Full Transcript
Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you, Mike. I know I caught you off guard back there.
Okay. Councilman Roswell, do we have an invocation? We do. We are very gracious to once again have our chaplain from the Riverhead Fire Department Ladies' Organization. We are very grateful for your auxiliary. So, Kathy Brenze is here today, and thank you for joining us. Lead us in prayer. Thank you. Let's bow our heads. As we gather today and look forward to the two biggest holiday events of the year, we ask your presence, Lord, in a time of giving thanks and praise for the blessings bestowed upon us. We ask your comfort for those we each know who may be suffering in body and spirit as we celebrate our blessings. We give thanks for the joy of the last great holiday season when many faiths gave thanks for the eternal blessings that have been given to us. May our leaders continue to seek to care for the needs of all their constituents, whether of minor concern or major consequences, as we all work toward a better future here in the town of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. We ask for your guidance as our brothers and sisters strive to rebuild the community of Riverhead. long island all this we pray in your everlasting presence amen amen thank you very much kathy thank you kathy thank you okay i have a couple of announcements we have a couple announcements to make um bob if you wouldn't mind talking about puddle for hunger oh sure um so this saturday registration is at 10 a.m i know that um sponsored by the riverhead rotary special guest super bowl winner gary brown will be there and taking photographs with the kids and the adults in collaboration with mark mk riverhead the riverhead anti-bias task force riverhead pal riverhead recreation department this is going to be at stotchki park fields uh i'm sorry both fields one and two registration begins at 10 a.m there are a lot of people coming and i think i always get his name wrong charles uh what's his name
i think where is he harry's hey charlie um i i think is working with another department to get some teams over um you have a team all right so we're gonna play you guys so practice up it's anyway the game play starts uh at 11. it's between 11 and 2. it's really and it's you have to bring canned food in order to to play thank you i'll be betting on the pd we're gonna win i don't know if it was golf i'd bet on charlie oh yeah um ken do you want to go over veterans daily activities yes so a couple things first just uh coming up this weekend uh we have a pancake breakfast that's sponsored by the vfw every year veterans are always welcome to come for free enjoy a good pancake breakfast but it's from 8 a.m to 11 30. so please uh throughout the community uh come down support your local veterans in the vfw moving to veterans day monday november 11th federal holiday so town hall is closed we have a couple events taking place at 11 a.m we invite the entire community to gather at the world war one monument here in riverhead uh it's right near the suffolk county historical society building and so if we gather there between 10 30 10 45 we will promptly start on the 11th hour of the 11th day 11th month so if you would uh please come and join and support our veterans and and as a debt of gratitude so veterans that we always say is our surviving living veterans in our communities it's an opportunity to say thank you for all them for their service for all the men and women in our town and then in uh later in the afternoon at one o'clock we will be having a gathering at veterans memorial park we uh the veterans advisory committee did put together a great program earlier this year where people within the community were able to purchase their own private funds people purchased trees and named it in honor of a local veteran and so we have 30 trees that have now been planted this week we just worked on putting the monuments in place this morning so we will be ready uh for monday at one o'clock and then please come up and see we're using the opportunity to beautify our parks in honor of veterans it'll be a great day excellent good job thank you very much yeah just a reminder ken mentioned it monday uh november 11th this coming monday town hall will be closed for the holiday um i have one go ahead i would just like to thank all of the community members and people actually from outside of the town of riverhead that took part of our fall cleanup this past saturday here at town hall we had over 150 volunteers that that came out to help so an extra special thank you to east end hiking group that brought a significant amount of people the children from the riverhead central school district as well as the rotc thank you for everybody's help um the town looks even more beautiful than than it did last week very good denise you have anything no okay all right we're going to move on we're going to go a little bit out of sequence here because as you notice we have uh one or two police officers in the room and that's always a good thing but uh even better than that is we're going to promote a police sergeant today so at this point in time i would ask captain wilsey to come on up and we're going to do i'm going to read the promotion uh the resolution and resolution 2024-904 says promotes a police officer to the rank of sergeant and today we'll be promoting police officer carly connors to police sergeant so carly come on up that was moved second we are moving
we're going to vote on the resolution now and then we'll go ahead with the ceremony okay all right um finish you want to read it um resolution 2024-904 promotes a police officer to the rank of sergeant so moved second vote please waski yes congratulations mary field yes congratulations yes congratulations rothwell yes congratulations carly and hubbard yes congratulations best of luck team resolution is carried okay welcome welcome
do you solemnly swear that you will uphold the constitution of the united states the Constitution of the State of New York and that you will faithfully perform the duties of the rank of sergeant for the Riverhead Police Department to the best of your ability so help you God.
I'm going to sign.
Congratulations Sergeant Conyers.
Thank you. Thank you to the men and women of Riverhead Police that came down for this event. Thank you for taking time out of your day. All right. Moving on. Town Clerk Wooten, do we have any correspondence? We do. We received four letters over the month. One from Meredith Ritter referenced the industrial zoning. A letter from Antoinette Carbone about love of land. I'm not sure. But that's on the website. If you'd like to read it. One letter from a Waiting River resident referenced today's public hearing on the proposed cell tower. And one letter from Richard Wines about the CPF project plan and water quality and pollution projects as addressed in the NASDA plan. And that's it for correspondence. Under reports, we received the October report from the Town Building Department collected $104,779. And respectively, we received a letter from the City of New York. We received Riverhead Fire Department, Waiting River Fire Department, Janesport Fire Department, and the Manneville Fire Department's adopted 2025 budgets for the year 2025. And that's it for reports. Okay. We have five public hearings scheduled for today. The first public hearing is scheduled for 2 o'clock. It is now 2-14. And this public hearing is regarding Elite Towers, Waiting River Fire Department, and the Manneville Fire Department. And I would ask Matt Charters to step on up to the microphone and start it up. Good afternoon, everyone. For the record, Matt Charters, Senior Planner for the Town of Riverhead. I'll just start off. We did get affidavits of mailing and posting that I provided to the Clerk's Office this morning. I'll read the public notice into the record and then update the Board and the public on the application just where we're at so far. And then I'll turn it over to the applicant. Okay. So in terms of the public notice, please take notice that a public hearing will be held before the Town Board of the Town of Riverhead at 4 West 2nd Street, Riverhead, New York, on the seventh day of November 2024 at 2 p.m. for the purposes of conducting the Monroe balancing test pursuant to the New York State Court of Appeals decision in the matter of County of Monroe, 72nd New York, 2nd Department 338 from 1988 to determine whether and to what extent the application entitled Elite Towers, Waiting River Fire District shall be exempt from the zoning and land use regulations of the Town of Riverhead. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. [transcription gap] 213 feet with Verizon Wireless installing three antennas at a centerline height of 185 feet. Feature carriers installed below the Verizon antennas with four antennas to be located at 75 feet and three antennas to be located at 95 feet. With all wireless communication antennas located within the concealment pole and with related in-site improvements including an equipment room within the building, a 174 square foot equipment area on the building's roof, as well as natural gas generator within a 1.57 acre parcel, which is currently improved with the Wading River Fire Station and accessory structures, a fueling station for the fire district, an existing metal lattice tower containing existing antennas, parking, and other related site improvements, which is located within the residence B80, RB80 zoning use district situated at 1503 North Country Road, Wading River, more particularly identified as Suffolk County Task Map No. 600, Desk 2. and a ! Thank you. Thank you so much. I'll head over to you next, Sean. So the purpose today is to go through the Monroe Balancing Test. It is a nine-part test to determine, like I said before, to what extent an applicant can be excluded from local zoning. So that test, the nine parts are the nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity, the encroaching government's legislative grant of authority, the kind of land use or function involved, the effect local land use regulations would have upon the enterprise concerned, alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas, the impact upon legitimate local interests, alternative methods of providing the proposed improvement, the extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements, and then intergovernmental participation in the project development process and opportunity to be heard. With that being said, I'll turn it over to Greg Alvarez, who's the attorney for the applicant, who's going to go through the project for the board and the public.
Greg Alvarez, Attorney General, Amado Law Group, 666 Old Country Road, Garden City, New York Good afternoon, Mr. Supervisor, Council Members, members of the public in attendance. My name is Greg Alvarez from the law firm of Amado Law Group, 666 Old Country Road, Garden City, New York, here on behalf of the co-applicants, Wading River Fire District, Elite Towers, and Verizon Wireless. So just the first few words about the applicants, because that's important internally, in terms of the analysis that we're asking of this board today. First, the Wading River Fire District. They provide fire rescue and ambulance services to the Wading River community, and as part of that work, they're licensed to operate a wireless facility, which aids in their mission to serve the community. Elite Towers. Elite Towers is a company that specializes in the construction of communication facilities, like the one we're proposing here, with vast experience throughout Long Island and the region. Verizon Wireless, as we're all familiar, is a commercial wireless carrier. They're also a public utility under the laws of the state of New York, and they provide wireless services to their subscribers. So today, we're seeking something that is unusual, but not overwhelmingly unique. It's something that happens on occurrence when a governmental agency, such as the fire district, seeks approval to do anything on their land. And so, what we're seeking today is an exemption from the zoning requirements under the town code. And this is pursuant to a Court of Appeals decision that dates back to 1988. It has been applied since then. It's called the Manor of County of Monroe versus the City of Rochester. And what that court case did was memorialize a test to consider in these types of situations, when you have a public entity, a government entity, that is seeking approval to, like I said, improve their property. So, it's normally called the Monroe Balancing Test, which is just named after the case that created the standards. So, we're seeking that here today because, in terms of the town code requirements, and the processes that would be required, as part of this application, are quite substantial. Three boards, so we'd have to come before your board, we'd have to come before the zoning board, as well as the planning board, for various approvals. And so, this type of procedure allows, and it is a perfect situation to allow this sort of application to proceed, because of the hurdles that sometimes can be in place in terms of town codes. Thank you. code requirements. But as part of this request in which we're asking for the exemption of zoning requirements, we're also asking for a negative declaration of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, which Mr. Charters had discussed briefly before. I just want to give you a brief overview in terms of this process just to make sure to understand what has come before. So we originally filed this application over a year ago in September of 2023 and since then we have been in close consultation with the Planning Department and many other government agencies in fact to go through the specifics of this application to ensure that we're providing each and every item under that balancing test. We've gone back and forth and we filed voluminous materials to this board and to the Planning Department for consideration to make sure that all of the details of that balancing test have been addressed. As mentioned, back in September this board heard a work session and scheduled this hearing shortly thereafter so that there would be this opportunity for public discourse on the application, which is another consideration to apply as part of this balancing test. So, the main reason why this request is being made, it all comes down to one word and that's need. And the need refers back to to the wireless communications that I mentioned at the top of my remarks. Currently within the Wading River area and for quite some time in fact, there have been difficulties in terms of communications with the fire district to ensure that they can meet the needs of their residents. I'm gonna have a representative of the fire district to come up in just a moment to explain in more detail, but as we discussed at the work session, I think everyone has a story as to the difficulties that are involved in terms of the communications within that area of the town. Verizon Wireless is a co-applicant here and they would be positioned at the top of the pole, at least in the concealment area. And they likewise have experienced that problem in the area. And because of that, that is why this facility is so critical. The piece with Verizon Wireless also, it should be noted, Verizon Wireless is the carrier that the fire district also uses as part of their wireless communications. So it's a perfect synergy at this point. Certainly more carriers will be positioned on that pole in the future, but Verizon Wireless being at the top of the pole is even most critical in particular for the fire district's needs. So it's not just a mere annoyance, it's something that has seriously impaired the fire district's ability to communicate. So it's not just a mere annoyance, to communicate and do its job on a day-to-day basis. And that's why we're here today. The reason for this, it's simply the area. We're talking about an area that has a topography where it is quite hilly. And also there is quite a bit of vegetation, quite a bit of tree cover. Both things that create difficulties for wireless systems. And we're gonna explain that for you in brief form when we have a few experts talk about that. So the property itself, I just wanna identify it. It's the main firehouse of the fire district located at 1503 North Country Road. It's approximately an acre and a half in size. And it's designated as District 600, Section 54, Block 1, Lot 28.4 under the Suffolk County Tax Map. It's on the western side of North Country Road and just south of Wading River Road. It's zone residence B80. In the area, it's a mix of uses, primarily, mostly residential, of course, but there are religious uses, both to the north and to the south. And there are some commercial uses even on Wading River Road. So on the north side, it's Wading River Congregational Church. On the south, it's St. John Baptist Church. And then residents are located just to the west. So let's just talk briefly about the proposal itself. If we could have the first document put on the screen, that would be helpful. There we have it there. Thank you. Could we go to about six pages in? I'll count six. Three. One more. There we go. So you can't really see too much there, but this is, in fact, the site. About, like I said, an acre and a half. The fire district building is positioned more towards the northerly part. The orientation that you're looking at is north, is the north of the building. is the north of the building. The orientation that you're looking at is north, The orientation that you're looking at is north, is to the left. South is to the right. And right in, I would say, kind of in the middle there, you'll see a circle. And that would be the actual location of the proposed pole. It would be 190 feet, as described earlier. And if you could go to the next page, please. One more page, please. I'm sorry, one more. And one more after that. There we go. Okay, so that's the elevation. That gives you an idea. And so this is what's called a concealment pole, which means that all of the proposed antennas that will be used by carriers will be insides to create that one single stick effect. And it will be consistent color all the way through. So it's designed to minimize the appearance because it's much different, say, than the poles you've seen that were previously built that had the exterior mounts and the antennas were on the outside. This is meant to create a sense of a single line effect. And on the top will be the whip antenna of the fire district, which will provide the needed communications for the district. And also has room for other public agencies to install in the future. If we go back to the previous one, I'm sorry.
If we could go back to the previous one, it was about three or four back. Okay. So here, again, this is just the site plan. So the second piece of the proposal, you do have ground equipment that is associated with the pole. A portion of it will be installed inside the building. And then another portion actually will be installed on the rooftop of the building located in the back as indicated on the plan. So just a couple other things I'm gonna point out. Then I'm gonna turn it over to the folks I have for you to hear from today. We're also required. Again, we filed numerous documents, numerous reports into the record. But I'd just like to point out a few more things. First, we're required under the FCC to make sure that the RF emissions are well below the FCC standards. And in fact, we have submitted a report to that effect and we're actually below 1% of the stated standards. So well, well, well below what the FCC states. And then to the bulk of it. So the Monroe balancing standards. It was mentioned by Mr. Charters as to the nine standards, but it really comes down to that balance. And the balance is this. You're balancing the need for the use of that will be provided to the public versus the considerations of the locality and the applying of the zoning standards. Now, as I mentioned, the need is unquestioned. And we're gonna provide further evidence of that. The area needs this service. So then you're balancing it against the needs of the locality and applying the zoning standards. As I've stated, we have submitted materials across the board to make sure that all of the considerations under the balancing standards and even under the zoning standards, in fact, are in the record. And that includes a planning report, a consistency study, which we'll talk about as well with one of the experts that we have here today. One other point I'd like to note, in terms of the balancing standards, you have to talk about alternatives. So of course we did that as well. We submitted an alternatives report to indicate the other folks that we have spoken to in the area in terms of other locations where it could have been positioned. All of the places you would think the churches, even up on Wading River, up on Wading River Road. And this is the location that's received any interest in terms of locating on that property. From a technical perspective, we also looked at alternatives, any alternative technology, any way to put the tower lower. And we have also demonstrated that because of the topography, because of the vegetation that I talked about earlier, this is the minimal site to install to make sure that that needed wireless communication will be there for the fire district. Okay. At this time, I'd like to bring up a couple of questions. I'll just introduce and tell you who we intend to, and then we'll go in order. First, we're going to have Commissioner Terrence Culhane of the Wading River Fire District who will talk about the issues that they've faced over the years in terms of wireless communications. To back that up, we're going to have Andrew Hintz, who is their radio frequency engineer, who will talk about that in technical terms. We'll try to keep that short. We also have a similar representative, on behalf of Verizon Wireless, that's Martin Lavin, who will talk as well in terms of the gap that's there currently. And then finally, we'll have William Sklar from VHB, who looked at the planning aspects of the application. And so he will go through his analysis in regard to the balancing test. So first, I'll have Commissioner Culhane step up, and I'll step away from the microphone.
Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Terry. It seems like you stole a little bit of my thunder, but I'm going to ask your patience, so let me get through what I have to get through. For those of you that don't know me, my name is Terry Culhane. I'm one of the five commissioners of the Wading River Fire District. I want to thank the board for this opportunity and the community to allow us to speak to all of you today. If I may indulge everyone, let me give a quick overview of the district. First, I'd like to introduce the Wading River Fire Department. The Wading River Fire Department was established on July 21, 1947. In September of that year, a siren was purchased and mounted on top of the general store, which was located near the duck ponds. Why is this important? That siren was used to alert volunteers of fires in the community. That first year, the department answered four calls for service. In 1954, the Wading River Fire District was formed, which greatly assisted the fire department with funding to operate and maintain the building, apparatus, and equipment. In 1955, the department relinquished all control and ownership of the building, property, and equipment to the fire district. In 1968, the very first radios were put into service. They were called Plectrons, which was single-band, UHF, VHF radios. They were somewhat experimental. Now fast forward to today, where our calls of service have increased significantly, approaching 1,300 calls already this year. Over the years since, radio technology has improved. Even with the dramatic increases in communication technology, it is a challenge by the topography of the community we serve. The topography of Wading River, for those of you that don't know, is a lot of hills and valleys, low-lying areas, and is heavily treed with a lot of vegetation. With topography such as this, radio communication is at best marginal in a substantial portion of our service area. As such, this places our first responders at an extreme disadvantage, both in responding to calls, to mitigating those calls for service that we respond to, and most importantly, puts the lives of those first responders in jeopardy. It is my understanding that back in 2010, there was a push to erect multiple cell towers in the Wading River area, as well as in other areas of the town. The Wading River sites included, but were not limited to, Little Flower, the East Wind Complex, and the church grounds of St. John the Baptist. At the time, all sites were denied due to the community's lack of communication. The Wading River site was a great example of the lack of community opposition and the lack of transparency in the process. Our goal today, as has always been, is to be as transparent as possible to explain the absolute need for communication enhancements. With that being said, it is essential that everyone understand that the primary function of this communication tower, not a cellular tower, a communication tower, is to address the safety of the community and the services of the community and the services of the community. This is accomplished by eliminating those obstacles, preventing radio transmissions from reaching a viable receiver. Additionally, we are offering the town an opportunity to put a site for the town police to enhance their limited communication issues in our service area. And yes, we are allowing at least two cellular companies access to the tower, which again serves two purposes. The first, it will enable our medical personnel the ability to transmit medical data to hospitals prior to transport so that we can provide immediate care to stabilize patients at the scene of a call. Secondly, this added benefit will provide better cellular coverage, which is sorely needed with the proliferation of cell usage over hardwired landlines, which are becoming a thing of the past in most households. Why bring up all of this? Let me highlight a few incidents which put a spotlight on the importance of this project. Earlier this year, we responded to a structure fire on North Wading River Road, approximately one quarter of a mile away from our headquarters, and we couldn't communicate with headquarters or Suffolk County Fire Dispatch, hampering our ability to request additional units, report on conditions, and provide updates as required. On a number of medical responses, our medical first responders were unable to transmit real-time crucial patient medical data to the hospitals, which would enable us to stabilize and treat patients properly prior to their transport. Our equipment relies on cellular service to transmit this important information, and without it, jeopardizes the safety of the patient's care. More recently, we had a member of our own department slip and fall on an exterior stairwell, suffering a substantial head injury. Another member, incidentally, came upon this member, he's also a member of our town board, and attempted to call for help on his cell phone without success as there was no cell service available. Due to the nature of the injuries, he could not leave that individual to use a landline in the fire headquarters to request help. Luckily, another member, who was a member of our town board, was able to help. Another member, who was a member of our town board, was able to help. Another member, who was a member of our town board, was able to help. Another member, who was a member of our town board, the injured party. These are just a few of the many incidents that highlight the immediate need for this communications tower. So I want to thank the town board for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the Wading River Fire District, the fire department, and all the community that we serve. Thank you very much. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you. Thank you. And at this time I'd ask Andrew Hintz to step forward and he'll speak about it from a technical side. And if we can put up the the next document and then Andrew, we have both all three up there for your use. Good afternoon. My name is Andrew Hintz with Integrated Wireless Technologies 101-1 Collin Drive, Holbrook, New York. And we are subcontracted to the Wading River Fire District to service and enhance their communication systems, specifically with relating to the the two-way radios and pagers, the RF technology that they utilize. I want to parent what Commissioner Kooling said. The height of this structure is driven by the fire district. I think that that's what's exceptional about this particular application. Typically we can restrict structures to a much lower height. The height of this structure is driven by the fire district. I don't know which map that is. I might have to get my eyes checked. I'll read it for you. Just let me know which one it is. This one here. That was fire headquarters. This is water tank. So yeah, this is the one we want to focus on first, which is the water tank. This particular map demonstrates their coverage for their systems as they appear today. What is the alarming about this particular map is that while the district exceeds the shaded areas, you see that the current system has a quality of communications that focuses in the center of the district. That was as it was designed when we had limited sites available to us. The fire district has already staged its own tower site at station 2, dedicated solely to RF communications at their substation 2. We have 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 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 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 from fire headquarters. This coverage is with the fire district's antennas being placed at the top of the tower at a base height of 190 feet as discussed. But this isn't a driving need for the height of the tower. Obviously, we speak to that radio coverage, and this is going to enhance it tremendously. If we can go to the last page, which is the link. Nope. Do we have the link plan? The third one, yeah. Apology? Yeah, if we could go back to that previous one, the one that has not been, that one. Nope. Nope? Okay. So not available on the slide deck is the plan that shows the data link that's required between the existing site, the water tower, and the site. Okay. So the plan that shows the data link that's required between the existing site, the water tank, and fire headquarters. So as we know, fire headquarters is down almost at sea level. It's probably 20 feet above sea level at best. And it increases dramatically as you exit that fire district. You're all uphill to get away from there. So when we draw a line from the top of the Riverhead Town Water Tank that we co-locate at to Waiting River Fire in order to make a data link, we need that dedicated data link for our system so that there's no problem. There's no latency. There's no delay. So we can have that simulcast communications synchronized between the water tank and the fire headquarters. That's what's driving the height for the structures, that data link. When we look at the tree growth and we anticipate tree growth over the next decade, if we're not at this height, we do not make a link. We do not have what's called direct line of sight. So that direct line of sight for that data link that we're going to establish to support RF communications is what's driving it. Okay. So that's what's driving the height of this tower. That data link is also going to serve as a backup to what the fire district operates today as its link between its stations. So obviously everything is data. Everything is files that's shared. Everything is a report that's passed between access control systems or all IP. And right now the fire department has a system that's reliant on other providers that are telephone based. So if there were ever to be any kind of catastrophic weather event where telephone poles are impaired or possibly if somebody just strikes a car, strikes a pole and that pole comes down, the fire department could lose communications between its facilities. So not only to enhance the radio communications, but also the data communications between the substation and fire headquarters. So the other thing that's driving the need to expand the fire district's communications that I wanted to touch on real quick was its original UHR, UHR frequency license was a higher emissions power channel. They've added two channels to their lineup since and attempted to use them from the water tank. Those two newly licensed channels were much lower emitting power, ERP. They're half as powerful as the channels that we originally licensed, the one channel. The one channel serves as their main operating channel and we've added paging and we've added some other district communication. We've added system clearances so that system clearances so that system clearances so that system clearances so that system clearances so that system clearances so that system clearances so that system clearances [transcription gap] that's the technological overview of what the fire district is looking to accomplish. And I appreciate your time. Thank you. [transcription gap] Okay, yes, and we apologize for not having it up on the screen, but that elevation plan was actually submitted into the record to depict what Andrew ably described. At this time, I'd like to ask Martin Levin to come forward just to speak briefly about the Rison wireless system as well. Thank you. Martin Levin, C-Squared Systems, on behalf of Rison Wireless 65 Dartmouth Drive, Auburn, New Hampshire. Next slide is our first one? Yes. That indicates the location of sites currently in this area. The black star in the middle is the proposed location, and the lines out there are marked and the number of miles between that location and the nearest sites in that area. So you can see there. They are pretty far away right now. Give me next page. Next page.
Current coverage in this area for us, green is in building coverage. Blue is in vehicle coverage. As you can see, in the area surrounding the proposed site, there is a substantial lack of coverage, and that we are located, optimally speaking, right in the middle of the gap, which is the most efficient way to serve it. Next slide. Next slide. There is the coverage we achieve to connect more on the roads and substantially reduce the gap in coverage at that site. One more slide is the topography in the area as the fire commissioner mentioned. There's a lot of trees in this area, certainly a lot of terrain, which interferes with signals both for us and for them. So that is the story of why the site is there and needs to be there. Mr. Lally, can you just speak briefly to the Verizon's connection with the fire district? Oh, yes. The data terminals used by the fire department are on the Verizon network. So the data for the medical information that was mentioned and communicating with hospitals and so forth goes over Verizon's. So that's the data that we're using to get the data to the Verizon commercial network. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. And finally, we have William Sklar from VHB who analyzed that other side of the balancing test, the considerations of the community character and planning considerations. So I'm going to turn it over to William at this point to go through his analysis that's also submitted in the record. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. William Sklar. I'm a senior environmental planner from VHB with offices at 100 Motor Parkway in Hop Hog, New York. So VHB was retained to prepare a part one environmental assessment form as well as a planning, zoning, and visual impact analysis for the proposed wireless communication facility at the Waiting River Fire Department property. The planning, zoning, and visual impact analysis. The planning, zoning, and visual impact analysis. The planning, zoning, and visual impact analysis includes a description of the need for the proposed facility for both the Waiting River Fire District's communications needs and Verizon Wireless' cellular network. So a quick overview of the existing conditions. The Waiting River Fire District property is approximately 1.5 acres and is within the town's RB80 zoning district. Existing improvements include the fire department's
headquarters, an accessory building, fueling station, and surface parking. The surrounding area includes a mix of community facilities, single family residential uses, commercial uses, and open space. These surrounding uses include the Waiting River Congregational Church to the north, single family residences to the south and west. The Waiting River Fire District is a multi-use facility. The américan américan américan
all currently occupied by paved areas and landscaping, and these areas would be replaced in kind after construction of the facility. The project does not involve tree removal, and there are no sensitive environmental resources, including wetlands, surface waters, or floodplains on or adjacent to the subject property. So one aspect of the report that we submitted is the visual impact analysis, and to conduct this analysis, a viewshed model map was prepared to assess the visibility of the concealment pole throughout the surrounding area within a one-mile radius. And you can see up on the screen, areas highlighted in pink are where the computer model predicts visibility of the top of the concealment pole. The viewshed analysis demonstrates that visibility of the concealment pole would be limited. The extensive tree cover in the majority of the areas surrounding the subject property would screen views from the vast majority of the surrounding residential and densely wooded areas. As shown on this viewshed map, views of the proposed concealment pole are expected to be limited to those areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. and within portions of the few nearby open cleared land and surface water areas. The proposed concealment pole would be expected to be visible in the immediate area of the subject property, along North Country Road to the northwest and southeast, and along North Wading River Road to the east. Visibility is expected to be more intermittent along North Country Road to the south, expected to become more intermittent, excuse me, along North Country Road to the south, up to a distance of approximately one-third of a mile. The proposed concealment pole is also expected to be visible primarily to the northwest of the subject property in areas without dense tree cover surrounding Wading River, along Creek Road, and on the ponds along North Country Road. The viewshed model also shows that there would be limited to no visibility to persons standing on the ground in most residential areas and along Route 25A and Sound Avenue. So, to verify the results of this viewshed model, VHB conducted a site and surrounding area investigation on April 25, 2023. A crane was... The crane was raised with a flag attached to the maximum antenna height for the Wading River Fire Department of 213 feet. VHB drove the publicly accessible roads within one mile of the site to assess the visibility of the flag that was attached to the top of the crane. The results of this one-mile visibility study confirmed the predicted visibility of the viewshed model with limited visibility throughout the surrounding area. And if we could get the photo simulation package up on the next... Thank you. So, during the field survey, photographs were taken to create photo simulations of the proposed facility. Photographs were obtained from 11 publicly accessible viewpoints in the surrounding area. These photographs were obtained on April 25, 2023, during the early stages of the survey. The survey was conducted in the area of the Wading River, and the photographs were taken from the surrounding area. The photographs were obtained from the area of the Wading River, and the photographs were taken from the surrounding area. The photos were obtained from the area of the Wading River, and the photographs were taken from the surrounding area. [transcription gap] Of these 11 viewpoints, photosimulations were prepared for 7 viewpoints where the flag on top of the crane was visible. And if you could please go to viewpoint number five... ...Under américana... [transcription gap] This is on and If you go to the next page, this is the existing condition here is the proposed condition this is on Near the intersection of Sound Road and North Country Road approximately 0.21 miles to the Northwest of the proposed facility and as you can see in the middle of the photo simulation the only the top portion of The concealment pole and the antennas for the waiting River Fire Department are visible above the tree line at this location If you could move to viewpoint number six, please
So this photo simulation was taken along North Country Road, this is approximately 0.32 miles to the southeast of the proposed facility and as you can see the trees in the
Vanishing point of the photograph conceal the bottom of the Pole at this location and as you can see flipping back and forth only the top portion of the pole is visible above the tree line in this area and Next if you could please skip to viewpoint number 10 And then you can see the tree line in the background
This is a long creek road approximately one mile to the north of the proposed facility as you can see again only the very top portion of the Concealment pole is visible and it largely blends with the horizon in this area above the tree line So there are several other Viewpoints included in the photo simulation Package as well, but I just wanted to highlight those few Make a comment when you did your test you disappointed the community because they all thought the tower was going up And then why we addressed to take it down the next day
So again as shown on the photo simulations in areas where the proposed concealment pole would be visible It would be seen among intervening tree cover that generally screens the lower portion of the concealment pole in Most locations of visibility only the upper portion would be visible above the tree line there are other elements including a neutral coloration of the concealment pole which would help blend it with the sky and the surrounding trees and I would also just note that During the time of year with full tree foliage There would be additional screening of the concealment pole as these were prepared in late April when only the early growth was present So moving on to the zoning analysis that was included in our report From a zoning perspective as mr. Alvarez indicated the waiting River Fire Department is applying for immunity from the townhouse special use permit requirements for wireless communications facilities as It is an eligible government entity under the Monroe balancing test however the zoning analysis included in the planning zoning and visual impact analysis report includes an assessment of the zoning criteria for a wireless communications facility That would apply if immunity from zoning is not granted under the Monroe balancing test Without zoning immunity the facility would require relief from the zoning use district requirement the minimum tower setback separation between towers security fencing landscaping and minimum rear yard requirements With regard to the zoning use district requirement the site is located within the town's RB 80 zoning district where wireless facilities are not permitted use With regard to minimum tower setbacks the requirement is for a setback of 100% of the tower height in this case 190 feet from adjoining lot lines The proposed setbacks are 27 feet 10 inches from the western property line 99 feet 9 inches from the eastern property line 170 feet 8 inches from the northern property line and 209 feet 7 inches from the southern property line With regard to the tower separation requirement the code requires a 25,000 foot separation distance between communications towers And under existing conditions there are currently six communication towers that are within 25,000 feet of the proposed facility With regard to security fencing the code requires an eight-foot fence to surround the wireless communications facility Instead where the proposal includes bollards to be installed on the west and south sides of the concealment pole foundation But the pole would be protected by the wading River fire department headquarters building to the north and east and the existing retaining walls to the west The rooftop equipment platform would also only be Accessible to appropriate personnel via stairs with a locking gate and the concealment pole would not be accessible from the ground The town code also requires landscape buffers to screen the tower base and accessory facilities from residential property The proposed facility would be situated between the fire station building and the existing retaining wall which abuts existing dense mature vegetation on a hillside to the west and there is also existing evergreen landscaping within the fire department parking lot so the base of the concealment pole would therefore be effectively screened from the existing surroundings and the ancillary equipment would be situated behind the existing rooftop parapet or within the fire department building itself Finally there is a minimum rear yard requirement in the RB 80 zoning district of 75 foot setback The concealment pole would be set back from the rear property line 71 feet 10 inches But given the shape size and existing improvements on the fire department property It is not feasible to locate the concealment pole at a location That meets this 75 foot rear yard requirement So to summarize it is respectfully submitted that the benefits of improved emergency communications for the Wading River fire department With a facility on its own property Would outweigh the benefits of full compliance with the zoning criteria for wireless communications facilities The proposed facility is not expected to result in significant adverse environmental or visual impacts and has been designed to be the least visually obtrusive feasible While meeting the communications needs of the Wading River fire department Thank you. Thank you
Thank you, all right and with that that is our presentation to this board Certainly if there are any questions of the board of the community We are here to answer them and We look forward to your input based based on what we presented to you. Thank you So after this now if any of us went on jeopardy. We now have the answer to what is the Monroe Balancing Test There you go That was a very well balanced presentation. Anyway Mr. Alvarez I actually have a request. I don't know if I don't know if it's to Mr. Alvarez Yes or maybe to Mr. Howard. Mr. Howard, I had invited the police captain to come in to speak because he had mentioned peripherally about the police department also needing to utilize communications in that area, and I just thought that might be helpful instead of hearsay that she could maybe come up. Is it appropriate for her to come up in this? It is a public hearing, though. Okay. So I'd just invite her, if she would, Captain Woolsey, please, to speak with regard to the police needs in that area for communication. Good afternoon. Well, I can tell you, speaking for the police department, there is a need to increase the ability for the residents of Wading River and residents or people passing through Wading River to be able to contact 901 and to be able to fully utilize the 911 services. Without the initial call, your cell phone call going through to 901, you're not going to be able to get any help. The police, the fire, the initial call really needs to go through. There are many residents who don't own landlines anymore, cell phones have become much more predominant right now, and with the inability of a cell phone to get through, you're not going to be able to get any help. In my prior position as the operations lieutenant, I was in charge of the dispatch office, and we've had several occasions in the past where people have contacted 901 from their cell phones, that cell call was dropped, and they were unable to get all their information out. We still always send an officer to their last known location, but without being able to get all their updated information, it will be a delay. We're not going to be able to get any response in getting people help.
Police radio transmissions are limited in that area of Winding River. It was said before, it's very sporadic. North Country Road, by the duck ponds, anybody who lives in Winding River knows when they travel down North Country Road, probably exactly where their cell phone is going to drop off. That happens for people in the ambulance who are trying to notify the hospital. It happens for a police officer who is trying to contact more resources. Sometimes they try on their portable radio first, that doesn't go through. They can try on their cell phone, and sometimes that takes two or three tries to actually get through. A faster connection between the residents and 901 and the ability for the first responders to talk to each other will decrease the response times for the residents and increase the ability for the public to get help they need in times of emergency. Thank you, Captain. Thank you, Captain. So just to, if I can mention a few things. So as people may know, I personally live in Winding River. Being active in the area, when you, on a weekend basis, we have hundreds of people that attend St. John the Baptist Roman Catholic Church. On our weekends, we have a large majority that go over to the First Congregational Church on weekends. And as the Captain says, many people strictly rely on the ability to utilize those cell phones to call 911. I can tell you that. I've been in church at times, and we've had incidents that occurred, and everyone grabs their cell phone, and it doesn't work, and you can't call 911. I'll switch hats and also say that I am a proud member of the Winding River Fire Department. It is a unique situation to have such limited radio communications down there. When we are sitting on the ramp, and I hope I don't mind if the, you know, I know our fire chief is here and our fire commissioners, but just speaking as a member, when you're on the ramp, I'm not going to be able to get you to the fire station. I'll head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head you know, the ability to work on their phone and get their Wi-Fi and do other things. But this is really strictly, in my eyes, this is about emergency communications, and it is about when our men and women in our law enforcement, our men and women in our fire service that are entering buildings, entering, responding to heart attack victims when every second counts. And we don't have that radio communication, and you can't get additional help, and you don't know what's happening when you arrive on scene. With every second counting, when we know we have the ability to fix it by building this tower, there is no reason not to do it. And so this is, from my standing point, I will always stand behind our fire department and law enforcement personnel. This is a correction to what is greatly needed down in the Waiting River Fire Department area so that every officer, member, and police officer that responds to the scene has continuously communications. When a chief is standing out on a front lawn and he's sending manpower into a building, he's sending a manpower into a building, he needs to have continuous communication, and that can't physically take place in many areas of Waiting River. And so there's a great risk at hand that must be addressed. I commend the fire commissioners that have worked very hard on this. This is something which they have been working on for years to put this together, to finally come to fruition. And so I commend them for their long-going work on this and pushing this through for a number of years. And I also always commend, I have our fire chief in this room, Chief Donnelly, and for his ongoing patience in this process towards us from the side getting ready, having an opportunity to correct a dangerous situation. So that our job as a town board and the people within our entire community is to provide our chiefs and officers with the necessary tools in which they need on the fire scene to succeed. We had a structure fire, as was mentioned earlier, that was just a few hundred yards from our firehouse, and there was really limited radio to no communications that could be on that scene. It was a very difficult situation. And so let's correct what we can and that thereby saving and protecting the lives of our officers on scene. And so that's really, it's not about just having a cell phone tower and about, you know, a different life that all of us get used to just wherever we are, Googling and surfing the web. This is about life and safety. And so this needs to be put in place. And I hope that it will continue to go through the process as quickly as possible. Because every day that it's not there, it leaves our officers, members at risk. And so I think that's a really important thing to do. And I think that's a really important thing to do. And I think that's a really important thing to do. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Do we have anybody from the public who would like to come up to the podium? Come on up. State your name, please. Hi. Good afternoon. The house right next to the fire department. I only wish I had that amount of time to do my research. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. [transcription gap] I didn't have that amount of time to do my research. research. So I got noticed 10 days ago that this was happening and there is a need without a doubt. No one in Wading River will ever argue that there's a need for this cell phone tower. I am proposing the location of it has not been researched to the fullest as it should be. We are talking about health issues and I have some questions on that as well. There are alternative locations with time and effort. I'm sure we can get to where that should be. I do have 25 signatures here of just the people. I only had three days knocking on doors. 25 people who are opposing to the location of the tower, not the tower itself. I also have something once I dug into this, I'm not sure if anyone is aware of this. So I'm going to share this information. MS. Thank you. MS. Thank you. In California, the firefighters had a cell phone tower in their district. They fought and won to get the cell tower removed from their fire station after they showed signs of sickness from the emissions. This was after brain scans found abnormalities in all the firefighters tested, as there was delayed reaction time, lack of impulse control, and cognitive impairment. All firefighters tested had suffered from sleep disturbances, headaches, lack of focus, and memory loss following the installation of a tower adjacent to their station five years earlier, only five years. Number two, I'm wondering if anyone has researched or has been aware that the firefighters lobbied and won the removal of the cell tower from near their station. There was a significant amount of information regarding health impact of cell towers on humans. The head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head website for the International Association of Firefighters. And as it stands now, that website and the IAFF opposes the use of fire stations as base stations for towers and or antennas for the conduction of cell phone transmissions until it is proven that at such sightings are not hazarded to the health of the members. Number three is, this was pretty profound when I realized this. Was anyone aware that in 2021 the court ordered the FCC to address the impact of the RF radiation on the children and the long-term exposure and as of January 2024, the FCC has not responded to the court order. I do have documents here. I would love for you to read this. It's astonishing. There's case studies. I printed them all out. Can someone give them to them? You can submit them to the town clerk. Okay. Okay. And they'll be put in part of the public record? Yes. Also, in that packet is two alternative sites. Like I said, I only had 10 days, but there are, judging by what that presentation said, that they will, they contacted East Winds, and so I would imagine right across the street from East Winds would be a good position for the tower, and that's the National Cemetery, which people are already dead, so I don't think we have to worry about any exposure there and health issues, and maybe that might, maybe we might have to jump over some hurdles to get that land qualifying for it, but I mean, this is the safety of our firefighters. If this information that I've read is true, and I don't think anyone is even knowing of it, it really needs to be looked at. So the Environmental Health Trust revealed in 2023 that the RF radiation was not going to be used. And in 2023, they submitted 375 documents to the FCC, and they still haven't upped their, or reviewed their standard regulations of how much toxic things we can absorb before getting sick. So that was in 1996 that they made those regulations, and they have not been updated, and the court has ordered them to do this, and they have not. So I am at least requesting that we wait for these five days. And I think that's the only way that we can get the findings to come back from the FCC, and with the updated regulations to how much radiation we can accept without getting cancer. And there's documented proof, all sorts of things in this packet. And I don't know if you wanted the petition, the? You can submit those also. Okay. And some letters. And once again, the lack of time. I'm at a deficit. I was only one person. There's other people. And some people here are going to speak on this behalf as well. I'll just say, no. A number of years ago, they looked at multiple locations like the East Wind and other areas. And I own property up on 25A. And when they looked at areas. The problem was that it's the significance low-lying area. So that the communications, the radio waves are not going. You know, they're not following the terrain. They're traveling basically in straight lines. And so they would basically be going right over, right over the, what we call the hole in Waiting River where all your churches are, the fire department. So maybe I misunderstood. The presentation. Having it down low, it's communicating outwards. And then we're covering and getting, you know, getting it in that area. So that was a big thing. Maybe I misunderstood the paperwork that was sent to me or that was on your website. Because they said the three, they can prove that. The three other sites were the golf course, the church, and East Winds. But they didn't respond to their letters. So I think when they said that those would actually work. So I'm asking it. Let's put a little more effort into it. Or at least wait. See how sick we're going to get. Because these are new regulations. 1996 was when they, FCC did their regulations that said that we can accept so many whatever. You know, and there's, now they're against court order. They're not, they're not filing. They're not, they just didn't, they're not doing it. They're not doing it. And that's our firefighters. They sleep there. My house is right next to it. I sleep there. But not only for me and my grandchildren and the surrounding areas, but our firefighters. I don't even know if they're aware of this. It's on their website. Well, the firefighters, this is going in headquarters. And currently firefighters are not staying overnight. They're not sleeping. Okay. So just me. I'm a member of the fire department. So that's not necessarily the case. Okay. But the surrounding areas, yeah. I understand your concerns. And I appreciate you bringing this in. Yeah. And the lack of time, you know, is the issue as well. But thank you for hearing me. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? Come on up, sir. State your name and your, where you're from. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Robert Bellow. I live in Wading River. I've been in my home there over 53 years. I live right behind the fire department. And the previous speaker addressed the health issues of the tower. I'm not going to get into that. I'm just going to talk about the aesthetics of it. This tower is about the height of a 20-story building. building. So, you know, I moved out here not to be in Manhattan or Brooklyn. It's called the Concealment Tower, but it's really not concealed. What's concealed are the materials inside the tower itself. So this is a large structure. And one of the gentlemen who spoke earlier described a crane that was set up to show the height of this tower and various photographs were taken. Well, one day, I guess it was in 2023, I went outside my home and I said, what the heck is this? And what it was, it was a boom of a crane sticking way up in the air. And I said, wow, what's going on? I thought maybe the fire department was getting a new air conditioning unit or I had no idea what was taking place. But that boom was clearly visible. And the photographs that he showed were taken in April, but you could see that those number of trees still had a lot of leaves on it and grain. So in the middle of the wintertime, this thing is going to be aesthetically just sticking right out. Now, this is in the historic district of Wading River. And I just agree with the previous speaker, not against, my father was a fireman. He was a fireman at Brekava National Lab and he worked there until he passed away. When I came out of the service, I worked in the fire department in for a while, then moved to Wading River. I've been a supporter of the fire department. They need it. But I agree again with the previous speaker that the location here is the issue. Is there a place where a piece of property could be leased or rented? You're talking about Creek Road or the Shoreham Power Plant. I'm not going to do a geographic or topographic survey to see where would be the best location. I have no idea. I'm not going to do a geographic or topographic survey. I'm not going to do a geographic or topographic survey. I'm not going to do a geographic point. I'm not going to do a geographic point. I'm not going to do a geographic point. I'm not going I just don't believe it would fit right in in the center of the town of Wading River. And I also looked at something else that was set up by one of the speakers. He was talking about setbacks from property lines, and it said that the minimum setback would be 100% of the tower height. Now, that tower is 190 feet, but with the additional antenna on the top, it goes to 213 feet. And in the town of Riverhead Planning Department, I got this on the Internet, they sent a statement to the supervisor dated 9-19-24, and they said that the setback from the western property line would be a minimum of 70%. So, it's going to be 71 feet, a minimum. So, is it going to be 71 feet or 213 feet? The setback from the eastern property line would be 99 feet 9 inches. So, we're not talking anywhere near 200 and some odd feet. And that's the other question. I mean, there's a number of houses right behind the fire department, and that's where I am. And I also looked at a statement from 2010 where one of the gentlemen said, a lot of, cell towers were being built at that time. And at that time, the town supervisor was Sean Walter, who also lives in Wading River. And he made a statement, and it said, our goal is to try to put these cell towers in industrial areas that will not impact the residents of the town, and not impact them health-wise and certainly aesthetically. I mean, I don't want to look out my window. I don't want to look out my window and see this huge thing. As I said, I didn't move to Brooklyn. I moved to Wading River. It's changed, and I accept, you know, I think change is great. But the location of this, I think, could be put in a different place. I think that's something that we have to, you know, look at, at least look into. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Do we have anybody else from the audience? Come on up, ma'am. State your name and where you're from, please. You can bring it down. Yeah, you can swing it. There you go. Okay, thank you. No, it's the height of this. That's all. I'll stand on my toes. My name is Valerie Frost, and I live at 12 Jacobs Lane in Wading River. Okay. In 1996, the FCC, and again, I've only had a very short time to really do any bit of research for this, which is unfortunate. But that's when they established regulations, 1996, which is almost 30 years ago. What they didn't have the benefit of at that time was to understand the long-term impacts of this. So, what they did in 2013 was they established a notice of inquiry, an NOI, to review some of these long-term effects and to address them. Well, in 2019, what they did was they then terminated the NOI without any adjustments or any new regulations or even any answers to this. So. In 2021, a U.S. Court of Appeals ruled, and I'm going to read this so that I get it straight, that the FCC's decision to terminate the NOI was arbitrary and capricious. And the FCC did not provide a reasoned explanation and did not adequately respond to whether the FCC's guidelines adequately protected against the harmful effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation. In 2023, the Environmental Health Trust, EHT, submitted almost 400 documents to the FCC, which included scientific studies, health studies, policy papers, and letters. And as of January of this year, 2024, the FCC has not received any letter from the FCC. And the FCC has not received any letter from the FCC. [transcription gap] And so, in 2030, under this same system, under this same system, under this same system, under this same system, under this same system, under this same system, under this same system, [transcription gap] hasn't changed anything. We have residents. We have firefighters. We have across the street a preschool at St. John's. We have catechism students coming there. We have an elementary school right down the block, and others too, but again, I only had a short amount of time to pull this all together, who would be impacted, at least if nothing else, and we can't find an alternative location. Could we wait to find out what the impact of these studies are? And I think that's important, and Mr. Rothwell, you just said it perfectly with the concerns for health and safety. What about broadening it to the health and safety of everybody else, the firefighters, the residents, the children who are within that vicinity? So thank you very much for the opportunity to be able to address you. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.
Hello. Hello. Say your name and location. Josephine Mikowski, Wading River. Okay. There's been a definite need for Wi-Fi in that area. It's dangerous. It's dangerous for any one of us. I understand their problem with the, what's it, RFV or whatever it is, the radio frequencies. Did we not get answers from the golf course or East Wind? And would it be feasible all the way up at East Wind to help them down in the valley? Do anyone know that? Gentlemen, do you want to? Well, that's the first question. I think the councilor will address that when you're done. It has been addressed? Okay. I know we always had the tower there, the water tower. Is there a Verizon wireless up there? Are they the Great Rock Water Tower? Yeah. There are multiple locations. There are multiple services on there. I can't say specifically it's Verizon. I know we lose it when I'm on the back roads. But again, I live in Great Rock. Great Rock. It's a high point in the community. It is. So you are, the entire Pasatino is very familiar with it. Yes, we are. Probably you've been in every house servicing. Absolutely. And it is a health and safety issue. The problem is we built our firehouse in the lowest landing spot in the town of Weedy River. Yes. But it's not only about the firehouse. Because if there's an accident down there, that's a high traveled area. Sundays, you know. Yeah. You can be going in there and there's a lot of people. We were all going to church or whatever there. So it is definitely been a problem for many years, especially once we all got Wi-Fi. I don't know what the answer is. Is there another piece of property that could be looked at, maybe purchased for that purpose? But I am in support of it. I just would like, I could hear their, what they're talking about. They're right there, maybe a half a mile from it. I don't know what the cause and effect is. But I do know that that is something that a lot of people would worry about. And the one thing I thought about is what happens if it falls? Where does it go? It's 200 and something feet up. It's a unique structure that's built in multiple components. So it doesn't fall, don't think of it as one large stick that falls and collapses. It's designed in a manner that the weakest top would collapse first. Okay. We had like a class five hurricane. The top may initially separate and then as winds pick up, then the middle section may separate. It would break down in individual pieces and components and collapse basically onto itself as opposed to entire structure just going over. That wouldn't happen, the others would give out prior. And you guys could certainly comment on that if you'd like. But I do think, I do think. Something I looked at because I didn't want it to come right down into the congregational church. So these are things that we looked at. No, you don't want it to come down. I don't want it to come down. I didn't want anyone. I get that. But what is the timing on it? I mean she did get the thing ten days ago so how long do we... That's a standard public notice. Right. To have a hearing and that's how we typically notice public hearing's. I understand that. But this has been studies that they've gone on I'm going to say... Do we... Three years. I mean I had meetings when I first came in with... How many times do we hear it though? How many times does it come here for public hearing? this is a this is the official the one time the official public this is the official we had work sessions so people watch the work session so there were work sessions but as a homeowner that's right there they didn't get notified ahead of time you not for a work session you get notified of the public hearing there's a public notice put up for the public hearing i don't know but i'm looking at this from her perspective she's sitting there she could have been away on vacation on a cruise and came back and found out about it and been without so i i don't know how fair that is to a homeowner winter in florida and she'd be there for months and i i understand that but she'd probably get the notification forever but it's not i understand that it's not practical it doesn't necessarily need that someone and i'm not present here someone can send things by letter by email by phone call we yes we take them i'm not against it but what i'm against is the procedure and how someone finds out and they have 10 days and then we'll make a decision and then they have a certain amount of time and that's it i find that we only got the money yeah sorry it's a public hearing they're not adopting it anybody else from the audience i think you wanted him to address the answer
yes my name is mukesh patel i live in a wedding river 1481 north country road my only concern is the fcc study regarding the health issue cell tower in your backyard it says
that the children are not allowed to go to school and the students are not allowed to go to school and the students are not allowed to go to school underage kids are getting sick seriously have a carcinogenic effect and a later stage after 10 year cancer so please if you can provide some more answer for that and how about the study it shows that the house value getting depreciated so because of the cell tower in your sight same you know
you would be talking about aesthetically your review but i could also talk about i think you have a higher value when you can use wi-fi in your home and and uh cell phone and have and have communications in your home that cannot, I mean, almost all the new innovative things that we use today use Wi-Fi services, and for the good portion of Wading River, they don't exist. So it actually would help and enhance many homes within the town as well. But I am not opposing the cell tower. I am just opposing the health issue, if you can clarify. Understood. Thank you. Thank you, sir. My name is Mike Sanchez, Wading River resident, but on the Brookhaven side. I want to thank the fire department because without them, I probably wouldn't be here today. A couple of years ago, you made it to my house, which is right around the corner. And again, it was something that without having them as close as they were. And again, I'm getting the call, wouldn't be here. But at the same time, I'm thinking about what Mr. Rothwell is saying about the length of time that this has been going on and not having been a participant in any conversation, not knowing about it. I think if I polled you and if you were answering honestly, if your property was adjacent to this site and this 213 foot tower was going to be staring at you every day going forward, you would have wanted... Your neighbor to maybe have reached out like you did this time with the letter and just say, this is what we're planning to do. Again, if we are a community and that's who you are here to represent, why would you not have thought over those many years to do exactly what this attorney did? It didn't even come from you. And that's really my story. I struggle. The process here, it sounds like this Monroe balance test. We're here now because there was opposition years ago to the 10 towers that went up. And I get it. I know what happened with McDonald's. There wasn't going to be a drive-through, so they fought against it and they wanted to keep it looking like Wading River. And I agree with that totally. And at the same time, I'm a first responder myself. So I totally understand the need for cell tower service. For the years that I served, Rocky Point, similar circumstance. I think we're in the same situation. So it's not lost on me what we need to do. But what is bothering me is that this conversation is happening now years into the process and we're on the eve of doing this and none of us knew about it. And I think if we were working together on whatever this would look like, wherever it might be, I think we would be in a much better place with a much better location, with a much better aesthetic, with exactly what we need for this community. So I would implore you to maybe tap the brake, reach out to the neighbors that are probably not many people know about this. That pole, I did not see that crane up there and I live next door to Bob. I'm just learning about all of this in the last seven days. So again, I totally understand the position that you have, Mr. Rothwell, as someone that sees the need for it, but I also see the need to be a part of a community. And right now, I don't really know. I don't really feel that we have that going on in this conversation. Thank you. Thank you. Claudia Bianca, Baiting Hollow. I just moved. Baiting Hollow. I just have a suggestion. We all understand the need. It goes beyond saying it's about safety. What I suggest. And I know you weren't the supervisor. Many of you on the board weren't even on the board at that point when you started talking about this. Maybe in the future, an issue of this size that's going to impact an entire community could be brought to the civic association or locations, a public meeting to discuss and have public input before this point. The notice that was sent out 10 days ago was the notice to attend a public hearing. That's a legal requirement. It wasn't about the topic. That's what's missing. That's the disconnect. It was brought to the Wading River Civic Association. And Sid Bell, he was even here during the work session. He brought it back to the civic association. They did hold a discussion on it. So just to correct you that it has been brought to the civic association. Okay. I stand corrected. It was a lengthy discussion about it. Not everybody who lives in Wading River attends the civic association. So it would be a starting place and the word could get out to have public input before the meeting. Before the decisions are made at this point. It's almost too late. So to start a practice to include the community that's going to be highly affected by it would be advantageous. Thanks. Thank you. Anybody else from the audience? We have nobody online. Counselor. Thank you. Yes. I'll respond to some of the comments. Try to address some of those questions. I'm sorry. [transcription gap] I'll just head over to you so you can clear yourself up. I'll head over to you so you can clear yourself up. [transcription gap] 2007. And in 2007, one of the first files I received was the Wading River Fire Department to determine whether or not that location was feasible. It's taken 17 years and probably more than that to really get this done. So it is a long time coming. And as expressed by the folks that have expressed it, I think everyone understands the need. Because at bottom, what are we discussing today? We're discussing the balancing, right? Nothing is perfect. But if we can establish that the need is that great, and I think we have, we believe it certainly counterbalances some of the other considerations. But just to discuss a few of those considerations, the alternatives. I had mentioned up front the materials that we had submitted. I had mentioned that we had some of the materials that we had submitted. To sort of cover it. And just in my own story, it just, I think, expresses the investigations that have gone on through the years to try to determine where the best location in Wading River is. I mean, at its bottom, Wading River is a pretty residential in terms of area. So in terms of the options that are available, they're pretty limited. And that's why we did investigate those other locations and spoke to their, and communicated with those people. And I think that's really important to see if there's any interest. And that's really the threshold starting. If they're not interested, we can't really move forward to see, oh, is it feasible? You know, how high is the pole supposed to be? And, you know, in some of those instances, probably the pole would have to actually be higher just because of the topography. So it is something that has just been part of the community for all of these years. It's just something that needed addressing, honestly. And we hope we can do this. with this particular application. In terms of the health discussion, we do obviously hear those concerns often. And what we do have to make clear is that this is something that the FCC has occupied the field on, number one, dating back to 1996 with the Telecommunications Act. At that point, it was determined, this is something that the FCC will have jurisdiction over, and will continually be looking at to make sure that the considerations of all communities around the US are looked after with these sorts of considerations. So it is true that the designation of the standards, I had mentioned at the front, there are standards that the FCC has set, and in our particular case, we're actually below 1% of that standard, just to give any idea of what kind of emissions we're talking about here. But, you know, we're not talking about the but there is something to the effect that we're dealing with the laws of physics here. We're talking about transmissions through wireless means and frequencies that in fact have been used for decades. Many of the frequencies that are used at this point, are not used for wireless purposes, such as when you used to get your TV through the rabbit ears, that communication that used to occur, those sorts of, that area of the wireless spectrum is now used for wireless. So it's been out there for decades, upwards of 100 years at this point. But the considerations continue to go on, and so the FCC's charge is to take all, all, all investigations, all studies, anything that is related to this particular topic. To make sure to see if anything changes. But again, the law of physics are quite immutable in terms of this. And so the account that we've heard from a few of the speakers today reflects that fact. The FCC is basically saying, yes, we continue to look at this. And yes, there are always gonna be studies that come our way. You know. to present something that would be helpful that would change things. But it's very much consistent because, again, we're dealing with a science that, and the principles of science that really don't change very much. It's been confirmed in terms of where those standards should be. And again, the proposal here is on the order of 100 times less than that standard that's even been set by the FCC. So we present that for you and we've obviously submitted our report in connection with that to help alleviate, we hope, some of the concerns that have been expressed here today. Can I just ask you to elaborate on that? Sure. It was mentioned, I believe, by one of the speakers you had produced that it's 0.1% or something. There was something he had said. Half a percent, yes. Half a percent? That's right. Of what? Of 100%. So if you're basing it on 100% to say the levels that we would like these facilities to be under is set. At 100%. And then with our studies we make sure and investigate what it will actually be in the field. And so factoring in the communications equipment that is going to be installed by the fire district and by the carriers, you factor that in. And again, it's simple math to determine exactly what those emissions would be. So if the 100% is where that standard is set, our standard for this particular facility is way down here. 0.5%. So we're going to have to make sure that we're not even anywhere near the standard that is suggested by the FCC. Thank you. Of course. Thank you. I just had one other point, too. Sure. You mentioned about there was discussion of the golf course, the church, and East Wind. That's right. Did they all decline to have this facility in their area? That's correct. That's correct. These are private properties. That's correct. I think they also looked at a number of years ago in the low-lying area, there is a town parking lot over by the duck ponds. But aesthetically, certainly that's going to be more visible right there. They like the idea of putting it behind the firehouse. The firehouse in itself as a building has some significant height that basically kind of hides the base of the whole entire unit. And then with the surrounding trees behind it as well, it was certainly more aesthetically, you know, aesthetically. That's correct. Yeah. I had actually pulled up a picture. I don't think I necessarily need to submit it. But just a representative picture, I can submit this in, of the rear of the property just to kind of give you an idea. And I think we do have a shot that shows perhaps the resident who's closest. And it gives you an idea of the vegetative structure or the vegetative barrier that actually is there and the topography behind it as well. I'll put it into record just to make sure. But that gives you an idea of the topography. Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [transcription gap] We've been trying to position this in the best possible way, again, to balance all of the details of this particular project. Again, nothing's 100%, but we're just looking to try to alleviate the issues on one side and obviously elevate the point of the need of this facility. That's really what we're talking about here today. Thank you very much. Of course. Anybody else from the public? You may. Just state your name again, ma'am. Joanne Romano, Waiting River resident. Now, what the heck was I going to say? Hold on a minute. He addressed the 1%. So he said he's the 1% below the FCC regulation standards. He's not. He's not. But I just want to say there were less than 1% of the standard. Oh, 1.5. Of the standards? Correct. Oh, okay. Well, that's good to hear. And then the other thing I wasn't sure, the information that I've got said that East Wind, you just mailed them a letter and they just didn't respond? Or they actually did respond? No, they did not respond. So all the people just didn't respond? They didn't say no, they just didn't respond. So that would be different. And then I just, once again, want to say. that I feel like there's more time and research for other places besides a residential spot. One other thing, if this cell phone tower had to be taken down, like it had to be taken down in Colorado and California, who pays for that? Because it's like $100,000. Who would pay for that? There would be a, I believe there would be a... The taxes would pay for that? I believe that would be part of a decommissioning plan that they would have to put in if this were to go forward. Of course. Okay, thank you.
Yeah, so if, in any sort of situation where the facility is decommissioned, that's part of Elite Towers' charge in their agreement with the fire district, and that's part of, that's in their lease arrangement with them. Just one more point on the alternatives as well, and I think we just have to remember this as well. Certainly, you know, the investment... The investigation of other alternative sites was looked at, but this is the primary site by virtue of the fact the fire district is going to be using it. And since it is, you know, primarily for their charge and primarily for their communications, it makes it enormously more convenient and easier and more efficient if it is actually on their site. So that was obviously part of the consideration as well. Thank you. Of course. Can you come on up to the mic? I'll take the microphone.
Eileen Morello, Waiting River. My property is 50 feet from the firehouse. How much did they look into the shore nuclear power plant? Because that sea level, it's right across. You can see it from the duck ponds. What kind of research was done on that? It's got to be low. You're talking about east wind being high. Calvary National Cemetery is high. This is low. If the lawyer could let us know, was that seriously looked into? And when you're talking about the FCC, they're not responding to the health effects. You've got children in the house, and it's a serious situation. But the shore nuclear power plant is all open. It's right there. It's level. I'd like you to look into that. Okay. Thank you. Maybe we can bring him up. Come on up. I'm sorry, sir. I could just mention the response to that last point. I did consult with our RF engineers, and they did confirm that even putting aside the difficulties of perhaps locating on that particular property from a permitting standpoint, the location there is difficult because of the low-lying area like we've mentioned before. So it would actually be much worse in connection with the technical side of siting there. You're talking about the shore on power plant. Correct. Correct. Yes, thank you. Okay. I'm sorry. Ron Hariri-Aquabog, thank you for the presentation, and thank you to our first responders and police captain for their analysis. My question is... ...what's next? thousands of acres of industrial land at EPCAL. Is that land still tied up in litigation? Councilwoman Merrifield said she expected the litigation to last years and years. I know there's a notice of pendency on the property that ties up the property, prohibits a sale. What is the status of a potential relocation of this 20-story tower to the industrial land at EPCAL? Or is that still unknown? Maybe council can address the status of that litigation. I'll just say the high point. So, you know, EPCAL is a much higher elevation. So the ongoing concern, the difficulty in placement of this tower is that basically it is significantly – the height of the tower around 219 feet is basically – the lower portion of the grade from comparing it to like Route 25A. So anybody that lives there, you're significantly going downhill. We always say living there, we're going into the hole on the way home as you go down there. So it's about trying to get the transmitting waves down into that lower portion. And that's the difference. So putting something up, as I mentioned earlier, on 25A or any of the higher areas such as EPCAL is not going to be able to assist the homes, the churches in that area, those public gathering spaces already existing. Another question is- Excuse me, I was just going to say, would you like to hear from Verizon or again- Actually, I have another question. And again, thank you for your presentation as a volunteer fireman at Wading River. What I understand there are multiple cellular companies that will also be using this tower. What compensation, if any, will those carriers provide to the Wading River Fire District or the town? And what is the cost of the town for use of that tower? We'll let the counselor answer that. Thank you. Their counselor. Doesn't involve us. Thank you. All right, so the two questions. EPCAL, the technology that's used both by the fire district and Verizon Wireless, it doesn't extend that far. You're really looking for a radius that's no more than a mile or so. Okay. Thank you. Part of that is in relation to the discussion on health. These facilities are meant to run at a very low power in order to avoid any sort of issues regarding that. So, unfortunately, EPCAL is not really in play here in terms of satisfying both the fire districts and Verizon Wireless' needs. And then the second question in terms of payment. Yes. There's. there is a cost share arrangement between both the fire department and elite towers. So that's the arrangements that would be in place. So the fire district obviously would receive proceeds as new carriers are added to the poll. What would those proceeds be? In terms of what? It's 50-50, I think, right? Well, we can't do this off the record. We have to do it one at a time. What would the Wading River Fire District receive from the carriers using the tower on its property? It's a 50-50 cost share. So basically that's the arrangement. I think that's also unknown to an extent as additional carriers able to sign up on there and could potentially increase revenue and all revenue when the Wading River Fire District goes to the Wading River Fire District, which primarily is used to buy equipment. So that's that. That's how we get, you know, so it could potentially save the taxpayers of the Wading River Fire District money in terms of using, purchasing new fire equipment, fire trucks, apparatuses, ambulance, BLS, everything in its cost as astronomical as we know in the fire service today. Well, that would be great if it generates some revenue. Mr. Harari, we use the microphone. We come up front if we're going to speak. I hope that answers your question. Okay. Anybody else from the public? I just also... I also wanted to mention a point, too, for Mr. Howard regarding Mr. Harari's question about EPCAL. Being that that isn't litigation, would it be feasible to put up a particular... the expense to put up such... And maybe for you, Mr. Alvarez, too. Probably not whoever would pay for it. Right. The expense to put up something on land that you may never have an... you may have to take it down. What would the expense be to that? Right. Right. Depending... I'm not familiar with the status of the litigation, but, you know, if we were even to be able to put up the land, we would have to put up the land. I think there would be some risk there, and I don't know if anyone necessarily would want to take that risk. I just wanted to point that out because it was a fair question, Mr. Harari. Of course. And have you actually ranked some other... No, no, no. Wait till you get up there, please. Thank you.
Actually, you were quoted, Councilwoman Merrifield, as saying that the litigation may last years and years, and we know there's a list pendants on the property. Can anybody clarify the status of that litigation? Okay. Okay. What projections you have in terms of the time frame of resolution of that case? I can't put an estimate on the resolution. The town has submitted a motion to dismiss and a motion to cancel the list pendants. That was pending for several months. A couple weeks ago, our special counsel got an order from the judge setting it down for an in-person settlement conference on the motions on November 21st. A conference on November 21st? Yes. Thank you. Anybody else from the public?
I mean, you're going to head back there, but... Nope. Microphone's getting closed here. Just in the future. Again, we could go around and around. I think I was involved with the Sean Wedding River School District. We hadn't passed a bond in repairing the schools for so many years. Got involved in that. We wound up passing that $48.5 million bond because the community came together. There was a working group. We went out to community meetings. We knocked on doors. We let people know what was happening, what was needing to be done. That didn't happen in this case, and you can hear from the voices in this room. If that had been done, this meeting wouldn't be happening. So again, if there is an opportunity to rethink where this is going, the aesthetics of it, where it might be, to hear that we didn't get a response and we've abandoned the idea doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense to me. It seems like this was a foregone conclusion. Issues were not explored that could be explored. We still have the time, and I would ask that if we could look into it, we should. Just for the record, sir, regardless of whether you knocked on doors or not, the public hearing still has to be held by law. Absolutely. Valerie Frost again. There you go. Okay. Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you. Thank you. Just to reiterate that the FCC regulations are almost 30 years old with no address to the health and safety issues of people who live nearby, so it's just kind of a reminder of I would hope that we could have some information on that so that the community can then be advised. as to what the risks are for us having this built right on top of us. Thank you. Michael Morello from waiting river. Has anybody from river head town did their own analysis of the impact of this tower? What type of analysis impact? I'm listening to all the technical data that they've had well over a year to put together which we only had seven days. Do you just take their word for what they say without anybody else a second opinion? They're hired experts to present paperwork to us. Who hires them? Our planning department also backs up and goes through everything that's submitted. Joe Schmoe. We can't come in off the street and say here I did a report and it says it's good. This is all verified through our planning department in answer to your question. And how long has that been going on? Since as long as we've been dealing with the situation. I'm going to say at least three years. This is the first I've ever heard of this in the last seven days. I don't think that's very fair. It seems like a foregone conclusion. It took that amount of time to put things together to make their final decisions and that's what you hear today that they have said they have looked at different areas and taken into all consideration and this is in their view the best placement of where it should go. When do you guys vote for this? This would be put on for our possibly for our next town board meeting. Tonight we end the public hearing today. We keep it open for written comment until October 15th so people still have a chance to write in and comment. November 15th. November 15th. Time flies when you're having fun. I'm sorry, November 15th. So people could still write in their concerns and have them part of the record. And when you write it in, every member of the board gets copies of everything that's sent in and we read everything that comes in with the correspondence. I think you might even go to November 18th because the 15th is a Friday and then you go into the weekend. I was given the date of the 15th for some reason. Okay. Is that 10 days? Usually it's the 17th but I don't know what day that fell on. Okay. I don't know. I also think the best way for communication is still hard wire. Anywhere you go with the cell phone, no matter where the tower is, it can still drop your call. You can still get static. It's not a foregone thing that it's perfect. So even if it's there, it doesn't mean that it's going to help as much as people think that it might. I mean. I give a lot of praise to the fire department. They do a really great job. I've been here for over 30 years and I feel that they did a very nice job without the cell tower. I mean, I'm sure that nobody here on this dais and the people that have been talking here are 500 feet from where this is going to be. Nobody said like where your property values are going to go. I mean, if you try to sell your house and they see this big tower in front of your house, yeah. Well, they're going to go somewhere else. So I think that's another consideration that should be taken care of. Another thing is this thing could be very susceptible to lightning strikes. Where does the lightning go after it hits the tower? Does it go down into a place where there's a lot of foliage and start a fire? Does it hit another house and toast your appliances? No matter how much suppression they put on these things. It doesn't. It doesn't. 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 head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head account for what could happen. And I think that also should be considered to the people that are around this area. But I wish I had more time to put things together. I've never been to a town meeting. This is the first one, and I wish I would have had more time to put things together and look at all the setbacks that this could be. Thank you. And if you want to continue, by all means, like say we'll keep it open 10 days. So if you have other future questions in the next few days and so forth, write to us, call us, email us, and we'll answer them. Thank you very much. I will. You're welcome. Thank you. Joanne Romano. Is it possible to delay the vote? We don't have the vote scheduled yet. Oh, well, you said 10 days? I said it could. This will be open for written. And I'll put it in comment. The public hearing will. For 10 days. After then, it gets scheduled for a town board vote. So we can't delay the scheduling for a town vote. We don't have a date yet for it. So we can't delay something I don't have a date for. Got it. Even when it's before the town board is a resolution, you still then, as all resolutions, have an opportunity to come forward and to speak about them and address any, ask questions or certainly make comments. So if there's any concerns. You may have at that time as well. I'd also like to speak on the property values. I was a real estate agent for over 10 years. I managed the office and I was an associate broker. Without a doubt, your value will be going down. As my professional opinion, taking people to a house, if they saw the local lines, they didn't want it. You know, nope, nope. So a cell tower is definitely going to decrease the value of the houses. Without it. So over 10 years of experience is considered pretty experienced in that field. So I dealt with a lot of people. So I just wanted to speak on that because someone, I think someone had mentioned it might increase your value. It will not increase your value to my ability and to, you know, that's what I wanted to say. Okay. Thank you. Nobody online? Okay. All right. But, councilor, you. No. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
I didn't get your head around this. [transcription gap] November 18th, do we have a sure date? 18th, it's a Monday. 18th, November 18th. Yeah, because 10 days will take us to Sunday, I believe. Or a weekend, so we do Monday close of business. Okay, so written comment open until November 18th on this matter. Yep. All right, moving on to our second public hearing. Scheduled for two o'clock, it is now 4.03. We have a public hearing regarding the override of the tax level, levy, and I would ask Jeanette. The polo to come on up. This is how much taxes you're getting. Well, you have to pay for taxes. You're right. Thank you. Thank you. People must have a lot of money. Yeah. Good afternoon. [transcription gap] So, we're here to discuss, have a public hearing on the 2025 preliminary budget. We are proposing to pierce the tax cap by 4.14%, which results in an increased tax levy of 7.92% for the town-wide tax levy, which includes the general fund, the street lighting fund, and highway. Some just notes quickly on the overall increase from the 2024 adopted budget to the 2025 preliminary budget. The general fund is the only fund that we're proposing to pierce the cap in, and the increase of 4.1 million over the 2024 budget is due to a few things. Salaries and related payroll taxes for PD and non-PD. These are contractual increases for the most part. New York State retirement, which is the most recent increase in the number of people who have been in the state for the past year. The new year's pension rate has increased about $600,000 from last year. That's basically due to rate increases, which comes straight from New York State. PD's rate increased by 4 percentage points. Also, health insurance increased another $600,000 from last year. Our rate increases are estimated to be a 9% increase over last year. We're budgeting for a few new vehicles to replace old vehicles that are pretty much the same as the previous year. We're budgeting for a few new cars, which is a pretty much end of life for police, fire marshal, and buildings and grounds. We have an increase of about $400,000 for debt service, which is basically related to a principal payment beginning next year for the new town hall building. On the debt for that, we have about a $200,000 increase for the purchase of new radios due to a new bandwidth set by Suffolk County, and about a $100,000 increase for insurance premiums, property insurance, general liability, and workers' comp. And that's about it for the overall increase. The preliminary budget is out on the website. It has been out there for a while for everybody to take a look at. So I don't know if you want to open the public hearing for comments from everybody else, or if you have any questions for me. Male Speaker 1 Supervisor, I would just add that because we're proposing to exceed the tax cap limit, we're required to adopt a local law authorizing that exceeding the cap to that extent that's pursuant to general municipal law. And that law will need to be adopted by three-fifths of the town board. Male Speaker 2 Correct. Okay. Do we have anybody from the comment who would like to comment on the tax levy? Male Speaker 2 Yes. Male Speaker 2 Yes. Female Speaker 1 Thank you. Hi. Colleen O'Brien, Aqibot. When you see me come out, you know it's bad. First of all, there's two questions I'd like to ask. The first one is, what is our current indebtedness with bonds, installment agreements, bond anticipations, anticipation bonds? Does anybody have an idea what our balance is? Male Speaker 1 Yes. Male Speaker 2 Yes. Male Speaker 1 Okay. We can get that information for you. Colleen O'Brien Okay. I'd also like to know what the balance is in our reserve accounts. Male Speaker 2 Yes. Colleen O'Brien I'm going to make this real short and sweet. I think that it's callous contempt, this budget for the taxpayer. Young and old, we have a population, a high population of senior citizens. So security increase is 2.5%. We're lucky. We're lucky. A lot of young people in this town who are struggling to make a go of it. I think that we've had reckless, unsustainable spending in this town. And I think we're getting to a point that's got to stop because I'm going to question personally how long are we going to be able to maintain control of our water department or our police department when we become Suffolk County because that's got to be a question that a lot of people I would think would be asking right now. As far as raises, that's just plain arrogance. Yep, I'm looking at you Mr. Hubbard. Arrogance. Just arrogance. To think you should compare yourself to CSEA, you should get equal to them. Perhaps you should resign and get a union job. Thank you. Male Speaker 2 Thank you. Have a wonderful evening. Anybody else would like to comment? All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. [transcription gap] MS. Good afternoon. Joan Cyr from Jamesport. First, I want to commend the town supervisor and the town board members for reducing your initial proposed salary increases. That was a good public relations move. More significantly, kudos to council members Waskie and Rothwell for offering not to accept any salary increase. That was a smarter PR move. I hope you'll follow through on that offer. Half of the town board members and the town supervisor have been in their elected positions for less than a year. They ran for election knowing what the salaries were for their respective positions. In a year when these elected officials, that's you, have repeatedly said that the town needs more money, and in a year when the board is proposing to significantly pierce the 2% tax cap by 20%. In my opinion, it's inappropriate for any of you to accept a salary increase. Next I have a few questions about the budget. In reviewing the 81-page budget document, I saw a pattern among the expenses wherein departments projected expenses of a certain amount, but the amount of funds that the 2025 budget proposes to allocate to that function or department exceeds the amount required. That's a good thing. the amount requested the variances in some places are only a few thousand dollars but in others they are significant and I'll just give you a few examples on page six the town board legislature expenses are projected at two hundred and eighty seven thousand okay so that's what the whoever controls the budget for the town board says that's what we needed for that function but the 2025 budget allocates two hundred and ninety seven thousand so the budget saying we're going to give you an extra fifteen thousand dollars over your projection which I don't understand give you a couple more examples on page seven the accounting and finance department which I would hope knows what they're doing expenses their expense projection is nine hundred and five thousand but the amount allocated in the 2025 budget again they asked for nine hundred and five thousand but the budget is saying we'll give you nine hundred and seventy nine thousand that's an increase of seventy four thousand dollars over what was projected on page 26 benefits and I know benefits have gone up I get that but benefits were projected at nineteen million five hundred and forty thousand but the budget allocation is twenty million three hundred eighty seven thousand which is eight hundred and forty seven thousand over what was requested for that function and I can give you more examples so can someone please explain to me why the budget allocations in these and several other areas are actually higher than what the respective department or function projects the cost to be yes I will ask you not to address that so the department request budget is done very early on in the budget process every department is asked to submit their requests by the end of July and we go through the supervisor and myself the budget assistant budget officer and the department heads go through and review everybody's budget in detail with them we do not we're not privy to certain information at the time of the department request budget we don't know what retirement rates are going to come in at until the umpteenth hour basically the end of August so that's a late change to the budget health insurance is not always known what it's going to come in at either so sometimes we start out lower and then we talk to personnel who is hearing the buzz that health insurance is going up even higher so some of these things are a moving target management buybacks from department heads are not the deadline is not until September 1st so we base our department head budgets based on last year's requests but those can absolutely change year to year so those numbers are updated later on in the budget process and anything else that comes up you know if a department request you know department head feels that they forgot something in the budget they will certainly bring it up and it's you know discussed it in the second meeting of the go-around with the Department head so it's a it's a good start but it's not the absolute dead set budget for the Department requests it absolutely changes over time some summer pluses summer minuses it just depends but overall the net budget usually goes down from Department requests to tentative and preliminary one more question is it possible to bring some of those timelines in sync so in other words If the departments have to submit their budgets by the end of July, can't the departments be required to submit whatever buybacks and so forth, and the employees who are submitting that need to be required to do the same by the same deadline so that the process might be just a little bit more cohesive when you're getting that preliminary budget, some of those numbers might be closer to final? Some of those changes were actually made once we got that information, but some of them were not by the time we had to submit the preliminary budget by law. So some of them, and some of them we still don't know at this point in time because of the timing of certain things, how they come out. So we do our best job of a guesstimate on some of these things. That's just how it has to be done, and it's been done that way forever. I understand that some of them come from third parties. Insurance organizations. Right. Right. I 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 that the internal deadlines that you have here, maybe those could be synced up and then moving forward, preliminary budgets might be closer to the actuals. So that was one group of questions and I appreciate the explanation. A couple of other things. And on page 14, I saw that in the police budget, the cost for radios and scanners is projected at $154,000. Now she mentioned something about the county changing something. Can you explain that? County changed the frequency that they have that we rely on and our radios don't match with that frequency. They become obsolete. Very good. Thank you. It's out of our control. Okay. Also in the police budget, the allocation for uniforms, I was stunned by this and I'm not saying they don't need uniforms, but the allocation for uniforms is $1 million, which is $300,000 more than lost. That's incorrect. You're not. Oh, you can explain? Okay. That would be great. They'd have to be made of gold. Well, I know. That's what I'm wondering. Yeah. You're looking at the overtime budget. So that line item for $1 million is actually personal services. Uniform just means it's uniform police. It's the policeman's overtime budget. It's not the clothing they wear. It's not uniform per se as the uniforms. Oh, well, okay. That's a little confusing. Referring to the uniform. That's a little confusing. Okay. Then next question I have is I didn't see an expense line for the Peconic Hockey ice rink. Can someone direct me to where that would be? Sure. Yeah. So we have one budget line that the Peconic Hockey Utilities is included in. It's actually on page ... It's before the police. It's cost center 1620. It's on page 11. So we have a town hall utilities electricity line of 800,000. 162,000 of that is set aside for Peconic Hockey, which was the 150 per the contract plus CPI for 24 plus CPI for 2025. That's the only line for Peconic Hockey in our operating budget. It's the only thing we're obligated to pay for them for operating expenses. Do we get any revenue from that? No. Don't get any revenue from Peconic Hockey. Okay. We may recoup. What does that mean? So if Peconic Hockey makes a profit, we may recoup the electricity funds that we paid out towards it based on the profit that they made the year before once we see the audited financial statements. And what is the timeline for getting that? March. March 31st of the following year. Okay. So March 21st of 2025, you'll get the first set of audited financial statements for Peconic Hockey. March 31st. March 31st. Okay. Thank you. Okay. And then on page 75 in the exemption impact report, it lists the municipal industrial development agency as receiving 22 exemptions at equalized value of more than $380 million. Would you please explain? Is this the total value of the tax exemptions that are awarded by the IDA? Or is this the assessed value and the amount requires some calculation? And if it does, what exactly is the value of the exemptions? That's probably for the assessor. Yeah, that would be an assessor's question. We can find that out for you. Okay. Would you please? Yes, we will. Thank you. Again, I understand the costs have gone up. I mean, I grocery shop too. However, I do feel that a 7.9% is a good amount. I mean, I'm not sure if that's the right number. I'm not sure if that's the right number. I just didn't get full head clear. [transcription gap] sources of revenue, such as a sales tax on agritourism entertainment functions, not on the pumpkins themselves, but on the bouncy house tickets, and a local bed tax. And a local bed tax is, if you're not familiar with it, is an additional tax that certain towns in New York State may charge on hotel occupancy charges. The bed tax is not administered by the state, but by the local taxing authority. So it could be an opportunity for us to take advantage of additional sources of revenue by taxing the people who come and stay and vacation in the town. And I, there have been comments made previously that you don't want to turn us into a town that's known for its taxes. But someone who's coming to our community for their niece's wedding and spending $500 a night on a room at the Hyatt downtown is not going to not come to that wedding. So. I would encourage you to look into that. There's a legality involved in that, because we have looked into that. And there already is a room tax applied. So we couldn't double dip and do the same thing. The room tax, my understanding, and the bed tax are two different things. And I understand that the room, there is a room tax charged by the county. And that money goes directly to promote tourism to discover Long Island and East End Getaway. I understand that. I think the bed tax might be different. And I ask you to please take a second look. I'm not sure. I will double check on that. But we have looked into that. We are aware of that and we have looked into it. Thank you. You're welcome. Ron Hariri of Aqua Bog. Mr. Supervisor, it's interesting you're not wearing your leprechaun outfit today. Nothing really inspires my confidence. I didn't have head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head a decade of poor decisions and bad judgments on the town's prior budgets that you never objected to during your entire tenure. My question is, did you expect that you'd be able to plug the budget deficit in addition to the raping the town's reserve with your lucky charms? You've had millions of dollars wasted during your tenure. They include your town square that is going nowhere with an unvetted master developer. As your council will tell you, I've made requests for the financials. I've yet to receive them. You have an IDA that has given benefits to one developer, fined millions of dollars by the attorney general. The attorney general for fleecing its employees and another developer that is engaged according to reports in Newsday and... Mr. Harari, stick to the budget tax levy, please. I am sticking to the budget. IDA has nothing to do with it. I know you don't want to hear... IDA has nothing to do with it. Stick with what we're talking about or you will be removed from the podium. IDA's members are appointed by you. Has nothing to do with our budget. And the budget deficit is attributed... Mr. Harari, I warn you, has nothing to do with the budget... I'm not... [transcription gap] I'm not... [transcription gap] I'm not scared for you. Oh, I'm sure you're not. You're an absolute disgrace to this town. You've created an irresponsible... At this point in time, have we...
Thank you. [transcription gap] taxpayers and you've heard you can get reductions in taxes and everything else I just assumed just hold the line where we are now and if we can do that then epcal will certainly be tremendous for everybody here in regards to uh the town board getting salary increases you know I bet you when Denise and when Ken and when Bob and when Joanne ran for board uh they didn't realize the amount of expenses to go into fundraisers and attending things that towns or civic associations asked for there's a lot of money that gets paid out of the pockets of these uh uh town board people just to go about their normal business and be interacting with the residents of this community I can't quantify it it's none of my business what it is but I know there's a course there and I know from Tim's perspective the supervisor he's underpaid as are the town board members in in a a comparative basis for the people in this town so to ask the town board people not to get a reasonable raise on occasion I think it's just um it's playing petty politics and we've had enough of that in this town we've had enough of that in this country as far as I'm concerned it's a good budget uh I thank you for your effort I thank you for the work that you do and I support this budget thank you thank you Mike Claudia Bianco Bading Hollow again um a question about the pot dispensaries that are not yet open but will be shortly the marijuana the marijuana dispensaries that will be open shortly what what revenue does the town get from those we get a percentage of the sales tax that the state collect collects okay we get a percentage of that we have one dispensary uh probably going to be opening up either by the end of this month or the first week of December that would be the one up on Route 58 on the corner of Cromer Avenue on Route 58. um they have it currently they were the first one to open up in Suffolk County up in Farmingdale and the supervisor of um Babylon Rich Schaefer um his town has recouped a lot 1.4 million dollars I believe since it it might it's more than that now right since they opened up and I want to say they opened up around I don't know the first of the year maybe but do you re get the revenue once a year or quarterly you know what honestly I don't know how they pay it out but they definitely pay it out and it's it's a huge source of income and where will that income go well that's what we have to decide as a board also I have to tell you that Councilman Rothwell and I met with the owners of it yesterday right yesterday um and they are because they give money back to the communities that they're in also over and above their sales tax and they have agreed to give money to support our cap program which is ideal yeah and um and Councilman Rothwell mentioned to him well if you're going to do that um also we need our police officers trained in dre training to determine if you're high on a drug right alcohol we know we have the Alka Center and all that not easy to determine if somebody's too high to be driving or on other types of drugs um these it's a specialty training for the police officers and it's lengthy and somewhat expensive so uh Councilman Rothwell was able to squeeze something out of them for that also which I they did they did follow up very good thank you and they did follow up and said that they would they would be willing to donate to the police department to cover the cost of that training that's great they're coming to our town and they want to make sure that they're also bringing an Avenue of safety with them that's great they commend them on that so you'll determine or you'll figure out when the revenues sooner than later the board we're gonna have to set something up at a work session and decide what we want to do with this money that comes in can you have a public hearing on that or uh public input um I'll just say that there's right now it's an unknown because so it's not in this year's budget because you can't predict an unknown entity but I think though after a full year goes by you'll you'll know exactly what you're collecting and then maybe that gets overall incorporated into the budget the goal obviously is to keep taxes down every year so if we thought we were getting a million dollars you know if we do receive a million dollars next year you can certainly anticipate that if that were to continue that the following year perhaps your budget could be a million dollars less but you you can't budget on an unknown fact or make predictions I know it's impossible to do a half of your budget you can't even predict now I know that we would have to go to a public hearing at some point in time to make a decision by resolution how to spend that money much like I don't I I don't know off the top of my head how we would if not a public hearing to determine at least to have public to allow the public to listen to hear the discussion and have sure okay but but always sometimes what happens if that money should come in this year right and then as we approaching the end of the year then we look at the foresight of okay what's needed the following year in the budget or additional cars or their tow trucks you know plow trucks things for the highway Department you can start to make those purchases when you have that revenue on hand therefore decreasing next year's budget right you know what I mean still utilizing as opposed to putting everything into fund balance right no I wouldn't recommend keep our ratings down but put it where we should buy it comes in it's it's it's it's some additional revenue right not on unanticipated you start picking at the things that you know you're going to need to replace next year and not funded by the taxpayers that was great too thank you thank you Claudette so I'm just gonna say this and it's been a couple years since I've read the OCM regulations but the 3% that the town would get cannot really has to be allocated for example to police towards helping homeless mental health etc etc and I will say this the police is a large part of our budget and the reason is for the last 10 years everybody said more and more police and I want to tell you as a result of bail reform we need a lot more police because we're arresting the same person five times a week in many cases and you asked for security and we're giving it to you you know and because it's well deserved in this community if I may I'd also like to speak I'd like to thank you mr. Foley very much for your comments I just liked following up on your remarks mr. Kern that are we all agree that our police are very vital and important to our community and we want to attract qualified candidates you need to do that by offering salaries that are competitive you also want to retain those qualified police officers and order in order to do that again you want to give them salaries that they can support their families on and be comfortable living here in our town because that's part of their job requirement to live in our town those increases are mandatory increases with regard to their salaries with the car to their contracts that they have the state with regard to the amount that the town has to pay in for their pensions with the amount for their insurance benefits so we all agree that it's very important to pay those town employees because they're vital to our community by the same token is also vitally important to our community our other town officials our other town employees the CSEA employees they also have a contract and by contract those raises are increased we increase those raises because again as mr. Foley pointed out you want to retain qualified talented people for the positions if you don't do that they're going to go to other places to work the benefits are also costly for the town we don't want to lose our water district we don't want to lose our police department to get absorbed into the Suffolk County Police Department we love our own police department to keep us safe they know us better than any other members of Suffolk County for many other parts of the town if we were in the Suffolk County Police Department system an officer that lives in Babylon could be patrolling here in Riverhead and not being familiar with the community at all so it's vital to our community to keep those public services and the public services that we provide to our town. we also need to keep our public servants we also need to keep our public servants such as our justices our local justices we're giving an increase in pay to them as well because you want to retain talented qualified people for the positions the same with our assessors the same as with our tax receiver the same with our town clerk you want qualified people and you want to retain them it's difficult when we are the body that is the one approving a raise because it's often very difficult to approve a raise for yourself it's very easy to recognize the talents of other individuals and reward them but it's often criticized when we have to do it for ourselves and as a result the supervisors position has not received a raise in almost 15 years is that correct sir? That is correct. 15 years and that I attribute to people being uncomfortable with the idea of themselves a raise it shouldn't have to be that way the same thing with the town board again our positions have not received any increase in pay and I believe it's nine years so again it's not that we're looking this is again as mrs. Sears points out you know the job when you take it but that doesn't mean that it is not permitted to also have an increase and I think the increases that I'm putting forth the 3.2 percent is in line with the increase for other town employees if we know when we take this position that you're not reaping huge rewards the reward is to help your community the reward is to be there and and just be a part of things and as mr. Foley pointed out that sometimes that incurs an awful lot of cost but the point I want to make to everyone is that in giving the increase to the town positions as well you're also encouraging the town to take a step back and think about what you're doing to attract that allows you to attract other qualified people for these positions not just people that are retired with pensions or successful business owners you want to make it so that the salary is something that any member of the community might feel that they would want to do this job and unless it is somewhat you can't you have to be at a level where someone could afford to take the job it sounds funny but that's exactly what it is being able to afford to take this position because it is much more than coming to board meetings committee meetings work sessions it's being out there with the public mainly so that we can hear what you have to say and how you feel about certain issues and being involved with you in the town that's very important to all of us so just like to say for those that feel that it's wrong of us as a public servant my whole life I know that always the public thinks very little of the public servants that serve them but I assure you it's a vital position just to be able to take that position and to head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head in the town and for that reason I do support a 3.2 increase for the town board members and the position for the supervisor and I thank you mr. Foley because it is important to point that out to people that it's necessary to retain and keep talented people at the positions thank you say what they Mike you know you actually you bring up a really good point I've been on the personnel Kennedy committee for three and a half years the most frustrating thing is we will hire people and to your point they will stay on maybe three months but while they're here they're looking for another position in another town that pays ten thousand fifteen thousand dollars more and we go through this you know yes I agree I mean I'm telling you and I'm just sitting there and we have looked at other town salaries and we're like how are we going to sustain people and I thank every dedicated employee that works here the head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head I appreciate them so much, but you're 100% right. And somebody made a comment about going to Suffolk County Water. Anybody that doesn't live in Riverhead, if you know somebody in Southhold, ask them what their water bill is compared to Riverhead. We're a lot lower. And so, anyway. While we're on this subject, real quick, I would just like to state so that everyone understands that I am fully in support of this budget. It was accurately reported by Riverhead Local that I will not be taking my pay raise should this budget get approved. The reason being is that I do have a business outside of this position, and that's my primary resource of income. And if I have the opportunity to be able to offset something else, within the town for that little additional amount of money, I'd rather give it back into a future budget. So I fully, fully support these raises. This is not an easy job, especially for the town board members. And as Mr. Foley, I believe, stated, the supervisor, or no, actually it was, oh, I forget. What was her name? Claudette? No, before that. Sear? She just left. No, I'm so sorry. She had stated that the supervisor, his position is 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Kathy. Kathy Grissom. Yes, Kathy. You know, a lot goes into this position, and it is kind of a hard thing to vote for yourself, for any kind of promotion or raise in this case. And this board, our elected officials, they work beyond what anybody in this town can see. And I've always been, you know, an active part of the town, and I served on the planning board. I had no idea as a resident exactly how much these elected officials work, beyond what you could ever imagine. So I just want to make sure. That everyone understands that my decision for my own salary is just based on something for myself. I want everybody else to be able to have their raise. It is so well deserved. And I'll echo the words of Councilwoman Waski. I myself have hired additional staff the day I came aboard here, almost four years ago. I love being in this position. I love working the town. It has been an honor to be here. But in terms of staffing-wise, I have spent over $200,000 on personalizing, staffing my offices in my absence, so that I may come here and make $48,000 a year. I'm not here for the money. I love doing this. I love being a part of the community. And I think that we have spearheaded a lot of great projects. And there's so many other wonderful things that, you know, are on the forefront of this town. And it's great to be a part of it and to see us moving forward. But not here for the financial reasons being at all. I know what the salary paid when I ran to the office, and I do not accept any type of salary increase during the duration of my term here. But thank you. It's a pleasure to sit up here. And Councilwoman Waski is right. Everybody sitting up here and everybody in this town hall is well worth it and worth more. But we do what we can, and we increase as we can to make sure that everybody else is financially sound. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Do we have anybody else from the public? Come on up, ma'am. Josephine MacHausky, Waiting River. As a student, I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a civil servant myself. I'm going to have 32 years of May. I understand that. And we have hiring problems everywhere in Suffolk County for the same reasons. Because someone comes in, they take the job, and then they have another position somewhere else. And it used to be the other way. Because I happen to have gone to the town here for a job back in 92 or 93, and the job that I went for Suffolk County was more. So this is a big problem, but it is something that's got to be fixed. And we all feel that way, especially after the pandemic. And for the two years that we had the pandemic, though, I want to point out, the town did get money for that. They did. And we didn't have to lay anybody off. Exactly. Because of it. And same with where I work, Suffolk County Community College, same thing. They were able to keep everyone, and no one had to get laid off. However, when people retired, they did not replace. We're on a very, very tight end. It's very hard for me to even come to a daytime meeting to get off, because we're so tight on employees. And I'm not suggesting that's what you should do, but that's one of their remedies, because you can't increase more students. They don't just appear. Right. However, and I want to speak Right. about Rochelle. Right. Ron Harari, I think this is what he was talking about. We give, the IDA gives tax relief or whatever to companies that are coming here to be in Riverhead. A lot of people, and I talk to a lot of people, feel that we could use that money here in Riverhead. Why are we giving it to them? We're the ones that are. Suffering. Suffering. There's a lot of people, and I'm not asking for an answer. This is what I'm hearing, and I feel the same way. We understand that. We hear that, and I will tell you, we are going to have the IDA come in and do a work session with us, because not everybody understands exactly how it works. And I understand what the public is saying, but I think you need to hear and have it clearly explained by the IDA, because many of these properties are not going to be able to pay the rent. Right. [transcription gap] Right. I know but where we are we we are like the hub of the North Fork right now Riverhead is the hub we have a lot of opportunities here and you know I think I was speaking with mr. Kern the last time I was at a meeting and it's there's a lot of opportunity and us not utilizing that really puts us and I'd say I don't even know how many but we have a lot of people that live in the trailer parks and the low-end and senior areas so they really are on fixed income they can't a lot of them cannot get out of their house to go to work another job I can other people can so they are on a fixed income so if their increase is only I don't even remember what they said it was two point something percent that's not it's hard for them I understand that they get the star program that but they're not getting the job they're not getting the full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full [transcription gap] full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full [transcription gap] be a good thing, but we need something to increase revenue. Otherwise, next year, I mean, logic tells me, I heard what she was saying, is what we spent this year, we're going to be spending more next year. We are. And then some. It's just a fact of life. It is the fact of life. So if we don't increase revenue somehow, you're going to be in a spot where you can't. And Joanne, I appreciate that you don't want to take your raise, but the raise is so minimal compared to the rest of the budget. And I do know that you do a lot of work. I've been involved in a lot of different things, including union work, where you're working 24-7. Even if you think you stopped, you didn't. So I just want you to realize that. I don't think, and I understand. That there's maybe a conflict between a person and you, but I do believe what he was saying is what people are saying to me. It's not that he was saying something that was so off. So thank you. Thank you. All right. We are looking to move on. We have one person online to handle, because I just realized we have a planning board meeting tonight at 6 o'clock. So we're in their room. But we do trump the planning board, don't we? A little bit? Yes. Maybe not. I don't know. I don't know. Okay. I'm going to vote no on that. Mr. McAuliffe, what can we do for you? I think you definitely do trump. What? I'm getting an echo. Is it all right? Okay. We can hear you. Did you say trump? Are you hearing me now? John, I never thought I'd hear you say trump. Are you hearing me? Echo, did you hear me? Yes. We hear you fine. Okay. Okay. All right. Fine. Sorry. I'm using earphones, and I'm actually in Florida helping my brother's health issues. So a couple of points of this discussion. One is I think where the last comments were going from the floor had to do with, which you must be very aware of, that there are two sides of the budget. The expenditure and the payment of the health insurance. Okay. And the payment of taxpayers. And, you know, all of the emotional and logical and decent reasons for increases in personnel, especially, there's another side of that, which is whether in River head, that's creating problems. I think River head, I don't know what River head's per capita income is compared to other towns around us. Okay. is that we are still a poorer community, and therefore it's not surprising that some of our payment levels are lower than in the other areas. I also wonder whether, rather than the board being in a position to have to make a decision on its own salaries, you could write legislation which would simply make your payments comparable in increase to the payments for the employees, the unionized employees of the town. That might make you better off or worse off over time, but I think... We talked about that, John, but if you do that, our salaries are going to be through the roof in no time. So you're better off going a few years without something and trying to get a little bit back, because if we got the same thing every year, you know, in like five, six, eight years, people are going to be like, really? So we don't want to do that. All right. Well, as long as you've thought about it, it's just taking it out of the subjective. It would be nice to find a way to do that. On sources of revenue, at one of the the meetings several months ago, the idea was raised that you might be able to put a tax on the oil and gas prices, which is a very important thing. So I think that's a very important thing. But there's a lot of oil that's coming into the depot. That can't be done. The town does not have the authority to do that. We looked into that also. We do not, because it's coming. All right. That's a pity. Because it's already taxed federally, state, county. We can't add a town tax to it. Nice idea. Because it's a social. Yeah. It's a social cost to the town. So it would only be fair. And maybe that's worth raising with our state legislators to see whether that could be addressed. We obviously are relatively few communities that have that need or have that opportunity and potential. I have a question about the way you do budgets. At some point in your process, have you evaluated these things are essential versus these things can be put off? By implication, you've said that, but I mean, if, for instance, you decided to not do the budget cap, do you have a background budget, a secondary budget that you would do without the increase, or is your budgeting entirely done with the assumption that you're going to be able to do that? Our budget was done with the bare minimum to keep the town sustaining the services that it needs. I have a clear head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head And it was mentioned earlier about employees retiring and not being replaced. I don't think there's a department in this town that we haven't done that to since I've been on the board. And we've asked our department heads to do more. We've asked our workers to do more. But it gets to the point then where building department, the building permits are stacking up because we don't have enough help. And we've been working short and we didn't get it. So we've done that as much as we can. We're taking you totally on. We can't do it anymore. Yeah, I'm taking you and the department heads totally as operating in good faith. I don't think we have a situation of luxury being generated in this. The last question is when, for instance, as an example, the ice rink, when the discussion took place about the ice rink, do you evaluate? The cost side and what impact that would have on the town's budget and who's benefiting from it? I mean, I don't know whether this is largely Riverhead taxpayers who are benefiting from it or it's people from east and west of us who are benefiting from it. But but how much on a particular project when you're bringing it for a hearing or bringing it for action by the board? How much within your capacity? How much is it? How much is it? [transcription gap] Are you saying if we do this, this is going to require a budget increase that's going to have to get paid in the next year? Well, the budget as it currently is, is like about one hundred and sixty thousand dollars for the ice rink for the electric that we contracted to do for one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. Now, in the operating budget of the ice rink itself, they are not turning a profit yet. And they're not expected. They're not expected. They're not expected. The study, recent sports study that we did shows that it's going to take probably about three years for them to turn a profit. Once they turn that profit, that then gets deducted off of the bill that we're paying for the town. But more importantly, we have that property as an asset. We own all that. We own the buildings. We own the rinks. So somewhere down the road, that's equity for the town one way or another. I'm not saying we're going to sell out from under the Peconic hockey, but I'm saying that was that was part of the investment is we'll pay this money. We own the property. We got well over a million dollars worth of of property or building a facility up there. Three point two million. Three point two. Now, with the with the second rink that they built up there, the direct result of that is yet to be seen because we have to wait for them to turn a profit. The immediate result is that the Riverhead. Residents get free skating dates and get reduced fees for programs. And what wasn't done well and it was reported locally, it hasn't been promoted well by Peconic hockey and our recreation department. And we are working on changing that. People have to know the immediate. Are available to them. And do you do you have any sense of what percentage of utilization is by Riverhead residents? I have no overhead residents. A bunch of topic. Yeah. I. I have no idea, John, but let's stick to the tax levy because I got a board. OK. Now, the only reason I'd say it is that I think that becomes relevant. And I hope you could get that data when you're looking at is a particular investment. Then it's the same way. It's hard if they come out here for the day to skate or their kids playing in a tournament. They're buying lunch out here. So there's an economic income that we realize from that. But there's no way to really calculate it. Yeah. OK. Anyway. That is a bottom line is I think getting through a budget is a very hard thing for people in the public to understand and understand whether there are fulcrum points, whether there are choices that you've had made that could have been made in another way that would have kept the tax rate lower. And you're saying there weren't any choices that you had, no options that you had. All right. Thank you, John. Yeah. Yeah. OK. Anybody else online? Nobody online. Anybody else here wants to come up and talk? All right. I will close this public hearing. It was scheduled for 2 o'clock, right? It was scheduled for 2 o'clock. I will close this public hearing and we will keep it open until November 18th for written comment. That date works good for us, right? We're still good with the budget? 15th for this? Yeah. We'll do it to next Friday. OK. So it will be the 15th for this because we're on a timeline with presenting the budget and getting it adopted and all that. So this will be open until November 15th at the end of day for written comment. OK. Moving on to our next public hearing, Chapter 293, Waterway and Related Activities. I would ask Greg Bergman to come up. Scheduled for a 2 o'clock start. It is now 5.07. Greg? Right on time. We're good? All right. Thank you. For the record, Greg Bergman, Senior Planner with the Riverhead Planning Department. I will keep this very brief. This is a proposed code amendment on Chapter 293 regarding residential dock regulations. This came through the Conservation Advisory Council. We had looked at our regulations regarding residential docks. The CIC members felt that they were very restrictive. So we're making a proposed change. The gist of the change is that right now, the CIC members are not going to be able to do any of the regulations that we have. So we're going to have to make a proposed change. We're going to have to make a proposed change. The length of a residential dock is not to exceed 150 feet or 15% of the width of the waterway. The CIC felt that people who are buying waterfront property should have the right and enjoyment of that waterfront property. So we did an analysis and a look at other neighboring towns on what their residential dock regulations were. A lot of those other towns allowed up to one-third of the width of the waterway. So we sort of split the difference. So we are recommending a code revision, which states in Section 293, Section 293-60 , Generally, the length of the dock shall not exceed the length needed to meet the minimum three-foot low water depth. However, in no case shall the length of the dock exceed 150 feet in length or exceed 25% of the width of the waterway, which shall be measured perpendicularly from the most seaward extension of the property taken at mean high water, subject to subsections two through seven below. Determination of the length of the dock must include the dimensions of the vessel birthed at such dock. Determination of the length of the dock must include the dimensions of the vessel birthed at such dock. So there are some just considerations also for the CAC to take into account when they're reviewing an application for a dock permit. But the 25% of the width of the waterway would in effect, if you had two properties across a canal from each other, if each dock was allowed to go 25% of the width of the waterway, including that vessel, that would still leave 50% of that waterway open for navigation. So it would not, one of the requirements is that it will not interfere with navigation, will not unduly interfere with public use of waterways for swimming, boating, fishing, shell fishing, etc. So minor change to the code. That's basically it. I'll keep it quick for time's sake. Do we have anybody on the board have any questions? I'll yield my five minutes to Councilman Kern. Okay. I'll yield my time to, I think it's excellent. Good work. I think it's a good idea. Anybody from the public here would like to commit? Nobody online? Comment, I'm sorry? Nobody would do that. I feel like I need to be committed. Nobody online. Okay. Then again, we'll do the same thing. We'll keep this open until the 18th on this one? November 18th? Yes. Yes. A written comment. Okay. November 18th for written comment. 10 days puts us to Sunday, so we'll keep it open for Monday. And we'll close it right now and keep it open for written comment. Okay. Next up we have a public hearing. Greg, I guess it's you again. Chapter 301. The parking schedule. And again, scheduled for 2 o'clock. It is 511. Greg? Thank you. So this is a code amendment proposed to off-street parking requirements. So it would affect Town Code Chapter 301-231 subsections D and E, as well as Town Code Section 301 Attachment 1, which is the parking schedule. The off-street parking requirements currently for single-family residences. A driveway counts as one parking space. So we're amending subsection D to state that a driveway for a one-family or two-family residence may be counted towards required parking. With each required parking space have a minimum size of 9 feet by 18 feet. And then we're amending the parking schedule to require for one-family and two-family dwellings, two parking stalls per dwelling unit plus one per bedroom in excess of three. Two parking stalls for a single-family residence anytime you go beyond three bedrooms. So for example, if you had a four-bedroom house, you need the two base stalls and then you get one additional parking stall for that fourth bedroom. So you will require three parking spaces for a four-bedroom house. This code amendment is consistent with the rental code, which was just adopted by the Town Board on October 1st, which set those identical requirements for single-family residences, which are obtaining a rental permit. I will say I have five kids and with five kids driving and my wife and I had seven cars in the yard, thank God I didn't have all five driving at the same time. But I could see that become a bit of a problem somewhere down the road maybe, but I don't think that's what this code was intended for. So I'm going to leave it alone at this point in time. Thank you. Do we have anybody who would like to comment on it in public? Anybody online? No? Okay. We will close this public hearing on parking schedule. We will keep it open until November 18th for written comment and we'll move on to our last public hearing. This one was scheduled for 2-10. So this is Town Officers and Employees Biennial Town Elections. And Eric, if you would run with this one. Yeah, thank you. This is in addition to our public hearing. This is in addition to our town code that establishes odd year elections for town offices. The town has been holding odd year elections since in my consultation with the town historian since 1887. This is enacted pursuant to municipal home rule law and Article 9 of the New York State Constitution. It is in part in response to a law that was passed in the early 2000s. A law that was adopted by the New York State Legislature at the end of 2023 that attempted to move local certain local elections to even numbered years. There was litigation upstate on this issue. And a New York State Supreme Court judge ruled that the New York State Legislature's proposed law is unconstitutional. And so we are. We are making this proposal to codify the town's custom and practice of holding these local office elections on odd numbered years. Okay. Board, do you have any questions? No, thank you. Do we have anybody in the public that would like to comment? I recognize you. Hi. Laverne Tenenberg, town assessor. Elected town assessor. With regard to the language where you write. Okay. The supervisor, town council, town clerk, town receiver of taxes, highway superintendent, and board of assessors. In my opinion, the words board of assessors is an inaccurate term for the office that I hold. Pursuant to town law section 20, under town officers, 1B, except as otherwise provided by law, excuse me, every town of the second class shall have a supervisor, two justices of the peace, two town council members, a town clerk, a town superintendent, and a town clerk. All of these are in accordance with the law. And I would like to ask the board to give a motion to approve this bill. So moved. Seconded by the Board of Assessors. [transcription gap] having more than one assessor may establish the office of chairman of town assessors. The chairman of town assessors, in addition to his regular duties, shall perform such services, et cetera, et cetera. Section 33 of town law says powers and duties of assessors. The assessor or assessor shall have such powers and shall perform such duties as are or hereafter may be conferred or imposed by law. The point being is that my title is not board of assessors. When I'm in the booth and I'm voting for myself, it says town assessor. That is the official title according to town law in my opinion. Not an attorney. I practice without a license. I read a lot of law books. But I think that the words board of assessors is not the appropriate term for the title that I hold. So I'm asking you to just change the wording to say and assessors, plural. There are three of us. That's all I'm asking. I'll go with that. Thank you. No problem. This was already addressed with the assessors between Ann Murray and myself. We determined that it wasn't necessary. However, if the board is inclined to make that change, I don't necessarily have an objection to it. Okay. I would suggest make the change. Make it happen. Make the change. Do we have somebody online? John McAuliffe? Okay. Go ahead. Go ahead, John. You're frozen on the screen. All right. I think you can hear me now. Hello. Yes. Are you hearing me? Yes. Hello. Okay. You're good. All right. Thank you. Technology. One legal question. I don't quite understand what the purpose of this is. If we're going to go through this. Okay. We already have a practice and system. If for example the state legislature readopted the even year provision and did it in such a way as to solve whatever the legal problem was with the on the previous action, is this intended to somehow supersede the state? Or to create the basis for challenging the state's decision? Yes. Mr. Howard, I'm at just this. Yes. So you are basically trying to put. Go ahead. Yes, it is. It's a short answer. So you're trying to put town law above state law? We're exerting our local government powers which are conferred on the town by Article 9 of the New York State Constitution and municipal home rule law. Okay. Which best matters. All right. So you're making the basis for a legal case. So at least we understand what's going on. Larger question. We used to have two residences here and in Tarrytown and the Rivertowns area. When we were there, they shifted over to even years and it increased substantially the number of people that voted in local elections. I think that's what the state legislature was after. And while some people think, oh, a smaller number are people more understanding or more committed or somehow local will be overshadowed by whatever national elections are going on, I think that's not the right position personally. I think the right position is something which maximizes participation. Public participation in the electoral process is better than something that detracts from it. So that's just my own position. And so I hope you don't adopt it, that this never becomes law. Plus, I think you're buying into a legal mess if you're essentially, because I'm sure that the logic that you just expressed is logic that the legislature will be aware of and they will try to write the legislation in a way. So that Riverhead Town is not more important than the state of New York. Well, I think I think the New York State Supreme Court judge that issued the opinion, he was of the opinion that it would take a constitutional amendment to make that change and take that power from. Yeah, but let's not be naive about this. The reason the legislator did it is they thought it would help Democratic votes. I mean, whether that is. The judge rejected it is because he favored Republican votes. That's just the nature of politics. I think that I've said primary questions in the past. What involves on issues in the past that the town should always exert its authority under municipal home rule law and to I mean, to the extent that those powers were previously given by the New York State Legislature. I don't think that the town should really on any issue sort of just back down and allow them to. Pick and choose matters that they want to take away from municipalities. All right. Well, as I say, I think you're buying into spending money on a legal case, but we'll see what happens. OK, thanks, John. Anybody else? Mr. Foley. Yeah, Mike Foley, Reeves Park. I favor keeping things the way they are. Right now, we have them for the last hundred and fifty years every year odd calendar year. It's worked for one hundred and fifty years. And the theory that moving elections to coincide with national elections to increase the vote, I think was kind of beaten up a few days ago. The most important contentious national election in my lifetime, and I'm older than everybody up there, was two days ago. Twenty million less people showed up. So that should just tell you, let's keep things the way we have it. We like it local. Keep it the same. And I support you guys keeping it the same. Thank you. Thanks, Mike. It also would increase the election options on the ballot. Essentially, if you added county and town on top of state and federal, you have a much longer ballot, which means it takes a longer time to vote, which means longer lines. And when people drive by, there's a lot of people that showed up here at Town Hall that came in and looked at the line and went back to their cars. And I hope they came back another time. But a lot of people are like, wow, that's really long. I can't wait. Just as an aside, myself and my wife voted early. And it was a little less than an hour in front of Town Hall. On Election Day, I just got a thing. I'm a politics nut. I drive around and look at the sites. There was an old line outside of the Riley Avenue schoolhouse, and there was an old line outside of the library. And I came home and I said, I don't know what's going on. People are not here on Election Day. And I found out two days later, 20 million less people showed up. I guess Riverhead's a microcosm of the country. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks, Mike. Okay. We're going to open it now to comments on the resolutions. Any comments on today's resolutions? We have to close this out for 10 days. I'm sorry. Yes. Let me close that out for 10 until November 18th. We'll keep it open for written comment, and we'll close the public hearing. All right. Comments on resolutions? We have one person online. Let's get it. No, they're gone. No. Okay. We're going to close this out. Okay. All right. Let's go ahead and start with the... Can I... Yes. Go ahead. So can we do a census resolution for the first 17? Greg and Matt, on these first 17 resolutions, we probably have to read each one individually. I could leave that up to Eric, whether he wants to read it. Because they're all going to be voted on individually. You can read the short title. They're all going to be voted on individually. Yeah. You have to vote on all of them. You have to vote. [transcription gap] Yeah. You got to call them each. Okay. Yeah. My just question is... Trying to get out here early, aren't you? Well, they're all calling for public hearings. I know. Correct. Each one's on a different thing. Yeah. So they each have to have their own public hearing. The point is they'll all be at the same time. So what we'll probably do is present all the textual code changes at once, and then present all the map changes at once. Got you. But they'll all be heard on the same day at the same time. Because they're all sort of part of the bigger picture. Okay. All right. Let's get going. I'll be voting. Okay. So Councilman Kern had made some very valid points. And so before we go ahead and go to post to a public hearing and so forth, we had concerns of going from 30 to 35 feet and how it was going to affect our agricultural community in terms of a lack of sale of TDRs. So has it been addressed or not? So we have left it the way it is. Which I believe we have a majority of board support for, for 35 feet. That's what was analyzed in the G.E.I.S. for the comp plan. So we have put forth what we analyzed. Okay. So I don't see a negative impact of going to 35 feet. It's the as of right height for a residential building. I don't see why in, you know, an industrial zone, why we should, you know, hold that against a property owner. In the most cases, yeah. One second, Bob. People aren't asking for more than 35 feet anyway. The free and clear height they really need is about 28 or 29, which they can achieve. So Matt, just so you know, I spoke to some people on the TDR committee. Yeah. Yeah. And I think, you know, the town has given it away. Okay. And I think, you know, as we had the work session and a lot of assumptions are made, right. And that's one. Two, and I have nothing, no problem with any of the maps. Nobody does. It's resolution 8.8.9. Which is 8.8.9. That's the one where, you know, we're going the dimension of the tables. Where, oh wait. I'm sorry. Maybe it's not 8.8.9. No. The 8.8.9 is the use regulation. Okay. So. [transcription gap] So, that's the use regulation. Yeah. That one, for me, I want the SIC code for basically upcycling. Okay. Heather did put that out and I hope you can, I think it's a simple fix just to put that in there without going. Yeah. Again, that would be a matter if we have full board support of that upcycling. I know it encompasses a lot of things. I know we've had discussions internally with various town board members upcycling. That's recycling potentially needing a part 360 permit. That's up to the board. That's something that they want to include in there. That's my special permit. In the, yeah. Which one am I talking about, Greg? I have to. Yeah. So, there is no, we've discussed this and we kind of spoke about this at length at work session. There is no SIC code for upcycling. It doesn't exist. No, no. The SIC code, it's essentially the recycling uses. So, the question fundamentally posed to the board is, do you want Middle Country Road and Edwards Avenue and Calverton to become potentially a recycling hub? Correct. So, that's the fundamental question. So, I mean, I understand that there are some board members who have questions, concerns about this. But again, like I said at the work session last week, if you guys would like to further discuss this, I would please ask you to readopt the moratorium because right now we are in a very unenvious position, unenviable position where people are wanting to process their applications and we are unable to give them a clear path forward. So, I understand. They need to be able to know the process and have a . Right. So, Greg. So, what you're saying. What you're saying is like recycling, everybody is going to do in that area. What I'm saying is why do we need to go back to a moratorium if three people on the board say that, yeah, I'm calling it upcycling, you're calling it recycling. I understand the SIC code defines it as recycling. I'm not going to credit the government for being on top of anything. It's by special permit. And all I'm saying is if new technology. If new technology comes to take cans and turn it into something, you call it recycling, I call it upcycling. What's the downside? And you're selling it like it's Frankenstein. So, when we spoke about this at work session, we got a majority of the board to move forward. We had this discussion. Well, do it right now. Pull it right now. We had this discussion on Thursday. Pull it now. We presented to the board. It was the agreement that those uses were maybe more appropriate within the PIP zoning, not within the Calverton industrial zone. Pull it now. We'll do next Thursday. [transcription gap] amendment to one of those resolutions they bring that up once it's been moved and seconded but we're under open comment right now so he can ask right just but I'm just saying we're not we we shouldn't be polling or anything like that the resolutions already in the packet so I'd agree with that and it's interesting that these these resolutions are for publishing posts for a public calling for a public hearing to address these matters it's not correct call I can make anything resolute I know but you can't change it's gonna go to a public hearing so if we need to learn on something right now because then we go back to another that would be currently saying so in these keys concerned the building department concerned about time so if we have to make an adjustment now is the time to do it so that the resolution that's voter on is accurate if it's changed in it I'm responding to your your concern about time is it something we do now we wait to the public hearing it's you would have to take an as Eric just said you'd have to take an action on the resolutions that are before you if you want to change them you'd have to offer an amendment and see if there's board support to amend them or not yeah so can you specify because there's a multitude of resolution here specifically which one is going so the table of uses should I'm not interested in I'm looking to protect the farmers like to know specifically which one that is in hand use of TDRs as a regulation yeah building height yes so 889 is the table of uses and then we just yeah I think it's 890 Matt is the yeah then 890 is the light industrial so it'll it'll become the industrial district table of dimensional regulations it's currently the light industrial so 890 has the height restriction yeah 889 and 890 giving additional height so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so 2003 in the like we're going to 0.5 F a are we have to do a new DG is right no but it's kind of yeah let's go yeah I mean yeah let's just go through just so I'm clear which resolution 889 and 890 yeah I can hang out must we start out with the resolution number one okay resolution 8 a to authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to local law to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article XL to transfer development rights 301 to 202 transfer development rights map pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan so moved second vote please Bosque yes Murrayfield yes yes yes yes resolution adopted resolution 883 authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to local law to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article two districts and boundaries 301 dash six boundaries of districts to amend zoning map to change certain properties to the Cavalcant industrial c1 zoning use district pursuant to the recommendations of the 2000 ! 204 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please Bosque yes very field yes Kern yes Rothwell yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 884 authorizes the town clerk to publish and post notice to local law to amend chapter 301 zoning and land use development part two districts article two districts and boundaries section 301 dash six boundaries of districts to amend zoning map to change certain properties and land use development section 301 dash six boundaries section 301 dash six boundaries of districts to amend zoning map to change certain properties to the améric middle school district to the Hamlet Center HC zoning use district pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved seconded folks please Mosky yes very field yes current yes Rothwell yes covered yes resolution is adopted resolution 885 authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to local law to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article 2 districts and boundaries 301 dash 6 boundaries of districts to amend zoning map to change certain properties to the open space conservation OSC zoning use district pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please Waski yes very few yes current yes well yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 886 yes authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to local law to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article 2 districts and boundaries 301 dash 6 boundaries of districts to amend zoning map to change certain properties in the residences b40 RB 40 zoning use district pursuant to recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan so moved second vote please waski yes very field yes current yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 885 so moved so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so parentheses L I zoning Houston district pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so move second to thank you vote please Waski yes Murrayfield yes turn yes Lathwell yes Hubbard yes resolution adopted resolution 888 authorizes the town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land use development article 2 districts and boundaries section 301 dash 5a classes of districts pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please Waski yes very few yes turn yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution adopted resolution 889 authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development to include attachment 4b town of Riverhead industrial districts table of use regulations pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please do we want to amend anything on this no this isn't the one it's eight eight nine and eight ninety oh yeah wait a second oh this is the specific uses the table this is the use table yeah yes this is the one so in this right I want to know the downside and I'm just gonna you would be allowing essentially the likely place would like in as I see what would fall would be recycling or some kind of waste process no but mat do we you head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head Can I answer the question so I can provide some logic as to why we decided where certain uses are going to go? So we have a new industrial zone, Calverton Industrial, so that's essentially the old Industrial A and old Industrial C that's becoming a new zone. And then light industrial is going to be in other areas. A use like this, it's a potentially noxious use, heavy traffic. It's not appropriate. We, as staff, are not recommending that it goes in these new industrial zones. These are large swaths of Calverton that this would be more appropriate to go in the PIP. If the majority of the board feels otherwise, that's up to this board. This is what staff has recommended to you. And I appreciate that, but the key word that you used is potential. These would require Part 360 permits, so I think the town board knows what a Part 360 permit is. That's solid waste from the deed. And this is what I'm recommending to the rest of the board. And I've done a lot of research on what's going on. I've done a lot of research on what's going on in upcycling. And I'll say this, if it's by special permit, the board, this board or a board a year from now or two or three years from now, has the opportunity to turn it down. I don't want to turn down the future now on the word potential. That's all I'm saying. If the rest of the board does, that's fine. Leave it up to the board. Okay, so what are you amending? What are you putting up? The policy code that Heather identified. It was waste and recycling. Great, that's the one. Because we know it is waste and recycling in the old way. There are new things happening and will continue to happen. And that's what I'm recommending to the board. And it's by special permit, so you can vote it up or down. So just state your amendment so we can vote. What's the code? What am I amending? That's a... I don't know what the number is off the top of my head. You'd like the waste and recycling code. Yeah, please. I don't think that recycling belongs in this area. Then you say no. So why don't we just vote on it? Yeah, I think that's the easier way to do it. Go ahead. I'm for it. Okay, so there's an amendment. There's a proposed amendment. I'm not sure what it is. [transcription gap] There's a proposed motion to amend this table that's part of this resolution by Councilman Kern proposing to add recycling with the appropriate SIC code. Is that accurate? I'll second his motion. Okay. Now you vote on the motion to amend. Hit it, Jim. Waskie? No. Murrayfield? No. Based upon the comprehensive plan that was submitted to the board. That was submitted to the public that we've had public hearings on. This is what the proposal that we have is the one that they've all looked at and spoken about. And I don't want to amend it any further at this point. No. Kern? Yes. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? No. Motion not carried. So now we have to vote on the resolution as it is, please. Right. Sorry. Yes. The absolute resolution. I don't want to step on your toes, Saki. Well, we did have Waskie originally move this. Yeah, it was moved in seconds. Okay. Resolution 889, can we move and second it? It's been moved and seconded. It's been moved and seconded. We just got to vote on it. You just voted on it. Okay. Then vote on the actual resolution. All right. 889 is written. Waskie? Yes. Murrayfield? Yes, it's written. Kern? No. Rothwell? Yes. Hubbard? Yes. Motion? Yes. Kern? No. Rothwell? Yes. américans? Yes. américans? Yes. américans? Yes. américans? [transcription gap]
to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved seconded anybody seconded so just brief discussions my reason for holding off on this was simply that the height for industrial has been increased from 30 to 35 and I feel like we're taking that potential TDR is away from our farming community I'd rather keep it at 30 let them go to 35 but let them purchase TDR is and help the agricultural farming community so I'm not interested in raising the height without benefiting the farmers so that's my reasons for did this go by the TDR committee at all the TDR committee we consulted with them the through the entire comprehensive plan process and I appreciate that that and I was on the steering committee and I was involved in a lot of this and in my notes I can tell you that somebody at the end of the day made the decision that the TDR committee was going to be the first to do this and I think that's really important because I know I was in favor of 0.35 and I also know I know the things that we discussed when we had people in the room and we were managed to do it I would leave it at 30 feet the way it was right and somebody wants to go to 35 because that they have to purchase development rights number one number two after talking with the Assessor when they when they take a look at the FAR and they want to go to 0.3 or I'm going to recommend 0.35 you end up with cubic feet when they do the assessment they don't look at it as I'm just adding 5,000 square feet to the FAR if it's 30 feet high they use the cubic feet metric as Greg and I are very much aware of same thing with the height so and I appreciate all the work that's been done on this don't get me wrong but I'm gonna say this I'm going to say that the FAR is a very important measure of how important this system should be so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so supported it it got passed how did it how did it end up in there we do not know so it went in the no minutes yeah it was it went in this as one recommendation and then was adopted as another that's a problem for the town board at the time that could be true yeah we have no there's no okay so let's let's leave it there that's fine so what you say so we could go from 35 to 30 without making any going back to D GE is because we know we can go to 35 right so are you skin are you saying that in order to go to from 0.25 to 0.30 to 0.30 and a 0.35 would that then say we need to do it new DG I would say yeah our entire analysis is based on the numbers that you have here's what I would do I would go to 30 I would vote to go to 0.30 now and go back to your commitment that you guys made at the work session that let's get this passed due to timing and then we'll fix it so I'm gonna recommend that it's voted on as written because that's the analysis that we did it's difficult to change to have height quantified different so everything that we do in terms of TDR floor area it's all two-dimensional numbers so to add a something that deals in three dimensions it's gonna throw off the whole system and everything else will have to be changed but you say that but after I take but you know you it's apples to oranges under the economic development department I went and spoke to the assessor and told me how its assess and actually it's assessed three dimensionally I get that I get the simplicity of you know keeping it at square footage but let's be you know we I have a fiduciary duty so I'm going to rely on the assessor and how the assessments are done and that's what I'm going to do. I don't know that and I even said I recommend it let's if it's a 80,000 square foot building and they want to go up five feet from 30 just sell one TDR to go up five feet every 80,000 feet. I agree with that. Then we're potentially creating two different values for TDR compared to when you're using it in other districts. You're doing that in other districts too because in residential you're saying it's X and Y that's correct but it's all in two dimensions. It's all assumptions and we all have assumptions. I agree on that. All I'm saying is leave it at 30 and let's figure it out to get to 35 let's sit with the assessor and do it right. You don't have to convince me Bob I have the recommendation before you to vote as is I think you should speak to the rest of the board but go ahead. Here's what I'm saying leave it at 30 people can vote any way they want I'm just one person up here and I would leave it at point three oh but I am going to go with what you guys said at the work session get it passed and then we'll fix it later I believed you when you said that I still believe you. So one you want to make an amendment to change it to from 35 to 30? Yeah so I want to make an amendment to go from 35 to 30. Motion seconded. Vote please. Okay vote on the amendment. Waski. No. Wait before we we need to know what we're changing to 30 is it both districts or just I'm sorry but it's the the table deals within two districts right so you want to know one so there's CI and there's light industrial this is Li we're talking about yeah sorry so it's it's both of them so we know I and CI both 35 but they're both essentially in the area of currently 30 right well no Li is already 35. If Li is 30 35 what doesn't it what is what is now 30 industrial C no over industrial which is coming C1 yeah see ya see yeah okay that's the one that is 30 that's the one I'm referring so changing the CI just CI 30 just CI I'm not gonna just want to be clear for the record I'm not gonna take something away from somebody but I'm not gonna give somebody something you know something for nothing so it's just CI. No. So it's just it's just to change that and I agree the farming go ahead. It's not that I'm that I'm anti farmers or farming I've actually sat down and had conversations with the planning department with Don Thomas about exactly what what this does or does not do and they're the professionals they know what the formula is going to be of what's going to work and what's not going to work and they basically assured me that this is the right thing to do for the town for everyone it's not anything against the farmers by by any means at all I fully support the the farmland community and the TDR program I want to see the TDR program succeed you're telling me that this is the way to get it done I trust you this is this is what we have to do. Again based that this is all on assumptions which we agreed we understand this. I wouldn't call three years of a comprehensive plan an assumption so I got to same same same same same same sent to me look you second it go call the vote vote I'm calling for now is an amended resolution from 35 feet to 30 feet in the LI district no no CI CI well that's not what the resolution okay mercy okay Mary I was key no Murrayfield no I don't want to extend the moratorium it's not they're not extending the moratorium well if we have to amend these things we can is more public notice about it it's gonna go on the go we're going less we're going less which this is not doing anything to the moratorium I heard I'm also satisfied with it is as it's written thank you turn your vote for the amendment from 35 to 30 Rothwell you're welcome yes I'd like to be corrected to 30 a vote yes Hubbard no like it as is as amended is not adopted resolution as written wasky yes Murrayfield yes Kern no Rothwell no yeah Hubbard yes resolution is adopted
resolution 891 okay you got it otherwise this talent clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development attachment 3 commercial districts table of dimensional regulations pursuant to recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please wasky yes Murrayfield yes Kern no second vote please Waskey yes yes Kern no yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution adopted resolution 892 authorizes the town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land use development part 2 districts article xx 151 v4 that's 24 thank you industrial B zoning use district to remove the industrial B zoning use district and reserve article 24 pursuant to the recommendations of the district's plan update so moved seconded vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 893 authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article 23 industrial a zoning use district to remove the industrial a zoning use district and reserve article 23 pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 894 authorize the town clerk to publish and post to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article 39 plan to adopt a new zoning plan for the district of industrial park PIP zoning use districts 301 to 185 a permitted uses pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan so moved that's you Bob second vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 895 authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article 20 26 light industrial Li zoning use district Brazilian to pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved seconded vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 896 authorizes the town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land use development part two districts article 25 industrial C zoning use district pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved second vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 897 second vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes resolution is adopted resolution 897 authorizes town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part two districts article that's 62 XL to transfer development right what 42 oh it is transfer development rights 301 204 through 301 dash 208 pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved seconded vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes Rothwell yes resolution is adopted resolution 897 to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plan update so moved seconded vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes yes yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 898 authorize the town clerk to publish and post notice to amend chapter 301 zoning and land development part one general provisions article 1 title purpose definitions and interpretation 301 dash 3b definitions word usage pursuant to the recommendations of the 2024 comprehensive plans updates so moved second vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes Rothwell yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 899 authorizes town clerk to publish and post public notice to consider a local law to amend chapter 103 title town offices and employees article 6 term limits of the Riverhead Town Code so moved seconded vote please waski yes Murrayfield yes current yes américans head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head full head law to amend chapter 237 section 4 of the Riverhead Town Code titled permit procedures so moved second it oh please Washington yes very cute yes Kern yes Rothwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 902 adopts the local law to amend chapter 231 of the Riverhead Town Code titled fire prevention so moved second vote please wasky yes Murray field yes Kern yes Rothwell yes yes resolution adopted resolution 903 is an easy one awards bid for class a biosolids improvements so moved seconded vote please wasky yes Murray field yes Kern yes yes yes yes as Lucian is adopted resolution 905 appoints a maintenance maintenance mechanic to so moved seconded yes vote please wasky yes very few yes turn yes yes yes yes resolution adopted resolution 906 appoints part-time traffic control specialists so moved second vote please wasky yes very few yes yes yes yes yes yes resolution is adopted resolution 907 points of code enforcement offices so moved seconded vote please 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 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 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 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 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 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 so moved so moved so Resolution adopted. Resolution 909. Assesses cost of labor and material for previously authorized remedial actions at premises known as 271 Hubbard Avenue, Riverhead, New York, Suffolk County Tax Map Number 0600-112-00-1-00-028-000, pursuant to Riverhead Town Code Chapter 251. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution adopted. Resolution 910. Ratifies authorization for supervisor to execute a license agreement with Ademco, Inc. to utilize runway at Epco. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution adopted. Resolution 911. Resolution 912. Authorizes submission of grant application to Suffolk County for program year 2025 Community Development Block Grant Funding. So moved. Seconded. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution is adopted. Resolution 912. Authorizes the Town of Riverhead Police Chief to execute New York State Title for settlement with State Farm Insurance Company. So moved. Second. [transcription gap] Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Hey, Tim. It's Denise. What? 913. 913. Apparently she's not watching the board meeting. She's following me. But that was a... Resolution 913. Authorizes application to Suffolk County for HUD home funds and authorizes supervisor to execute grant... So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. Resolution adopted. Resolution 914. Authorizes the removal of fixed assets. So moved. Second. Vote, please. Waske. Yes. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Are you sure we can't get 21 years out of this car? We got... 400,000 miles. Yes. We're so brave. We're brave. [transcription gap] Waske. Merrifield. Yes. Kern. Yes. Rothwell. Yes. Hubbard. Yes. yes Rockwell yes Hubbard yes resolution is adopted resolution 917 provisionally appoints a senior accountant so moved seconded vote please Waski yes Murrayfield yes Kern yes Rockwell congratulations John yes Hubbard yes is adopted resolution 918 resolution to amend the preliminary budget for the 2025 fiscal year by reducing salary expenditures for town board supervisor and town board so moved second vote please Waski yes Murrayfield yes Kern yes Rockwell yeah I vote to reduce it and again but I will not take it yes Rockwell Hubbard yes resolution is adopted that ends our few resolutions okay now what do we have here we have a motion to approve a resolution to amend the proposed budget for the next five years and we're going to open it up to comments from the public on any matter comments on any matter we have somebody on line let's take them there we go sorry this is something I wanted to say but you jumped into the resolutions and didn't he didn't notice my request just quick I think Mike's comment was something of a non sequitur the generalized national vote being less this year has nothing to do with the norm of when there are higher votes so my point is that the local election should go to the norm of when more people are inclined to vote but actually I think what I wanted to say more importantly is what came out after that which is I think I mean I don't know what the river head totals were versus four years ago but But certainly one of the factors that was going on was so many people did early vote because they felt so intensely their opinion, or at least they tried to do early vote. The long line at Town Hall, I think, was reflective of somebody's mistaken judgment about using the basement area for the early vote. I was down there as a poll watcher, and the line was stopped at various times because they couldn't fit people in the space, and also because of the conditions of the space, the heat and the lack of fresh air. So I hope whoever made that decision that it could be reconsidered and you find a more appropriate space, because I think, like it or not, early voting is going to be... part of the way we do elections in the future. Okay, John, I think you've got to take those sentiments to the Board of Elections, because they're the ones that set that up and requested the location. Okay. What's that? I will do that.
That's it. I do work for the Board of Elections, and they said that you guys pick where it goes in Riverhead. They asked us to use our... Oh. Okay. No, they told us that you wouldn't use Shade Tree to do it for the early voting. They told us Shade Tree was too small. For early voting? For early voting, because it's a presidential year. Yeah. Oh, okay. So they requested this. Okay. There's limited parking. The building might be the right size, but there's no parking. Well, I think that there was a whole debacle last year with the elevator being shut off on early voting, and there was a line. So I thought they were asking. I think they were asking if we could go somewhere else, because they had done the county center at one point, and then Shade Tree. Honestly, we wish they would. It's an inconvenience here. Just to add to this, the director of the senior center, Kelly Tocci, asked if we could move it out of the... At least the early voting out of the senior center, because it requires her to basically close down two rooms where she runs programs for the seniors, because they have to... Yeah. ...have the machines in there locked and everything like that. I guess it's just... So either. ...it's life, you know? So, but that's one thing that why they didn't like it here. Yeah. I had gotten complaints that going down to the basement on the stairs is dark, and that the elevator is slow. I don't know. I mean, I did notice that it was dark. It wouldn't hurt our feelings if they decided to go somewhere else. They'd have to find a better place. Why couldn't they do it up here? Yeah. Yeah. In this room for the early voting? This room is used all the time. All the time. Yeah. Okay. It's just... It's used cooperative extension. Thank you. Right. Right here. Yeah. All right. Seeing nobody else with public comments, I just want to take a minute to mention what happened earlier in the board meeting. And I've said this in my inauguration statement, that the town board meetings were not going to be circus acts anymore. And if you come in here and you decide to act like a clown and make it a circus, you will be removed. And I made that very clear. If you can't come, and it's not just the town board, it's any of our boards. If you can't come to the microphone and be respectful and civil, stay home. You won't be allowed in. You will be removed from the building. It was sad what happened, and it's unfortunate somebody had to be removed, but it won't be tolerated. And I just want to send that message out loud and strong. Thank you, everybody. I'd like to make a motion to close the town board meeting. Can we just say a special thank you? Thank you to the planning board who has been sitting so patiently here waiting for the room. It might be time to get them their own board room. I think that's what they want in offices. We'll think about that in the future. I think they're all sitting back there saying they would rather be on the town board than the planning board. Your seats are going to be warmed up, though. I know Ed would want to come up back to the town board. As well as the residents that are here to discuss projects with them, thanks for your patience. Thank you, everybody. Make a motion to close the town board meeting? I make a motion. Second it. All in favor? Aye. Everybody have a great weekend and thanks for bearing with us today.
Thank you.