Minutes of September 11, 2002

TOWN OF DRYDEN

TOWN BOARD MEETING
September 11, 2002

Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayanis, Cl Charles Hatfield, Cl Stephen Stelick, Jr., Cl Deborah Grantham, Cl Christopher Michaels

Other Elected Officials: Bambi L. Hollenbeck, Town Clerk

Jack Bush, Highway Superintendent

Other Town Staff: Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney

Henry Slater, Zoning Officer

David Putnam (TG Millers), Town Engineer

Supv Varvayanis opened the meeting at 7:00 pm and led board members and guests in the pledge of allegiance.

CITIZENS PRIVILEGE

Robin Seeley said that the citizens in the road widening lawsuit had won a temporary injunction against the Town in June and the citizens were pleased to have been granted the injunction and the Highway Superintendent had stated at the June 12 meeting that he was happy with the injunction and saw it as a victory. As of this morning they have a settlement offer from J Bush on behalf of the Town and apparently the offer is to make the temporary a permanent injunction and that is acceptable to all the plaintiffs that she has been able to contact so far. In addition, they would like the Town Board to authorize the Town Supervisor to sign the settlement. She suggested that since the citizens and the Highway Superintendent both saw the injunction as a positive step forward that perhaps the Town Board could borrow language from that agreement and use it to start setting up a policy that would apply to the whole town since both sides seem to view it positively.

R Seeley asked the Highway Superintendent what work still needed to be done on Hurd Road and Jack Bush said they had shoulders to put down and the banks needed to hydroseeded. Where the pavement is higher than the existing shoulders gravel will be placed to bring the shoulder level with the pavement. R Seeley asked what the standard width for the shoulders was and J Bush responded four to five feet, but in portions of the road that will not be possible. No more vegetation will be removed.

Zorika Henderson asked about the status of the quarry matter. Atty Perkins said he received three more responses from residents today containing information he had requested about the quarry (bringing the total to six). He is not prepared to discuss them because he hasn’t had time to review them, but it could be discussed at the October 2 Board meeting.

RESOLUTION #186 – APPROVE ABSTRACT #109

Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:

RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves Abstract #109, as audited, vouchers #668 through 729, totaling $3370,111.29.

2nd Cl Hatfield

Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes

Cl Stelick Yes

Supv Varvayanis Yes

Cl Grantham Yes

COUNTY BRIEFING

George Totman said that the County is currently looking at 21-22% increase in taxes. They are currently having meetings and County Departments are pleading their case to not have programs cut. He said it is a frustrating thing to work with, and he is not going to vote for a 20% increase and there are five or six others who will not. They are trying to pick out some programs that Tompkins County has that other counties don’t have and take at look at them and see if they are cost effective. There are some people who don’t agree with this. He said it is likely we will end up with a large increase because he doesn’t the think the number against it will prevail. He noted that Tompkins County is still half of what Cortland County pays per thousand of assessed value. He estimates that any increase in Tompkins County will be less than 20% over the current rate.

G Totman noted that there is a proposal to cut the Sheriff’s budget (eliminating two office staff and two deputies) but there is no proposal to cut human services programs. He feels that public safety is one of the top things on people’s minds in the county. There is no cut in the library budget and he believes the City should contribute to the support of the library. The human rights division in the County costs a quarter million dollars per year and Tompkins County is the only County upstate that has one. He thinks that some other programs should be cut rather taking deputies off the roads. The Alternatives to Incarceration program cost 1.2 million dollars last year and it is proposed to continue the program.

COUNCIL PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR

None.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

J Bush presented the Board with a copy of the Highway Inventory and Department of Public Works Inventory, together with a list of the equipment he would like to purchase. He plans to sell two ten-wheel trucks and replace only one; purchase a single axle dump truck (to replace an existing one) and put snow plow equipment on it so that it can be used year round; and purchase a pickup truck and backhoe (on rotation schedule).

He noted that after four years of trying to change things in the Highway Department, slimming the workforce, developing a plan for equipment replacement, working with a Cornell intern and coming up with a five year road plan and having a goal, have made it possible to submit a budget request for 2003 that is $355,000 less than the 2002 budget.

COUNTY BRIEFING (continued)

Mike Lane said they are beginning to get feedback on the new assessment process. When the revaluation was done in 2000, the plan was for that to be the last ten year revaluation because things get so far behind in the ten year period and through the new computerized system they have been able to track market changes more quickly and target areas when there seems to be a substantial change in the market. This is something the State is recommending. There have been some unhappy people, particularly in the Fall Creek area, that feel their area was unfairly targeted and there was an increase in values in that area. The County would like feedback from municipalities regarding this.

With respect to the budget, they are looking at some very heavy cuts, and he is unsure whether there will be enough votes on the board to sustain any of them because it is early in the process. They are starting the committee reviews of budgets.

Supv Varvayanis said he has heard complaints on the reassessments and doesn’t think anyone objects to it happening yearly, but because it was done in 2000 and some people he has talked to had an 80% increase (in Cayuga Heights), there is some difficulty in understanding how they could have been that far off in only two years. M Lane said that the values in some areas really have gone up that much. M Walbridge asked if the County would recognized decreases in the market in the same way they recognize increases, and M Lane said that they should, whether the change in value is up or down.

Ken Thompson distributed a map and information and explained what the County is doing with the Caswell Road Landfill site. He explained the leachate collection system that is currently used and how that system will be improved with the enhancements that are planned. Major elements of the construction project are:

1) Replacing and relocating the current leachate collection system (LCS), the LCS will be moved to coincide with waste limit. A portion of the current system will be retrofitted with 6” solid pipe to convey leachate to the tanks. This line, since it is solid, will also double for additional leachate storage if tanks become full.

2) Areas of the cap where settlement has occurred, due to waste consolidation, will be filled. Fill materials will be place don approximately 8 acres of the existing landfill cap.

3) Lined swales will be incorporated into the cap to facilitate removal of surface water.

4) Landfill entrance road entrance gate and area around tanks will be upgraded and improved.

5) A perimeter fence for security will be installed around the landfill footprint.

They expect the project to be completed in the first week in October.

The average cost per year in the past has been $143,000 for trucking the leachate from the site. They expect that will decrease dramatically, enabling them to pay the debt service and cover the annual operating cost for the facility.

The next phase of the project involves perhaps doing something with the Village of Freeville and running a line to their sewer facility to treat the leachate.

ATTORNEY

Nothing further.

TOWN CLERK

B Hollenbeck reminded the board that they had received drafts of local laws regarding attendance requirements for the Planning Board, Conservation Advisory Committee and Recreation Commission, and one increasing the number of members for the Recreation Commission which should be reviewed, introduced, and public hearings scheduled for.

RESOLUTION #187 – APPROVE MINUTES

Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:

RESOLVED, that the minutes of the April 3, 2002, as amended, and April 10, 2002, are hereby approved.

2nd Cl Stelick

Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes

Cl Stelick Yes

Supv Varvayanis Yes

Cl Michaels Yes

Cl Grantham Yes

ENGINEERING

D Putnam said he met with the DEC this morning regarding Virgil Creek Stabilization project. They have figured out how to put some temporary riprap at the base of the bank to get through the winter and go on to the complete project next year. The permits necessary from

DEC and the Army Corps are SEQR exempt. He will meet with Supv Varvayanis to complete the paperwork tomorrow.

ZONING OFFICER

ZO Slater stated that Gordon Deibler has regretfully resigned from the Planning Board due to the illness of a family member and will have to be replaced.

Board members have the zoning officer’s monthly report.

ZO Slater said that there is a copy of the most recent version of the draft Master Plan in the Town Clerk’s Office for public review. Cl Grantham would like to get an electronic version from George Frantz so that it can be distributed that way if requested.

NEW BUSINESS

The Board scheduled budget workshops for October 7, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. and if necessary, on October 21, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. at the Town Hall. Cl Stelick and Cl Michaels would like to receive the tentative budget electronically.

John Lampman updated the Town Board with respect to the Red Mill Road bridge. The Planning Board discussed it at their last meeting, and Pete Messmer told J Lampman that they had voted in favor of a two-lane option for the bridge replacement. He explained that the bridge was built in 1887 by the Groton Bridge Company and is now in pretty bad shape, having received numerous flaggings by the State inspectors. It is inspected every year because of its condition and the flaggings are warnings that different elements of the bridge need attention. In 1999 the County submitted an application to the State for State and Federal funding to replace the bridge or rehabilitate the bridge. The funding was granted and the project budget established at the time was around $930,000. A consultant was hired and two public meetings were held to gather information from the neighborhood. The need for a wider bridge was established at these meetings. Alternatives were presented at those meeting: three relocation scenarios, replacing the bridge in its existing location, and keeping the bridge and building another bridge right next to it. Other options considered were keeping the existing trusses on the sides of the bridge for aesthetics and to save the trusses and rebuild the bridge at another location for pedestrian use.

The alternatives were submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Albany and what they have said is that changing the bridge (making it two lanes) created an adverse effect on the structure. J Lampman was told by SHPO that anything done that changes the character of the bridge would be an adverse effect, and what the County needs to do is mitigate adverse effects to the point where they are acceptable. They had originally hoped that the bridge would be done by now, but delays in funding and delays in the review process have now caused delays in the availability of the funding and now the funding for construction has been moved to the 2004-05 Federal fiscal year. Because of the delay, the cost estimates will have to be reworked. An option still viable would be the replacement on the existing location with the addition of the trusses on the sides. He said that one point the Town Board discussed this issue and the consensus seemed to be that the town would support the public’s opinion as expressed at the public meetings of a two lane bridge in the same location, and wanted to see if that was still the board’s position.

Supv Varvayanis asked if SHPO determines that adequate mitigation has not been accomplished would the state and federal funding then not be available. J Lampman said he wasn’t sure, not having been through the process previously, but he didn’t think so, and he is not sure how long a process it would be to get them to sign off on the project.

Cl Grantham asked if SHPO had indicated which options they would consider adequate for historic preservation. J Lampman responded that the only thing they have said is that they don’t see that the width of the current bridge should not be maintained, and they have not really addressed location. He then explained which elements of the bridge had been flagged for repair and what was done to repair them.

J Lampman suggested that if the community is supportive of widening the bridge, that SHPO might change its position, although SHPO has cited the example in the Town of Ithaca where they did not widen a one-lane bridge on Forest Home Drive.

Robertson stated that she had talked with Russ Beck (owner of dairy farm in the area) who indicated he is more concerned with the weight restriction on the bridge than the width, and would be happy with the existing width if the weight restriction was lifted. Supv Varvayanis said that we should find out what SHPO would do, because R Beck would rather have something that he could use sooner rather than fighting SHPO for five years to end up with exactly what we would like. M Lane pointed out that SHPO is not the only hold-up, the funding is not available now.

It would cost $180,000 to relocate the existing bridge to a similar location, for foot traffic only. The estimate in 2000 to build a new two-lane bridge was $930,000, including money for right-of-way acquisition, etc.

The County has requested a meeting with SHPO to discuss this matter, and SHPO has not yet responded. Supv Varvayanis asked that the County find out what SHPO is proposing and then a course of action can be discussed. M Lane said that there is reluctance on the County Public Works Committee to build a one-lane bridge and M Robertson said there were some who would. Supv Varvayanis asked that the County find out what SHPO wants.

ZO Slater stated that Susan Boutros will be ready for a public hearing on October 2, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. to modify her special permit.

Supv Varvayanis said that DOT representatives seem to think the site in back of the Town Hall is workable, but the Village has some questions. Cl Hatfield suggested that someone contact Empire Livestock to see if they are willing to sell a portion of their property. ZO Slater said that when the site was visited by the County, State and Village representatives the DOT did not object to the location and the County kept reminding Mayor Taylor that their water is dependent on the project being on Ellis Drive, but they did say they would study it. Mike Hattery said he would support the DOT locating on East Main Street, but it would require a use variance or zoning change. Atty Perkins said that if the County is consistent in the way they apply the Monroe County case, they would not be subject to the zoning ordinance.

M Robertson asked the Board what its preference was for the DOT location. Supv Varvayanis said he thought most board members preferred the site by the Town Highway barn, but he would go with whatever the DOT likes and thinks there won’t be a problem for the High School if they were on Ellis Drive. Cl Michaels said he was leaning heavily toward the site on East Main Street because it would be concentrating similar uses in one place. ZO Slater said he had been told that the people on East Main Street and the Elementary School were opposed to it being there and someone with the Village had said they had envisioned the area as being the last residential development area in the Village. The owner of the property on Ellis Drive has not yet received an offer to purchase. Supv Varvayanis said that if the DOT were to go on East Main Street a new town hall building there also would help serve to buffer the residences from the DOT facility. The Village Public Works committee will be meeting tomorrow morning to discuss the matter DOT relocation. Cl Grantham asked ZO Slater to relate that the Town would be happy to settle on the East Main Street site. Cl Michaels asked how long it would take to the zoning changed and Atty Perkins said it could be only a matter of 15 to 20 days; that changing it is not the hard part, deciding to change it is. Supv Varvayanis said that is certainly shorter than establishing a water district. He is agreeable to whatever works for the DOT and speed is of the essence.

ZO Slater stated that anyone wanting to tour the TC3 project should be at the Village water works gate at the end of Lee Road. Cl Hatfield asked if the college intended to build a road from the housing site to the college. Mike Lane said that the current plan does not include a road, only a walking path, but that their long range plan is to build a road connecting the two when a recreation/athletic facility is constructed. Cl Hatfield said he had heard from residents of Livermore Road who are concerned about the amount of traffic on their road.

On motion of Cl Grantham, seconded by Cl Michaels and unanimously carried, the board adjourned to executive session at 9:10 p.m. to discuss current litigation. No action was taken and the board returned to regular session at 9:16 p.m.

The Board spoke at length with Martha Robertson about the County budget. She stated that all the departments are looking at staff cuts (40 positions total). Funding for the library is to remain the same as last year. The numbers for the jail are down and the County is hoping to be able to maintain that and not have to build a new jail. She believes the Alternatives to Incarceration program is partially responsible for that. There will still need to be some renovation of the jail on the civil side. The board urged M Robertson to look at programs closely and be sure they are programs that indeed serve all residents of the County and that the numbers presented for those programs are “real” numbers.

Cl Michaels stated that cutting the Human Rights program might be feasible considering the service is replicated at the federal and state levels. M Robertson said they have discovered that the County has not been reimbursed properly for some of the cases they have handled and they are looking into that. When asked why the County had the service in the first place when people could go elsewhere, M Robertson replied that if it was not here, people would have to go elsewhere and there are huge backloads.

Cl Michaels said that instead of hamstringing all programs with across the board staff cuts, the County should instead ask first whether they have effective programs and evaluate every single program. M Robertson said they are doing that. Cl Michaels and Cl Stelick pointed out that a lot of services that the County pays for, Dryden finds volunteers for. Cl Michaels said there is an advantage to having highly motivated volunteer staff over ineffectual paid staff.

Cl Grantham said the County needs to determine how many people are served in a program, where in the County is the service rendered, and whether it truly is a county-wide service. There is an accountability issue and the County needs to hold the programs accountable. For example, if a program is supposed to target “at risk” children, how do they do that and how do they justify it to the County Board.

M Robertson asked the Board if they felt the Flood Hazard Mitigation Program was worth continuing. The Board told her that the available money forces the approach of fixing small problems which then changes the hydrologics of the stream making other problems upstream or downstream and they should not continue the program, but perhaps put that money toward the aquifer study.

Cl Michaels said that when he thinks about local government, he thinks about roads, police and basic safety issues and that the some of the social programs, such as a dental hygienist to visit some public schools should not take precedent over something such as a basic water issue or the police or roads. He does not understand how the county legislature prioritizes the budget.

The Board urged M Robertson to return to the budget process and really investigate the programs. Cl Grantham said the County needs to look at the numbers of people served and make those figures available to the public. Cl Michaels stated a large amount of the budgets for social programs goes into administration and Cl Stelick noted it was the same in the recreation partnership programs. M Robertson stated that in some programs those administration fees actually save money, such as a program where individuals work with families to keep the children from being placed in foster care, which is very expensive. Cl Stelick said that in that case the dollar savings needs to be identified, and Supv Varvayanis added that they also need to prove that quality care is being provided. Cl Grantham said there needs to be long term studies done on the success of these programs.

Cl Michaels said it is not clear to him that the County looks at its primary objectives before it looks at other programs and he thinks the County often tries to duplicate efforts of what is done by not-for-profits, private interests and State and Federal government, and the Human Rights Division is a primary example of that. The County needs to look at how much money is spent on programs and how many people are actually served by the program and whether the program is effective. M Robertson assured board members that they really are grilling department heads to justify their budget requests, and at some point the County Board just has to trust what they are being told.

M Robertson said that she hoped her Dryden taxes as well as the Board is suggesting the County account for their expenses. Cl Michaels pointed out that the Highway Superintendent is going to lower his budget (about half the Town’s total budget) by $335,000, had lowered taxes for several years, and Supv Varvayanis said you could see that the Town is working on improvement.

M Robertson will come back to the board with a report on Alternatives to Incarceration and more information on assessment. She stated there are opportunities for the Town Board to address the County Board and urged them to do so. Cl Grantham said she would like to hear from M Robertson on the programs that she is reviewing about what types of data they are receiving to justify budget and budget increases, such as numbers served, cost per client, estimates of current and future savings.

On motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Bambi L. Hollenbeck

Town Clerk