Special Meeting 6/5/2009            Town Board Meeting 6/10/2009        Special Meeting 6/26/2009

JUNE 5, 2009                                                  

     A special meeting of the Jewett Town Board was held on Friday, June 5, 2009.  The purpose of the special meeting was to discuss the Fact Finders Report.  Supervisor Michael Flaherty called the meeting to order at 7 P.M.  Present were Board members Steve Jacobs, Michael McCrary, JR Quackenbush and Elaine Warfield and Dionne A. Wheatley, Esq.
     Also present were Highway employees Shawn Jaeger, Jason Tompkins, Waylon McCullar and Philip Benjamin, town residents Sandy Tompkins, Bruce Maben, Georgette Krauss, Jeanne Soule and Paul LaPierre.  

     Councilman McCrary made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Quackenbush and carried to go into executive session at 7:10 P.M. to discuss privileged information with council.
     Councilman Quackenbush made a motion, 2nd by Councilwoman Warfield to come out of executive session at 9:00 P.M.

     Attorney Wheatley addressed the audience. “I explained to the Board their requirements and obligation under the NYS Civil Service Law Section 209, subdivision 3, which outlines the process for fact finding.” 
     “Once the fact finder issues a report to the chief executive officer, in this case the Town Supervisor, the Town Supervisor is required to provide a copy of the fact finding report along with his recommendations for settling the dispute.  That’s what we discussed.”
     “I also discussed and explained that once the Supervisor submits to the Town Board the fact finding report and whether or not he recommends accepting or rejecting it and he must also provide his recommendations for settling the dispute if he’s not agreeing with the fact finders report. “
     “The Town Board as the legislative body then is required to conduct a Public Hearing.  It’s my understanding that a Public Hearing will be a part of the Town’s regular board meeting on June 10th.  On that day the union will have an opportunity to present its position regarding how to settle the dispute with respect to the fact finding report and the Town, as the Town’s representative, I will be assisting the town supervisor in explaining its position regarding how to settle the dispute.  The Town Board by law has the authority to impose the terms and conditions of employment for one year.  They can decide what the wage increases are.  They can decide issues regarding health insurance, longevity, whatever terms and conditions they can impose that for one year.”
     “ If the Town is interested in getting an agreement with the union for the four highway employees that is more than one year they must then get consent from the union to agree to it being more than one year.  If it’s only one year it’s an imposition which means the Town Board has absolute desecration to decide what the terms and conditions are.  That’s basically what we discussed during the executive session.  Supervisor Flaherty verbally gave the Town Board members what his recommendations are for settling the dispute.”

     Supervisor Flaherty read his recommendation to the public; “I am rejecting the Fact Finder’s report and I offer the following recommendations for settling the dispute.”
“1.  Health Care contribution- I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because it doesn’t make sense.
       I recommend that employees contribute to health insurance by paying 10% single, 5% family.

       Retiree Health – I agree with the Fact Finders that the town will not pay for retiree health insurance.

      Changing Health Insurance Carrier – I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because of our right to change.
       I recommend MVP PPO 15.

 2.  Longevity Payments – I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because current agreement is fair.
      I recommend longevity payments of a cap of 25 years with new employee start longevity after 4th year of service, to start at $400.

 3. Wages – I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because of Health Care.
      I recommend wage increases of 2008-3%, 2009-04%, 2010-4%.”

     This information will be posted on the town web-site.

      Attorney Wheatley, “Again, it is the Boards responsibility as the legislative body to conduct a Public Hearing regarding the Town Supervisor’s recommendations.  The union will have an opportunity to present their position and by law the Town Board is required, after the Public Hearing, whether it’s that night or at another meeting, the Town Board is required to enact legislation imposing the conditions of employment regarding the highway employees.”
     “After the year you’re back to the same process.  Either side can demand to negotiate.”

     Councilman Quackenbush made a motion, 2nd by Councilman McCrary and carried to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 P.M.

                                                           ___________________________________
                                                              Patricia Merwin, Town Clerk/RMC
    
Town Board Meeting

JUNE 10, 2009                                                     

     A regular meeting of the Jewett Town Board was held on Wednesday, June 10, 2009.  Supervisor Michael called the meeting to order at 7 P.M.  Present were Board members Steve Jacobs, Michael McCrary, JR Quackenbush and Elaine Warfield. 
     Present were Attorney for the Town Tal G. Rappleyea, Superintendent of Highways Robert Mallory, Zoning Officer William Dwyer, Dionne A. Wheatley, Esq.
   Highway employees Shawn Jaeger, Jason Tompkins, Waylon McCullar and Philip Benjamin, town residents and others Helga and Werner Pscherer, Skip Benjamin, Francis Benjamin, Bonnie Schertl, Deirdre and Peter Cunningham, Paul LaPierre, Cindy Mallory, Clarence and Jeanne Soule, Bruce Maben, Georgette Krauss, Sandra Tompkins, David Kessler, Sally and Nick Ilczyszyn, Tom Hitchcock, Kathleen and Gerald Whitcomb, Fawn Jaeger, Craig Benjamin, Donna Lukas, Harry Poladian, newspaper reporter Mike Ryan and the town clerk.

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush opened the Public Hearing on the Fact Finders Report at 7:30 P.M. 

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “The Fact Finding Report of Thomas Quimby, appointed fact finder between the Town of Jewett and Jewett Highway employees, represented by Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 17.”
     “On May 21, 2009 the Supervisor provided the Town Board with a copy of the Fact Finders Report and notified the Town Board that he recommends rejecting the Fact Finders Report.”
    “Is there a representative from the Union here tonight?”  There was no response.
     “Is there a representative for the Town?”   
     “Yes there is Dionne Wheatley from Romer Wallens and Mineaux LLP, Albany, New York on behalf of the Town of Jewett.  I did see the Union agent Wayne Mackey outside when I arrived.  Is Mr. Mackey still here with the union?  Is the Union Attorney Mr. Corenthal here?”
     The Town Board notes for the record that there is no one here from the Union at this time.
     A short break was taken to see if someone from the Union would arrive. 

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “Wayne Mackey is the business agent for the Union, Richard Messina is the business agent for the Union and Richard Corenthal is the attorney for the Union.  These gentlemen are outside but they didn’t want to participate in the meeting.”

     Attorney Wheatley: “I just want to make sure the record is clear at this hearing that the Union, Labors Local #17, was notified of this meeting.  I has communications with Attorney Corenthal regarding this meeting taking place tonight at 7 P.M.  He was aware of that by e-mail dated June 2, 2009.  I advised him that the Public Hearing will be on the agenda for the regularly scheduled Town Board meeting on June 10, 2009 at 7 P.M. and he replied thanks.  That was June 2, 2009.  I also want to note for the record that I sent additional correspondence to Mr. Corenthal on last Friday, June 5th.  I also spent correspondence to Mr. Corenthal reiterating that the Public Hearing would be taking place again tonight, June 10th at 7 P.M. at the Town of Jewett Town Hall.  I did not receive any correspondence or communications back from Mr. Corenthal requesting that this meeting be adjourned or indicating that the Union representatives were unavailable.   As indicated by Town Board member Mr. Quackenbush I did go outside to the parking lot to observe the gentlemen that were there and those gentlemen are representatives of Local 17.  Wayne Mackey is the business agent and participated in the negotiations and Mr. Messina is also a business agent who participated in the negotiations.  They are representatives of the Union, so they are here and for whatever reason they are not in this room to participate.”
     “I want to recommend that the Town Board move forward with this Public Hearing regarding the Fact Finders report.”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “Supervisor Flaherty will read his statement regarding the Fact Finders report.”    

     Supervisor Flaherty: “This is my memo to the Town Board dated June 5th.”
     “As you know from my 5/12/09 memo I am recommending rejection the Fact Finder’s report and I offer the following recommendations for settling the dispute.

1.  Health care contribution – I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because it doesn’t make sense.

     I recommend that employees contribute to health insurance by paying 10% single, 5% family.

    Retiree Health- I agree with the Fact Finder that the town will not pay for retiree health insurance.

    Changing Health Insurance Carrier- I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because of our right to change.  I recommend MVP PPO 15 as a replacement policy.

1.  Longevity Payments – I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because current agreement is fair.

 I recommend longevity payments of a cap of 25 years with new employee start longevity after 4th year of service, to start at $400. 

1.  Wages – I reject the Fact Finder’s recommendation because of Health Care.

I recommend wage increases of 2008-#5, 2009-4%, and 2010-4%.”

    Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “Once again for the record, is Richard Messina, Wayne Mackey or Richard Corenthal from the Union here?”
  There was no response from the audience.

     Attorney Wheatley; “In support of the Town Supervisor’s position regarding rejecting the Fact Finding report. “
     “The Fact Finder reviewed several issues that were being negotiated.  One issue was health insurance and health insurance contributions.  The Fact Finder did recommend that employees contribute to health insurance however he did not recommend the Town’s position regarding contributions.  It is recommended that employees pay 15% of the increase between the 2009 premium rates and whatever future rates would come about starting in 2010.  I looked at that recommendation as basically ceremonious in that the Fact Finder recognized that contributions were important to the town and it’s important to just about every employee these days because health insurance cost really takes up a lot of the budget.  In recommending the 15% of the increase the actual monetary value of that is so minimal that the intent the town has behind the contribution would probably never be realized.  In that the Town pays thousands of dollars in health insurance a year and the 15% contribution on an increase would probably be less than $100 a year from the employees.  That why I said it was sort of a ceremonial thing in that the arbitrator, fact finder, recognized that that issue was important.  But, when you look at the actual monetary value it would be minimal when you’re looking at the overall cost to the town with respect to health insurance.”
     “I do believe that the Supervisor’s recommendation to have a flat rate of 10% for single and 5% for family.  I think that’s fair when you look at comparable jurisdictions.  Just about every jurisdiction these days has some form of employee contribution to health insurance.”
     “Retiree health insurance- It was proper for the fact finder not to recommend that the town pay for retiree health insurance.  The reason being is that in a first time contract retiree health insurance is rarely ever talked about.  When you look at the age of the employees, the idea of discussing retiree health insurance when your 15 years if not more away from an employee to retire, it was not a critical issue at this point. ”
     “With respect to changing health insurance carriers- I know that the town did substantial research over the last few years regarding the health insurance carriers. The town has to act in its best interest to determine what health insurance carrier will benefit the town and its employees.”
     “With respect to longevity payments-I support the Supervisor’s position.  The town employees, based upon a comparison study that I did, received longevity payment far in excess of just about every other employee in this area including Greene County.  The idea of capping it at $2500 at the 25th year right now is fair and equitable.”
     “Wages-I think the wage increases recommended are fair both by the fact finder and the Supervisor.”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “The Board will not make a legislative enactment on this tonight.  We’re going to do it at a future date very soon.”

     The floor was opened to the public. 

     Craig Benjamin: “I’m a resident and a tax payer in the Town of Jewett.  I’m very proud of the Town of Jewett.   I strongly disagree with accepting this.   #1 I don’t feel any employee should have to pay any percent of his health insurance.  #2  What are these guys going to do when they retire.  You’ve got young guys here.  They’re not planning on leaving, but when they do they need something to look forward to.  They’re putting in a hard day’s work here every day.  In the winter time, I know for a fact, I’ve never seen a road in Jewett bad. I’ve been on a lot of county roads that were impassable and State roads just about the same way.  I’ve worked for the State of New York and I know it’s a tough job.

     I think everybody here needs to think about this strongly before you make a decision and the decision you’re talking about I personally don’t like.”
    
     Shawn Jaeger, foreman Town of Jewett: “I’d like to disagree with Councilman Quackenbush thinking that everybody here knows what’s going on because I don’t think they really do know what’s going on.”
     “On the health insurance issue do you have plan documents from both insurance plans for comparison, one from NYSHIP and MVP for a fair comparison?
 
     Councilwoman Warfield: “We went over that in November.  We met quite a few times.  I took about 6 hours and I compared NYSHIP side by side with MVP.  The only substantial difference was in the prescription plan.  We went through every single co-payment.  We went through prosthetics, cancer, home health aide, drug rehab, the co-pays, in hospital, the out- patient procedures, etc.  In some cases the MVP co-pay was less but substantially the coverage was comparable.  The only difference that we could see was the prescription and kids were covered up to a certain age, 23 or 24 as long as they’re in college and unmarried.”

     Shawn Jaeger: “It was never presented to the employees.  No comparison was given to the employees.”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “Because no decision was made on anything.  This has nothing to do with switching to MVP.  It has to do with the right to switch insurance if we find comparable insurance to what we have now that is of less cost to the taxpayer.  No one has said we’re going with MVP, we’re looking at possibilities.”

     Attorney Wheatley: “During the course of the negations parties submit proposals.  One of the proposals submitted on behalf of the Town was changing to MVP.  Part of the process we shared with the Union representatives was the differences between the plans.  The Union also would have the right to ask us for any other information.  The Union never seriously looked at whether MVP was comparable. They didn’t do that because they were stead fast that they weren’t going to change to anything other than NYSHIP.  So did we fulfill our obligations to provide them with information regarding MVP, absolutely yes?  Whose responsibility is it to share that  with the employees, the Union.”
     “The information provided to the Union;  MVP rates for 2009 single coverage were $414.55,NYSHIP single coverage for 2009 was $600.84.  Family coverage for 2009 NYSHIP was $1,283.43, MVP family coverage for 2009 was $1,115.67.  Those are monthly figures.”

     Shawn Jaeger: “I have one more statement to your fact finding rejection, Mike.”
    “ Item #1- Health Care.  You reject because it doesn’t make any sense.  Is there any scientific or financial reasoning for your rejection or are you not understanding the Fact Finders  recommendation?”
     “Item #2-Retiree Health.  I understand your position because it seems you’re always more concerned about dollars than the welfare or respect of lifelong employees. ‘
     “Item #3- Changing Health Care.  You reject it because it’s your right to change.  Do the employees have rights also to perhaps present themselves to keep the insurance they have?”
     “Item #4.  You reject the Fact Finders recommendation because our current agreement is fair.  Our current agreement is fair so you’re going to reject it?  Our current agreement is that there is no cap on longevity payments and the Fact Finders recommendation is for a cap of $2,700.  Your recommendation is for $2,500.”
     “Item #5-Wages.  You reject it because of health care.  I don’t understand that, perhaps it’s another scientific finding or because of the abundance of health care or lack of it.”

     Councilman Jacobs: “If we accepted the Fact Finders report, how many years would that be and at that point would we be able to re-discuss insurance?”

     Attorney Wheatley:  “Under the law the Town Board would be imposing the terms.  You are not making a contract.  It’s a legislative imposition.  You’re taking your legislative authority given by the Civil Service Law to decide what their terms and conditions are going to be for one year.  The Union didn’t show up here tonight.  You don’t know what their position is.  They haven’t shared with you publicly.   You have to make a decision based on what you do know to the extent that you consider what your town citizens have said here tonight.  That’s relevant because they elect you.   Ultimately, it’s your duty and responsibility, as the legislative body, to make a determination as to what you think is appropriate and it’s for one year.”
     “When you make your legislative enactment if it is the position of the Board that you want it to be longer than a year because the law only allows doing it for one year, you than have to get the consent of the Union.  They have to agree that yes we’ll agree to two years or three years.  If they say no than the imposition by the law is for one year.  Once the one year is imposed  either party has the right, when the one year is up, to demand to negotiate.”

     Councilman Jacobs:  “I’m Steve Jacobs.  I was elected in November.  When I campaigned one of my biggest concerns was what is going on here tonight  with the men.  I am a member of Local 17.  I’m very proud to belong to it.  I’ve only been there six years.  Local 17 does a good job for me.”
     “  I just have a question for each of the men.  Shawn, why and when did you join the Union?”

     Shawn Jaeger:  “In August of 2007.  The rumors from other Board members were out there that they wanted to start having us pay a percentage of our insurance, to eventually increase the percentage until there wasn’t one.”

     Councilman Jacobs:  “The legal fees, $15,200.60, were at the end of fact finding.  We’ve incurred more cost since then.  It concerns me because if we do not come to a conclusion that the men will accept this money we’ll start spending again one year from now.  Also since November  I was told by a Board member there was a gag order.  I understand that  I couldn’t talk about the specific negotiations.  However, since November I tried to get it on the agenda so if anyone was interested they could come to a meeting and simply ask what was going on that month.  Was it mediation, was it fact finders  none  of the specifics.  Just put it on so the public and press would know that it was still going on.  I think I got it on the agenda one month only after it wasn’t on a proposed agenda.  When I called, Mike did put it on but when it come to that point in the meeting he flipped me right into Executive Session.  All the other Board members allowed that to happen to me for seven months.  It upsets me.”
   
     All persons desiring to be heard were heard, having been heard, the Public Hearing was ended at 8:35 P.M. on a motion by Councilman McCrary, 2nd by Councilwoman Warfield and carried. 

Supervisor Flaherty opened the Public Hearing on Local Law #3 of 2009 at 8:40 P.M.

This Local Law is entitled “Reducing the Number of Planning Board Members” and reads
“Pursuant to the authority established in Section 10 of the Municipal Home Rule Law and Section 271 of the Town Law, the Town Board of the Town of Jewett hereby reduces the number of members of the Planning Board of the Town of Jewett from seven (7) to five (5).”

Comments:
Bob Mallory: “ Great idea.”
Paul LaPierre: “I use to think seven was better but with the problem of finding people it makes sense to go to five.”

The Public Hearing was closed at 8:46 P.M.

ROLL CALL VOTE: Aye 5 Flaherty, Jacobs, McCrary, Quackenbush and Warfield.

     The Supervisor’s financial report was given to the Board.

     Councilman Quackenbush made a motion, 2nd by Councilwoman Warfield and carried to accept the minutes of the May 13, 2009 regular meeting and the June 5, 2009 special meeting.

     Zoning Officer William Dwyer gave an oral report to the Board along with his monthly written report.

     The monthly written report was received from the Building Inspector. 

    Superintendent Mallory: “I know of a closed- in porch suspended at a height of about 8 to 12 feet.  The area is around 250 square feet or so and weights several ton.  Three wooden posts support the girder which carries the closed-in porch.  The posts and girder are in need of replacement .  Too replace these posts and girder the existing structure must be shored up using cribbing or some other means.  Posts and girder replacement then can be accomplished.  This obviously is structural.  Is there a permit needed for this project?” 
    Supervisor Flaherty: “From my little experience anytime there’s something structural involved a permit usually is necessary.”

     Superintendent Mallory:  “Mr. Flaherty preformed this work a year ago without a permit.  It’s documented and I have all the information.  It’s a very serious issue.”  
     Supervisor Flaherty:  “What was replaced at my house I didn’t think needed a permit.  You made a mention of something structural.  This had existed before and not only was it replaced it was upgraded.”
     Superintendent Mallory: “ This is what’s going on.  Knowing this where is my integrity. This isn’t to bust anybody.  I would like the Board to ask Mr. Cross to go and inspect the structure.”
     Supervisor Flaherty:  “I have no problem.  You’re welcome to come.”

     Courtesy of the floor was opened.

     Skip Benjamin, “There should be a statement in the newsletter about the amount of monies the Town gets from the court not the amount received.”

     Paul LaPierre asked the Board to consider lowering the speed limit on Ford Hill Road from 45MPH to 35MPH.
The Board will consider this.

     Courtesy of the floor was closed.

     Five bids were opened for a new highway garage roof.
Bid #1 was from Precession Roofing for $48,500.
      #2 was from Skip Dippold for $10,300 with a second bid for an additional $1,400.   
      #3 was from Catskill Mt. Construction for $14,325.    
      #4 was from Steve Rossignol for $7,300.
      #5 was from KCH Construction for $12,560.
     A decision was tabled until later in the meeting.

     Supervisor Flaherty: “On the wind turbine.  Congressman Murphy’s office called today.  Stimulus money has been sent to the State.  The State has a handbook specific to renewable energy.  It appears at this point; unless something changes they will be sending 27 million dollars to NYSERTA.  Municipalities can request funding for these projects.  I would like to continue unit we have good hard figures and numbers.”
     Councilwoman Warfield: “I have a concern.  I’ve done a tremendous amount of research on the wind turbines and I’m all for it but we don’t have the proper location.  All these wind turbines that I’m looking at that are effective are on ridges.  I have a real concern if we put it out here.  We’re in a bowl basically.  I honestly don’t think it’s going to do what we want it to do.   We don’t have a ridge or a one or two mile area that’s wide open.” 
     Supervisor Flaherty: “The proposal came in and he had a wind map.  He did average the wind in this area at 10 knots.”
     Councilwoman Warfield: “It doesn’t matter.  If you’re in a bowl haw can the wind get to it?”
     Supervisor Flaherty: “It can produce within a range of wind speeds.  It would still benefit us.”
     Councilman Jacobs, “I’m not against doing the wind power.  I’m against doing it until we have some regulations in place.  I’m concerned we’re dealing with a single source and should look around.”
     Supervisor Flaherty: “NYSERTA does publish the names of eligible installers and we happen to have one in Greene County.”

     Mr. and Mrs. Cunningham gave a brief slide presentation on Wind Turbines and specifically showed the area being considered as a site for a wind turbine behind the highway building.

      Councilwoman Warfield made a motion 2nd by Councilman Jacobs and carried to implement the energy guidelines as recommended by NYSERTA.

     The audit committee of Councilmen McCrary and Quackenbush audited the bills prior to the meeting.
Councilman McCrary made a motion to accept the audit.  Councilman Quackenbush 2nd  the motion and all Board members voted Aye.
     The general fund was $11,067.73 on abstract #6, claim numbers 139 to 168.  The highway fund was $4,210.17 on abstract #6, claim numbers 78 to 93.
     The audit committee for July, August and September will be Councilwoman Warfield and Councilman Jacobs.

     Councilman Quackenbush made a motion, 2nd by Councilman McCrary and carried accepting the Supervisor’s April financial report. 

     Councilwoman Warfield asked for clarification on the ambulance contract concerning transport of Town residents.
     The Board agreed the wording should read “the pickup has to be within the Town of Jewett.  Transport outside of the Town is not covered.”

     Councilman Jacobs asked about the return of the ambulance contract.  Attorney Rappleyea said it was still with the Town of Windham Attorney.

     Attorney Rappleyea provided copies of the WICKS Law for the Board to review.

     The Town Board will hold a Special Meeting on Friday, June 26, 2009 at 7:00 P.M. in the Municipal Building to issue a Legislative Enactment of the Terms and Conditions of employment for highway employees.

     The Board went over the bids on the highway garage roof. 
Bid #1 from Percussion Roofing was rejected because they were the high bidders.
     #2 from Catskill Mt. Construction was rejected because they were the second highest bidders.
     #4 from Steve Rossignol was rejected because it didn’t meet bid specifications even though it was the lowest bid.
    #5 from KCH Construction was the second lowest and set aside for consideration.
     #3 from Skip Dippold was the lowest but the Board wasn’t sure if the bid included a protective barrier and if the cost for that was in the additional bid of $ 1,400.

This determination was tabled and the town clerk is to contact Mr. Dippold and find out if a barrier is included in the bid. 

     Councilman McCrary made a motion 2nd by Councilman Quackenbush and carried to adjourn the meeting at 10:40 P.M.

                    ______________________________
                     Patricia Merwin, Town Clerk/RMC

Special Meeting

JUNE 26, 2009                                              

     A Special Meeting of the Jewett Town Board was held on Friday, June 26, 2009.  Supervisor Michael Flaherty opened the meeting at 7:00 P.M.  Present were Board members Steve Jacobs, Michael McCrary, JR Quackenbush, Elaine Warfield and Attorney William Wallens
     Present were highway employees Shawn Jaeger, Jason Tompkins, Waylon McCullar and Philip Benjamin.  Town residents  and others Bonnie and Robert Schertl, Tom Hitchcock, Werner and Helga Pscherer, Clarence Soule, Fawn Jaeger, Allen Cross, Dan Grinnell, Dan and Tammy Emel, Sandra Tompkins, Georgette Krauss, newspaper reporter Mike Ryan and the town clerk. 

     The purpose of the special meeting is to issue a Legislative Enactment of the Terms and Conditions of employment for Highway Employees pursuant to Civil Service Law Section 209 (3)(e)(iv).

     Supervisor Flaherty turned the meeting over to Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush.

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “For the record, the Town representative is Mike Flaherty.  Are there any Union representatives here tonight?”  There was no response from the audience.  “Let the record show there are no Union representatives at the meeting.”
     “Councilman Jacobs received an e-mail from the Attorney General’s Office saying that being that you are a member of Local 17, it is a conflict of interest, and that we should throw the option out of you recusing  yourself on anything to vote with the Union or not.”

     Councilman Jacobs: “I’m not a member of the negotiating team.  I have no family employed by the town.  I was elected by the people to represent them and vote.  And I’m not going to recuse. 

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “Okay.  On June 10th we had a public hearing which allowed people to be informed about the issues and express opinions.  Tonight’s meeting is to deliberate in a meaningful manner, determining the terms and conditions of employment to be imposed.”

     Councilman McCrary made a motion to adopt Resolution #15.  This is a resolution, legislated enactment of the terms and conditions of employment for the highway employees pursuant to civil service law Section 209 (3)(e)(iv).  The resolution reads:
“WHEREAS, the Town Board has a Fiduciary responsibility to all the Town citizens and tax payers; and

WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the recommendations of the Fact Finder do not fully satisfy that Fiduciary Responsibility; and

WHEREAS, the Board has tried always to consider favorably the welfare of the Highway employees, and

WHEREAS, most Greene County Towns, and the Greene County government are facing a decrease in tax receipts in the coming years and have hence instituted or increased contributions towards Health Insurance and/or changing Providers in order to protect the Taxpayers; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Jewett is also expected to experience a decrease in revenue in the coming year; and

WHEREAS, the Town Board held a Public Hearing on June 10, 2009 regarding the Fact Finder’s Report and the Recommendation of the Town Supervisor; and

WHEREAS, the Laborers Local 17 did not attend the Public Hearing after receiving due notice but did provide the town board with a position letter dated May 29, 2009 and the Town Board has considered the Union’s position regarding the Fact Finder’s Report;  and

WHEREAS, Town citizens including the Highway Employees affected by the labor dispute were in attendance and presented concerns and comments to the Town Board, and

WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered public opinion, the interests of the Highway employees, and its obligation to take action to resolve this dispute; and

WHEREAS, the Civil Service Law Section 209 subdivision 3 (e) (iv) requires the Town Board as the legislative body to “take such action as it deems to be in the public interest, including the interest of the public employees involved”; now

THEREFORE, the Board does impose the following conditions on the Highway employees in lieu of a contract as specified by law:                                       

1. change providers forthwith to MVP PPO;
2. require 10% contribution for single payers and 5% for family effective July 1, 2009;
3. retain buy-out at 50% of single premium payable to employee quarterly in arrears:
4. grant a pay raise of 4% on the wages as set forth in the Town Resolution #2 of January 14, 2009 effective July 1, 2009 through the remainder of 2009, and 3% for 2010 for the duration of Imposed Conditions;
5. the Town will not pay premiums for retiree health insurance, and
6. longevity payments of $100 per year payable after the 4th year of employment and capped at 25 years.

Other benefits as established in the Town Resolution #2 of January 14, 2009 shall continue to apply.

     There was no second.

     Councilwoman Warfield: “I have a problem with it” I want to make an amendment.

     Councilwoman Warfield: “First of all- I think it’s a big imposition to ask them to change from NYSIP to an insurance that even though did a lot of research, gathered more information since then, and I think it can create problems for people that already have doctors that they’re using, if MVP or whatever doesn’t—I’m saying that I think the town should retain the right—if in the future we have to change, but right not I think they should keep NYSHIP.  I agree with the contribution, 10% for individuals, it’s approximately $60 a month.  And for family 5%, which is approximately $64 a month.  I agree with retaining the buyout—I believe that’s what it is currently.  The pay raise 4% for 2009, but I think we should also do 4% for 2010 for the duration of imposed conditions.  The longevity I think should stay the same as what it’s been when it was originally established—what it is right now.  And I don’t think it should be capped.”

     Councilman McCrary: “For purposes of discussion, I’ll second that motion so we can discuss it.  As I understand, that is to retain NYSHIP but also preserve the right to change providers.”

     Councilwoman Warfield: “If it becomes necessary in the future.  Financially, if it really becomes necessary.  I don’t feel there’s a big enough difference in the premiums to warrant such disruption.”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “I agree with Elaine, I think the switch to MVP doesn’t really make sense right now, and that we should keep NYSHIP, but I also think the town should be the one to make the final decision on switching if need be at some point because of increased premiums on the NYSHIP policy—that puts it kind of out of range, but for now, I think we should keep the NYSHIP.  I agree with the 10% contribution for single, 5% for family, and the buyout I also agree with.  The pay raise 4% for 2009 I agree with and I also agree with Elaine that 4% would be a little more reasonable in 2010 and I agree about not paying the premiums for retiree health insurance.  But I do think it’s something that we need to discuss at some point.  Look into it and see what the possibilities are out there.  We talked about this in the past and I’m all for opening discussions on that.  And longevity-I also agree with Elaine.  I think there should be no cap on it, keep it the way it is right now.”

     Councilman McCrary: “The fourth year?”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “Someone new coming in and I agree with that.”

     Councilman McCrary: “So if I can restate what I believe to be the restated motion.  All the above to retain NYSHIP, but also the town retains the right to change providers if economic necessities dictate.”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “You’re saying if economic reasons determine us to be able to switch to another health insurance provider- I don’t even know if we have to say that’s the reason that we would switch.  It would always be to look for the best possible deal for the people that have the insurance and for the taxpayers of the town.  It’s obvious if you’re going to do it you’re going to do it because it’s going to save the taxpayers a great deal of money.”

     Councilman McCrary: “May I restate the amendment, then?  While retaining the right to change providers, the town agrees to retain NYSHIP for the period of this imposition.”

     Councilman Jacobs: “I would just recommend that you accept the fact finder’s report and suggest that we bring this to a conclusion.  And this will only be an imposition for one year.  Negotiations will start all over again.  You’re looking at incredible legal fees if you don’t make an agreeable decision.  I would recommend a three-year contract so we don’t have to go through this again.   This is going to expose the town to a great deal of liability.”

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush: “But we’re not allowed to do a three-year contract without the union being involved.”

     Councilman Jacobs: “You can accept the Fact Finder’s report.  Apparently we’re in violation-imposed- if you can call it that-a 3% raise I think it was in 2008, which is illegal, and you’re also suggesting at that  union meeting we spoke out about- it was in violation of something called an Article 78.  Apparently Mike made his objection but didn’t make his recommendation in the 10 day limit and Local 17 said they’re going to fight it.  And they’re not going away.  That was last night’s meeting.  Todd Diorio the business agent for Local 17.  And this too will be very costly to the town and we’ll never recover this money.  And in a contract it would state that we could shop for insurance and negotiate if it’s agreeable?  That’s my recommendation.”

     Resolution #15 reads as amended:

     All the WHERAS’ remain the same and the THEREFORE reads:

     “THEREFORE, the Board does impose the following conditions on the Highway employees in lieu of a contract as specifies by law:

1. the Town retains the right to change providers but will retain NYSHIP for the duration of this Imposition;
2. Require 10% contribution for single payers and 5% for family effective July 1, 2009;
3. Retain buy-out as 50% of single premium payable to employee quarterly in arrears;
4. Grant a pay raise of 4% on the wages as set forth in the Town Resolution #2 of January 14, 2009 effective July 1, 2009 through the remainder of 2009, and 4% for 2010 for the duration of Imposed Conditions;
5. The Town will not pay premiums for retiree health insurance, and
6. Longevity payments of $100 per year payable after the 4th year of employment with no cap.

     Other benefits as established in the town Resolution #2 of January 14, 2009 shall continue to apply.

ROLL CALL VOTE:
Supervisor Flaherty: Abstain
Councilman Jacobs: Opposed
Councilman McCrary: Aye
Councilman Quackenbush: Aye
Councilwoman Warfield: Aye

     Deputy Supervisor Quackenbush made a motion, 2nd by Councilman McCrary and carried to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 P.M.

                                                                                     ___________________________________
                                                                                           Patricia Merwin Town Clerk/RMC

Accepted

Planning Board Minutes

TOWN OF JEWETT
PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES
JUNE 4, 2009

Agenda Item 1: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm.

Roll Call:       Acting Chair: Joan Kutcher
Members: Gene Beers, Donna Bernard, Carol Muth, and Janet Nicholls

Agenda Item 2: Approval of Minutes for May 7, 2009.

The minutes were reviewed and one correction made. Mrs. Muth motioned to accept the minutes as amended; Ms. Bernard seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

Agenda Item 3: Larry Gardner to speak regarding questions of Mr. John Potter. Property located at 243 Ford Hill Road, Hunter, NY 12442; Tax Map No. 147.00-1-43.

Last month Mr. Potter had come to the Planning Board meeting questioning whether he could change the language of his property description from a "duplex" to a "town house" to improve the chances of aging co-owners to sell their half of the property. Neither party was present tonight nor has the PB received any application on the matter. Mr. Gardner had called Mrs. Kutcher asking to be put on the agenda, and it was assumed his request regarded this case.

Agenda Item 4: Mr. Bill Higgins for Ellie J. Pratt & Jenny L. Jeffrey. Application for Sketch Plan Approval for property located at Round Hill Road, Tax Map No. 113.00-03-9.2.; Zoning Districts Rural Conservation and Rural Residential.

The Planning Board received a check for the Applications for Sketch Plan Approval and Minor Subdivision. Mr. Jeffrey, the veterinarian, passed away a year ago and his daughters wish to subdivide the property. The first lot will be 11.530 acres (eleven and a half acres) and the second lot will be 27.962 acres (twenty seven and nine tenths acres) intended to be conveyed to the DEP. There is an existing house, well, and septic that will remain part of the 11.530 acres. Mr. Higgins had brought in new plats. The PB reviewed the plats and found the only requirement missing to be the contour lines. Everything else - utilities, woodlands, well and septic placement - has been demonstrated on the plat. Mrs. Kutcher measured the setback from the existing house. At 60' (sixty feet) the corner of the house meets the proposed setback of the newly proposed boundary line. She asked for comments. Mrs. Muth said the contours need to be included before the PB can vote to accept the Sketch Plan Approval. However, because everything else appears to be in order, the PB decided to schedule a public hearing for the next meeting of July 2 at 7:00pm. Ms. Laubmeier gave Mr. Higgins two signs for posting, the letter for the neighbors, and the certificate of sign posting.
         

Agenda Item 5: Report from Greene County Planning Board Representative Gene Beers.

Mr. Beers said the Greene County Planning Board almost lacked a quorum, but the difficulty was resolved. The Town of Cairo is moving its information kiosk from Slater's Market to Stewart's. In Tannersville across from the Grand Union an applicant is hoping to create a cafe-restaurant-bar named the "Foggy Dew Inn." Unfortunately for the prospective applicants, it is located in a flood plain. The county has also raised the question of adding an escrow fee for loggers in case of road repairs. The representative from Ashland is the road supervisor there, and he feels the question of whether to set escrow fees should remain at the discretion of the supervisors, because each case presents different conditions. Some loggers don't risk the road surface at all. In the Town of Athens, Peckham, a light industrial plant is seeking a variance to increase its level of industrialization. Although it will remain a light industry, it is relocating closer to the railroad tracks and wants to increase its shovel accessibility proactively in case it gets more business.   

Agenda Item 6: Report from Town Board liaison J.R. Quackenbush.

          Mr. Quackenbush was not present tonight.

Agenda Item 7: Other Business: Pending Cases & Windmills

Mrs. Kutcher had been unable to get hold of Mr. Rappleyea and asked the Planning Board and Ms. Laubmeier to locate the law they had written concerning the six month notification rule.  

Mrs. Kutcher had attended the Town Board meeting to ask the board to draft zoning regulations for windmills. Mr. Flaherty assumed it was the Planning Board's job to draft the laws, but Mrs. Kutcher disagreed. Mr. Flaherty later informed Ms. Laubmeier that he was attempting to get people from both boards to work out a draft of the windmill laws together. There has been no word from the Town of Hunter as to the scheduled date of a Public Hearing regarding its zoning for windmills. Someone wondered how long their moratorium on windmills would last, and Mrs. Muth said that moratoriums cannot last longer than six months.

The Town Board scheduled a Public Hearing for changing the number of members of the Planning Board from seven to five for June 10. Mrs. Muth noted that under town law, ten days notification should be allowed prior to a Public Hearing. A legal option would be to post the information in ten public places within the town. The Planning Board wondered whether ten public places could be found within the town.

The motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr. Beers, seconded by Mrs. Kutcher, and carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 pm.

         
Respectfully,

Susan Laubmeier, Clerk

_____________________________
Joan Kutcher, Acting Chair

 Zoning Board of Appeals    

June 3, 2009

ROLL CALL:             Acting Chair: Margaret Flaherty; Members: Ann Dwyer, Charles Kutcher, Kathleen Williams; Absent: Russ Coloton

            The meeting opened at 7:00 pm, Mrs. Dwyer made the motion to appoint Mrs. Flaherty as Acting Chair; Mr. Kutcher seconded the motion.  The vote was four ayes and one absent and the motion carried.

Agenda Item 2:  Approval of Minutes of June 3, 2009.   
            Mr. Kutcher made the motion to approve the minutes; Mrs. Williams seconded the motion.  The vote was four ayes and one absent and the motion carried.

Agenda Item 3: Public Hearing on Application for Yard Requirement Determination for Michael Poremba of 9928 Route 23A, Jewett, NY; Tax Map # 146.00-1-9; District: Rural Conservation.  Present Mr. Michael Poremba

            Mrs. Dwyer made the motion to open the public hearing.  Mrs. Williams seconded the motion.  The vote was four ayes and one absent and the hearing opened at 7:05pm.  Mr. Poremba submitted the certifications of mailing and certification of sign posting and Mrs. Dwyer stated that the notice was published in the paper.  Members clarified the yard measurements that are under consideration and determined that [1] the front yard is four feet which is a seventy-one foot variance from the requirement; [2] the left side yard would be four feet at the rear of the proposed garage which is a forty-six foot variance; and [3] six feet at the front of the proposed garage which is a forty-four foot variance.  Mrs. Flaherty asked for comments.  There were no comments from the public.  Mrs. Dwyer made the motion to close the public hearing.  Mr. Kutcher seconded the motion.  The vote was four ayes and one absent and the hearing closed at 7:09 pm.

Agenda Item 4: Application for Yard Requirement Determination for Michael Poremba of 9928 Route 23A, Jewett, NY; Tax Map # 146.00-1-9; District: Rural Conservation.  Present Mr. Michael Poremba

            Members reviewed the application and determined that it will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood; there is no other appropriate location available; although the variance to the regulations is substantial the existing house is four feet from the front property line so there is no increase in the non-conformity of the front yard and the lot line is well back from the center of the road; in addition, there is no other appropriate location for a garage on the undersized lot other than the left side; it will not have an adverse effect on the environment; it was not self-created; and there will be no effect on government services.  After the review, Mrs. Williams made the motion to approve the Yard Requirement Determination of the Front Yard = four [4] feet; Right side yard = forty-three [43] feet, six [6] inches; Rear yard = thirty-four [34] feet, and Left side yard = four [4] feet.  Mrs. Dwyer seconded the motion.  ROLL CALL VOTE: Mrs. Flaherty – AYE; Mrs. Williams – AYE; Mr. Kutcher – AYE; Mrs. Dwyer – AYE; Mr. Coloton -  Absent.  The motion carried by four ayes and one absent.

Agenda Item 5: Public Hearing on Application for Area Variance for Peter and Lyn Gillespie of 1378 Goshen St. Jewett, NY, Tax Map No. 111.00-2-21, District:  Rural Residential.  Present: Mr. Peter Gillespie

            Mrs. Dwyer made the motion to open the public hearing.  Mr. Kutcher seconded the motion.  The vote was four ayes and one absent and the hearing opened at 7:18pm.  Mr. Gillespie submitted the certifications of mailing and certification of sign posting and Mrs. Dwyer stated that the notice was published in the paper.  Mr. Gillespie agreed that the sketch plan numbered three [3] is the plan that the Board is considering.  That plan shows the proposed building would be twenty-nine [29] feet two [2] inches from the right side line which requires a variance of twenty [20] feet, ten [10] inches.  It also shows the proposed building to be fifty-eight [58] feet, nine [9] inches from the front lot line which is a sixteen [16] feet, three [3] inch variance and is a pre-existing non conforming variance of the existing house.  Mrs. Flaherty asked for comments.  There were no comments from the public.  Mrs. Dwyer made the motion to close the public hearing.  Mrs. Williams seconded the motion.  The vote was four ayes and one absent and the hearing closed at 7:22 pm.

Agenda Item 6: Application for Area Variance for Peter and Lyn Gillespie of 1378 Goshen St. Jewett, NY, Tax Map No. 111.00-2-21, District:  Rural Residential.  Present: Mr. Peter Gillespie

            Members reviewed the application and determined that that it will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood; there is no other appropriate location available; although the variance to the regulations is substantial the existing house is fifty-eight feet, nine inches from the front property line so there is no increase in the non-conformity of the front yard, and the right side lot line is bordered by an twenty foot wide road; it will not have an adverse effect on the environment; it was not self-created; and there will be no effect on government services.  Mrs. Dwyer made the motion to approve the area variance of sixteen feet three inches in the front yard and twenty feet ten inches in the side yard.  Mr. Kutcher seconded the motion.  ROLL CALL VOTE: Mrs. Flaherty – AYE; Mrs. Williams – AYE; Mr. Kutcher – AYE; Mrs. Dwyer – AYE; Mr. Coloton – Absent.  The variance was approved by four ayes and one absent.

Agenda Item 7: Other business:
            Since Mr. Coloton is absent, members agreed to postpone discussion of the Subdivision Appeal by Patricia and Wayne Koehler of 210 Goshen Street, Jewett, NY.
            Mrs. Dwyer stated that she would be unavailable for the July 1st meeting and Mrs. Williams stated she might not be available either.  Since there are no pending applications at this time, Mrs. Williams made the motion to cancel the July 1st meeting and to schedule a meeting later in the month if needed.  Mr. Kutcher seconded the motion, the vote was four ayes and one absent and the motion carried.  Mrs. Dwyer will post the cancellation notices.

            There being no other business, Mrs. Flaherty made the motion to close the meeting.  Mr. Kutcher seconded the motion.  The vote was unanimous.  The meeting ended at 7:33 pm.
 
                                    Respectfully submitted,                                             

Ann Dwyer                                                    
Secretary                                                        
________________________________
Accepted