Full Transcript
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm honored to. Thank you. This is your month. And congratulations on your Person of the Year Award from the News Review. Very good.
Okay, I have a couple quick announcements to make here prior to us starting the meeting. First one is a reminder that Reeves Beach is closed. The erosion up there from the two storms we had is incredible. And I will tell you that there's some excellent pictures on Riverhead Local if you want to see what it looks like. Do not go up there. That's the problem. People are going up to see, and it is extremely dangerous. It is barricaded off, so you have no business being up there. It's going to be closed. Probably for a couple of months. So they're promising to have it done ready for beach season. But there was some massive erosion up there. So stay out of there, and please obey all the signs. On the good news front today, the town received some awesome news. We were informed we've been awarded $5 million in grant money towards the Water District Extensions 95 and 96 through bipartisan infrastructure law, emerging contaminants funding award. Dawn Thomas, who is largely behind our efforts seeking the grant monies, is here to briefly explain to us how this happened. And it came through Senator Chuck Schumer's office, I might add, too. Very grateful for that support. Yeah. So let's see. I think we added up today. We're close to almost $20 million in water grants in the last 2018, since 2018. But this one. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. . . ! It's to address emerging contaminants, PFAS, PFOA, that have been detected in the private wells of residents up in the Middle Road, Tumee Avenue, River Road sections. It's one of the grants we've been continually applying for through various different programs. This is a New York State program that is managed by the Department of Health Environmental Facilities Corporation and DEC. But the funding comes from the bipartisan infrastructure law, which is federal funding. So, you know, Senator Schumer was instrumental in making sure that that money became available for these types of projects. And we were really fortunate to be awarded that funding today. And so, we'll be able to work even, you know, getting closer to getting everyone that needs to get off the private wells off the private wells. Male Speaker 1 And these people that this affects are people whose wells are contaminated. Female Speaker 2 Correct. Male Speaker 1 I mean, they are definitely, we know they're above the limits. They have been above the limits. Female Speaker 1 Yes. Male Speaker 2 So, unlike Manorville, and I'm not belittling Manorville at all, but some of the Manorville test wells have not been above the limits where these all pretty much have been. So, this is really good news. Female Speaker 1 That's correct. Yep. And we'll continue to apply for funding for these projects. Male Speaker 1 Right. Female Speaker 2 We have another round coming up in February, and we're on it. So, yeah. Male Speaker 1 Great work. Female Speaker 2 Yeah. No. Teamwork, everybody. Collins, Mancini, Prudente, everybody. It's always a great team effort. It's never just one person. And all levels of government. So, we're just super happy to be part of that. Male Speaker 1 Excellent. Thank you. Female Speaker 2 Thank you. Male Speaker 1 Excellent job.
Male Speaker 2 Just a quick note on EPCAL so Mr. McAuliffe doesn't run up to the microphone. I was at the Riverhead, heart of Riverhead civic meeting over the weekend, and I mentioned that, you know, obviously we can't talk about EPCAL because of the lawsuit. So, we're not going to make any comments regarding that. But I did ensure the people at the civic meeting and this is absolutely how I feel and how it's going to be. We are in the process, we're going to be interviewing attorneys to handle the case for us. And we will fight this to the end tooth and nail. We will not settle. We will not give up. We want to win this and we're going to take it all the way. So, that's what I conveyed on Saturday. And I've John asked me to reiterate it tonight to the board meeting. But that's our fight and we're going to fight it to the end. So. John, you had a note you wanted to mention? John Fenneman, Yes. So, I don't know if you people have been to East End Arts Gallery lately, but it's turned into a world class gallery. They have artists showing there that are in museums across the country and across the world. With that, there's a show coming up called Well Read, January 26th through March 1st. I would really urge you to go there. It's really turned into a world class gallery. So, thank you. John Fenneman, Okay. Okay. With that, we will get started with our regular meeting. And we have invocation, but I think Pastor Ivan Chagas is not here. Is Pastor here? Okay. Our substitute pastor will be Deacon Wooten tonight. Deacon Wooten will lead us in an invocation. John Fenneman, Oh, I thank you. If we could just bow our heads, please. Thank you. Lord, we call on you to quiet our minds and our spirits. We thank you for our community. We ask for your blessings upon all those who came out in this cold winter night to help shape and question our direction. We ask that you fill us with your spirit of humility and clear thought as we discuss issues surrounding our community. We ask for your peaceful spirit to help us deliberate and celebrate. We ask all these things, and we ask that you would do even much more for your Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Jim. Very nice job, Jim. Thank you. Okay. I'm going to vote on the approval of the minutes from the town board meeting on January 3rd, 2024. Can I have a motion to accept the approval of minutes? So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Wazki. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. So carried. Okay. Jim, do we have any correspondence? We do. We have a letter from Joanne Wazki, a resignation letter from the Board of Assessment and Review. We also had a very nice letter, actually, from Catherine DeSabo acknowledging dedication of the town employees and departments. It's something we don't hear as much as we'd like to. An email from Florence Liso with concerns regarding the activity of the town council. We also had a letter from James DeLuca, Kathleen Maragio, Charlene Martin, and Jordan McNurray, and all of them were opposing the renumbering of Linda Lane East up in Rolling Woods. And that's it for correspondence. On the reports, we have the January 2nd tax collection from the tax receiver at $28,914,637.42. That's the first one. And then we have the second one. The second one is from the Board of Assessment. We also have the collection date as of January 10th at $70,020,457.29. She also filed her December 2023 utility collection report. That's $688,255.51. And the town clerk's December monthly report for 2023 was $9,100.58. And that's it for reports. Okay. So what we're going to do now is we're going to close the town board meeting, and we're going to open up the community development meeting. Can I have a motion to close the town board meeting? So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskie. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Okay. The town board meeting is closed, and the CDA meeting is now open. Good evening. We have two resolutions. One's on tap for this evening, resolution number one and number two aptly named. These are our, this is our organizational meeting for the community development agency, which is a separate municipal entity from the town board, pursuant to New York State general municipal law. Its purpose is to provide economic development and urban renewal to areas in the town. The first resolution is appoint members and officers to the community development agency. We need a motion and a second. So moved. Seconded. Merrifield. Yes. Waskie. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Okay. Resolution is adopted. We need to just take comments on those. Oh, yeah. Any comments on our organizational? Oh, we got one on, we got a Zoomer. Okay, good.
Hi, Kathy McGraw. My comment is in the open comments of the CDA meeting. I didn't see any resolutions on the town board website today for the CDA. So do you, would you like me to make them now or do you want me to wait till after the resolutions? Kathy, you might as well make them now. There's only one other one. And we apologize. That was an error on our part that it didn't get put up. We just got it actually. That's why our meeting was delayed in getting started today. So by all means, go ahead now. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Kathy McGraw from Northville. And let me start by saying Happy New Year and by saying what a pleasure it is to see a new face in that center seat, Mr. Hubbard. And welcome to Ms. Waskie and Ms. Merrifield. All of you and this entire town are faced with one blockbuster lawsuit. And I am really relieved to hear your comments, Mr. Hubbard, about fighting this lawsuit tooth and nail. I do have a question though. You are one of five members and I don't know whether all the town board feels that way. So I just wanted to make a couple of comments. It's pretty clear that the Jermasians are not going to go away quietly. And I urge you as Mr. Hubbard has suggested, has actually asserted to fight this lawsuit tooth and nail with everything you've got. Their pleading which I read underscores what so many have been saying for so long. These are not people the town should be doing business with. They're ruthless and can't be trusted. As we have learned over the past seven years they will say and do anything to get their hand on the land at EPCAL. Kathy? For the bargain price of $40 million. Kathy? Yes? Your volume is fading. Oh, thank you. Let me see what I can do. Can you hear me? It's better now, yes. You're about to come right through our screen actually, I think. That I don't want to do to you all. Let me see. There you go. I'm not finding my video. Can you hear me? Yes, much better. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to say that we've learned over the past seven years the Jermasians will do just about anything to get their hands on this property at EPCAL for the bargain price of $40 million. And just a couple of examples. Not all the board members have been on the board the whole time. They used Daniel Preston to get this deal. And once they got it, they kicked him to the curb. We now know their initial spokesman at the Q&E process, Mr. Bienstock, has been found guilty of real estate fraud. And when despite its very best efforts, the town was unable to get the land subdivided, the Jermasians cajoled, or at least it appeared this way, to the public cajoled the town into not walking away from the contract, a right that was clearly stated in the contract. And next thing we know, they willingly, or so it appeared to the public, they willingly and knowingly, with the blessing of their own attorneys, entered into the agreement to move this matter to the town, to the IDA, excuse me. They then presented their development plan to the IDA, a massive logistics center and cargo air port. And then they claimed their hired spokesman had misspoken. And that really wasn't their plan. Now in this lawsuit, they claim to have been hoodwinked by the town, saying they didn't know the transfer of the matter to the IDA was illegal under New York law. Really, I find that hard to believe, given the caliber of the attorneys they have reached. Really, I find that hard to believe, given the caliber Really, I find that hard to believe, given the caliber This lawsuit can and must be defended vigorously, and I hope you will do so. It may cost a lot of money. The Jermasians are masters at using the legal system to attain their goals. But please remember as you move forward, there are human resources in this town available to assist. Many people of Riverhead have followed this fiasco from the get-go, and they have in-depth knowledge of what has gone on. While it would be somewhat unorthodox and novel, I have no doubt that the people who have followed this for seven years would be more than willing, ready, and able to provide any assistance needed to whomever the town retains to fight this lawsuit. I know I am among that group. Whatever it takes, Riverhead can and must be resolute in severing ties. I am a member of the Jermasians, and I really appreciate your time and listening to my comments. Thank you very much. CHAIR KARKLINS. Thank you, Cathy. CHAIR KARKLINS. Supervisor, can I just respond to Cathy's remarks to make sure and certain without any unclarity. I believe this entire Board is 100 percent behind our supervisor. We will all stand by the supervisor and defend this lawsuit. So I certainly will back the supervisor, and I'll make that public announcement, and I'm sure my fellow Board members will acknowledge that. CHAIR KARKLINS. Thank you very much. CHAIR KARKLINS. Yes, absolutely. I will fight this as well. CHAIR KARKLINS. Absolutely. CHAIR KARKLINS. CHAIR KARKLINS. Thanks. CHAIR KARKLINS. It's a good Board I have up here, I've got to tell you. Okay. Dawn, we have a second resolution on the CDA. MS. Yeah. Yeah, and this is the omnibus resolution. Basically this creates your policies and your rules for the upcoming year, and it's omnibus resolution relating to the requirements of the Public Authorities Accountability Act of 2005. And ratifying all prior committee chairs and policies to the Community Development Agency. We need a motion and a second. CHAIR KARKLINS. So moved. CHAIR KARKLINS. Second. MS. Merrifield. CHAIR KARKLINS. Yes. MS. Waskie. Yes. MS. Kern. Yes. MS. Rothwell. CHAIR KARKLINS. Yes. MS. Hubbard. CHAIR KARKLINS. Yes. MS. KERN. Yes. CHAIR KARKLINS. Yes. CHAIR KARKLINS. Yes. MS. John McAuliffe, Roanoke Landing. And Kathy already said much of what I would have said, which you can't say. But I think the underlying, the town has to recognize we are dealing with an issue of coercion and intimidation, that they're trying to create conflicts within the town by the whole language that they put in. And the people need to look at, if they take the time to look at the brief, that that's a brief. It's a totally partisan, one-sided, and as we've discovered in national politics, things can be made up to serve a purpose. And we have to assume that they have made up stuff to try to scare you. They also have used this pendency function, which is to stop the police from coming in and trying to stop you from doing anything with all of the land, not just the 1,600 acres, the 2,400 acres. And that's a separate motion. I don't know when you speak with your attorney. I hope you see if there's some way in terms of thinking about the future use of EPCAL that you can deal with that pendency motion and get the right of the town to use it. The other thing I wanted to say was thank you. First of all, I should say that, as Kathy didn't say it officially, but I will, as Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. that EPCAL Watch is totally supportive of your decision and what you and Mr. Rothwell said and the others said. And if there's anything institutionally, organizationally that we can do to support that, we will be there. And the finally, I thanks for the personal words. It's slightly out of order. But as I was telling Ms. Waski, I was totally shocked. Mary kept this totally hidden. And there is on the 25th of January, a reception at the vineyards of Aqabaag that they will be honoring not just the riverhead people. And remember, there's four other riverhead people that were honored, but people from South Hold and from Shelter Island. So I think it's a good chance to reinforce the the whole North Fork community that Riverhead is an important part of. So again, thank you very much. Mr. Thank you, John.
Phil Lorpato as co-founder of the Riverhead Neighborhood Preservation Coalition. I just very briefly want to say that the civic associations in this town are way behind you. We think that this is the right thing to do. How we got into this deal is another whole story. It took us a while to squeeze our way out of it, but we did it. And we did it correctly. I think we have a strong case on our side. And just keep in mind that the civic associations of the town of Riverhead are behind you on this. We'll fight with you. John Aucott, Jr.: Thank you, Phil. Appreciate that.
Anybody else? Good evening. Taupe Church and Greater Calverton Civic Association. My hands are thawed out. So I'm ready to hold a lot of papers and come up to you. It's a cold night out there. You rode here? Oh, yeah, always. Oh, my goodness. I'm so happy that on a cold night like tonight, you see the folks that you see here representing many people in town, different civics. We've been talking amongst ourselves. Folks at the microphone already have let you know what support you have. You have Calverton Civic Association's full support. Whatever need you have that you can look to us for, please do. You'll be seeing support letters. I think you already see one in there from the agenda here, Florence Liso. And thank you. It was brought to my attention, I didn't realize it, that that one email that was sent in, excuse me, on the online agenda, I think it was on the website. It was a photo of the email with a time stamp on it for total transparency on the correspondence that comes into the town board and the CDA and hopefully to the other boards. I've asked for it for over two years. I'm so thankful. Thanks so much. You're welcome. You're welcome. Just a reminder to everybody, if you ever, and to the people watching, if you want to communicate via a letter to the town, you can either bring it here to the town clerk's office, or mail it to the town clerk's office. They time stamp it. It becomes part of an official record, and it gets distributed to all of us up here once it's time stamped. So instead of sending an email or a text, if you want to make sure it's gotten by everybody, this is a recorded letter once you send it to the clerk's office. So we even print out emails that are sent and stamp them as well. Yes. Perfect. Okay. Bye-bye. Thank you. Oh, yeah. CDA meeting is, you're going to close? Yeah. We can take a motion to close the CDA meeting and reopen the town board meeting. So moved. Seconded. Merrifield. Yes. Mosky. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. CDA meeting is closed. Town board meeting now open. Okay. We're going to move on to our public hearings that we have scheduled tonight. We've got to reopen the town board meeting. Dawn did. Okay. Correct? Yes. I thought we just . Dawn did when she said that. Oh, I . Do it all in one motion. Close it and reopen. Do it.
Okay. The first public hearing we have scheduled is for 6.05 tonight. It is now 6.44. And this public hearing is regarding an unsafe structure at 29 East 2nd Street. And I'm going to ask Councilor Howard to . . . I'm going to ask Councilor Howard to inform us of the situation with this. Alright. So this was an unsafe structure that was noticed by code enforcement as an unsafe structure. You had previously adopted a resolution to publish in post-notice of a public hearing to consider demolition of the structure as unsafe. Since that time we've been in touch with, or my office has been contacted by the owner Ben Soloff. He has hired design professionals, an architect and an engineer. to help him come up with plans for restoration or renovation of the property he has requested an adjournment of this public hearing in order to meet with the building department make a determination as to whether he's going to submit for a building permit to restore the property or seek to demolish it currently the structure has been secured by code enforcement so my office's recommendation would be to grant the adjournment for approximately one month to February 21st 2024 which is our next evening meeting I will just say to that counselor as well as code enforcement thank you very much for the work in which you've done and put into this because you forced an action to take place so we're making progress thank you thank you okay we're not going to close that public hearing because we're adjourned we'll yes we'll leave it open to February 21st at which time we'll either have an update from the owner or if nothing has happened we would potentially proceed okay thank you all right we have a second public hearing scheduled tonight scheduled for 6 o 5 again it is now 646 public hearing to amend waterways and water related activities and council Howard again that's to you all right Thank You supervisor this is a proposal for the City of !
we are implementing regulations for shellfishing at East Creek the the East Creek shellfishing will be seasonal seasonal according to the schedule given to us by the DEC for this current year it would be open from January through the end of March and that time period will change year to year based on the DEC's assessment of data related to related to the growth of shellfish in the creek and rainfall and other precipitation this will allow it to be open only from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday through Friday it won't be open for shellfishing only on weekends and holidays it will be prohibited to remove shellfish outside of the window established by the DEC the taking of shellfish will be limited on a daily basis to a half bushel and a half bushel is a ! of which no more no more than a hundred Shelby hard shell clams there'll be no commercial removal of shellfish from East Creek and there will be no removal of fin fish from East Creek either and removal of shellfish from East Creek by non-riverhead residents will be prohibited riverhead residents will need to get a shell fishing permit from the town clerk's office and it's my understanding that there is no fee for that I'm going to go through that and see if there's any concerns I can make in the right town yes okay now with those regulations proposed and potentially implemented we are also proposing to increase the fines a fine on the first offense from 250 to 500 fine on a the fine on the second offense remains the same 1,000 to 3,000 fine on a third offense from 2000 up to 2,500 and we are proposing to double the fines for remove for violations committed by commercial entities and non-residents and this also prohibits the removal of any fin fish not just by only by commercial entities correct yes okay we have anybody from the public who would like to comment on this hello happy new year Robert Skinner Eileen circle and James port I tried to get this the information on this off the website and was unable to do so so the information that I have based on this is from Newsday and Rivet local so if it's a little off it's I apologize commercial entities we're talking strictly the you know the sale of claim of all say clams the type of gear that is used to to clam is that regulated or is it strictly the commercial activity so in other words if you've got a an 11 tooth or a larger rake which is traditionally considered commercial is that allowed to be used if it's being used for recreational purposes they take movement no more than 100 clams, that is not addressed as to which type of rake is used. Okay. But it also has to be, you can't use a boat to do it. That was the next question. You have to come in from the shoreline and clam. Okay. So with the big tongs that the commercial guys use, you're not going to be able to use those. But if you've got a T-handle 15-footer, you can still use that. Yeah. And there's no clamming. But it's only 100 clams, so. Yeah. But, you know, as it gets going and you need to get different grounds, then, you know, I can see where that could be questioned. And I didn't know if then, you know, if that's a riverhead thing or a DEC thing, so, you know, with the type of gear. So there's no clamming from the boat, but a boat can be used to access spots, if you will. Take it up to the shoreline, get out of the boat, and do your clamming. Okay. The access points are designated as per what the parking areas are now. So, in other words, the beach. You can park at the beach and walk around the point. You can park at. As long as you have your permit. Yes. Because the permits start January 1st. Right. So you have your beach parking permit. Absolutely. And then from the, let's just nominally say from the ramp. Okay. I understand the concept below the high water mark. Okay. But that's, quote, marshland. So then do you have to walk down to where there is no marsh in order to. Okay. So you can't walk through the marsh or on top of the marsh. Or that kind of stuff. Right. You should go around the bulkheading. If you're on the north side of East Creek. You can go around the bulkheading and down through the path through the Phragmites there. And down to get to where you can get the beach area. At a lower tide. At higher tide. Right. It's going to be more difficult. Yeah. Well, that's, yeah. We'll just play it by ear. And the other thing is in areas where you can clam or shellfish with a pitchfork, is it mandatory to fill your. Fill in the holes. I know some municipalities have that law where if you dig a hole, you've got to fill it back in. Is that under application here or does it matter? No. It hasn't. That hasn't been addressed. No. Okay. All right. It's a good point though. No. It is what it is. Okay. There's actually not many of those because you would use those primarily for the soft shell clams. Yeah. And there's not many down there anymore from what I understand. I remember as a kid we used to go down there and we had them all the time. But. Well. From what I understand, there's not many of those there anymore. Well. There's a couple areas. There's a couple areas now. This is quote unquote in East Creek. So in other words, if you're out on the bayside proper where the beach is, now there's nobody there right now, but you can still clam there and you can, can you pitchfork clam because in that area? Okay. Because that's a ground, those are grounds that are more conducive. Conducive to the soft shell. Yeah. So, okay. And other than that, I think this is a great deal and I'm. We're very happy. Grilled. It's been a long time coming. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Terrific. Thank you all. Good. Thank you, Bob. Anybody else on this topic? Anybody online? Okay. All right. It is 6.53 and make a motion. We'll close this public hearing for 10 days. Keep it open for written comment or no? No, I think we want to vote on that. I think, well, there is. Oh, it's coming up in the packet. Yeah. There's a resolution in the packet to adopt this code tonight and typically we wouldn't do that. But for in this instance, the season is already open and we need to implement the code in order for the, when there's another resolution for the agreement with the DEC to run this program in the packet. So in order to implement it and maximize the amount of time that residents can enjoy this shell fishing activity, we would need to go forward tonight. Okay. But of course that's subject to the board's discretion. Okay. So we'll make a motion to not keep this open for 10 days and go down this later on in the packet. Okay. So we can get our residents out there clamming if they want to go out clamming. I'll make a motion to close the hearing. I'll second it. Oh, great. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Rothwell? I know the supervisor cooks really awesome stuffed clams and so I expect him to be the first in line tomorrow morning at the town clerk's office and I do expect him at the next work session and with that in mind, I vote yes. Yeah. I'm going to have to get a little bit of ice breaking for trying to get through the sand bar. Okay. We're all set? Yes. Okay. All right. Our next public hearing is scheduled for 610. It is now 655. This will be a public hearing on solid waste and again, Councillor Howard. All right. Thank you, Mr. Supervisor. This is an amendment that was suggested by Councilman Kern. It is a public hearing. Thank you. Councillor fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist fist and incorporating hazardous materials listed in the federal regulations. This was just to remove as much ambiguity as possible from what is considered hazardous waste for the purposes of this chapter. To Councilman Kern's original objective here, we had some complaints from our waste collector about bulk items that are left on the side of the road. So we are implementing regulations where appliances or furniture have to be six feet or less when they're placed for pickup and they need to be off the roadway so as to remove any hazard to residents or travelers on the road. Carpets need to be rolled, bundled and tied and each roll is considered to be one bulk item. And mattresses, including the ones that are on the road, including sleeper sofa mattresses need to be disposed of in an appropriately sized plastic bag. This addresses water logging that was happening with these items which make them difficult to pick up. We also took the opportunity to amend the penalties. There's a provision in here for penalties for waste collectors. It's essentially when a waste collector doesn't pick up whatever they're picking up appropriately. And it just increases the fine from 500 to 1,000 and the upper limit of that fine from 1,000 to 1,500. Then we restructured what was defined as a deposit on public or private property and we simply renamed it dumping or prohibiting that. And we, let's see, and we identified three different areas where the dumping could occur. Either on public and private property in a Pine Barrens designated area or in a wetlands designated area. And we tiered the fines based on those areas. So the fines are going to be higher if you're dumping in a wetland as opposed to public property or Pine Barrens designated property. And those fines were also increased. The, well, the fines are there in the code. If anyone has any questions about it, I can, I can. I can address those. But that is in some substance the proposed code change. Okay. Councilman Kern, do you have anything you want to add? Or thank you for your work on this. Yeah. So, I mean, this, we have people, like, there's a difference between littering and dumping. If you drop a piece of paper, that's littering. But we have found that, especially in some of the beaches and wading river, people are actually depositing like a full white garbage bag. That's, that's dumping. So this addresses that and, and, and other things. But that's how we got here. If previously that penalty was limited to a $250 fine, this increases that substantially. Yeah. Excellent. Do we have anybody from the comment, from the public who would like to comment on this? Do we have anybody online? No. Okay. All right. I'd like to keep this open until January 26, 2024, if there are any comments. Really, thank you. Really thank you. Really thank you. Any objections? Good. Okay. Good. All right. We're on to public hearing number four and five, and we're going to combine them. And I'll tell you why they both relate to the Tanger properties. And number four is a public hearing manufacturer's outlook center overlay zone and the public hearing for general provisions of that same zone. And this was scheduled for 615. It is now 7 o'clock. And I'm going to ask Councilor Prudente to present to us. Good evening, everyone. Good evening. So, just doing the two in reverse order, the one that reads general provisions would amend the definition 3013 from manufacturer's outlet center to read manufacturer's outlet and retail sales center. Interior design showroom and jargon. Trade center and specialty grocery and food stores and market center. It's essentially just a definitional provision. Number four is actually the meat of the code. It begins with an amendment to chapter 301-86, the purpose. And the purpose section is amended to include retail sales center, interior design showroom, and trade center, and specialty grocery, food stores, and market center. The next provision, basically 301-87, describes the permitted uses, which include that it has to be a unitary design of the entire campus. All pad sites, currently there are three, shall be compatible with and complement the design of the outlet center. Retail, sales, interior, showroom, trade center, and grocery. Then, it describes specifically those three separate and distinct uses. The manufacturer's outlet and retail. The interior design and decor showroom and trade center. And the purpose section. All pad sites, currently there are three. The space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space and highlights some additional or expanded accessory uses, which include indoor and outdoor recreation. The outdoor recreation is very limited. It's walking, exercise, trail, playground, small amusement ride, carousel, splash pads. The indoor recreation can include an arcade, virtual reality games, billiards, foosball, ping pong, yoga, and other fitness activities. There's a limitation as to the indoor square footage, which shall be limited to 10,000 square feet per 100,000 square feet of approved site plan. In addition, within that section, in the food court, it describes and limits square footage, I'm sorry, in the food court, it actually permits one food court to be replaced by a restaurant. But the restaurant will not have signage along Route 58.
It's gonna be storefront and campus kiosk, no drive-through. Limited entertainment for patrons only.
Next, we actually, a indoor theater was always permitted in this section, but we highlighted it to address the new type of indoor theaters that are across the country, where you can have dining, comfortable seating, even, you know, a restaurant. Really, there are a number of space space space in the space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space The last thing we really added was limitations as to uses. We prohibited medical and professional offices except those related to the interior design, which will be very limited in scope as defined herein. We prohibited hotel lodging, any overnight accommodations, stand-alone personal care services such as a beauty parlor, nail salon, adult uses, and stores or lounges for tobacco, tobacco substances, cannabis, electronic cigarettes, or other products related to that. And, you know, I'll just report to the board. Councilman Kern, Dawn, I, together with planning staff, Greg, Matt, and Heather worked on this together for well over a year, actually over two years. It was first proposed and brought to our attention by the owners, agents of Tanger, pleading with us that outlets of the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the Tanger, the have amended their zoning. And because of the needed flexibility, the town board is well aware that Tanger 1 and Tanger 2 are our highest taxpaying entities. There was a lot of give and take. We did not grant them probably 50% of what they wanted. But we tried to be mindful of the existing comp plan, comments of residents throughout the years, cognizant of the desire to redevelop downtown and not compete with downtown. And that's how we drafted this code. This is just a national trend of how outlets are going because retail has taken a big hit with online shopping. So this is... That's correct. ... providing more amenities to give the shopper an experience when they go other than just... That's correct. ... I ordered online. Why would I go there? Now there's going to be other amenities for them to enjoy and use. There is a great demand for the interior design and showroom and trade center. Great demand. Do you have anything you want to add to this? No, I'm really glad. I mean, I'm sorry it took so long. You know, but this was ... This is necessary. I mean, retail, I think everybody in this room knows what's happening with retail, and we have to help Tanger. And after speaking to their corporate offices a little over two years ago and asking them how other towns across the country, I believe they have 26 locations, were, you know, treating them, and they said they were being very helpful and accommodating to make sure that they survived, given the changing atmosphere of retail. And I do have, if it's okay, somebody did send me a comment. They couldn't get on the Zoom. And if you give me a second, I'll read it. Is it okay to comment now? Oh, absolutely. Okay. So this is from Connie Lissandro, President of the Riverhead Chamber of Commerce. And it says, with a vision, there is progress. And this is exactly what Tanger is doing. The Riverhead Chamber of Commerce fully supports the amended ... I'm sorry. ... I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
when it's it does specifically address in these excuse me specialty grocery food stores and market center it is actually worded to foster our local agriculture and provide a venue to showcase and market everything grown local okay so our local vineyards can open up the shop there for distribution absolutely thank you we have anybody from the public that would like to comment on this good evening everyone my name is Richard Israel I am a local developer very involved with route 58 you know I'm a local developer and I'm very supportive of our downtown rehabilitation whatever we're trying to do again and I just want to give you an overlay of our zoning of our town which was done many years ago we're redoing it with the comprehensive plan but I I just asked you to be cautious you know Tanger is a great thing for our town it came with a lot of controversy it had a lot of restrictions on it had a particular overlay district because of its special use they're good citizens they're good neighbors they're good taxpayers because of their square footage understand they don't pay double the tax that I pay on route 58 or any other commercial entity it's just based on the vastness it is a tremendous shopping center we I've been a developer here and and and you know growing our town over the years we can't have a department store in our town because they can't compete with Tanger every time we try to bring a department store here we used to have Sweezy's you know they basically say we can't be there there you have Tanger. Everything that we would sell is is sold at a discount and they have the attraction. Tanger has a tremendous attraction. When we originally when I say we when the town originally allowed it we were hoping that it would bring commerce to the balance of our town. I think history has shown us that it hasn't done that. It's been a good neighbor everything else. We still have a corridor. We have big-box stores and things like that that as you start to allow Tanger who has a tremendous draw to have a Trader Joe's in there to have recreational entertainment there and the like you are going to be drawing away from what we're hoping is going to happen to our downtown. What we're what we know we can use along the Route 58 corridor and the like. So I understand that they're a good neighbor. We need to respect them and the like but I you know we talk about food courts. The original thing said that the food court would be for the employees only and that's not true. We're not going to be doing that. We're going to be doing that. We're going to be doing that. We're going to be doing that. We're going to be doing that. That would force their people to go out onto Route 58 Applebee's you know and all the theme restaurants that we've brought here by you allowing them to start to have sit-down restaurants in there you will try up 58 you will start to have those particular restaurants who are struggling as much as Tanger is okay you're going to impact them economically you know we've been trying to expand Route 58 with new eateries new things Route 58 has become a great source for shopping for both forks you know and and all the way back to the William Floyd people come our way so Riverhead got discovered in the last 20 years so I just ask you to be fair that you you don't kill the other baby down the street to help somebody you have to remember I know a lot of people say oh what are we going to do with the big box stores they're empty and this and that they're all run by professional people Tanger is a very professional organization okay most Tanger outlets are in the middle of nowhere Riverhead is not the middle of nowhere so you know if they're off a highway they're usually in a place that needed economic development development at that time and the like Riverhead and Tanger are part of a ecosystem we have have drawn people from far away which would have never come to Riverhead even our locals and services so I I just ask you to reconsider to keep the balance in our town we have very currently we have very precise zoning a big box shopping center can't have a restaurant a um it's only allowed in certain BC's and and other zoning if we start to open the gates you know to allow what we originally said hey we're going to allow this guy to build a couple of hundred thousand square feet in our town and now you're going to adjust it you know that they say that the restaurant is for patrons you have to go through a toll booth you know we've seen that that the food court at Tanger far exceeds what I think anybody ever expected to there are there are kiosk fast food restaurants in there and everything else and they solve the problem that we found that I'm going to say eighty percent of the patrons that come to Tanger leave from Tanger so yes we're feeding him and he's feeding his people and this and that but the original concept was and if you remember we had the trolley we had all these things to say hey you're here visiting Riverhead why don't you take a get to our downtown but Route 58 thrives off of Tanger and if we start to allow uses within Tanger that hurt that Route 58 corridor it's going to be a question you know the people that they're seeking because they're professional landlords and they know what's out there in the Marketplace you know Trader Joe's we've been trying to get Trader Joe's here for years they are out there actively looking to come to Riverhead we would all applaud them coming to Riverhead but if you start to put them in tank Tanger then you're you're taking away the competitive Edge of the market and you're going to see an increase in anybody else who pays taxes along Route 58 who that's where they would have to decide to go. Any major retailer and and restaurant and franchisee and everything else would choose Tanger twice over being on Route 58 because they get their 10,000 people there in a day. Okay? So just be careful. I know we want to be a good neighbor. I very rarely come talk to you guys because I believe in development of our town in any way that we can do it. It's all good. I don't mind competition and everything else but just be careful. If they want to build a design center, great. But if they start building, we allowed them to have a movie theater over 10 or 15 years ago. They never did it. Didn't make economic sense. That's why we've always fought for it. To try to get one in our town. They're just hard and in today's world it's even harder. So are they allowed to you know and I don't want to hypothesize or this or that but let's try to keep the zones where they are and let's try to make it fair along the corridor so that everybody has a meal to eat. And I think that's way our zoning currently is. I believe the comprehensive plan is kind of continuing away from the existing one. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the zoning plan. I'm not sure if you're familiar with that. But again these guys are professional landlords. They will solve their problems. You know you talk about the recreational. You were originally gonna try to go into Kmart. Kmart is full now. It's got a got a pickleball person going in there. Okay. Think about would you allow through this amendment pickleball at Tanger? That my wife's going shopping I'm gonna go play pickleball. Well let him get in his car and go down the street. Okay. So one of the things I want to say you know they you're right they had two large food courts which could service a lot of people. And if you look at this code we're limiting it to 25 seats in a restaurant for that reason and to your point we weren't looking to compete with other parts. How many seats is their food court to have Bob? One of them is completely shut down. And if there was a need for their patrons wouldn't they open it up? They have a right to open it up. I don't. Why do you need a sit-down restaurant with waitress service? So then it's just a regular food court. Let them open it up and put it there. They're allowed. You've allowed that. Yeah but we don't want but it's a trade-off. We don't we don't want it more than 25 seats. Ann Marie I'm gonna let you go. I'm gonna let you go. Do you think that 25 seats restricts it to a particular size? Of course.
So just to be clear a food court could be substituted for a restaurant. The code I think you misread it is not limited to patrons. It's the entertainment that is limited to the patrons of the restaurant. The restaurant would be a restaurant. Could potential non shoppers at Tanger come in and eat at that restaurant? Absolutely. Absolutely. But I also have to tell a town code. This is the 2003 comprehensive plan. plan. These provisions are not inconsistent with this document. Dawn and I spent a considerable amount of time going through this document. This document is 20 years old. So 20 years ago did they quote contemplate even recommend that Tanger have modifications to its zoning to continue it as enormous potential for retail growth not only in conjunction with tourism but also in the form of destination retail centers like Tanger. I'm not going to bore everybody in the room because at the work session when we outline this I recited the various provisions of this document 20 years old that had a vision for Tanger and what Tanger could be. So but on the restaurant excuse me. Excuse me. Council I have a question I just want to clarify too with the code that's proposed under section I with the food courts the way I understood it to read it allows only one food court in this area and that can be substituted for only one restaurant is that accurate and reading that so it's not like there would be several food courts in this area it's only one or or only one single restaurant that's correct okay you have to give up the food court in order for to have the rest both right that's correct does that I know that we have Tanger one Tanger two both have a food court. 19 19 19
a zone change like this before the change of what our new comprehensive plan coming out how does this affect other surrounding shopping centers restaurants and so forth well for the two years in the discussions and making of this and presently today this is our comp plan this is consistent with it in working with our consultants and dawn can get up and address it nothing of the new comp plan would in any way to minimize or contradict this proposed zoning okay nothing but if the one wants to hire nothing at all okay uh amory is correct and i would just say a couple of things and i think rich alluded to it when tanger's initial zoning was adopted it was very restrictive and one of the things you'll notice in there is that 70 30 split between outlet goods and retail goods and and i think at that time the town board and the community were fearful that tanger would overwhelm uh the town but what i think this proposal does is really help to shift uh and it may even assist other businesses on route 58 because it's creating more of an experiential shopping situation as you had mentioned uh um and the objective is to really shift the what they're having great success with is the large furniture stores they want to consolidate those and then consolidate the outlets into one section so and then put in where the furniture is move the food options to that side so um you know there's always competition on route 58 obviously but um based on the existing status of tanger the vacancies that are there now and um the potential to really create an experiential furniture um sort of like what they have in north carolina where you go with a designer and those people would be in there too it's a concept uh that's unique and we think it was appropriate for uh 58 and we think it will enhance that experience so
so i'm just a little confused but it was said that that restaurant can't have more than 25 seats no no in the code the councilman was referring to the provision regarding specialty grocery. That is designed to showcase local agricultural produce, and that quote, just like the concept is like Little Eataly in New York, if you've ever gone. So it showcases produce, and you can buy it, or there are small vignette restaurants limited to 25 seats where they're cooking and preparing, and you're tasting the local produce made into a dish. That's the difference. And if you read the totality of the code, that's fully explained in that use provision.
Eat Italy is a great concept. Oh, it is? It has five restaurants within a specialty grocery store so that you can shop. You can eat. You can dine and everything else. So what I just heard was we're now going to allow as many restaurants as we want in there, and you're basically going to be stealing from both downtown that we've been trying to get a significant restaurant down into and Route 58 of the people who normally finish shopping at Tanger and say, hey, let's grab a bite at Applebee's. Let's go to Panera. Let's go a quarter of a mile down the street to feed our family versus eating in a food court, which we had lunch in, that doesn't really have basic food, not a sit-down venue. If you put a sit-down venue within Tanger, you've destroyed your town. Okay? I don't mind. And again, if you want to talk about furniture stores, we've had two or three major furniture stores. One is wanting to come to our area. You know, they're looking for space and everything else. Tanger has plenty of space. So if they want to take the entire buildings to the east and turn it into a Huffman Coos or a Raymoor Flanagan, it's a simple task for them to do that. Okay? But again, you're then going to be stealing from across the street where Costco is or, you know, if a Christmas tree shop goes out or we just lost a tree, you're going to be stealing from across the street. Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Okay? Cindy Clifford, Riverhead. First of all, Tim, I want to thank you for coming to the civic meeting on Saturday. You were a big hit. I can't tell you how many emails I got going. That was so great. And I want everybody to know that Joanne will be joining us next month. And also, you're going to be at the Calverton one in February. Yes. So you guys are doing the tour. I wasn't going to comment. I was going to comment. I wasn't sure. And when Mr. Israel got up, I thought he's sort of saying what I'm feeling. Back in May of 94, when Tanger was first looking at Riverhead, the Main Street merchants were like 100%. They said Tanger is going to draw additional customers. They're going to save us. We're going to benefit. We're going to boost the downtown district. And that did not happen. As a matter of fact, Tanger instead became another nail in the coffin for Main Street as it once was. And I'm concerned. I'm concerned that with Tanger becoming bigger and better and more and more, that it might really start to hurt some of our Route 58 merchants. Their outlet model isn't working as successfully as it once was. I understand that. But Tanger is looking to Riverhead to give it the nod to expand beyond its original plan to permit retail, theaters, indoor, outdoor entertainment, grocery stores, restaurants, who knows what else. And maybe even just that, what Mr. Israel said, I believe, to be true. That the more you put at Tanger, the more it draws people and keeps them there. So if you have an all things to everyone Tanger, then there's a concern for the stores, the grocery stores, the restaurants, the retail stores on 58. Like, what is the potential? I mean, I know that this isn't going to hurt Big Lots or Christmas Tree Store or Bed Bath & Beyond because they've already folded. But we're really concerned about anything that could hurt or cripple. I mean, we're really concerned about anything that could hurt or crush our existing taxpaying business. I know Tanger is a big taxpayer. But, you know, can we afford to give them preferential treatment? Because they need help. Everybody needs a little bit of help. So I just want to suggest that if you would weigh whether this new zoning risks hurting our existing businesses in a way that the original Tanger hurt our Main Street. Thank you. Cindy, I just want to clarify. Big Lots, Christmas Tree Shop, Bed Bath & Beyond. Bed Bath & Beyond. Yes. As a whole, they went out of business. Not Big Lots. Nationwide, just not in Riverhead. Not Big Lots. Big Lots just closed. No. No, they filed bankruptcy. Yeah. But actually, I was just kind of using that for some local comment. I know. But I don't want people to think that they left Riverhead. No. Right, right. They're leaving, as the supervisor said, the nation. But just, you know, the concern. And, of course, you know, my heart doesn't go to big box stores. My heart goes to, like, the mom and pops and the local businesses that have always been here and need help to survive. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. And part of what brings people to Riverhead now is the appeal of all the businesses on 58. And I agree with Mr. Israel that the bigger Tanger is, because, you know, we saw it when Tanger first opened. It became like that's where everybody went, that's where all the cars were, and everybody else was, like, sitting out in the front porch and going, time to close. Right. So, anyway, I just wanted to put that out there because I really feel that all the businesses in Riverhead deserve the loyalty of this town. And not, you know, not just going, well, Tanger pays a lot of taxes. Because, you know, they do, but everybody pays taxes, and they all pay, hopefully, their fair share. So, thank you.
I'll just comment to the town board. Downtown didn't suffer because of Tanger. In large part, downtown suffered because you had one individual. One entity who owned and had control of an enormous amount of properties in the downtown and did not foster development, did not have reasonable lease fees, and those properties were left vacant. This town board, quote, took the bold step. And we purchased. We bought some of those properties. And we're going to make even older steps with all the improvements that the town is investing their tax dollars in. But to say that downtown, downtown was already failed before Tanger. And downtown didn't succeed, the lack of success of downtown was not due to Tanger. That would be inaccurate. I would just also point out, if you look at an aerial photograph of Route 58 from 1994 to 2024, I think you'll see pretty clearly that it wasn't Tanger. Tanger did nothing except for possibly really expand Route 58 as a shopping destination. So, you know, since 1994, and if you remember at that time, I'm sure you will, that many people were opposed to putting Tanger there. And so, I think they would come here. And I think they would come here with torches and pitchforks if we wanted to ever close Tanger down. But, you know, competition is real. And these, as Mr. Israel mentioned, these, all these companies are well managed. And they certainly can come to the town and ask for things that they think would be beneficial to them. But I don't think Tanger was the, was or will be the death knell to anything on Route 58 or downtown. I think downtown is a completely different economy. We're looking at a completely different economy. We're looking at a completely different economy. We're looking at a completely different model for downtown. And we think that those two things, Route 58 and downtown, can complement one another. And I'll just add that the whole purpose for the town square is to do exactly what Mr. Israel is talking about. And I agree with him that, you know, a large percentage of people that go to Tanger turn around and go the other way. The same thing happens with Costco. The whole purpose of developing the town square and really bringing, you know, the town square to downtown is to support the businesses down there. So we can get thousands of people down there is to support the businesses down there because it hasn't been done in the past. And to Anne Marie's point, that's why we purchased the buildings. So we could gain some control and make something happen, bring life back to downtown. Tanger didn't close Sears. Tanger didn't close Kidstuff. Tanger didn't close McCabe's. Tanger didn't close Woolworth's. These were the sign of times. And Main Street didn't change with the sign of times. Sometimes you have to move with how the society is going and how retail is going and everything else. And sometimes there are businesses that are going to falter if they don't make the move to change. So Tanger brought a lot of good things, some bad things, but mostly good. And I think this is designed to help them, not to hurt anybody else in town, but to make sure that they're able to be successful, their success, trickles over to Route 58 and the other businesses, especially downtown. Once the town square is completed, it's going to be a destination for people to go if they come out this way. So I think if you look a couple years down the road, you're going to see Main Street is going to be a hopping spot. And if you've got real estate down there, hang on to it because it's going to be worth a good bit of money as soon as this is completed. So there's a lot of factors that go into it. I will say on the record, I do support this. I do support this endeavor to help Tanger out. They are one of the largest taxpayers in the town. It's important to keep them here. And it's an important draw for the town of Riverhead to have people come in and use other businesses within the town. Do we have anybody else who would like to comment? Come on up. Oh, sorry. This is . Joseph. I'm Josephine from Weaning River. I've been listening to this. I did attend the comp plan on December 13th. I sat here and I went through each thing that's being planned for our town. And I'm very excited about it. I think what I'm hearing here is we have to have balance. And we have to have balance in our town. So and there's fear, too. If we put all that there, no one's going to want to come to us. And I'm not saying that we're going to want to come to Main Street. As kids, we were on Main Street all the time. We were at Woolworths. I used to get my hair cut. There was a lot of things. Go to the shoe store. Now you can't do a lot of that. And I think there's fear. Movie theater with alcohol. I've been out of state and gone to them. They're very nice. But wouldn't that be better on Main Street? And I'm looking at it that way. And I'm saying maybe we shouldn't rush into this. Sometimes you have to be proactive and not reactive. And I'm not reacting to everything. But not knowing all the details and listening to business owners here, I think we should be looking a little further into the comprehensive plan that you guys have been doing so much work on that we don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot. So I thank you. I will say. And Dawn kind of mentioned it. I'm sorry. Ann Marie mentioned it. That this is kind of baby steps that are being taken. Tanger really wanted a lot more. And they worked and they bartered back and forth. And this has been cut back quite a bit. So in a way it's baby steps. We do it. We see how it goes. If it works, great. And I have to say, the regular people are not going to be able to do it. They're going to be able to do it. And I think that's a big part of it. And I think that's a big part of it. I was driving here. I was on the phone with some people. And they were saying, well, where are they putting everything? No one is really understanding that it's already there. Right. And that we're realigning things. And I think sometimes you guys see it all the time where we're not seeing what you're seeing. I think maybe being a little bit more detailed in it so we can understand it. So that people don't go, well, what's going there? IHOP. And I'm going to use IHOP. Because I go there every once in a while. And that place is empty. And it's a great place to take kids. And I don't know why people don't go there. I don't know why people don't go there. I had to wait every time I go there. Oh, yeah. Well, I've gone there and there's hardly anyone in there. I have to sit in those silly little seats and wait and wait and wait. I guess you're going when I'm not going. But I'm using that. I'm just saying, like, I went to Applebee's the other day. And that place is packed. And we want them to be packed. And we want those people to succeed. That's where our children get to work, too. I mean, we want that here in Riverhead. But I also would like Riverhead, I like going down to the water behind there where Sweezy's was. We still call it behind Sweezy's. I like that. And I think that a lot of people in this room feel the same way. And we don't want 58 to go to the river. We want them to be packed. And we want them to be successful. And we want them to be successful. And we want them to be successful. And we want them to be successful. And we don't want them to get too much built up. But we want it to stay. Otherwise we're going to be like Lake Grove, Smithtown. And I don't know if you drive through there. But I do. And it's, oh, my God. You have to wait and you're in traffic. 58 is traffic. And I think we have to think these things out. And I mean I don't even know does the trolley still run from Main Street to Tanger? Those were the days. That's what I'm saying. I don't know. That was good. We had people interacting with people, and maybe we need to revisit that whole comprehensive plan better. And not to say that we shouldn't do things at Tanger and allow them to do it. I don't know. But I think that's what you have in this room. You have fear. Thank you. The President. Secretary Mnuchin You're welcome. Do we have anybody else? We have two people online. Okay, let's go to Zoom. See what you started, Mr. Israel?
You make valid points. You make valid points. Mr. It's all good points. The Press Good evening. Mike Foley, Reeves Park. Can you hear me okay? Mr. Yes, Mike. The Press I'd like to push back on the developer and Cindy's comments a little bit.
What Tanger is looking to do is to backfill vacant stores that are not really expand. They're looking to backfill. When Tanger Mall was built, Amazon was not in existence. So, Amazon has been the bane not only of malls, but of individual shops, as have closed around 58 and other places. But adjustments have to be made. And I want to just refer for a minute to the yesterday's Riverhead local article on Tanger Mall. As usual, I think they did a wonderful job on it. I just want to quote Anne-Marie Prudente, who is a former U.S. Vice President for the University of Texas, for having been a spokesman for the University of Texas for a long time. And then, for the University of Texas, for having been a spokesman for the University of Texas for a long time. But the town tried to, quote, maintain the integrity of certain provisions of the comprehensive plan with the zoning amendment. We try to create flexibility in this code, but at the same time, put in limitations and restrictions to continue to foster downtown and not have the two compete each other, unquote. is going to give as many or more options to backfill on Route 58 as you are now getting ready to grant the Tanger Law. One of the things that was excluded from Tanger Law development, I wasn't in the room, but I guarantee you that the Tanger developers wanted it, was the ability to build medical or health facilities. That is what I see Route 58 actually backfilling with. As Peconic Bay Medical Center in Northwell expands the way they are, you know, my primary health care right now is out of, God help me, how can I forget that? I've already been treated by them so many times on East Main Street. The best hospital in the country. Peconic Bay Medical Center, PBMC. No, I'm talking about a place on 889 East Main. To NYU Langone, forgive me. NYU Langone's got a footprint here. They're deemed the best hospital medical facility in the country. PBMC has gone up to almost an A rating. I think they did get an A rating. The days of people in Riverhead having to go west to get health care are over. They're now coming out here because we probably got the best health care in the country within 10 miles of us. All of those health care facilities, medical facilities, maybe assisted living facilities, all of these things can go on to Route 58 with a comprehensive plan code revision. And from what I've written, read on it, that is already being considered. So to the developer and to Cindy, I say, let's see what Route 58 is going to be retrofitted in, because I believe the comprehensive plan is going to give plenty of flexibility for Route 58 empty lots to come into something that is now needed. So I absolutely support the Tang of Moore. I believe we had to. I believe that if you leave stores go vacant, it spreads. We now have the ability, without taking anything away from Route 58 or anything away from Main Street, to put new businesses in Tang of Moore that want to be there and will help pay that largest tax payment on the Riverhead rolls presently. Who knows what Epco might bring someday, but that's for another time. You know, I do see Route 58 being helped by the comprehensive plan, and I think you cannot be afraid of competition. So I certainly support this resolution change. I would ask Anne Marie or Dawn to just confirm one thing. It's my understanding that the Tang of principles nor the West Seas have ever requested IDA consideration in the history of their Riverhead Tang of Moore occupancy. I assume that these renovations will not result in a new building. I'm not sure if you have any idea of the future plans. Do you think that the Tang of Moore and the West Seas have ever requested IDA consideration for these future plans? Was that discussed? And does the, does Tanger and the West Seas understand that we're not going to have the Riverhead taxpayer supplement the building of these facilities? I see Dawn getting up. She knows. Yeah, no. There's not going to be new buildings built here. It's a renovation and a reconfiguration. And as you correctly stated, they have not sought or received IDA benefits. And I don't anticipate them asking. Yeah. And to your point, they asked for a lot of uses, including hotel uses. Right. And that was an absolute hard no. Based upon the Bible, but we have to follow. That was a hard no. And we didn't want to. We have proposals even now for download. For hotels. And we have hotels on Route 58. And we did not want that one-on-one competition. Ann Marie, I and Dawn, I believe over the last two years have done a tremendously diligent job trying to split the baby, if you will. To have Tanger fill at the same time that Route 58 will be considered a residential area. And that's a big deal. And I think that's a big deal. And I think that's a big deal. And I think that's a big deal. And I think that's a big deal. And I think that's a big deal. Really, thank you. in the comprehensive plan to expand on Route 58 and backfill the buildings that have since gone vacant. I, too, I have, obviously, have concerns about restaurant seating, but I think the restrictions pretty much handle it, that good restaurants will stay open, bad restaurants will not, and so we move on. I certainly support the resolution, and thank you very much. Thank you, Mike. We have nobody else on. Anybody else on a comment? Okay, with that, we will close the public hearing. It is 747, and we will keep it open for written comment until January 26, 2024.
Okay, moving on to our last three public hearings. We're going to combine them into one, as they're all related, and I will, one is the site plan review, public notice, and the other is the site plan review. We're going to combine them into one, public notice, and the other is the site plan review. We're going to combine them into one, and I will, one is the site plan review, public notice to amend Chapter 301, zoning and land. One is a public hearing to increase park and recreation fees, and one is a public hearing on condominium maps. And, again, I'm going to ask Councilor Pridente to fill us in. So, all three of these code amendments, site plan, minor and major subdivisions, and condominiums, all the amendments, strictly relate to the increase in park and recreation fees in the state of Minnesota. So, all three of these code amendments, site plan, minor and major subdivisions, site plan, minor subdivisions, site plan, minor subdivisions, site plan, minor subdivisions, from $3,000 to $5,000 per residential unit. Years ago, we did have a $5,000 fee, and I want to say in early 2000s, in order to spur, the goal was to spur development, the fee was reduced from $5,000 to $3,000. As the town board and the public is well aware, in every annual recreation report by the recreation department, you can go back three years. In that report, it actually identifies the proposed plans for the year that were not completed because we had inadequate funding. Not a small deficit, but a large deficit. The planned improvements that we have for the town and that we want to deliver, to all our parks, cost money. And the park and rec fee money is strictly for capital improvement projects, not for maintenance, not for staff. It's actually new development for these parks, and there's great demand. The recreation superintendent and his team, together with rec advisory committee, received numerous requests, whether it's for swing sets, additional basketball courts, scoreboards, umbrellas for the beaches, picnic tables. All that costs the town money. And the develop, as the town is developed with residential units, there's an increase in population that utilize the parks, which demands that you increase the facilities of the parks, to accommodate all the influx of the new residential units, the people who live there, to have access to the park and have the improvements that they want to see at the park. That's what all three, in a nutshell, are. I'll also say that this legislation establishes flagship parks within our town. That's correct. That's very important to mention. So if a project happens in downtown Riverhead, usually the money had to stay within downtown. If it happened in Jamesport, we try to keep the money within Jamesport. The flagship parks are really parks that are overall going to be shared by the entire town residents. You know, we just recently, as everyone knows, we built the ice rink up in Veterans Memorial Park. We desperately need funding to put a parking lot in place and for bathrooms and things like that. So the Veterans Memorial Park comes to flagship park, as well as Stoddsky Park for future projects there. So it allows, you know, it's only a short distance from downtown Riverhead, to Veterans Memorial Park. And you're not going to tell me that, you know, that residents of a new apartment building downtown are not going to be using the ice rink and other things just because it's, quite frankly, only a mile and a half or so away. So the establishment of flagship parks gives us a little more ability to spread funds throughout the town on some more larger projects. In addition, just the smaller things in the smaller parks, such as, you know, what we didn't have 20 years ago was handicap-accessible swing sets and other things like that. So these are projects that are going to be used. These are projects that can enhance overall throughout even all our smaller parks throughout there, allowing us to purchase new and updated equipment so that everyone can access these. It used to be 5,000. It went down to three because of poor economic times. I think we're back in a better place today. The entire recreation community has been a great proponent of this, and we desperately need the funds to establish these different projects throughout the town of Riverhead. So I'll just identify. In working with the recreation department and the number of visitors and consideration of size, unique location, or wide range of or an offer of different improvements attracting the entire community, the following are designated as flagship parks. Veterans Memorial Park, Stotsky Park, Police Officers Memorial Park, Wading River Beach, Iron Pier Beach, and South Jamesport Beach. The significance of designating flagship parks, if a development occurs downtown, monies could be spent in the town square right on site or at one of the flagship parks. That's the significance. If there was a large residential subdivision, in Jamesport, it could be developed in Jamesport, or Iron Pier Beach, for instance. So it gives the town board the flexibility, under the local law, in where to spend the monies, what's needed most. And it's a more fair distribution when you have residents in Wading River that are in a heavily dense area, and the key component of the park there is Police Officers Memorial Park. So it's a more fair distribution. Police Officers Memorial Park, also known as Bayberry Park, it's like the park is in desperate need of projects and funding. And so allowing some of the larger scale projects in other places of the town allows us to kind of distribute the monies more evenly throughout the town. So we're kind of fair that everybody in the town is getting the same amenities. Anybody else? Nobody online? Oh, come on up. Robert Skinner, Jamesport. Does this, I keep hearing developments, small developments. Does this also go for individual spec lots too? I don't believe so. I think it has to be subdivisions, right, where there's multiple. I think that's unfortunate. I think it should also apply to spec lots. If you've got, and where I live, I'm about as far away from salt water as you can get. And a lot around the corner, the last one in the neighborhood, it went spec. Guy put a house on it, went for a million plus. Okay? Talking to the real estate guy that did the open house, and he's telling me, he says, yeah, this is a great neighborhood. This is great this, this is great that. And you got Iron Pier here and Jamesport here. Okay? And you're telling me on a million dollar house, you can't find room for another two million, another $2,000 on a million dollar house? Okay? And there's plenty of spec lots here. That's still available. There's plenty of individual houses. I think it should be also applied to that as well. I think the concept though is that if you have an individual house that you're building, you potentially have your own backyard and your own amenities and so forth within your own house. When somebody builds an apartment complex, they are more than likely going to a government park for amenities, going into, you know, somebody could put a basketball hoop in their backyard. But if you've got a, we're talking developments, but if you've got a, we're talking developments, so if you've got a 10 unit housing development off of Pier Avenue, okay, this rule would apply to that? Yes. Yes. But not to 10 individual single houses who are also going to use the beaches and also going to take the beaches as leverage and, you know, to attract the more, you know, I mean, you're using, you're leveraging that for more money. Okay? And I think that it should also be included in that. And it only makes sense that that happens rather than having, you know, specific has to be so many per. But I think we're also basing it off of New York State law. So maybe if Emory, if you want to just clarify as well, because there's a little. So just to be clear, it applies to minor and major subdivisions. You could have a two-level subdivision, a two-lot, three-lot, four-lot minor subdivision. If the planning board makes a determination that that minor development should provide a park or payment in lieu thereof, this will apply. This will absolutely apply. But not to individuals who are going to use the beaches. I think he had a good point. He had a good point. He had an individual home. If the lot is already held in single ownership and not subdivided. Yeah. It would not apply. It would not apply. But if that single lot was, had been subdivided at some point in time, it's probably already paid it. Correct. And, you know, you raise an excellent point. And through planning, recently, within the last six months, we've been very careful not to allow a minor on a minor on a minor. And those applications that have recently come in to do a minor on a minor, you absolutely better believe these fees, infrastructure improvements, we treated them either as a minor that should have been addressed in this category or we bumped them up to a major. And, you know, within six months, the team has put that together under Dawn's tutelage and leadership. But most individual spec lots more than likely were part of a subdivision many years ago and would have paid those fees then. So now all of a sudden someone comes in and buys that vacant lot and builds a home, they're not subject to pay the fee. It's already been covered many years ago or prior. Yeah. Any other comments? Christy? Yeah. Hi, everyone. Christy Verity, executive director of the Riverhead Business Improvement District. I'm speaking tonight on behalf of the Management Association. And we have a letter that we were going to submit in regard to this line item on the agenda this evening. So in regard to the, well, this is not in regard to the increase of fees. This is in regard to the fees in general. So as far as the fees are concerned, we're going to be looking at the fees. So as far as development and new parcels, you know, most of the dense development is happening downtown right now. And, you know, it's wonderful to hear everyone talk about downtown over and over, the progression that we've made. Most of the activation and programming that happens downtown as well as the oversight and some maintenance in the parks and recreation areas in conjunction with the buildings and grounds department is handled by the business improvement district. So our suggestion is that when the fees are collected from new development in the downtown district, that there is a portion of that that is allocated to the business improvement district or through recreation to downtown parcels, recreation assets. So, you know, it's disappointing. I'm not well-pressed with the flagship park background. But it's disappointing to read the progress. And I'm not sure if you can see the proposal here. And notice that Grangeville Park, the riverfront, the new town square, community garden and playground and many of the downtown recreation features that we have are not listed. So business improvement district management association is wondering where those funds are being allocated and where the support is for the downtown district as far as recreation facilities. The park and rec committee makes recommendations to the town board. And they have a priority list of major projects within all of our projects. So they make recommendations so the money can be divided up. It doesn't have to be spent in any one particular place. But you're never going to convince me that people that are living in an apartment in downtown Riverhead are not going to go and use the nine-mile trail or not going to go and play paintball or go up in place. Absolutely. Pick a ball, take their pets to the dog park and go ice skating. You're absolutely right. And I hope that they use all of Riverhead attractions and recreational facilities. However, they will also be using the downtown facilities and recreational facilities. And recreational areas that are within much closer walking distance of their apartment. And that's why the monies can be divided up adequately to cover different projects throughout the town. It's more, it's a better level playing field for everyone to utilize the parks. So that's what we're asking for. We're asking for some allocation of any development that happens downtown. Some of those recreational fees are allocated to the downtown district, whether it be to the bid or through the recreation department that there is a line item in their budget that is extended. And that is exclusive to the downtown district. You know, most of the, like I said, the programming and activation downtown is handled by the bid. We have made many efforts and outreach to the recreation department to partner with us, collaborate, support in any regard. And they go unanswered. I have not received an e-mail response from the recreation department in four years to everything that I send to them. And we host a lot of events and things downtown. And that's disappointing. They're not the only group. But, you know, we're going to have to do it. We're talking about this funding. This funding has to be for major projects. Right. So speaking of major projects, we do, we have worked with the community development agency. And we do have some big projects coming up. In fact, we were just granted through Suffolk County DRI, the downtown revitalization initiative, $80,000 for improvements to the playground by Griffin Avenue and Main Street. We're going to put new substrate. We're going to put sensory pieces in there and make it more ADA compliant. And with that $80,000, we have a 30% match. So the bid is a 501 nonprofit. We are under the 2% New York State property tax cap. So our budget does not grow as fast as downtown Riverhead is growing. So allocating funds to things like grant matches and playground projects and the riverfront and, you know, we have a lot of improvements to do downtown that are capital improvements. And I'm not talking about just maintenance or operations. The money can't be used for maintenance. But I encourage you to come to the Park and Rec's committee and then where you can express the interest or the desire of those and express them the capital projects that you are promoting in downtown Riverhead. And I'm sure they would take that all into consideration when they're allocating this money. I would love to. You can suggest it. They meet every month. It's a great committee. And let me know when their meetings are. I would love to attend. So last night you missed it. Reach out to Marge Acevedo and George Gabrielson, our co-chairs in the committee. Thank you. I'll give you their contacts and make sure that you're aware of the next meeting. Okay. Those committee meetings are not listed on the town calendar, by the way, or I would have caught that. They are. I don't think so. Yeah, they're on the town website. Recreation Advisory Committee. Yes. Advisory committees. Okay. It's whatever it is, whatever Tuesday of the month, every month. I'll tell you. I'm going to give you the next date just so you don't miss it. Thursday. Okay. So you're going to be here Tuesday of the month? Next meeting is February 27th. That's a Tuesday evening. It's here in this room. Okay. Thank you. And you're welcome to come talk about the projects you like. I'd love to. Thank you, Councilor. 6 o'clock? 6 o'clock. 6 o'clock. 530. Sorry. 530. Thanks, Christy. Anybody else? I want to hear from Mike. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. I always do the dirty work. So not against the raising of the fee. As you can know, I pay a lot of fees in our town and if it goes to enhance our town, it's great. Okay? But one question that I have and I want you to consider is I've been a proponent of affordable housing for 40 years. And under state law, if we build more than 10 units, I believe it's 10 units, we are required to put 10% of that into an affordable unit. I think it might even be more than five or six. So those units are sold based on certain criteria of the state and things and have to stay affordable, I think in most cases, forever now. And I would hate to see that particular lot have to pay that fee because it just raises the cost of everything and the like. You know, I've always been a proponent that affordable housing, especially if we're going to try to do subdivisions and one or two houses within them are going to be that way, that they get that little gimme. Right. Of not having to pay a lot of different fees which go into the town because that attracts, affordable housing attracts our work people. Whether they're police, beginning police officers or whatever, it's the lifeblood of our town. And I will tell you in South Hold, there is no workforce housing anymore. On the south side, there is no more workforce housing. All the workers work over there, but they live in Riverhead. Well, I hate to say it. I hate to tell you they don't live in Riverhead anymore. Well, they do. Because it's getting worse and they're heading further west and west and west. But I think it's very important that our town try to keep or maintain some of that workforce housing. And I think we've done a very good job of it. But, you know, it would be a shame that if we try to create this stuff and then I come to you as a developer and say, well, you know, by the way, I had to pay $17,000. $17,000. $17,000 worth of fees to create this lot. And I have to pass it along, you know. It just helps almost the impossible equation that we have to try to figure out to bring affordable housing to your house. The only flip side to that, Rich, is that the people in the affordable housing unit are still going to use the parks. Absolutely. You know, so. Absolutely. I'm not sure that the law allows it to be separate. They're going to use the fire department. They're going to use the police. They're going to use everything. But, again, remember that the affordable housing allows us a bonus. So that extra lot that we're creating in that subdivision is a bonus to the density. And, therefore, you've gotten, and I'll just pick on a 20-acre lot that would allow us 20 lots, you know, maybe 18. It would have to add two more. So the density. So the density is there. The amount of all the equations that all the ticket take, you know, the bean counters are, it's there. These are two additional lots that are being created because of state requirements and things like that. Yes, it's to help the people that are not buying million-dollar houses. Okay? So food for thought. It could be maybe as a special ask. You know what? time to be waived or whatever it can be to the discretion maybe of the Planning Board but give some consideration of not putting a hard line on that that's all I have to say Thank You rich so there is no provision of law or statutory provision to exempt that and when you talk about the affordable housing component that he was discussing the developer is getting additional density they're building more units and selling those units whether or not they're affordable housing or not it's additional yield for the developer to develop on so it doesn't really support a rationale not to charge a park and rec fee when you're getting the additional density you're building additional housing and you're getting additional housing and you're getting additional units because of the affordable housing component but again there's no provision which provides to exclude and make exclusions for certain projects or certain portion of projects under the law you either make a finding that it's necessitated under law and if the Planning Board or in the case of a town board urban renewal area makes such a finding it's applied equally in each and every residential unit we have anybody else nobody online okay then I would like to mark this public hearing open until for written comments until January 26 24 it is now 8 10 p.m. you And believe it or not, folks, I don't have any more public hearings for you tonight. We will now open it. We had eight public hearings. That's a busy night. And I said that I would try to put the majority of the public hearings on the night meetings because that's when the majority of the public can come, especially if it's a hot topic. They will always be on a night meeting because not everybody can make a day meeting. So that's one of the reasons, not that we had terribly hot topics tonight, but you'll see more public hearings in the evening meetings than you will during the day. All right, we're going to move on to open it up to comments on any resolution. Comments on any resolution. I do have one online. Okay, let me take the one online right now. I'm online, Zoom.
Mike Foley, Reeves Park. Can you hear me okay? Good to hear you, Mike. I'd like to comment on Resolution 106, which can be found on page 237 of the agenda packet, and it is page 5 of the 38-page final scope, which is adopts final scope for the Town of Riverhead comprehensive plan update. You know, when... Triple Five was sent packing in October, all of a sudden, EPCAL became a topic of concern that it was not being addressed in the comprehensive plan. You know, and I felt then that there was a real danger that EPCAL being inserted into this effort might delay the comprehensive plan. And I don't think anybody wanted that. So I looked through party. I kind of fast-read through. I think it was about 338 pages to see what, if anything, was going to concern EPCAL. And on page 5 of that scoping document, I'm going to read what the industrial area segment of it is. Quote, Industrial areas play an important role in the town's economy, providing space for businesses to grow and create jobs. The majority of industrial land is located in areas in and around the Enterprise Park at Calverton, EPCAL. The vision for these areas is to support a sustainable and vibrant economic hub that supports the needs of local businesses while preserving the town's natural resources and community character. It is critically important to balance the economic benefits of new industrial development with the potential impacts on traffic and the surrounding community. To address these concerns, the town must carefully consider the location and scale of new industrial areas, develop new infrastructure and industrial developments, proactively address the necessary infrastructure improvements, and develop elevated planning and site design standards to ensure any new projects are compatible with the surrounding community and natural environment. Unquote. I, you know, I was really concerned that this was going to delay things. I got a compliment, BFJ, on the verbiage here. I think it is very, very much what we all want, is the town. We want the economic development. We want, hopefully, legacy revenue. And we want to protect what's left in that environmental space. So, you know, I want to compliment BFJ on putting that in there. Now, I haven't read all 38 pages. I'm sure there's going to be things on it that I disagree with. But as we know, this is a document, the comprehensive plan is a document, to give us a direction to go in. It is not something that needs to be acted on, but something that we want to act on and can improvise and change as things develop. So for that paragraph alone, I support this resolution and look forward to reading the rest of it. Thanks. John McAuliffe, RONO, Thank you, Mike. We have anybody else on any resolution? John? Okay, we have one more in line. We'll get to that after Mr. McAuliffe. John McAuliffe, RONO, landing. I agree with what Mike just said. I think it's focused on that same paragraph, and I think it leaves space for what the supervisor wants to create in terms of a deep dive into how to use that land. And it doesn't create, it doesn't prevent it, it doesn't create it, but it does leave the space to do it. I wanted to focus on the, something that's, I fault myself for not catching this earlier in the discussions, but the height question. How about space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space space part of Riverhead. And I'm a little concerned also that TDR has become a kind of cost of doing business, that you can go from 25 to 40 feet as long as you do a TDR, or in another area that you can have more apartments downtown as long as you do a TDR for them. I think these are policy questions we, I think we should hold, frankly, to the 500 limit on apartments downtown for its own sake, and shouldn't make the offset of the TDRs. And also, I mean, I would like to have a real discussion, and maybe it's taken place in the comprehensive plan meetings in one meeting that I wasn't in, but I think the moving from the 25 to 40 foot height level is something that's disturbing. So, at any rate, this is not a final language, but it's something that came up in reading the scoping. And I'm not opposed to the scoping statement at all. I just think we need to focus back on that. Male Speaker 1 Okay. Thank you, John. We have one on Zoom.
Kathy McGraw in Northfield again. Kathy McGraw I do want to thank you all for putting the content of correspondence in the agenda packet. It's really helpful so we don't have to foil for that information. I'm speaking on resolution 2024-109, publishing a notice to hold a public hearing to amend the zoning code, specifically to allow agritourism, inns and resorts. This proposed zoning change is a most controversial, highly charged change. It has the potential to transform the Sound Avenue corridor, as well as the bluffs and the beaches of Long Island Sound. It also involves the TDR program, and it is exactly the kind of land use change that should be the subject of study in the town's comp plan update. And as we all know, that update has yet to be completed. Why on earth would you hold a public hearing on a zoning change that should not even be contemplated until the update is done? Mr. Hubbard, you went on record saying you would not support changing the zoning to allow hotels or spas. Surely you would not support changing the zoning to allow hotels or spas. I wonder if you understand this proposed amendment allowing such hotels and spas couched as agritourism, allowing these prior to completion of the comp plan update is premature. This is really putting the cart before the horse. And why? What is the rush? Developers can and will wait for such prime development opportunities. Why? pay BFJ thousands of dollars to complete the update if you are willing to jump the gun and consider such substantive zoning changes before BFJ has finished their work. I ask you, I beg you, the board, to either table this resolution or vote no. Thank you very much. Thank you, Kathy. Do we have anybody else? We have nobody on Zoom? Okay. All right. We will move on to the reading of the resolutions. Resolution 74. 2023 budget transfers for end of year. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske? Yes. Merrifield? Yes. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Motion adopted. Resolution 75. Is that me? Yeah. Can I say something? Water District Capital Project number 824-01-901-923 Berman Boulevard. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes is resolution is adopted resolution number 77 sets the fees for usage usage of recreation and other town facilities so moved seconded vote please waski yes Mary field yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 78 appoints a call in recreation specialist to the recreation department so moved second vote please waski yes Mary field yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 79 that's me I'm queuing up thank you set salaries for 2024 call in recreation personnel so moved second vote please waski yes Mary field yes yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 80 set salaries for various recreation employees for the year 2024 so moved second vote please waski yes Murray field yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 81 approves a salary increase for a paralegal so moved seconded seconded vote please waski yes Murray field yes Kern yes yes Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 82. Ratifies the promotion of an assessment clerk. So moved. Second. Vote please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 83. Accepts the retirement of a legislative secretary. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Yes. Okay. Murrayfield. Oh, I did it again. It's okay. Sorry. Mr. Harlan. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Carol Scafani has been so instrumental since my arrival in town hall. When I arrived, she showed me the way, the path from office to office and how to write things up and how to get things done. And I will forever be grateful and we will always miss her. So thank you very much for all your service for countless years. So I regretfully say yes to your retirement, Carol. Yeah. Echo, echo, echo. Hubbard. This is one way you wish you could vote no because I hate to see her leave. She's been a fantastic employee. As Ken said, the work that she's done for the town board, for our town board since we've been here is incredible. She's knowledgeable. She just always had the answer. And you didn't know what you should do. And she's going to be greatly missed. And I wish her nothing but the best and hope that she stops in once in a while and visits with us. So I vote yes. She was here today just for the record. So she couldn't even go a week without us. She was here. Although I'm just a town clerk, I tell you I worked with her when I was a councilman and she was a legislative aide to the supervisor. And she's a wealth of knowledge. She's a really nice lady, nice family. So the resolution is adopted. Resolution number 84. Appoints a town council. Appoints a town council. Town board coordinator. So moved. Seconded? Vote please. Waske? Yes. Murrayfield? Yes. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Diane, welcome aboard. I know you do an excellent job. Highly recommended and we look forward to working together. I know we're in good hands. I vote yes. Ann Hubbard? Very qualified candidate for this position. I'm glad to have her on board and I vote yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 85. Setting terms and conditions of employment. for town board coordinator Diane Tucci so moved seconded vote please waski yes Maryfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes and Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 86 authorizes the town supervisor to execute a professional services agreement with Lawrence and Levy DBA on-site productions for January 2024 nunth pro-tunk so moved second vote please waski yes Maryfield yes Kern yes Rothwell just wondered if we voted no if we'd be cut right now to like a commercial and be done with today so I'm gonna go with yes so we can continue this meeting yes adopted resolution number 87 ratifies the provisional appointment of a wastewater treatment plant operator trainees so moved second vote please waski yes yes Maryfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 88 ratifies the salary of current police academy officers for the year of 2024 so moved seconded vote please waski yes Maryfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution number 89 ratifies a stipend for network and systems specialist II so moved second vote please yes yes yes yes
Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 91. Amends adjustments for named highway employees so moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 92. Authorizes the town supervisor to execute a professional services agreement with Jason Hodge. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 93. Authorizes the supervisor to execute a stipulation agreement with a police officer. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 94. Adopts a local law amending chapter 293 of the Riverhead Town Code entitled, Waterways and Water-Related Activities. So moved. Yes. Okay. Who was that? Second. I'm sorry. I was so excited that we're doing this. Vote, please. So quickly. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Again. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yeah. This is what we talked about earlier with the shelf exchange. Yes. Yes. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 95. Authorize the supervisor to execute a 2024 conditional shellfish harvesting program agreement with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 96. Ratifies authorization for the supervisor to execute a license agreement with Racetrack Not Street LLC to utilize runway at EPCAL. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 97. Authorize the supervisor to execute a professional service organization. With Charles. It originally reads L-E-J-S. And I'd like to make a motion to amend this to read authorizes the supervisor to execute a professional service agreement with Charles L-E-J-A and also for the resolution to be amended throughout the agreement to the correct spelling of Charles' last name L-E-J-A. So moved. L-E-J-A. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. As amended. Merrifield. Yes. As amended. Kern. Yes. As amended. Rothwell. Yes. As amended. Hubbard. Yes. Amended. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 98. Authorizes the supervisor to execute a license agreement with Stein Seafoods LLC to allow the operation of floating upweller systems, FLUPSY, in East Creek. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 99. Authorizes the supervisor to execute settlement agreement and mutual release with Gershow Recycling of Riverhead. So moved. Before I second, I want to thank you, Eric, for the work on this. Second. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. About time. Yes. Yeah. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 100. Ratifies authorization for the supervisor to execute agreement with CSC Holdings LLC. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Absolutely. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 101. Resolution to award RFP and authorized supervisor to execute agreement for their Riverfront Adaptive Children's Playground. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Absolutely. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yeah. Really good. Really good. Really good. Really good. They have been working for countless months behind the scene and interviewing and writing up all these RFPs. So now as we start awarding and we actually see the visual progress of it. So thank you very much. I vote yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. And Hubbard. MR. Yes. Ditto, ditto, ditto. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Yes. MR. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 102. MS. No, I don't have it. MR. Yeah, yeah. MS. Oh, it got misplaced. Sorry. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Resolution to award RFP and authorized supervisor to execute agreement for the Town Square Amphitheater. So moved. MR. Seconded. MR. Vote, please. Woskie. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Please. Merrifield. MS. Yes, absolutely, again. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Kern. MR. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Rothwell. MR. It's all coming together. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. MR. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 103. MR. Authorizes the Town Clerk to publish and post notice to bidders for proposals for information technology managed service provider for the Town of Riverhead. So moved. Seconded. MR. Vote, please. Woskie. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Merrifield. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Kern. MR. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Rothwell. MR. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Hubbard. MR. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 104. MR. Authorizes the Town Clerk to publish and post a request for proposals for information technology-managed service provider for the Town of Riverhead. So moved. Seconded. MR. Vote, please. Woskie. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Merrifield. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Kern. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Rothwell. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Hubbard. MS. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 105. MR. Yes. CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Rothwell. MS. Yes. Moderator. explain the amendment that needs to be done yes thank you mr. supervisor I was notified by Matt charters this morning he wrote this resolution he wanted to remove the second resolved which indicates that the town the clerk for the Planning Board is forwarding this resolution to the town clerk the DEC environmental news bulletin in the applicant that paragraph isn't necessary I'm told BFJ will take care of that and in the fourth resolved striking out authorizes the town clerk to send the attached final scope to the Riverhead News Review the newspaper hereby designated as the official newspaper for this purpose and to post same on the town's website and further all right so that the whole portion of the paragraph should be taken out printing it and publishing it and then the town clerk should be able to send the attached final scope to the riverhead news report It's now required. And then adding, okay, and then directs BFJ Planning on behalf of the town board to strike, send, said, and add, notice the availability of the final scope in the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation's Environmental News Bulletin. And that effectively makes that the paragraph where BFJ sends it to the DEC's news bulletin. Understood. Honestly, it would be cost prohibitive for us to have 38 pages published in the newspaper. It would be available online with the town? Yes. It will be on the town's website. It will be on the comprehensive plan website. And then it will also be on the DEC's news bulletin. And, yeah, it would amount to approximately six full pages in the newspaper, which would be a tremendous amount of money.
Okay. How disappointing to the news review. All right. So adopts final scope for the town of Riverhead comprehensive plan update with the amendments offered by Council Eric Howard. Is that enough for me to? Yes. Yes. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. As amended, yes. Merrifield. As amended, yes. Kern. As amended, yes. Rothwell. Yes, as amended. Hubbard. I am highly pleased with the work that BFJ has done on the comprehensive plan. I certainly vote yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution number 107. Is that me? Thank you. I got stuck on looking at this. Otherwise, as town clerk, to publish and post public notice to consider a local law to amend Chapter 289 of the Riverhead Town Code entitled Vehicles, Traffic, and Parking Regulations. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Yes. Warren. Resolution 108. Authorizes town clerk to publish and post a public notice to consider a local law to amend procurement policy pursuant to general municipal law. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 109. Authorizes the town clerk to publish and post public notice to amend Chapter 103, Zoning and Land Development. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 110. Accepts letter of credit from Villas at Roanoke, Seacrest Estates. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution. Is adopted. Resolution 111. It's going to take you half hour to read this one. Pay bills. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. We have one last resolution to be taken off the floor as it's time sensitive. Um. Bob, do you want to read it? Sure. So this is. We got a number, right? This would be number 112, correct? Okay. Yes, 112. Okay. So number 112. Ratifies the promotion of a senior justice court clerk. So moved. Second. Hang on. You got a vote to take it off the floor first. Oh. Right. Yeah. Oh. So make a motion. Motion to take it off the floor. A motion to take it off the floor. Seconded. Vote, please. Um. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution has been taken off the floor. And now any comments on the resolution? No, I don't have a copy of it. Ratifies promotion of a justice. Right. But Eric's. Was it? Counsel's asking is there any comments? We, yes. Any comments on the resolution? We have any comments from the public on this resolution? Again, it ratifies the promotion of a senior justice court clerk. No comments. Nothing on it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. John. John, okay. Okay. So, ratifies the promotion of a senior justice court clerk. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. I just have a question, counsel. If, if we brought this, when we take something off the floor, wouldn't it be easier to bring it at the beginning of the meeting with the resolution, or would you make a different resolution for each of the three? I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, resolutions and announce it that we're bringing it off the floor so people have time to kind of resonate it and decide whether they want to. I mean, functionally, it can be done any way you like. If you want to create a period at the beginning of the call of the resolutions or the consideration. I think that might be a wise thing to do. To do that. It's out in the open. Yeah. I mean, that would certainly make sense. Right in the beginning. Okay. Perfect. Did we do the pay bills? Yes. We did. Oh, we did? We did. We paid them. Okay. We've already paid them. All right. So your bills are paid. Okay. That completes our resolutions for tonight. And at this time, I would like to have open comments from the public on any matter whatsoever. Any matter whatsoever.
John Cullen, Northville. Welcome to the new beast. Tim, good to see you in the hot seat. Jim, welcome back. Thank you. You're a little lower than the old days. I know, right? I got to put the seat up. I sat through five hours of Daniel. Preston's presentation back in seven, eight years ago, whatever it was. And two weeks later, we know it all went kaputs. I sat through seven hours of the Jermasians presentation. And two years later, and even to this day, I don't think one of those 25 people that came up to the mic and said, I'm coming, I'm coming, I'm coming. I haven't heard one word of either one of them coming. As some of the board members know, I've been against this from day one, even when Daniel Preston's fell apart. And I'm still against it. So I'm thrilled to hear the power of Tim's voice saying, we're going to fight it to the end. And I appreciate that. And I look forward to this coming to a hopefully a quicker ending than what everybody's thinking right now. Thank you for your time. Us too, John. Thank you very much. Thank you. Do we have anybody else? You want to go first? No, no. Go ahead. Peter and Deborah Conrad from Aquabog. I have some information I would like to distribute to the board members. I think I read it this afternoon. I think if I know what it is.
At the last board meeting, we expressed our concerns regarding the construction of a high school. We were told by the Riverhead Charter School on property located on Sound Avenue, just east of the current Charter High School. At that meeting, we were told by a planning department member that despite zoning regulations not permitting schools in APZ districts, that schools are exempt from zoning regulations. We did some further research regarding this. While we are not attorneys, to the best of our abilities, we could not find anything to validate this. What we did find was several articles. Some of which were for schools. which I am providing you with which cite court cases which ruled that despite a generally accepted belief school districts are not fully exempt from zoning regulations we implore the town to explore this issue before issuing a permit based on a possibly erroneous belief there are many other factors to consider before issuing a permit to name a few such as additional traffic the safety of buses students who drive and teachers exiting the school the remoteness of the location in relation to emergency assistance and the loss of our visitors however the question of zoning compliance seems to be at the forefront right now thank you this is what this is I received this today from mr. Wallace he sent an email containing explaining how the charter school which we originally said could be considered a public school the makeup of how our charter school is set up through the state and how they receive funding precludes them from being considered a public school they are in fact considered a private school under department list them as public so so under the education law there for the purposes of local zoning they are considered a non public school is what the education law says their charter was it was issued in I believe 2000 there was an amendment to the Charter School Act in 2010 you know the charter school has a lot of !
the APZ zoning use district okay but so the original information that I was given that they weren't subject to any zoning regulations was it correct? correct because they were considered public yeah I mean that was a generalized statement as to public public schools and even though they're listed on the New York State Education Department as public they're not considered public not for the purposes of land use and local zoning determinations wow this is confusing welcome to our world! thank you very much for looking at this! thank you! thank you! thank you for to our attention. I have one question, Mr. Hubbard. Being involved in the fire department, right, what do you think in this day and age with all that's going on in the news with schools and, you know, emergency response time is critical, paramount, you know, what do you think the response time will be if there was a major incident at that school having to use Sound Avenue, Tulane Road, in a situation where minutes count? Yes, exactly. So, you know, my concern, you know, with traffic and the availability of time, you know, not only police department, but medical, you know, in a crisis situation, I don't think they would be able to handle it during a rush hour situation. It's an area. They could handle it. It would certainly be delayed in times of response, there's no doubt about that. Being that school is so far north, Riverhead Fire Department, I mean, I don't know, I did do a time study on what the response time would be on something like that. Now you have Jamesport Fire Department too, but you only have to factor in not the time from the firehouse, but you have the time of the volunteers responding to the fire department. So, you know, I don't think there's a major incident, but I think it's a great opportunity to get equipment and then go to that particular area. I mean, I mean, we did Google and it was seven minutes by Google to get to that school from Jamesport. No, from Riverhead. I don't think, I think maybe it was Riverhead. Yeah, because they're Riverhead Fire. But, you know, it's just a nightmare waiting to happen, you know, and I hope, I pray to God that the police Department can handle it. police department and the fire department do drills and time scenarios during all hours of commuting and see what the actual time would be in a critical situation. That's, thank you for your time. Okay, thank you. Thank you for your comments. Thank you very much. Do we have anybody else that wants to come up? Mr. McAuliffe, and then I understand we have two on Zoom after Mr. McAuliffe. John McAuliffe, Frohn Oak Landing, and in this case, I'm reflecting concerns of my neighborhood as it were. All you did on 109 was basically set up a hearing, and while I agree with Kathy that I think that just really shouldn't be happening until after the comprehensive plan, I want to speak to it in a slightly different way because I know how deeply concerning it is to people along Soundhills. I know how deeply concerning it is to people on Soundhills and on the Avenue who have residences already. And I can imagine a public hearing in which there's the presentation of the developers and the argument that was made two weeks ago about this is preferable to housing and the other issues will come up and exactly what it is that's being planned will be in that hearing. I would think that if we're going to have a public hearing, we're going to have to have a public hearing. I think that if the supervisor organized a meeting for people and maybe, I don't know if they have a community building in that area of housing, but some kind of, or it could be a meeting downtown here in which you invite people in the neighborhood to come and meet with you and meet with the prospective developers before it gets to the point of a public hearing, that that would be a good thing. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. Really, if there's a space in the space for discussion about housing, to inform as to the pluses and minuses and what's in mind. So that would just, because this has been, we have one of these neighborhood internet systems, and it's been of great concern to a lot of people showing up. The other is the letters that you received about mailbox numbers. That's a block away from me, and I mean, it's a very confused area. We have somebody whose house is adjacent to us who has a Linda Lane East address, but he actually gets his mail on, and his entrance to his house is from where we live, not from, so I just hope, Eric, if it's possible, I don't know what's propelling this. I gather maybe there's concerns from emergency services that maybe you can physically, your members of the board, can physically meet with these neighbors and talk about the practicalities of, because in some ways it makes, I'm sure, a logical sense for what you're doing, but if you've read those letters, you're about to turn people's lives upside down, and I hope that before you do that, you'll actually meet with them. So just for context, I'm not sure if you've heard of, if you've read the notice about the Really, thank you. Really, thank you. Really, thank you. the engineering department found that the numbering of the houses on Linda Lane East didn't appear to follow any consistent pattern. So their recommendation was that it be renumbered so that there would be consistency. The engineering department asked me to put out a letter to the residents sort of soliciting feedback on that option. I mean, based on the responses that we've received, I think I would go back to the engineering department and see what other kind of options they could come up with. I agree. One that seemed to make sense, and I don't know if it's doable, but there were a couple of houses that were wrongly numbered. So why don't we just address those couple of houses rather than changing everybody's number up there? Because that seemed to cause the most agina with the residents living up there. Just deal with the ones that are incorrectly numbered. Yeah, so when I spoke with Jason in the engineering department, it just seemed that this issue was more widespread than a couple houses. And so the idea was let's just renumber the whole thing so that there's no interruption of mail service, so that, as Mr. McAuliffe said, emergency services were available. If we go back and we'll look and see what exactly they're supposed to be designated as pursuant to their deeds, maybe there's something we can do that way. So I think that's the idea. Okay, good. We will take a look at it. On Zoom, we have two people. Okay. Yes, Ron here, . I read with some interest Calvin Aviation's complaint against the town of Riverhead in which it is said that the city has been under attack by the American Air Force. And I think that's a very good point. I think that's a very good point. Okay. So, Mr. McAuliffe, you have been saying that your predecessor, Mr. Hubbard, Supervisor Aguiar, has allegedly induced Calvin Aviation to move forward with this deal. My question is, I saw a proposed list pendants attached to the court filings. Has that been reported against the property council? We haven't been served with any action at this point. Okay. So, thank you for that. Can you tell us what effect and perhaps the expert to your left, the title lady, can clarify what impact the list pendants would have on the marketability of the property? It would tie up the property for so long as the list pendants were recorded or pending. So just to clarify, a notice of pendancy is a document that's filed by a person to put the world on notice that they are asserting an interest in a piece of property that they may not directly have title to. And it essentially creates a contested situation. In many instances, it stays attached to the property until the litigation is resolved. There are other instances where you can have it removed. At the beginning of the litigation or after certain motion practice, after certain discovery has been had, or however the case resolves. So the impact, if that were to be filed against the property, would be that we wouldn't be able to market it for sale for so long as it was attached. I mean, we could market it. We couldn't follow through with the transaction until it were removed. So I think that's a good question. Thank you for that clarification. Has there been any projection? And I recognize that there's no question that the town has spent millions and millions of dollars on a variety of failed transactions involving Epco. Has there been any projection as to the cost of this litigation? Should it have to proceed to trial?
I would say it's far too early to tell that, Mr. Harari. Thank you. I have another question. And I'm going to direct it to Councilman Rothwell. I understand that with respect to the hockey rink that you have supported vigorously over the years, the town is incurring approximately $150,000 a year to provide electricity. Is that a fair statement? The town agreed to pay a maximum of $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. $150,000. I think this year was actually close. Can't quote me, but very close to about $23,000 was the total electric bill. And it's only been open since December, right? So I understand you also, sir, you also on the town board approved a resolution purchasing a bathroom facility there. Is that right? Bathroom facility could be used there. It could be used at the baseball fields throughout the town. Alive and 25. It's a multipurpose trailer. It's a multipurpose trailer with nine restrooms and handicap accessibility. And the cost was another approximately $150,000? I didn't hear what he said. The cost of approximately... The cost was another approximately $150,000? Did he say, I think it was about $120,000, as if that's what he's saying. I can't understand that. And what about the cost of maintaining that facility, removing the waste? How much, and who's paying for that? Well, the river, Michael Reichel and the Riverhead Sewer District has offered to help out, so there wouldn't be a cost. There wouldn't be a cost in terms of that trailer, but also we're beginning with the installation of the septic system, so that the portable restroom trailer that we just purchased could directly go into the septic system as soon as they're completed. So I'm going to do that question. Let me answer your question. So the septic system will be completed shortly, and then the portable trailer could be hooked up to the septic system in place. Therefore, it wouldn't have to be drained. And the building and grounds department... The building and grounds department does the maintenance on it. And that's no cost to the taxpayer, right? I'm sure it is. So just tell me, what will the cost of installing the permanent bathroom fixtures be to the taxpayers of our town, sir? The cost of the bathroom? Including the septic system, including water and sewer, whatever else you need to open up those restrooms. I don't have that in front of me. We've discussed them openly in the past, so you'd have to look in the past. In those discussions, do you remember what they were? No. It's hundreds of thousands of dollars. Isn't that true? If you say so. I don't have any information in front of me, so I'm not going to quote numbers. Mr. Harry, what are you getting at? I have another question. What discount do Riverhead taxpayers get to use this facility? They're currently given, I believe, a 20% discount on purchasing tickets. There's public skating time pretty much almost every day. There's been free... Free skating lessons, free figure skating lessons, open skating. The teen program has been amazing on Fridays. It's been overly crowded, so what we were doing from grades 8 through 12, we'd actually had to break it up now. We did one like 8th and 9th graders one week and 10th, 11th, 12th the next week because there's just too many teens. So it's a very popular thing, so thanks for pointing that out, Ron, how popular it is and how much the town residents love it. I'm just wondering. It's open to everyone else. And I don't know why the town taxpayers should be subsidizing this venture as much as you like hockey, sir. But, you know, we'll leave that for another day. I've got some concerns about it. Thank you for your effort to answer the questions. Thank you, Ron. We have one more.
Yeah, hi, Mike Foley, Reece Park. I actually have no comment. I was waiting to see if I had a comment, but, you know, the way I speak, it really doesn't demand a response from me. So, long night, guys. I'm in my robe already. Aren't you jealous? Thank you very much. Good night. Michael Heaney Thank you, Mike. Have a good night. Michael Heaney We have one more. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Michael Heaney No, please. Michael Heaney And we have one more online. Female Speaker It's more of a question. I just wanted to know how the determination is made whether something is private or public. Being that it's a public school, how is that? I mean, I'm just . Michael Heaney This was defined. What I read today was defined through the New York State Education Law. Female Speaker Okay. Is there some way, like, I can get a copy of that or? Michael Heaney Yes, I don't have it. Female Speaker I can always come by or email you. Michael Heaney I might have it on my phone. Female Speaker All right. Just I wanted to know. And my other question is 59 of the acres is protected farmland. The school will not be able to use that for entering or exiting the school, is that correct? Because right now there's a dirt road that the- Michael Heaney Dirt road that the sod farmers use to load their sod on once they cut it. Female Speaker But it's part of the protected land. So I assume- Michael Heaney Yeah, that's part of the permitted activities under the conservation easement. Because it's in furtherance of the farm production. To the extent that the land would be changed or modified for non-farming purposes, they wouldn't be allowed to do that. Female Speaker Okay. So like an entrance or an exit so that they didn't have to exit onto Sound Avenue would not be permitted? Michael Heaney Unless it was for farm activities, no. Female Speaker Right. Michael Heaney My concern would be that, you know, they're bringing in heavy equipment. Female Speaker I can't hear you. Michael Heaney Oh, I'm sorry. You know, they would be bringing in heavy equipment, right? For the construction aspect of it. Female Speaker All right. Okay.
Michael Heaney And my concern is that they would use Church Lane, use that dirt road, because it takes it right down to in front of where that school is, where it's being built. That they would use that as a cut-through. So they don't have to deal with the traffic situation that's going to be on Sound Avenue there. Michael Heaney Right. So however they would plan on doing that, all of those details would be examined by the planning board once they have an application. So, I mean, that's all good comment and good consideration. But I think we're a ways away from that at this point. Michael Heaney You know, I just felt that they purchased the land, but it's owned by the county. But the rights. Michael Heaney Yeah, so the county owns the development rights. Michael Heaney Right. But they could use that as an access point for construction purposes? Michael Heaney I don't know off the top of my head, just because I haven't seen a full application. I mean, I don't know if they have a full application with all of the details of where, you know, where they want to build this. Yeah. So. Michael Heaney Okay. Michael Heaney But they would have to have some kind of plan for ingress and egress for the construction. Michael Heaney Okay. All right. Thank you. Sorry to keep you again. Michael Heaney Yep. Thanks. My name's Kevin D'Amato from Aqaba. I live on the east side of the county. I live on the east side of the county. I live on the east side of the county. Michael Heaney Okay. So, I live on the farm where the new schools are proposed to be, backs up on my yard. And my question is akin to theirs. Say if the school starts having an agricultural program, are they then allowed to do whatever they'd like with that farm? Michael Heaney I'd want to look into that more. Michael Heaney So, we're at a point where we don't know what's happening with this land. Michael Heaney I don't know what their full plan is at this point, no. Michael Heaney At what point will you know that? Michael Heaney When they file an application. Michael Heaney When will that be? Michael Heaney I have no idea. It's up to them. Michael Heaney It's up to them. Michael Heaney So, they own the land now, but they can't do anything with it? Michael Heaney I don't know. Michael Heaney They have to put in an application with the planning department that lays out everything that they want to do. To my knowledge, that hasn't been filed yet. Michael Heaney Okay. Good. Thank you very much. Michael Heaney They came in and preliminarily met with the planning department at a planning pre-submission work session. Michael Heaney Mm-hmm. Michael Heaney And that's when they presented their thoughts and ideas of what they might want to do. And that's all the meeting was. So, it was for them to kind of get an idea of what they can and can't do, and how big they wanted to expand. They were given some information, and they left. So, now nothing's been filed since then. Michael Heaney Okay. That's good to hear. All right. Thank you very much. Michael Heaney You're welcome. Do we have somebody on Zoom? Oh, Sid Bell.
Sid Bell Can you hear me? Michael Heaney Yes, Sid. Sid Bell Yes. Okay. Sorry. Thank you for this opportunity. I just wanted to add my voice to those folks such as John McAuliffe and others who spoke in support of your position on the litigation.
It is great to hear, you know, you guys taking this position. Other item, though, I'm not as convinced as I think you guys are about the agro-tourism. The agro-resorts, I should say. And like Kathy McGraw, I just wonder, you know, what the haste is, et cetera, for getting this on the books. I hope I'm wrong. Okay. But I have concerns about that. And but thanks for the opportunity to vent, so to speak. Good evening. Michael Heaney Thank you, Sid. Sidney Mullis Good night. Michael Heaney Anybody else? Nobody on Zoom? Okay. People, it was a long meeting, but I thank you so much for coming out. We appreciate your input and, and, and, you know, and coming to the meetings and speaking to us. We need to hear what the community wants and thinks and feels. So, thank you for bearing with us and have a good night. Sidney Mullis Good night. Michael Heaney Second. Michael Heaney We have to make a motion to close the meeting. Sidney Mullis So moved. Michael Heaney Have a second? Sidney Mullis Second. Michael Heaney All in favor? Sidney Mullis Aye. Michael Heaney Aye. Michael Heaney Meeting is closed. Sidney Mullis Tim. Michael Heaney We're going to go home and leave this meeting.
We'll be right back.