ALLEGANY
REGULAR SESSION
SEPTEMBER 14, 2009
APPROVED
CALL
TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the Board of
Legislators was called to order at 2:00 p.m. by Chairman Curtis W. Crandall.
PLEDGE
OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by former
United States Army Air Corps Sergeant Gerald B. Jones.
INVOCATION: The
Invocation was given by Legislator Pullen.
ROLL
CALL: 14 Present; 1 Absent (Legislator Truax).
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES:
The Board meeting minutes of August
24, 2009 were approved on a motion made by Legislator Dibble, seconded by
Legislator Fanton and carried.
PRIVILEGE OF
THE FLOOR:
Chairman Crandall presented a certificate
to Gerald B. Jones, former United States Army Air Corps Sergeant, in grateful
appreciation of his service to our Country.
Mr. Jones’ service dates were from November 1942 to November 1945. Following Basic Training in
Chairman Crandall granted privilege
of the floor to the following:
Legislator
Norman G. Ungermann, Jr. read a prepared statement regarding the Court Facilities
Informational Package distributed at the August 24 meeting:
“Mr.
Chairman, thank you for privilege of the floor.
Chairman Crandall is correct that the public needs information and
facts. The public has become wary since
the debate and subsequent construction of a new jail, and who can blame
them? With the Courthouse issue, there
was discussion to have periodic public meetings. After all, it is the public’s tax dollar we
are spending. What the public got for
information was a folded one-page handout, so I’m very glad to see this book
put together. Although I feel that
numerous pertinent pieces are missing, I commend the staff and Chairman for
putting it together. In a moment, I will
make some comments on each of the sections of the book.
For
me and seven other newly-elected legislators who began our terms on January 1,
2006, this Courthouse odyssey began in June of 2006 when William Clark, Chief Counsel
for the OCA, spoke before the Legislature.
Some of you remember me standing up with my pockets turned inside out
and exclaiming that the taxpayer in
Next,
I did what I believe every good legislator is supposed to do: I put my thinking cap on. How can we help out the Courts as well as all
the other County departments that need space?
I talked to Judges, Court staff, department heads, engineers and
architects, and large contractors that I had previously worked with. I subsequently developed a three-part plan
that could be done all at once or over a fifteen-year period if need be,
depending on what was affordable.
Part
1 was to give the Courts immediate relief by using the old jail – estimated
cost to renovate was $3.2 to $4 million.
Part
2 was to move all departments related to social programs, such as the Health
Department, Department of Social Services, Office for the Aging, and Veterans’
Service Agency, to the former
Part
3 was to come back and renovate the existing Courthouse and give the Courts
additional space by using the vacated space from moving the departments to the
old school – this renovation work was estimated at $4 million.
Total
cost of the three-part plan was $13 to $14 million before any negotiations on
what we needed or didn’t need – some $10 million less than the numbers flying
around at the time. On December 26,
2006, I proposed Part 1 of this plan at a Committee of the Whole meeting. Mr. Kruger and I taped structural drawings
and floor plans to the podium behind me and I made my pitch. Some legislators were very interested, some
openly laughed and rolled their eyes back in their heads saying it would never
happen, and others sat stone-faced. One
legislator made the statement, ‘Mr. Ungermann is not an engineer; we should not
listen to him.’
It
should be noted that in the March 6, 2007 minutes, Mr. Isenberg stated that
‘the OCA is willing to work with the leadership of the County (Hall, Crandall,
and Margeson) on reviewing any proposal that may come forward from the County
leadership.’ Perhaps this is a good
argument for reducing the size of the Legislature; then everyone could be
considered leadership. In all fairness
to Mr. Isenberg, it is his job to get the very best he can for the OCA.
Let’s
now get back to the fact book, and start with the question and answer
page. I believe it should be
expanded. A lot of people have asked the
following questions, and they deserve to be answered:
·
Is parking replacement for the new addition
included in the $13.8 million?
·
The committee is called the Court Facilities
and
·
Is renovation of the old jail included in
the $13.8 million?
·
Is relocation of the maintenance building
included in the $13.8 million?
In
the Resolutions section, the authorization to purchase two houses on Court
Street and the subsequent negative impact declarations should be included.
In
the Correspondence section, I was pleased to see the letters from Teeters and
VanderHorst with regards to the proximity to the river. We have received another engineer’s letter of
concern since, and the DEC letter dated June 29, 2009 citing concerns with
closeness to the river as well as possible segmentation of the project should
be included. A June 15, 2007 letter from
Mr. Isenberg listed the deficiencies for the first time in writing. He complained about ceiling height, oversized
columns (similar to the one here in the Legislative Chambers, which could be
trimmed to the size of the ones in front of our windows), fragmentation, and
disjointed services. I answered his
concerns and ended my letter with the following paragraph:
‘I have again enclosed a letter from the State Comptroller’s Office for
your review, which states they will withhold certain state aid payments if
taxes levied are in excess of its tax limit.
It is a warning letter due to the fact that we are at 94 percent of our
tax limit.
That
response should be included, along with copies of the letters from Empire
Cheese of
Perhaps
there should be another section called ‘General Information,’ which should
include a letter to all legislators from former
In
1995, the Comptroller did an audit of the OCA activities concerning court expansions. In part, it states:
‘The Act establishes a procedure to be followed if a locality does not
develop an acceptable plan. If a plan is
not approved, the locality and the Court Facilities Capital Review Board may
enter mediation in an attempt to reach a settlement that produces a plan that
is satisfactory to all parties. If such
an effort fails, OCA may direct the State Comptroller’s Office to withhold
state aid payments to the locality in an amount equal to the cost of necessary
renovations to the court facilities. OCA
cannot spend this money on renovations, but can only have it withheld as a
punitive measure until the locality produces an acceptable plan. In addition, since the program was initiated,
local government officials that started the process may have changed during
subsequent elections. New officials may
not agree with the approach of prior officials and may be unwilling to
proceed. In a prime example, the City of
The
first few pages of Part 34, Rules of the Chief Judge – Guidelines for New York
State Court Facilities, which deals with buildings, safety, and security,
should be included. A copy of the County
Law, which says that a public referendum is required before the Courts can be
moved outside of the Village of Belmont, should have also been included. It was one legislator’s opinion that using
the old jail would be problematic, not necessarily the OCA’s opinion. Remember, Mr. Isenberg works for the
OCA. He’s trying to get the best deal
for the OCA. Judge Brown stated that,
throughout the Court Facilities exploration process, he felt he spoke for both
Judges in that their needs are simple and they are adaptable. To satisfy them, they need more space,
alleviation of their storage problems, and a solution to the current need to
hold attorneys’ meetings in Judges’ Chambers.
They have no agenda in the matter and realize it’s up to the Legislature
on the option to be chosen. They will
live with that choice and be involved in the refinement process. The decision is a difficult one to make and
it’s a balancing act between the taxpayers’ cost concerns and state mandates.
Our
staff has done an excellent job in providing minutes … the story is truly in
them. Now about the Minutes section of
the black binder. In the October 3, 2006
Ad Hoc Committee minutes, Ed Rodman, OCA’s Chief Architect, said that building
an addition would not be perfect either.
That is interesting. Again, I
would like to see the December 26, 2006 minutes included, and the January 7 and
February 26, 2007 Court Facilities minutes.
There were no minutes made for the July 27, 2007 trip to
Many
other things could have been included.
Instead of all the A1A documents, perhaps the other proposal to provide
design services should be included, along with their floor plans. It’s clear to many that they were confident
an alternate plan would be acceptable; however, the committee would not allow
them to even make a presentation to the full Board. Chairman Crandall is correct in his
observation that much has been editorialized with incorrect information. In one editorial by a legislator, and several
by the public, we have gone from a one-time sanction of $14 million to $14
million per year. In reality, $14
million is only an estimate because we have never gone through the mediation
process. Another editorial, again by a
legislator, stated that the existing Courthouse is 15 feet from the riverbank
and it’s just fine. In reality, it is 18
feet from the fence, which is 21 feet from the riverbank, for a total of 39
feet according to my tape measure, and we have no way of knowing how much the
riverbank has eroded since 1936. We have
heard numerous times about the City of Newburg being sanctioned. I spoke with Nick Valentine, Mayor of
Newburg. He never recalls any money
being withheld. OCA wanted a new
building, the public was up in arms over it, and they settled on using a vacant
100-year-old high school building. It
has revitalized his downtown area with a senior center in part of it, and has
attracted other businesses.
I
have compiled a folder with most of the documents I have described. I ask that it is copied and sent to all who
received the Allegany County Court Facilities Informational Package on August
24 as an addendum, resulting in a more complete and true history of the events
surrounding this Courthouse project.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I deal with plans and facts every day. Again, thank you for privilege of the floor.”
Public
Health Director Lori Ballengee addressed the Board regarding Allegany County
Cancer Services and gave an update on the
On
behalf of the Board of Legislators, Chairman Crandall presented a check to Lori
Ballengee for Allegany County Cancer Services in appreciation for what the group
accomplishes. Every dollar is spent in the
County, with no administrative fees.
(The donation was drawn from the Legislators’ Flower Fund, not
taxpayers’ dollars.)
Soil
& Water Conservation District Executive Director Gretchen Gary spoke about RC&D
Week. The Seneca Trail Resource
Conservation and
David
A. Howe Library Director Brian Hildreth spoke about Library Card Sign-Up Month,
which is the month of September. Mr.
Hildreth noted that he usually quotes statistics on the number of people using
the 17 libraries in the County, but this year he highlighted some of the
benefits of our public libraries that are sometimes taken for granted. He read a letter sent to him in 2007 by a
patron expressing his thanks for the services offered by the library. This particular patron was allowed to
volunteer in the library while in outpatient treatment for alcohol dependence
and also took GED classes in the basement of the library. At the time of the letter, he was preparing
to attend
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS,
COMMUNICATIONS, REPORTS, ETC.:
Copies of the following were placed on each Legislator’s desk:
1. Report of Intrafund Transfers approved
by the
The
following communications were also acknowledged:
1. The County Treasurer filed Certificates
of Withdrawal of Delinquent Tax Liens pursuant to Article 11 of the Real
Property Tax Law for properties located in the Towns of Clarksville and New
Hudson in the Clerk of the Board’s Office on September 9, 2009.
2. Correspondence from Lanny Sweet on
behalf of the Allegany County Citizens for Responsible Government urging the
Board to rescind the Resolution approving the Courthouse Project, along with
Chairman Crandall’s response to that letter.
Chairman Crandall noted that these letters were distributed to all of
the legislators, and given the importance of this correspondence, and in light
of all the conversations and press regarding the issue, he read the letters
aloud.
Lanny Sweet’s letter, dated August 9, 2009:
“I
am writing on behalf of
We
believe it is possible to convince the OCA to approve the alternate plan
proposed by Legislators Kruger and Ungermann.
Our tax burden is already too high.
We cannot in good conscience spend ten million dollars, or more, if it
can be avoided.
We
ask you to stand with us to fight unfair and ruinous state mandates.”
Chairman Crandall’s response to Lanny Sweet,
dated September 2, 2009:
“I
am writing in response to your letter dated August 9 that I received on August
21, which you wrote on behalf of
In
your letter, you say, “We believe it is possible to convince the OCA to approve
the alternate plan proposed by Legislators Kruger and Ungermann.” As the alternate plan, I assume you are
talking about using the old jail space on the third floor of the
‘The answer is no. As previously
explained, the Jail Proposal fails to meet the needs of the Courts, and would
cause numerous deficiencies and inefficiencies.
Some of these design defects could be cured only by operational
stopgaps, such as by assigning additional officers to address the security
flaws inherent in the Jail proposal, with the result that taxpayers would incur
substantial and permanent increases in operating expenses to achieve only a
short-term savings in construction costs.’
This letter also goes on to say, ‘No circumstances have changed that
warrant reconsideration of our decision.
The County has a long history of delay in providing decent Court
facilities. Having failed to meet this
statutory obligation through various economic cycles over a number of years, the
County cannot rely on the latest economic conditions to justify yet another
delay, or to make an unacceptable proposal worthy of approval.’
By
looking at these and other correspondence, you will see that much effort has
been given to come up with a plan that is not just acceptable to the Office of
Court Administration and the New York State Unified Court System, but time has
been spent to keep the cost of compliance minimal and practical. The square footage needed for the Courts has
been negotiated down, and the original estimated cost has been reduced from
over $20 million to $13,787,000, which includes costs beyond the actual
estimated Court construction cost of $11 million.
You
also make a statement in your letter, ‘We cannot in good conscience spend $10
million, or more, if it can be avoided.’
To this I would agree; however, the delay of
Your
last sentence asks that we stand with you to fight unfair and ruinous state
mandates. This Board and previous Boards
have done exactly that. Our involvement
with our state elected officials, organizations such as InterCounty Association
of Western New York, New York State Association of Counties (NYSAC), and
numerous resolutions asking that NYS stop placing unfunded mandates, not only
upon our County, but also our towns and villages, is a position our Board of
Legislators has taken for a long time. I
agree that these unfunded mandates indeed can be ruinous to local
government. This particular issue of
having to comply with a law from 1987, in my opinion, would be futile at this
point in time to try and reverse.
Allegany County is the last county in New York State to address this
issue, and a change in this state law would have needed to occur many years
ago, with the counties that have already addressed it at our side.
I
personally handed a copy of our Allegany County Court Facilities Informational
Package to your group’s attorney, Mr. Ross Scott, on August 24, and I am
enclosing a CD with the same information for your convenience. We are also making available thousands of
pages of other documents, which you are welcome to look at in the Clerk of the
Board’s Office. I want to thank you for
the opportunity to answer these questions and point to some facts and
information that you and your group were not aware of. I believe that by having the information on
the Court Facilities Project for Allegany County organized, easily accessible,
and available in several formats such as hard copy at the Town and Village
Clerks’ Offices and Libraries, online at www.alleganyco.com, and on CD, the
members of your organization and the general public can be better informed and
can understand the work that has and is being done to comply with the Laws of New
York.
I
appreciate you contacting me regarding this matter, and I look forward to
discussing this with you in more depth at any time.”
3. Correspondence from Senator Catharine
Young confirming receipt and support of Allegany County Resolution No. 118-09
in opposition of Senate Bill 2247 which the Senator believes would result in
disastrous consequences for farmers, and do immeasurable damage to our
economy. A news column wherein Senator
Young voiced her opposition to Senate Bills 2247 and 5212 was also enclosed.
4. Correspondence from Senator Catharine
Young confirming receipt of Allegany County Resolution No. 97-09 along with a
copy of her letter to US Energy Secretary Steven Chu and NYSERDA President
Frank Murray regarding the cleanup at the
5. A packet of information from the
Allegany/Western Steuben Rural Health Network inviting Legislators to
participate in several free or low-cost educational programs and networking
opportunities.
6. A copy of the Pennsylvania General
Energy Company’s Notice of Intent to construct a natural gas pipeline to serve
the EF Dean Inc. gas well in the Town of Willing.
7. Correspondence from former Public Works
Superintendent Richard Young and family thanking the Board for the flowers sent
for the funeral of Mary “Roxie” Young.
Mrs. Young worked in the County’s Social Services Department for many
years.
8. Town of Pike Notice of Public Hearing
on Monday, September 14, at 8 p.m. regarding the proposed amendments to the
Town of Pike Zoning Law and official Zone Map due to the dissolution of the
Village of Pike, effective December 31, 2009.
9. Southern Tier West Regional Planning
and
10. Correspondence from the Allegany County
Area Foundation inviting Legislators to attend the annual meeting of the
Foundation at the Crossroads Conference Center from 6:15 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on
September 22, 2009.
11. Correspondence from the ACCORD
Corporation inviting Legislators to attend the ACCESS Center Ribbon Cutting
Ceremony at their Belmont location on Thursday, September 17, at 9:30 a.m. Please let the Clerk of the Board know if you
plan to attend this event.
12. Correspondence from the Alfred State
College SUNY College of Technology inviting Legislators to attend the 4th
Annual Taste of Wellsville and Alumni Barbecue on Saturday, October 10, 2009.
13. Correspondence from ACCORD Corporation
Business & Community
14. Correspondence from Southern Tier West
inviting Legislators to attend a retirement dinner for Executive Director
Donald Rychnowski on December 10 at the Premier Banquet Center in Olean. A formal announcement with reservation
information will follow.
15. Announcement
of a special meeting of the Court Facilities and County Space Needs Committee
on September 28 at 12 p.m.
PROCLAMATIONS:
Chairman
Crandall proclaimed the week of September 20, 2009 as RC&D Week in
Chairman
Crandall proclaimed the month of September 2009 as Library Card Sign-up Month
in
Chairman
Crandall proclaimed the month of September 2009 as Youth Court Month in
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution Intro. No.
155-09 (Appropriation of Grant Funds from
New York State under the FY07 Public Safety Interoperable Communications [PSIC] Grant), originally tabled on August 24, 2009, was
removed from the table following a motion made by Legislator Dibble, seconded
by Legislator Reynolds and carried.
RESOLUTION
NO. 158-09
APPROPRIATION OF GRANT FUNDS FROM
FY07 PUBLIC SAFETY INTEROPERABLE
COMMUNICATIONS (PSIC) GRANT
Offered by:
Public Safety and Ways and Means Committees
WHEREAS, the County of Allegany accepted grant funds from New York State under the FY07 Public Safety Interoperable
Communications (PSIC) Grant Program by Resolution No. 143-08, contingent on
identifying a source of local
County share; and
WHEREAS, matching County
funds in the amount of $423,118.99 have been appropriated or identified as
follows: $200,000 local share
appropriated in the 2009 Budget under Account No. A3645.217, and the balance of
$223,119 local share proposed to be appropriated in the yet to be adopted 2010
Budget, under Account No. A3645.217;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED:
1. That PSIC grant funds in the amount of $1,700,475.96 are hereby accepted and
appropriated to Account No. A3645.217 (Homeland Security – Equipment) with a like amount placed in
Revenue Account No. A10.3306.SHF7 (State Aid Homeland Security – Sheriff).
Moved by: Mr. Dibble Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Reynolds 14
Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent
Comments made regarding Resolution No. 158-09 included: Legislator O’Grady requested the minutes reflect that discussion at the Public Safety
Committee meeting indicated there would be no more financial obligation for the
County other than the $423,118.99 local share match. That fulfills our obligation.
RESOLUTION
NO. 159-09
Offered by: Court Facilities and County Space Needs
Committee
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS, three different options for this study were reviewed by
the Court Facilities and County Space Needs Committee, and
WHEREAS, this Board,
on the recommendation of the Court Facilities and County Space Needs Committee, approves the independent study of Seeler
Engineering, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED:
1. That this Board authorizes the
retention of Seeler Engineering to perform a feasibility study on the Project
Labor Agreement relative to the Court Facilities Project with the condition
that their report must be submitted to the County by September 23, 2009.
2. That the cost for this feasibility
study shall not exceed $12,000.
Moved by: Mr. Pullen Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Fanton 12
Ayes, 2 Noes, 1 Absent
Voting
No: Kruger, Ungermann
(Memo: The feasibility study authorized by
Resolution No. 159-09 will generate a Project Labor Agreement Benefit Analysis,
a written report intended to illustrate whether the existence of a PLA for a
public capital construction project will result in financial savings to the
project owner.)
Comments made regarding Resolution No. 159-09 included:
Legislator Kruger did not support the
resolution, and he questioned if the $12,000 was over and above the $5,000
discussed in a prior Court Facilities meeting for total of $17,000, noting that
any potential savings related to the PLA are going to engineers and
attorneys. Mr. Kruger also made
reference to the many conversations and correspondence he has had, including
from people at A.L. Blades and also the electricians’ labor union, all advising
that this isn’t the type of project where you will see much in savings from a
PLA. Seeler Engineering’s report could
indicate there will be savings, and we’ll have no way of knowing. There will be no savings on labor due to
prevailing wage, and if not there, where would the savings be? If someone could show him the savings, he’d
be all for it.
Legislator Ungermann noted that the County has
a contract with Hodgson Russ for $15,000, LaBella for $5,000, and now this
$12,000. That totals $32,000 so far for
a Project Labor Agreement that will be locking out about forty percent of the
competition. There’s no guarantee of
savings. Contractors and labor unions
have said PLAs are foolish on a project of this size. Mr. Ungermann remarked that he has spoken
with several non-union contractors in the area who won’t touch it. If someone could show him where savings will
amount to $500,000 to $1 million, he might be convinced, but he felt it was a
waste of money.
Legislator Pullen responded that Hodgson Russ was authorized to draft the
Project Labor Agreement, and it was approved by the Court Facilities Committee
today. This resolution is for a
feasibility study that is required by the state labor laws to analyze likely
advantages of doing a PLA. The County
does not have a separate contract with LaBella Associates for $5,000 to work on
the feasibility study as referred to by Legislators Kruger and Ungermann. The $12,000 for Seeler’s study was instead of
the $5,000 that was discussed earlier, and it will be the only expense for the
feasibility study. Mr. Pullen noted that
Hodgson Russ could have done the study for less, but they are a law firm, not an
engineering firm, and it would have addressed only general advantages. Seeler has done many of these studies, and
they have been well received and found to be generally accurate. Savings that can be achieved will be
determined by looking at the specific details of our agreement on issues such
as the use of apprentices, flexible work hours, and varying shifts with no
premium pay, which will be significant. The
largest single area of savings will be the waiver of the Wicks Law, which can
only be achieved if there is a PLA. The
state has estimated typical savings at 10 to 30 percent. We could see between $1.2 and $3.6 million in
savings from the LaBella estimates. An investment
of $12,000 is appropriate to get this independent report, based on the
engineer’s professional expertise, on whether or not there will be any savings. Prior to starting this process and seeing the
recent change in state legislation, he wouldn’t have supported a PLA, but this appears
to be an extremely favorable agreement.
The unions have been very open to it.
Although there is potential for a reduction in competition, the market
is favorable. The potential savings are
too significant to ignore. In response
to a comment made by Mr. Kruger, Mr. Pullen noted that the electricians’ labor union
is a signatory to this agreement. The
president of the trade council has indicated that all trade unions appear to be
on board and supportive.
Legislator Reynolds questioned that since the
PLA was already written, if we were simply having someone else check it out. Mr. Pullen replied that the purpose of the
study is to estimate the likely savings due to specific terms of our PLA. Then the Board can vote on it.
Chairman Crandall noted that a study of this
sort is required for PLAs under the new law, but can be done in varying degrees. The cheaper option would have dealt with
general percentages based on historical Project Labor Agreement data. This feasibility study will be more detailed,
will be specific to our agreement and our County, and is being done by an independent
firm.
Legislator Dibble commented that he supports
the study, but would vote against the PLA based on the information he’s received
so far.
Legislator
Legislator Kruger questioned if the study
involves the other aspects of the project such as the properties acquired for
parking, widening of the access road, or stream bank remediation. Chairman Crandall replied that the study will
address the addition and renovations.
RESOLUTION
NO. 160-09
RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE CLOSURE OF THE
NYS DEC FORESTRY OFFICE LOCATED AT THE
Offered by: Public Works Committee
WHEREAS, the
WHEREAS, the yearly “rent” including utilities, parking, maintenance, janitorial services, and snow plowing is $11,300 per year, and
WHEREAS, that office manages the State forests in Allegany County with an estimated value between 125 and 150 million dollars; and forestry product sales from these forests, which are exempt from County taxes, have contributed in excess of $325,000 per year to the New York State treasury over the last ten years, and
WHEREAS, the County of Allegany has 46,426 acres of NYS DEC forest land, several thousand acres of NYS DEC wildlife management areas, a few thousand acres of County forest land, and thousands of acres of private forest that are timber tracts and wood lots. The County is largely rural, has no cities, and relies heavily on its natural resources which need proper management, and
WHEREAS, the present NYS DEC field office manages thirty-three (33) miles of the Genesee Valley Greenway in Region 9. It is expected that this office will also manage the nine (9) mile Wag/River Trail in Allegany County once acquisition is complete, and
WHEREAS, Allegany County is a sparsely populated rural county that relies heavily on the proper management of its natural resources to support its local economy and quality of life, and
WHEREAS, the present Forestry Office is located in the center of the County in a “one-stop shop” along with the three other natural resource agencies (USDA Farm Service Agency, USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the Allegany County Soil and Water Conservation District). The staff of both the Soil and Water Conservation District and the USDA meets the general public as they enter the Natural Resources building, answers questions, and directs persons to the proper agency or agencies. If individuals have questions for the NYS DEC and both foresters are out in the field, staff take down their name, address and phone numbers and relay this information to the foresters when they return, and
WHEREAS, the Cornell Cooperative Extension center is located next door, and many government employees and members of the public walk between the offices to gather information on forestry questions and problems, or to seek advice on how to manage resources, and
WHEREAS, the NYS DEC Forestry Belmont Office staff works as a team with the other agencies within the Ag Service Center: USDA Farm Service Agency, USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the Allegany County Soil & Water Conservation District, as well as the Cornell Cooperative Extension office located next door. Staff are readily able to share expertise on a variety of projects and programs. Agencies share materials back and forth, such as aerial photos and soil maps, and office tools such as a copy machine, fax machine and digitizer. Agencies also share a common area for meetings/conferences, as well as a kitchen/lunchroom facility, and
WHEREAS, the sharing of information by the four (4) agencies and their close location to one another permits the public to visit several such agencies in one visit, provides the public with ready referral to the appropriate services each may offer, and provides the government, businesses and members of the public efficient access to critical advice and information, and
WHEREAS, the NYS DEC Forestry Belmont
Office is in close proximity to other
WHEREAS, other DEC facilities in Allegany County (Camp Rushford, West Almond Maintenance Center) are situated in much more remote locations and are less accessible to the general public, particularly during the winter months. In addition, the NYS DEC Belmont Office has high-speed internet service. Other DEC facilities within the County have only dial-up service, and
WHEREAS, the NYS DEC Forestry Belmont Office is also a convenient location for local DEC Environmental Conservation Officers, who work out of their homes, to meet with their clients. Likewise, the office serves as a convenient location for local DEC Forest Rangers, who patrol State land (and also work out of their homes), to meet with the DEC Forestry staff, and
WHEREAS, the loss
of the existing central location of the NYS DEC Forestry Office would create a
hardship on the businesses and residents of Allegany County in obtaining
natural resource help, assistance and information. The presence of the NYS DEC sub office at the
WHEREAS, the proposed savings, by relocation of the office to a less accessible site, are far outweighed by the added cost imposed upon the public and other governmental agencies from the loss of easy access to and coordination of services, now therefore be it
RESOLVED:
1.
2. That certified copies of this resolution be mailed to New York State Governor David A. Paterson, NYS DEC Commissioner Peter Grannis, NYS DEC Region 9 Director Abby Snyder, Senator Catharine M. Young, and Assemblymen Daniel J. Burling and Joseph M. Giglio.
Moved by: Mr. Dibble Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Fanton 14
Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent
Comments made regarding Resolution No. 160-09
included: Legislator Ungermann noted
that what the state is trying to do is eliminate a single point of entry for
services that are related. It works and
has worked for years. Legislator Dibble
commented that the state is proposing to move the two foresters to West Almond,
which is less accessible, and they hope to save $11,000 per year. He felt it was ridiculous to close the more
central office.
RESOLUTION
NO. 161-09
APPOINTMENT OF LINDA EDWARDS AS YOUTH BUREAU DIRECTOR AND
STOP DWI COORDINATOR; FIXING ANNUAL SALARY
Offered by: Public Safety Committee
RESOLVED:
1. That Linda Edwards is appointed as the Youth Bureau Director and STOP DWI Coordinator to receive an annual salary of $44,000.
Moved by: Mr. Dibble Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Pullen 14
Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent
A motion was made by
Legislator Reynolds, seconded by Legislator Hall and carried to amend
Resolution Intro. No. 172-09 (Resolution
to Request Governor Paterson and New York State Legislature to Advance Funding and
Expedite the Timetables to Complete Parts of the Appalachian
A motion was made by
Legislator Hopkins, seconded by Legislator Kruger and carried to amend
Resolution Intro. No. 172-09 (same as paragraph above) by adding “and Southern
Tier West Regional Planning and
RESOLUTION
NO. 162-09
RESOLUTION TO
REQUEST GOVERNOR PATERSON AND
EXPEDITE THE
TIMETABLES TO COMPLETE PARTS OF THE
APPALACHIAN
(CORRIDOR U-1 I-99
AND CORRIDOR T I-86)
Offered by: Ways and Means Committee
WHEREAS,
Governors have made commitments to the revitalization and improvement of
the economy of "Upstate"
WHEREAS,
Allegany County and thirteen other counties along U.S. Route 17 (I-86)
corridor make up the three Local
WHEREAS,
U.S. Route 15 (I-99) Corridor U-1 and U.S. Route 17 (I-86) Corridor T are
New York State's section of the thirteen state Appalachian
WHEREAS, completing the I-99 U-1 Corridor fulfills the desires of both the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of New York to accelerate economic development opportunities in the area of Appalachia, as well as respond to the increasing traffic volumes (primarily commercial vehicles) in the Route 15 Corridor since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and
WHEREAS, U.S. Route 15 is the only north/south route in Central Pennsylvania that serves as a vital and direct link between Western New York and Canada and the ports of Baltimore and Philadelphia and the mid-Atlantic states, and
WHEREAS, completing Corridor T, which terminates in Broome County at I-81, and the U-1 Corridor in Steuben County will help complete the ADHS in New York State, and
WHEREAS,
the New York I-86 Economic
WHEREAS, Governor Pataki and the New York State Department of Transportation committed to a ten-to-twelve year construction program to complete the Route 17 conversion to I-86 beginning with the first designation (177 miles Chemung County west to Pennsylvania) on December 3, 1999, and
WHEREAS, in order to further enhance economic opportunities and promote the efficient flow of traffic through this region, NYS Route 400 should be extended southeasterly through the New York counties of Erie, Wyoming and Allegany to NYS Route 417 in the Village of Wellsville, Allegany County and eventually extended to U.S. Route 6 east of Galeton, Pennsylvania along the corridor as shown on the attached map, and
WHEREAS, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has projected a completion date for the conversion of Route 15 to Interstate standards (I-99) to the New York State border by the end of 2010, and
WHEREAS, the designation of New York State Route 17 to I-86 and Route 15 to I-99 will provide a highway network with connection to every Interstate Highway located within New York State and Interstates leading into Pennsylvania, and
WHEREAS,
the Appalachian Regional Commission has recently released a study, the "Economic Impact of Completing the
Appalachian
RESOLVED:
1. That the Allegany County Board of Legislators does hereby express its support for those projects contained within the 2005 Transportation Bond Act and the Transportation Plan for the State of New York Department of Transportation.
2. That this Board does hereby urge the
Governor and the New York State Legislature to advance funding necessary to
expedite the timetables set forth and complete the ADHS in
3. That this Board does hereby further urge the Governor and the New York State Legislature, working in cooperation with the federal government and the State of Pennsylvania, to undertake a study to look at the feasibility and economic benefit of extending NYS Route 400 southeasterly through the counties of Erie, Wyoming and Allegany to NYS Route 417 in the Village of Wellsville, Allegany County and eventually to U.S. Route 6 east of Galeton, Pennsylvania.
4. That the Clerk of this Board is hereby
authorized and directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to
Governor David A. Paterson, U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer, U.S. Senator
Kirsten Gillibrand, U.S. Representative Eric Massa, Senate Temporary President
Malcolm A. Smith, Senate Majority Leader Pedro Espada, Jr., Speaker of the
Assembly Sheldon Silver, State Senator Catharine M. Young, Assemblyman Daniel J. Burling, Assemblyman
Joseph M. Giglio, Acting Transportation Commissioner Stanley Gee, Senate
Transportation Committee Chairman Martin Malave Dilan, Assembly Standing
Committee on Transportation Chairman David Gantt, Appalachian Regional
Commission Executive Director Thomas M. Hunter, Empire State
Moved by: Mr. Reynolds Adopted: Voice Vote
Seconded by: Mr. Hall
RESOLUTION
NO. 163-09
Offered by: Ways and Means Committee
WHEREAS, a check in the amount of $200,
representing the cost to replace a windshield on a
RESOLVED:
1. That an insurance payment in the amount of $200 from NYMIR, representing the cost of replacing a windshield on a County Sheriff’s 2006 Ford Crown Victoria vehicle, is accepted.
2. That the sum of $200 is appropriated to Account No. CS1931.429 (Risk Retention – Uninsured Property Loss) with a like sum credited to Revenue Account No. CS07.2680.00 (Risk Retention – Insurance Recovery).
Moved by: Mr. Reynolds Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Fanton 14
Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent
RESOLUTION
NO. 164-09
APPROVAL OF RENEWAL LEASE BETWEEN
DONALD BALDWIN AND
PREMISES AT 3453B
Offered by: Ways and Means Committee
RESOLVED:
1. That a three-year lease at $2,000 per
month between Donald Baldwin and the
2. That the Chairman of this Board is authorized to execute said Lease.
Moved by: Mr. Reynolds Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Hopkins 14
Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent
(Memo: The renewal lease approved by Resolution No.
164-09 is for 4,080 square feet of commercial space which has been used since
2006 for the Women, Infants and Children [WIC] Program. The funding for the monthly rent is provided
entirely from the WIC grant. The lease
may be terminated on a 90-day notice if necessary.)
RESOLUTION
NO. 165-09
Offered by: Ways and Means Committee
WHEREAS, a check in the amount of $1,415.73, representing the full cost of repairs on a County vehicle, has been offered by Allstate Insurance Company in settlement for such property damage, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED:
1. That the amount of $1,415.73 from Allstate Insurance Company, representing the cost of repairs on a County vehicle that was involved in a three-car accident on July 17, 2009, is accepted.
2. That the sum of $1,415.73 is appropriated to Account No. CS1931.429 (Risk Retention – Uninsured Property Loss) with a like sum credited to Revenue Account No. CS07.2680.00 (Risk Retention – Insurance Recovery).
Moved by: Mr. Reynolds Adopted: Roll Call
Seconded by: Mr. Fanton 14
Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent
(Memo: The vehicle referred to in Resolution No.
165-09 was operated by a Community Services employee. Another driver was responsible for the
accident, and Allstate Insurance Company accepted 100 percent liability for our
claim.)
AUDITS:
A motion was made by
Legislator Reynolds, seconded by Legislator Fanton and carried, that the audits
be acted upon collectively and by totals.
A motion was made by
Legislator Hopkins, seconded by Legislator Pullen and adopted on a roll call
vote of 14 Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent, that the audit of claims, totaling $5,385,437.81
including prepaid expenses, be approved for payment as recommended by the
County Administrator. (
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m. on a motion made by Legislator
Dibble, seconded by Legislator Reynolds and carried.