Video recording

captions Language: en Thursday February 22nd 2024 and welcome everybody to the wer Town War workshop for today um I was telling some of the attendees a few minutes ago we're going to switch the order of the agenda and have the uh consideration by the board of resolution to adopt the repeal of chapter 103 of first and then after that we'll do the public hearing on the bond resolution for the conveyance pipes uh simply said I appreciate yourens of the fact it's 5:30 um in the public hearing there are some people that might be straggling in at 5:45 or later I certainly want to make sure they get a chance to speak so and Arthur you are the MD back there for anybody thank you very much um so without further Ado um our first agenda item tonight is a consideration by the town board uh to do a resolution to adopt the local law repeal to repeal in its entirety chapter 103 of the code of the town of Webster which is called the aircraft airports and horts law call it Charlie you can call what you CU I think you wrote it uh actually actually supervisor n wrote it and then we we made some changes to I didn't realize super man of many talents I'll tell you that um so uh just this is a little bit of a different resolution than the the we do about what 300 plus resolutions a year uh and we may depending upon the um complexity of it you might not even give an explanation if it's approving purchase order things like that this one's on the other side of the spectrum I think there's going to be a little probably I'll call it discussion by the town board maybe Town board members uh would like to uh opine on where they're at in this process um three weeks ago in this boardroom there was a public hearing on this we heard I think Dolly from 26 different people 21 in attendance and then five writings uh that were written into the record we also uh have accumulated some other people's comments since then they don't go into the public hearing record but certainly the town board members have been forwarded those so they can look at this thing from every angle so they can make an informed educated uh vote on this um I think some of you in fact I saw Debbie on the eth a week later as we were leaving the board we said well how did the vote go and I said well we tabled it or we took it off the agenda for the night because the town board had decided we had so many documents and requests for information that we had not gotten yet or got so late in the process that we didn't have enough time to really discern it so we put it on the 8th and put it tonight because last week py ran a wonderful board meeting there was only four of us here and I say once again you can do a resolution and get a majority uh three or four when there's only four board members here but I go back to the complexity of this it really merits having all five of us in the boardroom and all five of us voting on this and and I think it was s back on the 1st I think this will be the last time until April 4th P that the all five of the Town board members will be in the same room at board so that's my Prelude to this with that being said um do any of the board members want to lead off with any comments or findings or anything about this uh potential olution everybody's looking my way so I guess I will I will start since everybody's looking my way I did a research on this so I'm I'm happy to start um I know there's a a a lot of emotion as you said around this Tom and a lot of people came to spoke speak for and against um repealing this law in its entirety and we listen to those and I summarize the the the folks who were uh against repealing the law the primary concerns there were safety noise um and and lastly the fact that the law only benefits very few or one person uh the primary considerations of those um in favor of repealing this law that the FAA governs the skies um certainly there are a number of boards other than the FAA there's the New York State Department of Transportation it's also the national Transportation safety board which has an awful lot of information so there are pilot training requirements there are strict maintenance requirements and some of the other um comments were disinformation fear and question motivation those were the summary of the folks for and against so when I look at um some of the things was noise safety starting with noise I did some research on noise in decb that a helicopter would make um and 100 feet the noise that a helicopter makes is similar to that of a chainsaw Jackhammer power tools or a motorc cycle that's at 100 ft I think most of the neighbors are more in between say between 100 feet and 500 feet at 500 feet the the uh noise goes down to basically the sound of a lawnmower um or a very large barking dog it's be an awful big dog but a dog um beyond that and a mile it's the same sound as a vacuum cleaner so I from a from a noise perspective to me it would it would seem that the noise that this helicopter would make for the short period of time it was taking off and Landing would be very commensurate with other types of sounds that you might find in a neighborhood um another thing was about it being in a residential neighborhood so as I would do if I was on the planning board or when I was on the planning board I actually walked around the area and in in well dit road is certainly a residential area um the the piece of property where this the well where the one individual in Webster Who currently has a helicopter comes in and takes off and lands from um the neighbor is really Route 104 Route 104 to the South and to the West is the bay in about uh I don't know 30 plus acres of an open field so so so from from that aspect I would think that um there certainly is from a noise and from a space I I would say I I I would conclude that it's really not that atypical I a helicopter I guess is somewhat atypical but the noise it would make is not atypical of what you might find in a neighborhood from a safety perspective I think and this was mentioned and it's very true many helicopter accidents include um are are a cause of pilot negligence and um there was some information shared at the meeting about helicopter crashes um I would say unofficially what I can find on the internet there was 17 helicopter accidents and they mostly or if not all in the New York City area you will find there were 94 helicopter accidents in in uh all of 2003 so between April of 2003 and February of 2004 there were 94 helicopter accidents they they and that's across the entirety of the United States um most of those accidents happen in areas where they have a higher obviously number of helicopters and in addition to that in areas there is tourism and there are helicopter tours so of those 94 accidents not that any fatality is um you know nobody wants any fatalities but the fatality rate in a helicopter accident is about 20% so I just when you when you when you look at this data and I mean lots of things are are dangerous but helicopters are right in the middle of any other form of transportation as it as it relates to to safety risk from from being in or near a helicopter I also spoke with a commercial helicopter pilot because I work at an aerial imagery company so I do have some extra context about what it takes to fly um commercial or private private aircraft and um one of the reasons that the fatality rates tend to be so low in helicopters is because there are certain FAA requirements for where you can fly and how you can fly and you need to make sure as you're flying you can have an appropriate Glide path to Landing because with a helicopter you actually can land it by gliding which is part of the reason why the um accidents aren't as um as uh they are fatal on on onage so that was my safety um sorry I'm going through the the other thing this kind of goes to the safety aspects of Maintenance and then the what some folks were saying about um um the FAA requirements so when when you think about this this law that Webster has it's almost like it's an extra layer but there are very stringent laws from you know the FAA and the New York State Department of Transportation that govern helicopters in any aircraft and um the the the part that I'm actually very familiar with is the maintenance so we um Eagle View has like over a 100 aircraft and every single one has to go for scheduled maintenance and and ongoing maintenance and those planes can't fly unless they are in perfect mechanical condition which is why the FAA is in place and they have those those rules to protect the health welfare and safety of the people who are around those types of um vehicles or aircraft um there is also uh regular training that is required and and rules so this one I looked up whether I don't know that this is the only one but the FAA pilot flights and ground instructors chapter 14 sub chapter F part 91 you know it speaks to the level of training that a helicopter pilot would need and that they have to maintain with ongoing training to be able to fly so I think that you have the New York State Department of Transportation you have federal agencies to ensure the health welfare safety of regulated helicopters in New York state that's that that's that that's that um there were a couple of other things that I think are would like to share that are not necessarily pertinent to the law but to address some of the comments because that were made me towards me is the the um treasurer of the Republican committee which I was for a couple of years and if I go back and look at all donations dating back to 2006 the average contribution is $432 the highest contribution from any single organization was nearly $99,000 at 8,996 the top 10 non-candidate contributions average $3,975 if you look at a shorter period from 2015 it went up to $3,486 so when you look at the the um contributions from John kashani of $1,500 um to the Democratic committee or to um to to Tom's campaign or to the Republican campaign those are not out of line with any other organizations or individuals who contribute to to political organizations and in addition to that John also donated another $1,100 to a number of other campaigns um for judges Ontario um other Town Council and um uh the Democratic Committee in wellworth so all of this information is public you can find it very easily on on the New York State campaign Finance website so um you know I I appreciate the comment you I appreciate the perspective you can have that this is a a payoff for changing the law but when you look at that in total I would just like to say that that is not what that was and it really is not even the appearance of that then lastly and uh um councilman Cahill said this at the last meeting in the closing remarks speciic speically about Tony kashani Tony has been on the planning board or has chaired the planning board for I don't know probably 30 some OD close to 40 years and and one of the comments was made that by former supervisor nesbet that Tony here basically bribed him or he took took it as a bribe that Tony was trying to get him to repeal this law and I think if that truly was the case then I don't know why Tony would still be on the planning board and I just think that that was not not fair and a little out of bounds as it relates to this law or relates to Tony personally so those are those are my comments thank you and just to follow up on your your last few statements um I did speak to two people who were reportedly told about this attempted bribe neither one of these people recall um the past supervisor stating that Mr Shin had attempted a bribe it it would seem to me that something of that magnitude um they would remember so again I've known Mr kashani for a number of years and he's probably one of the most honorable and hardworking men that I know and I thank you again for your service to this community Ser um just to follow up on some of the comments that you made regarding the efaa and their regulations I went through many of the same documents that that you went through and you know helicopters are very very heavily regulated not only from a maintenance standpoint but more importantly from a flight standpoint coming in and going out um I don't both you had commented about the uh requirements for the actual pilots and the physicals that they had to go through also I did not comment on so I just wanted to mention that and when I was reading the um the minutes that that that do put together um a number of people spoke that they were against the removal of section 103 because um it would benefit just one person and in my opinion is my opinion section 103 was put in place purely as a punitive measure against one person oh that's all I had to say I can certainly and Jen I really appreciate all the the research that you did it was certainly very thorough and when I listen to those who came to the public hearing um I took several notes and tallied it all up there were people who thought it was a good idea that we repeal this law um four of them were pilots I would expect them to say nothing else uh there were 16 people who spoke against many of whom are still in what is considered the neighborhood and um just have to say that I'm I'm not sure that a heliport Landing a helicopter is really a proper thing for a neighborhood and I appreciate the maintenance and the safety concerns and the training let's not forget that all of those things are in place for anyone who flies a plane no matter what what that aircraft is and yes they go through safety checks last night on the news there was a there was a plane where the wing was falling off a door blew out of another one all of these all of these aircraft went through vigorous safety precautions and inspections but the bottom line to me is this is not an appropriate thing for a neighbor well the thing is that really impacted me when I was reading through these regulations is the fact that the FAA regulates the flight the flight path and if they were to come to the determination that is not safe to enter or to leave what talk into your microphone I'm hearing people say they can't hear you so the thing that that had the biggest impact on me with respect to the helicopters in that area is the fact that the FAA regulates the flight path and that they did not feel it was safe they would not come to the determination that it would be allowed and that to me they're they're more of an expert than you or I or anyone on this board in my opinion okay okay um this is my opinion and again this is my opinion and I thank you uh Tony for your years of service and it's great to know your families well but this is from my own perspective you know I do respect homeowners property right to be clear and fair we do care about the safety of our citizen here in Webster instead of a local law repeal don't just end it why don't we just amend it or change it and to add the helip pack you know on at least two or more acres of land adjacent to the Lake of the bay because the F may you know approve so so this way when they the person or anyone that take off a landing they're not going to go over people houses or buildings um and it's not for personal use we can add that you know in there in the law and then um it it's only for personal use only but not for commercial use and the application I mean the applicant can apply to use a permit from the town if more than one you know have the alicopter and willing to you know spend the time and money to um well I think one thing that's very important to note here is that this law is just about taking off and landing in the town of Webster anybody can fly a plane over Webster anybody can fly a helicopter over the town of Webster at any time um and if we repeal this law it does not mean that planes or helicopters will not be flying over Webster they just won't be taking off landing on the ground or or water surface area of Webster just to to your point jeny about safety and saying you know we don't want helicopters flying over houses they will be um at at uh the um Army Reserve Center they have helicopters flying in and out of there and I would argue that it's more densely populated there than it is at the end of DWI road yeah that's true but then you you don't have you don't want to have a Pandora open up and have people flying all over and what if they wanted to land you know I have a two acres in my backyard and they land in my backyard so there should be a to that to your point that you're making we don't want to open up Pandora's Box by getting rid of the laot someone someone in the village Webster or someone that has two acres of land still has to go through the stringent process of contacting and working with the FAA and the New York State Department of Transportation Aviation boards and they will come out and they will do the evaluation and if they determine that it's not safe they will not be lowed that that the white path is strictly determined based upon evaluation of the FAA and I don't think anybody in the village of Webster is going to be allowed by fa a helicopter the other thing is what's what's before us is to repeal this law not to amend it correct again it's just my suggestion y that was awesome very nice jenor wel to the board that was a lot of research appreciate that um okay John K is not in the room tonight this the 800B gorilla that doesn't mean he's overweight Tony okay uh I have a question before I give my comments um because Tony I know you and your son are very close so I'm going to say that you are def facto your answer probably would be the one that came out of John's mouth if the board repeals this law today and Charlie whatever that means as far as tomorrow is done still have to go to have to go to the Secretary of State whenever it is filed the day it's spot the repeal would John think he on that day can start landing on that Hort and taking up well I don't know how that part of the law works the law wasn't there the law is repealed yes the law is no longer in existence land tomorrow should just should Tony be up at the microphone or something just for benefit uh for people to hear I like I said I I appreciate we're not going to hold to this I can't answer directly but if that was the case some of you would have to say John don't fly until we get this thing totally resolved' be 100% in agreement well what what would be totally resolved because I'm GNA I'm going to pose the question again before I get my cams if the law is repealed and when it's formally repealed with the Secretary of State whatever it's as though the law never existed going forward right correct going forward going forward right so if there's no law to prohibit landing and taking off a helicopter do you think John would think at that point free it lasts I can land the helicopter and take it off at my FAA approved Hort and New York State Department of AV approv register my guess is probably so because without a law there's nothing that says you can't do that it's an open field and on the other side of the point we have like you've said before there are SE planes landing with boats Tony thank you and I appreciate I probably should have had but Tom here's my concern one one one thing before you go with respect to your your question regarding the law it's in the books there is a stringent process that Mr kashani or anyone else has to go through um prior to taking off or Landing from a Hort okay and one of those steps is obviously getting sanctioned by the FAA but there is a point where they have to come to the board it's my understanding from what I read and John that's what I'm going to count okay okay because here's here's I guess I when people take that Podium and tonight people will take that podium in a public hearing for the conveyance PL when people take that Podium for the five minutes open in the public at a board meeting it's been an interesting four plus years for me as supervisor because I'm a I like facts and truth and really try the best I can to be straight with people at open meetings like this or face to face with them people get on that Podium and either intentionally or unintentionally BS us all the time for reasons that run the Ganon okay but when Jared hurt the attorney for John kashani in this that you have combed with have you not Charlie over the years on the different lawsuits or whatever oh not on the lawsuits but in particular okay when attorney takes that Podium I tend to hold that person's words to a higher standard than When anybody else takes the podium and can just say whatever they want so when Jared hurt took the podium back three weeks ago tonight he said something that resonated with me so much that you might notice in these me I write down things I write down things that I that that I got to go and check out and what he said he said it is a incredibly robust process yes with the FAA the New York State Department of Transportation Aviation Division and the town board so this town board thing I when I went to start asking questions and Tony you were on these emails I asked on Saturday the 3D less than two days after the public hearing okay now that we've had the public hearing here are some things and I asked three questions and I said Charlie and Jared you're the guys are the attorneys I'm doubting Thomas I want to see documentation that substantiates what he said on that in that on that Podium over the last 20 days I've been surprised maybe I'm not a good communicator maybe I didn't ask the questions correctly but I'm concerned that I'm not getting documentation that at least in this old accountant's eyes is ticking and tying and supporting that robust process now when I go to Dolly McGuire and I say Dolly you're a town cler I need to know if there's anything in the town records at board meetings PL that was uh re about this subject whatever she comes back in 24 hours with stuff from 1963 1978 she finds that stuff right now I understand finite records Donal Wester I said to Charlie and jerk if you're telling me that at the 930 other towns in New York or whatever it is that don't have a specific law that those towns anybody with a Hort in those towns has to go through the FAA the New York State Department of Aviation and their Town Court could you please go and look for the last five or 10 years of precedent cases if you want to call it that that went before those Town boards after they got the FHA FAA and whatever now Charlie I don't know what you researched I don't know what the database was I don't know if it was Associates in towns but your answer to me was I found none now what does that mean it either means that Charlie and Jared was quiet to it all right it either means he found the resource that the association of town would have such a an answer a such a hearing and there were none so it sounds like does that mean nobody is ever in New York state in the 930 towns gotten the Hell aort in the last 5 to 10 years I find that hard to believe um I you can't prove something by something it doesn't I'm just saying um and I'm going to tell you something when I started my research I didn't have a dog in the fight I just like facts I just wanted to know I wanted to see how the process that Jared explained how it played out what was the application process how did they come out and do this what kind of license did you get how long does it last is it renewed every five years is it this and that and maybe I just didn't answer the question right but I didn't get the documents I thought I was going to get that supported this robust process that included and I can't be more key on this that included a town board shot at the Apple bite at the Apple now I thought we get a bite at the app this is a no-brainer for me this law is a joke why would this law have ever been written 17 years ago if in the normal course of a hort you got to go through the town board anyway right that's what Jared said wasn't that the process that was described to us correct have any of the board members seen proof that the way it's done is a town board part of that process to approve and it's zoning in neighborhoods and stuff like that because just because the FAA says okay on this place and just because the New York State Department of uh Transportation Aviation says it's okay the way it was described and he sent Jared sent some cuton pce stuff over to us hey this is frequently asked questions the town board has a shot at it but as we sit here tonight I I don't see anything I wanted to see some precedent Town board answers on these things from a town in B in there from a town up north from a town on Long Island because I don't want to create the wheel I wanted to see what do they what do what do the town boards bite at the Apple what are the things they take a bite at the Apple once the FAA allegedly and the New York State Department of Transportation Aviation has said yes what would the town board at that point be ruling on I couldn't guess so I figured Charlie pull a couple precedent cases maybe it'll start to you know come into clarity of what they rule out is it the neighborhood thing Patty is it the flight pattern but to our surprise and once again Charlie I'm not holding to you this to to this when Dolly tells me she looked back in the records of the town of fster when I asked her about a subject I would like you to find something if there's anything on the town board records of Tony kash's her you go through it and if you find nothing I feel very confident we've never done a town board resolution or whatever in 70 years anon's haircut sorry I didn't mean to use that as an example but there it is what he researched and whether it is in totality you can't prove a negative you just told me you found nothing that concerns something right here you found a town I didn't find a town oh I I got that but you have this from the New York State Department of Transportation so I guess if you email their Aviation Department you can ask that question because it it states right here the first step in the first step in airport or Hort establishment or modification is FAA airspace review and approval which examines impacts uh on nearby Aviation facilities blah blah blah right and call this person if the local J I have that from him yeah does that just mean that every other town there's been 100 horts in New York state the last 10 years that just no Town ever followed that no what is it establishes of process Tom my understanding of that is I'd rather same I think the question is and this is not to go your side the question is is whether they process you that's really what you're asking well if that's the process okay and I don't really care about the other towns other towns might not even know about that process okay that might be an answer to why there but that is what came from okay I want to make sure when we talk about amending this law and this think about some of the things you said J to me I'm like why do we got to amend the law for that if the process has the town board have a bite at the Apple on this thing we just get rid of the law and do it at that point in the already established practice or process through what 249 and FAA y I get that but I was having a hard time understanding what is the towns in that process what do they discern in that process what is what is it about is it and I just figured if I found a precedent case because obviously towns follow that process I mean they don't I don't I actually did that research too and I don't have the number in front of me but when you look there is a a not a lot of helicopters in the United States States so the fact that you might not come across that wouldn't be too astounding or alarming because I don't think it's a pretty common thing okay but here's the thing and I understand that John and I'm done now almost I come full circle back to asking Mr K to be the detective joh watch this so John will hear it from my mouth if his thought was that if we repeal it tonight that once it goes through the Secretary of State it's papered up and it's law now or should I say it's not law anymore that he's Landing that day and taking off and having a big party he's not because he's still got to go through this robust process yes and I want to make sure he understands that and I don't understand the process enough at this point to even give a timeline of okay the law is now repealed um Charlie when do we come to the board is it now that he's got FAA approval of that site now that he's got registration with uh uh New York City E when it comes to the board what are we ruling on at that point it there's two ways it can come to the board either the board can ask the FAA for to weigh in on right the approval correct or the applicant can ask the FAA to work to work on however there's there's also the issue of whether or not I'm not going to get into this much but the fact is is this still a permitted use there's a question just because it's not in there doesn't mean it's a permitted use well that and that's I I want to set expectations if this gets raled tonight and we obviously we spent about 40 minutes on it uh where was that you have the paper copy I'm looking for Jared send over the frequently asked questions all you're looking for that yeah I said initially when we first started going down this road that I might be able to consider an amendment like Jimmy mentioned but that is not what the applicant wanted us to look at at this time that's is correct so I go back to what's before us tonight is a full repeal of this law if we're going to go to Amendment we would have to go through an entire new public hearing process that is correct so I meant what you have as a print out is what I'm going through just digitally in that packet it's a bit of a cut and paste it's not you know if you really look at it there's some cut and paste there but this is the frequently asked questions commonly asked questions New York General business law section 249 what do I do if there is no local zoning you must still apply to the locality and ask for their approval what can I do if the local government doesn't wish to approve or take no action in regards to the airport or Airport and proposal assume that meanss too you'll have to talk to your local further I mean I don't know I just couldn't find specificity that gave us a a a blueprint of that process I think I understand the FAA side I think I understand the aviation department at New York State Department of Transportation I don't understand our side and I don't know John factored that the that repealing this if we do that tonight is a step in the process because it will if he wants to land there he's going to be right back here at some point in the future and you'll have to do some what are we doing in this this section 249 that is this very robust process with the FAA the New York State Department of Aviation and the town board what are we doing cuz we have a bite at the Apple that's the way it reads and I really was I don't like to re I wanted to see what other Town boards what did they rule on in this we haven't found it maybe we just didn't look at the totality of the datab I I can say absolutely that without Town board approval a helicop or or an airport cannot be built private corre cannot be built we're again about the flying so much is the construction of it taking the issue I think it's before the board right and that cannot be done um without Town board approval and consequently with app of the Department of Transportation no not the fa trans Transportation okay and yes helicopter helicopter can be used interchangeably with fix well if I had thought about that I would have reached out to the aviation Department of New York and asked that question in advance because it's I I say again you know why we're having such conversation on a resolution it's complex I do agree with J what you said about I found the irony at the public hearing that now this is this repeal is only for the benefit at this point of one person true I think the law 17 years ago was punitive and put in as a as a penalty to one person that doesn't fly in my no pun intended in my view of how you govern right I might not like you but I'm going to try to be unbiased building a law around being pragmatic to 45,000 citizens I hope I never go down that path pushing for something that is because I have I don't like you I think you have four other people on this boards will never allow that to happen plus I don't think you we're all human so let's face it we're not robots I mean it it it it enters into our minds but can you imagine even if all five of us didn't like a certain person that writing a law that's that's whatever um so as long as John understands if there is a motion a second and it passes repeal 3 to2 four to zero 4 to one 5 to nothing he's not land in his helicopter on the road tomorrow I don't know when he's going to be because I don't understand what Jared hert stood up at that Podium and impassionately talked as an attorney about the process and in the 20 days since I have been asking questions through email and I get it where emails can be confusing whatever it didn't get the answers and the documentation that I assumed that I was going to get that gave Clarity to this process that the town board has is aite app and I don't think any of the Town board members or Charlie you don't know what that b at the Apple is looks like what the Department of Transportation looks like the USS look is it do we have the flexibility to say we don't want it in a neighborhood a residential neighbor a zoning thing right do we have the ability to say because to tell you the truth I didn't see any of the paperwork that said you are going to take off from this Hort you are going to fly East over the bay and that's how you're going to come back in you will never be less 500 ft over a house that's to the east in Colorado I didn't see anything like that in this approval I see that approval that was s said conditional now I don't know what the conditions are of that FAA conditional approval from 2004 or six or whatever and if those conditions are still in effect today by the FAA I Tony you're an honest guy I don't make decisions on what somebody tells me I I make decisions on scene Ronald Reagan trust and verify in my book verify is paper trail and documents and I don't have that's what Jared said number four today said this this repal the next step is four put number four that would be to go through the process whatever it is so no he be where going to fly tomorrow I appreciate the fact that you know you're asking questions but we're really not following our normal decorum with the town board having conversations with members of the audience um I just wanted to mention that no doubt and it's a complex issue and I understand a lot of eyes on here I don't think everybody's in here it's like really interested in the the conveyance fight maybe I'll be wrong I know what's going on here everybody let's just call us sp sp on this one so with that being said there's five board members there's the resolution is there someone making a motion someone seconding it and do then you whatever which the options are Charlie correct me I'm wrong motion we just had one back in December nobody seconded it Dead uh you can say no no motion we don't want to do anything which means dead no repeal you somebody could do a motion a second and the next three people could say no and then it it was voted down I'll would make a motion to adopt the local law to repeal in its entirety chapter 103 of the code of the town of Webster aircraft airports and horts I'll second it Council k i councilwoman right I councilwoman when this is very emotional for me and like I said I was elected to be put on this place to do what best our community and do what best for everyone and it's not just for one individual and sometime a hard decision have to be made and I don't want to lose friends but I don't want you know to um think that this may affect our the safety of our citizen in the community so it's really really hard um for me to to make this emotion um therefore I don't think I can I don't I don't think I can uh pass this so thisn supervisor I Council [Music] no okay that is that next up and I guess anybody how many people did you get in from stragglers uh okay uh our next item up is okay this is for the uh a public hearing to consider a bond resolution in the amount of $7.1 million for certain improvements to the town of Webster Consolidated Sewer District that's what the agenda item says this is about where did that go about 12,000 linear feet of sewer M from tore Road really where the C life project is and Meandering along through Xerox out to 36 in main films okay um jeez you know John you're right dorm and I'm talking with Tony and this and that totally you know do as I say that as I do right which is going to sound funny now as he say does everybody understand the decorum of a public hearing um going to put the Mallet down we'll start the public hearing which means that we have four people that signed in to to speak and we will have them up to the podium since there's four I'm not going to make any executive decision to truncate from five minutes down to three minutes like we did three weeks ago you'll have up to five minutes to opine proon anything about this uh this bonding so public hearing is open and Michelle Anderson is first up you are you know it's funny Michelle it's like Price is Right you wrode in in the middle and then everybody went below you but I like the effort and you know what super NZ did I mean this guy is No rookie he put it on the bottom where nobody's going to get underneath his signature because the very foxy Cory r n he will be last I respect the game okay so I as it stands I'm not to say a lot but I I dis approve of adding an additional 7.1 million to the was against it from the beginning and there's lots of reasons why I w't go into here I think it should have been decided before the town approved it to be constructed and it kind of seems like it's being snuck anyway there's something else that I want to bring to your attention and some of you may know about it and some of you don't but it's called the Great taking by David Rogers web there is a video that he has produced himself online and this is a free pdf you can print off and given the times we live in I would strongly suggest every member of the board and every member of the audience get and read it and watch the video what's it called the Great um there's quite a history here and So based on that and what's happening now with the 7.1 million I'm just going to read AEF excert from chapter entitled collateral management and it states there will be an EP end to the decad seemingly out of control financialization which served no beneficial purpose for Humanity but the devasta of which are apparent even now it has been a deliberate strategy executed over decades this was the purpose of inflating the global bubble entirely out of proportion with any real world thing or activity which must end in disaster for so many with no pockets of resilience allowed to remain in any country and so again I would ask as a constituent of yours that you please try to find this and it's very important we are now in the middle of what this is and unless people stand up and educate themselves there's no stopping and the end is not great take thank you thanks Michelle thanks Michelle great taking uh next up is I hope I said this secr SEC or secet secret secret Burns great would you like to get up and talk well I came today just to urge you as a long time member of Le carefully consider the background of the caola plant as you said we are novices at building Industries and Coca-Cola I have heard has a bad reputation for pollution and that could be either air pollution or sewage pollution so I would suggest that you find out from previous members who have bu buildings for Coca-Cola whether or not they are realistic about their um estim flow predictions and to make sure that your extensions of the building are adequate or possibly could be extended if it was needed and as I say air pollution is another consideration I don't know anything about air carbon or any of that but I do want to be sure that Webster doesn't pollute the air in weer or that caola doesn't I guess I could complain that um you have cut me off totally from TV of the Town board and school board has already cut me off when you cancel the uh Community Access TV I have no computer so I can't address the C board's computer so I'm not saying that you should pay for something that the only one who needs it I'll just let you know that I have a complaint thank you thank you thank you c um next is uh Rick I always stories even I'm not an attorney so you know I hope you can trust a little bit about what I'm we hold you to a high but I'm a but I'm but I'm a taxpayer res of the town of Webster and one thing that I think is can you pleas St your name for the record I'm sorry say what can you just please state your name for I'm sorry Rick sty and I live at 1491 Providence Drive in W and I think everybody would agree that the Coca-Cola Corporation is one of the richest corporations in the world whereas the T Webster is not the richest town in Monroe County L state of New York $7.1 million that wasn't incorporated into the initial discussion I don't know doesn't make a lot of sense to me um I think they knew what was going on they're pretty smart people don't build a company that big with that kind of money without knowing a few things um I'm concerned a little bit about the money because we're paid for it right it's coming out of our pockets not their pocket and yeah they may be bringing a lot of Revenue to the town and that would be a good thing but what about the after effect we already have a huge I don't want to call it a white elephant let's call it a brown elephant in the Xerox Camp right we going to get another one is that what's going to happen here I mean I'll probably be gone but my daughter won't be and her kids may not be what are we doing here okay so I think is representatives of the of the people that live in this community it's the duty of the Town board to do due diligence and investigation and make sure that our futures are not br right that we don't get another situation like we have with Zer with the Xerox campus I scratched my head a little bit and don't understand why Fair life didn't go in the Xerox campus I know there's a lot of reasons right I'm sure they did a lot of investigation and I'm sure it'd be very very expensive to clean that area up what's that say to us about what they want to do and how much money they want to spend now I happen to be for fair life to come here because I know it'll bring jobs and I know it'll bring Revenue to the community it's got to be the right thing for the community so I think we need to really really discuss this thing in a much deeper basis not much deeper way to make sure that you know the future of this beautiful town is maintained and upheld um I had a couple other points but not related to this and I'm sure you don't want to hear about them you got a minute I got a minute I'd like to understand what $4.5 million in forward funding is I'm confused all right our esteemed Governor said that she's going to get the town Webster for no Village vage Webster oh that was the village sorry and now I heard something that I'm not I don't have any facts to verify but I heard it so maybe you can enlighten me I heard that there's some things going on where there's the state is trying to bring low income or middle or mixed income housing into the town like they've done in neighboring HS quite frankly I grew up I was born and grew up in the city of rster and then I moved to Webster there was a reason why I moved to Webster okay and it cost me more to live in Webster than it does in the city of Rochester I don't want low income and mixed income housing in the village in the town of Weston I'm pretty sure that that got she that last year and there was so much push back from the legislature and private citizens that it it was Dead on Arrival it didn't go anywhere that's great which doesn't mean that she will not try again this year but everybody is well aware of what her intent is okay I just as a concerned citizen no very very Veil point and that's a generic guys you guys need to fight for us right and I believe supervisor um Clarity mentioned a while ago that 19 other Town supervisors got together and put a letter together expressing their opposition to the direction she was trying to go and and sent and I'm sure that there are counties throughout New York state where the town supervisors and Village Mayors got together and sent the same letters which is why it went nowhere and if it comes up again I'm sure the same measures will be taken just for a point of information normally get but there was there was a resolution the association of town meetings to this okay yeah yeah I'm sorry I didn't hear second said there was a resolution by the Association a resolution at the association of towns annual meeting which just concluded to that effect the effect in opposition opposing yeah that's great I heard that great to hear just yesterday thanks for bringing it up great Point thank you the thanks so we only have one speaker left tonight um what's the good one pass Town supervisor Ron NB and Ron as you make your way to the podium before you start talking kind of saunter up there I just want to make sure everybody in the room understands that coke Fairlife is paying for this $7.1 million they are paying for it and that's if you follow the board meetings and articles and our communication as best as we try to tell people um basically Coke is going to to pay the town in an I'll call it an industrial use agreement uh for sewer plant um the monies that is really the specific infrastructure that the town had to improve or upsize specifically for them to come into town now the thing is and we have talked about this at many board meetings I just think a board meeting or two ago we had a presentation on it a at a workshop um and explained that if we got our onetime tiin fee to the sewer system from Coke it would be about $12 million correct d all right but between this pipe and the upsizing of the plant on Philips Road it's going to be more in the $24 million range of specific to Coke Fair life Town infrastructure cost improvements upsizing so we said to Coke and Fairlife right from the beginning there is no way that you're coming into the town paying us $12 million based on your flow for us Little Old Webster because you're right Rick Coke's big the state's big the Count's big the fourth player in this is the town and I've made this talk at this Podium many times we are going to guard against our taxpayers having an un disproportional tax burden of town tax for this project and we're holding the line on that and that wasn't always easy we've been in some interesting meetings and Patty you and I will continue to be in interesting meetings yes we will with state representatives because the town is not going to be left holding the bag on this so there's a misconception and if you came to this saying this is ridiculous why are we paying $7 million for Coke which is essentially what you said reck and I understand why you would say it that's what we're not that's what the sheet said well the thing is it's our infrastructure so it's a municipal if Co wasn't coming here would we change our infrastructure no and that's why if we're building $24 million of infrastructure they're going to have to pay for it and then to your point I don't mean to I'm not trying to argue with you okay by the way I like this kind of love it well you you g well by it um I can't tell you if they're going to be in 20 years another white elephant in the leave town leave Zer or whatever you want to call um life's risk we've tried to do this and Paul you're here tonight so many conversations we've had with Co and there attorneys have been with hey man I don't know if you're going to be here in 10 years you're a$ 46 billion company markets turn State regulation turns you could abandon this $800 million plant in six years so we are building everything around tightening up making sure that the town gets reimbursed in their monies don't give me this 30-year payback I don't believe in 30 years because you're a big Corporation and our town is watch Xerox a big Corporation leave like that so that's fresh in our memories and we've had to say to cope in their attorneys Charlie if you're looking at us as being unreasonable because we're looking for this money to come in a shorter period of time and you're like oh 30 years no I don't know if you're going to be here in 30 years so I always want to make sure the record's straight on that and me I hope that didn't ruin ry's talk because I know you probably wanted to say we're spending all this money and we're not getting reimburse but we are round you're up no I'm going to ask you where is the legal binding agreement with furite to show the residents how much they are providing to the S mil and What the residents of Webster not to know it are contributing to the sou M where's the legal binding agreement resolution Mr flarity that the Webster residents can see before you take this resolution this even because it's irresponsible vot by the board members could do otherwise if you don't have an agreement you're putting a horse before the C I would also like to know why we are putting the horse before the C thank you and you already in slip course before the thank you I would like to know why the resolution for this $7 million Bond was not published on the town's website 24 hours in advance as required by the law supervisor flarity apparently doesn't believe in the rule of law as Jerry Goldman has already explained to him you see Mr Goldman made sure the environmental application by Fairlife was put on the website4 hours in advance and he told Mr flarity about that uh now the residents of Webster are hoping the other four members of the Town board and town attorney will make it right for the residents of Webster to be able to read and understand these resolutions before a meeting as required under law signed by the governor back in November 2122 and just for grins the village board posts all their sou 24 hours in advance with the to Webster king that's not good Communications it states in the public hearing notice certain improvements but what are those improvements Mr flurry you couldn't Define them for us you couldn't let us know what on improvements are we doing also in your July 19th 23 column you stated quote the end result is that the edu charge annually for the Webster residents will be $300 a year Well my charge in my January tax bill this year was $296 183 and you're going to bond another 7 million and you're going to tell me that my next January s bill will only be300 that's total hotwash and you are not telling the truth to the West residents and that's sad because you're going to break that $300 and you know it you know and oh by the way where are all these grants the town was going to receive for sewer and the highway garage to reduce the cost to the tax payers in inclosing have a minute 35 seconds left I'm going go off top of just a minute Mr K nobody else was in the office that day it was just me and one other Jem and my assistant will contest to it he said there's no other way about it you want it the law changed and he would do anything to get me elected to do so it's the truth it's the truth I disagree go ask my assistant okay thanks for stopping in appreciate appreciate your input tonight thank you I got some I got 54 seconds left okay this camera back here is not doing a residen weer any good it's a $100 camera you bring in $550,000 a year in cable franchise fees let's get something it's been three months now let's get somebody in here so we can hear and we can understand the town board meetings in my easy chair instead of being coming up here every week thank you thank you br um I'd say that we're not trying to improve the quality of the video because I would miss Ron coming in and doing um and I kind of would to tell you the truth but we will we're working on getting the oh okay all right so that concludes the uh public speakers from the audience I'm going to close out the public hearing which means that the town board now can talk ask questions art we might need you at the podium on that uh from AUM stand public hearing I'm about to put the Mallet down the public ask Michelle I have a question very short and sweet you use the word reimbursement so my interpretation of that and I'm not an accountant means that the taxpayers going to pay up front Fair life's going to reimburse no I'll tell you what I'm going to do all right always count on well hey I broke theum today so you know two RS make it don't make it right three times so that's the public so let me let me start on this one because uh reimbursement okay you're going to notice that there's a resolution tonight that we will uh consider a well we're going to do this a resolution is scheduled a public hearing for March 7th to consider a local law change to section 27-1 165 and 257-6665 is that and if you've watched or come to our town board meetings the one that was two weeks ago we had a presentation about how our code when IT addresses one-time tieing fees to tie into our sewer system was built in the late 50s early 60s and never had the vision nor should it have done of a massive industrial user like c f translation if we use the code as it's written right now we would get $12 million from coch Fairlife to tie into our system based on the flow that's been well researched right Arthur correct that they're going to put into the system so they're going to pay or we are I'm gon to Michelle no I I I don't you know so way you should come to more meetings or watch the tapes before you come because this was explained in great detail is that for us to get the $24 million instead of the 12 million which I would assume all the taxpayers would be happy at the work that Paul Adams's Finance Charlie's attorney and the town board are doing to make sure we get the full 24 million but our code isn't written that way right now okay so we have to amend our code to on this tie-in fee have a component for an indust a large industrial user translation that code Amendment will allow us to say you're going in more words or less you're going to pay for the specific infrastructure of your company if it is essentially greater than the $12 million in fee based on the $1,000 per equivalent dwelling unit or $12 million now Coke and their attorneys are completely awar us they've been working with us all along so the bottom line is once that code is changed then there will be a industrial use agreement contract that spawns off of that of which CO's attorneys along with you and Storch from Harris Beach who we've outsourced you know we want to do it right that agreement essentially is going to be that they're paying this back over 10 years with commensurate interest time value of money but we're bonding it for 30 years so you tell me for the accountants out there we're getting our money in 10 years for something that is bonded for 30 years which in essence when you take that Revenue that's coming in from that agreement that's how you managed to keep the edu charge to 300 it's all been explained in fact ER when you went to the naua meeting uh down in New York the sewer uh Association you text me said what was our Joe deasio hit streak again the last 100 board meetings board how many have been uh addressing our sewer plant and Coca-Cola and all that 62 out of 100 this is on thepresent at these meetings and I get it you're living your life you walk in here and you say hey I heard why are we I get it four years ago before I was supervisor I'm living my life I would have seen something on the agenda and not been pretty to the 62 previous meetings that told the story honestly upfront as best we could we've answered that question probably a dozen times to Mr NZ where's the agreement what are we doing signing this thing without the agreement how many more times are I going to say we have to create a code change to get the agreement and that's just the facts now you can sit there and say well why aren we doing that first and then going to this there is a timeline of getting this process moving along so that's what we're doing and I think the board and our finance director and our attorney and everybody who has followed this along has been like yeah I guess that does make sense but when you come in late and I understand I would come in late too four or five years ago I'll explain it and recap it as best we can and I'll try to Readers Digest oh been over 62 meetings um but that's a resolution I mean I guess you know we're still in a public hearing we're not going to do that resolution to set the public hearing for the co right now we'll do that once we come out of you know this part of the discussion so um did the town board members because back on the E we had cage in here the engineering firm who has done the design for the 7.1 million and they did a PowerPoint presentation and abing that presentation was also the code change and how we're going to get paid on the 7.1 million um do the town board members have any questions that in our view probably would be best what this 7.1 million why do we need to bond it now based on the municipal Wix law process of going out toid in getting you want to jump up there yeah yeah I mean we have the engineer instrument uh which actually came in at about 6,757 uh there are other soft cost added to that yeah there there are other soft costs that that have to be added to that so I mean we need we need to get out the bid so we need get the actual cost and uh it's best to have the funding in place before you do that the authorization for the funding doesn't mean we're going to go out and borrow the money immediately the first borrowing will take place probably in August when we renew the current uh Bond anticipation note your Finance value set it you know absolutely perfect uh the bonding needs to be in place uh match up to the engineer's estimate once we get the bids back in that'll SC up the cost well I appreciate everybody's uh summary I don't have any questions I don't have any questions I've been in most of these meetings so I certainly don't have any questions I don't have any questions just through it okay um I think sequentially you gave me the instructions that that we're going to paper up with the resolution tonight this one goes first motion of the Town board the town Western M New York County New York to section 202 of the that it is in public interest to undertake certain improvements to be made to the Town West Consolidated SE District I'm G to read the whole thing Charlie unless you have anything says otherwise you don't so whereas the town Board of the town of Webster M County New York is considering authorizing certain improvements to the town of Webster Consolidated Sewer District that encompasses the town of Webster exclusive of exclusive of the village of Webster uh consisting of SE up Gades between Philips road to tore Road all set forth and described in a certain engineering report is prepared by costage engineering land surveying and Landscape architecture DPC dated January 2024 an on Pile in the office of the town clerk at an estimated cost of 7.22 million including the issuance of Serial bonds Andor Bond anticipation notes issued in anticipation of such serial bonds amount to exceed 7.1 million and whereas by resolution number 253 of 2023 adopted in July 20th 2023 the town board adopted a secet resolution in connection with the project and determined that the project constitutes a type one action under seeker and based on its coordinated review determined that the project will result in no significant impacts and therefore the action is not one which may include the potential for at least one significant adverse environmental impact there will be no significant adverse environmental impacts no environmental impact statement need be prepared as such quoted terms are defined in the seeker and such determination constitutes a negative declaration for purposes of seeker and whereas by resolution adopted on February 1st 2024 a regular meeting of the Town board held on such date the town board directed that a public hearing be held and whether to authorize the project and to hear all persons interested in the subject matter thereof con turning the same on February 22nd 2024 at 5:30 p.m.