to the (MURF) they don’t have a way of slitting those open.
Mr. Griffin stated that’s the way it works now. In Putnam Lake they put their recyclables in a blue bag, the private carter picks it up, takes it back to their (MURF), they open the bags and they sort all the recyclables, but they certainly do not do it for free.
Mr. LaPorte stated we certainly have the recyclable bags that we could do that with. Even if it was $60.00 a ton for your recyclables that you are paying, the diversion is going to be cheaper than your $98.22, so you will still be saving $30.00 a ton, even if they did charge you something.
Mr. Griffin stated unless we are out running our trucks places as much as we run them now.
Mr. LaPorte stated on the garbage side you wouldn’t. You are probably going to see a 10% to 15% increase on your recycling side. If that adds a truck or two, but you are going to see three trucks coming off on the garbage side. You are primarily going to generate 43% less.
Mr. Griffin stated basically now our garbage trucks are going to be running over to Connecticut two thirds half empty and we are going to be picking up two bags instead of one at every stop, but we will still be making every stop.
Mr. LaPorte stated instead of going your normal route you could add another 10 houses on, then that would certainly change your thought process.
Mr. Griffin stated basically all you guys do is send out some flyers and sell bags.
Mr. LaPorte stated that is also with a guarantee, we have already taken out our portion of the proceeds from that number. We are going to manufacture the bag, we are going to warehouse it, and we are going to transport it. We are going to deliver it to your retailers, make sure that your retailers never run out of bags, have a customer service representative reconcile your account and make sure that you never run out of bags and then wire the money to your account.
Mr. Griffins stated what happens when I forget to buy bags.
Mr. LaPorte stated then your trash doesn’t get picked up. We want to make it simple and convenient and make sure there are plenty of people to be able to buy them from.
Mr. Griffin stated I buy my garbage bags right now in rolls of 100 or 200. Are we buying these bags one at a time.
Mr. LaPorte stated no you can buy them at 5 or 10 at a time, whatever you decided.
Nanci Kalbfell stated (inaudible) once a week.
Mr. LaPorte stated you go through 5 bags.
Nanci Kalbfell stated yes
Mr. LaPorte stated a 14 gallon bag. Let me ask, are you a pretty good recycler.
Nanci Kalbfell stated I’m average probably with the rest of the community.
Mr. LaPorte stated if we can get you from 5 to 2 then that would be every 2 weeks you would be going through those 5 bags.
Nanci Kalbfell stated but I go to Costco and I get the bags.
Mr. LaPorte stated yes the 33 gallon bags. One thing you have to look at is if there is a way of giving back some of the money that you are generating back to the community to help offset the cost of the bags that you are currently buying. Let’s say you gave back 100% of it, hypothetically, on the tipping fees alone, you still would be saving $163,000.00.
Nanci Kalbfell stated from your side of the (inaudible) the practical side of life is that I would take my pail down at the end of the week on Sunday, and God Forbid, the Town of Patterson didn’t pick up my pails because I didn’t use the right colored bags. I’m sure…
Mr. LaPorte stated it has to be a mandate. It has to be an ordinance. It also had to be that after this certain date that you have to use this color bag.
Nanci Kalbfell stated if it’s convenient and it’s going to be less.
Mary Rice, Putnam County Department of Health Solid Waste Management stated the County is not endorsing any particular PAYT Program. However, the County is very much behind the concept. I have done months of research on this and it took me quite a while to actually begin to get a grasp on how this system works. The best way I can explain it, is it is just like your phone service. For example, you pay a certain amount a month to receive phone service to your home, if you make calls that may add to your bill. If you are doing a PAYT system such as we are talking about, you are paying a certain amount to have the garbage truck come to your house and pick up your stuff. That is that flat fee rate. I happen to live in the Town of Southeast and our garbage is picked up twice a week and our recyclables once a week. We can throw out as many as eight cans worth of garbage every week. I could throw out one can every two weeks. If my neighbor is throwing out eight cans then that is the same as if we were all paying the same phone bill or the same electric bill or the same water bill. There really is a cost to disposing of garbage and there are different costs for disposing of the MSW (municipal solid waste) which is what most of us call garbage and the recyclable or reusable components to it. Most of the cost, Frank you can correct me, it generally costs twice as much tipping fees to throw out MSW or garbage as the recyclable products. I can tell you the Counties that have their own municipal authorities doing garbage collection lost a lot of revenue that they generally counted on when all the markets crashed a year ago, October. They are now looking to make up that money. But, that means that when the markets turn around, as they are beginning to, that means that there is another revenue stream there. I know right now, nobody is counting on that money. Everything is cyclical and that money is going to go back up. The recyclables that the municipality is collecting will eventually provide an additional revenue. When we pay for garbage removal through our taxes, it looks invisible and it is not. There really is a cost. The Towns that I have talked to that use a PAYT program that are ecstatic about it have generally created an enterprise fund so that the costs are truly identified. One of the municipalities that I talked to said that they are not only paying for all of this program, all of the garbage collection and recyclable collection program, but there is enough extra revenue to put toward a household hazardous waste collection which our County provides, the Towns are not going to be expected to do that, but there is enough left over to add to other programs. I’ve also, and I can give you names if any of you want to contact me, I can give you names of people I have talked to who would be delighted to have other municipalities come to visit because despite all the problems getting it passed initially, they are so happy with the way the program works and with the revenue stream. There are so many plusses. Yes, you pay a little more for the garbage bag, but that is the garbage nobody wants. The other stuff is the same as before and whatever revenues there may be eventually will go to the Town. The Town does make money on the bags and that is the financial incentive to make people think before they just shove everything into the bags. Because there is a cost for throwing out the garbage stuff there should be a greater expense to the people who do that and some of who abuse it. Some of us are really too lazy to wash out the peanut butter jar or whatever it is, and it goes in the regular garbage. It costs more. It costs the Town more, it costs us the taxpayers more to do that. So, if you want to do that, then it costs a little bit more to do it that way. I don’t know if that made it any clearer. As I said I have been working with this for some time now and I know it was very confusing to me at the beginning.
Nanci Kalbfell stated I guess what would clear it up for me is that most of us I believe, pay $350.00 per unit for our garbage collection, which turns out to be $7.50 a week or $2.50 a pail. Is this in addition to what we already pay or is this in place of what we are paying now.
Mr. Griffin stated that is one of the things I want to find out from some of these other municipalities because quite frankly, while recycling may be a little cheaper to get rid of, my personal opinion and it is just my opinion, is the only way we are going to get really successful recycling on this side of Town, is if we just co-mingle and put it in a bag which means we are going to have to pick it up and take it to a (MURF) which is over in Danbury. If you are going to continue to source separate, for everybody it is going to be the same deal, wash your jars, turn over your things make sure it is the right number plastic, etc. etc. and then you are going to have glass, and there is going to be green glass and brown glass there is going to be clear glass and then you are going to have cans and you are going to have a variety of stuff. Personally if we doubled or tripled our recycling I think we would need more manpower and more recycling trucks because I think we would be picking up a lot more stuff. We pick up paper, we pick up cardboard, and we pick up the three different types of recycling.
Nanci Kalbfell stated all that separating on my part takes a lot of my time. I wouldn’t mind doing it but what is the incentive that I’m going to be reimbursed for that financially, because not everyone is going to be doing that.
Mr. Griffin stated I don’t know that you are going to get reimbursed. Many of these assumptions are based on recycling either being free or generating money. I can tell you right now that we do not make a profit on recycling no matter what we do. Even in the best of times, we do not make money off of recycling because we have a building and we have an electric bill, we have a bailer, we have the staff and we have people that work there. We have to maintain the place. It has to be plowed in the winter. All the vehicles have to be maintained. That’s why I’m very curious to talk to some of these other municipalities. The other part of it is, if it comes off your tax bill, it comes off your taxes when you file your income tax return. There are a lot of questions that we do not have the answers to yet which is why I think it is going to be very useful if you give me the names of half a dozen municipalities that are using this. I can talk to them and see what they have done and how it works for them. If selling bags generates more than enough money to pay the garbage guys and keep the trucks on the road, put the fuel in the trucks, and the cost of getting rid of the solid waste and also the recyclables, yes I don’t have a problem taking it off of your tax bill, that’s fine. Right now I don’t have a lot of the answers to the questions and at the moment you would have to put me in the skeptic category because I’m sitting here thinking about how much we spend, how many guys we have employed, the cost of having municipal pick-up and everything else. If Waste Zero was coming in here saying we are going to replace all that stuff, we are going to pick up your solid waste, we are going to pick up your recyclables and we are going to make sure your recyclables are for free, I think we would probably have a deal right here tonight. I don’t see that happening. Basically what I gather is that these guys sell garbage bags.
Mr. LaPorte stated I think we do a lot more than that and I truly believe that there is a lot behind the scenes. If we came up and you wanted to do some type of education, if you wanted to do some Town Meetings, if you wanted to do some educational letters, we will incur all that cost. One thing, the young lady said she generates five bags a week. On average with this program you are just over about one bag a week for a household of four. With the way the economy is people are not doing as much, people are not spending as much. Average a year ago it was about a bag and a half a week for a 35 gallon bag. It was going to cost you $3.00 per week. Now we are seeing on average about $2.50 per week. If you took your five bags at $0.22 each, if bought them in small quantities it would cost you, $1.10. For this program it would cost you another $1.40 per week about another $70.00 to run this program.
Mr. O’Connor stated I don’t know where this garbage is going when it disappears. Where I used to work, we used to have a lot of trouble and I know where some of it came from, it came from people who were paying to have their garbage picked up. Instead of that, they would bring it to work. They would use the dumpsters at work or they would bring it to the New York City roads, since they were not that much patrolled. New York City would be picking up bags of garbage constantly that people just threw out because they didn’t want to buy whatever the bag was. I can not see any post card that you would send me that would change my lifestyle, so that the amount of garbage that my Commander-in Chief saw was well divided, we are very good at dividing everything up, but it isn’t going to be any less no matter what happens. We are not going to be going to the store and say I won’t buy this shampoo because it comes in a box, I’ll buy the shampoo that is in a free standing jar. We do go to Goodwill, but we are not going to go there more than now.
Mr. Griffin stated when was the last time you threw an overcoat out in the garbage.
Mr. O’Connor stated never.
Mr. LaPorte stated I’m not saying that is everybody. I have to say, I have done it, now I do not do it. I threw away some old pants because it wasn’t convenient for me to go to the Salvation Army. Now becoming a better recycler, I don’t do that. It’s the other maybe 6,000 people in the area that aren’t as good as you.
Mr. O’Connor stated that is what I was saying. I don’t see whatever literature you could send them that would change them.
Mr. LaPorte stated it is not so much the literature, but every time they buy a $2.00 bag and they have to use three that week because there not a very good recycler…..
Mr. O’Connor stated unless they throw it in the road.
Mr. LaPorte stated you are going to find there is going to be some illegal dumping. Once the program starts you will find that the townspeople are going to be doing most of the policing and you are going to find that if I have to buy a $2.00 bag, I’m going to make sure my neighbor is doing it right. The town of Concord, New Hampshire was worried about illegal dumping. After the first 45 days of implementation they said the Town has never been cleaner. I understand where you are coming from and it is a great question.
Mr. Bruce Major stated education is great but you are going to need enforcement. Then there is another issue as it relates to plastics, which I think is the bulk of our recyclables, we are down to two, #1 and #2, clear plastics. If you have been to the Recycling Center they have a huge sign that says #1 and #2. If we want to do something why don’t we expand what we can recycle. Just recently, Frank I just saw it this week and I haven’t had a chance to check, the Village of Pawling, I happened to go to their website and they have added three additional plastics. I know you say well what is three additional plastics, but it may be quite substantial. If you go to Sauro’s and you get a little plastic container of chicken salad, that is #5 and you can’t recycle it. In the Village of Pawling, you can recycle it. That is just an example. Maybe we should be looking to expand what we can recycle. I don’t know what the cost factor is but we are talking about a greater percentage of the products out of our house that are being disposed of that have to go to recycling when we go from all the plastics down to only two, we are fighting a losing battle.
Mr. Griffin stated just keep in mind Bruce that especially with plastics they do not generate any money. That is a big loser.
Mr. Major stated I understand that. What I’m suggesting is that we look into what the Village of Pawling is doing just to see why they were proud to announce that they were able to add three additional numbers.
Mr. Griffin stated I’ll check into it but I can guarantee you it was much more for environmental reasons than financial.
Mr. Major stated but even in the program he is describing with the State mandates we have to get to a percentage. You know those big containers of Arizona ice tea, you can’t buy them anymore because you can’t recycle the plastic. Maybe what we need the solid waste people to do at the County is to start saying to the manufacturers maybe “Arizona” should be using #1 and #2. Maybe that is some of the things we need to be doing to help reduce the amount of things that we have to recycle.
Nanci Kalbfell stated (inaudible)
Mr. Major stated I think I’d rather spend $0.02 extra for that because I don’t think the cost is that much more on the plastics, but I don’t know.
Ms. Mary Rice stated just to let you know the reasons that some places can take more types of plastics, #1 through #7 in some cases, it depends on the destination. There are six distinct categories and #7 is an everything else category. The first six have different polymers, different lengths of their molecules. If you mix them together in a batch and melt them, it defeats the usefulness because some plastics we use for strength some we use for flexibility and some we use for all different reasons and if a lot of them are melted together, it becomes useless for any purpose. There are some (MURFS), or recycling facilities that have the ability to sort out those numbers and then sell them. Those in our area, for the most part are able to take only #1 and #2. Mike told me something interesting earlier.
Nanci Kalbfell stated Southeast is six.
Ms. Rice stated no, I live in Southeast they take #1 and #2.
Mr. Major stated the Village of Pawling just added those three and they are not that far away.
Ms. Rice stated and I believe Southeast uses the same destination that Patterson does. That also would indicate that #1 and #2 are the only ones acceptable there.
Mr. O’Connor stated we have two different Sanitation Districts in the Town of Patterson. What you are mostly talking about is this side. I understand about polymer strengths and you can’t make (inaudible) out of various things and old stuff. I don’t see turning my little small space in the back of my house into a seven category recycling center.
Ms. Rice stated you wouldn’t have to and that is the point. The destination, the (MURF), has the capability of taking either #1 and #2 or of #1 through #7. Some of them can only do the limited numbers and that is what we are all locked into. Anyplace our recyclable plastic goes in this surrounding area goes #1 and #2. I would also be interested to know where Pawling is taking it.
Mr. O’Connor stated where does Putnam Lake send it. Do they send it to Connecticut.
Ms. Rice stated to Connecticut.
Mr. O’Connor stated and they sort it out themselves.
Ms. Rice stated yes.
Mr. O’Connor stated we send them everything. I don’t sort it. It’s a private company. It was not set up to separate.
Ms. Rice stated you can put together whatever the (MURF) will take.
Mr. O’Connor stated I imagine that the (MURF) that we use for District #1, the non- municipal collection which goes to Connecticut…
Ms. Rice stated they take #1 and #2.
Mr. O’Connor stated well they get #1 through #7, they don’t separate.
Ms. Rice stated I thought they were getting a little more strict about that because it was costing them more if the batches were more contaminated.
Mr. Griffin stated at the same time it is probably more costly for them to have their guys on the road open the bagging up and saying wrong stuff, can’t take it. At this point I think we should say thank you very much for the presentation. If you could kindly give Sue a call with your contacts we will follow up on it and then we will bring it back up to the Town at a later date.
Mr. LaPorte stated one last thing on the #3 through #7, on an average family of 4 or 5 you generate about 16 pounds a year of the plastics. That is a half a pound per week. The problem is that it is very bulky but doesn’t produce much waste. It think that is why you are finding a lot of the (MURFS) aren’t really interested in those items because they take up a lot of space in the warehouse but they don’t generate any revenue for them. I appreciate your time. If I can provide anybody with any information, I would love to do that. Sue, I will be in touch with some references. Feel free to visit any one of our clients, and do a tour and ask as many questions as you like.
Mr. Griffin stated my daughter lives in New Hampshire about 20 miles from Concord, so I will be up there visiting her sometime in the next 6 weeks.
Mr. LaPorte stated is she anywhere near Nashua.
Mr. Griffin stated no, she is actually about 20 miles north of Concord in Devon.
Mr. LaPorte stated Nashua and Manchester are coming on board in the next 30 days. Thank you very much.
Mr. Griffin stated thank you, interesting concept.
The presentation ended at 8:30 pm.
Supervisor Griffin called the Patterson Town Board meeting to order at 9:10 p.m. with 25 in attendance.
AUDIT OF BILLS
Mrs. Nacerino made a motion to accept the abstract as written:
General Fund $108,387.15, Highway Fund Item 1 – General Repairs $47.00, Highway Fund Item 3 – Machinery $747.66, Highway Fund Item 4 – Miscellaneous $1,387.39, Highway Fund – Snow $20,845.59, Highway Fund - Employee Benefits $18,224.69, Putnam Lake Fire District $82.00, Patterson Fire District $122.00, Waste Water Treatment Plant $14,008.77, Capital Fund $6,095.00, Patterson Light District $25.86, Patterson Refuse District #2 $7,186.43, Deerwood Drainage District $15.50, Patterson Park District $1,038.14, Alpine Water District $638.76, Dorset Hollow Water District $1,511.15, Fox Run Water District $36.97, Trust & Agency $2,627.50, Grand Total Abstract $183,027.56.
Seconded by Mr. Capasso. Roll Call Vote: Mr. Burns, yes; Mr. Capasso, yes; Mrs. Nacerino, yes; Mr. O’Connor, yes; Mr. Griffin, yes.
KEVIN BURNS
CONFERENCE REQUESTS
Mr. Burns stated I have three conference requests. The first one is a request to attend a Special Districts seminar. I will approve these individually, since there are some comments on two of them.
Mr. Burns made a motion to approve the attendance of the Special Districts seminar.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mr. Burns stated the second conference request deals with two people attending a Tri-State Camp Conference. Ginny do you want to discuss the memo you circulated.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I circulated a memo to the Town Board. A Tri-State Conference request was put in for two people and basically what I wrote was:
While I realize that every conference provides you with some valuable learning experience, I believe this Board must prioritize its spending and consider conferences which are essential. In order to provide a fair assessment to this particular conference, I contacted some municipalities around the area.
One being the Town of Southeast. I spoke to Marianne Gallipani, the Senior Recreation Leader. Her comments were that taxpayer’s money is never expended for conferences and all rules, regulations and concerns are addressed through the Putnam County Department of Health. Her comment was, we are not Camp Quwee nor are we Camp Herrlich.
I spoke to Jim Gillcrest the Head of the Department of Recreation and Parks for the Town of Carmel which also encompasses, I believe, Kent and Mahopac. He said this is a good conference, but it is geared more toward a full-pledge camp and the New York State Recreation and Parks Conference is less costly and geared more toward Town camps.
I spoke to Beverley Golisano, Director of the Town of North Salem and she said we do not attend this conference. It is too expensive and we do not attend any conferences that are not within New York State.
I also spoke with Joel Muie the Recreation Leader for the Town of Lewisboro and Katonah and he said he has not attended this conference. He is considering it but bear in mind the Town of Lewisboro holds four camps and has possibly 950 children attending. Many of these children are bused, so this is a different type of camp then our camp. Ray indicated at the last meeting that his goal was to be an “accredited camp”. I said it should be noted that most of the people that I contacted didn’t even know what an “accredited camp” was. One comment was that although this is recognition by Tri-State, it is really not a benefit to municipal camps and traditionally Town camps do not attract people that are not within the area. Accredited camps may be for someone who is looking to send their child to an overnight camp. If they live in the city and they want to send them upstate or to a different state they would look for that accreditation. I don’t think that is applicable to our Towns needs. As Town Board members I believe we try to set an example by being good stewards of taxpayer’s money. We demonstrated this by electing not to attend the Association of Towns Conference, which is for three days. Instead three Town Board members have elected to commute into the city for one day in an effort to save money. I do not feel that this conference is essential for Ray to attend especially since he attended last year and other municipalities within our area do not participate. I am also strongly against a minor, someone under the age of 21 attending a conference in Atlantic City. Additionally, I think we should not be expending any monies for seasonal workers to attend any overnight conferences as adequate training can be achieved through the Putnam County Department of Health. My vote would be to deny this request.
Mr. Burns stated you have budgeted for this, correct.
Mrs. Nacerino stated we budgeted to basically encumber the monies. We don’t have to spend every dollar that we budget for. We strive to save money every way we can. It is up to this Board to prioritize whether or not they think that this is something that is essential to Ray or the Recreation Department. My personal opinion is that it is not, especially that it is piggy backed with another conference right behind it, which will probably satisfy the needs that Ray needs for this year in professional development. It also entails missing six work days from his job.
Mr. Burns stated you are saying between the two conferences.
Mr. Ray Blanar, Recreation Director stated I agree it is definitely not essential. I won’t say it is. Yes, it has a lot of useful information. Unfortunately, they do run the New York State and the camp conference one after the other, which is inconvenient. Since I was there last year, I don’t disagree. As far a minor in Atlantic City, I don’t know what is perceived. It was more to have an extra set of eyes and brain and knowledge to gather more information, if possible. Most over night camps are ACA accredited. It is a national accreditation. Obviously we are not, but it is a very nice title to have that people do look for it when they send their child to camp. That means they met the national standards and requirements.
Mr. Burns stated so you agree it wouldn’t be unreasonable to do every other year.
Mr. Blanar stated no, not at all. Actually I was at a luncheon today with the Hudson Valley League of Services and spoke with a gentleman who gave high praises to a National Conference that he attended. Maybe we can alternate with the camp.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I do want to stress that the venue is not what I object to as much as I object to anyone under the age of 21 attending any overnight camp conference. The Town of Patterson would be ultimately responsible when they send someone especially a minor away. The fact that this was a request for a seasonal worker who is not even a full fledge part-time employee much less a full-time employee. We need to draw the line and he doesn’t fit that criteria.
Mr. Burns stated based on this discussion do you want to withdraw this request.
Mr. Blanar stated yes. Regarding Fernie he is the only one that is going to be assisting and directing the camps, that is why I put in for him to go.
Mr. Burns stated with that withdrawn the next conference request has to do with attendance at a 2010 New York State Park and Recreation Conference that has been submitted for Saratoga Springs attendance 3/21 to 3/24. This is for one individual and encompasses hotels, meals and enrollment.
Mr. Burns made a motion to approve this conference request.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
TIME OFF REQUEST
Mr. Griffin stated both Ray and Tracey you will be out of the Recreation Center at the same time. That will leave no senior supervision in the building what-so-ever. That is my first concern. The other thing is she will be gone from the 29th to the 2nd. You will be gone from the 27th until the 3rd. She will be gone for forty hours and you will be gone for twenty four hours.
Mr. Blanar stated the week prior is the New York State Conference and I will be doing at least ten hour days with all the different sessions that go on plus my regular eight to ten hours that I will do when I get home Thursday and Friday. I figure it comes to about 54 hours that week if not more. This week I’m scheduled to do 58 hours.
Mrs. Nacerino stated you need to accurately reflect your time. If you have a twelve hour day and a conference that is a regular work day you need to indicate it as a regular work day and then have that extra time reflected on that day.
Mr. Blanar stated right.
Mrs. Nacerino stated this isn’t correctly stipulated is what Mike is saying.
Mr. Burns stated aren’t you a salaried employee as opposed to an hourly employee.
Mr. Blanar stated salaried.
Mr. Burns stated so we really don’t count hours, right.
Mr. Blanar stated I have to work 80 hours in a pay period.
Mr. Burns stated so if you work 120……
Mr. Blanar stated right, I don’t get anything for it. I work on a flex schedule.
Mr. O’Connor stated do you get comp time.
Mr. Blanar stated I don’t get anything. When I originally started it was a flex scheduled. I did 11 hours on Sunday and I don’t get time and a half, double time or anything. I know the Highway men or anyone else works on Sunday………..
Mr. Burns stated it’s a different classification. Exempt versus non-exempt.
Mr. Williams stated salaried employees we have to accurately account for our time for retirement purposes. That is why we have to do it that way.
Mr. O’Connor stated do you accrue time if you work.
Mr. Blanar stated no. If I work 95 hours in a pay period I get paid as if I worked 80.
Mr. O’Connor stated do we owe you 15.
Mr. Blanar stated no.
Mrs. Nacerino stated this is still incorrect. That is irrelevant to the fact that this form was filled out incorrectly.
Mr. Griffin stated I’m trying to figure out how you arrived at being gone from those time frames and that it only represents 24 hours. Now that you explained it. Basically you are giving yourself comp time.
Mr. Blanar stated I’m not giving myself comp time. I know I’m going to work that many hours.
Mr. Griffin stated we’ll work the logistics of the numbers out. Do you have any thought on the fact that for a week we will have no senior management in the building.
Mr. Blanar stated I think it will run fine. We had three days during Christmas break that neither one of us was there and everything went fine. Between Sue, Maya and Veronica there are plenty of senior staff that have been there over two years.
All parties continued to discuss the above topic.
Mr. Burns stated why don’t I propose this, can we withdraw the vacation request and if you want to resubmit it with a suggestion on how we could potentially handle it and I’m concerned about how the hours are reflected and if it can be done we will reconsider it.
Mr. Blanar stated okay, I will submit to you a chain of command for the Recreation Center.
RECREATION REQUEST FLOOR REFINISHING/ADDITIONAL BANKS
Mr. Burns stated I received a memo from Paul Fava regarding refinishing the floor at the Recreation Center. In the past we used an outside vendor to resurface the vinyl flooring and it is showing wear and tear. This is a request to send out for a proposal from a third party vendor to come in and refinish the floor.
Mr. Paul Fava, Building Operations and Maintenance stated I was extremely concerned with the condition of the floor mainly due to the type of operation that is going on in that room. We have people in that room using heavy gym equipment and it is damaging the floor to the point where it is no longer serviceable unless we do a refinishing job every two or three weeks. That would be quite costly.
Mr. Burns stated what equipment are you referring to.
Mr. Fava stated there is boxing equipment. They use 150 to 200 pound heavy bags filled with water that slide across the floor. When they hit them its gouging up the vinyl floor. There has also been some damage in some of the rooms, holes in the walls and things like that from this equipment being moved in and out of the closets. We were doing the floors four times a year and within several weeks they were back in the original damaged condition. I would suggest either move these people into the gym where it is designed to handle this heavy equipment or charge them back for all this cleaning and maintenance. A lot of businesses are obligated to pay. I was in the retail business and rented space and if there anything need to be cleaned it was charged back to us as tenants.
Mr. Burns stated you are saying this is beyond ordinary wear and tear.
Mr. Fava stated much more. We are paying somewhere in the vicinity of $8,000.00 a year to maintain these floors. The finish only stays on for a period of two or three weeks.
Mr. Burns stated well the proposal as I understand is to just shop for a vendor. It seems like we are treating the symptom and not addressing the problem.
Mr. Fava stated I’m not suggesting we shop for a vendor, I’m just saying do you want to spend this type of money which is fruitless if the floors are going to be constantly misused like that.
Mr. Capasso stated do they have a lease.
Mrs. Nacerino stated they have a rental agreement.
Mr. Capasso stated maybe they should have a lease where it stipulates they are responsible.
Mr. Blanar stated the boxing and karate program that John Carlo runs they rent Monday through Thursday. He pays $1,200.00 per month to use the facility which is $15,000.00 per year. The biggest issue is the heavy bags. I shopped around trying to find a felt cover to put on the bottom of them to help maintain them. The problem with moving them to the gym is that we don’t have space. We can look to find a protective cover. We did give him a hand truck to move them in and out. I know he tries. The floor is worn in different places. The area around my desk looks like garbage.
Mr. O’Connor stated when the bags are dragged in and out the wax is rubbing off the tiles.
Mr. Fava stated it’s a little more than that but yes, the wax is rubbed off.
Mr. O’Connor stated not when they are in use.
Mr. Fava stated yes, and I will show you on the video. When they hit these bags they slide all over the floor.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I think one of the dilemmas is that John Carlo’s program is one of the most successful things that we host at the Recreation Center. I don’t think it would be fair if we did charge him a fee to offset some of this cost and make him solely responsible for the whole maintenance of the floors. I think that should be prorated to some degree.
Mr. Fava stated no question about it. I wouldn’t suggest charging him the whole $8,400.00. What you are faced with in the very near future is possibly replacing that floor in the Recreation Center. Mike can attest to that. He came down to look at the floor.
Mr. Blanar stated I don’t know if raising rent across the board would help offset it. Any time you rent a facility to anyone there is going to be maintenance. Even if you want to say $4,000.00 is his responsibility that would be half of the cost. He still has to pay $15,000.00 to rent the room. $11,000.00 we won’t have coming in if he decides to go somewhere else.
Mr. Fava stated I think he pays $1,000.00 per month.
Mr. Griffin stated let’s see if we can come up with a solution to reduce the damage or eliminate it. This building is three years older than the Recreation Center and these floors are in one hundred percent better shape than those floors. The amount of damage that is being done to that floor is extensive. Let’s start with getting covers for those bags so they don’t continue to damage the floor. The question before us is are we going to reinstitute the floor program or not. What is being done now.
Mr. Fava stated nothing, just mopping.
Mr. Blanar stated I suggest we do it early April and again at the end of August when the camps are over then one more time in December.
Mr. Fava stated I would like to see it done on a quarterly basis. I think during the winter time the floors should be protected more because of the salt.
Mr. Griffin stated we will do three treatments to the floor with your direction Paul.
Mr. Burns made a motion to approve a tri-annual maintenance plan for the Recreation Center with regards to the vinyl flooring.
Seconded by Mr. O’Connor. All In Favor: Aye. Carried
Mr. Capasso stated one more thing. Paul is that just in that one area of the Recreation Center.
Mr. Fava stated the recreation room is the one we use the most.
Mr. Capasso stated how often do we use the other room.
Mr. Fava stated it depends on the program they are doing. The boxing event only stays primarily in the recreation or community room. There are other uses that don’t create the same problem. There are exercise programs.
Mr. Capasso stated so those floors are lasting longer. They have to be done three times a year.
Mr. Fava stated no, they are showing signs of wear also. We have exercise, child and dance programs. There are many different programs. It’s roughly about 10,000 square feet that we were doing on a quarterly basis.
ADDITIONAL BANKS
Mr. Burns stated the next memo has to do with additional banks for events regarding various concessions, admissions etc to be kept at the Recreation Center totaling $400.00.
Mr. Blanar stated we have a petty cash and Shoprite account for little cooks. The petty cash is for incidentals for parties and an emergency fund. There has always been this money at the Recreation Center.
Mr. Burns stated is this all in one location.
Mr. Blanar stated yes, it’s all together locked up in the draw.
Mr. Burns stated why do we need to have separate banks as opposed to having one petty cash that we make change for various things.
Mr. Blanar stated Trish wanted this in addition to our petty cash. Petty cash is separate from the other banks. Trish suggested breaking it down so you know where the $200.00 is going. In the past it was never properly accounted or maintained. This way we know at all times how much money is there.
Mr. Burns made a motion to approve the Recreation Director’s request subject to the Town Comptroller’s approval of methodology as to how the records are going to be kept and how she wants it deposited.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried
COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN – DISCUSSION
Mr. Burns stated I have a memo regarding the County of Putnam taking lead on a SEQRA review.
Mr. Griffin stated they have taken lead agency. They filled out a short form EAF that basically tells us absolutely nothing.
Mr. Burns stated and if we object we have to object within 30 days.
Mr. Griffin stated yes but do we really want to take the lead on a Countywide Solid Waste Management project. I don’t think so. We do want to have some input on this. I think we as a Town need to do more homework because I’m not sure what affect the County Solid Waste Management Plan is going to have on the current Town operations and what we are going to be obligated to do. If we don’t find that suitable to us are we going to be stuck with it.
Ms. Mary Rice stated the County welcomes all of the participants of all of the Towns and would not be able to function without it. Absolutely we hope to be in constant contact. The Towns have responsibilities for their Towns. It’s not the County’s intention to impose anything that would be terribly burdensome for any of the Towns. The County will continue to support the Towns with programs such as the Household Hazardous Waste and the Electronic Waste Containers that are too big for any single Town to take care of.
Mr. Williams stated I have read the Solid Waste Management Plan. I think there is some merit to going with a pay as you throw plan but there is also a lot of concerns. We need to take a hard look on how that will impact our residents. My question is it appears within the plan that within the next several years, the Town will be mandated to go to that type of system. I was looking to get some clarification on what the Town Board, Frank Farrell and Mrs. Rice thought. Is that what the plans say.
Ms. Rice stated it is not the County’s intention to mandate that the Town’s participate.
Mr. Griffin stated it might be the State’s to mandate the County Solid Waste Management Plan.
Ms. Rice stated the State is definitely mandating the County’s plan, but we did just recently receive the comments from the State. There will be some additional information forthcoming.
Mr. Griffin stated I’m just curious because sometimes Carmel doesn’t do anything. Kent does part of the Town. Southeast and Patterson do the entire Town. Putnam Valley does the entire Town. I have no idea what Phillipstown does.
Ms. Rice stated Phillipstown and Putnam Valley have garbage districts that are particularly covered.
Mr. Griffin stated does anyone have any questions.
Mr. O’Connor stated I don’t want to see anything coming in that places a big burden on the average person. I can see some of these things becoming that.
Ms. Rice stated again, the conversations I had with municipalities and other areas that have implemented a plan like this, the reverse has happened. I would love to go with you to some of these locations, because I have not been there. The conversations have been very positive.
ASSOCIATION OF TOWNS REQUEST – REFORM GML 207-C
Mr. Burns stated a memo from the Putnam County Legislature regarding a proposed resolution of general municipal law 207-C which has to do with responsibilities of Towns to incur liabilities for emergency responders to bear the cost of disability of an individual responding.
Mr. Curtiss stated currently if an emergency responder goes down to 207-C it is the municipality’s responsibility to continue to pay them there salary until they are either found to be disabled or they retire. Given the economics of the State, they will not let them go out on disability so it ends up to be a municipal burden forever until they get to retirement age. The proposed legislation is if they have not been able to be physically fit to return to the job within three years they would automatically come off the Towns payroll and be put on disability with the Stated.
Mr. Burns stated so it would be capped at 36 months.
Mr. Curtiss stated yes.
Mr. Burns stated basically limits are a liability in 36 months.
Mr. Curtiss stated correct. This is a recommendation to the Association of Towns to the State and from the County’s Association.
Mr. O’Connor stated and the State would be paying more money once they got off our rolls and onto their rolls.
Mr. Griffin stated I think the Association of Towns success rate at the State level of legislation is probably about 0.1000%.
Mr. O’Connor stated if you have an injury at work and after three years you are unable to return to work, one would think you were disabled.
Mr. Curtiss stated in the Township of Kent, which I am familiar with, we have policeman who go out on 207-C all the time but it is usually for one month or six weeks and then they are back and it documents that they have had this condition on the job. We also have officer’s who have been on 207-C for about 20 years and have been unable to get them off. That is an ongoing problem for many municipalities.
Mr. Burns stated this would typically be a responder from Carmel coming to Patterson and because he is injured in Patterson……..
Mr. Curtiss stated no, you would not have any emergency responders because you have no police force on the Town payroll so it doesn’t really effect Patterson. It is the Townships with paid fire and police departments.
Mr. Griffin stated it doesn’t affect Patterson today. Being it might take ten years to get this legislation passed we should probably support it.
Mr. O’Connor stated we would be showing our support for our fellow Towns and moving a petition to the State to do this.
Mr. Curtiss stated there is a resolution to do this.
Mr. Griffin stated Counselor can you clean it up and customize it to the Town of Patterson and we will bring this back at the next meeting.
GENERAL DISCUSSION OF ADOPTION OF LOCAL LAWS
Mr. Burns stated I passed around a memo to everyone regarding the procedures we are following for adoption of local laws. Based on the last meeting it was evident that I think we need to revisit and revise the procedure that we follow for proposal and adoption of local laws. It is our obligation to review local laws, update them, make revisions, and propose new ones. My concern is that the discussion and the initiation of that process take place as a Town Board together and not unilaterally by anyone or individual group and that we have a better procedure for having some discussion about those going forward. I was uncomfortable regarding something that was initiated before I was on the Town Board but I think we need to respect some kind of rule of procedure in terms of how these are considered in advance through the Town Board. I don’t have a resolution tonight; it was really more of a discussion.
Another point that I felt was important was that I know we are obligated to get a Planning Board opinion, which we learned at the last meeting. I think we also need to consider, if it is a novel issue or complex issue of law we need to have either local counsel or possibly special counsel give us an opinion, a survey of case law because I really felt I wasn’t informed enough and we certainly aren’t at the point where we should be having a Public Hearing on that. That may also segway into a possibility as a Board we may want to consider having work session for that purpose. Add a work session per month in between meetings where we don’t take any action but we have some discussions as a Board, the discussion is open, it may not be televised but people can attend. We won’t take any formal action. I would feel more comfortable with that process. This was really more of a discussion piece so we can have a better procedure going forward.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I certainly agree with you.
Mr. Capasso stated I do too Kevin.
Mr. Williams stated I thought it was a well thought out proposal. The only concern that I had and I will throw this back to Antoinette Kopeck, Town Clerk, is that one of the requirements that you had in there was to publish all local laws in the paper. When we are doing something like the Veterans Exemption it is really not a big deal, but if we get into a local law like we are redoing the whole zoning it could be a very costly publication. It’s something to think about.
Mr. Griffin stated I like the comment about getting it on the website and making it available because I know there were a number of comments from residents that they walked in here cold that night and they didn’t know what we were talking about. I don’t know if I am crazy about adding another meeting. I think we run every meeting like a work session. People get to comment on other people’s vacation requests. I don’t know how much more of a work session atmosphere you could possibly have.
Mr. Burns stated maybe we can consider it for a period of time.
Mr. Griffin stated we can discuss it later on in the evening.
CLOTHES DONATIONS TO THE RECYCLING CENTER
Mr. Burns stated at the last meeting I encouraged people to make donations to the people in Haiti. Frank Farrell, Recycle Director had approached me about donating clothes that had been received by the Recycling Center. We looked into that. As a practical matter it seemed like logistically that was impossible. There was not going to be anyway to do it. Right now unless someone in the Town has some connection where we could transport clothing or send a container down there, it can’t be done. It’s my understanding that they are looking for money. I wanted to acknowledge that it was a great idea of Franks but unless someone comes forward with some methodology to get it down there, unfortunately I don’t think it will be viable.
Mr. Curtiss stated there are local charities that do these midnight runs where they bring food and clothing to the homeless in the city. You might be able to access that kind of a local charitable run. I know the Mahopac Schools do it once or twice a year and they bring food and clothing.
JOSEPH CAPASSO
EXECUTIVE SESSION LEGAL
MICHAEL GRIFFIN
FOX RUN PHASE II
Mr. Griffin stated we have a memo from the Town Planner and some paperwork from one of the attorneys for the applicant who made some suggestions and recommendations.
Mr. Robert Marvin, Attorney for RC Enterprises stated we are seeking a zoning amendment here. I was before this Board back in September. This is my second time in front of the Board regarding this topic. In the meantime, I had a meeting with the Supervisor and have been speaking with Rich Williams the last couple of weeks trying to come up with some language that would work for the Town. The overall concept is to add a provision to the Zoning Code that allows active adult housing, which is a defined term in the proposal that we have come up with. What that does it limits the ownership or the residents of the dwellings that end up being created to people who are 55 years or older. That has been a very popular concept in municipalities not just in New York State but in the Southeast or Southwest in a lot of retirement communities. For the reason that it tends to generate a lot more tax dollars then the cost of the services that are consumed by the people who occupy those types of residences. We have come up with some minor changes to the existing zoning law in the Town of Patterson that would promote and allow that concept to happen. It will also allow the way that we have written it a clustering of buildings on a site so you can preserve a considerable amount of space as open space. On the particular site that my clients owns, it would also vastly reduce the type of disturbance that would have to be done because that property is now zoned R-4. If you were going to make it single family housing you would have to do an awful lot of blasting, cutting and filling in order to get into the site. To use it for this other purpose under the proposal that we have you could use an existing driveway extended and you wouldn’t have to come in from the location on Bullet Hole Road were the property has frontage. Hopefully you all had a chance to look at the proposal. I will try to entertain any questions you may have. I did do a little bit of research on what the process is from here. When the Town Board feels appropriate to move forward we will have to schedule a Public Hearing and notify people within certain distance. I’m anxious to move that forward when you feel that it is appropriate.
Mr. Griffin stated based on what we discussed prior to this and due to the fact that the Town Planner wasn’t able to get the memo to us until today, I think we are going to take the opportunity to wait a couple of weeks and let the Board discuss this and bring it up at the next meeting.
Mr. Curtiss stated you should also make a referral to the Planning Board.
Mr. Martin stated this matter was already looked at by the Planning Board last summer prior to it actually coming to the Town Board.
Mr. Griffin stated but they haven’t reviewed and commented on this proposal. It does have to be referred to them.
Mr. Bruce Major stated could you also refer to the Assessor so we can get a sense of how this property would be assessed. Once again, if it is assessed as a co-op the taxes are substantially lower and it’s a negative impact on the rest of the residents of the Town.
Mr. Martin stated I don’t know how you can assess it when there are no improvements there yet. I guess it would have to depend on what the improvements are that are ultimately constructed.
Mr. Major stated I am talking about the classification. In other words, is it a townhouse, a co-op, or an apartment building. That is what I am talking about. That determines how it is assessed.
Mr. Griffin stated Mr. Williams do you have any comments on this.
Mr. Williams stated I think Mr. Marvin and I have a good dynamic in pulling this together. Certainly we could refer this over to the Planning Board assuming the Town Board is comfortable with the language within the amendment.
Mr. Griffin stated are you comfortable requesting based on this or do you want to look at it first before we move it to get an opinion.
Mr. O’Connor stated it is dynamically different from the last time we went for this.
Mr. Martin stated I don’t think there was a written proposal exactly what the amendment would look like. It was more of a conceptual discussion. I think this is probably the first time that you as a member of the Town Board has actually seen words on paper that would………
Mr. O’Connor stated I saw maps and diagrams.
Mr. Martin stated yes. This is really not focused on a particular project, this is a proposed change to the law that the Town of Patterson has on its books.
Mr. Griffin stated I am going to hold this over to the next meeting because the Board is going to want to take a look at this.
Mr. Martin stated in the interim feel free to contact me and I will do the best I can to try to answer any questions. As Mr. Williams said, he and I have had a fair amount of back and forth on this and have come up with a concept that I think both of us think make some sense from both points of view.
ZONING AMENDMENT – HELICOPTER DISCUSSION
Mr. Griffin stated you received a memo from the Town Planner and I will give you two weeks to consider it and review it and come back with your comments. At that point we will ask the Town Planner and the Town Attorney to come up with draft language. There are three recommendations in here. No action, prohibit, restrict or regulate. Is one helicopter trip with Santa Claus landing in Town once in twenty years a bit of an overreaction or is it something we want to address. If you did have a commercial piece of property or someone had a racetrack and a lot of money with a six acre pad to land it on and it was a lot quicker for them to come up to the city that way, as opposed to driving up, you may want that restriction in place. We will address this again in two weeks.
LOSAP – LEGAL OPINION
Mr. Curtiss stated we are going to have to tweak our plan. Currently it provides entitlement begins at 65 which have just been ruled to be somewhat age discriminatory. I spoke with the plan managers and there is a relatively simple fix. We would have to amend the plan to provide that the benefits could be obtained at 65 or when the participant stops making accruals into the system. If you continue to work after 65, you would just continue to accrue time in the system and whenever you decide to retire you could accept your benefits. There is a slight cost in the administration of the plan to the Town. She will get me those numbers and I should have them by the next meeting so I can advise you what the cost is. I’ve done up a draft of the amendment. The Plan Administrator has to approve that basically in that format which says you can receive your benefits at 65 or when you cease accruing points under the system. You have the option to go either way at that point. You do not have to get out of the plan at 65.
Mr. Griffin stated is VFIS prepared to make those modifications to the plan. They are going to provide you with the language and you will provide us with a resolution.
Mr. Curitss stated they don’t have the language. I provided them with the language and said is this okay and she said she will run it by their attorneys, the Plan Administrator and the Actuaries to make sure and she said there will be a slight actuary administrative fee.
Mr. Griffin stated when do you think we will be prepared to take action on this.
Mr. Curtiss stated probably on February 10, 2010.
Mr. Griffin stated we will bring this back up at the meeting on the 10th.
BUDGET TRANSFER REQUEST
Mr. Griffin made a motion to approve the Comptrollers Budget Transfer request as written:
Budget Request No. 01
$3,000.00 from A.1990.400 Contingency Account transferred to A.9050.800 Unemployment Insurance
Budget Request No. 02
$5,546.00 from RP.8160.402 Sanitation Contractual to RP.9040.800 Workers Compensation Insurance
Budget Request No. 03
$4,895.00 from H.0909 Capital Project Fund Balance to H.8989.029 Courthouse
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
CHANGE ORDER REQUEST – MALCOLM PIRNIE
Mr. Griffin stated we have a memo from the Town Planner:
I would request that the Town Board approve Change Order #2 in the amount o $1,200.00 for Malcolm Pirnie to modify the Stormwater Improvement Study as requested by the NYS Department of State. Rich do you have anything else to add.
Mr. O’Connor stated my understanding is that they felt slighted by not having their name in often enough.
Mr. Williams stated correct. They wanted to see their name prominently displayed throughout the document since they provided all the funding.
Mr. O’Connor stated at first they wanted even more prominent but they are settling for a $1,200.00 partial refund.
Mr. Williams stated in fairness the $1,200.00 is their money.
Mr. Griffin stated if they want to pay for the courthouse, we will put their name on that too.
Mr. O’Connor stated it is not their money; it is the people’s money.
Mr. Griffin made a motion to approve Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $1,200.00 for Malcolm Pirnie to modify the Stormwater Improvement Study as requested by New York State Department of State.
Seconded by Mr. O’Connor. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
ADOPTION OF LOCAL LAW NO. 1 - APARTMENTS
Mr. Griffin stated do we want to wait on this one as well. We had the Public Hearing. This is essentially about zoning and apartments and it would allow residences in the General Business District.
Mr. Burns stated basically you are allowing special permit subject to special conditions that could be imposed by the Planning Board.
Mr. Curtiss stated yes.
Mr. Griffin introduced the following Resolution of Adoption of Local Law No. 1 of 2010 Apartments:
R-0110-04
WHEREAS, an amendment to Patterson Town Code Chapter 154, entitled “ Zoning - Apartments”, has been introduced before the Town Board of the Town of Patterson, as Local Law I-6 of 2009, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 13, 2009, upon notice duly published and posted, and
WHEREAS, public discussion was heard at such hearing concerning the merits of said introductory local law, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Patterson wishes to amend Chapter 154, entitled “ Zoning - Apartments”, which amendment will create §154-115.1 to permit apartments within commercial buildings in the General Business (GB) Zoning District, and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (the State Environmental Quality Review Act) and 6 NYCRR Part 617 of the implementing regulations the action under consideration constitutes an TYPE I ACTION, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Patterson has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Form submitted for Local Law I-9 entitled “ Zoning - Apartments” as well as other supporting documentation for the project,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby finds that the proposed action will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact for the following reasons:
1. The proposed local law will not create a substantial adverse change in existing air quality, ground or surface water quality or quantity, or noise levels.
2. The proposed local law will not create a substantial increase in potential for erosion, flooding, leaching or drainage problems.
3. The proposed local law will not create a substantial increase in traffic or the use of existing infrastructure.
4. The proposed local law will not create a removal or destruction of large quantities of vegetation or fauna, nor will there be any significant impacts on habitat areas.
5. The proposed local law will not create a significant impairment of the character or quality of important historical, archeological, architectural, or aesthetic resources
6. The proposed local law will not create a significant impairment of existing community or neighborhood character.
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.7 issues a NEGATIVE SEQRA Determination.
AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby amends Chapter 154, entitled “ Zoning -Apartments” in the form and manner as provided below, which amendment will create §154-115.1 to permit apartments within commercial buildings in the General Business (GB) Zoning District, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Introductory Local Law I-9 of 2009 of the Town of Patterson is hereby enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Patterson as Local Law 4 of 2010 of the Town of Patterson, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a true copy of the law is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
PLANNING BOARD/ENGINEER BILLING - DISCUSSION
Mr. Griffin stated we have run into a little bit of a problem. Rich do you want to explain it. Basically what is happening is that the engineers come to the meeting and stay and they are billing for the entire meeting. There are various projects that are discussed at the meeting that the engineers haven’t been asked to review or even comment on and the applicants are still getting a bill for it.
Mr. Williams stated that is basically it. It is the same way Stantec was billing and the same way most engineers’ bill. When they are present at a meeting they charge the Town for the time they are sitting there. They break it down to each applicant and some are charged back because we have a site plan or subdivision application. I spoke with Trish about this and she is very unhappy about doing it this way. It’s impossible for the Town Engineer to know which applicants we are actually charging back. An applicant came in for a minor site plan application and didn’t need the Town Engineer to review anything and he charged back his time to the applicant.
Mrs. Nacerino stated but this is how it is traditionally done. What is the recommendation for this process. What would alleviate this process.
Mr. Williams stated I don’t have a recommendation. I don’t know how we would alleviate it unless the Town Engineer is going to give us his time gratis. We know that is not going to happen.
Mr. O’Connor stated since he is doing billable hours, could we do projects that require his input in order and do the minor ones later.
Mr. Williams stated to some degree we could. We have to have the Public Hearings first. Typically the way we set the Planning Board agenda up we do the minor applications first. The way you want to do it is to put the bigger projects like Patterson Crossing, Genovese site plan up to the front and then everyone will have to wait.
Mr. O’Connor stated or have him come later.
Mr. Griffin stated there was a small business owner who had some issues. He needed to rearrange his parking and some minor things. The Town Engineer never looked at it or commented on it and he received a bill for $100.00.
Mr. Williams stated it was a little more than that. I think the total was $650.00 which was for multiple meetings.
Mr. Griffin stated at no point did the engineer do any work.
Mr. Williams stated he did review it initially when it came in. He wasn’t requested to. It’s one of the things we need to work out. I wanted to sit with you and Andrew and talk about it.
Mr. Griffin stated I wanted to get some feedback from the Board before I sat down with him. For a small business man that can be a big burden. Is the Board comfortable with Rich, myself and another Board member sitting down with Mr. Featherstone. Do you want us to pursue some other alternative.
Mr. O’Connor stated we have to have an alternate method.
Mr. Burns stated what is the fee distribution when you are making an application like that. It can’t be deferred by fees.
Mr. Griffin stated basically it is set up as an escrow. It’s like a pay as you go.
Mr. Burns stated no I’m suggesting the fee for the application.
Mr. Williams stated a lot of the fees that we charge don’t even cover the Planning Board’s time. There is not enough money there to offset the engineering costs which is a problem. I don’t foresee us to do that.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I have difficulty understanding how we can get around it. It’s the same thing if Ted sits here all night and we pay him on an hourly rate and only one or two cases pertain to Ted. Do we micro-manage his time as well and say he should only bill us for the cases on the Planning Board that are of interest to him and he needs to participate in. You kind of open Pandora’s Box. If you do it for the engineer, we need to look at everyone else that is on the dime at any given meeting.
Mr. Griffin stated we could also consider a flat fee. Whatever he works on gets billed directly back to the applicant.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I’m sure Andrew would be receptive to sitting down and negotiating to some degree.
Mr. Griffin stated is the Board comfortable with us doing that.
Town Board stated yes.
Mr. Griffin stated we are allowed to have two Board members in the room. Any particular individual want to be the other councilperson.
Mr. Capasso stated I’ll join in. Monday mornings are good for me.
Mr. Griffin stated we will set it up.
EXECUTIVE SESSION PERSONNEL
Mr. Griffin stated I will defer my Executive Session Personnel to the end of the meeting.
EDMOND O’CONNOR
STREET LIGHTS PUTNAM LAKE – SET PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. O’Connor made a motion to authorize the Town Clerk to advertise for a Public Hearing on February 10, 2010 for the addition of two street lights in the Putnam Lake Lighting District.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
ZONING AMENDMENT – LIVERY VEHICLES
Mr. O’Connor stated this has been submitted to the Planning Board for comments and they did respond. They have some concerns. Has everyone had a chance to review this. There is a slight change from the last time.
Mr. Burns stated Tim have we ever done a search. I can’t quite envision how contentious livery issues are going to be……..
Mr. Curtiss stated Rich did you go through General Code.
Mr. Williams stated of course.
Mr. Curtiss stated it went through General Code which is basically the company that codifies all the Town ordinances within the State of New York.
Mr. Burns stated is there any crazy case law on livery cabs where people have gotten into trouble with these amendments.
Mr. Williams stated this is kind of new. I looked at what other codes had and borrowed from them. I can give you the back-up.
Mr. Burns stated it wasn’t more what others have done as opposed to are there any case law issues out there.
Mr. Curtiss stated I haven’t checked but I would be happy to do that.
Mr. Burns stated that would be the only thing I would like to see.
Mr. O’Connor stated this is not an emergency. I would like to postpone this until such time the lawyer has had a chance to review this.
MPES MAPLE SUGARING PROGRAM REQUEST
Mr. O’Connor stated Matthew Paterson Elementary School has in the past introduced their children on how to tap trees for maple sap and turning the sap into maple syrup and follow it by a pancake breakfast. It shows the children how nature provides things and it is a good program. The sugar trees on their property are in decline. We have quite a few in the park and they would like permission to use the Patterson Park’s maple trees from February 22, 2010 to March 31, 2010.
Mr. O’Connor made a motion to approve the children of Matthew Paterson Elementary School be allowed to use the trees at the park.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
COLD WAR VETERAN EXEMPTION INCREASE – RESOLUTION
Mr. O’Connor introduced the following Resolution of Adoption Local Law No. 2 of 2010-Cold War Veterans:
R-0110-05
WHEREAS, an amendment to Section 142-5 of the Patterson Town Code entitled “Maximum Exemption Established,” has been introduced before the Town Board of the Town of Patterson, as Local Law 2 of 2010; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 27, 2010, upon notice duly published and posted; and
WHEREAS, public discussion was heard at such hearing concerning the merits of said introductory local law; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Patterson wishes to amend Section 142-5 of the Patterson Town Code entitled “Maximum Exemption Established;”
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby amends Section 142-5 of the Patterson Town Code entitled “Maximum Exemption Established;” and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Local Law 2 of 2010 of the Town of Patterson is hereby enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Patterson as Local Law 2 of 2010 of the Town of Patterson, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a true copy of the local law is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that said local law shall take effect immediately upon the filing of same with this State’s Secretary of State.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. O’Connor stated I would like to add Executive Session Personnel to my agenda.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
GINNY NACERINO
PUTNAM LAKE F.D. LETTER OF 1/06/10
Mrs. Nacerino made a motion to accept the following members to the Putnam Lake Fire Department: Michele Varian, Mathew Rizzotti and Alan Sliman.
Seconded by Mr. O’Connor. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mrs. Nacerino made a motion to accept Bethany Orifici as an Associate Member of the Patterson Fire Department.
Seconded by Mr. O’Connor. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
PATTERSON LIBRARY LETTER OF 1/11/10
Mrs. Nacerino stated I would like to share a letter written by Patti Ackerson, President of the Board of Trustees for the Patterson Library:
On behalf of the Patterson Library Board of Trustees, staff and patrons I thank you, Charlie Williams and the Patterson Highway Department for installing the catch basin and draining in the parking lot exit. The work was performed quickly and with very little impact to the staff and patrons and most importantly in a time to prevent ice buildup this winter. I look forward to working with you and the Town Board as 2010 progresses. I expect it to be an exciting year for all of us.
Mrs. Nacerino stated that was addressed to Supervisor Griffin.
WORK SESSION – DISCUSSION
Mrs. Nacerino stated about a year and half ago the Board discussed the possibility of having work sessions. The outcome of those discussions was basically that our regular meetings provided us with the forum to discuss what we needed to discuss. I bring this topic up once again because I think it is an important consideration. The Board needs an opportunity to assess and collaborate as a whole for any actions that may be taken. This lack of communication was clearly evident at the January 13, 2010 Town Board meeting. I echo Councilman Burns sentiments in calling for better procedures and communication and I feel the best way to achieve this is to hold a work session once a month. I believe we will better serve the people of Patterson by being well informed and well prepared. This is up for discussion. I know it was mentioned that we could have an extra meeting versus having one work session and one regular meeting. We came to the conclusion that we can audit the bills but no formal action would be taken. I think when we prioritize what our objectives are it is very important that we are all on the same page. It’s necessary right now in my opinion.
Mr. Burns stated right now as I understand it, Carmel does four meetings a month. They have two work sessions and two meetings. They are all public meetings but the two that are work sessions, there are no actions taken. Are we bound to have the work sessions at the same time as the Board meeting or do we do them earlier in the day.
Mr. Curtiss stated you can have them at any time you just have to advertise. The Town of Kent has one work session and one board meeting. At the work session they will audit the bills and do the ministerial things and then discuss policy issues, local laws and then they move all of that onto the agenda so when you come to the Town Board meeting that is basically what you enact. You can do it with an extra meeting or in any way you feel comfortable. Most Towns don’t televise the works session only because no action is taken and it’s a chance for everyone to deliberate, including the public. They ask questions at the end and at the end if the public has any input on any of the items they allow public input at that point. You are a collaborative Board and you need the three votes to carry anything forward. Whatever way you decide is the best way to communicate.
Mr. Burns stated it would be helpful for me for audit of bills. I have questions with simple things and unless someone else is here I can’t get background on certain issues. It would be helpful to me as a new member. How we do it, whether we add a meeting or change one meeting to a work session, I don’t know. If we have one work session, maybe the other meeting will go quicker.
Mr. Curtiss stated it does. The formal meeting usually goes within an hour because you’ve discussed it all before. The work sessions generally goes two to two and half hours.
Mr. Griffin stated at what point is the public allowed to comment on anything.
Mr. Curtiss stated they are allowed to comment on the work session. At the end of the meeting they have open discussion.
Mr. Griffin stated its fine, after we already voted.
Mr. Curtiss stated the theory is if they comment on it at the work session all the public comments have been taken before you make the action.
Mr. O’Connor stated can’t we do it any way we can.
Mr. Curtiss stated yes you can.
Mr. Griffin stated the only issue I would have with a work session is if you are going to limit it to no votes or no actions being taken, you are going to wind up with some very big agendas. If we discussed all of these things and didn’t vote on virtually any of it and then bring it back at the next meeting it will slow the process down. It’s like doing it twice. If you want to try it, fine. Kevin’s point is well taken on the local laws and that is a policy issue. If we all agree that we are going to take a different approach to the amendments and local laws that is fine, I don’t take an issue with that. My personal opinion is we will see these agendas get longer.
Mrs. Nacerino stated nothing is set in stone. I think the problem is internal. I think we need to interact as a Board more frequently and be able to bounce things off each other. Now we have three people working full time jobs that cannot get in here and see each other as frequently as maybe the Boards in the past. That has become quite evident.
Mr. Burns stated how would you feel about trying it for two months and we will see how it goes for two months.
Mr. Griffin stated the work session would have to be videotaped. If someone sees something that is a concern to them they may want to come to the next meeting.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I disagree with the videotaping.
Ms. Dede Lifgren stated I think if you have the work session that was on camera it would be what we are seeing here. We want to get more discussion, more information out, less formal so people will react quicker and more things will be discussed. If you put it on camera it is just going to repeat what we have here. I don’t know if it would do any good.
Mr. Burns stated is that a vote in favor or against videotaping.
Ms. Lifgren stated against videotaping. As a resident, I would love to have a work session because I feel many times you aren’t on the same page when it is coming to a vote and I think that would help get more information out to everyone.
Mrs. Nacerino stated work sessions can be tedious and drawn out but that is the sole purpose of having a work session. To videotape it, it is not necessary.
Mr. Capasso stated I say another meeting. First Tuesday or Wednesday of the month is what I’m for.
Mr. Griffin stated I will go along with anything you want to do. If you add a meeting then I would say don’t videotape it. If you really think adding a meeting is going to make this work any better than do it.
Mr. O’Connor stated let’s do it on the first Wednesday for two months.
Mr. Burns stated is there enough time to advertise. Let’s start in March.
Mr. Griffin stated it is going to create a lot more work in my office. It takes a week putting an agenda together. So now I am going to spend three weeks of every month putting together agendas. Sue and I work on the agenda for almost an entire week. Communicating with everyone, getting the materials together and everything else is not a simple process.
Mrs. Nacerino stated would we actually need an agenda or will we bring the correspondence to the table to discuss what actually will be on the agenda.
Mr. Burns stated I think it could be an agenda formulating meeting. We say the only thing we will have on the agenda is Audit of the Bills. Let’s try it. I don’t mean to burden you with another agenda.
Mrs. Nacerino stated each Town Board member would be responsible for their own agenda to what items they want to bring forth to discuss that particular evening.
Mr. Griffin stated we submit everything the Friday before and we will have the same rule apply.
Putting together a formal agenda is a lot work involved for Antoinette and for the Supervisors office. Sue puts together all the documents.
Mr. Burns made a motion effective the first Wednesday of March and April we have a work session with no agenda be added to our schedule and authorize the Town Clerk to advertise at 6:30 p.m.
Seconded by Mrs. Naceirno. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mrs. Nacerino stated I would like to add Executive Session – Personnel to my agenda.
Seconded by Mr. Burns. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
CONSERVATION EASEMENT 17 COUCH ROAD CORP. – RESOLUTION
Mrs. Nacerino introduced the following Resolution of Acceptance of Conservation Easement From 17 Couch Road Corp:
R-0110-06
WHEREAS, a Conservation Easement from 17 Couch Road Corp., as Grantor, to the Town of Patterson, as Grantee, has been introduced before the Town Board of the Town of Patterson affecting a portion of the premises which is the subject of the subdivision of property for 17 Couch Road Corp,; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 247 of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York, a public hearing was held on January 27, 2010, upon notice duly published and posted; and
WHEREAS, public discussion was heard at such hearing concerning the merits of said Conservation Easement; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Patterson wishes to accept the Conservation Easement.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby accepts the Conservation Easement from 17 Couch Road Corp. to the Town of Patterson; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a true copy of the Conservation Easement is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby authorizes the Supervisor to execute the Conservation Easement and any and all other documents necessary to give effect to this Resolution.
Seconded by Mr. Capasso. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Griffin stated we have a contract from Putnam County Office of the Aging. With the Boards permission, I would like to add this to the agenda so we can discuss and vote on this. Everyone knows Tee Vozzella who does a tremendous job with the Seniors in the Town of Patterson. We have a contract where we provide a portion of her salary on an annual basis. I would like to get it signed and back to the County and get it executed before anyone has a chance to change their mind about a program.
Mr. Griffin made a motion with the Board’s approval to add to the agenda the Resolution of Acceptance of Employment Contract Town of Patterson Agreement with the County of Putnam for the Year 2010.
Seconded by Mrs. Naceirno. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mr. Griffin introduced the following Resolution of Acceptance of Employment-Contract- Town of Patterson Agreement with the County of Putnam for the Year 2010 for Tee Vozzella to continue to serve the Seniors in Patterson:
R-0110-07
WHEREAS, THE TOWN OF PATTERSON and THE COUNTY OF PUTNAM recognize a need for linkage to County agencies for residents of the Town of Patterson who are over the age of 60 years; and
WHEREAS, THE COUNTY OF PUTNAM has submitted the attached Employment-Contract-Town of Patterson Agreement for the year 2010, which is to be entered into between THE COUNTY OF PUTNAM and THE TOWN OF PATTERSON for the services of an outreach worker to be furnished to the TOWN OF PATTERSON by THE COUNTY OF PUTNAM in order to provide elderly residents within the geographical area of the Town of Patterson who have problems with health, finance, or are in need of government assistance with guidance and assistance in contacting and obtaining services from the proper governmental agencies and other sources; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Patterson wishes to enter into the Agreement with THE COUNTY OF PUTNAM for the year 2010;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby approves the Employment-Contract-Town of Patterson Agreement with THE COUNTY OF PUTNAM for the year 2010;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Patterson hereby authorizes the Supervisor to execute the attached Employment-Contract-Town of Patterson Agreement for the year 2010 and any and all other documents necessary to give effect to this resolution
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mrs. Nacerino stated I had a meeting with personnel at the Recreation Center yesterday and set the date for our Fourth Annual Fashion Show and Wellness Expo to be held on May 7, 2010. This year’s honoree is Mrs. Maryann O’Connor.
MRS. NACERINO’S ENVIRONMENTAL TIP
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT RADON:
Lung cancer isn’t just for smokers, according to the Environmental Protection Agency estimates, radon is the leading cause of lung cancer behind smoking. It causes more than 20,000 deaths a year. The odorless colorless gas produced by the radio-active decay of natural occurring uranium. For many Americans the greatest risk comes from their own home which radon gas can infiltrate from the ground up. January is National Radon Action Month. The EPA is organizing a wide range of events and public service announcements to raise awareness and encourage testing and promote radon resisting building practices. The only way to test for radon gas is to use an at home test kit or to hire a professional. The inexpensive at home kit can be order through your local hardware store or is available through major retailers and home improvement stores. If radon is found in your home follow the EPA’s guide to radon removal who can test or fix your home. Of course, testing for and dealing with radon is a hassle and extra expense and who needs that. Testing would mean avoiding lung cancer and you will be glad you took the time.
Mr. Griffin stated the radon testing has improved dramatically. You can get it done very quickly. You use to have to wait twenty-four hours. They have a system now where they can do it right on the spot and get results. A lot of the home inspectors have them now.
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
Mr. Bruce Major stated I would like to follow up with Tim in reference to the traffic court update.
Mr. Curtiss stated we are doing the Sherriff’s (inaudible)
Mr. Major stated that is great.
Mr. Griffin stated when did that happen.
Mr. Curtiss stated the beginning of this year.
Mr. Griffin stated does John King know about this.
Mr. Curtiss stated they were doing them over there. In fact, she was doing them yesterday. I’ll check to make sure.
Mr. Griffin stated I wish you would because I spoke to John in the last 48 hours and he lead me to believe that was not the case.
Mr. Major stated that would be terrific because at the last meeting it still wasn’t resolved. Mike could you give us an update on the court. I believe the court using the library runs out in August. In looking at the minutes of the meeting, I see back in November this Board authorized $11,375.00 for the moving of the NYSEG line. What is the status of that and where do we stand with the acceptance of the bond resolution.
Mr. Griffin stated the bond resolution at this point has run its course. The estoppel period is done. Rich has been working with the Dormitory Authority to see what is there. There seems to be some optimism that maybe the $250,000.00 may be restored. As far as the gas line, at this point there are some legal and personnel issues that I will discuss with the Town Board. If they agree to the things that I am going to suggest, I believe we can be in construction by April 1.
Mr. Major stated I would hope it could be on the next agenda so everyone will have an understanding of where we are. Ginny, I would like to ask you about the Employee Handbook, where are we with that.
Mrs. Nacerino stated we started awhile ago revising the handbook, Mike, myself, Trisha and I believe Sue Brown were on the committee. To be perfectly honest we haven’t met in recent months, but we will continue to move forward with that.
Mr. Major stated in looking at some of the minutes back in April of 2007 that is when $6,000.00 was set aside for the consultant to do that handbook. Evidently, the discussions with recreation as it relates to vacations and other things, one would hope maybe we could get that handbook up and running soon. It’s been over two years. Maybe some of these things wouldn’t be surfacing and you wouldn’t be running into these problems.
Mrs. Nacerino stated you are absolutely right. I agree.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
There being no further business, Mr. O’Connor made a motion to go into Executive Session at 10:30 p.m.
Seconded by Mr. Capasso. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mr. O’Connor made a motion to close Executive Session at 12:00 a.m.
Seconded by Mrs. Nacerino. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mr. Griffin called the meeting back to order at 12:00 a.m.
Mr. Griffin made a motion to approve the Public Sector HR Consults LLC Professional Services Agreement for Executive Coaching for the Town of Patterson for the amount of $1,000.00.
Seconded by Mr. O’Connor. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Mr. Griffin stated I further move that we authorize the Supervisor to sign and execute said contract.
Seconded by Mr. O’Connor. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mr. O’Connor made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 12:05 a.m.
Seconded by Mr. Burns. All In Favor: Aye. Carried.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________________
ANTOINETTE KOPECK, TOWN CLERK