Full Transcript
Thank you. Thank you. On November 4th, 2024, we're here for a town board meeting. And as we start all of our meetings, if we could please all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilor Howard, would you mind leading us? Sure, thank you. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Councilor.
Okay, we normally start out with an invocation, and I believe we're supposed to have Reverend Lou Sanmaritano from the Calvary Baptist Church. Come on up to the microphone, sir, and thank you for coming today. Thank you. Well, let us pray. Dear wise and loving Father, First Lord, we thank you on behalf of all who are gathered here today. Thank you for your many abundant blessings. Thank you for life itself. For the measure of health we need to fulfill our callings, for the sustenance, for the friendship. Thank you for the ability to be involved in useful work, and for the honor of bearing appropriate responsibilities. Thank you, Lord, for the freedom we have in this nation. Thank you for your common grace that comes from your boundless and gracious nature, in whom all good gifts come upon us. In scriptures, Lord, you said that you have established governing, of our authorities to promote peace, order, and justice, and that we are to pray for them. And we pray now in your name, first, that your name will be hallowed among us in this land, that God, your kingdom will come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. I pray for you to grant them wisdom to govern in a manner that's pleasing to you. I pray, Lord, that you would turn hearts to you, that the only name which we must be saved is through Jesus, We pray for a sense of welfare and true needs of our people, a keen thirst for justice and righteousness, confidence in what is good and fitting, the ability to work together in harmony even when there is honest disagreement, personal peace in all of our lives, and joy in the tasks that you've given us. I pray for the agenda set before them today, and for all the people, please give an assurance of what would please you and would benefit those who live and work in Riverhead Township. It is in Jesus' name, the name above all names, I pray. Amen. Thank you, Reverend. Okay, I have a couple announcements to start off with. Today, as we all know, is the first day of school for Riverhead Central School District. Good luck to all the students and teachers getting back to the swing of things. Town Board and I wish you all a successful, prosperous, and fun academic year. This Saturday, September 7th, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Riverhead Recreation will host the 27th Annual Snapper Tournament down at the Peconic Riverfront. On-site registration will begin at the Town Dock at 9 a.m. Good luck to all the young anglers out there. Also happening Saturday is the first of a three-part series we are calling, Meet the New Police. Chief Frost is here in the back. Residents are invited to attend the Riverhead Senior Center this Saturday from 11 to 1 for an informal, casual, conversational setting in which you can ask questions and share concerns or ideas with the newly appointed police chief, Ed Frost. I want to thank Chief Frost for his willingness to participate, and I know we are both looking forward to this event. And there are two more events coming up in the next couple of weeks, and I will announce those. One is going to be at Riley Avenue School, and one is going to be here at Town Hall. Okay, that's what I have for announcements. We have a video. Is the video ready? Okay, we have a video we're going to show you, part of our Riverhead in Action video, where we try to promote the good and the positive of the town.
Hi, this is Chief Frost. I'm Tim Hubbard, supervisor of the great town of Riverhead, and you're watching Riverhead in Action, a media campaign designed to highlight the incredible work of the 350-plus employees that comprise Riverhead's 26 departments and sub-departments, town events, projects, job openings, local businesses, and other town happenings. I hope you find this informative and enjoyable, and thank you for watching Riverhead in Action. Hi, this is Councilman Ken Rothwell. As co-liaison with Supervisor Hubbard to the Riverhead Police Department, I am pleased to further highlight some of the recent accomplishments within the Riverhead Police Department under the direction of our newly appointed police chief, Ed Frost. Riverhead swore in its new police chief, Ed Frost, a 30-year veteran of the Riverhead Police Department, on July 3rd. Chief Frost, with his family at his side, was flanked by officers from the Riverhead Police Department and many surrounding agencies as he took the oath of office. We now begin to write the next chapter for the Riverhead Police Department. While there continues to be further movement and matriculation within the department, including Sergeant Brian Clements being promoted to lieutenant, surrounded by family, friends, and his fellow officers, for the promotional ceremony. In addition, two new probationary police officers, Ryan Waskey and Gina Falsetta, both from Riverhead, began their law enforcement careers at the academy. I am incredibly proud of the work our officers and I know my fellow town board members agree, the work our police do is absolutely invaluable to our community. They keep us safe and regularly, without hesitation, put their lives on the line. In short, they are heroes. There is no greater example of this heroism than when police officers Dahlem, Lenardi, Suprina, and Sergeant Rossini recently ran into an active burning home on Newton Avenue in the middle of the night, rescuing its occupants. They did this with no fire safety equipment and never hesitated. Their quick actions saved the lives of three local residents. Whether it's a house fire on Newton, an oil accident on Route 105, or a medical call, or a police call, they are all heroes. They bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely bravely department for all the fine work the men and women of that agency do for us okay mr. Wooten do we have any correspondence I don't I don't think so actually we had we had quite a bit of letters come in actually over over 120 but actually was more than that because actually was more than that because it was a lot of me to what I call me two letters which were just people signing like a petition type letter so those I just included names I didn't scan all of those I just can't one and then just add all the names of people that copied it we'd see the support in agritourism and then comp plan some about the meeting date and wanted to change the time and we had quite a bit of letters from people in favor of the charter school expansion so all those letters can be seen in their actual verbiage on the website and you can look at peruse every one of them and they're all from some well thought-out letters and some downright angry letters but they're all there for you to peruse and under reports we had no reports for this meeting I think we have we got one in this morning from the building farm which will be in the next meeting as well as the town clerk one and that's it okay thank you sir all right at this point in time we have two public hearings scheduled for today the first one listed as a public hearing for chapter 293 waterways and water related activities has been cancelled it was posted with some incorrect information on it so we're going to repost it with the correct information and have it on for our next town board meeting and the second public hearing we have is scheduled for 210 it is now 210 217 rather it is now 217 p.m. and this is a public hearing on chapter 221 community preservation and I would ask Anne Marie Prudente to please come up to the microphone so this is very straightforward this is a resolution to create an advisory committee for community preservation fund water quality improvement projects and pollution prevention projects it's going to consist of five individuals a representative from Community Development Agency and the ! economic development town attorney water district and financial administrator okay do we have any comments from anybody in the room regarding this public hearing do we have none online also they're telling me in the back okay then at this point in time I would close the public hearing and keep it open for written comment until August 14th 2024. September 14. That would be September. I'm still trying to hope it's summertime but it's not. It's gone. Yeah. Wait. August just blew by. September 14th at 4.30 p.m. We'll keep it open for written comment. Okay. Now we are going to open up the meeting for comments on resolutions. Comments on any resolution. That. That's on today's schedule. Hi. Laura Jen Smith from Laurel. Good afternoon. My first comment on the resolution is still and I think you received a lot of letters towards that. When you first came into office you said that any meeting that was going to be held to vote on or make any kind of motion on that was important to the community would happen at an evening meeting. Yet here we are in the middle of a meeting and we're not going to have a meeting. We're going to have a meeting in the afternoon. [transcription gap] Here we are looking to finalize the Com Plan and it's a 2 o'clock meeting. So I just would like to point out the inconsistency in that. I think we're all aware of that, Laura. Thank you for pointing that out. Okay. But you didn't change the meeting. Yeah. So you kept it at 2. So my other comment is on the Com Plan.
Which is, I don't know which resolution number it is on here. So a couple of things. Could you please? I know you put out a press release about the agritourism resorts being removed from there. Could you just say exactly what you've done to the Com Plan so we know? What we've done is as the community has requested and many other people also besides the people in this room, we removed anything regarding agritourism resorts out of the Com Plan. So the Com Plan that we'll be voting on today has nothing regarding agritourism resorts. We removed all the wording, the paragraphs, all that indicated that would allow this to happen on a certain area off north of Sound Avenue. That's all been removed. So it's no longer part of our comprehensive plan. Of the update for the Com Plan? Yep. So could you just? Could you just? Come on, folks. So just to clarify. So the meeting for September 18th, is that still moving forward? No reason to have it. [transcription gap] Because there's no reason to discuss agritourism resorts because they don't exist. So that code, there'll be no further movement on the code for agritourism resorts Correct. ... on sound. ... sound. [transcription gap] to be honest with you. Yeah, I think it's a good thing for Riverhead's future. I think it would have been disastrous over there. I really do. So one other thing on the comp plan that I just wanted to comment on, we have brought this up several times for the Jamesport Civic as far as the nonconforming uses go that are in this comp plan. We've sent quite a few letters about them being in here. And I just went over some of the stuff today. So, you know, there's a lot of nonconforming uses in the town of Riverhead. And going through these, I just find it, and maybe you can explain it to me, but of the ones that were pulled out for this town, several of them are properties owned by and businesses owned by the same family. So I'm just, it strikes me as odd that BFJ would come up with these particular parcels that are owned by the same family that have nonconforming uses that are looking to make them conforming uses. So I'm just asking the town board, you know, are you aware of that? And, you know, does it raise any questions for you that that is in here? It doesn't raise any question for me because I think it's pretty obvious that the business owners that have spoken out and requested certain things to be put into the comp plan have requested that to be done. And we listened to that and we decided to do it. I mean, one of the, and they're all by the same owner, right? I don't know that they're all by the same owner. But there's a few of them that have the same person. You know, in South Jamesport there is many nonconforming uses. You know, for one, the glass greenhouse. You know, we have, but that's not South Jamesport. But that's also been a nonconforming use that has been a big issue in this town. The town has spent a lot of money over where Vinland Commons is when they wanted to put a 7-Eleven in and put retail in and everything else. The town spent taxpayers dollars to make sure retail did not go in there. And now you're sanctioning it. it with the with the with this comp plan so I just would like to bring that up and and see if there is you know any any bandwidth to take this portion of the comp plan and remove it from from here so I don't support that board members does anybody else support that I always keep in mind Laura that any this there's nothing in this comp plan that is code and you know that right so when a project comes up it's going to go to a public hearing and then the people can voice you know their opinion on and I think you know that as well so I guess I guess my point is a non-conforming use was was okay when it was built it fit into the zoning and then through the 2003 comp plan they the zoning was changed and they no longer conform to the use in that location and basically with what's in here you're saying even though it's non-conforming and doesn't conform to the use we're gonna up zone it and you're up zoning particular parcels that are pretty much cherry picked out of neighborhoods and you know it's very odd to especially that they have the same owner so I'm just would like to bring that to your attention thank you folks we're gonna I'm usually pretty lenient on the time but I am gonna try to keep it to the time limit today because of the number of people that are here you 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 that's of great concern of the school system and also of the town board. And I don't know, we still haven't seen a report on what weapon was used, but I don't know if AR-15s are available. And- The President Okay, John, we got to keep to the resolution. The President Okay, all right. I just want to recognize- The President I understand that and I appreciate that. The President Okay. All right, on the resolutions. First of all, I also want to express appreciation for what you decided to do. Obviously, the number of people here today is- and the letters you received indicate the level of concern. I also appreciate the fact that you notified us yesterday afternoon about it. Now, in the Riverhead local story, it was- your position was eloquently stated about the future of this- of the Ag Resorts project. But- The President I appreciated your clear clear clear clear clear board members individually. You're up here to make comments. I think it would be helpful. I can tell you I don't support it. You were very clear and eloquent. I'm puzzled. When I looked at the agenda online, there was a resolution establishing your advisory group on EPCAL. Unless my eyes are going bad, I don't see it in this list. That was pulled simply because it was not support from the board to put that through. I see. There's difference of opinion on that advisory group. Correct. Obviously, I think that's a loss if that's not It doesn't mean that the committee is not staying and going forward. It's the supervisor's right to have an ad hoc committee. That is my ad hoc committee and I will continue with that ad hoc committee. What we thought we did is because we had something similar that Councilman Kern put together on an Energy Commission committee and they did it by resolution, so we thought we would do the same thing for this committee to give the public the knowledge that this committee exists. We have already discussed it. We brought it to work session. All my board members that were here publicly supported it, but when it came to resolution for a vote, there was some concern about it and so I withdrew it and it's not going to affect anything to do with the committee continuing. I think it's going to go forward. All right. Well, as I said, last meeting at Cal Watch would be very happy to do some kind of public forum with that advisory group. Those will be coming in the future. Okay. Very good. Well, thank you very much. You're welcome. Happy to be positive. Thank you, John.
Kathy McRaw, North Ville. I, too, would like to thank the board for removing agritourism resorts from the comp plan. The comp plan is supposed to be the community's vision for Riverhead over the next 10 to 20 years, and I think it's pretty clear we don't want resorts, and I thank you for doing the right thing. But that said, there's still a whole lot of work to be done. We have to come up with alternative ways to preserve agricultural lands. And sadly, the expensive, seemingly never-ending comp plan that you are about to adopt doesn't really help at all. Doesn't come up with any really good ideas for preservation. I think it's really important that the summit like you had scheduled for the 18th, which was on ag resorts, should be initiated, but it should be initiated to get input from the community, there are a lot of smart people in this community. You need financial input, you need planning input, and I think that some kind of a committee or a group to study this is really important. Because the comp plan doesn't lay it out for us, and preservation is really important to the people of Riverhead.
Kathy, if I can just jump on that and say part of our discussion yesterday when we came to the agreement to remove this out of the comp plan was to form a task force, if you will, for lack of a better word, of the public to work on land preservation, especially farm preservation, but land preservation. That's the one thing out of this whole agritourism that I'm sad that it's not going forward, because I did like the idea about how it could preserve land. But there were too many other factors with it, and I think that we had to give up in order to preserve that land. And I think there's got to be better ways, if we work collectively as a community, to sit down and figure this out, better ways to preserve the land without disturbing or ruining the land, if you will. And maybe ruining is not the right word, but to try to keep it as rural as we can. I think the collapse of Roanoke Point was a message, and you all got the message. We don't want building on the cliffs. Just one last question. I'm curious to know, you're about to adopt the Comp Plan update, and it is called an update. Does this Comp Plan update replace the 2003 Comp Plan? Yes. In all manners of speech, it will, in fact, replace the 2003. But there's many things in the 2003 that coincide with the 2024. It's just that the 2003 is 20-some-odd years later, and the world has changed, and so has the way things are developed and produced, and technology, and everything else. So it doesn't mean that we can't go back to 2003 and look at some of those things and continue them on. Again, this is not code. This is just a recommendation. So with those recommendations, now the job becomes, and it's kind of the hard part of it, is picking out of that and codifying the things that we want to use in the Comp Plan, and make sure that they're going to work for us for the next 10 or 15 years. Okay. I just want to be careful about that because, Ms. Merrifield, you made a point that the 2003 Comp Plan had hotels north of Sound Avenue. And I don't want that version of the 2003 Comp Plan to be relied upon in the future when you try to change zoning to put in hotels or resorts. Because it's clear the community doesn't want that. I would disagree, though, because I think that it doesn't replace the 2002 Comp Plan. Yeah, this is what I was afraid of. It's an additional resource to it. It's an additional book of recommendations. So we may have a difference of opinion, but I don't believe that you completely wash away what was done in the past. You have a revised copy with revised recommendations. So this is where our battle lies. Then you begin from that point to codify what's in there, and then you choose to and how you work off of it. In my opinion, I believe this new Comp Plan supersedes the old Comp Plan. Thank you, Ms. Merrifield. This is clearly the community's desire. Kathy, I love the fact I read all the emails and what I was looking for was we try to come up with solutions to preserve what we have. 60% of the people and probably most of the people in here have a house on farmland is my guess. I'm not saying that anybody that hasn't lived here for like 10 years They don't know where the farmland was. Target used to be farmland. This all used to be farmland, people, so you can't say that. But you know what I look for most of all is for ideas. I understand people are against things, but nobody's given me like, okay, here's another suggestion. We're not geniuses. Well, that's what we need. We need a task force. And what's going to happen is we are going to go out to the civics and explain from a 30,000 foot view what's going on in the town. Okay? So everybody gets the entire picture that we get on a daily basis. I think that's only fair. We welcome that. Thank you. Thank you, Kathy.
My name is Frederick Terry, Sr. I'm a senior. Forgive my throat. I'm on the tail end of pneumonia. And I was hoping that infection wasn't perpetuated by somebody on this town board because they wouldn't let me speak. I was also worried as I just came down in the elevator with Mr. Frost that he might have a warrant for my arrest due to my recent writings to the town board and other public forums. But that didn't occur either. I'm sorry. I serve in a very, very unique position in this town. My original address was Meeting House Creek Boulevard, Huckabuck Park, Acubog, New York. And until recently, nobody ever heard of that. The land grant that James Terry got was from Dreamers Cove to the Iron Pier. And then Daniel Terry took over that land grant. It was at that time called Frogtown, something many of you don't know because I found many people don't know a damn thing about Frogtown. And I found a lot of people don't know about the North Road, which is now called Sound Avenue. So, they don't know that David Crowley was saved on the beach in front of the Terry Farm in 1860 and brought to the Hutchinson House. They don't know that Roanoke Point was full of small cottages, one which was called the Jolly Dozen Club, where my grandfather died two hours after he attended that with the 12 major farm families that lived on the North Road and Bading Hollow. Don't underestimate my appearance. I'm 80 years old. I have a little bit... I will be entering the contest for the Fossil Bench Press this year. Mr. Terry, you're going to have to get on to what resolution you're speaking about. I will get on. Okay. I would like to say, with some authority that this is an excellent comprehensive plan. I think the Town Board did a superb job. If you really do the analysis, you compare it to another local town's comprehensive plan, which I happen to have a member of my family help write. It is an excellent comprehensive plan. I do not know how in hell we got blindsided by somebody who decided to include agritourism on the North Side of the town. I don't know how in hell we got blindsided of the last pristine bucolic country road in this town. It is without question the most misguided piece of legislation I've ever seen introduced in my 80 years. My DNA goes through the Youngs, the Hallocks, the Terrys, the Wells, the Lahamadoos. I'm very pleased that my father married out of the family so my mother would not be my cousin. when you're 12th generation you have a vested interest in this north road and you have a vested interest in the comprehensive plan of this town the last gem in this town is the north road i will guarantee you that i have property there i am restoring the oldest and last barn there it's the one where you see blue christmas lights that's all you're going to see there there are many who think i'm building a casino i'm not building a casino i'm building a family center so that my family can enjoy the north road of sound avenue thank you for your time thank you mr terry afternoon claudette bianco baiting hollow i also want to thank you guys for doing the right thing you and removing this from the comp plan i am however that being said very disappointed that it took hundreds of letters thousands of signatures and a potential press conference to get you to see the residents didn't want it and i hope that you've sort of learned a lesson so head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head that come to the meeting speak to a lot of our neighbors and our friends, and we represent a lot of people. So it shouldn't have taken the community in an uproar to get you to do what we want. Thank you.
Howard Reinhart. I'm a property owner out in Willow Ponds on the Sound. And I saw this resolution come up. Say your name again, sir, please. Howard Reinhart. When I saw this resolution come up on agritourism, I went to the state files and said, what is agritourism? What is the state of New York's definition of it? It does not include a hotel. It does not include a restaurant. It does not include a parking lot. So I ask, how did this committee come up with this idea that says this is agritourism? It's not. It's not even defined by the state. I'm sorry, which committee are you referring to? You said by this committee? Your town council. I mean, it should have never been in the plan to begin with. If you read the definition of agritourism, it's going out in the field, it's making maple syrup, it's picking apples, it's not a hotel. Just to clarify. A hotel is a commercial. And I'm sure if that came to fruition and was done, it wouldn't be taxed as a piece of agricultural land. It would be commercial. I live in Lake Tahoe as well. And I've seen the overdevelopment and the impact it's had. And it's atrocious. Gridlock, lack of facilities, tourism, people flood the area. It's not worth it. This is a pristine place that should be kept and controlled. It's up to you, all of you in this room, to put vigilance on this committee. Sir, sir. Don't put your . Excuse me. Yes. You addressed the board, not the audience. They need to know my. You addressed the board. Okay. But they're here for comments. It's a public forum. You addressed the board. That's what your comments are for. Okay. Then better vigilance of the committee needs to be done. This plan that you have, is this the first time this has been presented? No. Okay. So we've had presentations at. We actually had a public hearing on it about two months ago. Two months ago. Okay. And you said, have you gone to a public school and said, we're going to have a, let's show you this stuff so the public can come. That there'll be a big briefing. We had a public forum. I would have much rather seen the video on this plan than Riverhead in action. We had public forums leading up to the drafting of the comp plan. Okay. All right. I'm not aware of that. If I may, Mr. Reinhart. If I may, Mr. Reinhart, I'd just like to clarify that point for you. This board did not come up with the comprehensive plan. This comprehensive plan started back in the early 2000s. I'm not sure. But the comprehensive plan started back in 2020. It was initially by one group. It was initially one particular group. I apologize. I don't recall their name at the moment. It was taken over by BJF in 2023. Yes, Chair. It was prepared for four years. And the parts that this comprehensive plan, how this came about, four Hamlet focused public meetings. A public survey with 467 submissions. Four hundred and twenty-six. 10 topic-oriented public meetings, an online interactive map with 110 comments, stakeholder interviews. When BFJ took over, that's all with the first group that was initially doing the comprehensive plan. When BFJ took over, they held two public workshops, one in April of 23 at the Suffolk Theater, 120 participants attended. Thank you. And there was in December of 23 at Town Hall, 70 precipitants attended. Also monthly meetings were held by a steering committee, weekly meetings with town staff, ten focus group meetings. Other shareholders were targeted with outreach from civic groups, business owners, and department heads. The civic groups that did respond were the Wading River Civic, the Greater Jamesport Civic, the Heart of Riverhead, and the Greater Calvicton Civic Association. Questionnaires were sent to the town hall. The town boards, to the commissions, and to 27 groups, only 11 responded. The EAC, the conservation advisory council, the landmark preservation committee, the ARB, the recreation committee, the TDR committee, the open space committee. So there was, just so you know, sir. And agritourism was mentioned on all these. No. [transcription gap] Excuse me, sir. I'm not finished. Okay. But there was an accusation that this comprehensive plan was committed by, was prepared by this board, this committee. It was not. Okay. That's all I want to clarify for the record. I retract that statement. But there was a great. But this board's going to vote on it. There is a great deal over the past four years of public interaction to the acceptance of this. That's all I want to point out, sir. It was not prepared by us. It was a great deal of community input. That's all. And agritourism was mentioned? Yes. on all these meetings? I would know. Agritourism was brought up over two years ago. We've had multiple work sessions about it. It was initially initiated to help out the farmers with an opportunity to obtain additional land without having to purchase it. It would be a gift on behalf of the developer. Its initial concept was a low-lying inn or a spa, something that was less intrusive. So for two years, Excuse me. Folks in the audience, you will have your chance. If you cannot remain quiet, we will have you removed from the room. Let the speakers speak and let the councilmen speak. Everybody will have a chance. Do not be rude. It won't be tolerated. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor. For two years it has been. There has been multiple work sessions. The legislation that was proposed has been rewritten many times. It's not the proposal when you're thinking about an inn or a spa. We have clear clear clear clear clear clear That's not what's in the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan is a book of ideas. When this is passed today, when we wake up tomorrow, nothing has changed in Riverhead. It's a conceptual idea on how to move forward. Everything in it has to be individually codified. And so nothing is law. So we put a comprehensive plan based on community outreach, multiple meetings, all different organizations to build a book of ideas. That's what we're looking at today. When you pass it or you fail it, nothing changes. In terms of the proposal on a separate note about agritourism and the potential zone change, that is something that has been in the works for over two years. It's been drafted multiple times. We thought we had something. We went to the farmers. They raised concerns. We sent it. We redrafted. Then more concerns came up with the public. We redrafted. We've had countless meetings with individuals from the town that have come in, organizations, farming organizations. And we've redrafted again. It was redrafted as soon as even last week we made changes. And the Long Island Farm Bureau had a chance to look at it. We were going to have further discussions on the 18th. It's not a new concept. It's not something that was just initiated. It was to be a tool for our farmers. It had the potential to basically sell between $4 and $5 million of TDRs that they could purchase to local farmers. It was the opportunity for farmers out of a 100-acre parcel to get 70 acres to work on their property. At that time, we had a lot of money. We had no charge. They would be given that land so that you can have farm to table or vineyards, whatever they may choose. This is not something new concept. It was a way to say maybe less houses and maybe a better viable tax base could be implemented by a hotel which may present over $300,000 a year in property taxes. The ideas in it I still feel is a great tool. But to just say, nah, I'm not going to discuss it anymore. We can keep preserving it. We're preserving land and I firmly believe that. We need to do it. But every time you preserve land, you take something off the tax rolls. And we're going to be faced with another budget coming up at the end of the month into next month to vote on a budget. And guess what? We're probably going to be piercing the tax budget to go through. So this town needs to find ways to bring an economic revenue into the town of Riverhead so that we can survive moving forward. We're in a lawsuit with the town of South Hampton. I foresee if we lose that lawsuit, we can have 2,500 apartments being built in Flanders. And all those kids are coming back. But there's a lot of money coming into Riverhead Central School District. And how are we going to pay for them? Because the town of South Hampton doesn't reimburse us for how much it actually costs. So with that in mind, these are ideas that were put forth for discussion. You keep working on them. You keep changing. You keep amending until you get it right. And that's what we were trying to do. Okay. I'm going to ask you to wrap up because we're way beyond your time. Yes, okay. All I want to say is the definition of agritourism does not include a hotel. of agritourism does not include a hotel or restaurant. And I'm surprised that nobody, none of the planners that you hired looked at the regulation and said what does this entail? Yes, they did. Yes, they did. They would have said we can't build it. Yes, they did. BFJ looked at it and they wrote it. They can't build it. It can't be done. And at the last minute, it has now changed and it won't be done. Thank you. You're welcome. Hi. Good afternoon. Joan Sear, Jamesport. Delighted that agritourism resort development has been dropped from the comprehensive plan. I too am sorry that it took such a public outcry to get to this point. And I attended all the meetings that you had. I spoke at the public hearings that you had on the comp plan. I put little steps in the way that you had. I was surprised that you had a lot of sticky notes on maps with ideas and thoughts and recommendations and criticisms. And so I'm surprised that so many of the things that the public and the civic associations, and again, to the point that I think Ms. Bianco made, the civic associations aren't one person speaking. You know, in the case of the Greater Jamesport Civic Association, we have about 200 members. I mean, we're speaking for 200 people. But anyway, I'm surprised that given all that input that Ms. Merrifield pointed out and everything. I'm surprised that some of the things that people objected so strongly to made it to the finish line. Oh my God. And I mean, putting out a press release at 4.58 on a Wednesday afternoon that you've dropped this when the weekly newspapers have already gone to bed. When news days have already gone to bed, they can't make deadline. The timing looks a little calculated, shall I say. But that's the way it is. I just didn't have a clear head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head 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 rezoning we think it is highly unusual that the locate three of the locations mentioned out of four in the comprehensive plan are in Jamesport and aqua bog and have similar ownership as Laura Jen Smith pointed out that spot rezoning if that were to turn into code and these areas were rezoned if the spot rezoning goes through hundreds and thousands of parcels of land throughout the town could be spot rezoned it could be the parcel of land that these people each live next to so that's a risky thing the other thing is the accessory dwelling units so the comprehensive plan update proposes to eliminate the 650 square foot cap on accessory dwelling units and replace it with a recommendation that the accessory dwelling unit can be you up to 40% of the size of the main dwelling and my concern with that is people are building bigger and bigger homes now nobody wants a little 1700 square foot house like I have I'm quite happy but others are not so if you think about that if somebody bills like a 3,000 or 4,000 square foot house somebody bills a 4,000 square foot house which is not unusual these days we're looking at an accessory dwelling unit in their backyard that's 1,600 square feet that's the size of my house just about so I think the 40% of the main dwelling size is just excessive and that needs to be rethought maybe it needs to be calculated based on the square footage of the lot size because you certainly don't want a 1,600 square foot accessory dwelling unit put on a half acre lot so I think that that part of the comprehensive plan update needs to be reconsidered so the accessory dwelling units and the spot rezoning I would like you to reconsider those before you adopt the comprehensive plan so I'll head over to Cindy so she's going to head over to Cindy so she's going to head over to Cindy so she's going to head over to Cindy so she's going to We have two online right after Miss Clifford. I'll take two from online. Go ahead. I'm Miss Clifford. I'm Cindy Clifford from Riverhead. And, you know, it makes me sad and frustrated that this so often becomes contentious. And I know that it shouldn't because essentially, like some of you and I have spoken, this is like our collective town. And I know in our hearts, like we all really have Riverhead's best interest at heart. Yeah, we do. Now, you said that the comprehensive plan, it's not zoning, that when it comes, that it's recommendations and when zoning comes up, then there will be public hearings. But I want you guys to be aware, if you're not already, I mean, even judging by the number of people in the room at 2 o'clock on a Tuesday, that some of this stuff, it's like we have our hair on fire and we're in all red alert and we're having a lot of trouble. And we're having to, you know, get up and speak out and send letters and show up to say, we don't want this. So if the idea of it is in the comp plan, then for us, we're looking down the road of like, more of the same and it's exhausting. And less, you know, and I know that's not the intention for it to be exhausting. But anyway, I just wanted to point that out because it really matters. You know, it's part of like the quality of our life. We all want to have Riverhead be as good as it can be and not feel like we have to be, you know, stepping up and going, no, this is wrong. Now, when everybody saw the collapse of the bluffs on Roanoke, we felt like, well, clearly, you know, this has to stop any talk of resorts building on the zone, on the sound. And that was great. That our residents have great interest and concern in the decisions made about Riverhead is apparent. I looked at the list of letters, which Wooten, I got to say, me too letters, a little offensive. But that there are still issues in the comp plan. That we feel are either unresolved or just haven't been explained to us. Like are we piercing the apartment cap downtown? Like Ms. Sear was saying, what about accessory units? Has that been looked at closely enough that it won't be problematic down the line? The issues that have to, that we have to contend with down the road, isn't there a way that we could kind of review those beforehand with the many of us who have come forward with comments and concerns and details and suggestions? We're still not sure if those made it into the comp plan or if things were as they were before we made our comments. So I know you'll say no, or wait, let me not say I know you'll say no. I'm going to ask you to delay the vote on the comp plan today until like maybe another couple of weeks until everybody knows exactly what we're getting into. So that we can look down the road and go, we're pretty much in agreement with all this. This goes along with our vision. We're looking at the future of Riverhead. So you decide amongst yourselves. But in regard to the September 18th public forum, now I know you're not going to do that now on agritourism because agritourism is tabled. But what about having that be a public forum about the comp plan? You know, here's what it's going to be. So that everybody can know, going ahead, moving ahead. There won't be any surprises. There won't be, well wait a minute. Didn't we all say we didn't want that? Ms. Sear was right. Ms. Sear was right. Ms. Sear was right. And look, it's there anyway. So I would like you to consider that today or, you know, at some point rather than just going we're not going to have a meeting on the 18th. You already had set a date for it. So we could do that. Or to Ms. McGraw's suggestion, it could also be something regarding ideas for land preservation. So that's my two cents. Thanks. Mr. Thank you. We'll take a caller from online now. Mr. Terry, I would ask you to come back. Mr. Terry, I would ask you to wait until all speakers have spoken first. Mr. Absolutely. Mr. Since you've already been up here. Ms. Hi. I'm Sarah Standing from Bading Hollow. And I just want to support the previous speaker's notion to delay the vote on this plan. The most recent version that I saw online right before this meeting started, dated 9-4-2024, does not have a date. I just want to 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 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 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 clear page on page 207 redacted I'm sure you're all inundated with letters and phone calls and emails but just to say if that's the document that you're voting on it should be accurate thank you so much thank you we have one more online good afternoon this is Ron Hariri of Aquabog good afternoon Ron I'd like to thank the supervisor in the board for cabling agritourism but I think it's important that you know [transcription gap] you know that you use the public opposition and this experience as a bit of a learning experience you know particularly because the supervisor always expressed his desire to have a more transparent town board so some of the ingredients in this process involving agritourism are matters that you should be sensitive to the first really the first really the first really the lack of transparency and negotiations with an unelected official when all of this really should have been out out in the open and I just ask as you move forward on this legislation and any other potential legislation you do it differently in the spirit of transparency that you championed in the past years and years to come and I'm just wondering if there's the past, having these negotiations with counsel to the developer and the developer in the back room, not in the public view, was not helpful to getting the best possible result. So, I just ask that in the future you consider more public participation and open discussions from the beginning of consideration of new legislation. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have anybody else who would like to come up to speak? Hi. Ethel Sussman from South Jamesport. First, I would like to say that it's all well and good that we're all grateful for the agritourism to be eliminated from the comp plan, but it should never have been in the comp plan to begin with. And I think that it's a great opportunity for us to think about it. And I think that needs to be recognized. And the other point I would like to make is that, is the way this has been handled, I think it's disrespectful to the public to be making all these announcements at short notice, that at the last minute, at the last minute, you discover that the wrong version of the comp plan is not the right one. I do. is on the agenda, things like that. You're quite confused here. The right version is on. The right version is on. What I spoke about earlier was a public hearing. That was a public hearing that was improperly posted. Yes, well, that's what I'm talking about. You may be confused as well. No, you're talking the public hearing was on an entirely different subject. You're confused, ma'am. Really? Yes. Okay, well, whatever. Okay. This business of scheduling meetings, canceling them, and then having a meeting on one of the most important issues that our town has to consider, having it at 2 o'clock in the middle of a work day, the first day of school. There are so many things wrong with this that I don't even know what to do. I don't even need to go into it. I don't understand why in an administration that vowed to be transparent, why in the world you scheduled this meeting for this time, and I'd like to know, so I won't be confused. Well, as I stated at the last meeting, our meetings are scheduled a year out ahead of time. We have a 6 o'clock meeting. We have a 2 o'clock meeting. We have a 6 o'clock meeting. We have a 2 o'clock meeting, with some exceptions because of, certain schedules and calendars that other departments have tax hearings going on, and we can't do it on a particular night or a particular day, so we will change occasionally a date, but that's done a year out ahead of time. And that's exactly what I said. And you don't consider which items to schedule for the 2 o'clock? I do. I have put, if you've paid attention, you would notice that every hot topic, I have put on every evening meeting. So don't suggest to people that I don't, and it's not transparent, because you're incorrect. Every hot topic has been on for a night meeting. This was on for a night meeting, but due to a printing, or to an error in our minute track program, we had to cancel that meeting. The next meeting up is 2 o'clock in the afternoon. Apparently, quite a few people can make a 2 o'clock meeting, so they're here. It's televised. We're very transparent. So I take argument to your. Well, go ahead. But there's one thing about the fact that you're stating we're not transparent. This is the most transparent board you have seen in many, probably in your lifetime, or since you've been a Riverhead resident. Really? How about that? Really. Really. Well, just to be clear, since you're consider yourself transparent, I would like to request that you consider being more transparent going forward. Thank you. I think we're going into public comment at this point. Hi, my name is Catherine Leepa-Levinson. This is the first time I've ever attended this meeting, and I have to say I am ultimately very gratified that people are able to speak out and that you're able to listen back and forth. And I know I'm not supposed to address you, but thank you all. And I'm very grateful also that the agro-tourism has not come. My comment that I'd like to make to the board is a follow-up on the last speaker, that just listening and having never been here before, I think some of the concerns that were brought up by the board members are legit, like how do we receive money in Riverhead, and that this is very important. But I think we can make those comments, and forgive me for perhaps not wording it properly, it doesn't need to be cloaked in anything. I don't think we need to. I think we need to cloak something of we need money for the town of Riverhead and say it's agro-tourism, when maybe that is not the case. I think Mr. Rothwell is making a very good point. We have to figure that out. And I think we can just talk to one another without having either side, anybody, having to cover it in anything else. We need money. We need land preservation. We need to be able to speak to each other. We're worried about the crowds. We need to have an open meeting. And I would also respectfully ask that I think it would be great to have that September 18th meeting about the comprehensive plan so people can speak to it because some of my fellow residents have brought up some really good issues. And it would be great to be able to talk to you about it. And anyway, thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Kathleen, I didn't get your last name. I'm sorry. My? Lepa Levinson. It's hyphenated. Thank you. I am Frederick Terry again. I just want to speak anecdotally and maybe be a little bit helpful to the town board with a little bit of information. I have, other than the yoke of pedigree, being the oldest family on the North Fork, I've lived in many, many different occupational strata. Some of you know I have been in restaurant businesses. I've been in the restaurant business. [transcription gap] I am very famous among three-year-olds for Gingerbread University and no other people. I was a professor for 32 years in the state university system. But one of the compelling things I want to teach you now, I had an interesting experience 25 years ago because I have restaurants that were patronized by very wealthy people who like to divide up other people's things. And I looked over a table once at a restaurant I had, and the North Fork was being divided up by the largest real estate corporation in New York State. And the lady, she's the daughter of the owner of this, was making notes about, you know, the growth is going to come across Shelter Island through Greenport, and the executives there were all dividing this all up and so on. And it's wonderful to own hospitality businesses because people drink too much, and they talk too much, and then they show you too much. But I will tell you what came out of that for me, as many of these eastern towns, we're not, may not be now, and certainly we're not prepared for the influx of the Wall Street expertise that you are being inundated with right now. I've lived in that world. I change hats. I've had the great fortune of sitting in those kinds of rooms. Anecdotally, there's one other thing you need to know. This is a legacy play, and I guess you know that. Tim, you're, one of your relatives lived across the street. You're a relative of mine. You're a relative of my mother. You're a relative of my mother. And I have letters from her, which I would be happy to share with you. But the North Road being very, very important. I was sitting with my son, my granddaughter, and a great-grandson who's nine years old who overheard a discussion because he knew the family was upset about building hotels on Sound Avenue. And the nine-year-old looked at me after this heartfelt conversation I was having with my oldest son and said, my God. I hope it's going to have a water slide, Grandpa. Now, what that tells you and what it tells the audience, even though I'm not supposed to be speaking to you, is if you don't teach and in some way imbue these children with the history and the importance of these locations, the heritage behind this, every major historical society and God knows church on the North Fork is pretty much broke, by the way. I did Hallockville last year with Gingerbread to help them out. There are very deep pockets in the South Hole Historical Society, the Hallockville Society, the Bading Hollow Church and so on. And it's up to us. You guys are the keepers of the faith, so to speak. And I think you've done a very adequate job except some of these controversial blind shots, side shots that I felt I had to counterpunch against. But I'm happy to help. I just want to leave you with the thought, this is a legacy play and think to yourself when you look in the mirror tonight of what is the legacy you would like to leave to these generations ahead of you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kelly. Hi, Laura Jen Smith. I'll be quick. I just wanted to address you, Mr. Rothwell, for a minute because you said the ComPlan was just a book of ideas. It's more than that. And the community knows it's more than that. And I came up here several weeks ago and I asked about the code that you were putting in for the agritourism resorts. And the town attorney got up and rattled off section after section from the previous ComPlan saying that that was satisfied for the SECRA for that code and that it was in the ComPlan so it could move forward because it was in the ComPlan. So it carries a lot more weight than a book of ideas. So what in there matters. Only after it's codified. No, only after it's codified. Right now it's essentially a book of ideas. No. And I said, are you going to do SECRA on the code for agritourism? And I was told no, that SECRA did not have to be done on the code because of these sections that were listed in the previous ComPlan. I can rattle them off. 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.7, 7.7 from the 2003 ComPlan. We've met with you, Ms. Merrifield, and you've said the same thing. SECRA doesn't need to be done on the code before you were to pass it because it was in the ComPlan. The previous ComPlan. I'm sorry, Ms. Jensen, if that's inaccurate. I did not believe at the time that it needed SECRA. I have changed my mind on that and anything would. However, I did not say it was because it was in the prior ComPlan. I did not say it. Then what was the basis for it? That basis was my understanding of SECRA from my discussions with the planning board. I've since looked at that again and spoken with them further and I then they agreed that anything would need SECRA. Okay. I didn't have full head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head My point to all of this is it's not just a book of ideas. It carries a lot of weight. It matters what's in there. It matters what you're going to agree to putting in there. That's why the community is here. And we brought up other issues that are still in that Com Plan that could have very large effects in this town. And I think that you should consider them before you vote to this end. So, thank you. Thank you.
I just have a, Kathy McGraw again, a quick question about the Citizens Coalition Committee. Is that, I think that was the proper name, the EPCAL Committee. I'm really, I thought that was a great idea. And I watched the work session. And I watched all of the town board, I think one wasn't there, say this is terrific, we're going forward with this. And I'm curious to know why the resolution didn't come up today on that. But we did have a resolution. We did have a resolution on the Technology Committee that I think Mr. Kern, you created that is supposed to look at what's going on at EPCAL. I'm just really curious to know why the Citizens Coalition didn't get the same treatment. As I stated earlier, I had it in the packet as a resolution. Yes, yes. And I did not have board support to put it up as a resolution to pass it. So, between the work session and putting that up, something changed for the town board members. Can any of them tell us what changed? Because they were really supportive of that committee. You're not questioning board members because this is a comment period. And what I would suggest to you is to reach out to ask each board member individually why they feel that way. They will answer phone calls. They will answer emails. They will answer text. Well, are any of them willing to answer now? Yes. I have a question. I had asked the supervisor's office if we could put this on for a discussion because I would like to know the exact role of what each person is going to be doing. We really did not have any discussion. It was never brought into an executive session. And I was one of the people that would like to have the discussion to get a further understanding of exactly what this board is going to be capable of doing. Ann Marie Buerkle Anybody else want to tell the people why it changed? I realize you don't have to. But if you do, I would like to know. I'm sorry. [transcription gap] Ann Marie Buerkle I'd also point out this is a supervisor's ad hoc committee that was started by the supervisor when he took, when he came into office back at the beginning of the year. So whether the town board collectively supports it or not is irrelevant. The supervisor is entitled to have it notwithstanding that. So I think whatever the hesitancy for the rest of the town board is, is typically when you create boards, committees, whatever, there's a need to make changes. you have a specific function that they're going to serve, terms, all of that. Since it was set up as an ad hoc committee, I don't know that the town board members broadly were comfortable adopting that without further discussion. We had a simple work session on it where they explained what they had been doing, but I think it could be developed more if it's going to become a broader town committee instead of just the supervisor's ad hoc committee. So the technology committee was different. It wasn't an ad hoc committee. Mr. Kern, wasn't that your committee? Come on. Yes, it is. And how did you get that going? And how did that get implemented by resolution? So that committee is made up of people from Stony Brook University, Cornell University, Brookhaven National Labs. And people that have connections into over 150 incubators in New York State, in addition to incubators nationally and internationally. EPCAL has code. The purpose of that committee is to look at new, existing, new and emerging technology in order to bring high-paying jobs to Riverhead, period. I applaud that. I think it's wonderful. But I think a citizen's... I think a citizen's input to the committee is important. And I think that the entire U.S. coalition deserves the same weight and input. And I just don't get why at that work session everybody was gung-ho, wanted this to be done, and now it doesn't get done by a resolution. Kathy, I don't think you understand what the supervisor said. The committee is going to continue. I do. I do understand. I'm trying to grasp why the rest of the board doesn't feel that way. I just didn't get what she said. I didn't get what she said. [transcription gap] I didn't get what she said. [transcription gap] Thank you, Cathy. Adele Wallach, Riverhead. I just have to say something here because I'm sitting there fuming. I think that you believe to be the only transparent board in the history of Riverhead, but I think that you hate people being disrespectful. That had to have been one of the most disrespectful comments I've ever heard, especially considering that the first woman supervisor of Riverhead is sitting in the room. That would be assuming that her board and her administration was not transparent. So I think that you owe her an apology, and I think that that was really, really out of line. I cannot believe that you have the nerve to sit there and say that, as if you are the only transparent board in the history of Riverhead, which is what exactly Mr. Rothwell said. Well, I will tell you, I worked under the first lady supervisor in the town of Riverhead, and her board and her supervisor's office was not as transparent as what you have right now here today. I learned from my mistakes back then, and I corrected them now to move on to a transparent board. I'm very proud by that, and I stand by that. Ann Marie. I think it's important to correct the record. When I appeared and cited Chapter & Verse from the 2003 Comp Plan. I didn't have clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear That was in direct response to being asked a question whether it was supported by the comp plan. I was never asked nor commented on CEQRA. That was Matt Charter's. It was not me. So it's important when people come up to the podium and make statements, they're accurate. I agree 100%. We have anybody online? Two people? John just hang on a minute. John? I have people online? I'm waiting. Okay. As you see, I struggled to get here. Okay. Noah? Noah Levine. Oh, hello, Tom. Hi, Noah. Can you hear us? I can. I can. I'm just here to answer any questions you might have about the !
The process for the town board. I don't have any comments. Of course, I'm not a member of the public. But if there are any clarification questions you have for me, I'm happy to be of assistance. Thank you, Noah. Okay. We have one more online. I'm sorry. Noah Levine is the head of BFJ planning. He's the one who completed our comprehensive plan, worked on it from day one to hopefully the ending today. So. Do we have them online or no? Can I let Angela go? Angela, go ahead. Good afternoon. Angela DeVito, South Jamesport. I just have a question of clarification on the vote for the comprehensive plan today. There was a call in by a town resident from Bading Hollow, Sarah Steele, and a couple of other people. They were asking if they could come in and talk about the comprehensive plan. And I think they did. They did. [transcription gap] The documents we have up here today are the ones that have been redacted, and as soon as the vote is passed, the redacted version will be put online. Okay, thank you. John McCalla, Froenhoek Landing. I went online and the version that is online is redacted. Oh, it is redacted. So it has, at page 207, does not have anything about ag resorts. We've had a lot of history, and I'm afraid I need to also say something about the resolution in terms of history to Mr. Rothwell. I mean, it may be that something happened that I'm not aware of, but when I, both in my recollection and other people's recollection, of what happened in meetings and what was online, the first reference I could find to ag resorts in public, I mean, it's not to say private conversations didn't happen, but in public, was the December 13th, 2023 public forum in this room. And the comments that were made in notes on the board, and I think, I don't remember if people talked about it too, but the sentiment was predominantly negative about ag tourism. So or about, not ag tourism, about ag resorts. So the mystery that people were trying to get at is how ag resorts comes into the further iterations of the comprehensive plan. Where, who was the initiator, sponsor, motivator of adding in that. Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. Okay. took place I don't know the the last thing I wanted to say is that I mean I can imagine all hearing could you just delay further the vote and I understand administratively you resist that you don't want to do that because we've spent so much time on it I think there are other kinds of concerns that have been pre-empted by the concern about the AG resorts and since you don't seem to have an external deadline that forces you to act today if you can put off till the next evening meeting this particular resolution and give people the breathing space to now that there's no longer anxiety about the AG resorts to give them the time to review it again and to come back and see if there's any other concerns. I think that's a great question. I think that's a great question. I think that's a great question. I would just like to clear clear Because it may just be questions and clarifications, not opposition. But that, if I were in your position, I'd probably say that's very nice, but let's get this off the table. But that would be my personal suggestion that maybe you hold off until the next meeting, which is an evening meeting, to adopt this resolution. Thank you, Mr. McCullough. Okay, I want to thank everybody for their comments. We are now going to move on. Oh, sorry. Do you want me to go online? Is online ready? Okay, let's go online to Karen Kemp. Takwee, just hang on a second. Hi, Karen Kemp. I live in Calverton, and I appreciate all the work that has gone into the comprehensive plan. It's a very big document. However, I don't feel like it is a vision. I just have so much to talk about. [transcription gap] do to the people who live in calverton um you missed an opportunity to focus uh industrial development in ethical you have this you know huge swath of land that's isolated from all the neighborhoods um and furthermore there are farm stands all along middle country road on the north side and then on the south side you're going to have warehouses and that's just terrible and i also i was curious i didn't get a chance to look at this updated version are there warehouse definitions for like high key warehouse logistics centers um are we going to prevent those from being located along middle country road are there definitions for warehouses in the comp plan
noah do you want to so you have a head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head in and of itself. So I think the supervisor said that, you know, when the comp plan is adopted, none of the recommendations are going to be, you know, immediately law. Those things need to be worked out by the town board and any zoning changes would have further comment periods and seeker analysis and so on. With regard to warehouses specifically, we did recognize that that is an area that needs some further analysis, specifically the definitions of what warehouses are. So there is a recommendation for the town to define warehouses and the specific types of warehouses, whether it be, you know, High Cube or logistics and so on, and what would or would not be allowed in each district. However, that's a follow-up action that the town needs to undertake. We just acknowledge that that's an issue that needs to be addressed. We can't solve everything with the comp plan, but we can certainly move, you know, the ball you know, so to speak, down the road and point the town in the right direction so that you can get some of these things done. We can't solve all of the problems at this point, but we can point to what needs to be solved. Male Speaker 1 Thank you, Noah. Thank you, Ms. Kemp. Ms. Thank you. Thank you. Male Speaker 1 Do we have Takwe?
Takwe Turchin Good afternoon. My name is Takwe Turchin from Rarehead. I'm Calverton Civic President, Calverton Civic. I'm very glad to be here today. It is a 2 o'clock in the afternoon meeting. Don't let that make you think with all the folks that are here present that we're able to come here at a 2 o'clock meeting. Much sacrifice has been made, and there are still many people who are not able to make it here today. I'd like to acknowledge one of the previous speakers, Ms. Bianco, who's from Calverton Civic. Many of the civic representatives, as far as the civic, the presidents are concerned, have been here to the microphone on a regular basis, and you know that. And we speak for hundreds of people when we come to see you and talk. Please don't discount Ms. Bianco's words as only her own. She is what we call in Calverton a neighborhood leader. We have 11 of them. They represent their neighborhoods, and their neighbors speak to each of our neighborhood leaders. And then we are introduced. Their information is passed through their neighborhood leaders and brought to me and to our board. Probably five to seven times we civic leaders have been before this microphone to speak about requesting no agritourism in our comp plan update. So getting it removed yesterday late afternoon, it's a difficult thank you. However, 50 years ago, Sound Avenue was designated a historic corridor. Nothing was done beyond that designation for 50 years until you yesterday took action to absolutely expunge, not table, expunge agritourism hotel resorts from Sound Avenue. And thank you for confirming that today.
I am also resubmitting a letter from our civic that was directed to BFJ in March, and it's a short letter. I'm not going to recite it to you, but I will. Ms. Kemp, who's also from our civic, spoke on some of the pieces that are in here. She's one of the signers. I would point out, since Noah clarified for us what can and cannot be in the comp plan, obviously it's not codified, a codified plan. It's a codifying document. We would like to have reevaluated the following language such as urban areas, urbanizing, and California industrial district as incongruous to the meaning of the area and should not be used to describe the rural hamlet of Calverton. I'll submit this to you, to the clerk. Again, you do have record of it. I have been here. And I have quoted from it before, but I'm submitting it again today because, pardon me, because we did not see inclusion of our concerns nor have heard a reply as to the reasons why they were not addressed in the CPU document. We stay hopeful that our concerns are not simply overlooked and you will see in their, and that you will see to their incorporation into the document that will shape our hamlet. The last that I'd like to acknowledge is a person who, I've just come to know. I've talked to them today, but I'm speaking here at the microphone, Mr. Terry. There are so many connections I have to the North Fork where I call home. And my son's late grandfather is very famous for saying inside the family, seven times a Wells. That's a great name. Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you, Mr. Terry. Sir, step up. You can come up to the microphone. Thank you. I'd like to address the board. I just wanted to thank. My name is Steven Scarfo. I live in Reeves Park full time year round. And have for the past 10 years. I just wanted to thank the board for hiring additional marine police officers to patrol our area in Reeves Park and try to secure our beaches, keeping them a little cleaner and keep people who don't have 4x4 permits off the beach and people who aren't supposed to be parking on our beaches, you know, to ticket them and take care of that matter. I wanted to thank the board in reference to that. I also wanted to thank the board for the support of the community. I also wanted to say that I am very much against the plans for the agritourism that it's just a wonderful feeling to be driving down Roanoke and Sound Avenue and see the open space. Now, I moved here from West Hampton Beach and for the reasons of overdevelopment and I hate to see this beautiful farmland, you know, developed into something that doesn't belong in our area. And I just wanted to say that I'm very much against it. You know, living in Reeves Park and trying to make left hand turns onto Sound Avenue is next to impossible. And I want your consideration to try to keep our Riverhead town, Baiting Hollow, as rural as it is today. And it has been for the past decades. I think it's a mistake to put the amount of population and tourism that we're going to have on Sound Avenue and implement that. I think it's a poor move and a poor decision and I and many of my neighbors are much against moving forward on this. And that's what I have to say. Thank you. [transcription gap] Good afternoon. My name is Barbara Blass. I live in Jamesport and I'm speaking on a resolution to adopt the comprehensive plan. There's a lot of great information in that plan and I really want to commend all of those who worked very tirelessly and contributed so much to get it to this point. I was going to stand here and repeat the extensive list of comments and concerns that I still have. You've heard them all. You've read them all from me. I ripped up that document this morning and I said that's not an effective use of my time and this might not be either. But I just can't ignore the fact that I have to say something and what I'm saying is not fact based as my comments are usually. Why am I struggling? I realize that my comments this time have a degree of sentiment that I can't ignore. I remember very well the excitement and pride in voting to adopt the 2003 plan. But not just for me because it was not about me but it was for our community. It was a culmination of long and hard work by the people of our community. The atmosphere was abuzz with a sense of accomplishment. Was it a perfect document? Heck no. And we acknowledged that right out of the gate. There was going to be a lot of work. Thank you. There was going to be a lot of work that had yet to be done. But there was overwhelming support from stakeholders and residents. I went back to the minutes of that meeting, that special board meeting held on the evening of November 3rd, 2003. I trust that if you read those meetings of that, minutes of that meeting, which only took 45 minutes, you'll see for yourself what I'm talking about. Rex Farr, President of the Greater Calverton Civic Association was speaking on behalf of the Consensus Coalition. He was the first member of the Consensus Coalition whose members, organizations he acknowledged by name. There were 13 of them including League of Conservation Voters, Millbrook Gables, Nordoc Civics, NFVC, the list is all there for you to see. We, here's what he said. We have worked and we're here to continue to help you. Certainly when we get down to the nuts and bolts of this master plan, we're here to support you tonight. The late Joe Gurgala. 26 years. Executive Director of the Long Island Farm Bureau said while the Farm Bureau didn't support upzoning, in this case, with what's part of this master plan update, it's a fair and equitable plan with respect for private property rights. He ended his comments with, so we applaud you. We think you're making a step in the right direction. We urge you to move forward tonight. The late Rob Pike. I'm saying the late a few times. That bothers me too. The late Rob Pike, former councilman, spoke eloquently on farmland preservation and the important legacy the plan embodied. He stressed the importance of a workable TDR program. This very interesting information that he shared that evening and his own sentiments. What am I getting at? The board and the stakeholder groups acknowledged the efforts of the community and the community can pledge to continue to work cooperatively with the town for successful implementation of the plan. There was an enthusiasm and an optimism that we would be proud of the riverhead that was envisioned in the 2003 plan. Personally speaking, I wish I could stand here today with that same kind of enthusiasm and optimism, but I don't feel that. And I will continue to work with the town board as best as I can in whatever capacity, but there's a lot of work that has to be done and I think the community really wants very much to get behind a plan that works. I do 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 [transcription gap] people in opposition you've kind of known you've addressed most of the concerns. I don't think we could say that tonight, unfortunately. Thank you very much. Mrs. Blass? Mrs. Blass? I just want to make a statement. Okay. Mrs. Blass, I just want to address your comments. Yes. That not feeling as though that the community has heard and you're talking about the 2003 Comprehensive Plan. Yes. According to the current Comprehensive Plan, Mr. Levine has indicated that it stated the 2003 Comprehensive Plan recommended encouraging many things including resorts, spas, banquet facilities, picturesque settings throughout Riverhead, particularly adjacent to waterfront areas, open space preserves, popular recreation attractions like beaches, marinas, hiking trails, equestrian facilities. It talked about agritourism in those terms. Back in 2003 and that was improved, incorporated in that plan. Absolutely. And you're referring to that as something that the community was very proud of. Absolutely. So I'm just saying that it was always there. It was voted on by you and other members of that town board and it was there. Enthusiastically and I will address the fact, by the way, I'm not speaking specifically and only about agritourism. I have non-conforming uses, conditional use permits. I mean, I have a whole list of things that... I'll just clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you can clear up so you clear up so you can clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear up so you clear [transcription gap]
Everything in that plan has been implemented, and thankfully so. But we had a lot of good stuff, and what I can say is that I think the people of the community at the time had ownership. They felt for the most part, even those that were controversial stakeholders. We had a tremendous interaction with the Farm Bureau. I think perhaps Rob Carpenter can remember, but at the end of the day, you heard what Joe Gergales said. We worked through our issues, and it was an open dialogue. It was a different process entirely, and maybe that's why the sentiment of the community is a little bit different now. But it was also a very transparent process, and I have to say, Mr. Hubbard, I believe the administrations under which I served were transparent in just about every sense of the word. So thank you very much.
All right. Let's move on to our resolutions. Read the resolutions, please, Mr. Wooten. Yes. Resolution 761. Board of District, Capital Project number 82421, Calverton Hamlet Center. So moved. Second. Waskie. Vote, please. Sorry. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes.
Second. américano. Second. américano. Second. américano. Second. américano. Second. américano. Second. américano. Second. américano. [transcription gap] Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 763. Authorization for four police department employees to attend a governor's traffic safety DRE interview. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey? Yes. Merrifield? Yes. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 764. Grant special permit with conditions for 431 Griffin Avenue to convert an office to a single family dwelling, 431 Griffin Avenue, Riverhead, New York, Suffolk County tax map number 0600128-1-30. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey? Yes. Merrifield? Yes. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 765. Grant special permit with conditions for 4592 Middle Country Road to construct a two-family dwelling at 4592 Middle Country Road, Calverton, New York, Suffolk County tax map number 600-97-1-79.1. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey? Yes. Merrifield? Yes. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 766. Authorizes the execution of a contract between the town of Riverhead and the New York City. The city of Riverhead has been awarded the Office of State of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation, OPRHP, for a grant award for up to $500,000 for the Riverfront Adaptive Children's Playground. So moved. Seconded. Vote please. Waskey? Yes. Merrifield? Yes. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 767. Authorizes the town of Riverhead Community Development Agency to construct a two-family dwelling at 525-925-9500. So moved. agency and engineering department to coordinate efforts with the town of Brookhaven for the purpose of grant application for funding for the dredging and replacement repair of bulkheads and landscaping at the waiting River duck ponds situated in Riverhead and Brookhaven towns so moved seconded vote please wasky yes very field yes absolutely turn yes Rothwell there's a crucial aspect of waiting River residents to restore the duck ponds altogether we will work tirelessly with the town of Brookhaven to obtain grants on federal funding levels to bring back this pristine location proudly vote yes and Hubbard I just want to thank councilman Rothwell for his work with the town of Brookhaven and the meetings he's had in setting us up to make this come to fruition so hopefully we can finally get something completed up there thank you I vote yes the resolution is adopted resolution 768 you authorizes the supervisor to execute a license agreement with the dark side productions Inc so moved seconded vote please wasky yes Murrayfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 770 approved special event chapter 255 application for waiting River Shore um Chamber of Commerce wrs chamber fall festival so moved seconded vote please wasky yes very field yes it's going to be at the waiting River Shore um chamber commerce fall festival 729 of 2024 from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. yes so moved Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 771 approves the special event chapter 255 application for fine fairing and abges so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved [transcription gap] application of foodie fest productions LLC first annual foodie fest so moved second vote please wasky yes Murrayfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolutions adopted resolution 7 7 3 appoint some maintenance mechanic 2 so moved second vote please wasky yes Murrayfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 7 7 4 appoints a senior account clerk so moved seconded vote please wasky yes Murrayfield yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 7 7 5 ratifies the appointment of a fire marshal this are yes resolution 7 7 4 ratifies the appointment of a fire marshal this are
clear so moved so moved so moved so moved [transcription gap] Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 778. Ratifies and accepts the resignation of a part-time police officer so moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 779. Resolution 778. Ratifies and accepts the resignation of a part-time police officer so moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Congratulations, Jordan, and hopefully it works out well with you with the Suffolk County PD. Oh, I listen to Jordan. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 780. Ratifies and accepts the resignation from a part-time court officer so moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 781. Accepts the resignation of a water treatment plant operator to be so moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 782. Resolution calling public hearing regarding a capital improvement for the proposed lateral water main extension at 437 and 483 Young's Avenue, Calverton, New York, Suffolk County tax map, District 0600, Section 80 block 2, lots 6.1 and 9.1. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 783. Authorizes the town clerk to publish and post notice for public hearing regarding U.S. HUD Community Development Block Grant, CDBG 2025 funds. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 784. Sub américano. [transcription gap] Sub américano. [transcription gap] Sub américano.
Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 785. Revises bid award for the 2024 annual procurement contract. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 786. Extends bid for removal of household hazardous waste. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 787. Authorizes 2024 bow hunting for deer on town property at Enterprise Park at Calverton, Suffolk County Tax Act number 600-135-1-7.33 at all. 1751 Sound Avenue, Calverton, Suffolk County Tax Act number 600-60-11. 1-2. And Middle Road, Riverhead, Suffolk County Tax Map number 600-80-2-10.1. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waskey. Yes. Murrayfield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Next resolution is 760. Issues finding statement pursuant to 6NYCRR part 617.11 and adopts the town of Suffolk. Yes. [transcription gap] 2024 comprehensive plan update pursuant to the New York Town Law 272-A. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waski. Yes. Merrifield. Yes, but I'd like to make a statement, if I may, Supervisor. Absolutely. I'd like to just point out a few things for everyone that's still remaining in the room. The issue is, as I see it and many of you see in the town, is the preservation of our farmland and our open space, which is vitally important to everyone. The problem is we in our town are losing that farmland. I don't know whether everybody knows this, but much of that farmland is zoned residential by right, which means the farmer can sell that land at any time. That is a bad. That is a big problem for the town. In the past, now, there were 15,000 acres in Riverhead used for agricultural purposes. The town, in total, now, currently only 8,800 acres of land have been used for agricultural purposes that have been protected by county purchase of development rights, town purchase of development rights, county and town combined purchase of development rights and TDRs. There are still 6,342 acres of unprotected farmland in Riverhead. That's 42% that is still unpreserved. The town bonded in 2015 $72 million against future revenue to ensure that the town preserved key properties. The bond will not be paid off until 2030. The town PDR tool preserved over $1 million. The town PDR tool preserved over $1 million. The same system will be used by next five years. 326 acres. We can't buy any more land in our town. The town's TDR program so far only preserved 338 acres. These tools are not enough. We need other programs. The other problem with this town is that we are growing. According to the comprehensive plan and studies, by 2035, we're going to have another 5,000 residents in this town. Those residents require services, our police department, our sanitation department, our highway department, our schools. And I don't know how many people are actually aware of how important the lawsuit is that we have against the town of Southampton. As Mr. Rothwell has indicated, if that project goes forward in Southampton on Riverside and Flanders and approximately 2,300 units, we're going to have 3,500 units built over there. Those children will be going to River head school district, which means the river head school tax is going to go astronomically up, tremendously up. And that is something that we are trying to block, but we may not be successful about. So, one of our responsibilities is not only preservation of farmland in this town, but it's to keep taxes low for our citizens. There's a whole chapter in the comprehensive plan, so I'll just clear up a little bit. I'll clear up a little bit. I'll clear up a little bit. in the comprehensive plan about how it is that it's so important for our town to make it an affordable place for everyone to buy a home and live. The problem is this is something that keeps happening to the town, the increase of citizens in the town and the fact that our taxes that we obtain from residences is not enough to cover the cost. It's commercial development that helps. That is our highest tax revenue in our town is our commercial development. We have to do something to keep saying that Sound Avenue or this place or that place is pristine and we have to keep it this way is ignoring immense tax problems that are coming because the population is coming. They do love where we live. We love where we live. We're trying to preserve where we live, but there are real problems. To think that EPCAL is going to solve the problem is unrealistic. That case is going to be caught up in litigation in the civil suit for many years to come. I would venture to say five or more. There are things that need to be done to help our town. We want everybody to understand that something like agritourism resorts was just meant to be a potential tool. It would have always needed CECRA. It would have always needed code. It would have always needed approval and vote. That is not going to happen. I did vote to remove agritourism resorts from the comprehensive plan. I just want everybody to understand the huge financial problems that come from just saying, let's just turn it residential. Let's take that 100 acre parcel, make 70 of it preserved and only 30% clustered with homes. Those residents are not going to be able to pay. The amount of taxes we are going to have to start charging people. That's a reality because those burdens keep getting a year over year with inflation going up and up and up. I just ask everyone to just please keep in mind, keep an open mind in the future about ways we can try to do both because as the comprehensive plan keeps stating, we want to make Riverhead affordable for everyone to live in. If we just do that, we're going to have a lot of problems. We have so many other jobs. [transcription gap] that um you know people don't want develop they don't want development on industrial land well industrial land is the low we have a lot of it it's the lowest taxes coming in and tennise to denise's point it's commercial taxes that are extremely important i totally agree with denise i can this is part of why we need to come and talk to civics because it's one thing to suck in the ether and everybody go n-o-n-o-n-o i'm going to tell you the purpose of the task force is going to be k-n-o-w there's a real reality that denise is bringing up and this is what we're going to bring to the civics because it cannot be ignored we're concerned that your taxes don't go up we're looking at other ways to gain taxes there was a whole group more than what's in this room against charles of schools they had a big sign you know it was on the back of the sign industrial land is for taxes it's hanging in my office if you want to see it to denise's point we have a real problem we as a town board are on this constantly and constantly addressing it because we all sitting up here have a fiduciary duty to you i don't suck in the ether i look for the people that have solutions as we've been doing for years there's a lot of things that we've been doing for years we all do and I can tell you now out of everything that I've gotten okay all of it I've seen those solutions let's put it off let's do this let's put it off when are you going to hear us we'll hear you any day of the week I am available we all are available to speak with you at any time again I'm gonna say it there's one word that I care about and that's K and O W thank you and I vote yes Rothwell Thank You councilman so I think councilwoman Merrifield stole my speech perhaps we have been working on this for you know I I've been at it for three years now since since coming in and joining the town of Riverhead and it's been an honor and a privilege to be on this board there is immense work that's gone into this I support what's written in here but I do have issues for what's not written in here and I support what's written in here but I do have issues for what's not written in here but I do have issues for what's not in here and that's exactly what my fellow board members have spoke about when we had discussions about agritourism that was just one potential tool to say how do we solve the financial woes of the town of Riverhead how do we go forward with increasing police costs from precinct general overall services and highway department costs the school costs and taxes we have to find solutions I think that I'm gonna applaud our planning department and match harder worked for many years on this this was not something that was just you know put Lee put together hastily it has been amended it has been amended and reamended there's been countless engagements we thought we were doing good for the farmers and then they were concerns that came forward and we changed it but that all comes to the fact that we need to find financial ways to move forward for every parcel of land that we preserve it comes off the tax roll it's less income and we as the remaining residents have to make up for it and that's the most difficult thing and when you when you immediately a hastily remove items like aggregate tourism say let's not even discuss it and that's not even consider the idea you remove another potential method of revenue to be brought into the town so if it doesn't work on Sound Avenue does it work someplace else is there any other ideas I like the idea of having a forum I thought we were going to have a very constructive work session coming up on the 18th where we could share ideas and and and residents of the town could come forward and say how about this councilman what do you think about this idea how do we go forward from here and I think that I agree what is in this comprehensive plan I think it's a great work but I think that it does not overall put together forth a payment plan for how we move forward as residents in the future and I think that's still gonna need work to be done in here but because of what's in it I support I vote yes but I think it's still lacking in the things that we're doing in the town and I think that's what we need to get forward to create a payment plan for the town of Riverhead Thank You councilman Hubbard just a couple words I want to say here first of all I want to thank councilwoman Joanne Woskie she and I have been working behind the scenes for quite some time now trying to get support of the board to remove this from the comprehensive plan and I want to thank my board members for finally sitting down and talking about this and I think that's one of the things that we've all been doing is working together to make sure that we're doing what we've been doing to make sure that we're doing what we did today obviously we all got letters we saw a you know petition signed we saw everything we listened to the people I had been not in favor of doing this for quite some time but I was a minority on the board at the time and I thought okay that's fine everybody has her opinion everybody has her reason for it many of what councilman Rothwell said and councilwoman Merrifield just said is that Absolutely correct. I will also say that had this come to fruition and had this actually become a reality, it probably wouldn't have been nearly what everybody made it out to be. Traffic was really not going to be an issue because of the limited number of rooms. The tax base that would have come out of that would have helped the town significantly. The preservation of not the land that they were on, because that was already preserved. They were going to have to buy other land to preserve it. Would have helped our farmers. So in the end, I think this really would have been a good thing. However, I sit here today because everybody out here went and pulled the ballot. And I have to listen to the people that I represent. That's why I changed my mind from the beginning when I thought this was a great tool to preserve land. I said, wait a minute. People are speaking. We have to listen. And we listened. And I commend my fellow board members for doing that. They are doing the same thing. BFJ. Noah. I don't know if you are still on. But the work that BFJ did on this comprehensive plan was awesome. They put together an excellent product. And the end product when it comes to 36,000 people is never going to have 100% support. this town board does is never going to have 100% support in the town. But if at the end of the day, end of the week, end of the year, we can look at this and say 10 years or 15 years now we're better because of it, then we did our job and we were successful. And I firmly believe we did our job and we will be successful. This is a document that is not written or codified. It's a list of recommendations. It's in addition to the 2003 comprehensive plan and it's more ammunition that we can have to move forward and make Riverhead a successful town, as successful as it can be. But having said that, we have a lot of problems in front of us. Our farmers are selling their land. Our farmers cannot afford to make a living regular farming. That's why agritourism has become so big out here. The farmer has had to do it. We have to do it to survive. We talk to farmers and we have this discussion. Phil Schmidt, one of the local farmers, a generational farmer, has to take his lettuce into the city and try to sell it. Well, he's trying to sell it to the same people that the Canadians are sending their lettuce down and the Canadians are selling it for half, if not more, less than what Phil is trying to raise just to break even or make a little bit of money. Canada subsidizes that. We're going to have to do it. We're going to have to do it.
But there are farmers. So it costs the farmers very little to produce. They can sell it for less. And a lot of people are buying Canadian lettuce. That's just one small item in how the farmers are being affected out here in our particular area. Same thing had happened with potatoes. Potatoes had gone down. We used to be known for duck farms and potatoes. Well, guess what? The number of acres of potatoes being farmed today is minimal. And I will put a Long Island potato up against a potato from Maine, Idaho. Anyway, there's a lot of potatoes there. Anywhere else in the world is not a better potato than from Zildnicki Farms right here in Riverhead. But we're losing that. And we're losing that because the farmers can't afford to do it. And we're losing it because the farmer's children are saying, sorry, Dad, I see what you're going through. I'm not going to do that. And they're leaving. And the generational farms are disappearing. And this is a reality. No farmers, no food. It's a big reality. And more so of the reality is what your taxes are going to be if all this farmland, and Denise mentioned 6,300 acres of farmland that could still be preserved. We don't want to preserve 6,300 acres of it. We want to find a happy medium of preservation and development. Because if we preserve that, that's 6,300 more acres off the tax rolls. Nobody's going to be able to afford to live in the town of Riverhead. So there's a happy medium that has to be found. We have to find a way to preserve it. But we also have to find a way to help the farmers. And again, sitting down and putting public people together and work as a community to solve this is the way it's going to be done. And by saying we mentioned earlier about forming a task force, we have to do this. We're not all rocket scientists up here. I have never said I'm the smartest person in the room. I am not. But I rely on a lot of common sense. And the common sense says that we have to listen to the people, we have to work together, and we have to make this beneficial for everybody in the town. And that's the purpose of what we're trying to do up here today. So I applaud everybody for your letters, your handwriting campaign, our letter writing campaign, the text, the emails, showing up to all the meetings. I really appreciate it. And it's great to see the town energized. It really is. We appreciate it. But having said all this, I am not looking to postpone this. I want to get this started so we can move forward and take care of the issues that we have to take care of. I vote yes. That resolution is adopted. Resolution 788. These bills, so moved. No. Second. Vote please. Waskie. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 788. Yes. Yes. Sublet's provisionally appoints an account clerk so moved seconded vote please wasky yes merrifield yes kern yes rothwell yes hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 790 ratifies authorization for superintendent to execute change order number one wellhead treatment for removal of magnesium manganese i'm sorry at plant number five contract e electrical construction capital project 11 Riverhead border district so moved seconded vote please wasky yes merrifield yes kern yes rothwell yes hubbard yes a resolution is adopted that concludes the resolutions okay that concludes all of our resolutions for today's meeting we will now open the microphone up to open comments from the public on any topic whatsoever doesn't have to be just about the resolutions good afternoon supervisor town board my name is Kevin McAllister I am founder of defend h2o good to see you again based in sag harbor my comments today are really germane to your comp plan but I wanted to wait for public comment just so there's no no conflict there specifically I'd like to speak about bluff management with the AG resort proposal I was engaged in my thoughts on this with respect to encroachment into the bluff zone area you of course know me with water protection I'm a marine biologist by training but also my training is in coastal zone management specifically coastal processes so certainly with water quality issues I've been trying to draw attention to appropriate long-term management of our shorelines for a number of reasons habitat value recreational space ability to walk those beaches coastal resiliency the ability to really blunt a big storm energy that is certainly forthcoming we're seeing it pretty regularly now I urge you is as with relative to the bluffs there's an enormous sand source that is essentially available during storm events so we have a sand source that's critical to shoreline protection you know obviously the longshore currents are moving it up and down the coast so with long-term implications of sea level rise we need that sand source on the beaches so I urge the town board as you go forward with really a vision document your comp plan I encourage you to start thinking about bluff management you know that particular area I saw the I guess it was a drone shot in the publication of a very natural section you could see the farmland behind it you know it's prime time the bluffs are slumping off feeding those beaches that's a walkable beach that's habitat value there with respect to lack of management as we see these encroachments come in and this would I think would would have happened with the resorts ultimately to have that unobstructed vistas we're talking about clearing you know hardscaping for patios trying to get really out there on the on the front of the beach and I think that's a really important aspect of the sound so I just want to clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear use. And ultimately, over the long term, that would weaken this zone, leading to slumping. And then, of course, when you have developed properties behind it, the next implication is shoreline hardening. And over the long term, as you are anchoring beaches and armoring the coast, stone, bulkheads, et cetera, with sea level rise and the projections that we can expect over the next decades, we will see shrinking beaches and thus recreational loss. And then we are weakening our coastal resilience ability. So please give consideration to this. Try to identify those areas. I know it's a mixed bag in Riverhead on the Sound with residential development, number of structures, et cetera. But where it fits, I urge you to maybe consider greater setbacks. And I'm not sure how it's parsed with DEC. And the town with respect to regulations and permitting out there. But you can go ahead and certainly assume your authority over this area to try to provide greater protection. So again, long term, your economic interests are intact. The recreational interests are intact. And again, the environment. So thank you for your consideration. Go ahead. Wait, wait. Stay there, please. I'm sorry? Can you stay for a second, Mr. McAllister? Sure. Just curious. I have a question. I'm not sure if you have any information on a setback right now. Because I think we're at 500 feet with the hotel. This is just out of the blue. I would double it. I would be very aggressive on setbacks. Try to keep that bluff zone intact. Let nature take its course. But no harm, no foul until you put structure out there and property value. This is important also. Because in that zone. People can do developments. And it's 70-30. So you can develop 30%. So that would push the development a lot closer to the North Road. So that's why I asked the question. Thank you. Okay. Mr. McAllister. Thank you. Sorry. Go ahead, John. I'm actually the liaison for the beaches. So I'm going to come up and give you my card. Thank you. And I'll do the same. Thank you, Councilman. Thanks. Appreciate it. Thank you. [transcription gap] Thanks for the latitude. Thank you, Kevin. Appreciate it. I have one comment to make. Howard Reinhart again. You're looking for revenue. One, as the town of Riverhead ever entertained a port tax, we get tankers that come in that pump oil off to Northville. If you added a .01 cent on a gallon of oil. That's pumped off. That would be a source of revenue. Plus the fee to tie up at the dock. That would be a source of revenue. Impact fees. I'm assuming that the state does have impact fees for new development. New developments. If you approved over 55 communities, retirement communities, that would eliminate some of the stress on public schools and require less development. Less development for public schools. Most people that do come out here are retired or semi-retired to come out here. If we marketed that type of development, you wouldn't have the impact of schools and still get the tax revenue. A lot of people come out here now with agritourism to go to farm stands, get pumpkins, Christmas trees, et cetera. A small tax on the purchases of that given to the city. Would you be able to get that? I'm not sure. I didn't have full head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head part-time, I think that needs to be looked at with greater clarity. You're looking at an entity that is their hotels and restaurants. Let's look at other forms. I mean, a lot of counties out west and stuff, they'll put a tax, a one-cent tax on a gallon of gasoline and it goes to the local community, goes to the town. I mean, there are so many other ways to develop tax revenue that are hidden. We do it today in our government, our federal government. Income tax, everybody talks about income tax. Nobody talks about tariffs. We have tariffs on everything that comes into this country. And who pays for it? We do. So I think that instead of just looking at it from a tax perspective, a property tax perspective, there are so many other ways that the town of Riverhead can generate revenue that would make this an affordable place for its constituents. That's all I've got to say. Thank you.
Talk Recherche and Greater Calverton Civic Association. President, I just wanted to thank you for the warm welcome to Mr. McAllister. Thank you for giving him your contact information. And I do speak with Mr. McAllister on a, on a, [transcription gap] on a periodic basis. And part of the concerns that we've shown as a civic that represent residents along Sound Avenue is definitely the erosion of the bluff and, and the protection of it. And thank you for asking about the measurement of the setbacks and what his recommendations are. I think he has much more to offer us and thank you for keeping your ears open. Thank you.
Kathy McGraw, Northville. I just, I just like to say that what I heard during that resolution was more information than I heard from anybody during the comp plan. Your comments, Miss Merrifield, are exactly the kind of things that the people of this town need to know about. And that didn't get aired properly during this comp plan because people are willing to compromise. There are things that can be done and just the information you got right now about taxing, about taxes, those thoughts that can be so productive if you create task force and include people and share information. I really thought that was extremely helpful and I hope that going forward there's a lot more of that that's done. Thank you. Thank you. Just me. I'll be quick. I promise. I just want to clarify the record before. Yeah. The former supervisor had spoken to secret on code amendments. Just so everyone is quite clear, I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't clarify. This is any code amendment that affects the allowable uses in 25 acres in a zoning use district is a type one action, which means you have to comply with secret. That's always been the case. I was never stated otherwise by myself or anyone from my department. So I think it's important just to know that which Councilman Merrifield had stated before. I just wanted to add my two cents. And then I said I clarified with you. Yes, absolutely. Thank you. That was your position. Thank you. That's it. Thank you, Matt. Yep. I'm going to be super short. I know. Good afternoon. My name is Pilar. A little further so we can hear you better. Is that better? Yes. Okay. So my name is Pilar Moyamansara and I'm the executive director of a tiny but mighty housing counseling agency called Housing Help. Before I read my very short statement, first of all, I just want to say thank you to each one of you because throughout this year, I've been working with the City Council on the housing policy and the housing policy and the housing policy and the housing policy policy. And I'm very proud of the work that you're doing. [transcription gap] I have so much pleasure in this. [transcription gap] that I was a Town of Riverhead resident, although because of my job I have the opportunity to speak at various town board meetings in various townships throughout Long Island and I gotta tell you this is the only town that will allow five minutes for a public comment. In other townships they only allow three minutes and if you have a room full of people they reduce that to two minutes and sometimes to one minute. So I am grateful for that. Throughout the years I'm also grateful that you are one of the very few towns that not only televise that the town board meetings but also you allow testimony to be done through videoconferencing. Most townships don't allow that so all I want to say is thank you. You know sometimes we don't know what we have you know I think that my experience have always been very good and very positive so on that note I'm gonna read my very short statement. I want to sincerely thank you for incorporating Incorporating our recommendations in the in to the comprehensive plan which includes more favorable Favorable guidelines for creating accessory dwelling units ad use across the town This significant move is expected to play an important role in increasing access to home ownership in Riverhead and it is my hope and This is really truly my hope that other East End townships follow your lead Because the reason why we're experiences an increase of populations is because it's very unfortunate That Eastern townships are not doing their job in creating housing for their workers. I wholeheartedly congratulate the town of Riverhead on taking this bold and necessary step Towards making the dream of home ownership a reality your leadership in adopted in adopting more flexible Rules for accessory dwelling units is a crucial win for our community We expect the amnesty provisions will help address the fire and safety concerns already in 16 in non permitted rentals in the area supplementing housing with ad use provides multiple benefits to the residents of Riverhead and the broader community by adding housing in a fiscally and environmentally responsible manners ad use are designed to address the housing shortage and hence home ownership affordability and And in my opinion most importantly right now for our time to support homeowners Who are struggling to maintain ownership and achieve financial stability? We as housing help look forward to continuing our work together to draft and implement legislation that supports diverse and sustainable housing in Riverhead Thank you for your commitment and for making our community a more inclusive Community. Thank you. Thank you ma'am. You still have a minute and a half if you want to continue Can you please talk to the Huntington town supervisor I might talk to him, but I might join in with their three minutes instead of five So, I don't know if you want me to talk to him. All right That's all we have up John McAuliffe John McAuliffe Word in with you John the only problem with what? You all said at the end is it most of the people were out of the room It's not your fault. I'm just saying that that they can watch it on video and that's great But I hope that you might consider among yourselves whether maintaining the 18th Since it's already in people's calendars. I can tell you that's not gonna happen. That's canceled We will put a date together soon coming up. We would thinking more originally towards The end of the year, but I think the sooner we get started Yeah, I mean you had a lot of energy a lot of thought and momentum right and I sympathetic to task forces, but I also am sympathetic to Open forums where you get I mean this tax stuff is mind-boggling if he's right about your ability to get something that benefits the town from those depots that would be fantastic and make up a little bit for the trucks that come rumbling down the road The I wanted to come back because I didn't want to continue on in the initial discussion of resolutions about a resolution that wasn't there But I hope that you will bring your group Taskforce or whatever I forget the formal title because it's more than an advisory group I mean it if people go back and find that Resolution they'll see a whole page full of principles about the way Development ought to happen which are well thought out and I think epcal Was very failed maybe right that we got five years or Swaski I forget who said it we have five more years to wait on the legal case, but Yeah, but I think getting into the potential of epcal ought to be as public and involved a process as possible. And your formalizing that structure would be very helpful. The other thing I wanted to say from before is that if we look west of us and see the development that's to the west of us, I'm sure there were conversations among community leaders in those towns and villages that were very similar to the conversation that we've had over the last several months and certainly the last several weeks of wanting to preserve what they remembered. I mean, they used to be ag used to go much further west. I said the other day that when I grew up in Wanta, there was a dairy farm next to the development that my parents lived in. The question is not. Is how you do development and all of the logic for it
that puts as a higher priority maintaining what's unique in this area. And I think that's the kind of question that needs to be discussed whether whenever you set it up. The other thing, this will, I mentioned this to Mr. Kern last time, and he says it's impossible. So you can take it. I'll take it for one out of one more impossible idea. But I think if South Hampton is going to build all of that housing, which is not necessarily a bad thing, I think Riverhead needs to challenge South Hampton to redefine the school boundaries. South Hampton has the resources to support the students that will live in that area. They're not going to want to do it. John. John, I'm going to tell you something. The best thing the civics could do at this particular point is all get together, okay, and go over to South Hampton and get loud. I'm not saying it's impossible. I agree. I think we should get a vote from all the citizens in Riverhead if they would put it on a ballot. I guarantee we get 90% yes on that. But there's a lot of things to do. But there's a lot of things to do. But there's a lot of things to do. then go to Southampton and ask them what they would do. They're going to do zero. But to me, the civics can make a lot of noise there, and I think it would be extremely important that they make that noise. So, you know, there's another thing for the civics to do. I agree that that's going to be the initial reaction from Southampton. Yeah, but get the civics together, John. No, I'm not disagreeing with you at all, Bob. I think that's a great idea. I just want to point out, Mr. Howard, if you know more about this than I, but I understand it isn't just what Riverhead and Southampton want. I believe also the county, and I don't know if the state also has to vote on it as well, but at least the county. They have to approve. Yes, so it's not up to us to go. Oh, no, but I'm saying we need to initiate it. It's a monumental mountain to climb. But if those school districts were drawn how many years ago in a totally different environment, I agree. What I'm saying is if they're going to put in that housing, rather than getting into a fight legally about stopping them on the housing, I'd rather we get into a fight about them taking responsibility for the students. At any rate, I don't think we have disagreement on that except maybe practically. I said it was an impossible idea, but I would, maybe the civics can follow up on what Bob said. John, so was going to the moon about 60 years ago. Right. Look what happened. You could do it. So the last thing I want to say is sadly to go back to my opening comments, the death toll now is four kids that died. It's a 14-year-old shooter who was captured and is alive. Nobody knows motive. Nobody knows the weapon. There are 306, this is the 366th mass shooting this year alone. And so I think as somebody was saying on this morning, on the media, this is not a partisan issue. It's often described that way, but I think it's really a national sanity issue that we have to find it and hopefully find a solution before Riverhead becomes another statistic like that. Thank you.
Good afternoon. Derek Stein with the Long Island Housing Coalition just here to really echo what Pilar said about the work that you've been doing. I think really leading the way, not just for the east end, but for all of Long Island in terms of this comprehensive plan and what it does, not just about ADUs, but with adaptive reuse as well. That's something that, you know, is a key topic, but when you're talking about redoing or the low tax burden of industrial properties and being able to convert those to mixed use or turn those into housing, that's a way to generate that tax revenue. And it's something that just by me, I live out in Central Islip and we just had a major development there, $300 million for the Belmont at Eastview, which is totally redoing the old NYIT and Central Islip Psychiatric Center campus and turning that into housing. It's market rate. There's affordable with that as well. And it has just, that was a totally blinded area. There was crime. There was nothing going on there. And I was able to bring that back onto the tax roll, help the school district. They actually put in a new fire department with that as well, that is currently being constructed. And it's those sort of projects that are the way that, you know, the town can also work to preserve that farmland is by keeping that balance. So just again, thank you for all your work on this. Thank you for the transparency as well. And also just for having Zoom, because I think you're the only town that still has that. And I was driving out here two weeks ago, coming for the previous vote at 6 p.m. And there was a lot of traffic. And I was driving out here two weeks ago, coming for the previous vote at 6 p.m. And there was a lot of traffic. And there was a lot of traffic. And there was a lot of traffic on Sunrise Highway. I was stuck in that. So I turned on the Zoom and I was able to learn that it was no vote. So it worked out perfectly. So, yes. Thank you again and have a good one. David M. You know, one of the things that we take for granted here is that that 6,500 acres is going to stay farmland. And that's something we, all of us, have to be cognizant of. Because the reason why we have so many subdivisions that are on farmland is because farmers kept their development rights. And when they couldn't succeed anymore, they sold them to a developer. That's why projects like the hotel, right, or other projects, maybe putting a price on where the oil comes in, right, .01 cents, can help us. Is that going to solve the problem of the farmer going out of business? It hasn't for thousands of acres. It's just that farmers once owned that people are now living in a house on that farm field. That's why, you know, so anyway, I understand and thank you. David M. Thank you. David M. Hey, by the way, you're the people that gave us a number of foreclosures that were going on, right? Can you give us? David M. That was housing housing. David M. Yes. Can you let the audience know how many foreclosures there are currently in Riverhead? I know you gave us a number last time. Can you? David M. I think it's important for people to understand the gravity of the economy. I might be one of them. Keep raising my hand. David M. Ever since I turned 50, I became so forgetful. So I don't recall the exact number, but let me tell you. The highest numbers of foreclosures are usually concentrated in Copaic, Wyandotte, Huntington Station, Brentwood, Central Islip, and Riverhead. Now, there were data recently released by the New York State Court Administration. As a county, Suffolk County has the highest number of foreclosures in the entire state of New York, right? With this, I don't want to say that we're going to go back to the real estate crash that we saw in 2008 and 2009, but certainly it's not looking great. And that's why the work of housing counseling agencies like Housing Health working with homeowners to help them keep their properties so that they don't have to go through foreclosures, because you know what happened back then in 2008 and 2009? When these homeowners let go of those properties, they become boarded-out properties, which is a welcoming to a lot of criminal activities, right? And that's what we are trying to avoid. So let me tell you, we continue to do the work at the Rural Migrant Ministry, 573 Gronach Avenue, and we will continue doing it. And, you know, please, ask me any questions you may have. Thank you. Good question. Hi, Barbara Blass again. I'll be brief. I really appreciate your concerns and the information you shared about the economic situation. I couldn't agree with you more. Preservation definitely comes at a price. The 12,000 acres that we have that receive an agricultural assessment, you know, that's practically a 90% reduction in taxes on those 12,000 acres. We've got a commercial, Councilman Kern, you mentioned the commercial tax base. If you start to look or if you've ever followed the tax cert challenges that the commercial entities, right? And it's very, they legally challenge their assessments, and it very often results in tax reductions. So there goes that putting our eggs in that basket, so to speak. Well, no, they get reduced. They get reduced. I'm not, but if there was nothing there, I would say, oh, no. I would say, oh, no. I would say, oh, no. So they go from here to here. So they go from here to here. But where there's nothing there, they're down here. Except on top of that, you know, we do have the IDA. That offers exempt, or that provides relief to a degree. All I'm getting at is that I believe this is a regional issue. It's not a town issue per se. If we're talking about preservation and we're talking about getting gold stars for, you know, preservation. I think. Preserving land that puts us in some category at the state. How great we're doing. We have, CPF has created actually a greater divide. When you have a town that has a billion dollars that they've collected, and yet we're struggling. We are a disadvantaged community. We can't ignore that. And all of that creates a greater divide. We will forever. Find ourselves trying to dig out of a hole if we don't come up with some creative solutions. And I think broader minds. I think we have to reach out to other entities. Maybe other levels of government. The business community. This is really something that is, has to command our attention going forward. I'm not, I know I'm preaching to the choir. But I think there are a lot of people in town that acknowledge that. And are willing to do what they can do to try to. You know, help along those lines. And we were hoping maybe that the forum on the 18th could have been repurposed. To start that kind of discussion. But you know, it's of course certainly up to you. But know that there are people that have that concern. And share your sense of. Robert Nussbaum. Robert Nussbaum. Barbara, you brought up the IDA. I'm going to give you an example. Okay. Because I think it's, I think. I'm tired of the, you know, the thing with the IDA. I was on that board. So, Riverhead Lofts, for example, was paying $32,000 a year for 10 plus years. You know how long it's been vacant. The land over there on McDermott. So, they're paying 32,000. That $32,000 a year. They are now paying in excess of $130,000 a year. So, even when the school complains. They're getting 60% now of $130,000. And I think it's more than that. As opposed to 68% of 32. So, the misinformation about the IDA. And the school often uses that to deflect. You know, from their own budgetary problems. People really need to K-N-O-W. And not spread false information. And I'm not saying you are. But you mentioned the IDA like it was a bad thing. I'm merely saying that it's part of the mix of concerns. In the sense that. How could it be when the property always goes. The taxes always go higher. Because as the number of dwelling units increases. We have greater demands. We have greater demands. And even to the extent that we are fueling, if you will. Or propose to fuel a TDR credit to be four units. Additional units. Somewhere along the line. Well. Do you provide the housing on farmland. Where you need a lot of roads. And a lot. And you have a lot more infrastructure. Think about the cost of that. I mean. You know. We're really balancing out of your head. We're not talking one or the other. We're talking. We're identifying issues that you can't ignore. And facts that we can't ignore. And these all come together. And Riverhead residents pay. Just like you do. To somehow make that budget. Work. Because our services are increasing. As the population increases. We are the affordable housing alternative. We know that people are coming to live here. It's just something that I wanted to say. I think we need to broaden the field of individuals that have to get involved in this. Because it's important. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. Thank you Barbara. You're right. All right. I haven't seen nobody online. Nobody else. Looking to come up. I will make a motion to end the town board meeting. Make that motion. I would like a motion. Somebody make a motion. I make that motion. Second. Denise made the motion. Okay. Anybody want to stand? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Town board meeting is closed. Everybody thank you for coming out today. And enjoy the nice weather while we still have it. Thank you.
Thank you so much. [transcription gap]