Another marathon meeting. This one ended at 12:45 am.
Recycling. After closing the public hearing, the Board, in a unanimous vote, adopted the local law that eliminated recycling from the Zoning Code as a permitted use in a light industrial zone. Based on the vote, there is nothing in the Zoning Code that would allow the Planning Board to continue reviewing the current application for a recycling facility on Route 6.
Fluoridation. In a 4-1 vote, with me voting NO, the Board voted to schedule a public hearing on October 15th on a local law that would give the Board the authority to shut down the town’s fluoridation system by a simple resolution that would not require a public hearing, (Note: Last week, Supervisor Lachterman made a unilateral decision to shut down the system – or, in his words, “pause” the system.)
The position of the four Board members was that based on the decision of a district court judge who found that fluoridation posed a risk to public health, and even though more studies were needed, they were erring on the side of caution in order to protect the town’s children. My comments in opposition to the shut down restated the arguments I posted on the Issues link elsewhere on this web site.
During Courtesy of the Floor that followed the vote, several residents spoke for and against fluoridation.
Solar Law. The Board adjourned the hearing on amendments to the 2020 law and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another six months. The date of the moratorium hearing was left open for the town clerk to decide based on the requirement governing advertising the hearing, but it likely will be as soon as possible.
Residents, and an attorney and urban planner representing a homeowner, spoke in opposition to the proposed amendments but also to what the amendments did not cover. Most were concerned that the law’s goal to promote solar while also maintaining a high quality environment that valued open space and naturalized areas wasn’t being enforced and that too many large scale solar farms were being approved or considered in naturalized areas. They also expressed concern that the law did not consider the values that trees and woodlands provide. No resident spoke in favor of the amendments.
Lawyers for two pending solar projects spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment that would have increased the setback to 200’ from the law’s current 100’ requirement. Instead, they suggested that the Planning Board be given the flexibility to determine what an appropriate setback should be on a case-by-case basis.
There were also comments about whether large scale solar farms could or should be fully screened from adjacent properties or only screened to the “greatest extent reasonably practicable.”
When Councilman Esposito suggested that large scale solar farms should be prohibited in all residential zones, Supervisor Lachterman and Planning Director Tegeder pointed out that some of existing solar installations that were not controversial are located on farms, and that farms are in residentially zoned parcels.
Battery storage moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and proceeded to vote to adopt a six-month moratorium. Prior to the vote, I pointed out that the town already had two battery storage facilities based on the town’s 2020 law and that the Board needed more information on what provisions in the current law we might want to change, e.g., the current law allows these facilities in all zones and does not limit their size.
Smoke shop moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another three months. In response to my comment noting that during those six months, the Board never discussed changes to the law, Supervisor Lachterman said that town staff was reviewing similar legislation from other municipalities.
Advanced life support program. The Board voted to go out to bid for the town’s Advanced Life Support contract that provides advanced paramedic services in conjunction with the volunteer ambulance corps in response to 911 calls. In contrast to the current contract, the bid specs include the addition of a second paramedic flycar and a second paramedic on the overnight shift. Supervisor Lachterman indicated that as he will be putting together his 2025 budget before the town receives any responses from the bid advertisement, his budget will likely include the estimated increase in cost for the second flycar and added shift based on an estimate he has received from Empress, the town’s current ALS vendor.
At Courtesy of the Floor, two speakers familiar with ALS services, advised the Board that a comprehensive study of how the town provides basic ambulance and advanced life support services was needed that reflected major changes that have taken place over time.
Ethics. When, during Courtesy of the Floor, a resident mentioned the word Examiner, Supervisor Lachterman immediately shut her down saying that personal attacks were inappropriate for Courtesy. He then defended his position as it related to an article in the Examiner that dealt with compliance with the Ethics Law, citing an Ethics Board decision that did not find he had a conflict of interest. At issue was how the provisions of the Ethics Law dealt with the supervisor’s relationship with a local attorney handling a personal matter when the attorney was also appearing before the Town Board.
Board meeting schedule. Given the town’s recent experience with very long meetings (and that was before this meeting ended), two residents suggested during Courtesy of the Floor that the Board return to having four meetings a month. Noting later in athe meeting the unfinished business involving solar, battery storage and smoke shop legislation, I supported that initiative. Supervisor Lachterman said the Board could always schedule extra meetings as needed and that the Board might revisit the meeting schedule in January when it sets the calendar for the new year.
Route 118/Underhill Avenue road improvements. The Board voted to advertise for bids the planned road improvements. But, in response to my question about the financing, Supervisor Lachterman explained that the bids specs would not be advertised until Unicorn Contracting paid the town for its share of the improvements. (Note: A June 5, 2024 resolution capped Unicorn’s contribution at $695,035.25, with the town paying for the balance, which was estimated at the time would be $543,032.44.)
Another marathon meeting. This one ended at 12:45 am.
Recycling. After closing the public hearing, the Board, in a unanimous vote, adopted the local law that eliminated recycling from the Zoning Code as a permitted use in a light industrial zone. Based on the vote, there is nothing in the Zoning Code that would allow the Planning Board to continue reviewing the current application for a recycling facility on Route 6.
Fluoridation. In a 4-1 vote, with me voting NO, the Board voted to schedule a public hearing on October 15th on a local law that would give the Board the authority to shut down the town’s fluoridation system by a simple resolution that would not require a public hearing, (Note: Last week, Supervisor Lachterman made a unilateral decision to shut down the system – or, in his words, “pause” the system.)
The position of the four Board members was that based on the decision of a district court judge who found that fluoridation posed a risk to public health, and even though more studies were needed, they were erring on the side of caution in order to protect the town’s children. My comments in opposition to the shut down restated the arguments I posted on the Issues link elsewhere on this web site.
During Courtesy of the Floor that followed the vote, several residents spoke for and against fluoridation.
Solar Law. The Board adjourned the hearing on amendments to the 2020 law and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another six months. The date of the moratorium hearing was left open for the town clerk to decide based on the requirement governing advertising the hearing, but it likely will be as soon as possible.
Residents, and an attorney and urban planner representing a homeowner, spoke in opposition to the proposed amendments but also to what the amendments did not cover. Most were concerned that the law’s goal to promote solar while also maintaining a high quality environment that valued open space and naturalized areas wasn’t being enforced and that too many large scale solar farms were being approved or considered in naturalized areas. They also expressed concern that the law did not consider the values that trees and woodlands provide. No resident spoke in favor of the amendments.
Lawyers for two pending solar projects spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment that would have increased the setback to 200’ from the law’s current 100’ requirement. Instead, they suggested that the Planning Board be given the flexibility to determine what an appropriate setback should be on a case-by-case basis.
There were also comments about whether large scale solar farms could or should be fully screened from adjacent properties or only screened to the “greatest extent reasonably practicable.”
When Councilman Esposito suggested that large scale solar farms should be prohibited in all residential zones, Supervisor Lachterman and Planning Director Tegeder pointed out that some of existing solar installations that were not controversial are located on farms, and that farms are in residentially zoned parcels.
Battery storage moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and proceeded to vote to adopt a six-month moratorium. Prior to the vote, I pointed out that the town already had two battery storage facilities based on the town’s 2020 law and that the Board needed more information on what provisions in the current law we might want to change, e.g., the current law allows these facilities in all zones and does not limit their size.
Smoke shop moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another three months. In response to my comment noting that during those six months, the Board never discussed changes to the law, Supervisor Lachterman said that town staff was reviewing similar legislation from other municipalities.
Advanced life support program. The Board voted to go out to bid for the town’s Advanced Life Support contract that provides advanced paramedic services in conjunction with the volunteer ambulance corps in response to 911 calls. In contrast to the current contract, the bid specs include the addition of a second paramedic flycar and a second paramedic on the overnight shift. Supervisor Lachterman indicated that as he will be putting together his 2025 budget before the town receives any responses from the bid advertisement, his budget will likely include the estimated increase in cost for the second flycar and added shift based on an estimate he has received from Empress, the town’s current ALS vendor.
At Courtesy of the Floor, two speakers familiar with ALS services, advised the Board that a comprehensive study of how the town provides basic ambulance and advanced life support services was needed that reflected major changes that have taken place over time.
Ethics. When, during Courtesy of the Floor, a resident mentioned the word Examiner, Supervisor Lachterman immediately shut her down saying that personal attacks were inappropriate for Courtesy. He then defended his position as it related to an article in the Examiner that dealt with compliance with the Ethics Law, citing an Ethics Board decision that did not find he had a conflict of interest. At issue was how the provisions of the Ethics Law dealt with the supervisor’s relationship with a local attorney handling a personal matter when the attorney was also appearing before the Town Board.
Board meeting schedule. Given the town’s recent experience with very long meetings (and that was before this meeting ended), two residents suggested during Courtesy of the Floor that the Board return to having four meetings a month. Noting later in athe meeting the unfinished business involving solar, battery storage and smoke shop legislation, I supported that initiative. Supervisor Lachterman said the Board could always schedule extra meetings as needed and that the Board might revisit the meeting schedule in January when it sets the calendar for the new year.
Route 118/Underhill Avenue road improvements. The Board voted to advertise for bids the planned road improvements. But, in response to my question about the financing, Supervisor Lachterman explained that the bids specs would not be advertised until Unicorn Contracting paid the town for its share of the improvements. (Note: A June 5, 2024 resolution capped Unicorn’s contribution at $695,035.25, with the town paying for the balance, which was estimated at the time would be $543,032.44.)
Another marathon meeting. This one ended at 12:45 am.
Recycling. After closing the public hearing, the Board, in a unanimous vote, adopted the local law that eliminated recycling from the Zoning Code as a permitted use in a light industrial zone. Based on the vote, there is nothing in the Zoning Code that would allow the Planning Board to continue reviewing the current application for a recycling facility on Route 6.
Fluoridation. In a 4-1 vote, with me voting NO, the Board voted to schedule a public hearing on October 15th on a local law that would give the Board the authority to shut down the town’s fluoridation system by a simple resolution that would not require a public hearing, (Note: Last week, Supervisor Lachterman made a unilateral decision to shut down the system – or, in his words, “pause” the system.)
The position of the four Board members was that based on the decision of a district court judge who found that fluoridation posed a risk to public health, and even though more studies were needed, they were erring on the side of caution in order to protect the town’s children. My comments in opposition to the shut down restated the arguments I posted on the Issues link elsewhere on this web site.
During Courtesy of the Floor that followed the vote, several residents spoke for and against fluoridation.
Solar Law. The Board adjourned the hearing on amendments to the 2020 law and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another six months. The date of the moratorium hearing was left open for the town clerk to decide based on the requirement governing advertising the hearing, but it likely will be as soon as possible.
Residents, and an attorney and urban planner representing a homeowner, spoke in opposition to the proposed amendments but also to what the amendments did not cover. Most were concerned that the law’s goal to promote solar while also maintaining a high quality environment that valued open space and naturalized areas wasn’t being enforced and that too many large scale solar farms were being approved or considered in naturalized areas. They also expressed concern that the law did not consider the values that trees and woodlands provide. No resident spoke in favor of the amendments.
Lawyers for two pending solar projects spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment that would have increased the setback to 200’ from the law’s current 100’ requirement. Instead, they suggested that the Planning Board be given the flexibility to determine what an appropriate setback should be on a case-by-case basis.
There were also comments about whether large scale solar farms could or should be fully screened from adjacent properties or only screened to the “greatest extent reasonably practicable.”
When Councilman Esposito suggested that large scale solar farms should be prohibited in all residential zones, Supervisor Lachterman and Planning Director Tegeder pointed out that some of existing solar installations that were not controversial are located on farms, and that farms are in residentially zoned parcels.
Battery storage moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and proceeded to vote to adopt a six-month moratorium. Prior to the vote, I pointed out that the town already had two battery storage facilities based on the town’s 2020 law and that the Board needed more information on what provisions in the current law we might want to change, e.g., the current law allows these facilities in all zones and does not limit their size.
Smoke shop moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another three months. In response to my comment noting that during those six months, the Board never discussed changes to the law, Supervisor Lachterman said that town staff was reviewing similar legislation from other municipalities.
Advanced life support program. The Board voted to go out to bid for the town’s Advanced Life Support contract that provides advanced paramedic services in conjunction with the volunteer ambulance corps in response to 911 calls. In contrast to the current contract, the bid specs include the addition of a second paramedic flycar and a second paramedic on the overnight shift. Supervisor Lachterman indicated that as he will be putting together his 2025 budget before the town receives any responses from the bid advertisement, his budget will likely include the estimated increase in cost for the second flycar and added shift based on an estimate he has received from Empress, the town’s current ALS vendor.
At Courtesy of the Floor, two speakers familiar with ALS services, advised the Board that a comprehensive study of how the town provides basic ambulance and advanced life support services was needed that reflected major changes that have taken place over time.
Ethics. When, during Courtesy of the Floor, a resident mentioned the word Examiner, Supervisor Lachterman immediately shut her down saying that personal attacks were inappropriate for Courtesy. He then defended his position as it related to an article in the Examiner that dealt with compliance with the Ethics Law, citing an Ethics Board decision that did not find he had a conflict of interest. At issue was how the provisions of the Ethics Law dealt with the supervisor’s relationship with a local attorney handling a personal matter when the attorney was also appearing before the Town Board.
Board meeting schedule. Given the town’s recent experience with very long meetings (and that was before this meeting ended), two residents suggested during Courtesy of the Floor that the Board return to having four meetings a month. Noting later in athe meeting the unfinished business involving solar, battery storage and smoke shop legislation, I supported that initiative. Supervisor Lachterman said the Board could always schedule extra meetings as needed and that the Board might revisit the meeting schedule in January when it sets the calendar for the new year.
Route 118/Underhill Avenue road improvements. The Board voted to advertise for bids the planned road improvements. But, in response to my question about the financing, Supervisor Lachterman explained that the bids specs would not be advertised until Unicorn Contracting paid the town for its share of the improvements. (Note: A June 5, 2024 resolution capped Unicorn’s contribution at $695,035.25, with the town paying for the balance, which was estimated at the time would be $543,032.44.)
Another marathon meeting. This one ended at 12:45 am.
Recycling. After closing the public hearing, the Board, in a unanimous vote, adopted the local law that eliminated recycling from the Zoning Code as a permitted use in a light industrial zone. Based on the vote, there is nothing in the Zoning Code that would allow the Planning Board to continue reviewing the current application for a recycling facility on Route 6.
Fluoridation. In a 4-1 vote, with me voting NO, the Board voted to schedule a public hearing on October 15th on a local law that would give the Board the authority to shut down the town’s fluoridation system by a simple resolution that would not require a public hearing, (Note: Last week, Supervisor Lachterman made a unilateral decision to shut down the system – or, in his words, “pause” the system.)
The position of the four Board members was that based on the decision of a district court judge who found that fluoridation posed a risk to public health, and even though more studies were needed, they were erring on the side of caution in order to protect the town’s children. My comments in opposition to the shut down restated the arguments I posted on the Issues link elsewhere on this web site.
During Courtesy of the Floor that followed the vote, several residents spoke for and against fluoridation.
Solar Law. The Board adjourned the hearing on amendments to the 2020 law and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another six months. The date of the moratorium hearing was left open for the town clerk to decide based on the requirement governing advertising the hearing, but it likely will be as soon as possible.
Residents, and an attorney and urban planner representing a homeowner, spoke in opposition to the proposed amendments but also to what the amendments did not cover. Most were concerned that the law’s goal to promote solar while also maintaining a high quality environment that valued open space and naturalized areas wasn’t being enforced and that too many large scale solar farms were being approved or considered in naturalized areas. They also expressed concern that the law did not consider the values that trees and woodlands provide. No resident spoke in favor of the amendments.
Lawyers for two pending solar projects spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment that would have increased the setback to 200’ from the law’s current 100’ requirement. Instead, they suggested that the Planning Board be given the flexibility to determine what an appropriate setback should be on a case-by-case basis.
There were also comments about whether large scale solar farms could or should be fully screened from adjacent properties or only screened to the “greatest extent reasonably practicable.”
When Councilman Esposito suggested that large scale solar farms should be prohibited in all residential zones, Supervisor Lachterman and Planning Director Tegeder pointed out that some of existing solar installations that were not controversial are located on farms, and that farms are in residentially zoned parcels.
Battery storage moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and proceeded to vote to adopt a six-month moratorium. Prior to the vote, I pointed out that the town already had two battery storage facilities based on the town’s 2020 law and that the Board needed more information on what provisions in the current law we might want to change, e.g., the current law allows these facilities in all zones and does not limit their size.
Smoke shop moratorium. The Board opened and closed the hearing and voted to extend the six-month moratorium that expired on September 30th for another three months. In response to my comment noting that during those six months, the Board never discussed changes to the law, Supervisor Lachterman said that town staff was reviewing similar legislation from other municipalities.
Advanced life support program. The Board voted to go out to bid for the town’s Advanced Life Support contract that provides advanced paramedic services in conjunction with the volunteer ambulance corps in response to 911 calls. In contrast to the current contract, the bid specs include the addition of a second paramedic flycar and a second paramedic on the overnight shift. Supervisor Lachterman indicated that as he will be putting together his 2025 budget before the town receives any responses from the bid advertisement, his budget will likely include the estimated increase in cost for the second flycar and added shift based on an estimate he has received from Empress, the town’s current ALS vendor.
At Courtesy of the Floor, two speakers familiar with ALS services, advised the Board that a comprehensive study of how the town provides basic ambulance and advanced life support services was needed that reflected major changes that have taken place over time.
Ethics. When, during Courtesy of the Floor, a resident mentioned the word Examiner, Supervisor Lachterman immediately shut her down saying that personal attacks were inappropriate for Courtesy. He then defended his position as it related to an article in the Examiner that dealt with compliance with the Ethics Law, citing an Ethics Board decision that did not find he had a conflict of interest. At issue was how the provisions of the Ethics Law dealt with the supervisor’s relationship with a local attorney handling a personal matter when the attorney was also appearing before the Town Board.
Board meeting schedule. Given the town’s recent experience with very long meetings (and that was before this meeting ended), two residents suggested during Courtesy of the Floor that the Board return to having four meetings a month. Noting later in athe meeting the unfinished business involving solar, battery storage and smoke shop legislation, I supported that initiative. Supervisor Lachterman said the Board could always schedule extra meetings as needed and that the Board might revisit the meeting schedule in January when it sets the calendar for the new year.
Route 118/Underhill Avenue road improvements. The Board voted to advertise for bids the planned road improvements. But, in response to my question about the financing, Supervisor Lachterman explained that the bids specs would not be advertised until Unicorn Contracting paid the town for its share of the improvements. (Note: A June 5, 2024 resolution capped Unicorn’s contribution at $695,035.25, with the town paying for the balance, which was estimated at the time would be $543,032.44.)
Discover more from SUSANSIEGEL4YORKTOWN
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.