Posted by: Dawn Powell | May 16, 2010

PUTNAM VALLEY TOWN BOARD, April 2010

Putnam Valley Town Board meeting, April 21, 2010

Regular town board meeting – What exactly does that mean? A meeting is a meeting is a meeting.

They announced the topic of litigation for their executive session in accordance with the NYS Open Meetings law!  Yay!  Thanks Eileen.

Oh, it was Kaspar (the litigation topic).

There was a lot of blah de blah blah blah…….. a lot.

Mr. Oliverio talked about the Legislature’s revision to Chapter 31 of the county code.  It allows the ledge to transfer public property to private entities as they see fit.  On top of eminent domain, which gives officials broad authority to take property away from individuals, this gives the legislature the right to give that property to someone they choose, without benefit of the state’s public auction process.  They are planning to “bequeath” the Oregon Corners garage to S&W Development Corp. and then have it developed for a Dunkin’ Donuts, CVS, or some such.  Moreover, they were negotiating with this company while the public local law process was ongoing, that is, before the law gave them the authority to do so. They are going to “bequeath” it, but then they will sell it.  Huh???? We’ll have to get a copy of the contract to find out exactly what it is they are doing. 

Then the town will give this business a zoning incentive, and a tax credit, and we, the taxpayers will continue to pay. But it certainly does make it easier for them to put 5 lanes at Oregon Corners.

When the Physical Services Committee listened to the opponents of the current Peekskill Hollow Road project, a major issue raised was trust in government.  Is it any wonder?

Oddly, when Mr. Oliverio talked about the Ingersoll house, the one at Crofts Corners that is falling down, where the taxes haven’t been paid in years (well, we have footed the bill), he said that the county can only give a building to a non-profit (I don’t think S&W is a non-profit), and that they will charge the Friends of Croft’s Inn $8,000 for it.  They will charge the Friends of Crofts Inn, but not S&W????  I don’t get it.

Mr. Tendy has a draft incentive zoning law.  This is the art of overriding our zoning laws in return for some gift from a developer.  I’m sure they already have something in mind, and the only one opposed is Wendy…..

Bob says that this allows us to “preserve open space, historic areas, and get sports and arts amenities.”  But we do not need incentive zoning for open space or any recreational use. 

They are going out to bid for an architect to design Bob’s Town Hall addition… a bigger office for him, and storage of duplicate files.

They will have a flow meter installed in the sewer district, but they referred to this as a town expense and it should be a district expense. 

They deleted setting the MS4 public meeting, surprising.  Seems a bit late.

They talked about the vehicular easement that Bob wants to sell across Lake Peekskill park property.  He thinks it is a “reasonable accommodation” since the homeowners are “doing it illegally anyway.” I’ve heard that argument used with illegal immigration.

It seems that creating an easement over park property is “tricky” (BZ).  Gene expressed concern over doing this.  Thanks Gene.  I appreciate it. 

There was a conversation about the Lake Peekskill Civic Center.  I wish that someone would tell Bob that it is a community center.  They did tell him who was sponsoring the farmers’ market.  I was surprised that he didn’t know.  He also has never seen or heard of the community center rules. One rule doesn’t allow the center to be rented for personal profit.  I don’t know that I object to a farm market in LP, but I do approve of that rule, and I believe it is very difficult for the community to voice their objections if they have them.  I recommend anonymous blogging on lohud.  It seems to be the only outlet. And for the record, it is district property, not town property.  There is a difference.

And speaking of that difference, the dam is town property, not district.  That distinction was not maintained when discussing the Woidt Engineering contract that they planned to authorize at the May work session.

DP


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: