September 9 Town Board Meeting. After an invocation from Pastor Nathan Robinson... the board opened an adjourned Public Hearing regarding Proposed Local Law # 3. This was an extension of the Public Hearing opened on August 19th... but at the very last minute (late on September 5th) a revised version of the Proposed Law was published... removing the clause that restricted where gas stations can be built. There has been no public reason or explanation for this action from the board members who supported this removal.
First - we have always worked to be very factual about actions taken by our elected officials and not ascribe any nefarious actions to their work. We continue to hope and believe that we, living in this small community of around 30,000, can work together to build a better future for all of us. So we in no way condone the outbursts, inappropriate questions & assertions made during the Town Board Meeting.
That being said, for those who did spend time contacting their council member, writing letters, attending the meeting, speaking at the meeting and being with us in spirit - we are so very grateful. We know that it takes time and that you would much rather be doing other things — but supporting our neighbors and raising this issue to our elected officials is really critical… especially as the removal of the code from the proposed law was only made public late in the day on September 5th. The potential of this, or any concerns or issues about the restrictions on where gas stations can be built were never raised during earlier board meetings. So thank you for responding so quickly.
The Board closed the public hearing and tabled the revised Proposed Law, ostensibly because Council Member Beale had more concerns he wanted to talk about in Executive Session. This is a bit concerning, because if there are more “revisions” to the published proposed law, there will not be an opportunity for the public to speak about those revisions.
Supervisor Cavaccini did clarify, in response to a question from a resident during the public hearing - that he sponsored the Proposed Law in the original form - that included restrictions on where Gas Stations can be built. Town Council Members - who have not said anything in public - are hiding behind “Advice from Counsel” — let’s parse the points made by the Town Attorney:
1) Michael Liguori, the Town Board’s Attorney - made clear, that he is not the “Litigating” attorney that provided this advice. The Attorney who made these recommendations to the Town Council Members is Tom Wood, who was tapped by the previous Town Supervisor to represent the town in the Law Suits regarding the Hughsonville Project. Please keep in mind that this advice is given by a lawyer who might be motivated to “win” this litigation vs. providing advice benefiting town residents.
This is further reinforced by the fact that Mr. Liguori had clearly reviewed Proposed Law # 3 before it was introduced in July - and he did not flag any of these issues.
2) Mr. Liguori said the project was “not grandfathered” — since that is not a legal term, I’m not sure how he was using that term. But to be very clear - GasLand has an approved project plan - approved by the Town of Wappinger Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals.
Yes, the project is currently in litigation - but the fact is the plan was approved and that is why the construction is happening, and the gas station could be opened for business while being litigated. The Developer has begun the project at his own risk. The passage of the restrictions in Proposed Law # 3 would NOT affect this project, just like a change in Residential Zoning Code - does not require residents to change their homes retroactively.
Predicting the decision of a court - and there are a number of outcomes that could result - is a fool’s errand. A potential outcome — just one of many — Could be… that the Court asks that the Planning Board revisit the project. It is this hypothetical outcome that the litigating attorney, Tom Wood, advised the Town Council Members, to remove the proposed restrictions. So the result is …. The Town of Wappinger continues to be “unprotected” on where Gas Stations can be built, and the Litigating attorney and Town Council Members have left the Town Residents unprotected to help enable one favored developer by reducing the risks for him. They have also tied the Planning Board’s hands IF, a big IF, this hypothetical scenario does come to pass.
Indications that the Town Council, made in private conversations, that they would reconsider limitations on where Gas Stations can be built ….. AFTER the current Litigation is resolved, is just salt in a wound. Also the implication that the current Litigation by Hughsonville residents is somehow the inhibitor in protecting the rest of Wappinger is obnoxious. Because the majority of the Town Council Members were responsible for the removal of the protections to begin with …. that they now would really love to protect Wappinger Residents, but the Hughsonville Group is tying their hands… is wrong. The residents felt obligated to sue the town because the town was not providing protections…. protections that every surrounding town has in place and 28 out of 30 communities in Dutchess County have. The residents are suing to get the Town to act to protect their homes.
3) It was also stated that the advice to the town council members was made, because the Town of Wappinger has been sued, and lost… because of actions/decisions made by the various Boards, that somehow this action would avoid a lawsuit from the developer. In fact, on Monday night, the Town Board came from executive session to pass a resolution that they will appeal a Law Suit that the town lost regarding Alpine Commons. The judge found fault with the Zoning Board of Appeals decision in not granting a variance to the developers. This follows a judgment by the courts that Town Council members didn’t follow Open Meeting Laws and the town wound up paying the legal fees on behalf of the developer suing the town, which follows a loss where the former town attorney entered into agreement with a developer without informing the town board members - and then the town used the same attorney to appeal the decision - they may still be laughing at the courthouse over that move - follows the judgment that led to a cell tower in Chelsea. Apparently the litigating attorney is worried that another lawsuit by a developer would create more of a pattern. So to cover themselves, the Town Council members agreed to this logic.
Reinforcing and updating the code, with Boards that follow the processes and use all the tools available to them (SEQR anyone? SEQR - environmental reviews - were not required by the town in the gas station application) is the antidote to developer lawsuits… and by the way, the Town should not be afraid of lawsuits when they are protecting the rights of residents. The Hughsonville lawsuit is a symptom of a larger picture of when the previous Town Administration was NOT protecting the interests of residents. And it is unconscionable that residents have to take this action.
A bit of good news….
Coincident with all of this — The Dutchess County Legislature - at the same time the Town Board was meeting - passed legislation which requires that new gas stations be placed 250 feet away from wells. Thank you to Legislator Rob Faust, who attended the Town Board Meeting after voting at the Legislature, for bringing us that news.
The Board then opened the public portion of the meeting - and several members of the public spoke about the need to do something with the buildings at Carnwath - and their suport for the conceptual plan to lease the buildings... NOT THE WHOLE property - to a developer who would refurbish the buildings, operate a business - open to the public - as a B&B, Event space and pay the town rent.
During the Non-Consent Resolution Portion of the meeting - the board expressed concerns that they need to do more due diligence (despite them having had the proposal since February of this year -- and the members that like to beat their chests on how long they have been on the board, deflected any notion that they should have been doing something long before now, the town has owned the property for over 20 years). So they tabled this resolution -- but passed a resolution to hire a Professional Real Estate Appraisal Services to evaluate the lease agreement -- criteria unspecified.
The Board passed a resolution to get 3 quotes to get heat/water connected to the Sports Museum at Carnwath - using 2 grants of $50K each. This will provide climate control for that building which is unusable during winter months and uncomfortable the reamining months because of lack of restroom facilities.
The Board did pass a Resolution authorizing an agreement with L&M Wappingers Falls Housing Development Fund Corporation properties 62-72 Imperial Boulevard - agreeing to reduction in valuation of $4.145 Million.
The Board - after retreating to executive session - voted to approved a Resolution of Understanding with Regency Homeowner's Assocation - the agreement outlines the use and amount of water to irrigate plants - and protocols during periods of draught as well as the rates to be charged.
The Board - after having no agreement in place since 2015 - agreed to an collective Bargaining Agreement with CSEA Local 1000 AFSCME AFL-CIO (CSEA) -- covering labor agreements/compensation for Town Employees.
The Board Excused themselves at 9:10 for an executive session for the purposes of discussing active litigation and the tabled resolutions - and returned at 11:40 -- so spent more time in executive session than in the public portion of the town board meeting... In an open government environment - executive sessions are supposed to be rare and brief. Also please remember that any court decisions/litigation are an open record.
Comentarios