HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB-06/01/1998-S JUNE 1, 1998 329
SPECIAL MEETING
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
A Special Meeting of the Southold Town Board was held on June 1,
1998, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New ' York.
Supervisor Cochran opened the meeting at 10:00 A.M:
Present: Supervisor Jean W. Cochran
Councilwoman Alice J. Hussie
Councilman William D. Moore
Councilman John M. Romanelli
Councilman Brian G. Murphy
Town Clerk Elizabeth A. Neville
. Town Attorney Gregory F. Yakaboski
Absent: Justice Louisa P. Evans
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This is a special Town Board meeting. A Waiver of
Notice with the undersigned being members of the Town Board of the Town
of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, do hereby verily waive notice of
time, place and purpose of the meeting of the Town Board to be held at
10:00 A.M., at Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road; Southold, New York,
on Monday, June 1, 1998. The same shall be held on said date of
transaction of any business which may properly come before said meeting.
Dated: 27th of May, 1998, Southold, New York, and signed by all
members of the Town Board. I think the first thing we will take up because
from looking at those here with .us today, them main interest I am sure is
the municipal electric utility system, so that will be our first order of
business, although we do have two resolutions in relation to Fishers Island.
One is rescinding the resolution that was passed for the kids on the
mosquito control program, and the second resolution for Fishers Island is
making a correction in the names of those that we hire. Also, there is a
resolution on for Cablevision, because there is a time frame on that, which
Greg will explain to us. The first order of business is the resolutions.
As you know, both resolutions to operate and establish both an electrical
system, and a .gas system was on the agenda for . last Tuesday's meeting,
and it was felt that we did not have adequate time to really look at all of
this with the time frame, so it was held for today's meeting, so that we can
further discuss it. Alice, 1 will call on you first. If there is anything
you would like to add before I ask Greg for legal opinions on this.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: No, the only thing we were waiting for was the
SEQRA process, and a determination about that,. so' since that is his game,
go ahead.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You are on. I want you to explain to the Board
the whole situation, where we are now. Greg.. I am asking for your legal
opinion.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Under the attorney client .privilege, that is
not an open meeting, so It does not apply, thus it would be just under a
Board meeting. Initially you can come back in. That is how it would be.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: On what part of it, Greg? It certainly can't be
all of it. What about the SEQRA part of it?
330 JUNE 1, 1998
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: I did two things. One, as attorney for the
Board I prepared it, or went through it, giving my legal opinion regarding
that. That is under the terms of client privilege, and then my suggestion
would be to you first discuss and then come back out.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Can we talk about it without having your
opinion? Can we ask you questions? I might say to you, have done a
SEQRA performance, which kind are we using, and that sort of stuff?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: 1 think there are some issues regarding
the overall processes SEQRA first, just to let the Board know some of the
processes. That would be my suggestion.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Those processes have to - be done in Executive
Session?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: No, they don't have .to be. We can
discuss everything right now if the Board wants to.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I think we should do as much as we can in open
session, be it SEQRA, be it whatever. The resolution certainly is public
information, and everybody- has had a copy of this all ready. I realize that
there are some points that, you know, that should discussed in Executive
Session, but there is so much I feel can be discussed in open session. No?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: It would difficult, I think, to do an
overall discussion. In doing the overall discussion some issues might come
up which the Board might be more comfortable. That might clearly fall
under attorney client. I can do it all right now, but in discussing it, and
making an comprehensive presentation some things might come up, which
the Board might. .
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I think, Greg, when we get to that point, and
you are our attorney, you are. the one that keeps us out of trouble, but
think we should try to discuss as much as we can. If we get to a point
where you feel very, very strongly about it being client attorney.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: I feel strongly at this point that some .
initial points you have discussed could be very. quick, and then come back
out, and start the process. I can not promise that if we go, and I start
doing a comprehensive presentation, that some issues might not come up
which the Board might be clearly attorney-client privilege in my legal
opinion. I would be happy to discuss it all. I can express it now.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am trying to think what it might possibly be.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I can't know what is in his head. I respect you,
Greg, and I am not going to second guess that.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Attorney-client communication is privileged and
confidential. - I hate not taking the attorney's recommendation. You are the
one that keeps us out of trouble.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: ' I don't want disrupt you, but I want to make a
motion that we go into Executive Session,* and give you five minutes to lay.
your. .
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Executive Session, the attorney-client is
exempt from the open meeting.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That is my request, that we give him five minutes,
let him get out his uncomfortable feat, get it off his chest, and then get
back out into the public.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Your exemption to go into Executive,
however it is separate and apart from an open meeting for the Board like
any other client is entitled to certain privileges of Federal, State Law.
One of the privileges of the attorney client discussion.
•�dr ,,p,
!JNE 1, 1998 331
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Bill, make the motion, then 1 will call for a
second, and vote.
Moved by Councilman Moore, seconded by Councilman Romanelli, it was
RESOLVED that the Town Board recess to go into Executive Session to
discuss items of attorney-client privilege, which is exempt from the open
meetings law, which relate to the establishment of a power company for the
Town of Southold
Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Romanelli, Councilman Moore,
Supervisor Cochran. No: Councilman Murphy, Councilwoman Hussie.
This resolution was LOST.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I will have to ask the same attorney to do as
much- as we can.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: I am going to give the presentation.
Focussing we are willing to go under the packet that says, attorney-client
privilege communication is confidential in terms of the second page. To
sum up, my recommendation is going to be that these resolutions are going
to be an action that falls under SEQRA. That under SEQRA, that prior to
doing action SEQRA must be completed. That if you are looking at the page
that it Is referenced, that agency, in this case the Town Board, classifies
the project as one of three types of actions, a Type I, a Type II unlisted
actions. Project, using my definition, the creation under Chapter 360, the
General Municipal Law of a municipal electric service, and municipal gas
utility service, with the stated purpose of decreasing the electric and gas
rates paid by local citizens, private citizens, and corporations of
commercial enterprises in the town, and also by the town body, by the
Town itself. My mind is clearly, it is at the very least an unlisted
action, and could only be considered a Type I action. If you go forward. as
an unlisted action you can conduct an uncoordinated review, if no other
agency is involved. If it falls into a Type I action a coordinated review is
what have to be done. What happened at the last Town Board meeting, the
SEQRA resolution was adopted, which stated as an uncoordinated review.
In looking at the matter closely, I think it would be unlisted for Type I.
In any event, my opinion is a mote point, because in doing the
environmental assessment, and looking over everything, what has to be
done in doing SEQRA, is you have to look at the proposed reasonable
expectation of the impact of the project. Then what do under, I passed out
617 for SEQRA, look at .these impacts. What we are looking at for here is to
determine whether or not the project may have at least one, or potential for
at least one significant adverse environment impact. If the Board, or the
body preparing the environmental assessment form determines that it may
have at least one potential' significant adverse environmental impact. Then a
positive declaration would be issued, and that would lead to an
Environmental Impact Statement. In looking over the impacts of this
project, and then . looking at the criteria listed in 617.7C, what that 617C
does is these criteria are considered -indicators of significant adverse
impacts on the environment. Stepping back for a second, if the Board or
the preparers determines that the proposed project is a Type I project is
an implication that it will have a significant adverse, at least one
significant adverse environmental impact. What you do. is you look at the
impacts that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed
project, proposed action, and determine that the criteria listed in 617.7C.
The impacts include both short term, long term, direct, indirect, and
continuing impact of the project. In looking at things—lets flash ahead,
let's say the whole project goes forward, or we go forward, the Town of
Southold, as everybody knows is unique, and much difference, the site,
the Town of Southold is much different than -some of the villages up west,
Farmingdale, Lynbrook, which are going through the process right
now, of forming a municipal ' electric service. Farmingdale, Lynbrook,
they are developed areas, versus Southold which is attempting to preserve
it's rural character, struggling with development pressure from Western
Long Island. There is a. lot of things, it has an open space preservation
program going on right now. Think about what might happen if all of a
sudden, compared to, say, Southold and Western Long Island, as they say,
40% drop in electric rates. The feasibility report itself talks about on
page six, that this project will result in a number. of benefits to the town
in a number of ways, such as attracting more commercial and industrial
development in the town, as desired, increasing property values and
stimulating the commercial and residential real estate sectors. In short
332 JUNE 1, 1998
you can make a very strong argument that creates a vacuum in the sense
that commercial enterprises, residential developments, which might locate
further up west, might be very much attracted to come into Southold. In
talking with the Town Planning Department, say what happened in
Creenport, the Village which has it's own electric company, and the rates
are lower to be able to move easily. than the town attract in business,
because one of the main overheads of a business is it's electric rates. In
looking over the criteria for determining the significance in 617.7C one of
the things—think about what might happen. You have more commercial
enterprises, more residential development coming in, increase in traffic,
pressure on the development of open space that is going on. The Town
currently has an open space program going on. This might significantly
hinder the open space program for agricultural and farmers, that are going
to stay in the business, or if the land is too valuable now. In going
through the criteria to determine the significance look at the first little
number I, little small Roman numeral I. Substantial adverse change in
existing air quality, ground or surface water quality, traffic or noise
levels. You can make an argument that increased commercial development
and residents would effect that. Number two, you could ' probably make an
argument, but some many more clean cut ones. Number 4, creation of
material conflict with community plans or goals as officially approved and
adopted. I know right now, that the Town of Southold has an open space
preservation program, both for farmland development rights, and open
space going on right now.' By having a growth incentive, such as
significantly decreased electric rates. A strong argument could be made that
that would effect that current plan. 'Number six, a major change in use of
either the quantity or type of energy, while we will not be switching type
of energy, the quantity if you significantly cheaper electric rates could
rise. Number eight, substantial change in use or intensity of use of land
including agricultural,• open space or recreational resources, and it's
capacity to support existing uses. Again, a strong argument that the
expected impacts of commercial and residential development would conflict,
or would meet criteria, encouraging attracting a large amount of people to a
place, or places in more than few days compared to the number of people
who would come to such a place absent the action. That is number nine.
Again, you could make an argument on that. That is one, two, three,
four, five, based on those alone it would be my recommendation that a
Positive Declaration as prepared should be found by the Board. In that
case an Environmental Impact Statement would. be called, thus on a time
line. Where we are today is, we have a couple of resolutions before the
Board. That .is, in my opinion, an action that SEQRA must be done. That
is the critical date. SEQRA must be done prior. Doing the research I have
talked to the Department of State in reference to New York State. DEC. I
have talked to DEC. SEQRA attorney. Also, someone from the DEC who is
the permit process, has been there for many years. The Department of
State recommended I speak to him. 1 have talked to an environmental
planner, and I have talked to our own Planning Department. -I have also
looked. over everything myself. If the Board chooses to go forward without
completing SEQRA at this juncture, and move forward with resolutions, and
then went forward to vote a special election, or a• general election, and
then went forward to bond, .an example of. what could happen is. . did
everyone get the copy of this case which I handed out? Attached is cases,
Taxpayers Association versus Queensberry, that Is right there. New
York State, this is our Court of Appeals case. In there what happens is,
the Town Board was considering the establishment of a sewer district. It is
very analogous. What happens was the Town Board passed resolutions, just
like here they went forward, did a vote, a very close vote, and then they
• did bonds, and had all kinds of approvals. The group was challenged early
on within the applicable time limitations, the fact that a- SEQRA was not
properly done. As you know everything had gone all the way through. It
went to the Court of Appeals, and they annulled everything. That is
what the Board could be facing if it moves forward without completing the
SEQRA properly. In addition, today I did not have full and complete
recommendation for a pos dec prepared. The reason for that is; I think
the criteria I have laid out so far, and the reasoning I have laid out so
far clearly indicate that a positive dec is warranted. I do have two
questions, though. When I first recommended to this Board back at the
last Town Board meeting, we established that the Board has filed as It's
lead agency of an unlisted action. In reviewing this and talking to other
people I believe I might have to change that opinion, and that should be a
Type I action. In that case an uncoordinated review would have to be
;
4F.,..
JUKE , , 1998 333
done. So, the next step is correcting that 'step. In addition when you do a
positive dec and you issue it you want to list all the impacts, as many
impacts as I can come ' up with. I would like to have a little more time to
talk : with our Planning and perhaps an environmental consultant as
establishing the full potential environmental impacts that clearly establish
and set forth the positive dec. That is my reasoning on the SEQRA.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Okay, now can we talk? Those are specious
arguments, if 1 have heard. In the first place, you are talking about
something that might happen,' and it is going to have a significant effect on
the environment. We are not putting in any poles. We are not digging up
a piece of ground. We are taking over an existing company. The fact that
it is going to bring business, in, how do know it is going to bring business
in? That is a speculation; and besides business is controlled by our
zoning, just like the number of homes that, 'we have is controlled by
zoning. Just because you say we are going to have cheaper electric rates,
Messina .didn't have a sudden influx of many, many people coming in.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Greenport hasn't had it for years.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Neither has Greenport. I. don't understand: It
just does. not make sense.. ....Development is alright. Development is done by
zoning, and then you cite this law. - Was this an existing sewer district, or
were they going to dig up the ground, and put one in?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: They are going to establish a district.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: They are going to establish a district, but it
doesn't say whether they were going to build new, or they were taking
over an existing one. So, I am not going to listen to that. I can not
believe that we have gone this far. You told us that this required a
negative declaration. We were not going to dig up anything, therefore we
can go ahead. Now, all of a sudden we have been waiting, waiting, and
waiting, this is going to be the third time. There is something peculiar
here.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: In reviewing the environmental, I
appreciate your frustration. .I do. Quite frankly you look at the SEQRA
rights, it calls for SEQRA being started as soon as possible. As soon as
an agency is considering an action.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: That's why we postponed doing the vote two
weeks ago, because the SEQRA thing was going to be done. It was going
to be a neg dec. It was going to be fairly short, and all was going to be
well, and last Tuesday we were supposed to take care of this.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: That was my impression. However, in
going through the Environmental Assessment Form, and completing it. .l did
receive the Environmental. Assessment Form from Power Alternative as you
know. I walked through it at the last Board meeting. In going through it I
realized that some of the answers I have been filled in by Power
Alternatives I did not quite frankly agree with. I received that
Environmental Assessment Form nine o'clock during that Work Session last
Tuesday.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: That's right, and we have had five or six days
in between then.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Let me just ask a question. It is sort of
rhetorical, but, Alice, maybe. it is directed more at you, than it is you,
Greg. Is there some clock that we are racing against, that suggests. that
we should, and don't want to say sidestep, because I respect the fact that
you. disagree that we need to take a certain step with a positive dec, or a
negative dec, or this, or that, so I am not going to address the substance
of it, just your vote, but I don't get the' sense that there is nothing that
we do. .if this still is a good idea, and if the numbers work out, and we
still have the authority under State law to do this, and set it up and do it
right, and process it right along according to the proper procedures, and
by the way, at some point in time your bond counsel will ask you, show me
your SEQRA resolutions, because that is part and parcel of their opinion
letters that go out as they are packaged, so you have to have that in place
3 3 40�4 1, 1998
before you start doing anything whether it is a negative dec, or positive
dec, or something, you know, coordinated, or uncoordinated. Having read,
and 1 asked for some other opinions, and having gotten them, there was a
court case going on last week as far as this race in clock that we are
talking about. The two villages that are ahead us process-wise had raced
into the Appellate Division seeking to leapfrog through the imminent domain
process. You know of what I. am speaking, right, Greg? They want to seize
assets immediately sized up into procedural mechanisms in place, because at
least those villages and their counsel believed that if they were going to
accomplish the task they had to obtain the assets prior to the
LILCO/LIPA closing last week, and the court said, no. I am assuming we
are stuck with that court's decision. Whether we agree that the law, that
we can still use imminent domain down the road as a proper course of action
to take, that door has been closed to us, so I don't see the need to put
your foot to the metal, and go hell's bells forward,. if you have steps. -to
be done properly, who wants bond counselor saying, I'm sorry but I can't
give you the kind of premium you need to market your bonds.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: I talked to Power Alternatives, heavily
involved. They are also involved, and very familiar with those two cases.
asked them point blank. I said, are we under any deadline? What are our
deadlines -right now? They .said, no, you are not .on any deadlines. In
addition, backing up a step in this process the project, the goal here, the
goal with the decreased electric rates, the plan was to form a municipal
utility service such that, that service could then. .it is really the
purchase of power off the power bridge. It is called wheel in power from
out of state. In reviewing the whole file, again, .I found nothing from
Endpact Power System, I should have. handed this out. This is .dated
October 29, 1996, and it was a letter to the Supervisor and to the Board.
It said there is a recent decision by New York .Public Service Commission
has ordered that open retail commission on electricity begin in New York in
early 1998. There's a possibility, and I don't know anything more about
this, that perhaps we are permitted to bring in retail power. I also talked
to Power Alternatives about something along this line the other day, , and
they also indicated that perhaps the town itself, I don't know about private
citizens, could be bring in power without forming an initial utility
service. Those are other issues.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Those things are .for the Town to act as a
wholesaler for itself, for it's own buildings, and . little places that it
owns. School districts can do the same things. Okay, so we spent $180,000
on electric for the town, but we spent $19,000,000 all together with
everybody. The other people 'are being affected. The other thing is,
why. .l am not saying that have to hurry, and hurry, and do this, because
they are racing against the clock. I don't say that. But, I am very
disturbed to constantly see this dragging, dragging, dragging. I have been
through, this before. In the previous administration I have been through
this. We have-to check this. We have to check the other thing. We have to
check the other thing as if everybody is dumb, and only one person can
understand that you have to follow the SEQRA process. I realize we have
to follow the SEQRA process, but at the same time you can also use your
head. We are not going to do anything to the environment. We are not
changing anything.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: These arguments can go two ways.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Absolutely true, and correct. Regarding
the dragging process, I appreciate your frustration. Part of what has
happened since I came on board, and accepted responsibility for this .is,
when I first came on board .this was a long ways along, and Power
Alternatives was heavily involved. In looking at everything it was my
impression, rightly or wrongly, that Power Alternatives was leading this,
advising the Board, advising the. town on what the legal steps, and on the
feasibility of what had to happen. What has happened Is when I receive
things at the last second, the Board rightly has asked my opinion, and
what happened is a couple of things, Is that having to sign off on those
things, I am not comfortable . in signing off some of the things that don't
look good to me, especially the last second, especially the SEQRA, which
was delivered at the last Board meeting. Since that time, unless the Board
would like 'to change that, I noticed. Power Alternatives that since this is
happening it is unfair to the Board. I believe that if I have to sign off at
JUi`aE 7, 3919€3
335
the end that I become involved much earlier, and take the lead role, and
use them as the expert .advisors.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Are you taking the lead role, or taking
opinions? Are you making decisions or giving us your opinion?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: This is my thoughts on it. To help
alleviates what Is so frustrating, which is the fact that things come in, at
the last second things are getting pulled, because when I review them they
are not comfortable, and then when 1 ask questions I am being told they
are good questions by our experts, by Power Alternative. So, that is what
happened.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I would like to clarify one thing, Greg. I spoke
.with Greg, and said, as a attorney to the .Town of Southold it is his
responsibility to. make sure we do this whole process correctly with all the
is dotted, all the is crossed. I personally feel that we should have
SEQRA, and I see it as a type of action. I really do.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Why?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: . I.think it is going to affect the environment. I
think it affects economics in the town. I think it will, Alice, and you
know as well as I know that'this community is going to receive lawsuits as
we go through and try to fight this thing. It is going to be part of the
whole process, lawsuits. I do not feel that:: having this Town obligate
themselves to $47,000,000. It is fair to them until we know the answers,
and they know the answers. So, the time frame, in my mind, is not the
key point.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: There is not going to be $40,000 being dedicated
or anything until the referendum is done.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I still think there is lot of information that we
have to get out there.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: We will never get it until we establish ourselves.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: After SEQRA.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: It is a legal regarding the; expenditure of
the bond, and things like that. The only reason I brought it up was the
fact that once we go forward, however, as I said there is a paper here now
that has some pitfalls on it. Again, I fully appreciate your frustration,
which is why I have made my statement that I did ,last week to Power
Alternatives.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Not as much frustration as it is puzzlement,
actually puzzlement. This thing has been going on for six weeks, and now
we are ready, we said, yes, we are right there ready to do it, and
suddenly pull back the reins, and we have to stop for a reason. Why?
Because it is going to cause more business to come into town? That is a
dream, or a nightmare. I don't know, how does everyone else feel?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I feel you go through the process, legal manner,
the manner we are supposed to go through, and SEQRA is an important
part of this whole process, and I feel we start the process of SEQRA
immediately, and then follow our steps as we should.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: The SEQRA process that Greg, you can argue
them on the other side, too. I mean they are suggestions, they could
happen. You could completely make a strong argument that it is not going
to bring more business, that your zoning and your planning.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The process will show you that.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: What, another study? The Environmental Impact
Statement, which is�a study.
33 6 JUk'-"E 1, 1998.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: John, just weighing in with a little bit. If you
want something to stick, and you want to assure yourself, that you have
not given your opposition that is out there something to grab on to, SEQRA
is one place where the courts are much more respectful of. The Boards are
stopped, looked, and examined, and then taken their action versus those
that have sidestepped, or said, oh, we don't thik, and others come back
and say, hey, wait a second, that warranted what they call the hard look,
and you didn't give it. That is the only concern. I am not saying
whether it should, or shouldn't have, which way you want to go on it in
that respect, but having done it, you can't be faulted with having done
it. We hired these guys, what last fall?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Last December.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Okay, and they were late in getting their report to
us, and everyone is trying to race a perceived deadline.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: And regarding the fact that commercial
and residential development might come in, this is what they stated in their
own feasibility report. This is where a lot of the bases came from, on page
six, attracting more commercial investment development in the town as
desired, increasing property values, and stimulating the commercial and
residential real estate sectors. So, that is the first step in SEQRA. That
is the impact. That is a perceived impact, and then you look at the
criteria, which are listed in 617.C, and you look at that, and it starts
showing. .
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Public water could do the same thing.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Absolutely.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Did the Suffolk County Water Authority do it?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: When they took over Creenport they did. They did a
full DEIS. I read it. I don't know if the extension has gone to, but
know they did it on the acquisition.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Really reading this, .and this, LIPA would have
to give us a statement to reduce the rates by 20%.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Interesting enough, I was doing some research over
the weekend. LIPA, actually, because they are a State Authority were
granted a New York State Legislative exemption.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: There you go.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: There you go, but that is the point. State
Legislature sits there and exempts itself from. the laws to which it puts
everybody through, and we have to adhere with it, and they give
themselves an exemption.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: I don't see where this is going to affect. It is an
existing system. It is already here. The zoning Is in place. I don't see.
Now it would be a 20% decrease, because we are already getting twenty
from LIPA, so what we are looking at is 20% more decrease. The way our
zoning Is right now, it .is not going to change.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: My question is what is .the harm of doing ' the
process then? If there. is not time critical deadline here, that what we are
not racing against some closing statement, we are not racing against some
legislation.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: In other words, justification for taking a Negative
Dec on it.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: When I first - looked at it. .these are just
my recommendations that I gave to the Board. When 1 first looked at It,
when we talked about it, and just take note of the system, and then
started talking to different people, and started looking again at the
feasibility report, and looking at perceived impact, and that, and you
AS`
JUN E ,, 1998 337
know, there is a line between Riverhead and Southold, you have 40%
rates. What that might do, especially with a lot of open land, undeveloped
land, that is still out here, that is both zoned commercial and residential,
that is kind of why I came to my conclusions. My initial feeling exactly as
you pointed out, and that is as Alice pointed out, which is all we are doing
is taking over the system.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: At that rate, Greenport shouldn't have a bit of
land left in it. It has been less than half of our rate for how many
years? There shouldn't be a piece of land left in Greenport if you take
that logic.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I think you are focussing on just one point.
There are more points than just that it will- increase business. 1 don't
know if it is going to increase business or not, but certainly a DEIS is
going to show you that. It is going to give us answers we, don't now have.
COUNCILWOMAN .HUSSIE: And you won't have them later. You don't - know
what business is going to do, and according to this if I sneeze I need to do
a SEQR thing, because it says it is creating of a hazard to human health.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Another factor which came into play. was,
I know a lot of the Board members have talked about, hey, it would be nice
if all power lines were underground, and currently I know our Planning
Department requires that any developments that the power lines be
underground. That has a lot of aesthetic value. You know you drive down
the road. One thing that Power Alternatives was mentioning at one point
when they were here, was the fact that potentially there are companies that
are out there, that can. come in and lay a whole new system. So, when you
are looking at purchasing existing (tape change) I also do' know there are
environmental factors put into play.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Of course there is an environmental factor. As
you recall that feasibility study laid out a number of different ways to
acquire the company, a number of different ways to run the company, a
number of different goals, or possible goals. You yourself said, well, they
have everything in here, so that we can go either way. That is what we
wanted to do. Now, suddenly that is being turned against us.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: In that situation, let's make the determination at
some point down the road to put the stuff underground, because it was a
definite environmental consequence, digging up.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: The current plan would probably have to
change having an amendment to the current resolution to allow a
complete. .if you didn't purchase all of the existing transmission and
distributions lines, instead went with a third party different company, they
put everything underground you would probably have to amend, the plan.
Another thing to finish up on SEQRA in general, just - because you go
through the process and there is a Positive Dec, and an Environmental
Impact Statement is required, that doesn't mean that the project doesn't go
forward. That simply means, all SEQRA was trying to do in legislature
active SEQRA was when various boards, including this board, were sitting
here making decisions, weighing decisions on different actions, that an
action was going to be taken, that this decision of land use would also
bring in environmental factors into the consideration. That is why in this
particular case when the Board of Appeals overturned it, and the
Appellete Division overturned they went back to square one, because they
said when the people had to vote they deserved to have all the
enviromental factors before them. They might still come out with the
exact same vote. If they had done SEQRA this case could have gone right
forward: Nobody could have one
it. The factors were before the
people, and say the vote was the same still. You never would have had to
go back. That is what happened in this particular case.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Alice, you said the last administration did not
move on this at all. I feel that we have been moving. I think we have
been moving. We have had this firm on board what, less than a year?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: We have gone through them, and we still are not
any place.
338 JUFIE ,, 1,998
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We are moving, though, and SEQRA is a part of
that moving. 1 just feel that we should start that SEQRA process. I don't
know exactly how long it will take timewise.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: That means we have to go out to Kramer, and
Vorhis, and somebody, and get this, and do the other thing, and wait,
and it will be another six weeks, eight weeks, ten weeks, maybe it will be
three months.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is a good idea, it will still be a good idea six
weeks from now.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: As I say, that was just simply my
recommendations to the Board as preparing, and looking it over, that type
of thing. As I stated in the beginning, Supervisor, It could have been done
at the turning point -but. .l just want everybody to know.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This is an important thing for the community of
Southold, and I think that people should hear as much as they can. Alice
has worked very hard on this project, and we ask you to be just a little
bit more patient, Alice, and let's take each step 'and do it, so that when
the lawsuits come down we have certain protections. ,Let's keep moving in a
forward direction.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: In the spirit of bitterness I wonder how long it
is going to be, what is going'to be the thing to hold it up the next time.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will move it as quickly as we can. I was also
asked to express , Councilwoman Evans position on this, and she did sign a
waiver, so that we could meet without her today, but she is against the
resolution at this time, and .she wants Fishers Island completely out of the
process, so I have done her bidding, and I have relayed this information.
She also shared it with the Town Attorney. Okay, It is up to the Board.
Do you want to present the resolution and vote? Do you want to hold it?
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Do we need a resolution to go forward on a full
SEQRA?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: On that, if it is okay with the Board, I
would like to again consult with the environmental consultant and the
Planning Department. I believe that is strong case for a Type I
Coordinated Review. That means that we would rescind the earlier
resolution because it is going to be an uncoordinated review. I thought it
was just simply an unlisted action, when I spoke last time. An
uncoordinated review more agencies are Involved. I am waiving on that. I
think that has been held until the next Board meeting as to the type of
action, and the type of review, that would be my suggestions.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I offer the resolution that we retain the services of
Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, which is the Environmental Consultant, to
perform whether it is the Long Form EIEF, make a decision on negative
and positive dec, and go from there. Whatever step you are at with the
material you have presently, that we retain them to perform that service.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: We are going to do that. We are not going to
take a vote on the present. thing. We are just going to let it slide, is that
right?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Alice, this Is your resolution. As Chairman you
were going to present the resolution. You may still present it, and we can
vote on it. Is that what you are saying?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: I am asking.. You are the Chairman, Madame
Supervisor, or the one pulling the strings here. What are we going to do
about this? Are we each going to put up our reasons for not doing it, or
are we just going to let it languish in the gutter; and move on to something
else.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I have just asked, would you like to present
your resolutions, and we can vote on it, otherwise the Board can take the
direction. I do have a motion on the floor at this point. I don't have a
JUP•Jc 1, 1998 339
second yet, but I do have a motion on the floor. I can ask Bill to rescind
his motion if you would like to present yours. We will vote on it. If it is
a positive vote, then you are voting to move ahead without doing the full
SEQRA process. If it is a negative vote, then I will entertain Bill's motion
to hire Voorhis, and we will go in the direction of an environmental
study, SEQRA.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Okay, then I move that the Town Board at this
time creates a . .
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: If the Board is then going to go prior to
your resolution, suggest that prior to making a resolution, make a
resolution for a Negative Dec SEQRA, then make your motion.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Did we do that last Tuesday?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: It was lead agency. Prior to making a
finding, make a finding on Negative Dec and the reasons, and then the
resolution.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: I move the Town Board declares this action of
creation of Southold Electric Utility having a negative impact on the
environment. How you do that?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: There are two things. One is a Type. I, or
unlisted, and then the Negative Dec. The only reason for a Type I .is
that, I did have a clear answer on this one, ' is that if the action occurs
wholly with the parcel within, or substantially indigenous to any historic
building, structure, facility, site, or prehistoric site as listed on
National Register of Historic places, or has proposed by New York State on
Historic Preservation for recommendation to the State Historic Preservation
Office for nominal. I didn't know the answer to this, and talking to the
Planning Department it was thought that Fort Corchaug falls under that.
I don't know the answer. That would be the only reason for a Type I. If
not, it would be an unlisted action.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Instead of trying to figure out these things out
of my head. You know you often take an informal poll. Let's do an
informal poll.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, we can do that.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Take an informal poll, on what?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: On a negative dec.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Why don't you do it on the establishment?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, let's do it on the establishment. I have
no difficulty with that.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: My only problem is with -all this discussion we
had today. We have given the attorney, who want to sue the town if we go
forward all the ammunition they need. We have given them the argument to
sue us. Right out here in the public-meeting, so we would really have to. .
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, do you want to know where the chips fall?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: I suggest to the Board, if we do the
informal call first as to an unlisted, I think it clearly unlisted, only
vote whether it is a Type I or not, and then after that it would be a
negative or positive dec.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, let's do this poll, and this is on the
negative?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Unlisted, or Type I, you have to declare
which type of action.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: I just wanted to know where everybody stood,
and I guess I know where everybody stands.
340 JUKE 1, 1998
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am holding it. I am going to go through the
process, and I. am .going to continue with the process, but I am going to do
it the correct way, and that Is doing SEQRA first. I am holding. . 1 am not
moving ahead with the resolutions today. That is.where I stand. Bill?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I am in agreement. I am ready to go to the next
step, which is do your resolution declaring it an unlisted action SEQRA.
'We already are the lead agent, and then we authorize the hiring of Nelson,
Pope, and Voorhis to perform the necessary environmental review.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Alice?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Okay.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, what?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Let's go ahead with the full SEQRA thing...
Gentlemen, I would still like to know your feelings.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: I agree with you at the moment on this point at
this stage that we need to hold it.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Just by way of understanding what I am talking
about. We didn't sit here, and I didn't just suggest that we just positive
dec this thing. I simply ask that we hire people to prepare a long form
EAF. The attorney had one from Power Alternatives. Let them prepare
a Long. Form EAF. If you decide having read that, and you ask them
these very good questions about this type of, which are an existing thing,
it is really a debt obligation as opposed to building new lines, and that
kind of stuff. These guys do this all the time. Let's get their opinion on
what type declaration is . appropriate. You. have a long form EAF filled
out by a designated environment consultant, you are not going to be, as
far as we are talking about our legal advise, and our positions to the
public you can't be faulted for having a designated person sit there and
assist you in preparing the environmental review on a long form.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, I will entertain your resolution, Bill, once
again. Would you like to repeat it?
1 .-Moved by•Councilman Moore, seconded by Councilwoman Hussie, it was
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold declares the
formation of public utility service for electric and' gas as unlisted actions
of SEQRA, and engages the services of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis,
Environmental Consultants, to perform an environmental review process, and
to prepare the Long Form Environmental 'Assessment Form.
I .-Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Murphy, Councilman
Romanelli, Councilman Moore, Councilwoman Hussie, Supervisor Cochran.
This resolution was duly ADOPTED.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Our next order of business relates to
Cablevision. Alice, would you share this with the group.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: The Board probably knows that over the last
January we had received many, many complaints from citizens in Southold
concerning the rate increase. They did what they thought they were
supposed to do, which was to make their complaints to the Department of
Public Service. That done, we then have to get involved with the FCC. In
March, I wrote a letter to the FCC saying, that on January 1st
Cablevision raised it's cable user rates, and the Town of Southold has gone
on record to protest this unwarranted ,increase. The Town of Southold, the
franchising authority has received at • least two consumer complaints
concerning this increase, and therefore filed it's rate complaint with the
FCC. The Town further notes the clause on complaint process established
by Congress. The practice of sending rate increases and basic service to
the State Public Service Commission, while sending rate increases in higher
levels to the FCC, presents the cable companies with the perfect
opportunity. for slight of hand. High plan rate increases, or decreases, in
different levels of service against each other, they can mask unfair rate
increases with opportunity for a comprehensive review. That was in March
30, 1998. Last Thursday I got a phone call from Mr. Gary Ramandeno
from the FCC saying that I had followed the 'wrong process, and what all
JUNE 1, 1998 341
this explanation that. they sent to the people who complained really meant
was that we had to fill out a form, and we have 180 days in which to do
that, so we are okay on that score except if you follow 180 days from
January 1st it brings us to June 30th. Also, in the instructions for
this it says, that we have to - give our complaint, fill' out on their form
here, two pages worth of form, and send It to Cablevision. But, before we
can do that we, as a Board, have to decide that we have received these
complaints, and we are following their steps, that indeed, the resolution
says that the increase took effect and we received the complaints, and it
effects two tiers of service as a franchising authority. So, I have gotten
this, and I do believe the form has been filled out to be sent, and it just
requires that you agree that this kind of thing should be done. There is
an interesting little flip in here, though, and that is that we have 180
days, but the Cablevision people have 30 days, at least, 30 days to get
their reply back to us, which means that they would have to get their
reply back immediately in order for us to comply with the 180 days. I
don't know why they waited until the last minute to let me know, because
he has had this for three months. It is such a Catch-22 situation. It is
absolutely Joseph Hiller. He' is probably sitting here. somewhere.
2.- Moved by Councilwoman Hussie, seconded by Councilman Moore, it was
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold as the
franchising authority dealing with Cablevision, hereby determines that the
increase instituted by Cablevision, Inc. of Riverhead took effect no more
than ninety days before the subscriber complaints were received, and that
the increase pertains to the cable programming services tiers).
2.- Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Murphy, Councilman
Romanelli, Councilman Moore, Councilwoman Hussie, Supervisor Cochran.
This resolution was duly ADOPTED.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Resolution #3 in relation to Fishers Island,
rescinding the hiring of the mosquito course over there.
3.- Moved by Councilman Romanelli, seconded by Supervisor Cochran, it was
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby rescinds
Resolution #13 of May 26, 1.998, Southold Town Board meeting which reads
as follows:
Resolved that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby appoints
Megan Callaghan, Kristin Unfried, and Katherine Holbrook, and
Lasser O'Callaghan as technicians under the Fishers Island Safe BTI
Mosquito Control Program, effective May 16, 1988 through October 10, 1998
at a salary of $6.50 per hour, total expenditure not to exceed $8,500 for
the 1998 season.
3•- Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Murphy, Councilman
Romanelli, Councilman Moore, Councilwoman Hussie, Supervisor Cochran.
This resolution was duly ADOPTED.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Resolution to hire three of the people with the
job, and their salaries.
4.- Moved by Councilman Murphy, seconded by Councilman. Romanelli, it was
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby- appoints
the following individuals as Technicians under the Fishers Island Safe BTI
Mosquito Control Program, effective May 16, 1998 through October 10, 1998,
at the ,following salaries total expenses not to exceed $8,500 for the 1998:
Lasser O'Callaghan $ 6.50 per hour
Megan Callaghan 8 Katherine Holbrook , 8.00 per hour
Kristin 'Unfried 10.00 per hour
4.- Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Murphy, Councilman
Romanelli, Councilman Moore, Councilwoman Hussie, , Supervisor Cochran.
This resolution was duly ADOPTED.
342 J-01NE 1, 1998
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: May I have a motion to adjourn?
Moved by Councilwoman Hussie, seconded by Councilman Moore, -it was
RESOLVED that this Town. Board meeting be and hereby is adjourned at
11:04 P.M.
Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Murphy, Councilman
Romanelli, Councilman Moore> Councilwoman Hussie, Supervisor Cochran.
This resolution was duly ADOPTED.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk