Town Board - Regular Meeting

and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all before I dive into the meeting I just want to um today there's a new face at the table um but not new to the town Rick Whan is here on behalf of Whan farther Thomas Crouch um who normally is here representing us um is away so Rick is fing in today and tomorrow. So, I just wanted to make sure everybody knew who he was. Um Shelby, do you have correspondence? No. Just correspondence with public hearings. Yes. Y Okay.

All right. Um the first thing that we have is a proclamation. Um I guess I will read it. Month of the military child proclamation. Whereas the town of Shelter Island is a close-knit community that values service, sacrifice, and support for one another. And whereas military children through of though often unseen serve alongside their families by demonstrating strength, resilience, and adaptability through frequent moves, school transitions, and long periods of separation from loved ones. And whereas these young individuals are an important part of our extended community, and their experiences and contributions enrich the fabric of our town. And whereas it is important that we as a community take time to recognize and uplift military children whose sacrifices are made quietly but meaningfully in support of our nation's armed forces. And whereas the month of the military child provides an opportunity for Shelter Island residents to come together in appreciation, recognizing the unique challenges these children face while celebrating their strengths and achievements. And whereas the American Legion Auxiliary Mitchell unit 281 in partnership with the Shelter Island Schools National Honor Society is working on a service project aimed at easing the burden on military children, improving their mental health, and supporting their educational and developmental needs. Now therefore, be it known that the town of Shel Island proudly recognizes and honors military children and reaffirms its commitment to fostering a supportive and inclusive community for all youth. And be it further resolved that the town board of the town of Shelter Island hereby declares April 2026 as the month of the military child and encourages all residents to participate in Purple Update on Thursday, April 30th, 2026 by wearing purple as a visible sign of support and appreciation for military children both within our community and across the nation. And I want to just call up Sharon Gibs um who is um spearheading this on behalf of the ladies auxiliary. Sharon, I don't think you'd like to just take a minute to talk about purple update for everybody. I would say step

back a little bit further so you can be on camera. My auxiliary hat on just Thank you. I can tell you. Okay,

I'd like to thank the town board for um making this proclamation. My name is Sharon Gibbs and I am representing the American Regional Auxiliary, our parent here on Children's Round 281. I'm the chairperson of our uh newly rejuvenized um children and youth committee and um we are celebrating month of the military child. I think kind of that the state that we're in in our country and things going on. This is a great time to start this initiative. We hope that's going to become an annual event. Um and we have been selling um online though that has closed now a t-shirt. We met our goal shirts. Um and we raised uh at the last count was the end was um $870 and um we will also be having on our purple update which is going to be for children by April 30th. And it's purple because everyone keeps asking me that. Um, it's actually all the colors of the military branch uniform, army green, marine red, and the blues from the Navy, the Air Force, Space Force, and Coast Guard that are put together make purple to show a unifying and support and support of military initiatives and again for the children. And we are now encouraging everyone in the community to wear purple. Wear a scarf, a pin, a hair tie, anything that day would be great just to show that you know you're thinking about those children. The um we will culminate with a little bake sale for uh at the school. Um everything will be a dollar so that the kids can also help kids themselves. Um and we will be taking all those funds and everything will be going um the committee will be working on charities through the

auxiliary, the legion, other milchair organizations and we hope to be able to get to about three different um organizations to help both physical, educational and overall wellness of children. And so again, we appreciate you guys supporting this initiative and appreciate everybody here who supported that and again encourage you to do that on both. Thank you. Thank you.

We will now move on to um before I move to resolutions. Um, is there anyone in the audience who has a question about any of the resolutions that were not subject to public hearing? Stephen

Stephen Jacobs, two uh brief comments about two of the resolutions. First, the resolution with respect to the ADU tax exemption. Uh, I wanted to commend the board for substantially revising what had initially been proposed, the initial versions, but it allowed somebody with a mega mansion and mega income to get a tax break. It also didn't have any uh requirements with respect to the uh rent for the unit. Um, the town board has responded and they deserve commendation for that. So, kudos. Uh the second uh resolution I wanted to briefly comment on is the one with uh authorizing the supervisor to enter into a letter of engagement um for a housing study. Um like the u uh agreement with an architect that was approved three weeks ago, the public really has no idea what this is about. um the letter of engagement like the uh agreement with the architect weren't posted. RFP wasn't posted. Uh and I think the public deserves a little more background so we can understand what's going on and if their concerns be able to express them. Uh, I might also add that my concerns have been elevated because two or three days after the architect uh resolution was passed, I foiled the town for a copy of what uh supervisor had been authorized to um execute and I still haven't gotten it which raises in my mind if in fact there was an agreement

at least in final form at that point, why hasn't it been made public? And if it if there wasn't an agreement in final form, then what exactly was the town board authorizing the supervisor to do? So, thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Anyone else with questions or comments? Anyone on Zoom? Pam. Yeah. Yeah. So my question is two weeks ago you had talked about Pam if you could state your name for the record first.

Uh Pam Demerest. So my question to the board is a few weeks ago you had mentioned doing an RFP for the comprehensive plan uh consultant, the environmental consultant that you were going to hire. And I was just wondering why it wasn't on it wasn't on the agenda last week. It's not on the agenda for tomorrow's discussion work session and and I was wondering when that might be readressed. This public comment session is section is just for any resolutions that we're about to read. So you can either um at the end when we general public comments or tomorrow with the work session.

Okay. Well then I'll just follow up on what Steven said about the Nelson Pope for uh resolution that has no monies attached to that. We have no idea what that that agreement is for the housing needs assessment. and I think that is of concern. Um, so I'd like you to take that into consideration on that resolution. Thanks. Thank you. Um, anyone else? Liz, do you want to start us off? Yeah.

All right. Be it resolved that the town board of the town of Shelter Island hereby directs that a public hearing be set on April 27th, 2026 at 6 p.m. or soon thereafter to hear any and all persons either for or against a local law entitled a local law amending chapter 115 taxation article 8 exemption for an accessory dwelling unit and article 9 tax bill enclosures. Be it enacted by the town board of the town of Shelter Island as follows. This local law is adopted pursuant to the authority granted to the municipal home rule law section 10 general powers of the local governments to adopt and amend local laws. If any section provision or part of this local law shall be a judge invalid or unconstitutional by court of competent jurisdiction and such adjudication shall not affect the validity of local law as a whole or any section provision a part thereof. So is not a judged invalid or unconstitutional. It's local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the secretary of state. Um let's see article okay um article 8 exemption for accessory dwelling unit section 115-25 exemption granted eligibility requirements limitation limitations pursuant to real property tax law 42 421-P a qualifying accessory dwelling unit defined as an accessory apartment under section 133 3-1B of the town code of the town of Shelter Island. Constructed, reconstructed, altered, or improved after the effective date of this local law that provides independent living facilities for one or more persons on a year- round basis shall be exempt from an increase in assessed value attributable to the qualifying accessory dwelling unit limited to a $200,000 increase as determined in the

initial year of the exemption for a period of 5 years. where the equalization rate equals or exceeds 95%. The increased in excess value shall equal the market value. The exemption shall be reduced over an additional 5-year period as follows. One, in the subsequent 3 years of the additional period, the exemption shall decrease each year by 25% of the exemption base. Two, in the final two years of the additional period, exemption shall decrease by a further 10% during each of the final two years. Three, the exemption shall expire at the end of the additional 5-year period. B, in order to be eligible for this exemption, a qualifying accessory dwelling unit must have a value of reconstruction, alteration, improvement, or new construction cost of at least $3,000 must not include any ordinary maintenance or repair, and must meet each of the following additional requirements. one must be registered as an accessory apartment with the building department in accordance with the procedure in town code 133-17C. Two, must be the owner's primary residence. Three, the yearly rent charge to the tenant of the qualifying ADU must be at or below the New York HUD fair market rent for NASA SUFFK. Four, the owner must qualify for the STAR exemption in order to be eligible for this exemption. Article 9 tactical enclosures 26 oh 11526 definition as used in this article the following terms shall have the meaning indicated enclosures a notice circulate pamphlet card handill or other enclosure concerning the matter of public concern of service section 155-27 authorization for tax bill enclosures for tax receivers shelter island shall include the tax build of the town of Shelter Island. Certain enclosure so long as A, the enclosure has been authorized by resolution of the town

board. B, the enclosure includes a notation that is included by order of the town of Shelter Island. C, the enclosure does not reference an elected official by name, but only the title of office. And D, the enclosure does not include any matter that is of political nature, is propaganda, or any type of advertising. So move. Second. All in favor? I I

motion carried. Where is Overbook Real Property LLC carob Emily Alt Schultz Miller 16 Princen Avenue SE County Tax Map number 700538 has petitioned the town of Shelter Island for a permit to remove and dispose of 128'6 in of existing face bulkhead and a 12T north return and to construct a new 128T 6 in face bulkhead and 12T north return incline in place for a total of 140t 6 in and provide a 10- foot wide vegetated non-turf buffer with a 4 foot wide walking path as per plans prepared by KS Castello Marine Contracting Corporation dated 11626 and approved by the New York State DEEC on 2326. Now therefore, be it resolved that pursuant to section 53 of the town of the code of the town of Shelter Island, a public hearing will be held on Monday, April 27th, 2026 at 6 PM or as soon thereafter prevailing time in the Shelter Island Town Hall, 38 North Berry Road, Shelter Island, New York, 11 1964 for all interested persons to be heard in favor of or in opposition to the proposed application. So moved. Second. All in favor?

I. Motion carries. Be it resolved that the town board of the town of Chel Island hereby directs that a public hearing be held on April 27th, 2026 at 6 p.m. or as soon thereafter to hear any and all persons either for or against a local law entitled a local law amending chapter 36 beaches and parks be enacted by the town board of the town of Shelter Island as follows. This local law is adopted pursuant to the authority granted by municipal home rule law section 10 general powers of local governments to adopt and amend local laws. If any section, provision or part of this local law shall be judged invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction and such educa ad education not saying that right. Um shall not affect the validity of the local law as a whole or any section provision or part thereof not so a judge invalid or unconstitutional. This local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the secretary of state. I'm just going to read the parts that we are amending. So, under parking stickers, a sticker issued by the office of the town clerk too, and we're adding those who are not residents as defined in this article. It continues on. And then the period of time is being changed from Friday preceding the observance of Memorial Day through Labor Day to May 15th to September 15th of any year. We are also adding a definition for resident all doiliaries owners of real property and lees of real property situated in the town of shelter island. So moved

second

discussion. Um we are making this change because as we are looking to um change the beach sticker fees the um the code section and what we have historically been doing which is May 15th to September 15th is when beach stickers are um enforced. We um wanted to have that align with the town code. So that's why we're doing this is just to make sure that they match up. We also realized that um there was an error in the parking stickers definition. And it was saying residents had to have these stick parking stickers that were paid for um either on a weekly, monthly, or seasonal basis when in fact it is non-residents who have to pay for these stickers, not residents.

So that's that's why we're doing this. Um all in favor?

I motion carried. Whereas the town board of town of Shelter Island previously adopted resolution number 2026-130 granting a license to venture out uh Cara Matt Strober to conduct business on town property for the 2026 summer season. And whereas the town board now wishes to amend said resolution to include additional conditions regarding access to the water. And whereas the town board has reviewed the application and determined that the granting of the license as amended is in the best interest of the town of Shelter Island. Now therefore, be it resolved that resolution number 2026-130 is hereby amended to include an additional condition as set forth herein. And be it further resolved that venture out is hereweight granted a license to operate the business as outlined in the application subject to the following conditions. A submission of the $500 application fee. B. The lency provides to the town clerk proof of workers compensation coverage or proof of exemption from workers compensation. C. The business shall be contained in a 13.3x 30 foot rectangle representing an area of 400 square ft and a 30foot marking will be established by the shelter island highway department along the railing to clarify uh to clearly assist in designating the area. D. The location of the lency's business is subject to review and adjustment by the Shelter Island Police Department andor Shelter Island Highway Department. E. The proposed uh tent shall not be larger than 10 ft

by 10 ft. F. The proposed storage locker shall be located within the 13.3 ftx 30t rectangle, 400 square ft. G. The business operation shall not exceed the period between May 1st and November 30th, 2026. H. The hours of operation cannot exceed 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. I there shall be no parking spot guaranteed in connection with this application. J. The lency shall not come off any ex uh cone off any empty parking spot at any time. K. The licency is responsible for daily disposal of the trash created in connection with the operation of the business. Uh l the disposal of trash shall be in different receptacles than those provided by the town at the beaches. M the license the license is subject to the execution of a commercial use license with the town and the lency is permitted a 4ft wide access path runway extending from the designated 13.3 ftx 30 ft business area to the water for the purpose of launching and retrieving equipment. Set access path shall be maintained in a safe and unobstructed condition at all times. Shall not be used for the storage of equipment or materials and shall not interfere with public use of the area. And be it further resolved that the town of Shelter Island reserves the right to revoke this permit at its discretion. And be it further resolved that the town supervisor worker designignate is hereby authorized to sign the commercial use

license between the town of Shelter Island and venture out. So move second discussion. Um it did um I don't know if it got it um circulated to everyone um over the weekend about um extending that 4 foot wide access path to either five or six feet wide. just, you know, Matt was saying that with his arms span and just carrying um boards back and forth um that four five, you know, six feet would be the safest, but 5t would be acceptable. So, I just wanted to see if anyone wanted to modify. Did you send a email over the weekend?

Yes, I just realized it um to Shelby and myself. I just realized Yeah. Yeah. Is he concerned that like with with the boards he's worried that like slipping like I'm just trying to understand what he suddenly pulls up a towel in a beach chair right at the forefoot. Yeah. Verbally granted last year an arm band wide and his arm band is 6 feet. It was loosely verbally agreed to on a 5 foot wide runway but it was never added in writing and I just double checked and it wasn't there. Um, so it doesn't leave him much room to transport anything to the water with no issues. Um,

yeah, he figured five feet. Yeah, I guess he's requesting 5T, not six feet. 5T just for. All right. So, so amending that. Yes. I was going to say with the amendment to end reading 5T. Um, all in favor? I I motion carries.

Whereas the term of Richard Holman as a member of the emergency medical services advisory board expired on December 31st, 2025 and whereas Mr. Holman has expressed willingness to continue to serve in said capacity. Now therefore be resolved that Richard Holman is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the Emergency Medical Service Advisory Board for a term to expire on December 31, 2028. So moved. Second. All in favor? Motion carried.

Whereas the term of Father Peter Dantes is a member of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Board expired on December 31st, 2025. and whether Father Dantis has expressed willingness to continue to serve in said capacity. Now therefore, be it resolved that Father Peter DSantis is is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Board for a term to expire on December 31st uh 2028. So moved. Second. All in favor?

Motion carried of Dr. Charles Einfeld as a member of the emergency medical services advisory board expired on December 31st 2025 and when Dr. Iinfeld has expressed willingness to continue to serve in said capacity now therefore be resolved that Dr. Charles Einfeld is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the emergency medical services v advisory board for a term to expire on December 31st 2027. So moved. Second. All in favor? I.

Motion carried. Whereas the term of Jeannie Richardson as a member of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Board expired on December 31st, 2025. And whereas Miss Richardson has expressed willingness to continue to serve in said capacity, now therefore be it resolved, the Genie Richardson is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the Emergency Medical Service Advisory Board for a term to expire on December 31st, 2027. So moved. Second. All in favor?

I motion carries. Whereas the term of Cody Miller as a member of the dear and tick committee expired on December 31, 2025 and whereas Miss Miller has expressed willingness to continue to serve in said capacity. Now therefore be it resolved that Cody Miller is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the dear and tick committee for a term to expire on June 24, 2028. So moved. Second. All in favor? I I

motion carried. Whereas a term of Elizabeth Galley as a member of the ferry study group expired on January 29, 2026 and whereas Miss Galley has expressed willingness to continue to serve in set capacity. Now therefore be resolved that Elizabeth Galley is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the Ferry Study Group for a term to expire on January 29, 2029. So moved. Second. All in favor? I. Motion carried.

Whereas the term of John Nem as a member of the Ferry study group expired on January 29th, 2026 and whereas Mr. Nem has expressed a willingness to continue to serve in said capacity. Now therefore, be it resolved that John Nem is hereby reappointed to serve as a member of the Ferry Study Group for a term to expire on January 29th, 2029. So moved. Second. All in favor? I. Motion carried. Whereas Jennifer Maxon is hereby appointed to serve as a volunteer facilitator for the senior center reading program for the year of 2026 retroactive to March 27th, 2026. So move second. All in favor?

I. Motion carried. Whereas a vacancy exists on the planning board and whereas the town board has advertised for and interviewed applicants. Now therefore be it resolved that Scott Matthews is hereby appointed to serve as a member of the planning board for a term to expire on December 31st, 2032. So moved. Second. discussion. Nope. Um, I think Scott Matthews is a very good candidate. Um, but he's also an architect by background and we already have two architects on the planning board. So, I would prefer to see more diversity in the appointments. So, for that reason alone, I will probably vote no on this.

Further discussion. Um, Scott Matthews technically is a lighting architect, not a marble building architect, very specific discipline and also is a more of an architectural consultant. So it it is a different skill set and um can be very beneficial to the discussion on the panel. So for those reasons and the fact that it adds a lot of diversity to the planning board, I will probably vote yes for this. Any other discussion?

Yeah, I think um I have similar feelings as me and I would love to see uh I think he's a very qualified candidate. I would love to see someone involved with a different trade or with coming to it with a a different uh point of view or skill set. still something that's important. If there's no further discussion, I'll do a roll call vote. Um, myself, yes. Meg, no. Ben, yes. Albert, yes. Liz, no. Motion carries.

Yes. Resolved that the town board hereby appoints Donna Cass, a senior shopping assistance program coordinator. And be it further resolved that Donna Cass shall receive a stipen in the amount of $2,600 for the performance of these duties and that said stipen shall be retroactive to January 1, 2026. So move. Second. All in favor? I. Motion carried. Resolve that the town supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement between the town of Shelter Island and Nelson Pope and Vorhees LLC for the housing needs assessment for the town of Shelter Island. So moved

second discussion. Is the payment for this assessment um needs assessment is that coming out of the community housing fund? It is partially coming out. I I can ask this one. So, it's going to partially come out of the uh housing fund, but we actually applied for a grant last cycle that will cover a little over half of it. So, this will be coming out of both the housing fund and there was a grant applied for especially for this project. When is the grant supposed to be available? It is available now and we like kind of need to spend it. So, it was from the last it's already been awarded.

Community development block grant. It's a block grant that we applied for last cycle that was available for this planning purpose. Okay. Yeah. So, there was um I believe it was for $35,000 that we got the block grant. Um but in reviewing the other uh in reviewing the proposals that we got, uh Bran, the current chair, decided that he wanted to add on uh more public engagement sessions. So, it brought the price up a little bit. And so, that'll be coming from the community housing fund. Okay. All right. Thank you. Hit for discussion. All in favor? I. Motion carried. It's false. This is

Yeah, I got uh resolved that the supervisor is hereby authorizes and directed to execute the letter of engagement between the town of Shelter Island and PFK O' Conor Davies LLP concerning the nature and scope of the audit services being provided to the town for the fiscal years ending December 31st, 2025 and 2026 as per the agreement. So moved. Second discussion. Yeah. Um we we got the audited for 2024 from them. The did we receive the kind of the followup the internal control letter

and assessment of the towns. It should have been in your folder with the financial statements. It was I was just like I literally just picked it up. Okay. All right. Probably in there waiting for you. Yeah. There's three things in there in my folder. Shelby, thank you. audited financial statements. There's the report to um those in charge of governance and then there's also the yellowbook report which is a consolidated um federal uh report for any you know any grants that we get. Okay. Thank you. Um all in favor I motion carried. That's me right.

Resolve of the following 2026 budget modification is hereby approved. $2,5448 increase to the DA2680 insurance recovery revenue account to be funded by the reimbursement check from Nimmer for claim TSHI 20226-001-001 and a $2,548 increase to the DA513046 highway machine repairs expense account. So moved. Second. All in favor? I I motion carried.

Resolved that the town board hereby establishes the following scheduled fees for parking permits pursuant to section 126-8.3D of the town code of the town of Shelter Island. A. Resident permit shall be issued at no charge for any motor vehicle or motorcycle that is registered to an address within the town of Shelter Island or registered or leased to an owner of real property located within the town of Shelter Island. B. Non-resident permits shall be subject to the following parking permit fees per vehicle. One, daily permit fee, $35 per day. Two, weekly permit, $90, valid for seven consecutive days. Three, monthly permit, $170, valid for 31 consecutive days. Four, seasonal permit, $325, valid from May 15th to September 15th. So moved.

Second. All in favor? Opposed? Oh, opposed. resolved that the supervisor hereby authorized and directed to expend the sum of 3,900 from the IT computer maintenance general register account A1680.476 476 to CAI technologies 11 Pleasant Street, Littleton, New Hampshire 03561 for the web GIS support for June 1st, 2026 to May 31, 2027. So moved. Second.

All in favor? I. Motion carried. Resolve that the supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to issue a refund in the amount of $75 to Kathleen Lynch 14 Country Club Drive from the 2026 A20508 boat storage revenue code for the overpayment of a boat storage application. So moved. Second. All in favor? I motion carries.

All that the following 2026 budget transfers are hereby approved. $2,000 from A677748 senior center drivers for a new bus to A67747 senior center part-time clerk to collect additional assistance needed for seniors in programming. 2600 from A6778.101 101 senior shopping assistance driver number one to A6778103 senior shopping assistance program coordinator number two to reflect growth in the program and greater need for coordinating and $1,100 from A1220.102 supervisor administrative assistance to A1220.107 107 supervisor overtime to cover the training of a new of the new account clerk. So moved.

Second. All in favor? I. Motion carried. Resolve the 2026 general claims number 422 through 554 in the amount of 137,988.67 67 and 2026 highway claims number 53 through61 in the amount of $6,86.70 are hereby approved for payment as audited and the supervisor andor any town board member is hereby authorized and directed to sign the approval for payment of this so move second all in favor I motion carried

all right we will adjourn the regular part of the meeting and move into public hearings and the first and Thomas fault that on the 6th day of April 2026 at the Shelter Island Town Hall at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter prevailing time on the application of Kyle and Thomas Walsh for permission to install a moing at a location designated as latitude 41.09915 09915 degrees north and longitude 72.34029° west.

Um does anyone want to do the report for WMAC? Are there the or the the uh the vote was 60 to approve? The only question was the question who owned the house and who was the mooring. I don't know if there was any clarity clarity on that. Dolby. Um I believe it was it's Thomas Walsh is the father and then Kyle's his son. So Thomas is the mooring holder. But then they're both they are both listed on the boat registration. On the boat registration. Yeah. It was a 60 to approve, you know.

Um we'll open it up to the public. There being no public, we will close that for here. Um, just a point of reference for the public is we do have four moing applications on here. And generally, if the water management advisory committee does not have any objections or modifications, um, we do proforma for after closing all of the public hearings the, um, the resolutions to pass those, especially this time of year when um, people are looking to get their moorings in before the season starts. Um, so we will have if there's no objections or concerns on the town board's part, we will have um resolutions to approve these four moing applications at the end of the meeting. So, I just want to get that out there so everyone understood. Um, it's unusual that we will have a public hearing um and then later in the meeting approve um something that was had a public hearing. Generally, it only happens for moing applications that have no um concerns and also if there's something that has a really strict time pressure. Um and again, that would be for a permit application, not like wetlands, not for anything that requires discussion. I just I saw something out there that um there was going to that we were going to pass I think somebody said we're going to pass the irrigation code tonight. That would not happen because we know that there's a lot of people here for the irrigation code. So, just wanted to toss that out there. All right. Next, uh so that uh we're closing that a motion to close that um public hearing. Second.

All in favor? Hi. Hi. Um, the next one is Steven Rosilla Malia at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter prevailing time on the application of Steven Rosilia for permission to relocate a moing designated as C 3636 to a location designated as latitude 41.06615° north and longitude 72.36470° west. WAC report. The the mooring is located in West Neck Bay and it was a 50 vote to approve. Anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this one?

60. Okay. There were some, but there were some too that were five. Yeah. Yeah. Some guys recuse themselves from hearing. Um, I'll make a motion to close that public hearing. All in favor? I The next one is Adam Ronzone

at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter prevailing time on the application of Adam Ronzone for permission to relocate a moing designated as W3559 to a location designated as latitude 41.05670 05670 degrees north and longitude 72.35787 degrees west WAC report overhead I just blanked out my screen sorry I have it as well yeah he was taking over a mooring that was forfeited by Mr. Conway in in West. Um and the vote was that vote was 50 to approve.

One extension. I'll open that up to the public. Public comment. Um I'll make a motion to close that. All in favor? Last of the morning applications. Rudolph at 6:00 p.m. or assumed thereafter prevailing time on the application of Steve and Cynthia Rudolph for permission to install a moing at a location designated as latitude 41.08861° north and longitude 72.32301° west report.

Uh this application was a request to take over someone else's uh morning location. um was asked to confirm that the previous permittee relinquished that location and um pending that confirmation it was unanimously approved 6 and as of March 10th 2026 town clerk confirmed that the moing has not yet been relinquished. Has that changed? Has it has been okay in writing? 6 approve. Open that up to the public.

Seeing no public comment, I'll make a motion to close that public hearing. Second. All in favor? I caract whatever what you said. Yeah.

Okay. The next is public hearing on the Ingred and Robert Fagan dock. At 6 o'clock p.m. announced prevailing time on the application of Ingrid and Robert Fagan one tarquettle road to construct a staircase leading up to a 4ft x 20 foot fixed catwalk leading to a 4ft x 50t ramp down to a 4tx 26 ft kayak launch and install two ladders revised plan submitted by Costello Marine last revised December 3rd 2025 and stamped New York State DEEC approved on January 16th 2026 sex WAC report.

It was a two to two vote, split vote on that one abstension, two to two vote. And then, um, Teresa Mason, I thought I saw you online. Yeah.

Good evening. Uh, Terresa Mason on behalf of the town. I reviewed the revised project plans and a uh reduced length of the dock is obviously a benefit to the wetlands and the coastal waters of the creek. Um the applicant is still proposing to use CCA um stringers and pilings. Um and we recommend against doing so because those chemicals can leech into the environment into the water column and um in settle into the sediments and cause um adverse impacts to benthic life um marine marine benthic life including polyets and um buring animals such as scallops and things of that nature. Um this is particularly important because this is a very slow water uh moving water body. there's very limited tidal flushing in this particular um water body. So, it is recommended against the CCA use um using some alternatives. There's a lot of alternatives now for the construction of docks without CCA. Um and then secondly, we were also recommending that the steps at the end of the dock be retractable so that they're not um uh you know out in the water uh during storm events that they can become storm debris. And then also uh it would prevent um sedimentation for or sediments from resuspending when the water currents come through there. Uh which could also adversely impact marine life um by causing uh turbidity uh reduced light penetration. Uh that all impacts the uh marine organisms. of particular in uh concern are like subaquatic vegetation like eel grass, wijon grass, things of that nature which are uh critical for this uh marine ecosystem. Uh finally, uh we are just wanting clarification as to whether or not the applicant is proposing to use utilities, electric,

water, uh along the dock. And if so, we do recommend against lighting at the end of the dock because that can um impact circadian rhythms for marine animals and other wildlife. Great. Thank you, Teresa. Do we have anyone here on behalf of the applicant who wishes to speak? Yes. Hi everyone. Could you just state your name for the record?

Sure. It's in my letter. So, my name is Robert Fagan. I am the applicant. I'm a year round resident on Dickerson Creek. I live on this waterway. And I look out my window every day and I see four docks. I see the town bulkhead across the creek which I might add is made entirely of the CCA material that she's recommending against. Um there is a police boat that is mored fishing boats are regularly tied up and there's often a random unidentified boat stored there for weeks at a time. Recently there has been a sailboat sitting there for the past month. Dickerson Creek is an active working. I am simply asking for the same access to it that my neighbors already enjoy. Let me start with the law. The morning code explicitly allows repairarian property owners to have a dock in Dickerson Creek. My application was filed under the old doc code and must be evaluated under those rules. Not do code. That is not a technicality. It is fundamental fairness. The town hired an environmental analyst to use our speakers just now and they reviewed the project. The DEC reviewed and both concluded that the dock at my property is appropriate and consistent with protecting the environment. The DEC issued a permit. I have cleared every legal and environmental hurdle this process requires. My proposed dock reaches 1.9 ft of water deeper than each of the three comparable docks this board approved in recent years. The dock in West Hack Bay approved in 23 reaches.3 ft of water. The dock in Manantic Creek approved in 23 reaches 1.4 ft of water and the dock in Chase Creek approved in 2020 reaches

4 ft. On the objective merits, my application is stronger than all three. Now I want to speak plainly about the opposition. The arguments against this application are not grounded in law, environmental science or town policy. They are personal opinions, subjective judgments about how I should use my own water property offered by people who do not live on Dickerson Creek. They are not my neighbors. They do not look at this water every morning. They have no greater stake in this creek than any other resident of Shelter Island and considerably less than I do as someone who actually lives there. The opposition suggests that because I can launch a kayak from the shore, I do not need a dock. By that logic, no one needs a dock. That argument has never been the standard this town applies, and it should not be applied selectively to my property. All four docks stand visible from my home. The opposition argues that this dock would obstruct public uses of the creek. Kaying, fishing, shell fishing, shore walking. Yet, they offer no evidence that a dock on my property would meaningfully interfere with any of these activities. These are assertions, not facts. Meanwhile, the town bulkhead directly across from me accommodates a police vessel, fishing boats, and stored watercraft on a daily basis. If this creek can absorb all of that activity, it can absorb one private residential dot. This board's responsibility is to apply the law equally and consistently to all applicants. I meet the legal standard. I have environmental approval. I have precedent on my side. I live here and asking for nothing more than what this town has already granted to others. I respectfully ask the board to approve

the application. Thank you. Thank you. Questions from the town board before I open it up to the public.

I have one question. Um I see in here um I don't see a request for utilities on the dock. That's correct, right? No water, no electricity, no lighting. All right. Thank you. I just want to clarify that.

One of the questions that I had is that um as you go around the island for docks um so that people can go around between the high water mark and the um low watermark um access to get across docks and I don't see um a mechanism for doing that. So I was just curious whether or not you would consider something like that. Hi, I'm Ingred Fagan. I'm not sure. There's one other p, you know, there's the Dickerson Creek, the now the the land that has been purchased for the town, and then there's my neighbor and then the docks. Then we have a dock on the other side. So, I I I think they could still go under it because it's high enough that they creep under.

Um, as I walk all around the island and other areas like Shorewood and that's what we have to do. you have to, you know, go under. But because it's raised so that we could have the grasses underneath, I think you can definitely sneak under. Yeah. That's what we do on the back on the other side, you know. Also, not in a heavily traffked area. It's pretty squishy there. True. In seven years of living there, I have never seen anybody walk by other than my neighbors. I know during co it became an issue because people were killing time by walking around the island and seeing

Yeah. They didn't come by us because there's there's a deep water. You can't go around. They get to the bulkhead and then it's very very deep. So there's no way to walk all the way around. If there's no other questions from the board, I'll open it up to the public. Anyone in the physical audience? Anyone on Zoom? I'll say something. Okay. You just identify yourself for the record.

Yep. Uh Bert Waif, 9 North Ferry Road. Um I'm in favor of this doc. uh and particularly because the town has faced the issue in Daniel Lord Road of getting a a letter from the DEEC that you can't disturb um the beach grass and if you believe that the Fagens have repairarian rights that they actually own to the uh title mark um then By denying this, you are leaving them in a position where they can't access the water at all because they would potentially hurt the grass. So, um I think this is um a very modest addition to the waterfront there and um considering the the constraints that would put upon it, I think it's fine. as far as you know the environmental report of of uh CCA, you know, to be specific to this creek um would be um ownorous, I think, in in um uh and set a precedent that I can't see how you would allow CCA anywhere else in town waters if you denied uh this applicant. And you know, furthermore, if you wanted to go further with environmental controls or etc., you might outlaw um water jetting pilings in and only and demand that they go in with uh with a hammer. So, um I think it's um a little bit of a stretch to uh require uh a

nonCCA or it could be even actually ACQ. I don't know exactly what they um are going to use, but you know, the green lumber that's treated um is um you know, used all around the island. So, unless you're going to make an islandwide policy here, I can't see how you can single them out. Anyway, that's you know, as I said, I'm in favor of it. Thank you.

Thank you. Thanks, B. Anyone else? Um the only last question I have is um just the question about retractable um steps and ladders whether or not the applicant would consider that.

Um I don't know. I I'm not saying I wouldn't consider it. Um, I I just feel like, you know, originally I wanted a a motorized boat dock and I compromised to a non-motorized dock and then I wanted a 70 a 90 ft and then the board said, "Why don't you go back to the DAC and try for a 70 ft?" So then I went for a 70 ft. And I feel like I'm trying to understand what you want and to give me what you want so that we can also not stop in the muck every single up to here every time we go into our waters and disturb the waters. Um I I I don't know taking it up and down and up and down. I know that what she was saying in her written report is that if the storm comes that we could take it out. Maybe there's a way of just putting a a little ladder in that has screws on it so that we could We also don't want to lose our ladder during a storm that maybe it's a removable and we could just take, you know, take it out whenever cuz we saw what happened during the storms. We don't want our things to float away either. Um, but that's not a deal. If that's if that's the only thing you need, we'll make it happen. I I am not opposed to that.

Thank you. Other question, Teresa? A lot of the retractable stairs that I've seen on bulkheads and docks, they're like a hand crank and there it's, you know, they're easy to lift in and out of the water. Um, and it's just a hand crank. Uh so that's something that could easily be done to to be able to retract the stairs both during storm, you know, when they're not in use for actual uh kayaking and uh during storm events. I'm happy to use a crankable. Whatever this is, whatever it is, I'll use it. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions?

Make a motion to close this public hearing. Second that. All in favor? One is closed. Um, next we will open up the public hearing for dismiss. I want to say this right. Go ahead. Just keep working on it. Okay. Say say it for us. Cameller. Camel. Okay. All right.

Okay. At 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter prevailing time on the application of Christopher Chris Christopher Camilar and Danielle Ferrer 13 Dickerson Drive to amend their existing wetlands permit to allow for the demolition of the existing walls to be rebuilt in the same place as per plans submitted by Jeffrey Butler dated November 17, 2025. Um, is there we do have a report from Teresa Mason.

Good evening again, Theresa Mason for the record. Uh generally speaking, when we see construction for wetlands permits and the house gets demoed, we do recommend retreat from the wetlands. Um I know that this is a case where they had had originally a wetlands permit from last year to build a second story addition to top the existing first floor and then a small addition uh within the vegetated buffer and regulated area and then the the rest of the construction outside of the regulated area. However, the house got demolished without the required authorization. Stop work order was issued. Uh now is an opportunity to explore whether or not we can get the property into compliance or into more compliance setbacks. Um and by doing so, you can increase the energy efficiency of the dwelling because you'd be putting it on a a a fully engineered basement versus the current slab. Uh you could also um get a conforming vegetative buffer and maximize the setbacks to the wetlands. And by reconfiguring and relocating the house further landward, you'd also get further horizontal separation between the septic system or the IIA system rather and the wetlands. All those actions will uh provide better protection to those wetlands. In the event that you're uh willing to con allow them to construct the uh dwelling on the existing foundation, I had outlined a host of recommendations on my uh advisory report from January, including expanding the vegetative buffer, getting a revised reveation plan. Um, so those are are the recommendations, but it really should we should really explore whether or not it's appropriate to have the applicant retreat from the wetlands, particularly in light of um increased storm frequency, climate change, increased flood in inundation um associated with

the changing climate uh and um I know that there is some concerns now that the uh New York State is going to increase the required base flight elevation requirements uh for FEMA. So, those are all things that need to be considered as whether or not it's appropriate to request that the property owner explore alternatives where they uh increase the wetland setbacks or try and get into a more conforming location. Thank you. We also have a CAC report somewhere. Um I have it.

Oh, you do? Okay. Go over. Um essentially they just added to their original report. Um they said that the CAC reviewed the revised submission for the existing wetlands application and note that the applicant has addressed all of their previous comments and their previous comments were um that we needed to identify the cast iron cover in the concrete slab and figure out what it was. Um correct an error in the site plan that had the setback listed incorrectly. And then um it says do not use the existing well for irrigation. So those issues had been addressed and um they approved the revised application um with a vote of 4 and they had previously approved the original application with a vote of 7 to zero. So that was the CAC. Thank you. Is there anyone here? There is someone here from the applicant. Would you like to speak on this? Christopher go. Um I think all of you are pretty aware of what's happened here. Um when we're taking down the original uh walls in the demolition, we did by mistake take down two extra walls, actually three extra walls. Um we didn't believe we're going to be able to support the upper building the second floor. Um, so we intended completely to build again on the exact same footprint that we had, the exact same plans, we had just new construction and due to I think rulings that we have here that had to come back to wetlands again um which has now taken 7 months and almost $100,000 of extra money out of my pocket um to have to rent with a brand new child and not have a house to live in. Um, and uh there's there certainly there's no way that I can look and justify moving the house back with uh foundation that's already existing. Sethic that's in place right now, the pool that's

there. Um the cost would be outrageous. I probably have to look for a different place to live. So, we're trying to do what got approved. We we're not building a huge house. It's a simple house for me and my wife and my brand new child and my three other daughters to come and visit and live here full time. Um, most of you know my face, so I really want to start construction. Please let me know if there's anything else we can do. Are there questions from the board?

The planning board just No, that's okay. Um, they pretty much just said that their original letter stands. They didn't have anything to add to it. Um, and that that was a vote approving the application. think if there's no questions from I can't I can't read the measurements on this sheet. I don't know what these Is there somebody that can tell me the measurements? Which page are you looking at?

Just the dimensions from the water from the wetlands from water to the front of the big one. Yeah. one the little one. Yeah, just the same one. Yeah.

So, you see how the for the distance from the If you could just come up so you can definitely get picked up on the mic. The distance from the from the water is the original distance that the house existing had. Nothing's being changed. We're actually going to be removing um the patio that was out there and then building a buffer of natural grasses and stuff. So So the the deck is removed. That's not going to be rebuilt. Deck will be removed from the front. It's going to be natural soil. The deck is removed now. But I see gone now. It won't be It won't be rebuilt. Be rebuilt. Okay.

I measured I took a measurement. I went out there and took a measurement. I went up six feet from the southern wide corner of the house and measured straight out to the top of the bank. I mean, the measurement calls 48 ft roughly here, but I measured 38 ft to the edge of the top of the bank. So, you're really you're set back. Well, we had it measured by uh yen consultants and the they came out and st the whole

I'm not questioning. Yeah, their their measurements are better than mine. I'm saying the top of the bank, not the wetlands demarcation, which is down at the foot of the bank. And the bank is 5 ft, 6 ft there at least. Kind of a sheer drop. Mhm.

Um, so you're close. I mean, I I had 38 ft, whatever to the top of the bank, whatever it is. And we do the new code that's being proposed, the amendments to the wetlands code is asking people to move back 100 ft. But the current code that we operate under is asking nothing within 75 ft. And really you're you're just a slab in that portion. You know, you have plenty of property. You can move the house back. I know you wouldn't want to

finally financially and due to the if you look at the septic plans and the well plans and the existing pool everything would have to get moved. It becomes almost undoable. There's room. I mean it it's doable. It's it's it's a bother. I understand that. But I'm looking at I think the different looked at pretty big complications to move in a house back. But in in any case, the the request is we were approved for this previously, five six months ago. I know that I'm I'm well aware of the situation. I'm well aware of the original

application and yeah, and we're and we're just trying to to to move on. We're not looking to do anything incorrect. We're looking to protect the environment. I'm a fisherman. I love the water. Um well, I also went to Cornell for agriculture. I know a hell a lot about it and I know about what what happens to the soil. We will protect that. We're looking to have the exact same footprint we had. It was approved again just we're building out off the back a little bit.

But you tore it down. There's really no house there now. You tore everything down. We basically a little bit of some there's some posts on the water side of the house. Basically, you took everything down cuz the building department would have made us tear that down when we tried to put the second floor on and we would have had to build again. We did it out of order and without permission, but it would have had to be built for down. The anchors were incorrect. Uh walls are made of 2x4s instead of 2x six's and they're set at 14 in instead of 16 in. So that was a surprise. That was surp you. We had you can't remove any sheetrock or any inside siding or inside the house to see the structure.

We had not really did it. So, we're trying to build something that's sturdy that's not going to fall down. We couldn't have built on top of that. What I'm saying is on your existing house, if you scanned an inside wall to look at it and see if is it 2x4, 2x6, you said you didn't do that. No, that would have been a prudent thing to do, I think. Right. I I don't know. I mean, that being said, Albert, we did also approve this with that stipulation. So, it it's, you know, blame goes both ways here.

It always count on you, Nick. That's what I'm here for. any effect from the board before I open it up to the public. Okay. Um, anyone from the fiscal audience that wishes to speak on this application or this public hearing? Anyone on Zoom? We don't have any other comments or questions. Um, make a motion to close this public hearing. Second. All in favor?

I. Okay. Thank you. Next, we have a local law amending chapter 82 of the irrigation. want me to go grab it or just get this helpful.

Yes. At 6:00 p.m. or soon thereafter prevailing time on the proposed local law entitled a local law amending chapter 82 irrigation regulations. The full text of this local law is available in the town clerk's office and online. Um, someone who sat on the subcommittee, do you want to just talk a little bit about what we were trying to accomplish with this irrigation? Oh, yeah. We're on irrigation. Yeah. No, that's me.

Yes. And just so people, there are some um seats actually seats being vacated. So, anyone standing out in the hall or standing in the back, if you wish to find a seat, there's there's seats now. Um all right. So for this this is not intended to be like the comprehensive revision of the irrigation code. What we were looking at was just strictly the permitting requirements in the current irrigation code because there were um issues that the building department was coming up against. So, one of the things that kept happening is we had this line in here for temporary irrigation allowed for 150 days and um it was causing problems because there was no real clarity on when you needed to get a permit for it. Is it 150 consecutive days, but if you put it in in December, you don't really need it until June. I mean, there were all these complications with it. So in looking at that it started kind of the thought process of how can we clarify this and sort of help to make the process both enforcable and easily understood. Um there were also issues with the application for the grandfathered irrigation where it required this like long page three having you note any changes to the system but technically there shouldn't be any changes to the system unless you've gotten a permit for that. So there was just a whole bunch of things that weren't making sense. Um so we were trying to just clarify that in this proposed revision. We know there are other issues in the code, but we weren't looking to tackle those. Mostly just the permitting. Um but there are a few things that I have noticed and I do recognize need to be addressed. Um, one of them is in the

turf irrigation the the drip irrigation requirements in 82-8. There is a very poorly written it's D2 very poorly written um requirement for nearshore drip systems. Um, that sort of sounds like they require assist, but we're not sure if it's or if they're being used for turf irrigation or if it's just because it's thrift um and because it's in the nearshore. So, I feel like that is going to need to get clarified, but we don't have clarifying language in here. So, if someone has any that they propose um definitely be open to that. Otherwise, the what's listed in the code essentially stating that, you know, drip irrigation systems with 1500 emitters require a permit. There is no way for the building department to go out and say, "How many emitters are in your drip irrigation hose?" Most of the time it's buried under mulch. They going to do go and count the holes in the drip. I mean, that's what an emitter is. It's the hole in the drip line. So, it's just not enforceable and it didn't make any sense. So, we're trying to find a way to just clarify it and make it fair for everybody. Um, and I know that it seems like a lot to require it, you know, islandwide. If you're doing drip irrigation, get a permit. Um, some of the thought behind that is that our aquafer is a shared resource. So, if everybody, you know, if you're using it, it's part of a shared resource. Um, and then there's the proposal that maybe it should only be that you need a permanently nearshore overland where saltwater intrusion isn't a concern. um it's not necessarily as much of a concern in the center or at all in the center, but in the nearshore it can be a concern. So, those are some of the things that we're trying to sort out with this. Um but initially the proposal is that it's really around drip irrigation. Um if you're putting in drip irrigation,

you require a permit. The permit lasts for a year. That's kind of the big one. And then the other thing that we added in here is if you are an installer of sprinkler head turf irrigation, you know, fully plumbed into the ground turf irrigation that you need to provide the building department with a copy of your Suffach County restricted plumbers's license. Um because that's a requirement in Suffach County if you're installing turf irrigation. Um, I know the language in this can get confusing because there's like three different types of irrigation systems that are discussed. One is the grandfathered turf irrigation system. So, those are older systems that are well drawn. Um, and those are for, you know, the big green lawns where you have sprinkler heads that pop out and water the lawn. Then there are the newer irrigation systems that are run off of a sistern. So, it's the same turf irrigation with the sprinkler heads, but instead of a well, it's running off a sistern. And then the other thing that we talked about in here is drip irrigation, which is typically running off of your well um and has far less strain on the well and the aquifer because it's such a slow draw that it really has no real impact is what we've learned in our research. Um, but this is what's currently being proposed. Thank you for that overview. We have um three pieces of correspondence I skipped over by accident. Um,

I got William King, Leah Lip. I don't have William came by email today. Um, but you can take a look at the top to see. Um, so you may not have been included. Yes. Yeah. So, I think it was just to the town board.

So, if you could read those into the record, please. Um, it's an email from Bill Kang. Uh, the $50 proposed fee for a drip hose is a bad idea, and I would urge you to decline to implement it. There is little revenue likely to be received. It is one more hassle interrupting our shared goal of a bucolic life on Shelter Island. It creates one more rule that has to be administered and enforced costing taxpayers money. While I am sure it is well-intentioned, I urge you and the town board to vote no. Respectfully yours, Bill King. And we have another email from Leah Lipitch to the town council. I seem to have misplaced the information on the hearing, but my main question is what can possibly be the rationale for the fee for sistns? You pay to have a sistern put in. You pay for the permit. You pay for the water deliveries. You pay for the drip lines to be put in. You pay for the maintenance of all of the above. And all while you are putting water back in the aquifer is a good thing. So why do these people have to pay anything? They should be paid, not the other way around. You have no rationale for charging these people except gouging money. So just raise the taxes taxes if that is all you want. Nothing like being punished for doing a good thing for the environment. And then I gave you all a copy if you wanted to follow along, but it's a letter um from Stella Lagutas from the Heights Property Owners Corporation. And she says, "Deartown board, I am submitting the following comments on behalf of the Shelter Island Heights Property Owners Corporation. We begin with general comments and follow with some specific comments and drafting considerations." General comments. It is unclear who participated on the irrigation working group as the heights was asked to step down early in the process. Reference has been made to collecting feedback from landscapers and irrigation companies, but has neck water been solicited as the draft regulations do not reference any public water district restrictions which

may conflict with this draft. Are true clay tennis courts require irrigation? We recommend that tennis courts be referenced in the same manner that turf and non-turf irrigation are referenced. Drafting considerations. Chapter 82-2A. New irrigation systems are referenced and we recommend that the ongoing use of those systems are also highlighted. Chapter 82-5. C3. Should the reference to soaker hose be deleted? C3. Can a separate requirement of the irrigation system be a leak detection device/water shut off? Example, meat flow or mowing. C5, we recommend it be made clearer that all receipts for Phillips in the prior year be submitted or a summary on the water carriers letterhead. D1, we recommend that leak detection device/water shut off be made part of the required design. D4 make it clear that the billing department/suffach county department of health services are the parties responsible for signing off on the black backflow prevention device for public water and that the backflow prevention device must be inspected annually by a certified party if on public water. E2 we recommend it be made clear that all re receipts for fillups in the prior year be submitted or a summary on the water carriers waterhead. Chapter 82-7 B2 add that sistern should not be filled with water from public water systems B1 do you want to delete the number of emitters chapter 82-9 how will this be enforced chapter 82-10E how will this be enforced thank you for considering these comments should you need additional information please contact me thank you Shelby um I have um people who signed in to speak so I was going to go down this list first but then I also s started to see some hands getting raised So, um, I'll add those to the list as we go along. So, first on the list, I had Walter Richards.

Hello, Walter Richards. The, uh, subtle changes to the irrigation code proposed tonight uh, with the ongoing changes reported by the board in the future will not only affect business and my employees, but it will also adversely affect homeowners who will be subject to the new requirements. To further exacerbate these changes, it has been communicated in a work session I attended that the town intends to stop the roughly 100 grandfathered irrigation uh turf irrigation systems as well and more legislation to come in the near future. I was a member of the water advisory committee 20 years ago and then moved on to the irrigation committee when turf irrigation was to be disallowed in the town. I supported this effort 100%. Because I believe that allowing more systems to be added could have the potential to threaten our water supply. I prop I propose preserving the 120 existing systems based on science so as not to adversely affect the industry and the homeowners whose property values would be impacted. The irrigation committee worked diligently to accomplish this goal, drafting our current law that works and makes sense. During the process, a firm was retained by the town to do a study on the impact of irrigation on Shelter Island to develop a science-based approach for the new code. The study revealed the following. 17.6 million gallons of fresh water a day are discharged into our bays and harbors. At the time of the report, the Heist property owners were permitted to discharge 19 million gallons per year into the bay from the wastewater treatment plant. Irrigation Islandwide uses less than 1% of the total aquifer recharge. Here are some quotes from the study. No correlation was observed between elevated chloride levels and the

location of permitted irrigation systems on the island. quote, "Based on the available information, there is no evidence that the operation of permitted irrigation systems in accordance with the current legislation in the current irrigation regulations has adversely impacted groundwater resources on Shelter Island." Quote, "With the total consumptive use at 1.2% of the total recharge, there are sufficient water resources available to support water supply demands of Shelter Island. With more than 98% of the annual recharge discharging to surface water bodies, significant landward movement of the saline groundwater is considered unlikely. Finally, the USGS monthly monitoring well levels are recorded and tracked. The science to support leaving irrigation alone reveals the lowest wellle reading ever was in 1983. And the highest was in 2010, which caused flooding in the center area and prompted the town to pump fresh water off the island to try to lower the water table. This high reading in 2010 and subsequent pumping was at a time when there was the most amount of Turk irrigation systems used on the island. All of this information revealed that irrigation was having little to no impact on the aquifer behind it. The way I can best understand the changes proposed to the code are as follows. Number one, remove the emitters a nearshore system can have. Therefore, allowing 1500 emitters instead of the original 250 emitter cap. I do not support this. Currently, you are permitted to have 1500 emitters in the center and 250 emitters in the nearshore. This has worked and is

completely reasonable and protects our aquifer. It encourages native plantings and drought tolerant landscapes to help preserve our aquifer and the character of the island. Number two, it requires a person who's working on pre-existing turf irrigation system or system to be a restricted plumber, a professional. I support this addition to which protects our water supply. The third change require a permit for all drip systems islandwide. I do not support this. I do not see how hundreds of new permits can be processed in a timely fashion which I do not think is fair to the building department. It will burden us as homeowners as well. Number four, I'm going to read this change. This is the one that Meg cited before because it's very confusing to me. Uh it says in the nearshore and peninsula overlay zone, a drift system shall require an irrigation permit and shall meet the following standards. Shall be a cliff with a master valve time clock and moisture sensor. And number two shall be fed only from a system as described for turf irrigation systems except that if an owner can establish that the drip system uses less water and the grandfathered irrigation system it is replacing the owner may have turn a permit to convert that drip system without a sister. I do not support this. This means that any system installed in the nearshore will require a system. Since there is only a definition in the code for grandfathered turf irrigation, it is unclear what a grandfathered irrigation system is. It is also unclear what standards make it less consumptive than before. This section of the code was designed to help homeowners with larger drip systems get them converted to grandfathered permit or be forced to install the system. Although I agree it

was not well written at the time, the intent was for the transition period during 2013. This period is over and I know of no drip systems with permits eligible for a grandfather clause. Therefore, this change tells me that everyone in the nearshore is going to need a sister the way it's written. The last one, number five, remove the 150day temporary irrigation requirement. I support this change. Since the establishment of plants can take up to three growing seasons, I would suggest we require a temporary permit and after 3 years bring it into compliance with the existing code. Thank you for allowing me to present tonight. I know that the irrigation subcommittee and everyone on shelter wants to feel good about our water supply. It is a frequent campaign platform and often in the local news media. My message here tonight is that we should feel good at where we stand with our water quantity on Shelurn Island. We have a working code. We've stopped new turf irrigation. We have paid for science-based studies. The USGS has tested our well levels for years with no real concern. The town has adopted a fertilizer law to help keep the APA for clean side by side with Suffach County requirements. The New York State regulates pesticides on the island. Over one-third of the aquar aquifer is preserved sitting underneath forever open space land. The water advisory committee does a wonderful job and continues to diligently oversee the water table level with a warning system in place should the cons should any concern arise. Moving forward, please add dry wells to promote aquaer recharge where we could stand to gain 1 billion gallons instead of running of it running off into our bays and harbors. Please continue to purchase open space. Please

let the ever growing green movement in our industry change our practices because we all want to make the island better. Finally, I'm happy to assist in this process if requested and please do not act on this amendment without further review. Thank you. Before you leave the podium, I just have one question for you. Um, what was the study that you were referring to? Um, Rashir and Grant. Okay. Thank you. And it was done in 2014 and it's called the hydraologic data review and elevations for shelter island New York. It's searchable on the town website. I was going to say just so everybody knows. Thank you. Walter, what you just read from um I got the Mailchimp.

Can you send I got your Mailchimp Chimp uh posting, but can you send that as well? Absolutely. Yeah, no problem. Thank you. Thank you. Um next on the list, I have Peter I think it's Levenson. I'm not sure of the handwriting. Sorry. Yeah, that handwriting. Um good evening. Thank you. Uh, so I say your name for the record,

Peter Levenson. I live at 23 Winthre Road. It's a nearshore property. Um, and I was uh in front of the board in uh 2015 uh I believe when the when the original where the last irrigation law was considered and passed. And I am one of theund I thought it was 109 grandfathered irrigation systems. uh on the island and I continue um to permit it and I thought it would be helpful for me to speak on the modifications to the sprinkler uh law tonight even though it doesn't specifically uh make changes as I understand it to the protocol that I have. Um so uh in in referring to not not being repetitive for uh from what Walter said, I also looked very carefully in 2015 at the report that the town had commissioned and it's an extraordinarily interesting report. I mean just from a a science perspective and something that I'd never think how you would you would understand what the water conditions are in relation to Shelter Island. And what it said was that there are 48 inches uh and historically an average of 48 in over the 40 years prior to the report which was written at 14. Um and interestingly I looked up since since 14 to 25 48 in still is about what we get. In fact in in recent years we've gotten more and this is precipitation. So it includes both rainwater and snow. Um, and noting that the snow is actually more valuable precipitation because it percolates slower. Uh, what's interesting about the report is that 48 in over the land mass

of Shelter Island and I I don't know Walter's numbers. I I believe my recollection of that report was that it's 10 billion gallons of water. um half of which goes into the aquifer, half of which goes other places, mostly streams, bays, and creeks. Um so, so with that, um it's pretty important to digest the the science of of our irrigation and our position and our precious resource. Um based on that report I recall it was 5% I think it's 22 250 million gallons that we used it's all broken down with how many showers and laundry and all kinds of stuff and then they they addressed the 109 irrigation I think that they thought it would use 30,000 or 40,000 gallons per year um which was another 10 million gallons but the bottom line was it's still a fraction of the of the five billion gallons that go into the aquafer. Um, interestingly though, the report did not address what other irrigation was happening. Um, so clearly there is there's additional gallons that are being used. uh I would say predominantly from the golf course and and from many of the other sources, but if you doubled the amount that they estimated, it's still less than 10% of the of the of the billions of gallons that they estimated would go in the aquifer. Um so so with that um I thought that it would be it would be interesting to uh or important to uh just convey what my experience was over the 10 years with my personal nearshore irrigation system. I don't have a big lawn that I use for use it for. So most of the and and some of the lawn I don't irrigate uh just a very small portion of it I

changed most of it to drip irrigation. And I installed a computer internetbased clock so that I get notifications if it's quarter of an inch of rain coming predicted or or uh or had already fallen. Um it tells the the irrigation system to stop. I file my annual permit every year. I I pay the required fees and I submit the chloride tests every year. And I think the chloride test is a which you have from from me and the other 109 120 irrigation system is a great tool that you should look at and say do we have a problem. The fact of the matter is my chloride tests have averaged um over the last 5 years at 50 parts per million. Um I think I had one year when we just started that was and I don't know it was n it was 99 but the average for the last five years is 50 average over the 10 years I've been or nine years that I've been uh uh testing it for the town the town's been got has the records it's uh uh 58 parts per million and and uh I test it personally over the year just to see what the trends are and the bottom line is that it is It is it is if anything better today than it was in 2015. So there shouldn't be a law that's looking for a problem. I mean we have to understand the problem. Um, and the problems I think are parts of the island that really are difficult and that's Silver Beach for sure and the rams and they're difficult because of the geograph the geological um condition of that in those areas in some places according to the report the the freshwater lens is 10 to 20 ft above the surface. There is no law that you're going to pass that's going to help those

areas. It's it has to do with the nature of of their geology. Um so um so then a word about vegetation and runoff and the the piece that that's missed about about irrigation and vegetated areas is that we have according to report half the half the the uh the water that we get runs off and is something that Walter talked to about vegetation helps um irrigated vegetation helps the root system of plants help the water get to the aquifer. That's a really important piece of this. Um restricting restricting irrigation the point where landscaping dies back and soils compact or actually reduce the total recharge of the aquifer. Um and what else do I have to say? I have one more page. Um yeah, so so I the uh I think the mandate of the board is is to try to mitigate the amount of runoff we have and and what's odd to me is is a lot of the nearshore regulations. I mean, one in particular that I was reading this afternoon was that was that the the rainwater system the rainwater systems in nearshore in the nearshore overlay are limited to 10% of the of the per per uh permeable land and the inbound ones are 15. That makes no sense. I mean, the whole point is to reduce the runoff. So why do you have something that's contrary to to logic? Um so I do appreciate all the uh you know the study that you're doing and and the concern

you have for something that's dear and important to all of us but but really my point is to try to use as much science as you can to make these regulations and uh I appreciate your time and your attention to this. Thank you.

Thank you Fred Hyatt. just going to be quick Fred Icon here. Um I too was on the irrigation committee. I think it started in 2011. Anyway, um I support the code as it is. Uh one of the things building department has a lot of trouble with is enforcement. They don't have enough people. Um, I don't know how this is going to make their job any easier. We currently have in 2021, landscapers were added to the contractor's license. Well, um, as far as I know, I mean, there's dozens of contractors here every day. Yeah. So, the building department can't even keep up with that. So, I don't even know how they're going to keep up with this. So I I just urge you to uh think about that and think about all of us who are complying with that law and think about all the people that come here every day and they're adding irrigation without so we don't even know who they are. Um you know how are we going to do this? That's all. Thanks,

Joel Kerry.

Oh, my name is Joel Kerry. I'm here representing Lynch's irrigation. Um, I just want to go on record saying I support Mr. Richards and Mr. Lemonson. And what they spoke about, I think everything they said is correct. Um, I think adding uh the burden of another drip system. every single irrigation system we work on has drip, which means you're going to double the amount of permits that you're going to need to go through. Um, and I think that is drip is the most efficient use of water. So, I think that would be extra burden to the people who are on Shelter Island. Um, and as mentioned in the reports, I think that the systems aren't the way they are. Thank you, Christian Clark.

How's it going? It's Christian Clark. Um, yeah, I'm just kind of going to second what these guys said. Um, I think adding more regulation to it is going to make it more difficult for the town. Um, as somebody who plants trees and knows establishment, I definitely think we need to make edits um about how long the system is good for. And I think solved would be the deer shore overlay needs a permit and the rest of the island does not. um just so you guys are aware of what's going on. Um and then the rest in the center doesn't really seem to have a problem. So that's all I got.

Thank you. Thanks. Vicky Cordera. Um Walter pretty much covered what I was going to bring up, which is the confusing language. I'm just state your name for the record.

Vicky Cardiero on the drip irrigation um with nearshore overlay. It's crossed out. It used to be 250. So now it the language is that everybody gets 1,500. Um there are certain areas we know are really bad. Uh but the the tables discussed shore uh certain areas of Shorewood, but um it's local beach etc. Um I think that uh the extending it to at least three growing seasons is is a very good idea. Um, with regards to the nearshore overlay, if it's not in the sensitive water table area, um, the old of 250 emitters, which is 200 linear feet, you're saying how you can't count it, but it's a the hole, the emitter is every 12 in. So, you, you know, you have the drip irrigation, those clay colored pipes, it's, you know, 250 linear feet of that pipe. Um, and it's 0.9 gallons per hour, but you can just kind of round it off to a gallon an hour. But um in the nearshore where it's not sensitive, I mean when I plant probably 75% natives and in these historic droughts and and heat that we've had last summer we got a bit of a break but the previous two summers was unbearable and even native plants that are established and they are getting no water. Water is live with those temperatures and absolutely no water. They will die if it's five, six weeks of no rain, which we've had, you know, consistently going into July and August. And if you don't water them just once a week, those plants will die. And that that is pre uh preventing your runoff and all of that. That's why we have these plants, right? So, I think that certain areas that should really be by uh location and that certain nearshore overlay should be entitled to,500 uh linear feet um of drip irrigation. Um, another thing like I have one employee that goes around when we when

we're getting um rain like we you know you get the predictions there's two three days rain. I have one guy that goes around and shuts off all of our timers every single you know it's a period of rain because I can't the thing that drives me crazy is you're driving around and you see water going on um while it's raining. So we shut it off and we don't turn it on if you get an inch of rain. You don't turn it on for a week. That's plenty of water for you know that period. Um so try to be very mindful the um is this language saying that if you're in the nearshore and you have the 1500 uh emitters only if you had a grandfather this is what's confusing I don't understand that

right so what I would like to do is eliminate 82-8D2 which is that very confusing sentence that drip irrigation shall be fed only from a sister and I like to just delete that line because it doesn't make any sense, right? Okay. Um proving that that is more efficient than the old grandfathered, right? That's impossible. We know and we know it is by its nature more efficient, right? Um so yeah, I would like I was going to say it's because I read it differently, but yeah, it's okay. Yeah, I just wanted clarification on that. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Um I had next um Teresa Mason um our environmental consultant. Did you want to speak on this code? I had gotten an email.

Good afternoon. Um I had met with Meg and I had also met with Reed regarding the code. uh they had asked my opinion on some code amendments and um I do feel that in some cases particularly where there's shallow water table it might be worth it um considering how you can get reduced water usage whether through drip irrigation conversion to drip irrigation or the conversion of of um of stat to sistns uh and then also the question about permitting generally speaking the standards that I've seen used industrywide is 85% survivab ability of plantings for 2 years uh after two-year period. So if you have a permit for a minimum of two years, possibly three, I think that's more in line with industry standards for survivability on on plant materials. Um and then with respect to the question about um preserving those areas where the water water table is shallow and the lens is very shallow, one could argue that you could set aside a small portion of your water quality funding to convert those older systems, those uh systems that are not as efficient to newer systems. You can you can make that argument. you're you're trying to protect these shallow groundwater table areas for the purposes of drinking water for salt water preventing saltwater intrusion. There is that argument to be made and you can say all right we can afford to do two of these a year. This is first come first serve and you have priority areas. These are the three priority areas where we want to get those done first and then you can work your way through that as a potential um way to proceed on on getting to those more efficient systems. But um with respect to the code, the only thing that I would really have to say is probably a 2 to threeyear um permitting for that temporary irrigation because it is generally ir um industry standards for the uh 85% survivability

for 2 years. Great. Thank you. Um Jay Card, you're on mute. How was that? Now we can hear you.

Oh, thank you. Sorry I'm traveling and can't be there in person. Um, I just wanted to really bring up one point. Everybody touched on such great points there, but uh technology has changed quite a bit since we started the irrigation uh ordinance. And when we talk about saltwater intrusion, uh the one thing that's important is the volume and rate in which we pull water to actually pull the saltwater lens up. And that's where we come into trouble. So, a lot of the systems now can be can be um fine-tuned. So, you could pull for a very short amount of time, have a rest period, and then have them run multiple cycles through a course of a day or whatever period you need based on your plant material, which wasn't available until really recently. So, in very sensitive areas, you do have the ability to pull some water without jeopardizing your water source. So, just something to consider uh on on going forward on how we can actually water more effectively and and everybody can protect uh protect because this isn't only just an irrigation issue. It's everybody that's pulling water out of the aquifer for whatever reason they're pulling the water from. And I look look forward to being at the next uh meeting in person. Sorry.

Great. Thank you. I have run out of people on my signup sheet and raised hands. Um, anyone in the physical audience who wishes to speak on this come on up very brief 25 Windsor Road just like to second forcefully Mr. Levenson asked Rich's comments. I think uh the science let the science guide you seems pretty clear and I think Mr. Richard's point about just please don't pull more bureaucracy on all of us is something you will feel very relieved about. Thank you.

Anyone else in the physical audience? Anyone else on Zoom? Pam.

Yeah. May I just ask why there doesn't seem to be anything written in this code about uh Westneck Water not permitting irrigation at all in that district? It seems to just be a missing piece. I I'm not quite I understand. Uh and they're supposed to be eliminating their irrigation wells in that district as well. I don't know if that's happened. I did I did notice I did find a map that that shows irrigation systems that are grandfathered and oldistns that are in and perhaps that's worth looking at and seeing what's the status of those sistns that are existing on these grandfathered irrigation systems because it seems to me that's probably your number one difficulty and I agree that uh you know seems to be like a bit of more uh research needs to be done on the purpose and the intent of this law and how on earth you're going to enforce it. It seems like an impossibility in my opinion, but uh I think that that's all worth looking into a little further. But the West Neck Water, I think it should be mentioned in this legislation. It's it's it's part of their rules and regulations in that district, and as a townowned entity, I think it's important that it's mentioned here. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyone else? I have a question for the public.

Sure. Um, so one of the reasons why this came up is because we get a tremendous amount of complaints from the public about drip irrigation. We get neighbors calling because their neighbor has drip irrigation and they want to know if it's allowed or if it's not allowed. And then the building department ends up having to get in their car, go out, and they're looking at and they're like, "Well, I can't tell if that's 250 emitters or not. It's buried. It's under the mulch. I don't know how far it goes. I don't know what plants it's supposed to be targeting. I don't know how long it's been here. So, one of the reasons for requiring the permitting is because when we get those calls, we'll already have and it's pretty much an administrative permit where you come in with a handdrawn map of where the irrigation is going, what it's for, and so when the neighbors call, we could the building department could say they have a permit for it. We know where it is. you know who to contact if something's going wrong with it. Um, one of the things that can sometimes happen with drip irrigation, these guys can correct me, is that, you know, rodents eat it, it pops, it starts shooting water everywhere, and then a neighbor calls really upset. Um, and so then they call the building department. The building department has to figure out who's the contact for the property, who's the installer, who's managing it. Um, and it actually takes a tremendous amount of plan of building department time to follow up on all of these calls. Um, so part of the thought was that it would actually make it easier for the building department if we had the permitting process where you're like, "Hey, look, I put irrigation in here, here, and here today. These are the maps. These are the properties. You know, it's a three-year permit." Something like that. That way, the building department when they get a call, they can say, "Yes, we have a record of that. It's permitted." Or, "No, it's not. We'll come and check. we'll see what's going on. Um, but that was part of the building department's

perspective. So, um, the idea on eliminating the number of emitters as a specific target for the legislation was because we really just there's no way once it's in the ground to know how many emitters or even how many feet you've installed. So, if you guys have a better suggestion on how to do it, let us know. So, we were trying to simplify the process by having you say, "Hey, we're putting drip in here. Here's our permit request. 3 years from now, we'll send you a letter saying, "Hey, how your planning is doing? You want to renew or are you good? You want to turn it off?" Um, so that was kind of like the objective. Um, and that's why we were trying to take the emitters out because it's just not enforceable. It's it's just chasing your tail. Um, but if anybody has a suggestion on how to fix that, I'd love to hear it. You know, I'm all ears.

Sounds like the issue is that there's leaks coming and neighbors are worried about the wastage of water. Is that right?

Yeah. And I think that because drip irrigation tends to be more visible than some of the other types of irrigation. Typically, when you have the turf irrigation, it's on a lawn behind a hedge and people don't really see it as much. And so, it's one of those things where it's like, I see irrigation. Do they have a permit or is it the right length? And so you get a lot of nervous neighbors especially in areas where there is sensitive aquifers like Silver Beach or Monontlair or you know other places like that. And um so then it just tends to be one of the biggest complaints we get at the building department. And it's one that's very hard to follow up on and enforce and follow through with because the code as it's written. Um you know we don't know if it's 250 emitters or 300 or you know

there is a new technology that allows you to push just come up just so you can up on the microphone and then um next I see J card maybe you're answering this question as well. Uh Joel Kerry again, sorry I irrigation. Um there's a new technology that you can put on the water mainline that you can put a device that if there's a leak on the irrigation system, it's notified and your system the water shut off. Like that would be the easiest thing. Make that a mandatory thing for systems and then you won't have leaks. If you've been notified on your phone or you'll get a notification on your uh irrigation clock that'll tell you there's a leak, we've shut it off, here's where it is, you need to go fix it. I think that's probably the easiest solution.

Thank you. Okay. Were you answering this question or did I miss your hand was still raised?

Yeah. No, no, I was trying to answer it. Uh, he's he's 100% correct on that. And I think most homeowners get an insurance rebate if they install one of those devices. So, that that's a plus. Uh, secondly, drip irrigation is probably 90% efficient over top of people watering with by hand, watering with sprinklers. So, the efficiency of drip is is huge. And we're focused, I believe, on on permits just for the nearshore, which are the most vulnerable areas. So, I think that cuts a lot of the load down on the permitting and and the work of the building department. So, I think if we focus on the nearshore, I think it focuses on the most fragile part of the island that we have right now. That's that's all we got.

And that was Jay Card for the record. Thank you.

Did you raise your hand again? I was just kind of covered it, but I was just going to say that I think it's actually the opposite that rotary heads are much more visible. You hear them, people hear them come on in the middle of the night. You see them when you're driving around. Drip is invisible because as you mentioned, it's also often covered with mulch. So, it's much harder to uh know exactly and regulate all that. But in terms of the technology that Joel just mentioned, um that he just referenced for sistns, but it seems much more important if it's a timer connected to a well because those people are paying for the water in the sistns or have collected 10% or whatever they're allowed. But for people drawing drip from the well, that's where it's really key if there is and we get calls all the time. Um you know, I've got a little geyser here. The the thing popped off or the rodent ate through it or whatever. So we run over and repair it. That's just part of the the nature of that particular um material that product it does happen just you know you try and repair it as quickly as you can but it does seem to have if you had that uh device on your water man when it's from the well and not as much as important as a sister um that's you know our water not the sister water that's fine. Okay. Thank you.

Anyone else?

One more thing on the building department. I would be curious to know or or if it would be good for Walter Richard for the record, uh it would be good for you to know. Um, I don't know how they keep track of complaints if they have a form. But it would be interesting to know exactly, you know, how big the problem of the complaints is and if they're just simply going and asking the landscaper to help measure it out to tell the complainant that they're in compliance, man, they're in compliance. They they have the right amount of emitters or, oh, no, they're not. Here's your sums. So, that that that might make the problem seem a little smaller if we find out how many of these calls we're actually getting. I'll ask them because I'm curious to All right. Anyone else? Anyone on Zoom?

All right. If there's no other public comment, um I would suggest that we close this public hearing. Um, and we I have it on the work session for tomorrow to um talk about a path forward. Okay. And we're going to close because we're assuming we're going to make more changes to the code that will then get renoticed and reheard. Just so everybody's clear. Yes. Exactly. We're not closing the vote. Correct. No. No. So tomorrow we would say what do we want to do to go forward with this? Do we send it back to subcommittee? Do we keep it at the town board level? So Okay. Yeah. Good. Think about Okay. All in favor of closing. I

um the next um public hearing number eight out of 10 is um the increase to the senior property tax exemption resolution. For those of you actually we'll just take a two-minut break to let those who are are leaving to go ahead and leave a little too. I don't mind so much and bring it here for everybody. I was like, "That's not the first time."

He's got my mom, so I just sent it all there. Somebody goes to like Home Depot and buys irrigation and sells them. If I thing all variation like a girl, you know, even if they're not by, you know, by contractor home, I have no problem not regulating social at all. It's just not requiring a permit. You got to keep track of

like about that. Yeah, I know. I have them in my pocket. I also understand why you guys are concerned about it. You know, being on gone. It's really gone. Oh, yeah. This is hiding. There's nothing the sad sad candies left behind. Except nobody loves the generic lollipop. flavors. That color sesame lollipop flavor. I don't know.

I don't know if we'll keep it open on the night. I don't know.

Candy. Candy. energy here. I know I'm good. Thank you, ma'am. He came. I told him. I'm sure he'll be back. He's whatever. Are we going to do the morning after? You want me to come back? You got it.

Said he has nothing else to do. something else.

Can I like in and out? We could get back. I'm sorry.

If we could get our town board members back, we could guess we don't have yet. baskets over there if you need to meet the Grab Benjamin as you pass by him.

Watch tonight. Just right. This is the final night. All right. All right. Yes. Exactly. Okay.

Candy break is over. Bathroom break is over. Okay. So, we're going to open the public hearing on increasing the senior property tax exemption

at 6:00 p.m. or soon thereafter prevailing time on the proposed resolution to increase the senior property tax exemption percentage up to 65% based on a sliding scale pursuant to real property tax law section 467. Um, I'll just start off with a little summary on this. Um so the assessor's um office looked at what the implications would be and they had pulled up a um they had put together a slide that showed and actually maybe I can share this if I can still find it. Of course I had it open. It won't let me open. But basically, we have a senior tax exemption that go allows for 50% up to I think it's like 50,000. Just see if I can get this to restart again.

Yeah, I know. I know. It was open and then it just closed.

Just do what you're supposed to do. There we go. All right, let me Okay, there we go. So, the current um is up to 50,000 um you get a 50% exemption on your um assessed value. The new um legislation that we're looking at is if you if your income limit drops below 40 or up to 47,000, you can get 65% um and 60% of the next thousand, 55% of the next thousand. So, it's just adding a few more layers. In looking at the existing um seniors who qualify for this exemption, a guesstimate was made that all of them if they're 50,000 would be below 47,000. So that would equate to just find my numbers here that an additional $21 million a little bit more would be elig eligible for this additional exemption from the tax. And that would calculate to a tax redistribution, and this is only town taxes, of $42,180, which would get redistributed back to the entire tax base, which um would equate to an average home price on Shelter Island is 1,621,000. And that would cost every that would cost that average house um $10.52 more in tax. um if this gets passed and that would be each each year or you know would go up if as taxes went up and there's currently 80 recipients of this

exemption. So that is um the overview of what the impact would be. 80 um yes 80 people are taking it now. Yes, 80 people are eligible which is up on the screen. Eligible or taking it?

Um they're taking it and um the number that I put out the 21 million um is not doesn't include what's already being redistributed in taxes. So, just having that little summary, I open it up to the public. There's no one in the physical audience. Um, anyone on Zoom who wishes to speak to this?

Okay. Um, I will make a motion to close that uh second that public hearing. All in favor? I.

Okay. On the next one, um, we have two public hearings left for this evening. Um, one is a local law on taxation exempting volunteer firefighters, ambulance workers. Um, so Liz is recusing herself on that because she is married to a firefighter and so she needs to. I am excusing myself because I am waiting for the ethics board to um wade through my relationship with the fire district as treasurer. Um I'm not involved with the fire department or the latest auxiliary, but until the ethics board gives me a final ruling, I've been um recusing myself on anything that has to do with all three of those organizations. So, I'm going to step away and turn the meeting over to the public hearing over to you. I don't know if you want to if you need to you can I think uh there's some stuff on here so that if you want to share that screen

um and then Liz is also recusing herself from the Sylvester Maners but she gets to leave for the good and then I'll pick my phone and I'll come back. All right. at 6:00 p.m. or assume thereafter prevailing time on the proposed local law entitled a local law amending chapter 115 taxation article 6 exemption for volunteer firefighters and ambulance workers. Full text is available on the town website and at the town clerk's office. All right. Um, so this specific exemption is for volunteer firefighters and ambulance workers. Um, currently as it stands, we've adopted a 5-year minimum in order to qualify for the exemption. What this would do is reduce that to a 2-year minimum. So, you'd have to be a volunteer for two full years before you could qualify for the exemption. Um the redistributed cost of this is 35 cents per household with an assessed value of 1.6 million. Um we're assuming that there's about five volunteers added a year, possibly five people between the fire department and the ambulance may qualify for this exemption. Um we're hoping that it would help with retention. of firefighters and ambulance. Um, and so that's what this one is about. Anybody from the public want to comment on it or have any questions? I don't see anybody in the physical audience and I don't see anybody on Zoom. So

going once, going twice. I'll make a motion to close this hearing. All in favor? All in favor? I.

Thank you. All right. So, we'll close this and we'll move on to Sylvester Manor. We can get Amber back in here. I'll text her or Federico grab her. All right. I was going to say that was extremely fast. I try to be efficient. Going to argue over 35 cents.

Okay. All right. So, next we will open up the Oh, um yeah, we'll open up the hearing for Sylvester Manor site plan. Um I wanted to just start off with um the recusal.

Yes. Yes. I don't know if you want to speak to it or um you want me to speak. Um I had at the last um public hearing thought that um based upon prior town attorney advice um a number of years ago that if you didn't have a relationship with um an organization or company business whatever um after a year you could recuse yourself. But the ethics board picked it up and um given Benjamin's sub past substantial connections to Sylvester Manor um thought it best that he does refuse himself. Yes, you are free. You can fly away. Thank you. Good luck everyone.

Thank you. So number three. Yes, number three. Um so, oh that's right. We don't read it because this is a continuation. So, um we covered um Terresa just so only three T board members are participating on application. Yes. Yeah. Sorry, I didn't fill you in on that. Um Teresa Mason had um updated her report. So Teresa, if you'd like to fill us in on that.

Uh, good evening, Theresa Mason. Again, for the record, I just wanted to say that um we received the revised documents the day of the public hearing and we had uh you had requested that I pro uh provide my comments in writing based on the testimony I provided at the public hearing. And based on that, I said that the project plans were generally compliant with uh the provisions for uh natural features and environmental concerns and screening and landscaping. However, prior to final conditional approval, it was recommended that we get final grading and drainage plans and if they were going to do any additional plantings around the dwelling, I'm sorry, around the manor that they would provide uh revised landscape plans. Presently they're only proposing or they presently they only indicated that they were going to transplant and then re reinstall the climbing roses. But if any additional plantings were provided uh were to be provided we had recommended a reveation plan. Also we had recommended a screening of the mechanical equipment uh with a planting plan for that. But generally speaking they were compliant with the other provisions of the code. We just had some concerns with respect to the grading for the ADA compliant parking because there's a 2 to four foot grade changed there and we and that's close to the wetlands. Um but that can be submitted as a conditional of a condition of approval uh as part of your your requirement.

Thank you. Um, we do not have a planning board update. Um, still they had some open items in their report dated March 13th. Um, their last meeting was on March 10th. Yeah, I was going to say March 10th. Um, and their next meeting is April 14th. Um, so they have yet to um, review the response. So if the two liaison could make sure that this gets on um their agenda for next week so that they can look at that.

I mean they they kind of gave us their recommendations and things to look for and ask about. So um I don't know if the planning board feels like they need to do another memo but I think we have I mean can I Oh yeah why don't you come come on. Julia Weisber I'm chairperson of the planning board. So it was my understanding that the advisory memo that we sent was our consensus on the application. So I just wanted to correct you that that was our we turned it in unless yes no we do not lean and I haven't watched that meeting yet. I didn't know we submitted it.

Okay Julia yes thank you for that. Um and then Kaitlyn I saw that you were on. Didn't know if you had anything that you wanted to update. Let's see if new memo.

Good evening, Caitlyn coming for the record. Um, we do not have an update. Um, our stance remains the same as uh the last hearing that we um cons that the town board consider imposing a condition of site plan approval that prohibits parking within the town regulated area.

Okay. Thank you. All right. Um I will open it up to the applicant if you want to fill us in on any new information. Hello smaller board. I'm Julia Brennan. I am the capital projects manager at Sil Manor and resident of children. So um this was a great segue because we did want to respond to what Caitlyn had recommended at the last hearing. Um she suggested that in the conversation that we limit the grassy overflow parking that's proposed north of the manor house that we not have any grassy overflow parking there because of potential conflicts also with the ADA um parking area that's going to be there. We want to make sure that that area is completely separate and it's care is given to the ADA needs. Um it's also on a curve. There's lots of good reasons for us not to have parking in that area on the grass there and we certainly would comply with any kind of um limited and very specific recommendation. Um but the way that she phrased it and she just framed it again is that the town would impose as a condition of site plan approval a prohibition of any parking um within the town regulated area. We don't have any parking lots that are within the town regulated area. What we have are um parking areas or or roads that go through in various locations where we may have people park alongside the road. Um, and we certainly understand the sensitivity of these areas, but we have some uses that we would not be able to function as we currently do and as we were um, under our special permit from the ZBA enabled to continue certain uses that

periodically may require us to have vehicles parked in certain areas that are within the town regulated area. not as a parking lot, not as a here's where we want you to park tonight all you 50 cars. Um but when you think about um the grassy lawn in front of the manor house um we are concerned that if we were trying to do uses like concerts that sometimes are presented in coordination with um Sappa County, Sappa County has the show mobile. The showmobile comes on the back of a tractor trailer truck and gets dropped off and is basically parked in that location um for the duration.

It doesn't even get it's the same. It's just just a truck up the Go ahead for a second. I just want to clarify when you drop in the regulated wetlands area. That's what was to us is that we can't park. No vehicles in the regulated, right? 0 to 75 ft wetlands buffer as it is right now. Yes, as it currently stands. Yes,

as it currently stands. Uh so we do have uh other other uses. We have the stage. We have summer Shakespeare that may require the drop off of equipment. Somebody's going to have to park a car to drop things off. We have outdoor art exhibitions. We have artists who come and install materials. they may need to park a car that if we don't have those wetlands continuously flagged the whole length of Gardener's Creek um it would be very difficult for us to indicate to people where they have to stop. Um these are all very temporary actions. Our farm-totable celebration we bring a lot of vendors come to deliver materials. They deliver tents. Tents are then erected. they bring um catering equipment that's put into the tents and then they come back and pick it all up um later. Um we also have other areas that have the only parking that's available is probably within that certain aspects of it might be within that regulated area and that's people who are coming to the Quaker um meeting on Sundays. that road wind lines along a very wet area and on either side of the road you're probably within 75 ft of the regulated wetlands. And so our concern would be this would limit the capacity of people to come um to that particular uh meeting that happens in you know good weather in the summertime. Um we also have our own maintenance vehicles um and vendor vehicles who provide services to us. We might have tree trimming. We might have other um work that has requires parking a vehicle even just temporarily. When our own staff are for instance gathering up sticks that have fallen during a storm, they might drive a pickup truck down to where the sticks have fallen and throw the sticks in the back of the truck. That truck is parked. You know, we can't have a generalized band. Um in this situation, we also have hunters come to Sylvester Manor as part of the annual town call. Mhm.

Um, sometimes they're tracking an animal that's been injured. Sometimes they need to bring a truck close enough to haul carcass into a truck, but this all might put cars within our vehicles within that 75 ft boundary. Um, we know that your past practice has been to accept testimony during the public hearing. Um, we do not have our attorney with us. It's very expensive for us to have our attorney with us the whole time. And so when you're discussing um the conditions of approval during subsequent work sessions, our our there's no public comments allowed at that point. And what we would ask is that if this is something that you're considering that we have an opportunity to have our attorney um work with us to develop a response um to this because we really haven't had a chance to do that. Um, we think these are reasonable uh we have some reasonable objections to a a broad ban on parking in this area. There's numerous waterfront businesses around the island with numerous examples of parking that is allowed elsewhere in the town regulated areas and have parking lots in the town regulated areas, including town parking lots in town in this regulated area. We're not talking about trying to put a parking lot anywhere. We're just talking about the occasional temporary parking of vehicles in order for us to be able to conduct our business. Um, we uh know that there are town permits that are granted to people who are doing business on town property where the only place for people to park are in town parking areas that are certainly within 75 ft of wetlands all along beaches, especially on Shore Road. So, we're worried that something is being carved out just for Sylvester Manor that doesn't apply elsewhere and we just want to make sure that we have an opportunity um to have an effective response should you decide to make this a condition. So, thank you. Appreciate it.

Before I open it up to the public, Rick, I guess on that last point of um allowing if we're going to allow the attorney to be able to weigh in on conditions that we want to impose, how do we deal with that? You want to be very clear about when you close public hearing. So, public hearing should close on a date certain.

Um up to that point in time, everyone should have an opportunity. The easiest way to do it is actually at a board meeting because that way the parties can, you know, go back and forth. A lot harder to do it on paper because uh one side might submit, you know, their comments 10 minutes before the hearing closes on 5:00 on, you know, a given day. And so the other side doesn't get a chance to respond to that. So the easiest way to do it, I think, is to would be to continue the hearing at a town board meeting and then close it at that time so that you know verbal comments can be taken up to the very last second. But you want to be very clear when the record closes and should close for everybody ideally at the same time.

Teresa, I see you raised your hand. Just uh one way to potentially alleviate some concerns with respect to the parking in in or near the wetlands is establish a reasonable distance from the wetlands boundary, be it 10, 15, 25 ft, and install a post and rail fence. So that way you're not actually encroaching on the wetlands themselves. And so if you do have temporary parking for an event for the purposes of offloading equipment or the showmobile, uh you're not encroaching into those wetlands by accident. Uh same thing with like if you do have to park on the side of the road because of the part, you know, that there is insufficient parking for what particular event there is. Again, you're not encroaching on the wetlands and a post and rail fence is relatively easy to install. it doesn't um impede pass and repass of wildlife. It's uh it does prevent encroachment onto the wetland. So that's something that could be offered as potential compromise is to to establish a a distance that you feel is acceptable at 10 to 25 ft and then install that post and rail fence along that boundary so that that there's a clear delineation so you know that they're not going to encroach onto the wetlands themselves. Uh but then they can still provide for those those offloading and temporary parking uh opportunities if necessary.

Thank you.

Okay. Um any questions from the board before I open it up to the public? I was going to say you want to address the fence idea. Um, so our shoreline on Gardenner's Creek is about a mile long. And so the idea of us simply putting up a poster fence that's a mile long is um in order to create this kind of boundary seems to me not to be a practical solution to the problem.

I do have a question. Um so in the ZBA ruling they said that your have it highlighted you are limited to the scope of the prior use for events and things like that. So um one of the questions I had is for an event like the farm tot how many attendees do you typically have? Three 400. Oh, well, four 350 to 4 It came up around 400. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Um and then same thing with Shakespeare at the Manor and the Creek Side concerts. Um for the Shakespeare, one of the reports I got was 200 people over the course of the weekend. I don't know if that's accurate. Um and then for the Creek Side concerts, I'm sure that's probably depends on the band. Yeah. And and I think that we should probably go back through the record that was submitted at the zoning board and provide you with those answer because it was a matter of record. If it's in the record, then I can go back. Um I just might just be in the transcript now. All right, I'll look. It's 200. It's 200 per for the Shakespeare

for Shakespeare. For Shakespeare. Okay. Um, and then the Creek Side concerts vary depending on your Yeah. But it's never more than I think the biggest we've ever had. Probably the biggest we ever had was 425. Sorry. 425. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. You want to get like an idea of the scope? The other thing that the ZBA um limited us to is we're not allowed to construct any any new structures,

right? right without going back to the ZBA to ask specific permission for it. So the idea that we would have any kind of building and new structures, it it it's not going to happen immediately. It's something we're going to have to look through. Agricultural structures. Agricultural structures. Yes. Right. We needed another greenhouse that goes has a different permitting process. Right. Thanks. Thank you. Kate.

Hi. Yes. So, um just wanted to go back to um the PWR memo dated March 10th. So, the language that um we had added, we were really talking about um in the eastern unpaved parking area where they're going to add the 38 ADA spaces that would kind that would create that um physical barrier to prevent encroachment. um when looking at the parking areas for visitors during events. Not necessarily looking at vendors or some you know other um uh professionals coming and dropping things off tents. We were only looking at the again visitors I guess attendees maybe a better word. So I do see that um from the applicant's perspective that imposing that condition kind of blanketly um prohibits some other um you know activities going on but we still should be protective for the wetlands. So, um, you know, maybe there's some language that could be worked out with the town attorney that really attendees or visitors should should not be um within that area, but allowing for some of these special events um but that they still cannot the um professionals coming to drop items off, vendors setting stuff up cannot encroach onto the wetland area.

Thank you. All right. The table

and I will open it up to the public and Mike Gainner, if you had signed up,

please. Thank you. Hi. Uh Mike Gainor, 8 and 10 Cobitz Lane. As I think everybody in the town now pretty well knows, I'm uh uh opposed to this uh process that's taking place here. And my issues have to do principally with the um with the character of the applicant and the past performance of the applicant and the application and the past performance of the town. I've made all these statements before

and since this is a continuation, you have made some of these statements before. So, um we generally like to hear new information.

100%. You're about to get some new information right now, Amber. So last week on that topic, last week Wednesday, um, two employees from the town of East Hampton just across the South Berry on 114, uh, they were arraigned on felony charges uh, for fixing uh, building permit problems and big city stuff. Um, these two folks are likely going to prison. Uh, stuff like that doesn't happen around here. Suffach County Public Corruption Bureau arrested them. Uh they're being represented by uh my buddy uh Eddie Burke Jr. And uh so I'm going to present all sorts of facts tonight, but I'd like you guys to take this to heart because it speaks to uh it speaks to uh uh what my concerns are here. Um and I've mentioned this many times. I've been very vocal inside of this community. Um, these folks are going to prison uh likely because they treated uh uh they they traded a building permit solution, a permit solution for money, right? I'm going to make an argument here tonight that these folks have avoided the permit process because you folks have traded votes. Right.

Hold on just a sec. I took it down because um we're not going through that at the moment. So, I want this um the Sure. screen to be shown.

And so that's going to be my argument. I'm going to speak to the past behavior of this board. I've made this point already that you're unfit to be hearing this application based on your previous performance inside of this thing. And these folks, their application, this thing that your consultants there are uh responding to, it's the size of war and peace. It's 196 pages long. and their comments are reflective of this document. And this document basically says that they're going to go out there and they're going to fix up this the historic Sylvester Manor. That's what this speaks to and that's what your consultants are responding to. And I believe the character of these applicants and the character of the town board uh uh uh are completely glazing over what actually has taken place here. This applicant has been allowed, and please correct me, and I'm going to call you out on this when I'm done making my statement. This applicant has been allowed to uh uh avoid the building permit problem for 16 years. Is that a truthful statement? Did the town allow them to do that or not, Amber? It's a very simple question.

They are before us and there's been a process to get them here and we are here now.

But they did not have a building permit. Somebody greased the wheels, right? It started off with Jim Dhy. It didn't happen. They There's something that changed inside of this inside of Sylvester Manor. They haven't been doing that. They haven't had 13 uh farm-totable properties. They haven't had concerts year in and year out. Has something changed about the condition of Sylvester Manor? So, this is just a very this is like a baseline fact. You have allowed them you have greased the wheels. This town board has allowed them, just like those inspectors that are going to prison over at East Hampton that are helping people get out from under building permits for cash, you guys have allowed them to operate illegally for 16 years without going through this permit process. Yes or no?

This is a time for public comment. It's not a back and forth.

So, you're not going to answer the question. That's fine. Please bring up the my presentation again. Take your time. Sorry for the horse voice. I got a little sick on the floor. It's not going to shut me up. You do it without pictures. Nope. There we go.

Um, it's not showing up on the Zoom screen.

How about now? Um, it's just loading. You have to Okay, there you go. Thank you, John. Okay. Um, you we can take the shot of Ben. Yeah.

We can go on to the next slide, please. F. Thank you. I'm going to go through a quick history of uh of uh Sylvester Manor and how we got here. Had we had this conversation 16 years ago when we were supposed to happen, I wouldn't have to go through the 16 years of history, but now I have to. Okay. Als dies 2006 her ne nephew inherits the property basically 230 240 acres whatever it is at that point in time it's a single family residence 2009 rolls around my neighbor Sarah Gordon uh goes to the uh uh uh the federal government with a check for 500 bucks and she says we're going to create a notfor-profit organization right she goes to the federal government to the to the uh department of the treasury and she says, "We're going to create a not for-p profofit corporation." And it's very, very simple what they're going to do there. This is so simple. I didn't graduate from high school. I'm not a super smart guy. She goes to the federal government. Sean Clark did the very same thing. There's 38 not for profofits on this island. He's got one to save the quailes. She went out, Sarah Gordon goes to the uh federal government and she says in as few words as possible, the purpose of our organization is we are going to preserve and protect the historic Sylvester Manor. That's it. And as a result of that, the government says, "Awesome. You don't have to pay any taxes ever again to the federal government. No federal taxes, no state taxes, no local taxes, cuz you just got a billion dollars worth of real estate. And you promised us that you're not going to do anything with it. You're going to preserve it." It was that simple. From that moment on, the moment that happened, they started operating a notfor-profit educational institution in 2009 in a residential zone. Jim Dohy knew it at the time and he knew that this conversation was going to happen back then and he greased the wheels for them so they didn't have to go through

this process. My problem with this this entire thing, and I've told you about this folks before, when you guys do stuff like that, it's not about some building inspector picking up $1,000 or or $6,000, whatever it is, you undermine people's faith in government. Nobody cares what's going on in DC anymore. We haven't for a couple election cycles now. Nor do we care about what's going on upstate. The only the last bastion of freaking democracy is what goes on right here. And so when all those people that came in here today that women pleading, please just tell me what to do to get a dock, people start thinking that who do I have to know in order to get something solved around here? That's my problem with this thing. These folks have been treated with extreme bias unlike anybody else inside of this community for 16 years now. Time in and time out. And I'm going to go through every single one of those scenarios because they are well documented. I have to get my own notes down here. Sorry for a second. So in any event, uh Fisk dies, she gives the thing to her her nephew. He turns around. All the land is protected. It is completely protected. You cannot double protect something. It's not in any way under the threat of development. You can't develop the land. They purchased they got the land for zero dollars.

By the way, let me I just interrupt. When you file for a for a federal tax exemption that applies to income that you earn from an operation, it would have nothing to do with the developability of the land. If they sell the property someday, the tax exemption doesn't matter anymore. They don't own the property, but the property is not sterilized. The federal government cannot sterilize this property against development. Let me correct you for a couple on a couple of points there. In the state of New York, once a not for-profit organization gets their hands on on on real property, in order to sell that land, the governor has to sign off on it. The attorney general has to sign off on it, and the New York State Supreme Court has to sign off on it. Well, that's not true. But that is 100% true. No, it's not.

You're not talking about the state though. You were talking about the federal tax exemption. They received real property. They didn't get real. All right, we'll get into a legal debate. You and I can do it afterwards. This would be great. Um, in any event, they received a bunch of property. It's completely protected. There is no way. The only way the land is unsubdivided. Is that why the county paid them x number of million dollars? Well, we're going to get to that. We're going to get to that. So, it wasn't undefable.

No, it was uh that is the county and uh uh our our former first district New York State Assemblyman, Fred Theel. Uh to our current uh uh uh Kathleen Stark, uh uh county legislator. We're going to get to all those folks in a in a moment. In any event, please next slide. The entire story about this entire thing is about uh our local elected and appointed officials trying to appease a very powder power powerful voting block around here. This party right here, this is what you're looking at right now. This thing makes a half million dollars a year in four hours. They've had 12 of these things. We're on to our 13th one. They've generated close to $7 million in revenue. This is a playground for the rich and famous. These people are untouchable. They sit they have to recuse themselves. One of them was sitting on our on our zoning board. Had to recuse himself from the zoning process. One of them is sitting on our town board. He had to recuse himself from this process. We had three of them on our planning board. They had to recruit themselves in the process. The tentacles of this thing travels through our entire community, Rick. And it's a real problem. It's a cancer. And I'll continue to go on and you can see all of the various times where I've called people out on this. In any event, we'll go to the next slide. In 2024, I show up at this board and apparently I uncover the the worstkept secret inside of this community that these guys have been uh that they've been operating illegally since 2009. And everybody knew it. Jim Dhy knew it, Gary Girth knew it, Jerry Siller knew it, and Amber knew it. And every single person knew it. And they were allowed to operate illegally. Every single other person in this community, you heard these people, the weight of permits and licenses and freaking all of this other stuff. Every single other person gets

held to task on this stuff. These folks have never been held to task. Please take me to the next slide. My argument here is that this thing on the surface, all of their statements about all of these things that nobody can pin them down on. go look at the zoning board of appeals me uh uh meetings for this thing when they try and explain they can't explain what it is that they do. They call themselves an educational institution. The only thing that I can find out that they do, just look at their balance sheet. I'm a business guy. Go look at their P&L. They make the bulk of their money from having these events. That's it. How else do you define an event venue? They have a a a farm-totable party every summer on June for one night in June. They make over a half million dollars and they have concerts. They advertise for these things on Eventbrite, okay? And they sell tickets. That's it. Hundreds of people show up. No one knows how many people show up in one conversation in their own public comments. It went from 125 to 200 to 300 to 500 on any given day. Who knows how many people are showing up inside of this thing? Please take me to the next slide. 16 years have taken place inside of this thing. Tens of millions of dollars. This slide I do want to hold everybody on because nobody can seem to get themselves to get in their car and drive over and take a look at this place. This place is one of the most historic properties in the United States of America. There's this misnomer out there right now that these guys own this property. First of all, these are temporary part-time employees of an organization, as are you folks. They don't own anything. These are not owners like the folks that you talk to tonight who are came here to talk about their homes. This thing is the property of the United States of America. This is three

basically 300 years of history in this country of slavery and it is falling into the ground. And these are the stewards of it. I'm going to walk you through the finances very quickly of how much money and I want you to take a hard look at that building. This is what's gone into that property in the form of conservation easements. Right? In 2011, they picked up $2.6 million. In 2012, in the form of a conservation easement, they picked up $4.6 million. In 2019, they picked up $2,55,000. In 2023 through 2026, they picked up a grant for $3,750,000 from the Melon Foundation. Another grant for $1.8 million from the New York State Council for the Arts. Another grant for $750,000 from the National Park Service. Another grant for $500,000 from the New York State Office of Historic Preservation. Another grant for $675,000 from the New York State Environmental Protection Front. Another grant for $500,000 from the New York State Council for the Arts that you gave him a big alkalate for, Amber. Another grant for $100,000 from the African-American Cultural Organization. And then there's me at the bottom of the pile. I gave them 30 grand. I gave him 30 grand because they told me they were going to clean that pace up place up. If somebody could show me so much as a receipt for a quart of primer that they've purchased in 16 years to apply to that building, I'll shut up. You'll never hear from me again. That's never happened. Tell me where all that money has gone. I'll give you the grand total on it. Oh, wait a minute. I forgot this one. This one's kind of important. I just found out about this one last week. Thanks to my friend Pam Demerest, who's a super super super uh uh helpful person inside of this

community. Last year in April, about a year ago today, they picked up 3,781,540 from the Suffach County Drinking Water Protection Program for 7.28 parcel uh a 7.28 2 acre part acre parcel of land $3,781,540. Al, you're concerned about the water. Do you think that this organization that $4 million being applied to this organization is helping our drinking water problem? Mag, how many IA systems would $3,700,000 uh dollars buy inside of this community? You could basically kit out 150 homes in the center and solve that problem so we wouldn't have to talk about it. But they got it. Somebody please explain that to me how that happened for a grand total of $21,221,540. And look at the condition of that property 16 years later. Please tell me where that money went. That doesn't include the 7 million bucks from their big fancy party that they have every June for their well-healed uh uh for their well-healed uh uh supporters that everybody wants to appease here so that you guys can capture their votes every couple of years. Please go to the next slide. This thing's 6 miles away from here. Everybody knew what was going on. Next slide, please. You've heard my points. Does this look like any of that money has gone into this place? I strongly encourage everybody to go over there and take a

hard look at this place. I want to impress upon everybody about this thing right now. Whatever decision you guys make long after you're gone, when Shel's kids are growing up here, they're going to have to deal with this just like I'm having to deal with Jim Dhy's mistakes, right? All of this stuff about, well, they're telling us this and they're telling us that. They're not going to be here. They now have a permit in their hot little hands from the zoning board of appeals that says they can have two concerts a year and about one sentence of text that describes what those things are, Margaret, and you keep on focusing on, well, this is what they did last year or whatever. Uh, what's going to happen 10 years from now when somebody has that document? They have a towh hold inside of the ground that says, "Hey, we we got a permit here. We have a special permit from the zoning board of appeals. Somebody please tell me what a defined term is for a concert because I'll tell you what a defined term is for a concert for Coachella. Coachella is a multi-day procedure. Is it an is a concert a 1-hour thing, a 4-hour thing? Is it a day? Is it multiple days? Do you know they're marketing after they got that permit in their hot little hands? They're marketing to their uh to all of their supporters. Right now this year they're going to have Did they tell you about this one yet? They're going to have a concert festival. Does that sound like a concert or does that sound like a lot of concerts? Please go to the next slide. New York State public hearings law says that a board member's prior public statements, prior vote, or prior conduct demonstrating a fixed viewpoint on a particular applicant or application constitutes a disqualifying basis. I think all of your backgrounds and all of your track records in dealing with this applicant are a basis for a recusal. I've said it before and I'm going to move through this point. Now I'm going to make my points. Please go to the next

slide. Sylvester Manor is a tax and charity scam. I've been scammed personally for $30,000 from these folks. They told me they would take my money and do something good with it. I asked them as late as Saturday to give me my money back and they won't respond to me and give me my money back. Is that that much to ask? I can go to the IG and return fruits and vegetables and they'll give me my freaking money back. All I said is just give me my money back. You told me you were going to fix up the house. Give me my 30 grand back and I'm out of your hair. I've been asking them for years now. They refuse to do it. Fair warning to everybody inside of this community. Next time you think about giving these guys a dime, say heed all of this. What's going on here? Please go to the next slide. I'm going to call out two specific transactions that took place here. Amber and L. This is a specific reason why you guys should uh recuse yourself in this thing. In 2019, they had a a at Christmas time. Uh uh one week before Christmas, a piece of legislation. You guys have all seen these before with the community preservation fund. Nobody's in town. Less people that are in around here right now. A 16 acre parcel of land of this 230 plus acres. Somebody draws a line around it and I think it's Fredfield. Draws a hashtag line around it. It's an unsubdivided parcel of land and says, "We absolutely have to protect this parcel of land. It's got to get protected. There's 142 acres behind it right there that have are completely unprotected. There are thousands of acres over on the North Fork that have all of their development rights intact and there is no threat of them ever being developed because everybody knows they'd never make it through the process to be developed. Somehow 16 are there's nothing historical about that property. Nothing. There's no basis for it. We

drew a line around it and this was just a conservation easement. We didn't get the land. And it's not like we get to erect a skateboard park there or something. We drew a line around it and we sent them a wire transfer for $2,55,000. And all we got out of it was a promise that they weren't going to develop a parcel of land that they couldn't develop. There's nothing they could do. The only thing they could do is build a farm building there. And what like that would be a great improvement. That's about it. That was completely fraudulent transaction. That is local elected officials passing off money to their friends to ensure themselves of getting elected during the next election cycle. That's all that was. Nothing else took place. Please go to the next slide. Happen again. Like I told you, this just happened in April. My neighbor came over here to talk to me about this today. No one wants to say anything inside of this community. I'm the only one crazy enough to do it because I don't give a crap what anybody thinks about me. Those are the al those are the two parcels of land that we just paid $4 million to go get protected from development. Those are undevelopable properties. You can't you couldn't build a dog house on those properties. Go drive down Winthre over there. Kids go and play over there in the summer. That's where the kids from the yach club go over there. And supposedly we use uh uh water uh uh tax money set aside to protect our drinking water, which is all you people talk about is protecting our drinking water. and we went and gave these guys $3,700,000 to protect those two pieces of land. It was a complete scam. It was Last year was a big year, wasn't it? It was an election year. So, uh, yard signs weren't enough for Katherine Stark. She needed to make sure that she had a powerful voting block that was getting paid off inside of this thing. And that's the way to do it. And they're not done yet. They still have over aundred acres over there. So every time they

want to go back to the well and go get another conservation easement again long after you're gone, we're going to keep on paying. They have turn this into a process. They have figured this thing out. Please go to the next slide. This is happening everywhere. I've already talked about this. These people are permeating everywhere. This woman right here, Kathleen Gerard, who ju who who just uh uh uh turned in her uh uh uh whatever her resignation for the community preservation fund. She's been a focal point inside this thing. She's sitting on the community preservation fund and she sits on their board of trustees and she's in charge of all of the building and land use over there and she sits on both of those boards. She's been a focal point along with Ben who was the former president. He was there when that transaction took place in 2019 that you guys signed off for. He received the wire on it. His signature is in on that transaction. Then he comes and he sits on the town board. Everyone is in on this thing. Please go to the next slide. They've been getting away with everything forever. This is inside of the paper, right? We've talked about this. Beyonce has a concert over there. It's defined as a megapilm inside of the town code. There's all sorts of permitting fees that are associated with it. They don't get cited for it. I have to I had to sue the town over this BS in order to get you guys to take action. And finally, they were required to pay what the original permit fee was. That was it. Meanwhile, we lost out on god knows how much licensing money we could have squeezed out of Disney. As I told you, one year prior to this, HBO offered to film here for one night, offered us $55,000, and we walked away from it. You could have gotten that. Tom could have gotten hundreds of thousands of dollars. They knew that they had friends in high places and they could just pull this off and nobody's going to know about it. It was in the paper and like nobody they didn't get a ticket and it's just like I had to go crazy about it. Please, next slide.

As a result of that, I finally uncovered that this thing is uh that this thing is operating illegally. It's going through the zoning board of appeals process. I call you guys out and I say you shouldn't have they they shouldn't be allowed to have any parties until the ZBA actually finally does what it's supposed to do in the first place and give these people a permit or not give them a permit but they shouldn't be operating illegally in a double A zone. Ben recuses himself at a at the time you three say that they can't have a no noise variance and what happens? Please go to the next slide. Ben shows up at the at at the party where they're not supposed to have the music and I'm up until 11 o'clock at night listening to this. Last weekend I went down to St. Petersburg. I stayed out till 3:00 in the morning. I was basically getting lap dances by college cheerleaders by the time by the night was over. I do crazy and stupid like that all the time, too. That's not my problem with this. And I I don't even care about the concerts or or or any of that stuff. What I care about is that he thumbmed his nose and they thumbmed their nose at the law. And for the other guys out there that don't have my kind of bank, people in this town I because I talk to them all the time, the guys that work at the gas station and on the ferry and the stuff who can't defend themselves and they see stuff like this, it undermines people's faith in government. That's my problem. When Ben did that, that guy should resign over that. That was not funny. He was sitting here at the last board. I mean, he was he thought that was a who that he did that. I didn't sneak in there with a pair of nods and take that picture or whatever. These guys took those pictures of everybody after you told them they couldn't have live music there and they put them up on Instagram again because they have you on lease as far as they're concerned. Nobody's going to take any enforcement action. You guys didn't do anything about this. They didn't so much as get a ticket. Please go to the next slide. Then they double down. Gets even better.

So they no contact, no enforcement action. And they go ahead and they have one of their concerts illegally. The character of this applicant. These are the people who are putting inside of this application that our consultants are relying upon. They're saying that, well, I guess they're telling me the truth, you know, so I'm going to respond to this application. these people who do illegal stuff left and right and they've been doing it year in year out and it's well documented. They have an illegal concert out there. I call out the town and what happens? Nothing happens. You guys take no enforcement action. Hundreds of people. They served alcohol there. What would happen to somebody else in town? What What about uh uh uh my Laspia, my buddy, two doors down? You want my to start having concerts over there? Cuz my horrible taste of music. If anybody wants to go out and have a concert, can they do that? You know, and what are you going to do to somebody else if they what would you do to Andrea Carter? And what have you done to Andrea Carter and other people? What about the hotels that everybody's worried about down in Crescent Beach? What if they started doing stuff like this? Are you not going to take enforcement action against them either? Next slide, please. I confront the town board. Eversighted. End of story. Bias. You folks need to recuse yourself. you were all in office at the time. You shouldn't be hearing this application. Next slide, please. After the noise violation and the illegal concert in 2025, uh uh I come back or or those dates are wrong on there. In 2024, I come back in 2025. Not only do you not freaking uh reprimand them for having an illegal concert and violating their noise permit, you actually allow them to have the concerts this year. at this time two of them even though they still haven't been approved by the zoning board of appeals to operate over there to operate their concert venue which is exactly what they're doing. You still allow them you allow them to have both of those things.

You take no action against them and you allow them to have two concerts. The reason you do that cuz you last year was a big election year and you were up for election and you wanted to beat Gordon and Meg was up for election and these are a powerful voting block and you guys are no better those than those two inspectors in East Hampton that are on their way to prison right now. They took money. You were trading votes for your favors here. Period. Next slide, please. They go to the zoning board of appeals finally in September of this year. Big day is up and they have the zoning board of appeals. This is the work session from se September 17th. Go listen to this thing. If you people do nothing else, if no one else does anything, go listen to this thing and listen to the logic, the underlying logic about this thing. Town attorney Tim Hill, super smart guy. He says, "We have to find a nexus between everything that they're doing there. It's got to be an intersection. There the the the the zoning code says in order to operate in a double A zone, they need to be a educational farm. They need to be an educational institution. We need to find a nexus, an intersection between everything that you're doing." And and our zoning board says, "You know what? I think concerts have something to do with education." somehow concerts I to this day no one can explain it to me that they should be allowed to have concerts hundreds of persons concerts as a matter of fact they don't put any stipulations on them whatsoever except for this sentence inside of there that me seems to want to keep on leaning into that whatever they did in the past which they did illegally for 16 years. So I I mean try and apply that logic to any person inside of this town. Al just laid the boots to some guy telling him to rip up who's trying to figure out how to pay for his new baby daughter. laid the boots to him, tell him to go rip up a slab, but and because he installed it illegally, but these guys, we're gonna Well, the standard is you only did it illegally for 16 years. And so, we'll set that with that. That'll be our stake in the ground. That's some brilliant logic right there

to assess these people by. That's this applicant's being treated with bias by you. You treat other applicants that show up here left and right one way, you treat them another way altogether. Next slide, please. This is what happens when concerts get out of control. Whether you guys want to admit it or not, you live in the Hamptons. This is not some faroff land. We talked about this already. This is the Shinikok Indian Reservation. It's not 40 miles away from here. They started off a few years ago and they were having a couple hundred person concerts and the town of Southampton lost control of it. Last year it clocked in at 10,000 people. Right. This year they think it's going to be 20,000 people. And you know who's going to have to deal with that? It's not going to be you guys cuz it's not going to happen this year. It's going to be Shel's kicks. That's who's going to have to deal with it. And they're going to be standing up here going crazy like I am. And they're going to be like, "What the f? Traffic is backed up 114 all the way down to each ferry. I can't get out." Cuz I've seen that happen before. I lived in Sag Harbor. And when stuff like this gets out of control, you guys are all be off the hook, right? you know, you you'll have moved on three, five, seven, 10 years from now after you guys are all gone. This is what you guys are setting up here. You've got to get back to the ZBA. The town giveth and the town taketh away. They have a special permit right now. Go back to the ZBA, tear it up. It was made in bad faith. The application was not clear. Get back to the ZBA and start over and do this process correctly because you didn't do it correctly this time. Next slide, please. I'm never going to actually I got corrected. Uh uh I I think very highly of this uh uh planning board uh uh uh guy uh uh Sean uh what's his last name?

Davey Davy.

Sean Davey reached out to me. He's like, "Mike, don't put words in my mouth kind of thing because everybody's scared of coming out and saying anything inside of town." go listen to his statements inside of this uh planning board thing. I think it's very clear the spirit of what he was saying. They give these documents. They're completely unclear. They don't want to be pinned down on anything. Even if they were to be completely clear, as you've said, like emitters inside of landscaping systems, who's going to enforce this stuff? I called you guys out on this the last time. If they say it's there's going to be 300 people at the concert, are you guys going to go volunteer two Saturday nights or whatever when they have the concerts to go click them in? Is it going to be the police department? Should Jimmy Reid be stuck with the mess that you guys are creating here? There is no reason inside of this small community to have a a 230 acre concert venue. None whatsoever. Another one doesn't exist. There's not a privately held concert venue anywhere on the east end of Long Island. The county has various places where people can go have concerts and they highly regulate those places. The Hampton Classics playgrounds, the all of these various places. This is a private uh uh uh entity. They're an LLC or a corporation or whatever, not for profofit corporation. Another one doesn't exist and now they're in the business of having concerts. That needs to go. You get them to take a very simple, this is very simple. This is my ask. This is my big finish. Go back to the zoning board. Make them go back to the zoning board. Take concerts out of this process. They can have their stupid uh uh farm-totable uh uh party for all their rich friends and stuff. And that's great. 700 bucks a plate, thousand bucks a plate. I really don't care. You are setting up a disaster area with these concert things. It's going to metastasize into this massive thing. Some really smart people are going to get a hold of this thing someday and it's going to go ridiculous.

There's going to be thousands of people. It's not about me in my house. I'm out of here. Trust me, I could care less. People have said, "Well, you're just you're just, you know, worried about your own backyard." That's not it at all. I actually care about this community and it's a ridiculous thing to allow them to do. Next slide, please. take a good hard look at what Sylvester Manor looks like and what our town board has achieved in the last 16 years with these folks. This is a mess, folks. And you guys did this. I didn't do this. And I I haven't been around here that long. You guys allowed this thing to happen. That is a national treasure. And you guys got to come up with a smart solution. I'm not a smart guy. Maybe you need another like Taylor. Maybe you need another board to oversee these guys or something. some people who are not, you know, going to their parties or something. I don't know. But this thing is one of the most historical landmarks. I've tried to appeal to the ethical side of this community. It got me absolutely nowhere because we have no moral compass apparently relative to the fact that that place was a slave market for 200 years. It's not mentioned inside of the historical society anywhere. Nobody seems to want to talk about it. There's not a plaque anywhere in this community. Fine. You don't want to talk about that. do something to protect that building. They're not capable. If they haven't pulled it off in 16 years, they're not going to do it in the next 16 years. So, I don't know what the solution is, but I'm smart enough to know that whatever they're doing is not working. Next slide. I think I'm done here. You've heard my recommendations. You guys need to recruit yourself based on your prior behavior. And the best thing I can come up with is that toss this thing back to the planning board. I do uh feel very uh think very uh uh highly of the planning board. I think they'd be well equipped. They're they have the time to read 196 page applications and snip through the BS from what limited exposure I've

had to them and start this process over again. And I'm sorry that it's going to take them more time and everything. Permits suck as every single person inside of this community knows. It's time for them to pay the bill on this thing. And that's it. Mike Gainer out. Mike, I just want to tell you something here. Uh the zoning board of appeals made a determination on a special permit application. The town cannot send it back to the zoning board. They made a determination on October 27th of last year. That decision is final. And there are conditions there that would limit what Sylvester Mana can do in terms of the number of concerts or other events, where they can put them, how many people they can have. There were conditions. The conditions are, you know, they're they're a little uh they're not spelled out in precise numbers. You know, I get that.

Rick, I don't want to insult you. Uh you're here for the night or whatever. You're an attorney. A lot of people around here are impressed by attorneys. I'm not. They it up. It's time to unfuck it. Uh that was that was a remarkably remarkably poor decision. back to the zoning board. It's done. Well, I hope everybody's comforted by that. You're a neighbor. You could have challenged the decision if you didn't agree with it. It's a final decision. Good luck with that. Have a great night, everybody. We have anyone else who wishes to speak on this? Can I just suggest that you have a time limit on public comment for everybody?

Yes. And you've heard all that before and you should not let that happen. It means you it means the whole process. It means all of us in this room. You need a procedure and a process not just for that but for everything else. It's not on to let someone like that hijack this meeting, this this board and this community. That's all I would say. Thank you. Thank you. Just like there's somebody else. Okay. Okay. Is there anyone on Zoom who wishes to speak? Pam,

you're muted. Pam,

I'm sorry. Uh, good evening. I I just wanted to make sure that you received my submission today about the conservation easements. I you know this is very conf confusing on these on the whole 273 acres what parts of it are conserved for preservation what areas cannot be developed I mean it's 22 acres here it's 16 acres there it's 7 acres there I I really would like to ask Sylvester Mana to provide a a survey showing the delineations of these I mean some of it Suffach County with development rights taken away some of it is is is the um Bonic Land Trust and now Suffach County has purchased some properties. I don't I I don't think we're really clear on what is actually conserved and I and I know that from the comprehensive plan conversations. Uh it's it's not really clear and I do feel the same concern that Miss Mason has and and Caitlyn have over the wetlands and the parking. I mentioned the parking the last uh board uh public hearing about how how many spaces it is would make this now a type one project according to our town code. No one has addressed that this evening. I don't know how that's getting handled. If you have 200, 300, 400 people attending an event, that's more than 20 parking spaces. So, I'd like to see the town board address that issue and and also really look into what's the conservation easement because, you know, I I've traveled around the country to national parks and and there are certain parks like uh Crater Lake in uh Oregon there that you cannot drive close to the edge of the waterways there because of the cars dripping their oils and gasoline and all of the pollutants that wind up into the water there. Now they now they actually have electric buses that take you to that lake and and I feel the same way about this location and the sensitivity of that um and how many and and what's what are we doing to

mitigate any problems such as that. So keeping the parking away from 75 ft from the wetland seems reasonable. It may not seem easy for them to do but it certainly seems reasonable from an environmental standpoint. We know that Gardener's Creek does not have a good flush of water just like Dickerson Creek as we heard this evening. Uh I I just would like the board to request that a full environmental assessment form is is submitted as well as a true survey showing the exact locations of every parcel, subdivision, subpiece of this property that is protected for for future generations to come if nothing else. Thanks. Thank you. Caitlyn, I see you turned your screen on.

Yeah. So, I was trying to find the raised hand icon. Um, I can address the seeker classification if the board would like me to. Um, yes.

So, this was in consultation with um Thomas Crouch. And with regard to the parking, um, it is for the events that are existing at the site today and that the parking facility is they're they're already parking those cars today. So it the interpretation is that it would not pass or exceed that type one threshold in the town code because it's an existing use and based on the site plan um submitted materials. It would not increase the parking over 20 spaces. Um so this would be a type two action pursuant to um multiple different sections of uh part 17.5 in the type 2 action list which was in our memo dated October 31st, 2025. Thank you. Um, is there anyone else who wishes to speak in Zoom? Would

you want me to just address the conservation quickly? Yes.

Uh, so Stephen Surl, uh, executive director Manner. Uh, so there have been, actually Pam brought up a good point, right? There has been a lot of conservation over the years. There's a number of different conservation easements on the property. I would hope that the board has a survey, a map of those. Okay. Um, now also recall that the site plan application is for one parcel, right? It doesn't necessarily include all of those conservation easement areas, right? Just like the ZBA does not include the entire 236 acres uh because there's a number of different parcels um including the farm. this of the whole farm on that side which we're really not talking a whole lot about because obviously it's not under you know a part of that application uh that of the original ZBA. Um, so that's something that I'm, you know, we've gone kind of back and forth with both the ZBA, our own attorney about that and still we're perfectly forthcoming with anything and everything that you need. Um, especially the conservation ement areas, um, all of that which I think you're familiar with. But, um, and yes, she is right that there are lots of different restrictions uh, for there are different restrictions for each conservation easement area. We can I don't know if there I'll wait until there are other questions concerns or raised.

Right. If there are no other public comments, go ahead. Come on up to the podium.

Gay Gingrich. Uh my wife and I have been coming to Shelter Island since 93. Went a house here since 98. Lived here full-time since co um I've been leading the Sylvester Manor Harvest Service at Union Chapel ever since it existed. I'm now on the Sylvester Manor board. I want to pick up on point Mike made when he was talking about the search for a nexus. And it seems to me that the town board was written for organizations that do one thing, a house, a store, a school, a museum. And the problem with Sylvester Manor is both the challenge to the planning to the board and to the uh planning process is that it is a lot of different things like we are as individuals a lot of different things. I'm a husband and a father and a preacher and a volunteer and a board member etc. I don't want to have to choose one of those things and do that throughout my life. And I think what Sylvester Manor wants to do is to be the nexus for the community of Shelter Island that it has become. That's happened over time, but it's a lot of different things to a lot of different people. So, it doesn't fit neatly into one planning slot. And I think what we are asking you to do is to recognize that the nexus is the community of shelter and we'd like to preserve this treasure and we have a lot of the money to do it and we just need your help to get to the

point that we can start. So please give us that help. Thank you. Um I see someone actually it looks like was here earlier Mr. Peter Levenson is that you named Pamela you have you have your video on do was that in lie of raising your hand um or you're just joining the the meeting you're muted.

I'm muted. Thank you. Uh just to very briefly um we have listened to the presentation and we just I want to apologize on the behalf of what I think is the overwhelming majority of Shelter Island to the abuse that you have to get from one resident here. It's completely unfair and and I truly appreciate the work and the attention that you spend uh for this democratic process which unfortunately unwinds in such an ugly way. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you. Okay. If there's no other public comment, come on up.

Yeah. So our question is about process. Um to follow up on my question earlier on Julia Brennan again from Sister Matter. Um, I think that what I heard Caitlyn say is that there is an opportunity to talk about that parking having to do specifically with parking areas, which we completely understand and appreciate, rather than the periodic occasional parking of a a vehicle to do maintenance or a vehicle to make a delivery or something like that, which is really what we're concerned about is that we not be limited and also that there not be a limitation that would be imposed um for people who are coming to the uh Quaker Quaker cemetery and the Quaker meeting house. Not the meeting house, but you know the kiosk in the woods um for their religious observations um observances, sorry. Um obviously what we heard here had a lot of false information. I don't want to get into a back and forth. Um you have the information that you need. If you have any questions about the information that you received, it's all available on the website for anybody who wants to go through it. We are available to anybody who wants to ask us a legitimate question and we're happy to engage um with people who have questions about the information that we're providing. We've provided information to the best of our ability that's as accurate as we can. This is a very complex project as as Mr. Gator pointed out, it's a giant file um with multiple multiple things sort of added at the last minute. Um, so we really appreciate all of your questions, your concerns, and are happy to answer them. What is the next step in the process? Can we close the hearing? Do we have to go um

with written comments? That's what I was going to bring back to the three of us, right? That's our question. Yes, that was going to be my question to the to the board. Um, do we have what we need? Um, questions answered. Um, do we like so if we have more questions and we want to keep it open so that we could ask those questions if we the question that I was concerned about earlier is um wanting to be able to go back and forth with Sylvester Manor and their attorney on conditions and we do need to leave this open. Um, yeah,

where we'd want to come back and kind of turn the next public hearing into a work session to some extent where we like roll up our sleeves and go through and talk about what conditions and restrictions and leave it openly allow ourselves to be able to have that back and forth dialogue. You don't have to have that at the public hearing though when you have when you get to the dialogue. That should be after you close your hearing and then you're free to discuss among yourselves and nobody no outside noise can come in at that point. Um but if we have any questions or we want if you have any questions that you don't know that you have answered yet then you might want to continue the hearing to the next you know whatever.

Yeah. So what I'm hearing is that if we are considering certain conditions we should ask about them now. Yes. Yes. So, if we have any questions about conditions that we're thinking of putting on, now is the time to ask them, right? Um, you know, the one thing that I was the reason why I asked, you know, how many people come to the events is because wanted to add more clarity to what the zoning board had put in their condition, right? So, maybe a maximum number of people could be in attendance for certain events. Um, that was

the only thing I'll say and I look I'm not completely familiar with the file obviously and I have still not seen the site plan which I'd like to take a look at at some point. Um, but the con the limitations on the nature of the uses that really goes with the special permit and the zoning board has done that. Now there is some unclarity because they didn't throw out exact numbers but we know it's not 10,000 people in a concert. We know that.

Okay. Um what you're doing dealing with right now is a much more limited thing. You're dealing with the impro the approval of improvements on the site some work on the manor house and and I guess mainly parking. I mean your actual function right now is quite limited. You're doing site planet rule site plan rules for improvements and where you put them and what they are. The the use issue all the stuff that Mike was talking about it's water under the bridge. whatever you think about his history about things and I don't know much about the you know prior history of Sylvester Manor other than they had slaves there for a long time. Um it's all irrelevant because the zoning the zoning appeals rendered a decision October 27th of last year. No one challenged that decision. It is now final. It says what uses they can engage in. In some cases it limits their number per year and it has a general restriction on the number you know the size the intensity and all that for those uses. So, those are all the special permits things. I wouldn't want to in I don't think you should intrude into that space.

Thank you. That's helpful.

Just to review what the standards of review are. We've got traffic. We've got interior circula circulation and parking. We've got landscaping and screening, existing development and comprehensive plan and prior stipulations, natural features and environmental concerns, cultural features, pavement, lighting, drainage, public utilities, public address or sound system, handicap access compliance, energy conservation and size. You guys think I feel like we have everything in here and

we have everything. We have everything. Mhm. All right. I'll make a motion to close this then. I'll second that. Okay. All in favor? I

good. Okay. Thank you everyone. Now we will reconvene. Thank you. Going to lose a lot of people quietly because we've still got a little bit of business. All right. So, we're I'll make a motion to go back into the regular meeting and we have four resolutions. I'll start off with the first one. Whereas Kyle and Thomas Walsh, 28 Dino Rock Road, petition the town of Shelf Island for permission to install a moing at a location designated as latitude 41.09915° north and longitude 72.3429 west, formerly um or known as birth 02955 2955. And whereas a public hearing is duly held on the 6th day of April, 2026 for all interested persons to be heard in favor of or in opposition to now. Therefore, be it resolved that the town clerk is hereby authorized to issue a permit for the affformentioned installation. So moved.

Second. All in favor? I. I.

Motion carried. Whereas Steven Rose Amelia, 22 New York Avenue, has petitioned the town of Shel Brown for permission to relocate a moing at a location designated as C 3636 to a location designated as latitude 41.06615° north and longitude 72.36470° west, Earth W6008. And whereas a public hearing was duly held on the 6th day of April, 2026 for all interested persons to be heard in favor of or in opposition to not therefore be a result that town clerk is hereby authorized to issue a permit for the aforementioned installation. So moved.

Second. All in favor? I. Motion carried. Whereas Adam Ronzone, 37A West Morland Drive, has petitioned the town of Shelter Island for permission to relocate a moing at a location designated as W3559 to a location designated as latitude 41.05670 north and longitude 72.35787 West, Earth W2789, formerly occupied by John T. Conway. And whereas the public hearing was duly held on the 6th day of April, 2026 for all interested persons to be heard in favor of or in opposition to now therefore be resolved. The town clerk is hereby authorized to issue a permit for the aforementioned installation. So moved. Second. All in favor? I.

Motion carried. Where Steve and Cynthia Rudolph three sheep pasture lane have petitioned the town for permission to install a moing at a location designated as latitude 41.08861° 08861° north and longitude 72.32301° west for W3719 formerly occupied by Quinn Eddie and whereas a public hearing was duly held on the 6th day of April 2026 for all interested persons to be heard in favor of or in opposition to now therefore be it resolved that the town clerk is hereby authorized to issue a permit for the aforementioned installation. So moved. Second. All in favor?

I I motion carried. Um, we now will open up the meeting for just general public comments. We have no one left in the physical audience. Anyone on Zoom? Okay. I will make a motion to close the town board meeting. Second. All in favor? I. Thank you everybody.