Full Transcript
Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you, Laura.
Okay. We're going to open up today. We have, do we have any communications or correspondence from Mr. Wooten? Okay. Well, we're a little out of order here. Hang on one second. Okay. We have the invocation. Councilman Rothwald? Why, thank you, Supervisor. We are honored this evening to be in the presence of the Reverend Janet Wright, our interfaith minister. So if you would kindly come forward to lead us in our invocation, please.
She came to do it twice today.
Thank you. [transcription gap] Good evening. Good evening. Supervisor. Good evening. Board members. And members of the community of Riverhead. Which we love. This evening, we will be giving a proclamation to honor Poetry and Poetry Street. Poetry gives us a different way of communication with beautiful words, rhymes, and phrases. And we are grateful. Thank you. Thank you. We will be working on an important, comprehensive plan that will affect all of us. And we and the board and the town will need to work together, for we are much stronger together. The high school students this evening will be celebrating at their senior prom, and we hope they will have a happy and will return home after a beautiful evening and memories. At this time, I would ask that we all take a moment to just let all the worries and concerns and problems of the day just pass away, and maybe shake it off, as someone famous has said. Please be in an attitude of prayer.
Thank you. Oh God of many names, be with the town supervisor, the town board members, as well as the community to work on the comprehensive plan together with one goal, the best for Riverhead community. We are stronger together. Let us speak with civility to each other, speak in words of truth, and justice and from the heart. Guide us as we discuss all the issues raised in the plan, and grant us the freedom to ask the hard questions, so we all will understand what is being asked of us. We ask that you bless this meeting and all who are attending, and we ask in your many names, and forms. Amen. Thank you. Thank you Reverend Wright. Thank you. Let's see here, we're a little out of order. Jim, do we have any correspondence? We do. Actually, the first probably two and a half pages of your agenda today received 49 letters, all related in one way or another to the Conference of Plan Update or the D.C. Conference of Plan Update. And I think that's a great way to end the day. Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you. [transcription gap] 168,650,000. The tax receiver report as of June 12th was 173,083,545.75. We received the May monthly report from the Red Building Department at $155,000.25. And the tax receiver, their May utility payment report was $291,247.81. And the town clerk's May monthly report was $13,059.23. And that includes all of our reports. Mr. Thank you, Jim. Okay, we have a proclamation for tonight. And it's regarding a program called Poetry Street, which has been going on for 10 years now in the town of Riverhead. And we'd like to call up the people from Poetry Street. And we have a proclamation we would like to present to you. The town board, you can come down. Mr. Come on up in here and turn and face the camera. We have Bobby Brown. We have Chip LeFord. Maggie Bloomfield. Mr. And Maggie Bloomfield. Okay. We are honoring Poetry Street's 10-year anniversary. And it seems like yesterday that you started this. And I'm glad to know you've been around various places in the town of Riverhead. It says, whereas Poetry Street was founded in 2014 as a collaboration of two poets, Susan Grafwell Dingle and Robert Bobby Brown, as a public art project for the East End Arts Jumpstart Program in partnership with Nancy Quiros, owner of the Blue Duck Baker Cafe, Poetry Street, the room without a roof, was designed to foster diversity through art in the community, encouraging participants to come together and safely share their stories and views through writing and poetry. Whereas today, Poetry Street has a national platform where every voice is heard. Poetry Street is an open mic with featured poets meeting the last Saturday of every month. Poetry Street's new director, Chip LeFord, has been leading Poetry Street forward with assistant director and co-host Maggie Bloomfield, along with the growing number of poets who simply admire and appreciate prose and poetry. Excuse me. Now let it be known that Poetry Street has brought together talent from all walks of life and experiences through creating a venue of openness and inclusivity. The town of Riverhead supports and encourages the environment and atmosphere that Poetry Street has been delivering to our citizens for over ten years. Now therefore, I, Timothy C. Hubbard, supervisor of the town of Riverhead, together with the entire town board, will be the director of the Poetry Street Poetry Center. Hereby congratulate the members of Poetry Street for continuing to enhance the lives of others to the betterment of our community, as well as the arts in our town, and urge all citizens to sustain public awareness of these vital members of our community. So congratulations. Timothy C. Thank you so much.
Thank you so much. And actually, I have flyers from the board. Perfect. Excellent. Is there anything you guys would like to say? Well, I would like to thank Mr. Wooten for setting this up for us and for inviting us here tonight. And I hope that everybody here will come on the 29th when we will have poetry and cake. It's just an honor to be part of this organization. We do our best to promote it. We do our best to promote poetry and diversity in the community. And we hope to continue for ten more years. Well, we hope it's longer than that, but we thank you very much for what you've done for the past ten years. And on the 29th, I just want to mention to everybody out there, this is at the Riverhead Library. And it is at? Two to four. Two to four. 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday, June 29th at the Riverhead Library. So come on down if you're interested in poetry. These guys are pros at it. They've been doing it for, pros, no pun intended. They've been at it for a long time, and it's a pretty good event. So I suggest you come down and participate or just sit and listen. And it's also on Zoom. Yes. It's on hybrid. Yeah, Zoom. Okay. Thank you so much. Awesome. Well, thank you and congratulations. Thank you. Thank you again. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Thank you. Have me a cake. [transcription gap]
in it and sent their concerns to us so we appreciate that okay we are going to move on to our first public hearing we had two public hearings scheduled for tonight but we ended up we had to cancel the one regarding the Riverhead Charter School portables they are they have changed attorneys and they requested a change in the date so their new attorney could kind of get up to date with the case so the only public hearing on for tonight is the public hearing local law amending chapter 221 and with that I would ask Eric Howard to speak on the public hearing on the town's behalf thank you all right this is a relatively straightforward amendment chapter 221 of the town code establishes the committee's that make recommendations for use of CPF funds collected through the Peconic Bay tax and this currently we we have the farmland preservation committee in the open space committee this establishes a subcommittee that would that would focus solely on water quality projects and pollution prevention projects okay do we have anybody from the public who would like to come up and comment on tonight's public hearing I see nobody in the audience do we have anybody online no so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so There's nothing there. Oh, we have this. I don't have any of this on here. We can do that at the end. There's no resolutions on. Okay. We can just. Up to you. Yeah. Okay. All right. Then we're going to open it up to comments on tonight's resolutions. Any comments at all on tonight's resolutions?
We have nobody in the audience for comments? We have a quiet audience tonight. We have nobody online. Where is everybody tonight? Okay. Peach. All right. Then we're going to move right on to our resolutions. Okay. We'll call Resolution 563. Ratifies authorization for designated alcohol service vendors to serve alcohol at the 2024 Live on 25 Streets Festival. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution 563. Motion is adopted. Resolution 564. Rejects bids for residential solid waste collection and disposal service and authorizes the town clerk to publish in post notice two bidders for re-bid for residential solid waste collection and disposal service. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 566. Approves affordable cesspool sewer and drain service ink as a drain layer for the ! Resolution 566. Approves affordable cesspool sewer and drain service ink as a drain layer for the! Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. [transcription gap] Yes. [transcription gap] there's something that's different. Yeah, the numbers. These are all not. I think none of them are numbered. I think the other board members may have the old packet. I'm just not sure. None of these are numbered. They're not numbered. Mine aren't numbered, but they're coinciding with the. Yeah, with the resolution list. Mine are definitely out of order. Okay. This whole town board is out of order. Don't publish that. These came from online, right, recently? Okay. So I think the need to be in correct version is posted online. We have to just double check that. So can I see your public? Sure.
Maybe we want to just take a five-minute recess, and we'll figure this out and come back. He's loving what this says. Yeah, we'll go find out what's going on. Yeah, that's our number. It's incorrect. All right, mine are in order coinciding, so I'll share with you. Okay. Mine is, too. Okay. So we'll just continue on that way. All right. Jim, you're just going to have to read the number when you read it like you've been doing? I've been reading the number. Yeah. My numbers don't coincide with what you're reading. Why don't you share with Ken? We don't have numbers at all, so. I have a number up in the corner. You want to share with Ken, and I'll share with you. Okay. That's fine. Ken, I think, has it. Vanessa changed it to a nine. It's the top portion. What did you get? These are numbered. Because we have one eight at the end.
We didn't do that one. Where is? We're at 567. We're at 567, correct? Points of seasonal recreation. Yeah, that's 567. Did we do 565? I read 565. No, I read 566. 66. We didn't do 565. Jim, what's the last one we did? 566. Well, what was it? All right. So, let's see. Let's go to 566. 566, yes. Yeah, but we didn't do. I don't think we voted on that one. I know we missed one about the tow truck. Right. 565 wasn't done. I don't have the tow truck on here yet. What's that? Yeah, I did the website. The website is up there. That's the one I got. Yeah, see, 565 is awards-bidding tow truck. This is up there. You guys can just read off it. So, if you have copies of the agenda. We'll make it larger. Yeah, we can read off the screen. He's got it on. He's got it on the screen. Well, you should have the agenda outside on the table. You should have it in your.
We just have to remember the order that we're going. That's all. We'll move on. Why don't you just read the number and the heading, Jim? I was going to say, is there a copy? Jim, if you could just read the number and the heading, then we can all follow and make motions. We can follow off of the other sheet. But that's not. It'll work. Just read the number with each one you do. Okay. Because. I'm reading off of there now. Which is. No, we're going to do the agenda. We should it be on 565. That's. Actually, did we vote on the one for the recreation department before we got into this? No. No, we did not. I read it. We didn't vote. You read it, but we didn't vote on it. That's great. Do you have a solution? And that's because. No. I have a solution. Supervisor. Yes. I think Ms. McGraw has something that she likes. Supervisor. Yes. Excuse me. I got here. I thought that you would be holding a hearing. And I just had a comment on one of the resolutions that you haven't. Go ahead. Thank you very much. It's the 572, the Berman subdivision. The Hildreth Real Estate Warehouse. It's more a question than. Well, it is a question. It's a 70,000 square foot warehouse with 21 loading bays. And two outdoor storage areas of 65,000 square feet. And. Yes. I have a clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear [transcription gap] of the preliminary site plan for another warehouse just down the street from this one. And I was just wondering how the conclusion was reached that there was no significant impact either alone or cumulatively with respect to transportation in that area. Are they the same address, Kathy? One is at 1001 Scott Avenue, and the other one is at 901 to 923 Berman Boulevard. I think they're practically side by side. But I don't think there's anybody here from planning who can explain why it got a neg deck. And I was wondering if you all had some thoughts about that. We don't have the Part 1 also. Okay. Well, that is the extent of my comment. So I would like to have seen that and to get an explanation for why a neg deck. It may be appropriate. I don't know. Yeah, it's a very sparse area over there. I'm very familiar with it. It's a little curve by island. It's really... But they have to get out on the road. I don't even know what these warehouses are going to be doing. I know one is a one-storey. 40-foot high with 33 truck... 30 truck spaces. And the other one is three buildings with a total of 21 loading bays. And those trucks have to go somewhere. And I didn't know, you know, they're not just staying on Scott Boulevard in Berman. They have to get out onto the road. And so it just raised a question for me. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're on to the next question. Okay. Thank you. Next one. Okay. We should be up to... If I have it right, we should be up to 565. Yes. Well, Supervisor, if we could just start with... Because some of the ones that were 563, 65 for you is not what was posted. So if we could probably start again at 563 and just run through... Okay. Go ahead. ...the list that was posted. That's fine. That's easier for me. And my apologies for that. That was totally in my office because we were trying to correct some things. We didn't have... [transcription gap] WANTS TO START OVER TO MATCH THE NUMBERS UP. WE'RE GOING TO START WITH 563 AGAIN BECAUSE MY 563 WAS NOT WHAT YOU WANTED. JUST TO BE CLEAR, MINE DOESN'T HAVE ANY 560 NUMBERS ON THEM AT ALL. RIGHT. YES. YOU'LL HAVE TO READ OFF THE AGENDA. SO WHERE ARE YOU? WE'LL TALK OVER. RESOLUTION 563. RATIFIES AUTHORIZATION FOR DESIGNATED ALCOHOL SERVICE VENDORS TO SERVE ALCOHOL AT THE 2024 YEAR. THAT'S NOT IT. THAT'S NOT IT. THAT'S NOT 563. THAT'S WHAT WE ORIGINALLY HAD. SEWER DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECT. WE WOULD JUST GIVE IT A NEW SHOT. IT'S RIGHT UP THERE. RIGHT UP TOP. THERE YOU GO. IF I'D LIKE TO FIND THE RESOLUTION, I HAVE IT. IT'S RIGHT THERE. I JUST HAD TO DO THAT. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE. KEN, IT'S UP ON THE SCREEN. I KNOW THAT, BUT I'M JUST LOOKING FOR THE ACTUAL RESOLUTION. I HEAR YOU. ACCORDING TO THE SEWER DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECT 24002 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT. SO MOVED. SECOND. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. TURN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. MOTION IS ADOPTED. MOTION 564. REJECTS BIDS FOR RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICE AND AUTHORIZES THE TOWN CLERK TO PUBLISH AND POST NOTICE TO BIDDERS FOR REBID FOR RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICE. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. TURN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. MOTION IS ADOPTED. MOTION 565. AWARDS BID FOR A USED TOW TRUCK. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. TURN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. MOTION IS ADOPTED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. TURN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. MOTION IS ADOPTED. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. TURN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. TO THE BARBERSHOP POLLS. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MOTION IS ADOPTED. SECONDED. RESOLUTION ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 567. RESOLUTION 567, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT READY TO GO. THIS COINCIDES WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE JUST HAD. AND WE HAVE TO FORM A COMMITTEE FROM THE COMMUNITY AND FROM THE TOWN FOR PRESERVATION FUND. SO WE'RE NOT READY TO DO THAT YET BECAUSE WE JUST FOUND OUT TODAY THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE CERTAIN PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR THE TOWN BUT ALSO LIVE IN THE TOWN. WE HAD PEOPLE LINED UP FOR THIS AND WE HAVE TO RECRUIT A FORMER FROM THE COMMUNITY. SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS. SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL AGAINST? OKAY. MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE RESOLUTION 567. ALL RIGHT. SO CARRIED. RESOLUTION 568. SCHEDULES PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SPECIAL ADVISORS. OKAY. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS. OKAY. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS. OKAY. RESOLUTION 568. SCHEDULES PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION OF 4592 MIDDLE COUNTRY ROAD TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-FAMILY DWELLING. 4592 MIDDLE COUNTRY ROAD. CALVITON, NEW YORK. SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP NUMBER 600-97-1-79.1. SO MOVED. SECONDED. TOTAL. WASKE. YES. 25. 25. 25. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution adopted. Resolution 569. Amends resolution 2024-533. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution adopted. Resolution 570. Yes. And that's me. Yes. Authorizes down clerk to vote. Resolution post public notice to amend chapter 303 to extend Calverton industrial moratorium within the town of Riverhead. So moved. Second. Vote please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 572. Assumes lead agency and issues negative declaration pursuant to secret for the site plan application entitled Hildreth Real Estate Estates Advisors Calverton 1001 Scott Avenue Calverton Suffolk County tax map number 600-135.10-1-1. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 573. Authorizes town clerk to publish and post. Public notice of the public hearing for the site plan application entitled Hildreth Real Estate Advisors Calverton 1001 Scott Avenue Calverton Suffolk County tax map number 600-135.10-1-1. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 574. Yes. [transcription gap] Committee sorry and Gabelson so moved second vote please wasky yes yes yes yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 575 appoints a maintenance mechanic to so moved second vote please wasky yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 576 appoints a seasonal recreation leader to the recreation department so moved seconded vote please wasky yes yes yes yes yes yes yes resolution 577 appoints new seasonal Beach employees to the recreation department so moved seconded vote please wasky yes Merrifield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 578 appoints a justice court clerk Spanish speaking so moved seconded vote please wasky yes Merrifield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 579 men's terms and conditions of employment of a deputy head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head Yes, best of luck to you, Craig. Maryfield. Yes, congratulations on your retirement. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes, Craig, congratulations. Thank you very much for your service. Yes. And Hubbard. Yeah, Craig, thanks for your service. You've been a member of the fire marshal staff for quite some time, done a lot of work for us in the town. We appreciate it. Nothing but the best to you and your retirement. Resolution is approved. Resolution 581. Ratifies and accepts the resignation of a traffic control specialist. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Maryfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Your best wishes again to Remy. He's always done an awesome job, so many years of service. I vote yes. Thank you. And Hubbard. Yeah, Remy, thank you for your time and service to the town. Much appreciated and best of luck to you in the future. Resolution adopted. Resolution adopted. Resolution 582. Ratifies authorization to amend terms and conditions of employment for William Rothaar. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Maryfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 583. Ratifies appointment of financial administrator and authorizes the supervisor to enter into an agreement with Jeanette DiPola. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Maryfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. I know we are in very good hands in the future. Thank you. I vote yes. And Hubbard. Yes. Resolution adopted. Resolution 584. Ratifies the appointment of a senior citizen aide. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Maryfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 586. Ratifies authorization to designate alcohol service vendor to serve alcohol at the reflections are in the park experience in the Milton L. Burns Park, Grangeville Park, Peconic Avenue, Riverhead, New York City, and the
! Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Maryfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 587. Ratifies authorization for designated alcohol service vendors to serve alcohol at the 2024 Live on 25 Street Festival. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Maryfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Second. américano. [transcription gap] YES. RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 589. RATIFIES AWARD OF BID FOR STREET LIGHT AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL REPAIR PARTS. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. UBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 590. AUTHORIZES THE REMOVAL OF FIXED ASSETS. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 591. AUTHORIZES THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD AND THE NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF PARKS RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR A GRANT AWARD FOR UP TO $500,000 FOR THE RIVERFRONT ADOPTIVE CHILDREN'S PLAYGROUND. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. KERN. YES. HUBBARD. YES. I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN ON THIS ONE. OKAY. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION SO ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 592. AUTHORIZES THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL VALUATION SERVICES, INC. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION SO ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 593. APPROVES FIREWORKS APPLICATION FOR RIVERHEAD RACEWAY JUNE 29, 2024. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION SO ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 594. APPROVES FIREWORKS APPLICATION FOR RIVERHEAD RACEWAY AUGUST 10, 2024. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION SO ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 595. APPROVES SPECIAL EVENT CHAPTER 255, APPLICATION FOR IGLECIA FAMILIA DE DEAS. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION SO ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 596. APPROVES SPECIAL EVENT CHAPTER 255, APPLICATION FOR RIVERHEAD FOUNDATION FOR MARINE RESEARCH RUN FOR THE RIDLEY 5K. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION SO ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 597. APPROVES SPECIAL EVENT CHAPTER 255, APPLICATION FOR WATER DRINKER FARM, GARLIC FEST. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. NO VAMPIRES ALLOWED. RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 598. GRANTS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR THE 901-923 BERMAN BOULEVARD COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE SITE PLAN APPLICATION 901-923 BERMAN BOULEVARD CALVERTON, NEW YORK, SOUTH COUNTY TAX MET NUMBER 600-135.1-1-3. SO MOVED. SECONDED. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION 599. TOWN HALL LED LIGHTING CONVERSION PROJECT. SO MOVED. SECOND. VOTE, PLEASE. WOSKEY. YES. MURRAYFIELD. YES. KERN. YES. ROTHWELL. YES. HUBBARD. YES. RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. THAT CLUES OUR RESOLUTIONS FOR THE SE américans. EXCUSE ME, MR. SUPERVISOR. EXCUSE ME, MR. SUPERVISOR. YES. RESOLUTION 571 NEEDS TO BE RECALLED TO BE AMENDED. THAT'S THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS ADOPTED. YES. 71 needs to be recalled to be amended that's the resolution authorizing publish and post for the moratorium extension so the public notice needs to be amended to schedule the public hearing for july 2nd at 205 pm so i'll make a motion to amend it to the correct dates and times okay and then yes and then in the body of the resolution the uh publication date needs to be amended to the june 27th edition of the news review make a motion to amend second vote please wasky yes mary field yes as amended kern yes as amended rothwell yes as amended yes there's a resolution carried with its amendment okay okay that concludes all our resolutions what i'm going to do now is i'm going to move on to the cda meeting before i open it up for comments on anything um we will move on to the cda meeting and good evening we have a very light agenda this evening uh there are no resolutions so we would uh have open comment on cda matters only okay open matters on cda uh matters only open matters on cda matters only
john mccullough of roanoke landing and riverhead um i have two questions about where we are on epcal one is whether mr howard can give us any updating on the legal situation i know there was a postponement but i don't know what the implication of that is and what you're now expecting when you now i guess my question specifically is when you now expect this to go to court and and be debated well it's already it's already in court our attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss the underlying lawsuit um the attorneys for cat filed in opposition to that motion we now have an opportunity to reply to their motion uh they were working on a briefing schedule with counsel uh whatever i i don't remember the exact date but whatever's reflected in the new york state court system would be the current return date if our attorneys need more time for our reply then they will ask for that so it's basically papers going back and forth they're at some point yes it's just to fully brief the motion once you have clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head Once it's fully briefed, the court will mark it submitted, and they'll either render a determination on it or schedule it for oral argument. Male Speaker 1 Okay. And you'll let us know when it goes to oral argument, if people would like to be there. Male Speaker 2 Sure. Male Speaker 1 Okay, wonderful. Second question going to the supervisor. And that is sort of where your thinking is about the process of thinking about how EPCAL ought to be used, the idea of a special commission to evaluate goals. Male Speaker 2 Same answer to you. The last 12 times you've asked me that, John, and that is when the timing is right, we will put together that commission or task force. Male Speaker 1 So, no timing is not right. Male Speaker 2 No timing. Male Speaker 1 Okay. Thank you.
Male Speaker 2 Do we have any other comments on CDA matters? Do we have any comments online? None online for CDA matters. Okay. Make a motion we close the CDA meeting and return back to the town board meeting. Female Speaker 1 Okay. Male Speaker 2 Seconded. Female Speaker 1 Waskie. Female Speaker 2 Yes. Female Speaker 1 Merrifield. Female Speaker 2 Yes. Female Speaker 1 Kern. Female Speaker 2 Yes. Female Speaker 1 Rothwell. Male Speaker 2 Yes. Female Speaker 2 Hubbard. Male Speaker 2 Yes. Female Speaker 2 Okay. The meeting is closed, and we'll see you next time. Thank you. Male Speaker 1 Okay. We're now going to open it up to comments on any matter regarding the town. Female Speaker 2 Hello again. Kathy McGraw from Northville. I have three quick comments. I think it's worth noting that in today's correspondence, there are 49 items, and in 23 of them, the authors expressed opposition to agritourism resorts. My question to you is whether you plan to listen to the significant and growing sentiment telling you that the residents of Riverhead don't want these resorts. On this issue, I was extremely troubled and upset by the fact that at a work session on June 6th, you discussed the proposed zoning legislation that will allow the resorts. Could you not at least have waited to do so until after the comment period on the comp plan had closed on June 10th? By having that premature discussion, I was able to clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear clear head clear head clear head clear head clear clear head clear head clear head clear [transcription gap] clear head clear head clear [transcription gap] clear head clear [transcription gap] It's what the residents of the town want. Second point, goal 1.4 of the comp plan on housing states, and I quote, encourage other East End communities to provide their fair share of affordable workforce housing. It goes on to recommend that Riverhead work with other towns, and citing Southampton specifically. I'm sure you all are aware that about a week or so ago, Southampton voted against Liberty Gardens, a housing development of 50 units for not only workforce housing, but also for veterans. My question to you all is, did Riverhead contact Southampton to encourage allowing this project, to have a dialogue with them? And if you did, whether you... You could tell us what happened. We've had a dialogue with them regarding the situation in Riverside, and we tied that into... I specifically said to them, and I asked them, what are you doing to address affordable housing? Because we house all your workers that travel through your town to get out East. So what are you doing to address it to make housing for the workers to live in your community? And they said, well, we're working on low-income housing in the Southampton area. And I said, that's great. It's long overdue. How many? And they said it was something like 30. And I was like, wow, that's real big of you. 30 units for all the people that commute and go over there and get caught in the traffic, you're going to put 30 places up. And they said, yeah, that's what we're looking at. So those were the conversations. We've made it known to them that they need to do more on their part. My opinion is they're dropping the ball big time over there when it comes to affordable housing. They have none to speak of. And the perfect example is what they just tried to do in Sagaponic with the proposed development over there. I'd really encourage some kind of dialogue with them other than just being mad that they're not doing it. We've had the conversation. And this is what they're telling us. That is the conversation. I don't doubt what you're telling me, Supervisor. Thank you. My final point is I wanted to say thanks to a diligent planning department employee. Who saw an ad for a brand-new racetrack at Scotts Point on the Scotts Point Facebook page. It has finally come to light that Scotts Point built this racetrack along with pickleball courts and several other things that it had no right whatsoever to build. It's hard to believe that these blatant violations went unnoticed when we know these Scotts Point developers have a lot of experience. They have a track record. No pun intended, a track record. And pardon my language, they have a track record for doing whatever they damn well please. I guess the word is out, and I think of the Cider House, that in River head, it's easier to seek forgiveness than permission. And could they have been more brazen about it than touting this racetrack with a video on their Facebook page? Facebook page showing how cool this racetrack is. These gots point folks have thumbed their nose at this town's rules, regulations, and building requirements. I know stop orders have been issued along with citations, but until this town says no and says it with some teeth, developers will continue to do whatever they want. There can and should be no forgiveness in this case. Make this developer a repeat offender, rip out everything built without approval, fines just aren't sufficient or adequate. And once you've done that, I'd ask that you think about going to our IDA and asking them to cut off the Scotts Point tax abatements and clawing back the money. I'm not sure if you've heard of the !
I'm not sure if you've heard of the Scotts Point tax abatement. I didn't head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head [transcription gap] head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head As for the cider house, since I put in the covenants on the property, reiterated no weddings, all the things that they're not allowed to do, they paid the fines that they were asked to pay, and they have not had any violations. So what was done in that matter worked. Just so you know, I know that that likes to keep coming up every now and then, and it's kind of like, come on. It wasn't as bad as everybody thought it was going to be, and he has been on the right side where he should be. We need to reevaluate our fines for this, because some of these businesses just write it off as the cost of doing business, and it's like, okay, you know what, it's easier to do it that way. Well, that's got to stop. We've got to make it hurt them in the pocketbook. It's the only way I can think of doing it besides of getting them into court, but we get them into court, and it costs the town money to go to court, and nobody wins out of this besides the attorneys. So we've got to upgrade our fines, and we've got to make it really hurt if people are going to violate what goes on in this town. I won't repeat everything that you just talked about, because that was one of the points that I wanted to bring up, and I think Kathy is completely right that they tear it up, and that's the place to start with them. So I have a couple of different things that I just wanted to bring up from some of the things I've been seeing. One of them is I went over to the ice skating, and I know that there is a Riverhead discount over there, but in order to avail yourself of the Riverhead discount, you have to come to Riverhead Town Hall and get a pass for you to use the discount over there, and I'm just wondering why that is or if there's another way to do that, because if you want to decide on a Friday night that you're going there and the town isn't open, you can't avail yourselves of that discount. So I was just wondering if there's a way to kind of address that for families. It's through the recreation department, and it's for the whole year. You just do it once a year. You stop in when you're getting your parking pass and everything else, and you register, and you're good for the year. It's not like you have to come here first each time you go. You're set for the year. But I'm just kind of curious. Why can't you just show your ID of where you live over there? It's no different than parking at the beach. If you come here, you get a permit, and you're good for the year. That's the way it is. That way we can control and verify that the people going there aren't using maybe a fake ID to get in and get a Riverhead discount. We're verifying it here in Riverhead. And there's no way you could? They can verify it there and buy it there? They tried other methods prior, but they went by school ID, but then they realized that a number of people live in the town of Southampton that have Riverhead school ID, and that just wasn't working, to be fair to the taxpayers of Riverhead. So they tried different methods. This seems to be the most simplest way to do it, is for each family to check in with the recreation department and get yourself set up for the year. Okay. Can they do that online for that? I don't know. I'd have to ask Great Coin. I'm not sure. I don't think so, but I'm not sure. That would be good to do. Yeah. Online would work. And then just my other couple questions, just congratulations to Craig on his retirement. He's done a fantastic job for the town. My other comments have to do with I watched the May 30th meeting for the town square, and I just have a few questions about that or comments about that. I understand the need to activate the area and to make it a welcoming area in our community and to help activate downtown, but a couple of points that I just wanted to bring up about just the town square itself. I know that Mr. Petrucelli was put as the master developer, but as I've heard with many other things that are going on, especially things over at EPCOW, that in order to have a master developer, you have to have the qualified and eligible hearing first. He was appointed as the master developer back in April of 2022, and we still have not had a qualified and eligible hearing on that. Am I correct? Or what? Or was there one and I missed it? Dawn?
There was a public hearing. I really have to look it up. I'm sorry. I can't remember off the top of my head until a couple of years back. And there will be additional hearings. There will be a contract of sale coming up shortly, that will be publicly available in the town board, in the clerk's office, and all of that will be revetted, and the public will get to comment again. We are having two public engagement sessions. I'll just point that out now. One July 10th and one the following week, and I believe that's July. 10th? Maybe? Yeah. And then one July 17th. July 10th will be the public engagement session for the, for the adaptive playground. And July 17th will be the public discussion, second, or it will actually be a second round on the amphitheater. What times are those? I'll double check. I think they're both at 6. We have two sessions, 6 and 7. So there will be public announcements. I know Justin is working with our consultants on graphics to put online. Okay. Thank you, Dawn. And I'll just say, I think we have a few more. I think we have a few more. [transcription gap] So, no. None of you guys remember having the qualified and eligible? I do. I definitely remember that. We had one with RXR. We also had one with Joe Petruccelli. I know you had a meeting with him. I just, I don't remember it after. Yeah. I don't. So, I'll go back and look. It was two years ago. Yeah. Yeah. I will go back and look. So, my other comments on the amphitheater is, the amphitheater that will, the town will have to engage maybe four to five new full-time employees is what the consultants were saying. Is that correct? I'm going to defer to Dawn again. She's the resident expert. I think you might be referring to the market study that was done in connection with the amphitheater study. So, the market evaluation determines the appropriate size based on market conditions and what it might take to run it. And it is suggesting a number of employees. Whether the town actually runs that itself or it's run by another entity is still undetermined. It's just information gathering to right size and to make, give us all the information we need to find the right purveyor for that venue. Thank you. Good. Just it seems like a lot of full-time employees for the Banchella, what they're doing, what they're recommending. The other thing. Well, it doesn't mean, excuse me, it doesn't mean that we are hiring those as she just pointed out. No, I know, but it's, you did pay a consultant for a market study to see what would make the Banchella successful. And that was their recommend to make successful. So, you don't end up with just the Banchella as sort of a white elephant there. Well, they also. You would need to have some sort of programming and they're recommending that for the program. I'm just, I'm repeating what they say. I don't know what, you know, you'll choose to do what you. Right. We don't necessarily. We don't necessarily want to follow all of their recommendations including the design of that Banchella we're not happy with. So, that doesn't mean we're going to follow everything they're suggesting. Right. Well, that was one of my other comments on the design of the Banchella. I know you guys said that you thought it looked a little bit modern, but I think one of the whole points was to open the area back there to the water. So, if you have a Banchella that is blocking the water by having it not see through as they designed it, I think that's a good thing. Right. I think, you know, that kind of, you kind of lose that view of the water there. That's just my opinion. There's acoustics involved with that too. Yeah. And the design of it. So, whether it would be open or not too, that all has to be addressed. Right. Well, that. Plenty of view of the water at Jones Beach. What was that? There's plenty of view of the water at Jones Beach. Well, this is my other comment. It's, you know, I understand that the area needs to be activated and I agree with that totally. I think, you know, I just would like you guys to consider having an amphitheater in one of the most crowded. Most densely populated areas in all of the town of Riverhead with amplified music may be a challenge, you know. And is it something that's going to really benefit the town? You know, we know every time somebody has a wedding and there's some amplified music in it, you know. I mean, you guys have gotten the calls all of the time that the music is very loud. It's echoing all around. So, I urge you to consider, you know, the amphitheater as the activation area with all of those things. You know, is there something else that would be more ideal? And, you know, it's costly. It's what, three, four million dollars to do this without moving the buildings on the East End Arts there. The other thing I asked you to consider is, you know, they were talking about 16 weeks of activation for this venue. You know, we have the Suffolk, which is a successful venue in the town of Riverhead. And I know you guys just took over the Vale Leavitt and are looking to activate that as well. Is this going to be synergistic with it or is it actually going to be in competition with those venues for audience? I mean, there's only so many people that are going to go to these things on a Saturday night or a Friday night. And are you taking business away from some of our successful businesses and competing with them as opposed to enhancing them by bringing people in? I'll just say, ma'am, I just want to say that I understand not, in addition to live acts, there are also going to be public events that can be held there. It can be used for community projects. It can be used for other. I mean, I think it's a great example of a lot of art projects, such as poetry readings, such as theater production. So it's not necessarily a music venue only. But you also don't need that big a band shell? I'm just saying, you mentioned a moment ago about being in competition with those other venues. And we don't see it that way. We think there are other opportunities for the amphitheater besides just music. I'm just putting it that way. I understand that. And I love the arts. I would love to see some plays there. I would love to see other things that, well, I'm just pointing out what the consultants were saying, what they were presenting through. But I think that's a great example of a lot of the things that we're doing with tribute bands and things like that, that those would be, you know, you're not going to, if you're going to say, okay, we won't have any of that stuff there, that's a different thing. So, just. Ron Charles, Jr.: Laura, from day one, the conversations we've had with the Suffolk Theater and then with the people that we're talking to with the Vale Levitt, none of this is designed to take, or will be designed or programmed to take away one from another. Each one has its own venue and their specialty of their venues. And we discussed this early on in the plan to make sure that wasn't going to happen. Bob was very instrumental in bringing this up and discussing, having conversations with the theater and with the people from the Vale Levitt that, you know, we didn't want to duplicate services and we don't want to do one thing here and hurt the other one over there. So, I think the program is going to be key to it and we are aware of that. Laura Flanders- Okay. All right. I think that's all I had on that. Oh, the one other question I have about the town squares. I know that you have brought up about the eminent domain for the science center there. And that's sort of, you know, not the picture that has been presented to the public at all about the science center there in all of the grant applications and everything else. You know, you've kind of hailed the science center as a jewel of the town square. And it looks like that's not the direction you're heading in at this point. But there's been no conversation with the public as to why the, you know, there is a pivot on that. And we're just wondering if there's anything that you guys want to share with the public about that or what, you know, because that's going to be a big expense to the town as well. It will all show itself up in due time. Laura Flanders- Okay. At this point, it would be not to get too deep into the weeds on the reasoning of it. Laura Flanders- I can imagine what the reasoning is on it, but, you know, I think, you know, this is public money. This is public space. I think there should be some conversation as to what, what is it that's going to be green space. And if it's going to be green space, why are we then selling the green space we have for a hotel and buying something else to be green space? And it's going to be shops because there's no going to be any shops in the hotel. And those are going to be the shops that activate the town square. I think the public should be made aware of these things as these decisions are going forward and you negotiate. David Plylar- They will because they will be notified before final decision. David Plylar- And those decisions are made, absolutely. They have to be. Laura Flanders- Okay. David Plylar- Yep. Laura Flanders- All right. Thank you. David Plylar- You owe me five minutes, Laura. Laura Flanders- All right. I'll get it back to you. Laura Flanders- Hi. Dr. Turton. Dr. Hi. Laura Flanders- Dr. Turton, Greater Calverton Civic Association President. So just three brief things. First of all, thank you again for noticing Scott's point and doing something about it. It did show up in the Riverhead Local and that's where I learned about it. I learned that our code enforcement officer detected it. I believe I have that right. You know, I like go-karts. I like having fun. You know, I just don't like the way this guy's going about it. And I know, Joanne, you brought up about Mr. King. And you know, when you compare the two actors and the multiple offenses that Mr. King created for himself, he's an altar boy compared to the Scott's Point owner. I'd also like to thank you for being very strong, Supervisor Hubbard, on fines that need to be looked at for the future. Certainly we can't, you know, turn around and clobber this guy now with those fines, but we should do everything we can to the utmost that we can. You know, all this stuff can be done well. Obviously he's able to do it. I know he's been in there for what? He's been at this for 20 years or so, I think is the number, and really invested himself in it. You know, why can't you play by the rules if you're able to stay in it that long or willing to stay in it that long? And it made me think of you, Mr. Kern, that, you know, when you were looking at different fines for different things in town, especially with litter, you were, you know, very proactive on it and updating the fines. And I hope that you also participate in this. And this one, updating it as well. Yeah, we're looking at a whole host of fines across the board. Gee, excitement. I mean, if I could just. I hate to sound like that, but it is true. You got to be careful. No, I mean, a lot of them haven't been adjusted for 20 years, so. Right. Yeah, so if I could just jump in just quickly. Part of the problem that we have with fines as they relate to zoning violations, the amount that we're allowed to have as a fine for a zoning violation is under state executive law. And that's limited to 1,000. That's why all the violations that could be written under Chapter 301 top out at $1,000. So we can, you know, with respect to the other chapters, namely Chapter 217, which is the building code, you know, that can be reexamined. But I have addressed that issue with the town board before. And so we would just have to be a little bit creative in how we go about that. You know, and the more that you share it with us, the better we can support you in it. So I have a lot to learn in that area. And my last piece is also a thank you for giving the information for the public hearing. I looked at that last night and I'm staring at it and I'm going, they're going to have what tomorrow night? So I was very confused and I wanted to get the information out correctly and I called Matt Charters and he wasn't sure. But I was glad to see that someone took care of it today, thanks, Devin. Thank you. And just a bit of a public notice on we had originally scheduled our work session agenda for Thursday to discuss amongst the board the comp plan. And we got more information in today back from DFJ. So we want more time to digest it. We're going to make that the following Thursday. So not this Thursday, but it's going to be the following Thursday at our work session that we're going to discuss the comp plan and the DGEIS.
So I just have a quick question on that. Is that the final product from them on their compilation? Or is that the first run through? That's our first run through of the final draft, yes. There's still changes made to it. Pardon? That's what you're asking. There still can be changes made to it. So my question is on the workload part for DFJ, have they let you know that they've been able to sift through all the comments or do they need more time? That's what we just got today. That's why we want more time. Part of it, okay. They filtered the comments into the final draft plan. And they did a great job with it, the way they set it up and the way you can read it. But we just felt between now and with town hall being closed tomorrow and then Thursday morning being a work session, we all wanted a little bit more time to really thoroughly go through it. So. I think most specifically people have been asking me and talking to me about the definition. I know you guys tried to address it at the DGEIS. Yes. [transcription gap] Public hearing. The definition of what is significant. Really want to hear what DFJ comes down on. They need to be much more black and white on that and show you and show us. That's what we'll be looking for. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, . I just want to say on top of that how great it was to have all of these letters come in so that for myself, I was able to sit down and read everything that was presented to us and highlight the important things that I wanted to look back at. I know Laura was really good with actually giving the page numbers and where you could find all of the things that she was pointing out. So I think it's so much more effective that if you really have something structured that you want to tell us to send it in writing is so good because some of it just gets muted out during the speaking process. But this is so valuable what I have in my hands right now that came from the residents of the town. So thank you to everybody that took the time. Thank you. And sent these to us. We were trying to write down up here. We said this at the meeting. We were trying to write down as you're speaking. And it's just too hard to do. And then we asked you if you're reading something off, just submit it to us. And then we have it. And it's part of the record. And I have to say, Kathy McGraw even complained about that and wanted to, wanted us to pay the stenographer to go back and print everything out that was said instead of having people submit their stuff in. And to me, I just, I don't know. I don't know what to say. Thank you, everybody. I'll ditto what Joanne said. Thank you, everybody, for turning your paperwork in. It makes life a lot easier and a lot less expensive than paying a stenographer to transcribe everything. So. I have a file drawer full. Right. Right. Absolutely. Do we have any more open comments from anybody? I think I know this guy. Closer. Closer. I don't want to disappoint you. Absolutely. John McAuliffe, Rolling Woods. I'm from the University of Michigan, Riverhead. I also want, in terms of process, express appreciation. I don't know if it's Mr. Wooten or it preceded him, but the putting on the agenda, the actual texts of the letters, is really invaluable to know what's going on and how people are feeling about it. And as Takwe said, I think while many could be consigned and consolidated, I hope there are. And we'll see what is integrated. But I hope if things aren't integrated in, if there's a specific response as to why they're not integrated in. That would be very helpful. Two point I wanted to make. Otherwise. One is. There seemed to me a contradiction. At least in spirit. If not in law. In what you just did. That. Is. You. EXTENDED THE MORATORIUM WITH ONE HAND AND WITH THE OTHER HAND YOU ADDED 100. WE SCHEDULED PUBLIC CARE. WE HAVEN'T EXTENDED IT YET. THANK YOU FOR THE CORRECTION. ALL RIGHT. SO YOU MOVED FORWARD EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM. I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT AT THE SAME, YOU HAVE A, IS THE CURRENT MORATORIUM STILL IN EFFECT OR ARE WE IN A GRAY PERIOD? CURRENT MORATORIUM IS STILL IN EFFECT I BELIEVE UNTIL JULY 12. JULY 12. OKAY. WELL, THEN I FIND THIS MAY BE SOME WEIRDNESS OF ZONING BUT YOU APPROVED TWO RESOLUTIONS THAT TOTALED 152,695 SQUARE FOOT OF INDOOR WAREHOUSING AND 65,000 OF OUTDOOR WAREHOUSING. AND AGAIN, IT MAY BE A TECHNICALITY OF ZONING BUT I THINK THAT IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO GIVE CREDENCE TO A MORATORIUM AND THEN HAVE THEM IN THE PROCEDURAL. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND, I'M NOT GOING TO BRING UP H.K. AGAIN BUT THAT WAS SORT OF SLIPPED IN PROCEDURALLY BUT THE THESE TWO THINGS. H.K. IS AFFECTED BY THE MORATORIUM. THE TWO WE JUST APPROVED ARE INSIDE DEFENSE AT EPCAL. SO NOTHING INSIDE EPCAL IS AFFECTED BY THE MORATORIUM. THEY'RE NOT VERY BIG BUILDINGS EITHER, JOHN. EITHER ONE OF THEM ARE LARGE BUILDINGS. WELL, IT'S TOTALING 153,000 SQUARE FEET. BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM, IF YOU DRIVE BY ISLAND, THAT'S THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF ONE OF THOSE OR GO BY RILEY, THEY'RE SMALL IN COMPARISON TO WHAT'S THERE. TAKE A RIDE OVER THERE. I HAVE BEEN. ISLAND IS VERY IMPRESSIVE. OKAY. WELL, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT'S GRADATIONS AND ONE THING LEADS TO ANOTHER. ANY RATE, I GUESS IT'S A LITTLE SURPRISING THAT THINGS WITHIN DEFENSE ARE NOT AFFECTED BY THE MORATORIUM. SO MAYBE THAT COULD BE BROUGHT UP DURING THE MORATORIUM. THE PUBLIC KEPT SAYING THEY WANTED EVERYTHING INSIDE THE PLATES. RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT THE PUBLIC. WELL, IF THERE'S A MORATORIUM, THERE'S A MORATORIUM. NOT ON THAT PROPERTY. SO THE MORATORIUM IS RELATIVE TO INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS A, B, AND C IN CALVERTON HAMLET, RIGHT? THE CORE OF EPCAL IS PRP. YEAH, BUT IT'S I UNDERSTAND THAT. I SAY THERE ARE TECHNICAL REASONS. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, THAT WHICH IS A RATE, THAT'S A RATE, THAT'S A RATE. BUT THE FACT THAT THIS IS GOING INSIDE THE FENCE IS GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON CALVERTON. JUST AS MUCH AS THINGS OUTSIDE THE FENCE. BUT THE BUILDOUT OF THAT WAS ALREADY SUBJECT TO ITS OWN STUDY, WHICH INCLUDED A SECRET ANALYSIS. BUT IF THERE IS A MORATORIUM TO PAUSE, THEN AT ANY RATE, WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT WHEN YOU GET TO THE MORATORIUM HEARING. THERE'S BEEN A GREAT PAUSE. I MEAN, YOU REALLY HAVE TO SEE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WHAT THE MORATORIUM HAS DONE UP UNTIL THIS POINT. IT WAS JUST NOT INSIDE THE FENCE. OKAY. I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. IT'S WHY NOT INSIDE THE FENCE. BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AT THE HEARING. THE SECOND QUESTION I HAD HAS TO DO WITH, AS WAS POINTED OUT, THE LARGE NUMBER OF LETTERS THAT OBJECTED TO THE AG RESORTS. AND I THINK WE'RE ALMOST APPROACHING THE ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF ALEC LEWIS' FIRST STORY. WHICH APPEARED ON JULY 26TH. AND THE, I WANT TO READ ONE SMALL SECTION FROM THAT TO REMIND US OF WHO IT IS WE'RE DEALING WITH AND WHAT THEIR AGENDA IS REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU SAY YOUR AGENDA IS. THE NORTH FORK RESORT WOULD BE A LUXURY RESORT AND SPA ON 105 ACRES SITE ON THE NORTH FORK WINE TRAIL. THE LAND OFFERS THE POTENTIAL TO BUILD A TRULY UNIQUE CAMPUS BEACH RESORT. THE PROPERTY HAS A PRIVATE BEACH WITH OVER 600 LINEAR FEET OF COASTLINE. AND A 70 ACRE ORGANIC FARM THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THE OFFERING OF AN ORGANIC FARM TO TABLE EXPERIENCE. AWRE IS LOOKING TO BUILD A FIVE-STAR RESORT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE PROPERTY'S NATURAL BEAUTY, PROXIMITY TO NEW YORK CITY, THE HAMPTONS AND THE NORTH FORK WINE TRAIL. THE PROPERTY IS LOOKING TO BUILD A FIVE-STAR RESORT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE PROPERTY'S NATURAL BEAUTY, PROXIMITY TO NEW YORK CITY, THE HAMPTONS AND THE NORTH FORK WINE TRAIL. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED LESS THAN 90 MILES FROM NEW YORK CITY AND 13 MILES FROM WEST HAMPTON BEACH. SO AGAIN, INTENTIONS SEEM TO BE GOING IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. SO MY QUESTION NOW IS WHAT YOUR TIMING IS WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THIS REZONING. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN ROLLING WOODS AND IN THE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN ROLLING WOODS AND IN THE LONG SOUND AVENUE THAT WANT TO EXPRESS YOUR OPINION AND THE QUESTION IS WHEN SHOULD THEY PLAN ON DOING THAT? WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS SCHEDULED. BUT DO YOU HAVE A PLAN AS TO WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO SCHEDULE IT? NO. OKAY. NOT RIGHT YET. IT'S STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THEN WE WILL LOOK FORWARD TO WHEN IT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THERE WERE LIKE 23 OR 24 PEOPLE. I KNOW THERE'S 23 LETTERS ON AGRITOURISM. BUT I DO HAVE TO SAY THIS BECAUSE IT'S TRUE. THERE'S 23 LETTERS ON IT AND THERE'S 35,000 RESIDENTS IN THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD. AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT TO SAY THAT I'M NOT LISTENING TO WHAT'S BEING WRITTEN IN. BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT DO FAVOR THIS THAT JUST DON'T CARE ENOUGH ABOUT IT TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE OR WRITE A LETTER. SO I DON'T WANT THE 23 PEOPLE TO THINK THAT WROTE LETTERS ARE THE WAY THAT EVERYBODY IN TOWN FEELS THAT WAY BECAUSE THEY DON'T. AND IT'S NOT FAIR. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE VOCAL PEOPLE ARE AGAINST IT. THE PEOPLE THAT EITHER DON'T CARE OR WANT IT DON'T WANT IT ENOUGH TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. AND SUPERVISOR, TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, EVEN ROB CARPENTER IN HIS LETTERS AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE LONG ISLAND FARM BUREAU STATES THEY WANT AGRITOURISM. SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT DO. WHAT KIND OF PROJECT? I MEAN, THERE IS A CERTAIN ECHO IN THE RESPONSES TO THE CRITICISM OF THE EPCAL DEVELOPMENT. YES, YOU'RE RIGHT. BUT I THINK THE FACT THAT PEOPLE CARE ENOUGH ABOUT IT, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE THE PEOPLE AROUND SOUND AVENUE OBVIOUSLY HAVE A DIFFERENT MOTIVATION JUST AS THE PEOPLE IN CALVERTON HAD A DIFFERENT MOTIVATION ABOUT EPCAL. UNDERSTOOD. IT'S A LITTLE BIT DISMISSED. THE PEOPLE IN WILLOW PONDS THAT ARE AGAINST IT, THERE WAS MOTIVATION BACK IN THE TIME WHEN WILLOW PONDS WAS BEING BUILT. AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS. RIGHT. NOW THEY'RE HAPPY BECAUSE THEY'RE LIVING IN WILLOW PONDS. WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING ELSE. WE'VE NOTICED IN IMMIGRATION THERE'S A CERTAIN TENDENCY TOWARDS PULLING THE LADDER UP AFTER YOU'VE MADE IT OVER THE WALL. THAT IS HUMAN NATURE. AND I AGREE THAT THERE IS A CONTRADICTION IN THERE. THERE WILL BE MUCH MORE CONVERSATION ON THIS TOPIC IN THE FUTURE. I PROMISE YOU. AND JOHN, I'M JUST GOING TO LET YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I'VE SEEN PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS ALONG SOUND AVENUE. AND I KNOW ANOTHER PIECE OF 60 ACRES WITH DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS JUST SOLD. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING NOT FOR HOUSES TO FILL UP THE SCHOOLS. WE'RE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO PRESERVE LAND, RIGHT, SELL TDRs AND KEEP THE VISTA THAT EVERYBODY KEEPS LOVING THAT THE FARM IS CREATED, YOU KNOW, 100 YEARS AGO AND FURTHER BACK. I'M NOT ORIGINAL. I'M NOT GOING TO EVEN ASK WHY THE 500-FOOT LINE WAS SHIFTED TO 250-FOOT. THAT'S FOR THE DISCUSSION OF THE HEARING. IT'S STILL IN PROCESS, JOHN. OKAY. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING PUBLICLY. IT WOULD PROBABLY BE A FARM STAND. AND I, WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY POINT TO HAVE A DETAILED DISCUSSION BETWEEN ME AND YOU BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONCERN ABOUT IT. ABSOLUTELY. WE JUST HAVE TO PROVIDE THE FORM. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOMEBODY COME UP HERE AND OFFER A WAY THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SOME FARM PRESERVATION ON SOUND AVENUE. WHAT ARE THE IDEAS? EVERYTHING IS NO, NO, NO. WE DON'T WANT CHANGE. WE DON'T WANT THIS. WE DON'T WANT THAT. CHANGE IS COMING IN SOME FORM. SO PUT YOUR HEADS TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT SOMETHING ELSE. LET'S SEE IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER. YOU LOOK TO THE WEST OF US, YOU SEE HOW CHANGE IS COMING. YOU LOOK AROUND GREENPORT. ALONG THE SHORE THERE, YOU SEE ANOTHER KIND OF CHANGE. THEY DON'T HAVE THE LAND DEPTH THERE. BUT THE CONCERN THAT PEOPLE HAVE, BUT AGAIN, THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS DISCUSSION IS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, WHY YOU CAN'T JUST SAY THE LAND IS ONLY FOR AGRICULTURE. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT CAN'T BE ZONED ONLY FOR AGRICULTURE. IF THAT'S THE GOAL, WHY THAT ISN'T A LEGAL POSSIBILITY. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS A RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT ISN'T A LEGAL POSSIBILITY. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS A RIGHT. TO DO WHAT THEY WANT WITH THE LAND. I'M GOING TO ZONE YOUR HOUSE, JOHN, THAT YOU CAN ONLY GROW TOMATOES IN IT AND TAKE THE HOUSE DOWN. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. PEOPLE HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. SO WE JUST LET IT MARCH EAST. JOHN, TO THE COUNCILWOMAN'S POINT, WE WELCOME YOUR SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING. ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO, YOU KNOW, WRITE IN SOLUTIONS AND PLEASE WRITE IN THEM ON HOW TO PRESERVE THE NORTH SIDE OF SOUND AVENUE, WRITE THEM IN. BECAUSE IF WE DON'T. CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT WOULD BE ZONED UP THERE. THE WHOLE THING. THAT'S ANOTHER ARGUMENT ABOUT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS AND RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS. IT'S NOT AN ARGUMENT. THAT'S THE QUESTION OF WHAT THE PREMISE IS OF THE ZONING. COME UP WITH SOME SOLUTIONS. WE LOVE IT. LET'S GO. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ONLINE. WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE ONLINE. LET'S GO. CAN YOU HEAR US. OKAY. I WANTED TO BEGIN BY SAYING JOB WELL DONE TO THE PLANNING STAFF MEMBER WHO SAW AND REPORTED THE UNPERMITTED GO-KART USE AT SCOTT'S POINT. I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT PERSON IS, BUT THEIR ABILITY TO SEE SOMETHING AND KNOW IT'S WRONG AND DO THE RIGHT THING REALLY IS COMMENDABLE. JUST A LITTLE BIT ON THAT TOPIC FURTHER. IF YOU'VE SEEN THE AERIAL PHOTO, THE PAVED TRACK THAT THEY PUT IN THERE IS RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE LAKE AND IT RAISES CONCERNS OF CONTAMINATION FROM RUNOFF AND IT POSES THE QUESTIONS OF WHERE AND HOW THE FUEL FOR THE GO-KARTS HAS BEEN STORED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS INVESTIGATED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUT THE LAKE AS WE KNOW IS FED BY THE AQUIFER AND ALONG WITH THE ENJOYMENT AND THE PRIVILEGE OF OPERATING SUCH A BUSINESS COMES THE RESPONSIBILITY TO REALLY BE A GOOD STEWARD OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND JUST TO BE A DECENT NEIGHBOR IN THE FACE OF SUCH A PRECIOUS RESOURCE AS OUR WATER. SUPERVISOR HUBBARD, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS EARLIER. I WAS LISTENING. I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID. AND IT'S MY HOPE THAT EVERY MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD WILL AGREE TO HAVE A ZERO-TOLERANCE POLICY WHEN DEALING WITH ANY ISSUES RELATED TO CONTAMINATION BECAUSE WE KNOW IT IS AN ISSUE RIGHT NOW AT EPCAL. SPEAKING OF GROUNDWATER AND SCOTT'S POINT, I UNDERSTAND A CONDITION OF THE SCOTTSDALE. THE CONDITION OF THE SCOTTSPOINT OPERATIONS WAS TO ENTER INTO A GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN. IN FEBRUARY, I FOILED FOR THAT AGREEMENT. AND I DID NOT RECEIVE IT. SINCE THEN, I HAVE FOLLOWED UP A HANDFUL OF TIMES WITH THE TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE AND THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. AND I NEVER GOT A RESPONSE. CAN YOU SHED SOME LIGHT ON WHAT THE STATUS IS REGARDING THAT AGREEMENT? I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO. I FORWARDED YOUR EMAIL EARLIER THIS WEEK TO DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY DANIELLE HURLEY, WHO IS OVERSEEING THE FOILS. AND IF SHE HASN'T GOTTEN BACK TO YOU YET, SHE SHOULD GET BACK TO YOU SHORTLY. OKAY. DO WE KNOW IF JUST BASICALLY IS THAT AGREEMENT IN PLACE? IS IT BEING UTILIZED? IS SCOTT'S POINT DOING WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO ON THEIR END? I DIDN'T NEGOTIATE THAT AGREEMENT, SO I'M NOT SURE. I WOULD HAVE TO. I WOULD DEFER TO MS. HURLEY TO PRODUCE WHATEVER IS IN THE FILE FROM THE FOIL. OKAY. THEN I LOOK FORWARD TO HER ANSWER. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. THANK YOU, KELLY. ONE MORE ONLINE, CHIP? ONE MORE? OH, GOD. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, RON HURLEY OF AQUABOG. I WANT TO THANK THE PRIOR SPEAKERS, INCLUDING THE CIVIC PERSON OF THE YEAR, JOHN MCAULIFFE, AND CATHY MCGRAW TO POINT OUT THE OVERWHELMING OPPOSITION TO YOUR COCKAMANY IDEA OF MASSIVE AND DANGEROUS CONTROL OF THE CIVIC RESORTS TEARING UP OUR SOUNDFRONT. WE ALSO KNOW BASED UPON A WONDERFUL EXPOSE BY DENISE CIVILETTI IN RIVERHOOD LOCAL THAT BOTH MISSERS HUBBARD AND ROTHWELL RECEIVED A COUPLE OF THOUSAND DOLLARS FROM ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS. MY QUESTION IS, IN THE E-MAIL TRAIL THAT WAS PROVIDED IN RIVERHOOD LOCAL, ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS SAID, I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THE SITUATION OF THE AGRI-TOURISM LEGISLATION. ONE OF YOUR OTHER DONORS, MR. PETRUCCELLI, WAS COPIED REGARDING THE DRAFTING OF THE AGRI-TOURISM LEGISLATION. DO ANY OF YOU AS YOU SIT HERE AND PERHAPS COUNCIL CAN ADVISE BECAUSE YOUR DEPUTY COUNCIL WAS THE PERSON SENDING THE E-MAILS, MS. PRUDENTI, WHY MR. PETRUCCELLI WAS NOT ABLE TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION ON THE SITUATION? I THINK THAT WAS COPIED ON THOSE E-MAILS REGARDING AGRI-TOURISM. JOHN, THIS IS OPEN. I MEAN, RON, THIS IS OPEN COMMENT SESSION. SO WHAT IS YOUR COMMENT? THIS ISN'T QUESTION IN INQUISITION TIME AS WE'VE TOLD YOU IN THE PAST. IT'S OPEN COMMENTS. CAN YOU PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION? YES. MY COMMENT IS THIS IS A SENSITIVE AREA. YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO AVOID EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY. AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO YOU, COUNCILMAN HUBBARD AND COUNCILMAN WROTHWELL, I SINCERELY DOUBT THAT YOU GOT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE OF YOUR WITTY REPARTE AND GOOD LOOKS. SO I WANT TO KNOW WHETHER THERE'S AN EXPLANATION WHY THIS INDIVIDUAL WAS COPIED ON THESE SENSITIVE E-MAILS REGARDING THIS AGRI-TOURISM PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO GO TO THE NEXT QUESTION. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MR. HURRY. HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. CUT HIM. BUT HE DID SAY I HAVE GOOD LOOKS. WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? IT'S OPEN COMMENT PERIOD. WE GO THROUGH THIS WITH HIM TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN. AND IF HE CAN'T FIGURE THAT, HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE AN ATTORNEY. IF HE CAN'T FIGURE THAT, I'M SORRY, BUT HE'S RUDE, DISRESPECTFUL. AND I SAID RIGHT FROM DAY ONE, I WILL NOT TOLERATE THAT IN THIS BOARD ROOM. AND IF THAT'S HOW YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT YOURSELF, I'M GOING TO TOLERATE THAT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT YOURSELF, YOU WILL NOT BE HEARD. OR IF YOU COME IN HERE, YOU WILL BE ESCORTED OUT. AND SUPERVISOR, IF I COULD, IF MR. HURRY CONTACTS DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY PRUDENTI, I'M SURE SHE WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE HIM AN EXPLANATION. THE FOIL FOR THAT WAS IN RESPONSE TO THAT FOIL WAS RELEASED MONTHS AGO. SO IF HE HAD THAT QUESTION, I'M SURE HE COULD HAVE HE'S HAD TIME SINCE THEN TO POSE THAT TO MS. PRUDENTI. THANK YOU. WE AGREE. ANYBODY ELSE ONLINE? NO? ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE AUDIENCE? HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND, EVERYBODY. ENJOY SUMMER. IT'S HERE. THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT. WHAT MAKES YOU SAY SUMMER IS HERE? SUMMER IS HERE. I HAD A MOTION TO ADJOURN. CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AND WOSKI SECONDED. 733. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. I THOUGHT I HEARD BOB. I'M WELCOME. [transcription gap] Thank you.