(1) Town Board - Regular Meeting

Very good, folks. Welcome to the Red Hook Town Board meeting of Tuesday, May 12, 2026. May I ask you to join me in the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Very good. Suzanne, if you'd be kind enough to pan over to the big screen, we can show the folks at home what we'll be discussing tonight. It's the first meeting of the month, so we have the supervisor's report, the clerk's report, announcements. We have a public hearing at 7.35. We will then move into the agenda. We're going to discuss, and it's a little bit out of order, We have our engineer here this evening. We're going to have just a status report on the potential formation of Water District Number 2, if you've been following along. We need to create, and for many reasons, not only to facilitate additional hookups to properties from here down to south of Panaford that are not currently served, but also to formalize what are, in some cases, informal agreements with properties that are currently served by the village. In fact, the town hall here is on village water. So we're getting an update from our engineer, and that'll be the first thing on the agenda. We're then gonna move into local law A, which is just to include five parcels which are surplus parcels owned by the water district where there used to be wells. They no longer need those parcels. So tonight we have a public hearing in just a couple of minutes to take comments on whether to include them into the community preservation fund. And then the second action, and we'll entertain a public First we have to get those parcels into the CVF so that they are at least eligible. And so that is 1, 1A, 2, and 3. And then resolution to set public hearing water district rates. So if you've been following along for the last, I think, couple of years now, the Water Board has been trying to determine whether or not to replace the storage tank or to rehab it. They think it's in good condition and should be rehabbed. out of it, and they have in their meetings have determined the way they want to pay for it instead of having a large assessment is just to increase rates, not dramatically, but to increase rates to get the rate level up so that it can pay for debt service. And so there is a proposal to raise it, I think, by $11 next year per quarter, and they're going to continue sort of along similar increases for the next couple of years thereafter until they get to the point where they feel that's sustained. starting July 1st this is only for people who are in water district number one the 488 users by the way and so we will entertain a motion to set the public hearing then we are going to have a discussion a continuing discussion and camp rising Sun for the public to have an opportunity to use the pool we were approached by Camp Rising Sun, they said they had availability this year. The camp that normally rents it out wasn't going to be renting it out and wanted to know if we would like to do so. And so we'll be discussing that proposal. And then we have another draft in the Barton Water District Agreement. Again, this is just for discussion. We won't be taking action on this. It's an agreement that relates to backup water supply from that storage tank and a contribution from BAR towards the rehab. Then we're going to take public comments, and then we are going to entertain a motion to go into attorney-client session this evening. And that's what we have for tonight, folks. With that being said, let's get started because we need to get to the public hearing. We have the supervisor's report. This is for the folks, and I'd like to welcome the nearly 20 Pine Plains students. Thank you for coming here, and your local government class, is that right? That's what it's for? Okay, well, local government in action, and we like having you here. So it's the first meeting of the month, and so what we do is we report out. to the taxpayers where the finances are at any given moment. And so this is for the period that ends April 30th. We started with an opening balance of $11,864,000. We had receipts of $979,000, disbursements of $1.1 million, and an ending balance of $11,715,000. Only a couple of budget adjustments proposed by our bookkeeper and Conway. And then you have your monthly variance report as always. Are there any questions folks? If not, would somebody like to make a motion to accept the monthly supervisor's report? So moved. Thank you, Bill.

Second.

Thank you, Christina. All in favor? Aye. Okay, Bill, Christina. Aye. Thank you very much, let's all file. We also have the clerk's report for the month of April. Deanna, if you'd be kind enough to report out.

Town clerk's report for the month of April 2026. Total local shares remitted to the town, $7,295.70. Amount paid to New York State Agriculture and Markets for the spay-neuter program, $37.00. Amount paid to New York State Department of Health for marriage licenses, $157.50. Amount paid to New York State Environmental Conservation for hunting and fishing licenses, $956.80. Total state, county, and local revenues, $8,447. Thank you.

We also have some vouchers.

And I hereby certify that vouchers numbered 34774 to 34872, processed in the month of April 2026, are an accurate reporting of the abstracts approved for payment by the town board.

Very good. Is there a motion to accept the clerk's report? So moved. Second. All in favor, any? Aye. Myself, aye. Bill? Aye. And Christine? Aye. Thank you. Very good. Okay, just quickly, we'll go through announcements. The county's Office of Veterans Affairs has a mobile outreach coming to Village Hall. Village Hall, we have the mayor with us tonight.

It was yesterday.

What's that?

It was yesterday.

It was yesterday, so that's not helpful, is it? How'd it go?

It was good.

Good.

The County Office of Veterans Affairs is there to support. They can do home visits as well. Happy to share information if anyone would like.

Great.

Thank you very much.

The town of Red Hook, as you know if you've been following along, we applied for a grant a couple of years ago to update our comprehensive plan. We received that from Department of State. There is a committee headed by Julia Solomon and they are doing their second workshop. They completed their information gathering and now they're looking for feedback about their initial reports. And so they're having an open house workshop that's this weekend, Sunday, noon to 4 p.m. at Rosedale Farm. And so they'll be family friendly. We had, by the way, successful events this weekend. Apple Blossom Day's loss. It always seems to be every other Apple Blossom Day where The weather is not ideal, but it was sort of our gain for e-waste and for Shred Day. Everybody went home and cleaned out their closets and brought their e-waste and their shredding. So that was pretty intense but successful, even in the rain. So I want to thank all the volunteers. I want to thank our highway superintendent for setting up and directing traffic because there was a lot of traffic. But all the volunteers, the CAC, Jim Cavanaugh, and others for a great event. Now a follow up to that will be that Kingston and the Kingston area is having a free paint collection. So you'll probably figure out what to do with those paint cans. And this is Saturday, May 16th, Kingston Plaza, Plaza Road. If you've watched the last few meetings, the town of Red Oak is partnering with the library, the Red Oak Village Library, and we were approached and asked if we would sponsor Dolly Parton, any of you know, has an imagination library program where they mail to young kids to books. in order to get them in the habit of reading and looking forward to new books. And there's a launch party that is happening at the library Friday, May 22nd at 4 p.m. There is Rogers Run. Our annual Rogers Run is happening June 6th. It's a 5K. It starts as it always does. that's 730 to 830 start one mile or is that 845 I don't see we have a Memorial Day parade flyer but obviously the normal Memorial Day festivities with the lineup at the high school is happening on Monday Memorial Day it is the 250th anniversary of the United States The Revolutionary War, 1776. We have a couple of events that we'd like to let you know about. Flag Day, we will be opening up the Red Church. The Red Church, if you want to know where that is, is right at the border of Northern Boer of Tivoli and the town of Breadhub on 9G. It is a historic structure, very primitive and beautiful. We'll be opening that up for tours. We will have our town historian and also mayor, Major, give a talk. And a legion is participating also up in Tivoli. There will be several folks joining in those festivities. That's Flag Day. 3 to 5 p.m. about seven or eight years ago, the town took over ownership of the cemetery. The Cemetery Association transferred ownership over to us. Hope you'll enjoy it. Historic Red Hook has an open house June 6th with displays and a revolutionary duchess exhibit. Food trucks and activities on the lawn. I don't see that we have ours here, but we'll try and get that to you at our next meeting. Okay, with that being said, we have a public hearing. We're running late for it. I apologize.

Do we have the, we received a time sensitive memo from the housing committee. Is that on the agenda tonight?

It is not on the agenda tonight, but we can discuss it. We can discuss it, yeah. Yeah, I'd like to. Deanna, would you be kind enough to read the notice for the public hearing?

Notice of Public Hearing, Town of Red Hook. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Red Hook on May 12, 2026 at 7.35 p.m. local time at the Town Hall, 7340 South Broadway, Red Hook, New York, to hear all interested persons on a proposed local law, number A, proposed of 2026, entitled Local Law, number A, proposed of 2026, a local law adopting an amendment to the Community Preservation Plan. The proposed amendment incorporates certain additional properties currently owned on behalf of the Town of Water District No. 1. The Town of Red Hook Community Preservation Plan in accordance with Section 64 of the Town Law and Chapter 57 of the Red Hook Town Code establishes a plan for the preservation of community character to acquire interests or rights in real property for the preservation of community character within the Town including villages in accordance with such plan and in cooperation with willing sellers. and to provide a management and stewardship program for such interests and rights. The Town Board will meet to consider such amendment and hear all persons interested in the subject thereof and concerning the same. Copies of said proposed local law are available for review at the Town Hall, Red Hook, New York. The Town Board has classified the action as a Type 1 action and declared its intent to serve as lead agency for the matter. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at said hearing. All reasonable accommodations will be made for persons with disabilities. In such case, notify the town clerk in advance so that arrangements can be made. By order of the town board of the town of Red Hook, dated April 14th, 2026, Deanna Cochran, town clerk, town of Red Hook.

Thank you, Deanna. I put up on the board so folks could see. Again, this is just to be included in the community preservation plan. There was a significant update to the plan I believe 2016 and 2019 that reflects a lot of water resource protection eligible parcels. We were trying to figure out why these parcels weren't included and then we realized when you went to the county parcel access website, it came up Town of Redhub, and so it left one with the impression that the town already owned them, but they were actually owned by the water district, which isn't one and the same as the township. And so you can see the green, by the way, is the federal wetlands. And this is just to orient you folks if you haven't been following along. My cursor here is Aspen Wall. If you go Rec Park West, there is a trail that exits right about here. There's a parcel line here you may not be aware of. The water district used to own this. The trail comes out here and then you'll be on Aspen Wall. One, two, three, four, five parcels. This one here is almost entirely in the wetlands. The thinking is that there is probably a buildable lot here somewhere if they were joined together. I think the appraiser was looking at it as sort of one unit when they appraise. Sometimes they appraise separately or they look for the highest and best use and sometimes that's one unit. This parcel here later on, we'll be talking about calling a public hearing on the potential acquisition of just these four because we believe that there may be some retained rights to the adjoining landowner over here, including the right of first refusal. We're trying to figure out exactly what that ROFR is for. So the draft application that would need to be referred to the advisory board is going to only include these four parcels. And with that being said, I hope that's helpful. These are all surplus parcels that the Water District has been wanting to get rid of for a while. Used to have wells, can't have wells again. By owning it, the town, and using community preservation fund, we can permanently protect that water resource. The aquifer goes on and on, just so you get a sense of where things are. That's the water so that it can infiltrate the giant aquifer that we have in this community, village, and town. We've spoken enough. At this time, I'd like to make a motion to open the public hearing as it relates to the inclusion of these five parcels. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? Aye.

Aye.

Would anybody like to speak on this matter? Yes.

Chris. Thank you. Hi, my name is Eric Harpuzas. I'm the owner of One Dog with a Parcel. For those watching, I own Right here, I've got, from my understanding, the easement that goes roughly this bottom left corner of the star that I've maintained for five years. And from my understanding, the previous owners have maintained for roughly 50 years. Some of my neighbors have come to me to explain how it used to be clear cut down and they go and go ice skating on the pond. I've had trees fall down and cleaned everything up and maintained it. I just wanted to thank you for calling out my interest in that easement and working with me to do what we can to make sure that it's maintained for five years and the previous one for 50 I hadn't looked at when I purchased the property and I just again want to thank you for respecting that. Thank you very much.

Good evening. It's obviously not set for me. Karen Smyth, Mayor of the Village of Red Hook. With the second amendment to the Community Preservation Fund in a period of six months, it led to a discussion at the village board level. We had a meeting last night. And one of the discussions was the Community Preservation Fund gets its funding from the entire town, including both villages. However, the village has zero input Um, and, um, control over what may happen with these funds. And so the board actually put together a letter and, uh, I agreed to be the one to come and read that letter to you and put it on the record. So to the town, the Red Hook town board, we, the village board of trustees officially request that the Red Hook town council commit to a community preservation fund memorandum of understanding between the town and villages. as the Town Council once again considers an amendment to expand the power and broaden the scope of the Community Preservation Fund in their interest, and as the Town Council voted unanimously on February 10, 2026, to request that the New York State extend the Town of Red Hook's preservation funds and tax on real estate transfers in the Town until 2051, we ask that the Town fulfill the recommendations of the Community Preservation Fund Advisory Board listed within the Community Preservation Plan on page 2.6. I have a copy of the letter and that page for each of you. Community character includes village character, and as the nation commemorates 250 years of independence based on the premise that taxation without representation is unjust, village property owners deserve to have representation as part of the recommendation process. and that there should be an annual amount equitably allocated for village benefits and interests. That no such inter-municipal agreement or memorandum of understanding has been established to protect the interests of village property owners during the 10 years that this tax has been collected is a failure of representation. The village board of trustees, with the awareness that the real estate tax transfer extension is under consideration by the state this year, request the town council delay this amendment until an agreement is reached between the town and villages. And I'll just add, should you choose to proceed because you have specific parcels in mind, we would request that you put on your agenda very quickly this memorandum of understanding with both villages because we think this is very important and we think the villages should have direct control over what happens in their villages. Thank you very much. Thank you.

I'd just like to acknowledge that Mel Corka, the Deputy Mayor, is that her? Deputy Mayor, yes. Her official title. And made an effort to have a meeting, phone call that wasn't able to happen. And so there was significant outreach, but we weren't able to

um connect her with the community preservation fund committee today and apologies i will just point out you also have charlie lang listed as a member you have been listed as an architect i think he might appreciate the fact that he's got a different profession but he is not an architect so uh you know just for clarification i think on the list

When the reorg list was updated somehow architect got attributed to his name when I think it was who had previously been a member of the Community Preservation Fund, so I think that's a typo. Of course, Mel Korka has not been appointed to the Community Preservation Fund Advisory Board. Unlike many of our committees, the Community Preservation Advisory Board by statute needs to be comprised of a majority of members with conservation That would be why Charlie Lang fits the bill. It's because he worked for a DEP for, and maybe still does, for many years. And so when we look at who to repopulate, we need to make sure that we're not in violation of that. And the other requirement, and I think I have this right, and it's been 20 years, 20 years since we've had this, or 19 and change, is that it must be one farmer also on the board.

And I don't dispute that, but I just want to point out that there was an effort made, there were questions raised, there was an effort made to have communication, and that hasn't been able to be scheduled to date yet, just to to follow up on Karen's comments.

Yeah, I think that's between the chair of that advisory board and whoever wants to. They're all public meetings. Everybody's welcome to attend with those as well. And then we'll look into the idea of an allocation. I'm not sure that's legal. We've always wanted to have applications from the Village of Red Hook. We have assisted the Village of Tivoli. We didn't end up using CPF funds. But we have assisted them when they've needed to purchase and protect important parts of the village. We would love to have a project in the village. I know at one point Brett was interested in whether or not that wall would qualify in front of Maynard Ham's house or not. But please, if you all have some projects, bring them forward. Okay.

These public hearings have consistently been pro forma with the outcomes predetermined, and I expect that tonight's will not be any different. And three of you have been rather predictable in how the voting goes. This public hearing is aimed at modifying, again, the community preservation plan, the CPP, to add the five parcels in Water District 1 as a first step in their possible acquisition using money from the preservation fund. The parcels are designated as wetlands, and as a result, they meet the defined purpose of the CPP, but that was not the reason stated for adding the parcels. On March 25th, when the acquisition was first discussed, Robert was very quick to propose a pocket park detailed enough to even specify where the benches might be placed stating these parcels would be a great resting place a respite and if you go back and watch the video which is a gold mine of quotes you'll see that he was rather detailed in his vision and like many actions recently we were told this has to happen quickly in order to determine if the parcels are worth pursuing to offset the cost of the water tank rehab. Now I searched the 150 page CPP and I could not find one reference to using the funds to offset costs in another department. And we still haven't heard how much BART is contributing. On April 14th, the short EAF was reviewed and Robert stated the action is just the acquisition of the property. Christina disagreed because the EAF does not address the property use. at which point Robert said, I have no plan. I didn't hear anybody propose a plan here. I just suggested we would throw a couple benches out there, but there's no plan. Well, Mark Twain was right when he said, if you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything. After Christina added that having a few benches and paths should be included in the EAF, since there was an idea connected with the purchase, Robert stated, I appreciate your point of view, but I'm more opportunistic. The definition of opportunistic is taking immediate advantage of situations, often unethically or without regard for principles, and to serve self-interests. In terms of human behavior, it's often a negative connotation implying someone is calculating and unethical. Opportunistic indeed. The proposed modification to the CPP is the second one in less than six months. The feeling then, as now, is that the CPP is being manipulated to set a precedent for your larger self-indulgent project. All trust has been eroded. Take the sage advice of your colleague, Christina, and for once, follow the proper procedures and stop cutting corners.

Thank you, Lisa. Anybody else like to speak at the public hearing on this matter? Thank you. Roxanne, would you be kind enough to state your name?

Roxanne Fisher, Barrytown. Tonight's hearing is a study in procedural whiplash and willful negligence. Your own public notice for tonight's hearing invites us to a meeting in the year 2025. While that might be a simple typo, the legal errors that follow are not. Your notice labels tonight's action as type 1, yet your resolution calls it unlisted. And you have filed a short EAF. when the law mandates a full EAF for Type 1 actions. If this board cannot get the basic paperwork right for a self-sale of land, how can we trust your diligence in a multi-court litigation that has already cost the town nearly $300,000? You have dismissed six separate inconsistencies identified by your own planning board regarding the boat club seizure, yet you are now rushing a shortcut review tonight to shuffle preservation funds. This pro forma exercise is a bailout for a water district where infrastructure was neglected for years because fees were kept artificially low. You are shuffling millions of utility repairs while extracting revenue from our schools and spending on outside lawyers. This is a matter of untypical and illegal governance, a calculated manipulation of the CPF to set a precedent for future vanity projects. And as I always close my statements for the Red Hook Vote Club, it just takes one vote. One council member can choose to rescind his positive vote and end this eminent domain action tonight. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Senator.

I live at 52 Albee Road, which faces two of the parcels in question on the board there. When we moved to Red Hook in 2011, we were most interested in our house, which faced a woods forest that was natural with the animals running around as they do. And we did receive a letter from the zoning enforcement officer dated June 14, 2011, regarding 47 Albee Road, which is two acres of the top two parcels shown up there. Please be advised that the above-reference parcel is owned by the town of Bretthook, and that the town has no intention of developing the parcel. The parcel contains a national wetlands inventory wetland over much of the property and it is very unlikely that it could ever be developed. And so it's with great alarm that we're hearing about these plans and absolutely are not in favor of developing that land at all. It's already been kind of, you know, built on, you know, gradually in Linden Acres and the way it looks, the way it feels is changing. You know, certainly would like to hear what is being thought about, but the idea of taking down trees or, you know, even any of the foliage, because at this point it offers, you know, it characterizes the area. And so, I don't even know if people trooping in and out, sitting down in there. I don't know where they're going to park their cars. This type of intrusion is going to change the area entirely. So we are not in favor of anything that is going to cause that kind of disruption.

Thank you. And again, what this is about is inclusion in the plan. And to follow the next step would be an application to acquire it just to preserve the property for water resource protection. There's no plan to develop a park. I did say at some point it could be a pocket park. You can speculate all you want. I did think it would be nice to have a bench over here until I found out The adjoining landowner, you know, is where I thought a bench could go. Nobody's talking about driving anywhere. As I explained in a previous meeting, right here, you can see the cursor. Right here is the exit from Rec Park West. We've developed that very lovely trail that comes out here. There are more trails, as you know. Hopefully you're taking advantage of the trails over there. All I was thinking of is wouldn't it be nice if somebody could have a place where they could sit en route to doing all these trails. So that's for what it's worth, but there is no plan, and if there ever were to be a plan, that would have to be studied, whatever it is that the plan is that suggested. We don't have time to come up with a plan, and we've heard from others on the board that they don't want to have anything there. They just want to have, you know, protected for water resource. We can speculate all we want, but at this point, all we're talking about, and by the way, if we acquire it for water resource protection, then it's protected. I do want to let you know, if the town does not acquire it, the water district can put it up for sale.

Right. Well, as you mentioned, this letter made it sound as if the town already owned it. Right. That's what you mentioned at the beginning.

Right. It made it sound like it. But if the town does not acquire it, the developer could acquire it and come into, and if they can meet the laws and the codes, they can build one. I don't know if they could build two. Again, I'm not an engineer. They could build houses. They could do whatever is permitted in that zoning. So I would ask you all, all of you, to consider what the alternatives are if the town does not acquire it in order to protect the water resources that are on the property. And of course, as you can see how things flow, we want to make sure that Nothing untoward happens down into this aquifer.

So can you clarify what would be the procedure if the water board were to put the properties on the open market? That would require what?

A public hearing? That would require a public hearing, yeah, absolutely. And then they own it. We don't own it. So the 488 users are... essentially the water district number one and so if they decide on the water board on their behalf decides to put it up for sale which I they've been wanting to do for a while This worked out nicely because they were like, we need money to help with the rehab. I think somebody mentioned we don't know what part is contributing. We absolutely do. It's in the packet tonight. We've talked about it for several meetings.

But the procedure for that wouldn't be something that would happen overnight. There would be...

the procedure would not happen overnight, but they could put it up and they could put it up to the highest bidder and that's what they would probably be obligated to do is take the highest bidder.

There would be a public process involved in selling it if the water board decided to do that.

And there would be another public hearing should this go on the plan and should an application be made for the town to acquire from the water board, there would still have to be another public hearing with another opportunity to provide comments on that acquisition.

On the acquisition. This is just inclusion in the plan, in the community preservation plan. So I would, you know, suggest to you, give it some thought about whether or not you want these parcels that you thought were permanently protected, whether you want them included in the plan. I'm assuming you're in the water department.

So as a user, this does impact you directly to the extent that this is a way of preventing rates from going higher for the cost of the rehab of the attack.

That's what this is about. It was a two birds with one stone thing. It wasn't you were acquiring it because of It just happened that both things were working out. It seemed to be the water board chair had been asking about it for years. He was interested in disposing of it, but they never acted on it. And so the idea came, hey, why don't we do both of these things? And you know we're doing a lot of water protection, right? Parcels protecting around town, Camp Rising Sun being one of them. But I do thank you, and I appreciate your contribution. I can understand it. Whenever a project is proposed, even if it's a preservation project, we always hear from people in the neighborhood, and that's important that we do that. So we want to make sure that we're taking that into account. Thank you. I appreciate it. So you're saying... Anybody else would like to... Sorry. Yeah. Well, it's public hearing, so the public gets to go, and then we can make sure everybody's... I'll just answer my question.

Does the water board need... approval from this board to sell the property?

For disposition of surplus. I don't know that we can unreasonably restrict that, right, Chris? Let me put you by the rest of you there.

Is the question, well, this town board is essentially serving as trustee for the water district, right?

So they have to do what's in the best interest of the water district as a fiduciary.

in the district right so yes they would have to approve it after a public hearing that's the process for disposition right but the board would have to approve it but if we get the highest and best offer we would have to have a very good reason why we would reject that right well that's the fiduciary obligation I feel more confident that we can take that down. Yes, please, if you'd be kind enough to state your name just for the record, thank you.

Jeremy Cohen, I live at Two Dogwood. I'd just like to say that those wetlands are integral to the character and nature of the community, and I'm supportive as long as you guys don't develop If you guys are the ones who will preserve it, then I'm supportive on that basis. And it's an important issue to me and to my family. And yeah, just to let you know that it's integral to the nature of the community.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Anyone else want to speak on the carpet?

Yeah. Did you say before that there is a possible building site? Only one of parcels?

Well, again, I don't know. I'm not an engineer. I think that's what I said, is that if there's a possible building site for two on this property, that's what could occur, ultimately, if the town does not acquire it and preserve it.

Have we done a parcel JD? Have we done a parcel J.D. for the wetlands? There was noted in... A jurisdictional determination. A jurisdictional determination for the wetlands. We did not. Because one of the subsequent slides shows, calls it federal wetlands, which doesn't exist any longer.

No, the wetlands exist. We can talk about whether...

The classification of federal wetlands doesn't exist as a blanket determination. So have we done a parcel JD with DEC?

We have not. We feel confident there's a pond and a wetland there and that it's worthy and it leads into our aquifer and that it's worthy of inclusion because when we look at similar properties that were and there were hundreds of properties that were included in the community preservation plan There was a specific focus on updating with water preservation, water resource protection. No, we have not.

But a parcel duty is something that takes five minutes to request, but it takes a number of months to come back.

So it wouldn't be back in time for us to make a decision.

Well, I mean, what is our timeline for making a decision? I think that's up for discussion.

Well, if we hope to do the storage tank rehab this year, there's no way we would have that back in time. I'm not sure the purpose of that.

It's out for bid right now, and the bid closes at the end of the month. And given the environmental nature of this kind of project, which requires having to paint not the outside, but the inside, you have a very limited amount of time to work with. Because when it gets really humid later in the summer, it can affect the curing of the coating on the inside as well as the outside.

And so... Bill, they actually cannot do this project over the winter because of the temporary water.

Right. Right. And so, you know, what we're looking at is a very short time frame to deal with this. We did issue a bond. We did evoke and approve a bond of 1.6-something million. But until we get bids in, we don't really know, you know, what this thing is going to look like, and the water department would like to make a substantial contribution if they can. So I'm not seeing reasons for there to be resistance on this. What would the JD tell us, Christina?

It tells the classification of the wetlands and whether the DEC has jurisdiction over the wetlands, which is the regulations that went into effect January of this year for wetlands. They're no longer classified just as federal or state.

I just want to interrupt you. Those new regulations are no longer in place.

I understand that. I'm aware of that. It's another layer of complication to it that certainly would affect the assessed value.

Well, appraised value, I think, is what you're talking about. The assessed value is the valuation the assessor places on it. I understand what you're saying. I'm not sure how that would change if the line were to move over 10 feet or 20 feet or whatever. If we're not going to develop the land, it doesn't matter. Yeah, I think the point is if we're acquiring to protect the water resource, it seems to me that... You know, we've seen with our own eyes. The neighbors know it well. There's a water resource there. We've got 3 million and change and we think this is 200,000 maybe because it's one building site maybe. It doesn't matter if there's a building site or not. It has some value to neighbors. I believe that we heard that tonight that it has value to neighbors. So it's going to come up with some kind of valuation and yeah. We did hear there were two typos. Our attorney did say there was a corrected notice sent. Can we, Chris, can you just give us those corrections please on the notice? Somehow there was an old notice that was posted that had a typo. Is that right?

Yeah.

It's on this one. It says 2025. Oh, it was a typo on the 2025. And then the type 1 versus 2?

No, no. What we sent to be posted was that it was an unlisted action.

It was an unlisted action.

Correct. Because that was a correction that we sent after we had finished the secret review with Ted.

Okay, go ahead.

The resolution says it's an unlisted action.

The resolution does say that, okay. But the notice said that it was.

I don't know what the notice said. This is just what you have in your packet, Robert. I used what was in the packet, so.

It did say that. Yeah. When you read it tonight.

But I used what was in the packet. I didn't use what I posted.

So when you read it tonight, you used the packet?

What was in this packet.

Okay, but what was noticed was unlisted?

If it was sent to me, I usually print my own notice out and I did it this time. But if that was what was sent to me, I used what Chris Shaw sent to me.

Okay. Chris, did you hear that? You sent Deanna the correct notice? I sent it? Yeah.

I mean, I can't confirm what she published. I can only tell what we sent you.

You should confirm what was published. I can confirm what was published. If you want me to go get it right now, I can.

I think that would be helpful.

I read what was in the agenda packet.

Okay, so there was a... She read an old version. Okay, um...

Can we also confirm who was noticed for the public hearing? Is it the same as like a DBA where you're noticed within 300 feet?

It's the entire town. It's the entire town.

No, but when for like DBA and Planning Board, they'll be certified letters sent to properties within a certain boundary. So that didn't happen for DBA.

It's not part of the process. It's not part of the process.

It's significant to me because I've heard from a number of neighbors in the area that I haven't been able to connect with yet. So I consider leaving the public hearing open.

So remember that this is a public hearing on including it in the plan as a potential acquisition site. The other resolution on the agenda tonight is to set a public hearing in the future for consideration of the disposition and acquisition. Understood.

Yeah, so what I can do...

I just want to make sure that it's clear.

Yeah. So what I can do to alleviate that concern is we can get out tomorrow, we can like... Send a postcard to let people know about the, we often do that in neighborhoods. If we're going to hold a public hearing, we can send it to that part of Linden Acres. Let them know that the public hearing has been that town is looking to acquire four out of five parcels just to preserve the water resource. We can do that. Which sounds like what we've heard tonight.

What I would suggest is that we consider following the same standards that we do for every planning board and zoning board. We cannot do that.

That's not part of the process.

We absolutely, I mean, we're in control of the process, so we could choose to send a certified letter notifying neighbors within a determined boundary that there's an upcoming public hearing.

Well, that's, I think I just said we'll send all of it.

But a postpartum and a certified letter are two different things. Yeah.

Certainly the Water Department, as a part of their monthly billing, can send, or quarterly billing, as they do regularly. They send notices regularly as included in the bill when there's various things that are going to happen that they need to be aware of. It seems to me this would be a good opportunity.

I totally agree. I just don't understand why we would have a different standard than a certified letter is different than a postcard because there's a higher chance that it's going to be received and paid attention to. And so if that's the standard for other actions in other areas of our government, I think we should consider doing that for this action and other public hearings.

I mean, there's 488 users, so I don't think we're going to certify the 488 users of the water district.

Same standards as a public hearing for a site plan application. But it's not.

It's not. And I don't necessarily agree with you. Sending a postcard gets to people. In the mail, sending a certified requires, in many cases, they have to go to the post office, so they have to arrange it. Anybody who's sent for a certified that's not home knows what a hassle that is. And then they read this thing and they're like, why did I have to go through this thing to be here?

Maybe our council can answer the question. If the town board wanted to do what you're suggesting, would it require a change in the law for the town of Red Hook? Which could take a considerable period of time to do. which I don't think is very efficient in this situation. I do think, and the Water Board has said, issues notices as a part of their bills, which people read because they've got to pay them. Like, for example, if there's going to be a period on a certain street where the water's not going to be operated because they have to flush a hydrant or some other thing. They let users know this is an opportunity for them to pick the users who would be most immediately affected as a part of the bill. I think it's a good idea. And you don't have to be certified because they're going to get a bill that counts as a legal notification.

Can Chris answer that?

That's a good question. Can Chris answer that question?

Chris, do you want to talk about both the standards and And I don't even know who we'd mail to.

Well, I mean, I guess what I'm trying to understand is when we adopt a plan, there are hundreds, literally hundreds of parcels that are identified in the plan that are proposed to be potentially included.

And the statutory mandate that we can't change is that we have to identify all the parcels that might someday be acquired in the plan.

So the town in the past chose to be very inclusive in its discussion of parcels. And Ted actually said he didn't know why these parcels weren't identified previously, but because they met the wetland criteria. But the committee did their best to identify all these parcels. And as we've seen in some of these amendments, sometimes they didn't identify all of them. that really seemed to fit the criteria. But it would be a tremendous number of parcels. And when you consider that you're going to be adopting another plan next year, presumably, it would be presumably infeasible financially to do all those notices for the plan amendment.

I completely disagree.

To do it for all of the parcels would be very costly. And you guys would have to think about that.

Chris, can you answer Bill's question, though, as to whether whether legally we can notice the properties or we would have to amend one of our laws?

I don't think I would, I would not attempt to answer that off the cuff, Christina. I'm not going to give legal advice about things like that off the cuff, I'm sorry. What I can tell you is what the current requirements are for the CPF amendments.

And so just to be clear, what I'm proposing is that if these parcels were part of a site plan application privately that went before our planning board or our ZBA, then there would be a radius around those properties, which is something like 300 feet. And so that wouldn't be every house in the neighborhood, but it would be all of the Neighbors around the area and they would receive a certified notice of the public hearing and that happens Anytime anyone wants to do anything that requires a public hearing in our in our in our other board I thought it was 500 feet. It might be 500 feet.

I don't know what it is and I think that'd be appropriate if there was a development plan to notify them of There are 488 users who are entitled to know that the Water District is contemplating selling these to the town for preservation, where you're not going to certify mail all of those 488. That is too labor-intensive. I will also say that... It's not what I suggested, Robert. Please let me finish. There were hundreds of parcels included in the last iteration for water resource protection. We didn't. Inclusion in the plan. We did not send an email, sorry, a certified mail to those landowners. I don't like treating, you know, different property owners different than others. call going forward I would suggest if that's what we want to do next year when we take up the full-blown plan that we think about and ask the advisory board whether or not they want to incorporate that into the process to me I think frankly that this is just you know we can send a postcard we'll let them know of the public hearing we could you know, leaflet the neighborhood, the immediate neighborhood, and advise all the water district users and get the word out there. We obviously let people know to sign up for notifications so they would know. And I'm sure some of the neighbors talk to each other, and that's why they're here tonight, which is helpful also. We appreciate that. But to spend thousands of dollars in I don't know how many hours, and by the way, just doing a mailing for the water district or this neighborhood is not as simple as you think it is.

Well, so just to be clear, there's a public hearing currently open. I'm not in favor of closing it unless I know that the neighbors surrounding this property have been notified to the same standard that is held for any other site plan approval? I understand, but that is my opinion. And so if we have to take a vote to close the public hearing, my opinion is to keep the public hearing open because I have specifically heard from folks in this neighborhood that I haven't had a chance to respond to. And looking into it today, I realize I didn't know after all the years I spent on planning boards and all the applications that have come forth that have had to notice their neighbors, it's not a huge expense. We require that of every site plan application that comes before the ZBI or the planning board. So in my opinion, we should leave the public hearing open tonight.

I think there are a lot of people who should know about this, and the entire town should know about it. The 488 water district users should know about it. We should mail as many postcards as possible. So the impacted are the community, the entire community, the water district people, and the immediate vicinity. So I could see us mailing postcards to the immediate vicinity to then send out more news alerts that a public hearing is happening on the five parcels. But no, I don't believe that we should treat preservation projects and restrict the notice to 500 feet. So I look at it as what you're doing is a negative. You're restricting it to just 500 feet. I think we should notice everybody in the neighborhood and we should let them know and that's not 500 feet. And everybody in the water district we should let know. And I think we can do that to the extent that we have information available. We do that regularly. Is that not what you want but maybe a good attempt?

I would be, I think that that is very reasonable, but I'm still in favor of keeping the public hearing open until that happens.

Until that happens for inclusion into the plan. We've heard from people that want it protected in the neighborhood. I don't want to jeopardize our ability to protect this.

That's my opinion.

Okay. The clock runs out. We'll have to consider what other options the Water District wants to take. How do you feel if we notify people by postcards and we do a broader outreach but it's not certified? We include the notice in every billing. Well, I don't know if that's going to get there on time, though. So I think what we can do is use the... We can do postcards to the whole water district, okay? That we can do because we have that list. So we're going to keep the public email? I don't see a reason to keep the public hearing open to keep, to have this included. I think the better part, and you tell me if you disagree, would be to notify them that there's an upcoming public hearing on the acquisition so they can come to that. This only makes these parcels eligible, which I've heard tonight from at least the three landowners that they would like it to be permanently protected and not developed even as a park-to-park. So I think there's an opportunity to ensure that everybody's aware. There's an opportunity to stop this project from moving forward. But it can't move forward unless it's in the list of eligible parcels. Make sense?

Christine said there's other people that would like to speak, so I'd like to keep the public hearing.

Okay, I think we jeopardized the time frame. We jeopardized it. Okay. With that, a motion to... We'll make those typo corrections, and then I'd like to make a motion that we extend the public hearing until... May 27th. 735. Okay. We'll adjourn the public hearing.

Do you need a second on that?

Yeah. Would somebody like to second that? Christina, why don't you second that since you're suggesting it. Okay. Great. I'm going to go. You are now on it. No, I see no reason to extend the public hearing. Okay, so there's a motion to extend the public hearing. There's a second by Christina. Any further discussion? No. Okay. Kenny? Yes. You are a yes? You are a no? I'm a no.

I am a yes.

You are a no? You are a yes, rather? Sorry. Okay, so the motion fails. The motion will not be adjourned until 735 with the next meeting.

Well, I'm certainly not going to vote to close it. So then we're at a deadlock.

OK.

Let's come back. Let's move on to the next silence, please.

So I have a question for Chris. If we don't vote to close the public hearing, would it not just be continued?

It remains open. Chris, do you want to answer a question? No, I thought you just did. Yeah, it remains open. OK. We'll come back to it later tonight. We've got to get through some stuff. Did you all have a chance to take a look at the secret documents? Did you have any questions related to that? Any of the comments that you have?

Yes, I think we should immediately submit for a parcel JD with DEC.

Okay. The purpose of which is?

Is jurisdictional determination of those wetlands. Okay.

The wetlands that you said are not in effect?

I didn't say the wetlands are not in effect. I'm saying on the on the page, the application for funds, they're listed as federal wetlands. It says federal wetlands run through each parcel. That is not true. I don't disagree that there were wetlands on that parcel. That seems extremely likely. But the jurisdiction over those wetlands is not federal. It would have to be determined through a jurisdictional determination by the DEC. And why are they not federal if the wetland law was struck down? Well, that's an up-to-the-minute question. I don't know where that stands legally, but I certainly haven't heard that it's been overturned.

Yeah, it was overturned on April 9.

Yeah, but they haven't made a determination of what that looks like. So it hasn't, to my understanding, reverted back to federal and state prior to 2026 regulations.

I think it has. And unless there's an appeal, in which case the appeal or change from DEC, existing regulations are in place.

Can you speak up, Robert?

Sorry. I think that existing regulations would still be in place. Sorry, Rob. OK. You would like a JD knowing that it's going to take months and knowing it's going to be later than we can do it for this product?

There's no reason not to file for a JD. It's more information. And whether the time frame that it takes and how it turns out with the DEC with their regulations remains to be seen. But there's no reason. zero cost to it, and it's an administrative task that takes maybe a few minutes.

Okay, but you understand we would not be able to use the proceeds towards the, the water department would not be able to use the proceeds towards the storage tank rehab project? You understand that if it's going to take months because they need an answer in the next couple of months because that's part and parcel.

I'm not saying that we make a decision based on the jurisdictional determination or if that information doesn't come back, whether we don't decide to move forward one way or another. That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that we missed a step here. We should have... applied for a JD when we knew we were at all interested in the parcel and gotten that moving. And so now that I understand we haven't done that yet, we should do that.

I feel like we're repeating ourselves. You were used to development. These are not development projects, so you want requirements of all of them. It's nothing to do with development.

It has to do with understanding existing conditions on the parcels and understanding their value and their answering questions of the public of what can be developed, what can't be developed, what is the, have the wetlands been delineated? But if we're not planning on developing the land, even if it wasn't a wetland, if we have no intention to develop property, then... We should know what exists on the property.

We can always do that. There's nothing to stop us from doing that. However, if you're suggesting that that gets done before this process goes through to help the water department, there are 488 users. who may have to pay a lot more for their water as a result of not being able to lower the cost on the rehab of the tank. This is a very simple matter, and I'm kind of bewildered by the amount of what appears to be resistance to this action. I don't think there's anything controversial about this. I'm not saying we shouldn't do a JD at some point. Fine. It just says where the lines are. But this is about... and making it and it does affect the value I mean obviously if it's going to be appraised but I don't think it's going to make that much of a difference because an appraiser is going to go out there and see you can't really develop this I just don't see a reason why we why we wouldn't do a GD well you you came up with the reason that you said it's going to take several months so we're not going to know it's something that you request in five minutes and then it comes in when it comes in so it like I think it's

I think, Bill, you're right that it deserves further discussion, and whether that factors in to a final decision or not remains to be discussed, but there's zero reason, in my opinion, why we would be resistant to requesting a partial J.D. and seeing what comes back from that. I'm not resistant to doing it.

I'm resistant to making that a requirement. proceed with this action.

Understood. And that was not my intention to make it a requirement. I think we should file for parcel JD. And we should continue to discuss.

OK. So it sounds like we could file for a determination. and see what we get back from DEC, although I think we've acknowledged that we're not going to get back anything from DEC, but we can do that in time. So let's do that, but we won't make it a condition, if I'm hearing that right, of moving forward. We should further discuss it. Further discuss.

We're not passing a resolution and coming up with conditions of what the what an approval is, so it's irrelevant in tonight's discussion.

Well, I'm not sure what relevance it is, knowing exactly where the line is, because it's a white line, and the line is going to change over time. The whole idea is to protect that resource.

The whole idea is to have information and filing for a JD. I don't know why there'd be any resistance to that because it gives you more information.

I think you brought out why it's wasted, but yeah, let's file for the JD. Let's do it. Okay. Do you agree on that? I think we're going to lose this project. Okay. Any questions on two and three? Impact, no impact. Again, this is just so it can be included in the plan. Would you all have a chance to read that? We're an hour and ten minutes into it. We've got our engineer waiting. All right. No questions on the, Christina, anything that you want? Any concerns you have on Seeker review of it?

No further comments.

Does that mean no further concerns or no further comments?

No further comments tonight.

All right. I just would suggest, you know, New York State has a guideline book on Seeker, page 54, 55, addresses some of the things that you... concerns that you've raised and talked about.

Yes, I'm very familiar with secret.

Right. Since there is no plan for the property. Okay. Let's move on. Let's go. Hi. Hi. Can I still talk? Yeah, India's still open. We've got to go quickly because we've got our engineer waiting in another state.

Yeah, well, you know, my name's . I live at Fort Dogwood. And like the climate I can tell has been challenging largely because it seems like there's been a lot of discussion about property acquisition. And I know there's a lot of folks here, right? And so when you have a climate like that in a town like this, It makes these discussions even more challenging. I live right next to Jeremy. We live right across from this parcel. It's wet. There's not much you can do with it. It sounds to me like you want to preserve it. I can take you at face value for that. It sounds to me like you want to go through more procedure, but is there a potential buyer for the property outside of the town or is that just hyperbole?

I have no idea if the water district puts it up. I will just tell you if you haven't read my my newsletter Part properties that are going up for sale in this community in the last month Many of them have gone to contract in four days or yeah, but the water tables rising here people don't want this land So I'm asking you flat out.

I have no are you aware of a potential? Oh, I have no idea Okay, so it's hyperbole

No, no, no, I'm just saying that the property, I have no idea, there's no, again, Speculation. I'm not going to speculate on what would happen with the property if somebody else were to buy it. I'm not going to do that. Nor am I going to have an engineer to find out whether or not it's buildable. Can I make a request? You can make it your statement.

Well, I think it's a request. You're the elected official. I'm just a taxpayer. I think it would be helpful to minimize the amount of speculation and discussion because when you say things, people react, right? People think, oh, they're gonna develop a house in front of my house, right? You talked about a bench, it's turned into this whole thing, right? People get emotional. So I think speculation, maybe try to minimize it if you can. If you legitimately want to preserve this land, I would request, let's just preserve it, if that's the goal. I don't think that this land is going to do anything other than be a sanctuary for turtles and have deer walking through it. If you want to come by, I'll make coffee, give me your orders, we can walk around, we can talk about it, legitimately. I'm not being a jerk. But I think we're caught up in a lot of discussion that probably doesn't need to take place. If you are being authentic in your goal, and I know that there's like procedural problems that have come up and there's not trust in procedures, but to a certain extent, I think we should just like figure this out. You know what I'm saying? Because if there is a legitimate buyer, then I would prefer the town to preserve it. But if that's not really the case, then maybe we should let the public hearing go on. So I don't know.

I think you guys just... To answer your question, authentic about preserving, I worked 21 years ago with the state senator and assembly person to get this drafted and enacted. And that's why it's up again as a 20-year period, this community preservation fund. So yes, I'm very serious. Worked tirelessly to get that thing passed. The most controversial thing in this community is not the book club acquisition. The most controversial thing was the 2007 referendum for community preservation, which was passed by 33 votes because the timing, now I'm giving you a little background, this might be new here. The voters went because it's a new tax, it was eligible for a referendum, unlike other things that are not new tax, okay? So all I'm saying to you is that yes, we're very serious about We have protected and used this tool. We've collected over $8 million. We've leveraged it to almost $20 million worth of projects, which have made a huge difference to the quality of life in this community. If you drive down West Curly Corners, almost all of it is preserved with community preservation. Are we serious about preservation? Of course we are. I don't know what, there are properties here I never thought would be developed in this neighborhood, by the way, in different parts of this neighborhood that were too wet to develop. You'd be surprised. what Dutchess County will allow with an above ground septic, right? Above ground, right? A raised septic bed on wet parcels. So I don't know. I don't want to speculate. And we are not going to, you know, a review seeker about what might or might not happen, okay? We're just looking at the eligibility of these parcels. And we're getting pushback on the eligibility of these parcels for preservation. And so I'm thinking the clock's going to run out.

One clarification. You are voting tonight to determine whether you're going to add this to a plan. That's it. And then there will be another hearing to determine whether you're going to acquire it. Can you please pass it? That's my request. Two votes don't pass. Unfortunately, we have a new member tonight. It's all good.

Thank you.

Nice job. Thanks.

Okay, let's, Randy, I thank you for your patience, and if we have time tonight to get back to that issue, we'll get back to that issue. If the clock runs out, we'll have to do something else. Randy, would you be kind enough to just give us, Christina, you had asked for an update on the formation of potential water district number two, and... We weren't quite ready with the map plan and report, but we wanted to get an update.

Hi, everyone. So I'm Brandy Nelson. I'm an engineer with High and Bond. We've been working with the town on infrastructure improvements to the town's traditional neighborhood development zone. Just for the public who are here, the first step was forming a sewer district. And so providing the TND the opportunity to develop to the density that the community had originally envisioned requires infrastructure. And that infrastructure would be sewer and water so that large amounts of space doesn't have to be allocated for wellhead protection areas and septic systems. So specifically, now we're in the phase of looking at water. A couple of months ago I was before this board with a summary of the preliminary engineering report which looked at all of the parcels in the town that are served water through the village's distribution system. So the village distribution system extends sort of in a radial fashion out from the village and serves a number of properties. There is still nothing from the county. I don't know how to get the maps out of the county for the other water districts. Could we approximate it?

I mean, we know, so if there's no maps, For instance, the Jefferson Road neighborhood, we know that there's public water in that neighborhood, right?

Correct. So maybe... Like, if you guys are comfortable with just, like, circles, like, we know there's water here, here, and here, we can probably do that. We were hoping the county could give us the shade models. It would be so much easier and more accurate.

I agree with you, it would be more accurate, but given the time frame, maybe it could be, like, um... like a parcel access activity where you, you know.

That might be a little time consuming, but we can, I think we could generally say like circles. Generally there's a water service in this area. What we were hoping to also get with the county is how many users, how big the service is, like because I can see the questions will spiral out from like, oh, there's a water facility here. Well, what's the capacity? Can we add to it? You know, at a more like regional planning kind of level. At the meeting, at that meeting, this board asked us to focus specifically, oh yeah, if you want to look at this, so the parcels in green are the parcels that are served water now. We're focusing specifically on the Route 9 corridor area in the traditional neighborhood development zone, which is Route 9 south of the village. Again, the parcels in green there are the ones that currently receive water service from the village. But the TND zone also includes a number of parcels that do not have public water. And in those instances, if the parcels are developed, they have a well as the water supply. So we're looking at the area that is the same as the sewer district, which parcels are served by water, which parcels are not served by water. So if you don't mind going to the next slide, please. So I have changed the orientation on this. So the other map you were looking at north was up, now north is to the page right. And that's just so that geometrically it fits better on the slide. The parcels that are outlined in light blue are all the parcels that would be located in the proposed water district number two. Those parcels are, as I said before, the same that are included in the sewer district number one. that was formed last year. The parcels that have black dots on them are parcels that do not currently have water service from the village. The parcels that have, I'm sorry it doesn't show very well here, gray dots on them are the ones that do have water service. And then in green lines are the existing water mains that serve the parcels that have water and the black lines are proposed water mains that would need to be installed to extend the service or provide what's called looping in the water service to improve water quality and reliability. And so on Metzger Road, for instance, we're showing that we can pick up water service to four or five more parcels by adding a section of water main that would connect from Route 9 down to where the water main stubs from the Glen Pond Drive neighborhood. What that does is it allows water to be fed in two directions, improve water quality. It's best practice in terms of maintaining high quality water.

So I have a question for you, Brandi, on this slide. Can you point out which parcel is Savona's restaurant?

Savona's restaurant is, is it two down for Mighty Donuts? Or is it one down?

Yeah, I think, is it that L-shaped one right there?

Oh, okay, yes, that's correct.

So, I know that that parcel is connected to the neighborhood behind it. So part of the request of understanding where all the water districts are isn't like, necessarily to have the boundaries extremely precise if that's difficult to achieve, but understanding the context of where their connections are. So that black dot does have, to my understanding, water service.

So the black dots do not signify anything other than they are not served by the village. So they do have either some other water service, or they would have a well, or there's no development.

I just want to make sure. No, that's valid. But just to go back to our discussion a few months ago, the context that I was looking for is understanding where properties are connected to other water districts, whether or not they're in the village or something else.

Yeah, so, I mean, in this case, we may take Savonis out and not include it.

It's... Oh, no, don't take Savonis out.

That's a good question. No, no, they don't want to be taken out. Right now, we're just sort of, like, a binary, sort of.

If there's a county water district or if there's any other water districts that are in the areas that we're considering and looking for, like, to understand what... For what purpose?

Can we just color code that?

I'm just curious, like, what are you driving at? To understand what the existing conditions are and who's connected to what in this district that we're considering.

So I think Savonis is the only one that's the one-off connected to anything else.

There are no other water systems, as I'm aware.

If we could confirm that, that would be helpful. Okay. Okay. All right, so this is the proposed area. As I said before, black lines are the proposed distribution system improvements that would provide service to all the parcels. And then what we do in the map plan report. So this is the map part of the map plan and report. So what parcels are going to be served, what improvements need to be made that would result in some capital costs. Then what we did on the next slide, if you don't mind reducing and then going to the next slide, we looked at how much water is being used currently. So right now, out of the 51 parcels that are in the proposed district, approximately 25 of them are already receiving water service. And to determine how much usage they have, we have looked back over the last three years of billing data that the village provided to us, and those 25 parcels are using approximately 10,320 gallons per day, that's an average flow. So they may have days where it's higher, they may have days where it's lower, but that's the average based on three years' worth of meter data, assuming their current parcel use. When we go to the next slide, we're looking at what is the additional usage that would be anticipated given the current development of those parcels that are not served water yet. So current development, so if they have a single-family house on them, but they're zoned for multifamily, they might change in the future. But right now, they're just a single-family house. So we use the New York State DEC's estimated values for each building use or parcel use type to estimate what the usage would be for the additional parcels in the district. And that's 18,210 gallons per day. So altogether, we'd expect that the district's average day consumption of water from the village would be approximately 29,143 gallons per day. We then also, because we're going to need to go and have a conversation because the mayor's not here anymore, but we need to go and talk with her team and they ask us what's the usage going to be now and what do you anticipate the usage could be in the future because they need to confirm that they can provide that supply to us. to estimate potential future use if there is growth on all those parcels that is to the upper limit of what the zoning will allow. We estimate that full build out, we would call that, is 115,130 gallons per day. So what we need to do is take these values of existing use, future use and full build use and go back to the village and get what's essentially like a will serve letter from them. The way you dealt with this with the sewer was that early conversation about how much capacity you needed in the sewer system resulted in an inter-municipal agreement. So there will be some action this board's gonna have to take related to water consumption as well. And so that's kind of where we are in terms of process. We looked at quantity, quality, and then we took the estimated capital costs associated with the full build-out to look at, preliminarily, the cost associated. That's on the next slide if you want to go one more slide. So there are a couple of tables here that I'm showing you that are in the map plan and report. The top table is the estimated cost for the capital improvements that are necessary to extend the water service to all the users. So those were, again, those black lines that I showed you on the slide. on the graphic a couple slides back. And so we have nothing but very rough lines on plan right now. So these are fairly conservative costs, but we want to use conservative costs for planning purposes. So that works out to be just about $3.3 million. Then what we need to do is we need to look at what are the costs going to be to users and to equalize users, recognizing that some users are single-family homes and some users are commercial users. we use what's called an equivalent dwelling unit. And so that's like a factor, if you will, that equalizes the water consumption and allows for that variation in water consumption between a residential user and a commercial user. So based on the calculation, the number of equivalent dwelling units in the district is 193 EDUs. And from that, we've figured out what the EDU-based user fee would be to pay for those capital improvements. And that works out to be $984 annually per EDU. So some parcels would be assessed one EDU, others may be assessed more than one EDU based on their water consumption. And then what we have to do is we have to look at an affordability calculation. depending on the affordability will trigger whether or not the office of state comptroller needs to review the district formation. And so what we did was we look at affordability using three different things. One is the water rate that is charged by the village for base water consumption. The way the village's rate structure works right now is that they assume you're going to use a certain amount of water per quarter, and they charge you a flat rate for that amount of water. If you use over that amount of water, then they have a per gallon rate. And then there would be the EDU-based user fees that carry the capital costs associated with the improvements in the water district. So you can see in table 4.2 on the right hand side, lower right hand side, the base user charge is $678 per year. We estimate that the average user is going to use more than the base. And so that would be an additional $233 plus the user fee per EU. $984 which gives us a total of $1,895. The line for affordability is $1,213. So this means we are over the affordability line and based on these initial calculations we would need to have a conversation or we need to have a review by the Office of State Comptroller. So I think there's some you know, discussion that we need to have with the village around the rate structure. And so we thought it best at this point in time to like sort of hit the pause button, give you guys an update, and then let's have a discussion around what conversations need to be had with the village before we would move forward with finalizing this and the board taking any action.

So we've got existing agreements in place, handshakes in place. Yes. It's a bit of a mess that we have to clean up in a way. Um, existing service, holding pipes, um, properties that aren't yet serviced, but that will be... There's quite, within the district, there's quite, um, an eclectic mix of agreements and service structures and things like that, so... And I think the important thing is that we need to get the right structure down to, because this is a town water district, so the village has to work with us if they're going to service these properties that are on the property. to get a rate that falls, you know, within reason. Right. And there's some existing agreements. Right. Especially if the district is going to be responsible for the capital replacement costs. Correct. Right? Right. And I don't know what their position has been on these pipes that they've put out into our township.

I mean that is actually one of the reasons we're looking at forming the district is it's unclear who is responsible as pipes come to the end of their useful life who is responsible for paying for those pipe upgrades and so a district is the mechanism that can borrow money or seek grant funds and so forming the district gives the users the opportunity to avail themselves of those financing mechanisms.

And the only two choices are the village because they provided the service and they charged the fee or the individual property owner has to figure out where to get their water. It's not like the town's going to be on the hook for that.

And there are also complexities between how a village provides water versus how a town can provide water because you're not serving all the residents of the town and so You can't apportion capital costs where there isn't a benefit to everyone in the town. So this is worth sorting out. It's good that you guys are tackling this, but we're at the point where we're kind of at a sticky point where we need to go back and visit with the village again.

But to be clear, towns are not required to provide water to their residents. Villages are.

That is correct.

And therein lies the difference.

That's it.

That is true.

We're never going to realize the vision of the TMD and get, you know, we've got to figure out how to service one way or the other those parcels, those black dots.

When you talk about affordability, of these 193 build-outs, what's the percentage of commercial as opposed to residential?

I would have to get back to you on that, Kenny. I don't know off the top of my head. But there is a mixed, one of the TND parcels is identified specifically for residential development, sort of similar to the traditions development. off Metsger Road. The others are allowed for mixed use but we don't have any firm plans like the Ross's parcel. They've got conceptually plans that are for mixed use but you know nothing firm that we've looked at. So I could give you what is commercial now versus what is residential now if that's helpful.

It goes right through the TND commercial corridor zone.

And how many single-family, I mean, in terms of residential, there's many types of residential, but single-family homes. Is that kind of your non-conforming single-family?

If that's useful for you guys, I can aggregate that information. I don't have it off the top of my head.

Marshall has a different rate than residential.

In terms of the rate structure, the rate structure is set by the village, and the village has one uniform rate structure that they apply to all out-of-district users unless they've negotiated a special arrangement, and there are a handful of those as well.

And that's why I would ask you all to consider as we move forward, you know, if the village is letting go of whatever obligation they have, or if don't feel they have to maintain they've been servicing and charging double all these decades Willow Park you know right here for example if they're letting go of that obligation and the creation of a water district then you know perhaps something more reasonable like the 1.5 times might be appropriate and get us down below and a more affordable so we can see So if we don't get water to go with the sewer, those properties in the T&D are not going to be happy.

And if I can just, just for point of clarification, if you are thinking, well, why do we need water? If we've got sewer, just let people stay on their wells. The way the village now bills their residents for sewer is based on water usage. And it's easier to meter water than sewer for some obvious reasons, and just a lot less maintenance. And so to have the water and sewer be the same and be able to meter the water and then base a building on the water meter is very typical for municipalities in New York and more aligned with best practice.

Okay.

Are there any other questions or any other feedback you guys have?

I appreciate the update. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you guys. Okay. Got it. Okay. Well, next on the agenda item was supposed to be Local Law A. We looked at Seeker. I think it'd be appropriate to come back to Local Law A. I've heard what you both have said. Also heard from the public. I heard all the comments, I believe, with the exception of the neighbors. The neighbors were very much in favor of preserving these parcels. They cannot be preserved with community preservation funds right now. That is not a possibility right now. I've heard from the neighbors. I can't imagine. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the other neighbors around there that we're going to mail to, whether it's certified or postcards, we can reach everybody at the water district. I can't imagine they would be opposed to preserving those parcels. But they're not eligible. The clock's going to run out because we have to do bond resolutions. We have to figure out the financing. We're going to get our appraisal. We're not going to call a public hearing. We can't call a public hearing on parcels that aren't eligible. The clock's going to run out on this one. The Water District's going to have to put the parcels up at a later date. And so be it. So I'm going to come back to you both, Kenny and Christina, and ask you whether or not what you've heard tonight tells you that you don't think those parcels should be eligible for preservation funds. Because time is of the essence.

Well, we meet every two weeks, so it's...

I understand how often we meet, but I want to tell you, first you want to run through the process of what's left to do, because we have to call a public hearing, which we're not going to call tonight because they're not eligible for CPP. We're not going to refer to the CPF advisory plan because they're not... parcels that are eligible we're not going to get their feedback then we have to do a financing plan we have to do a bond resolution right chris that has to age for 30 days all of this needs to be done by the end of june well you have already done the bond resolution right that's right we did do the bond that's true but we do have to come up with the financing plan and so we need to be able to tell our lender what the financing plan is, and we won't have a financing plan in place. And again, the only question in front of us tonight is whether or not these parcels should be included because they have water resources, something that nobody seems to deny, just where the exact lines are, is what's been called to question. And there is an opportunity for the public to comment at the call of public hearing on the acquisition for preservation of water resources. So I'm going to put it out there for maybe the second time and maybe the last time whether or not we would like to entertain passing local law A tonight after the comments that we did hear in the public hearing. Kenny, what are your thoughts?

I'd like to hear more comments.

You'd like to hear more comments. Okay, so you're okay with not passing this and making these parcels eligible in the CPF plans, knowing that the public will be able to comment on whether they get acquired. It's just whether or not they get included as a possibility in the plan.

I'm good with the vote as it stands. I would consider if Robert or Chris could weigh in. If there are other... like overarching tasks that need to be scheduled that we can look at the overall process and consider what that looks like. But if there's nothing else that we can do because we're keeping that public hearing open, I'm OK with that for two weeks. Question.

Is a public hearing still open? Do we still have a chance to comment?

Public hearing is still open for tonight, Robert.

My name is Rob Singleton. I live at 19 Smith Street. Kenny, Christina, I don't think you can answer this question. Robert and Bill, how did we get to this spot where the clock has got to be done? Why is the clock running out? What was your plan for financing before this came up?

I'll answer that question. Part of the reason that we got to this place is the type of rehab that is being proposed for the water tank is extremely narrow because of the environmental conditions in which it can be done. And, hear me out. I'm an engineer. Okay, so are you involved in rehabbing water tanks? On nuclear submarines, yes I was. So the issue here is, and our water board, not the department, but the board, consists of people who run water departments in other municipalities, and they do this. What they're saying is, basically you have June into about half of July to complete this task, otherwise you're probably going to have to wait another year. And if you wait another year, the cost will just be much more than it is now, and It's their professional considered opinion that it has to be done. They made the decision to rehab as opposed to replace. And we're at where we are because of the timing on this issue. It's out for bid. The bid closes the end of this month. And part of the financing issue is that it's a shame Brandy left because Brandy did a report that talked about the potential costs for these activities. We passed a bond resolution for 1.6 and change million. When the water department came up with time bonds estimate, part of the cost they were hoping is to get maybe $150,000 to $250,000 from these parcels to help lower that cost and burden on the people who live in the water department, the 488 users. If we don't do that, when we see what the bids are, it may turn out that the bids are so astronomical that we can't do it anyway. But we were hoping to be able to at least have something in place to be able to, if those bids come in an area that is viable, that we could then make an award and get it done.

I don't think that was the question, though. The question is why.

How long have we known about the issue?

Many months this has been on the agenda. Many, many meetings. This is not something that maybe some of you won't.

So I think it's a little ironic now that we're under a time crunch. Only a few months.

It has been on the agenda for many, many meetings. It's a time crunch because that's where we are. The time crunch is only on the issue of the rehab.

I want to answer this. I think it's important for the public to know. I know, but the issue of the rehab has been going on for years, actually. A decision was finally made many months ago to rehab as opposed to replace. We passed the bond resolution. This issue on these four parcels, we're adding the parcels, was something that the water department has been wanting to do for a long time. And finally they said, well, If this can help defer the cost to our users, this would be a good thing to do. And we agree. Why there is such resistance to trying to get what is really a mechanical process done, I am bewildered. Okay.

We need to, Robert, thank you. I appreciate it very much. This has been on the agenda for many, many months. We'd like to accomplish it for people in the neighborhood and people in the water district, but it doesn't look like that's happening. Going through the rest of the agenda, at least town board members take a look at, we would have been setting a public hearing to get input on the acquisition on behalf of the water district. And then here was what the application, I realize I didn't date it, It was for the four parcels, as I mentioned. It was not for the fifth parcel. So we got more information on that. And I don't think that necessarily that's anything that would happen anytime soon on that fifth parcel. And I have on there federal wetlands. Let's move on to number four, please. Okay. All right. I will note that in my experience, the county has not, if there's an individual parcel, the county has not denied the building permit for a single family house if it's already separate. But that may be the case. Certainly might be the case on the parcel. Typically they will allow building permits for building houses when they've already been separated. Okay, water rates. So here we are on the second part. The Water Board met on several occasions, and again, I think I described to you, you know, the cost of infrastructure has gone up a lot. Different municipalities have chosen to address it in different ways. I think that I mentioned it illegitimately, had an annual $1,300 assessment. to raise the minimum to 68. And I say that, and the reason I'm pausing is because now that there's not going to be sale proceeds, because there's not enough time, we have to decide if we want to call the public hearing knowing that it's likely that those rates, they have a meaning between now and the next?

They were going to, except that there's an issue that is preventing that from happening.

Oh, gotcha. That's a good one. I agree. Well, the rest of them might have to make, because they might have to make an alternate proposal now.

Well, there's no reason we couldn't open that public hearing and keep it open if there was a question about whether the rates were effective.

at all. I mean, we'll just drag this out so it's not a possibility this year. I mean, if you're going to hold, if you're going to extend this public hearing on the rates, by the way, the rates are effective July 1st, they would need to notice the 488 water district people. So if we don't...

But there's no reason a public hearing can't be continued if there's ongoing information. There's no reason not to open a public hearing and start to hear comment. And if there's questions about anything within the proposal, then it could remain open. We're not under any obligation to take action. by a certain date until a public hearing is closed.

No, I'm just saying if we wanted to accomplish this financing that included the several elements, which is the BART contribution. sale proceeds.

I'm in favor of scheduling a public hearing for our next meeting and then determining whether it can be closed or not.

No, we should.

I agree with you, but I think it's important for the public to know all of these issues are integrated. So, for example, what the Board of the Water Board came up with, this $11 for $9,000, was predicated in part on both what Bard's contribution is as well as the disposition of those four parcels. So if we can't sell the four parcels...

It's going to be a higher rate. We just tonight voted for essentially higher rates. Okay. But we can call this public hearing at this amount. Chris, if we substantially raise the rates at the next meeting because we don't have the sale proceeds, we're going to have to extend that public hearing, you think?

Well, any time you're going to consider a rate increase, you're going to have to have a hearing notice that states the rates you're composing.

Right.

What do we have from BART? Where did that land? 200.

It's in your backup. So if there was a material increase in the rate,

compensate well I'm gonna tell us we're gonna extend well no we should have the public hearing because the bids will be in the next meeting is what yeah no I don't I don't disagree I'm sorry I didn't mean to suggest we wouldn't have a public no I mean we should and and when we get the bids it'll be informative of whether what the water department is requesting is adequate to me and if it's not and we'll have to reconsider. Okay.

I'm starting to get a lesson in how things don't get accomplished.

All right, let's call resolution number? 18. 18. It is May 12th, 26th, establishing a date for a public hearing regarding water rates and charges for water district number one, whereas the Red Hook Water Board has recommended modifications of water rates and charges to increase the minimum rate with the town park and just for the folks at home. The rates are on file with the town clerk with the proposed schedule for the water district rates and charges. We have very affordable rates here right now. The water board has decided it needs to ramp up those rates so that we don't have a big assessment like you've seen in other municipalities, and to pay for this project, the debt services associated with this project, and other expenses. So the public hearing is in this notice, scheduled for May 27th at 735. The Red Hook Water Board thought that they would raise the rates from $57.33 to $68 for up to 9,000 gallons, and from $6.95 to $7.56 for 1,000 gallons over 9,000. That's further set forth in the schedule on file with the town clerk. May we make that 745 instead of 735? Do we care? Just a little more time. Are you okay with that modification? Resolution number 18. Very good. Others of you have forms? Do you want to just bring the forms over here? Thank you all. Resolution number 18. So moved. Okay, set the public hearing as modified to 745. We're going to fill in the rest of that. I love that. Let's move forward. All right, we have a motion, 745. Second, thank you so much. Any more forms to sign?

Thank you very much. Thank you for coming tonight. I hope we inspired you again at the local government. Thank you.

745 on the 27th.

I second it.

The second. Any further discussion? No. All in favor? Aye. Bill? I'm going to vote no on this. I don't see any reason to raise rights if we're not doing the project.

I'll vote yes.

Okay. Resolution passes. There's a public hearing 745 resolution 815. There's the proposed schedule and then we'll try and Bill, can you update the water board and see if they can meet between now and then?

They had a meeting scheduled for the 20th, but they just sent an email out canceling it because of that situation.

Because of an individual not able to attend? I will speak with them tomorrow. Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Okay, let's talk about swimming. One of the healthiest things to do, supposedly. for all of us and the opportunity for everybody to get a chance to swim in this community. And so this is another thing we've been talking about for several meetings. Camp Rising Sun approached us and said Camp Ramapo was not using their facility this summer. They had a five year lease. Would we like to lease the pool? We've discussed it. We had Proposed some dates the usage would be basically summertime schools out 620 To September 7th Memorial Labor Day Federal holiday itis and The rent that they would like in exchange for that was $20,000 which is quite reasonable. Lifeguards, we've already had a couple of interests on that. And budgeting for to have two at a time, we would probably be looking at somewhere around $19,000. So we're looking at a $39,000, maybe a little more. Maybe we'll get a couple of chairs to go around the pool or whatever. And again, just to remind the public, they would take care of the entire pool facility. All we would have to do is pick up after ourselves and provide. But they'll clean the pool, they'll clean the bathrooms, all of that stuff at the conclusion of the day. We were looking at six hours afternoonish so that the pool warms up. if it ever is going to warm up here in the town of Brown tomorrow. Apparently it will. So here is a temporary use agreement, and I know you haven't had a chance to have much time to review it, so I'm not going to ask you to approve it tonight. I'm just going to ask you whether or not I know that you wanted to advance to this point at least, whether or not we're still in favor of trying this. It's a one-year project.

I'm in favor of it. I did actually review the lease in detail. I didn't know what we wanted to do. So I have comments on it. They're minor, but I don't know if Chris or anyone is.

Well, Chris is on.

Let's hear it.

No time better than that.

We can get this done. All right, so item eight, there's building rules. Do we have a draft of the rules? I'm just gonna go through them quickly. I don't need the answers tonight, but quiet number nine, quiet enjoyment. I don't know how you can be quiet at a pool, so I was concerned about the language in that one. There was, I think it in 12, Somewhere either in 12 or 13, there was a $2,500 damage deposit. But if it doesn't cover that, then what is the cap? In 13, there was nuclear explosions were noted. I don't understand that.

We would provide them a deposit of $2,500. That's all they're asking for is a deposit against any damage. They would review the property on September 8th and say, hey, we noticed our...

fence around the pool or something that there's damage to and so we're deducting X amount of dollars we hope you find that fair here's an estimate for the repair that's the purpose of that okay 19 insurance do we have a cost of the insurance and then on item 20 L there was a note of non-discrimination and handicap access so whether or not there was an ADA left included or whether we'd have to deal with that.

There was no ADA left, I'm not sure. Chris, did we cover this ADA accessibility for pools? I mean, we did.

No, I asked you to talk to whatever you were going to talk to the rec department and have them look at that. Yeah.

I mean, I don't know that we can modify their facility. I don't think that's good. I know that individuals can get in. I have to check. I have to check. I'm trying to remember now the entrance to the facility. I don't believe there's an obstacle except for getting into the pool itself, which is available. I don't think there's a lift there. Maybe look at the renting one, maybe?

I don't really ask the camp what they've done, because they've been running this camp in this pool for years. perhaps they've had issues with the campers who have needed assistance.

Yeah, that's a good question. I'd like to know. Okay, so let me just go back to 8 and 9 there for a moment, Christine. Building rules, yeah, we don't know what the owner's building rules are. have been and we can adopt and we do have our own rules. So we would implement our own rules which restrict many of the things listed here. Smoking, alcohol, vaping, all of that stuff. Yeah, it's general rule. We can come up with a list maybe between now and next meeting. Yeah, Chris. So just to explain, quiet enjoyment is just a real estate term.

It means that the landlord will let you be the tenant.

That's all it means. You don't change that. It comes from back in the day when landlords used to bust right into, unannounced, into realtors' apartments or homes.

Okay. What is... anybody sign a contract that is not affiliated with investment activities in Iran.

So you understand those are standard provisions that are from a statutory source that we mimic many of the provisions that are in the comptroller's standard conditions for their contracts to the extent that they apply to municipalities. So that's where that standard language comes from. It's mostly there. I mean, this is really there to protect the town, to require things that the town requires for its contracts.

Understood.

Yeah.

And in terms of insurance, Robert, I believe that you did look into this and conclude that these are coverages that you already have, right? We already have these existing coverages. One of the first things I did a decade ago was raise our coverage because we had very minimal coverage. That wasn't appropriate. So we exceed the amount that they're requesting. And the standard contract provisions. Picture of the pool. Those of you who haven't seen here, chemicals and everything in this side. Those are shower heads there, restrooms in the back. It's 40 by 80. There's a deep end and a shallow end. It would be very different than, you know, This is sort of in a quiet place off of Coral Mills Road. And many adults have expressed a desire to be able to swim and can afford either this or the BART swimming pool, because BART does allow that you have to pay either the rec or the BART. OK, so it sounds like, am I correct in saying it sounds like we're in favor of moving forward? We're going to make some changes to keep moving with getting the everything's time sensitive you want to get stuff done you got to get stuff done because these paintings separated apart and all the requirements so we've got to get lifeguards without lifeguards you don't have a program so i don't want to get ahead of our skis sounds like we're in favor of doing it yes sounds we're in favor of doing it okay we'll change the make some edits to the use agreement get a couple questions answered on Okay, so a question was raised about Barn and Water District amount, and we've reported on this in several meetings. Barn has offered $200,000 towards the rehab of the tank for our college back in the 80s. the backup, and have made this offer of $200,000, $100,000 to be done this year, $150,000, and ensuing next two fiscal years for them, which I think is July 1. And this agreement would, unlike the previous agreement, which didn't have an end date for some reason, 1989, So it's been in place now for 37 years, and this agreement would be for 10 years, and it would require them to contribute to any other type of improvements that were necessary during that period. When we looked at the actual usage, you know, you look at the contribution, For this project, it's 12-something percent. Their actual usage was something like 1%. So they're paying a premium because it's their backup, but they're not paying what their usage was. So this is the agreement.

So that's considered a final amount. I think that amount came up previously in another meeting.

This is the amount that they will agree to.

So the other question I had then is in Exhibit D, there are easements referenced that I didn't see attached. It's the very last page, page 14.

Yeah, I think this is a Word document. The Water District had an old map which showed the route of the easement.

So we can attach that.

It's something that the Water District has. It's an existing area that they have had for years. It's across from the... It's at the Route 9G entrance to Bard. because that's where the water line crosses, and Bill may have been out there directly, but the water vault is on that side, in the barred side of the road. So there's an easement for the water distributor to inspect and check the meter down there. That's the meter pit that's over there. So that's all that is.

Okay.

Okay, so we can attach that. We're not looking for action tonight on this agreement? So we could attach that. We will at the next meeting, any time. And then we'll see if we get any comments from the board.

Yeah, I mean, they need to confirm the properties served and some of those other details, right?

We're moving right along. We did get, I wanted to bring up, Christina mentioned, we got a memo from the housing committee. We're looking at, I had mentioned, I think a few meetings ago, that our county legislator, Chris Munt, had proposed a grant. funding for municipal innovation grant, well now municipal investment grant, sorry, the acronym has changed meaning every May the county puts out a certain amount of funding and highlights different areas for funding projects and they have put 50-50 matching up to, I think, 20 or 25,000, depending on what your project is, for emergency housing, temporary shelters, something that has been a topic of concern and conversation in the community. We do have, I'm sure you've noticed, we have a couple of individuals, at least, in our community that are unhoused. And we all got very concerned about what happens during the winter time in particular for housing. And so there was a shelter location in one of our churches a couple of years ago, a couple of years ago, that was not made available last winter. So the search is on for another location where we could do that or any other type of emergency we've shown for options and one of the things that was proposed by the housing committee and I should backtrack and say Jacob in his response to the housing committee, did he CC everybody on this one? Yes. Okay, so you all know. Is that one sort of a short notice on it and just The previous membership of the housing committee did not want to tackle emergency housing and sheltering. This group seems to want to try to do what they can with this issue, but we don't really have anything to apply with. We don't have a location, we don't have a partner to administer. to provide the support services. I don't think we would have a grant application that would at all succeed.

Well, so what would be the, so I mean, I know this was sort of slipped in last minute, but my understanding was that they have, they have it ready to go and they're ready to send it in and it's due like tomorrow or, or, I think it's literally tomorrow, right?

It is due tomorrow. I don't know what they have. Our committees don't apply for grants. That's not how it works. We have to review it. Just like you scrutinized tonight, you're going to have to scrutinize grant applications as well. And you're going to have that same level of detail, I'm sure. You're going to want to know. Studies, traffic, all of that, support services, all of that stuff you're going to want to know before you apply.

And it seemed to me like the high level that it would be a match that we would have to agree to in six months. So it would be a...

It's a 50-50 match.

A 50-50 match. And the amount is TBD until... six months down the road.

It's not the amount. Actually, money is not the issue, surprisingly, with this. Money is not the issue. Some of us, and I'm part of this little group, have been trying to work on identifying a location that would be suitable. And I've been in touch with them. We met with Hudson River Housing. They have grant money to do something like this. They can do the shelter as they administered it two winters ago. So it's not necessarily the money that's the issue. The issue is who wants it, right? I mean, we heard from people who live around a pond who care very deeply about what's happening there. We have people who care very much about what's happening elsewhere. You can better believe when it comes to emergency sheltering and people sometimes with mental health issues, you know, It's going to be a challenge to try to locate the property because you get so much pushback. And this is what I keep saying is, like, let's find a place. Can we all just, with an open heart, try to identify a place that may be suitable and recognize that it's going to be a challenge?

Well, St. Margaret's came to mind. I mean, it's a building that's not currently occupied.

And, you know, it's... We couldn't provide the support services for that. So that's the thing. It doesn't work for the purposes, and Hudson River Housing, by the way, has grant funding not only for temporary shelter, but to also take folks. and locate them into permanent housing. And they were successful actually with one individual to find them permanent housing, which is obviously the goal. When it comes to mental health issues, It's a real challenge, and so we don't have a facility that is suitable for people with really challenging mental health issues. I mean, you know, one of the individuals that needs to be housed walks down the middle of the street, for example, and, you know, there's issues with, you know, I don't need to, it's very personal, you know, and I don't need to get into it, but just suffice it to say that it's a real challenge.

So if you find a place You need to have somebody there 24-7.

Well, that's what Hudson River Housing does. They provide the staffing. They provide the staffing. They've got money for staffing. There are certain state programs that they can use. And it's certain populations. Mental health is an issue, formerly incarcerated. I mean, there's these programs to help try to address these situations. But the challenge for us as a community is, where are we willing to have these people? You mention it, and we haven't been able to locate. You would think the churches would be sort of a natural thing, but they're not necessarily always prepared for

what comes but it seems it seemed to me that that in this case that the housing committee has done has done a bunch of work but the committee cannot apply for a grant that would be a town board action so they've they've done all the work and it didn't I mean I could agree with you that it seems like there's a lot to figure out and maybe they're maybe they're not getting the grant but that doesn't seem like that has to be answered and in determining whether or not we wanted to apply for the grant so it They're not going to take us seriously.

We don't have a location. They're not going to take us seriously. And you can imagine the public outreach we're going to need to do. You want to do tremendous outreach for protecting around a wet pond. I mean, you're going to have to do an enormous amount of public outreach to locate an emergency shelter, the municipality. I'm all for it. I'm all for it. This is very important. This is... What's wrong with St. Margaret's? St. Margaret's is not suitable for this type of purpose. It needs to be supervised.

But I don't think they're asking that. Look, it's very last minute that this came to us. But the question is whether or not we would support the grant writing that the committee has done.

I don't see a grant. Do you have a grant in front of you?

We're not going to get something done by tomorrow. I mean, I think that's unrealistic.

I don't see that. We're not going to approve a grant.

But I also think that the housing committee has an obligation to come before this whole board and present this to us as an issue and provide, just like they've done with other things, what they think are solutions. And they haven't done that.

That's true.

I mean, we got an email from somebody, from our liaison to the housing committee. And it was the first I heard of it. And, you know, it's a more complicated issue than people give it credit for. But, you know, I think they need to come before us and, you know, to not just throw it out there.

It's not going to get funded. I mean, I've applied for, I don't know how many we've gotten, applied for these grants. It's not going to get funded. This is, there's an appointed committee that reviews these applications. And we were turned down once, twice, for the sidewalk along St. Margaret's to get to. Why are we wasting people's time if we don't identify a place? And so we do have to scour the community and see where would we be comfortable. And we've had, you know, halfway houses, so to speak, and Section 8 in that community, but this is intentional now. So now this is something that I feel very strongly about. You think we have a place? Let's talk because you're not sure. You're not sure. Well, you did say you were okay with somebody sitting on a bench. You were fine with that, right? But, you know, two other people said they weren't sure. There's nothing to take that from.

Then I think that there's a, just to recognize that it's an issue, and maybe we can have some outreach in recognizing that Jacob is not here tonight. But to the committee, if they're willing to put forth the effort in looking for a grant opportunity and giving us time to review it and all that.

I just want to reiterate, there are grant funds. where would you like this and so therein lies the rub is that you know and I offered to the village representatives like you will find where you think and they the other thing is that they didn't want some of these programs you can't say it's restricted just to those two or three people that you know in your community it's like the bread of Commons over here got built and everybody's like well it should be just for the people in the community well nice but it's funded with federal tax credits and you can't do that market it locally hope that you know people populated from from what about last time, some of the people in the villages, that there were three people known in the community, but then three others came from surrounding areas that also needed winter sheltering. So I would like to think our heart is big enough that we can... And we had somebody die from the cold just a couple of years ago. We had somebody found in a pond up in Columbia County, also one house.

I guess my point is when you see a committee taking action and taking interest in an issue, that's a collection of people on a committee, advisory to this board, that we should invite them to come make a presentation and see where they're at and understand what their collective opinions are.

I mean it was news to us, that's why I think We had heard very distinctly they did not want to take this up, that they were interested in other housing. They had enough on their plate to deal with other housing, creating other housing opportunities. Anything more? We're running late. Do we have any? We're going to go into attorney crime, but is there any public comments before we do? Roxanne? I think we missed you. We saw you there earlier tonight, didn't we?

But this is different.

Okay. It's different, yeah. Okay. Go ahead.

One second.

Three minutes, then we're outside. It's less.

Okay. I recently attended the school district budget hearing in preparation for the May 19th vote. I investigated why this town is extracting $66,550 from our students for use of the rec fields. while our neighbors in Rhinebeck, Saugerties, Pine Plains, and Germantown charge nothing for their shared facilities, recognizing that we are all paying the same taxes. I am here because the sentiment has been expressed that our school board has no choice but to accept these terms. That is a false choice. I have reviewed the actual invoices paid by the Red Hook School District over the last three years. The preamble of your 2022 IMA, that's the inter-municipal agreement, promises a, quote, shared fiscal responsibility and, quote, mutual cost savings. Where are those savings? Furthermore, Section 6C of your contract requires an annual review of these costs. Your own FOIL response admits no such records exist. You are taking money from our children's education budget without the cost justification required by your own signature. The appended fact sheet provides the details. The IMA agreement signed in 2022 expired in 2024 with the provision of a 10% increase on a yearly basis if no new contract is negotiated. The supervisor declined request to renegotiate, preferring to keep the one-year contract. Supervisor, You champion a frozen tax rate, but that is cold comfort to residents whose assessments just went up approximately 7%. You're freezing the rate while the total bill goes up anyway. Our residents are already struggling under a school tax burden of over $15 per thousand, and this board is making it worse by treating our school district as an unregulated revenue stream. There is no choice. Govern properly and stop overcharging the school district. Negotiate a fair contract based on data, not unilateral dictates.

Okay. Thank you, Roxanne. I don't normally respond to public comment, but I think it's important that I respond to those remarks. And Roxanne, I just want to say for the record, because you're fairly new to the community, about five years or so, there was a big discussion of this about seven, eight, nine years ago. So I'm just going to give you sort of, if I could, because we're running late, the two-minute skinny on this, if I could. This is a shared service. It's one of many shared services that we do. We don't extract money from children, as you like to say. The reason that this shared service requires that the school district chip in is because they are not, as you indicated in your statement, the same taxpayers. There are taxpayers in Columbia County. There are taxpayers in Milan. They all have use of that facility. And in order for them to chip in, this runs through the school district. There was a very detailed analysis done on usage, the number of hours, the value of each hour on each field and each thing to come up with that amount. This shared service is frankly a bargain for the Red Hook School District. You now see some of the costs that are proposed for a field, for example, millions of dollars, instead they share our field. And because they are a public entity, we can give them preferential treatment. If they were private, we could not give them preferential treatment by law. So I understand what you're saying. There was no duplication there. That's $66,000 they've elected to do. And by the way, I reached out to them on the contract, so I don't know where you're getting your information that I denied a meeting to have renewed the contract. It's quite the opposite. That $66,500 is an expense, but the only way that we can capture it fairly is for the school district, which is using the facility. We calculate the hours, and that's their contribution. It saves all of us tons of money, tons of money, because they don't go out and build their own fields. They don't go out and build new tennis courts. We did all that. We built all new parts and that's what they're sharing and they're only paying for what they use which is so much cheaper than paying for something that.

I want to see documentation because Reinbeck has the same kind of situation where they have students from other places and they do have a billing arrangement and it's very clear cut and they know how many hours and how many students.

We did that with that.

Well, but it should be done on a yearly basis.

We did.

I think it's been changed. Okay. There's been a decrease in the number of students

Roxanne, I think I've answered your statement and you're not happy with it. I reached out to them about renewing the contract and haven't heard back from them. There's a new business person there at the school and yes, they can renegotiate. I suspect they're better off with a 10% increase because when we go over those numbers and what it costs to build those fields that we built and the depreciation associated with that, They might be looking at quite a bit more than the $66,000.

But this is the town park that we built, you built with the taxpayer money. It's not that you just went out and built them only so that they could have their team play for the spring season. And don't you use their facilities?

They only pay for the proportional. It's the same thing we do with sand and salt. We store it for the villages here. We only bill them for what they use. That's it. It's the same thing we do with all shared services. And we all save money because we're doing a shared service. We have this shared highway garage that runs

Do you use the school for your summer programs?

Yes, we do adjust. Wait, hang on a second. We do adjust when we use the school. We very rarely use the school. But yes, there is also a deduction from their amount for that. That went all into this very complicated spreadsheet that was done based upon hours of usage.

Right, but again, it should be done every year to see whether that continues to be the usage rate. And the number of students?

It could be adjusted each year. There was a multi-year contract. It could be, and I've reached out to them to have it done. So I can't say it again. I mean, I've said it. I've reached out to them. They have not come back. Okay? There's no duplication. This is no double-dipping.

What about all the other school districts? They have teams that use their... Roxanne?

I and the board represent these taxpayers. We do not represent Claremont taxpayers. We do not represent Milan taxpayers. Our fiduciary is to make sure that if we are providing a service or a property for use for people who are outside of the taxpayers, it's these taxpayers that are paid for it, right? The Red Hook School District taxpayers did not pay for that part to be completely redone, which we've done in the last eight years or so. They didn't contribute a penny. But now they need to contribute, the Milan and Columbia County taxpayers need to contribute to the .

I agree. I just would like to see that there is an annual evaluation, at least of the numbers, so that you can get it.

You and me both. It's very time consuming, but you and me both. Okay. With that being said, I want to thank you all for coming tonight.

Hold on a second.

Oh, sorry. Thank you. I'm sorry. I thought we were finished. I didn't realize.

So, Robert, 1719 Smith Street. Thank you. Two weeks ago when I was at the board meeting, there was a lot of consternation about finding the money to pay for trucks for the town, which we need the trucks, right?

No, there was no consternation.

There was a lot of talk about how it was getting paid. So, tonight there's a lot of consternation about how we're paying for the water tower to get fixed. And, agreed, it's going to need to be fixed. What I don't hear any consternation about is legal fees. We don't have any discussion about the money for the legal fees. We seem to be able to find that money rather easily and without a whole lot of conversation. So I'm just a little perplexed about where the board's priorities are. When we're having a hard time on certain things that we need, why are we going out for things where the town doesn't want it? And where is the discussion about that? So I'll leave it at that.

Thank you, Robert. I will disagree with you as I disagree with Roxanne. There was no discussion about having difficulty What about the money for the water tower?

Robert, we need to go on a fire sale to go fix the water tower.

Why is that?

Why is there money for the leading things?

Robert, I'm going to ask you to not interrupt. I will remind you that's the water district that is separate and apart from the town. The water district is just the 488 users. Thank you. Richie.

Bill, I have a question for you. Are you aware that we are in the discovery phase at the federal court level? Yes. You are? You're aware that Robert and I have depositions coming up in the next couple weeks as well?

I'm aware that depositions are supposed to be happening.

And you're aware that in all probability yourself, Jacob, Christine, and Julie will probably all be given depositions as well? That I'm not aware of. Oh, alright. Well, just figured I'd bring it up. I'm quite frankly looking forward to mine. I get to tell my side of the story. And I hope it doesn't get to a jury. But if it does, I'm happy to share my side of the story. And with that being said, you know, when you give a deposition, and I'm sure you're familiar with this, you take it under oath. So I certainly hope that your stories align and that you're all on the same page because it's not going to be looked at too fondly, too kindly, if they're not, because it's becoming very apparent that there's a lot of lies and a lot of things that happen behind closed doors. So I'm curious to see how that all unfolds, to be quite honest with you. Thank you, Richie. Okay, would anybody else like to make a comment? Yes.

I say thanks again. Christina and Kenna, I think I discussed this with you, but I appreciate your time again tonight discussing these matters. I'll tell you, Hank called me about two hours before we last discussed, telling me that our understanding was the same, and he'd tell me before anyone else, and then roughly two hours later we discussed, which I don't think I've had a good night's sleep since. I think tonight I'll probably have the first good night since. I've been sleeping on my couch since the tree hit my roof about six weeks ago. I think this week will hopefully be the first time back in the bedroom since boys started coming in, but I think tonight will be my first night of good rest, so thank you all.

All right, at this time I'd like to make a motion. First of all, thank you all for coming. And I'd like to make a motion that we go into