Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
  • Citizen Action Center
  • Follow us on Social Media
  • Freedom of Information
  • Online Payments
  • Online Forms
  • Subscribe to News
  • Send Us Comments
  • Contacts Directory
  • Projects & Initiatives
  • Public Documents
  • Community Links
  • Village Code
December 15, 1997


A regular meeting of the Village Board of Trustees of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York was held on Monday, December 15, 1997 at the Municipal Building.

        MEMBERS PRESENT:                Mayor Elliott           Village Manager Herbek
                                        Trustee Daubney Village Attorney Waldman
                                        Trustee Grant
                                        Trustee Rickles
                                        Trustee Watkins

Call to Order:

The meeting was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Mayor Elliott.  The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all.

Approval of Minutes:

Trustee Grant entered a motion to approve the minutes of the regular Board Meeting held on December 1, 1997, as amended.  Trustee Rickles seconded the motion which was unanimously carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

Approval of Vouchers:

Trustee Grant entered a motion to approve the following vouchers, subject to review by the Audit Committee.  The motion was seconded by Trustee Daubney and approved unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.

        General Fund            $44,185.08
        Water Fund                    455.10
        Trust & Agency      8,383.92

Presentation by Diane Rainey, Media One, re:  Increase in Cable Rates:

Ms. Rainey of Media One approached the Board and explained that she was asked by Village Manager Herbek to address the Board concerning the impending increase in cable rates.  She stated that the rates will be raised effective January 1, 1998.  She is here this evening because she was informed by Mr. Herbek that the Board has several questions.

Trustee Rickles asked Ms. Rainey if a subscriber wishes to stay with basic services, and they decrease other certain services, are they able to keep their cable service rate the same, without an increase?

Ms. Rainey stated that they could downgrade their services.  She explained that there are different level of services, such as CPS and CPS2.  Media One is adding the Disney channel, Animal Planet and Fox News, which are the most requested channels in a survey that was compiled.  All of those three channels combined are what most of the customers will be receiving.  

Trustee Rickles asked what the increase will be for basic service.

Ms. Rainey replied that it will be $3.46 per month, a 12% increase.

Trustee Watkins stated that they signed a new agreement last spring , and at that time, the new rates were given to them.

Ms. Rainey explained that Media one reassesses cable rates annually, and that they are regulated by the FCC.  Croton had elected to have a public service commission review their rates.  The rates are calculated in accordance with a particular formula.  

Trustee Daubney noted that he found it disturbing that everyone usually gets a 3 to 4% raise in salary per year and this is a 12% increase in rates for one year.

Ms. Rainey stated that they are adding three new channels and the increase in rates reflects the cost that the programmers charge.  Media One pays them to show a Lifetime, MTV or Family Channel; and they are paid by the programmers to carry the services.  

Trustee Rickles asked what the increase for Croton residents will be next year.  

Ms. Rainey replied that she did not know – the rate increase accounts for inflation.  

Trustee Watkins stated that he did not think that anyone questions the fact that Media One can legally raise their rates; however, the increase seems to be significantly higher than people expected.  He noted that if he raised his attorney fees the same way that Media One raises their rates, he would be out of business soon.

Trustee Daubney asked Ms. Rainey if the channels that are purchased raise their rates 15%.

Ms. Rainey replied that they are raised at least that amount -- some services are very popular.  

Trustee Grant stated that she did not have the paperwork in front of her from the negotiations; however, she stated that she clearly remembers discussions regarding no ‘take-aways’ from what they currently had in the new contract although there was the possibility of other cable companies bidding for these services.  After that, Croton’s studio was taken away and they were given the option of sharing a studio.  They could have went with this option, but it would have cost the subscribers more per month.  The second thing that she remembers is that the rates were to be stabilized for a certain amount of time in the contract.

Village Manager Herbek informed the Board that he researched this in the contract, which  notes that the franchisee agrees to pay for all rates, as they may be amended.

Trustee Grant stated that if that is the case, then there is nothing they can do about it but swallow the increase.

Ms. Rainey stated that Media One is trying to add to their services with these three channels, and at least they have added value to those services.  They do regret having to increase the cost.

Trustee Grant asked what the length of the contract is.

Ms. Rainey replied that the contract is for 10 years.  However, the contract does allow for other companies to come in and allow other services.

Village Manager Herbek noted that in accordance with the FCC Act of 1992,  in 1999, the only rate that will be regulated is the basic rate.

Ms. Rainey stated that it could be regulated at the local level through the year 2000; at that time, the regulations will be over.   There will be more open competition which will help to keep rates lower.

A resident in the audience asked if the company has done any surveys to see what services would be desired or whether an increase in cost was desirable to the residents.  

Ms. Rainey replied that they have just finished a survey of programming choices.

The same resident asked how many people were surveyed and who did the survey.

Ms. Rainey replied that it was a random survey done over the telephone.  They also took into account many letters and phone calls that they had received.  

The resident asked Ms. Rainey what percentage of the residents these letters and phone calls was.

Ms. Rainey replied that she did not know.

The resident stated that at least 50% of this community does not have children that might like or benefit from the Disney channel.  She stated that her concern was that the makeup of the survey was not random enough to make up a true composition for the survey.

Ms. Rainey stated that she can endeavor to get the specifics of the survey.   

Another resident asked what percentage of the rise in rates is due to.

Ms. Rainey replied that 60% of the increase is due to the increase in the programming cost to Media One, along with some inflation costs.

Trustee Grant noted that only 40% goes to the structural improvements.

The resident inquired as to what other services are available, if they are not satisfied with Media One..

Ms. Rainey replied that there are two other service companies out there, and they do advertise.  

A resident asked if senior citizens can receive special provisions.

Ms. Rainey replied that unfortunately, the FCC has ruled that out -- there is no way to reduce costs for certain groups.  Everything is clearly enumerated at the direction of the FCC.  

Another resident asked if it would be possible to propose that Croton immediately look for other sources.  Could the Village break this contract and look for alternate bids?  Can an individual in Croton look for other services and drop Media One?

Mayor Elliot replied that yes, residents are free to sign up with other cable services.

Trustee Rickles asked Ms. Rainey if the rate increase came after they had already put the numbers into the FCC.

Ms. Rainey replied that it is all done at the same time.  If the FCC sees a discrepancy, Media One would demand that they make a refund.

Mayor Elliott thanked Ms. Rainey for answering some of their questions.


a)  Local Law Introductory #7 of 1997, Amending Chapter 50 of the Village Code to Remove the Residency Exemption for Planning Board Member:

Village Manager Herbek read the proposed Local Law #7 of 1997 to those present to remove the residency exemption for one (1) Planning Board member, which shall become effective on 12/31/97.

Mayor Elliott opened the public hearing for comments at this time.

As there were no comments, the public hearing was closed.  Mayor Elliott requested a motion to approve the proposed Local Law #7, 1997.

Trustee Rickles stated that he would like to enter the motion to approve the Local Law, but added that he would like to say that this particular issue involves Norman Sheer, Chairman of the Planning Board.  Tomorrow, December 16th, is Mr. Sheer’s last night on the Planning Board.   He stated that he would like to give him a big ‘thank you’ for the thousands and thousands of hours that he has put into the Village.  - need to give him a big thank you for the thousands and thousands of hours he has put into the Village with his services.

Trustee Daubney seconded the motion, with all voting in favor (4 to 0).

b)  Greenway Vision Plan:

Village Manager Herbek explained that this public hearing is being held to consider the amendment of Village Master plan in order to incorporate the documents of the Greenway Vision plan.  The public hearing has been duly published in the official Village Newspaper.  The Village has received a response from the Westchester County Planning Board with their comments.  Village Manager Herbek explained that here have been numerous meetings and hearings over the past several years on the Greenway Vision Plan and that this evening they would be adopting the Greenway Vision Plan as an amendment to the Master Plan.  Mr. Imbiano is here this evening to answer any questions.

Mayor Elliott opened the public hearing at this time for any public comment.

Ms. Debra Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that her first question was whether or not the Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC) has review the Greenway Vision Plan for consistency with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP).

Trustee Watkins, a member of the WAC, replied that the WAC reviewed the Greenway Vision Plan, made certain changes to the Coastal Assessment Form (CAF) that was submitted and made a recommendation to the Village Manager for its approval.  

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that it is her understanding that the Greenway Vision Plan would just be incorporated into the Master Plan, and there would be no indication that the Master Plan was amended.   One would have to review it carefully to find out what the revisions are.  She asked if there would be specific sections for the Greenway Vision Plan in the Master Plan.  

Mayor Elliott replied that there would not be specific sections; the Greenway Vision Plan would be incorporated in the Master Plan.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that she was opposed to amending the Master Plan in this fashion.  The Master Plan was adopted in March, 1977 - - it is time to re-visit the Master Plan and not amend it piece meal.  She stated that we have multiple documents now to see what the vision is for the community and she did not see how the Village can adopt the Greenway Vision Plan as an amendment to the Master Plan until the feasibility study is done on the Seprieo property.  She noted that she had previously asked Mayor Elliott about the feasibility study of the Seprieo property and that she had suggested that there be at least one public hearing to see what the document says once it is completed, and at least one other public hearing to see what the public wants to do with a portion of the property.   She stated that they are finding themselves confronted with a vision plan for not only the Seprieo property, but other properties on the waterfront.  There has not been sufficient public input through public hearings, and the ramifications of the document sought.  She would not do this at this time; it may be appropriate at a later time.  There have not been any public hearings on the feasibility study.  It seems obvious from reading the vision plan, that irrespective of what the residents want, there is going to be a restaurant and museum or cultural center.  All one needs to do is to look at page 63 of the vision plan.  The residents paid for this property, and they have a right to make a decision regarding the uses of the property.  The use of the Seprieo property brings up the question of whether the Village should be the landlord of this property.   Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy also noted her disappointment to see the constant misrepresentations made regarding the ownership of the property.   The Village bought 13.4 acres of property, of which 7.6 acres are upland and the other land underwater.  Beaverkill Conservancy bought the rest of the property involved.  

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy continued, stating that the document leads the reader to believe that the Village has bought the entire parcel.  There are other provisions of that agreement that state that Beaverkill will allow portions of the property to be used, but such uses can only be obtained by the prior written approval from Beaverkill.  Therefore, she would request that the pages cited be revised to accurately reflect what the Village ownership interest is in this parcel.  She stated that she would also like to point out that as part of the Greenway Vision Plan, discussion regarding restrictions on development refers to the number of parking spaces – this restriction was part and parcel of the Half Moon Bay contract.  This contract provides that there be a total of 434 parking spaces for the area.  The Greenway Vision Plan states that the restrictions established on the parking will serve to limit the waterfront uses and other types of development.  She stated that it is important to know how the Greenway Vision Plan has addressed that particular issue.  Her last point on the Greenway Vision Plan is that on page 36, it states that the key to creating a functional waterfront will be a continuous path along the edge.  Part of this should run through Senasqua Park.  She asked the Board if they were planning to open Senasqua Park to the general public.

Mayor Elliott replied that the Board has not addressed this, but the path would probably run along the access road.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy asked if there would be a loss of parking spaces at the train station.

Mayor Elliott replied that he did not recall that ever being contemplated.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that in the long term view of this issue, the Village needs to take another assessment of how many acres they have that are devoted to public access and recreation, as well as conservation.

Mayor Elliott replied that the hallmark of the last eight years has been exactly that -- acquiring open space for the environment.  This Vision Plan was not a product of this Board, but a product of numerous committees, wide participation and is also flexible; not dictating any kind of commercial development of the waterfront.  They are contemplating a museum or restaurant, but he stated that he did not think it would be planned in a piece meal fashion.

Mr. Sid Huckvale of Amber Drive spoke next, stating that he would like to follow-up on Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy’s questions.  He asked if the Village is negotiating with any commercial entity to develop that property.

Mayor Elliott replied that they have not.  He stated that they have had conversations about the Half Moon ship and its possible involvement with one or two restaurant tours, but the Village would certainly not engage in that unless the public was totally involved in the process.

Mayor Elliott requested any further public comment.  As there were no further comments, Mayor Elliott closed the public hearing and requested a motion to approve the Greenway Vision Plan as an amendment to the Master Plan.   Trustee Rickles entered the motion, seconded by Trustee Grant.  

Trustee Watkins stated that he believed that the Greenway Vision Plan has had numerous public hearings.  Presentations were made, comments received and implemented into the Vision Plan.  The opportunity for the Village residents to be heard on this has been held over a significant period of time, and comments were recognized.

Trustee Daubney stated that he believed Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy’s point in wanting to wait until the feasibility study is done is not a bad point. Parts of the plan could be eliminated if the study indicates such.  

Mayor Elliott stated that the Vision Plan was done with the participation of the entire community and the next step is to take the Vision Plan and do a feasibility study on it.

Trustee Rickles stated that the Greenway Vision Plan is an organic document which sets forth ideas and future visions.  He stated that he took exception to Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy’s comments – nothing mandates in the Greenway Vision Plan that there is going to be a museum or a restaurant at the Seprieo property.  It merely gives the Village ideas that they can flush out over time with public input.  In regard to Beaverkill, all they did was to save the Village money.  He stated that he was not sure why that is a bad thing.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy replied that they own their piece and we own our piece.

Trustee Rickles stated that we can use their piece.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that the Village can use that piece with their consent.  It is not true and correct.   However, that in itself is a different issue - the document itself contains misrepresentations and she asked Trustee Rickles if he were advocating those.  

Trustee Grant suggested that the word should be changed to control rather than own in the documents.

Mayor Elliott stated that he felt that the relationship of the management contract is in the documents.

Trustee Grant stated that the Greenway Vision Plan, as is the Master Plan, is only a guide – things that could be done, or might be good on the waterfront.  They are springboards of ideas. When and if anything is done there, people may well come to the Village Board if a museum is proposed and they may say that this is not what they want.  This Village has changed since 1977, and nothing in the Master Plan or the Greenway Vision Plan is written in concrete.  She stated that she fully supports it, and noted that there have been many public hearings.  The meetings concerning this have been going on for a couple of years.

Mayor Elliott asked for any further comments.  As there were no further comments, Mayor Elliott closed the public hearing.

The vote was carried by a vote of 3 -0 with one abstention (Trustee Daubney).

c.  Special Permit - Metro Enviro - Operation of a Recyclables Handling-Recovery and Construction and Demolition  Debris Processing:

Village Manger Herbek stated that the legal notice of public hearing of the above referenced application was duly published in the Village newspaper, which he read to those present.  The property is located off Croton Point Avenue and zoned for light industrial use.  Mr. Herbek stated that he believed that the Board members have most of the documents in their packets.  The Village has received a notice from Westchester County, and that have stated in their correspondence that this is a matter for local determination.    Mr. Herbek stated that there are representatives from Metro-Enviro here this evening who will be making a presentation before the Board.

Mr. Kenneth Gunshor, counsel for Metro Enviro, LLC introduced himself to those present.  He stated that they will address the issues of planning and land use surrounding their purchase of the Liguori site in the Village of Croton.  He stated that the applicant applied for a Special Permit in August of 1997, and has been before the Village’s Planning Board for three and one-half months.  The Planning Board has made a favorable report to the Village Board.  He then introduced Mr. Millspaugh of Spectra Engineering, who stated that they had conceived the site ideas under the prior owner.  He stated that he will make his presentation with respect to the site under the prior ownership and current ownership.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that this application has been pending for some time and that his firm has been working off and on the matter since the first appearance before the DEC in December of 1994.  Since then he has been to numerous meetings with the Planning Board and the DEC, and has, in the last year obtained the necessary State permits for C & D processing.  The previous owner had both a C & D permit, a permit from the State and a Special Permit from the Village that was limited to wood recycling and other types of recyclables.   His firm was retained in late 1994 to assist in the necessary applications and the engineering report and other documents that were necessary to expand their activities.  As part of the process, the Village, through the Planning Board, (assigned as Lead Agency), undertook a very thorough review, under the standards established through SEQRA, State Code and Village Code.  The Village had hired their own consultant for this matter by the name of Weston.  The nature of the type of review got into the range of potential impacts the facility could generate, such as noise, truck traffic, etc.  Both the Planning Board and its consultant did a review regarding the performance standards in the Zoning Code.  The Planning Board decided that the facility as proposed, with modifications, was mitigating any potential environmental impacts and was in compliance with the standards set forth in the Zoning Code.  The Planning Board issued a Negative Declaration, which completed the local process.  In the last few months they have obtained the operating permits from the DEC.  The property has sold, and under the local code, the previous approval does not run automatically to the new owner and requires an appearance before the Board and obtaining a new special permit.

Mr. Millspaugh had a series of photographs and drawings to present.  On one side, he presented the previous conditions of the site of several years ago, wherein there were large piles and a wood shredding piece of equipment.  The nature of the business was to bring in wood waste.  A view from a distance indicates large piles of materials.  The previous owners had applied to expand their business; however, the DEC stated that all the debris had to be removed.  Along the way, they ultimately sold the property to Metro-Enviro.  The photographs on the right indicate the site as it is today.   The yard has been completely cleaned out and the scalehouse is on the way in.  The view from the middle of the site, looking south, one can see that the site has been paved and landscaped, and the roads have been created.   Areas have been landscaped, and the purpose of the photos is to show that all the debris that was previously there has been removed. He stated that the photos are available for the residents to look at when he is done.

Mr. Millspaugh next showed a drawing of the site plan that has been reviewed by the Village and the DEC.  He then described the locations on the map particular to this site.  Trucks are unloaded on the concrete slab, material is manually pieced over to remove recyclable materials.  There are drain lines on the site to collect storm water.  Any water collected on the slab is collected and moved to another facility.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that there are landscape ferns along the site.  With him this evening, he has a mock-up of a sign which has been reviewed by both the Village and the DEC and lists the acceptable and non-acceptable materials to be brought on site.  The permit is very specific as to what may be accepted.  The next chart down is a graphical description of the waste pile movement.  There was some progress in December of 1995 and the opportunity presented itself and large material was removed.  The progress has been fairly slow up until 1996 when the current owner took over.  The current owner represented that they would promptly remove any remaining material from the site.  Basically, little more than 50% of the material that had been stockpiled was removed by the new owner.  Last year on December 20th, with the DEC, although Metro-Enviro was not being ordered by the State to do so, removed the material to clean the site out.  At this time, Mr. Millspaugh offered to answer questions from the public.  

Mr. Gunshor stated that he would like to point out that the Village maintains a Zoning Code, and that code has a provision for a performance standard.  He submitted that the project complies with the performance standards supplied by the Village Code.

Mayor Elliott stated that they would take public comment at this time.

A resident of 96 Mt. Airy Road asked if there were any way to screen unacceptable materials.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that the State Permit and the underlying documents set forth procedures for characterizing the materials, inspecting the materials and basically assuring that the customers of the facility only bring in what can be accepted.  There is a program for employee training to recognize what is not acceptable.   He further explained that the way the New York State describes waste materials is structured so that everything you discard is described as solid waste, and construction and demolition debris is one subset.   There is quite a list of what is not included such as carpet and lighting fixtures.  Houses do have some garbage which is specifically excluded from acceptable demolition debris.

The resident of 96 Mt. Airy Road asked if asbestos would be prohibited from being accepted at the site.  

Mr. Millspaugh replied that most communities, as a condition of demolition, require that one of the pre-conditions of the demolition permit is that there be a proper asbestos inspection.  However, that is not a guarantee that other people will not comply with the law.  It is a burden on the site owner to inspect the material if they recognize asbestos.  The permit specifically prohibits the handling of asbestos.

Mr. Sid Huckvale asked Mr. Millspaugh where the secretions from storage would ultimately drain to.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that any secretions or rainwater that falls on the slab drains to a tank, which is then pumped to a truck and then to a wastewater plant.  There are contracts with several companies.  Beyond the limits of the slab, rainwater collects in ditches or pipes along the road, and the storm drains direct all of the water to one corner of the site into a pond (excavation lined with crushed stone) and when the water level rises, it passes through a sewer maintained by the NYS DOT.

Mr. Huckvale then asked a question about user fees that the Village might be receiving.  

Mayor Elliott stated that the Village has excluded conversations about user fees, as they did not want anyone to feel that they were going to compromise the environment of the community for user fees.

Mr. Huckvale questioned the ratable to the Village in this instance.

Mayor Elliott stated that this would be discussed in public at a later time.

Mr. Huckvale asked if there were an outside consultant hired to monitor the site.  

Mr. Millspaugh replied that a consultant had been hired by the Village at one time.

Mr. Huckvale noted that to do something like this so close to the Greenway project seemed detrimental to the Vision Plan.

Mr. Scott Johnston, a resident of Half Moon Bay stated that there is no question that the site has been cleaned up since the new owner has gotten involved.   He is curious to know if they anticipate greater amounts of materials in and out of the property.  

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the current owner has inherited the State permits that previous owner has applied for.  The previous owner was under-financed and did not get all the work done that was necessary to get the permit.

Mr. Johnston noted that there seems to be a cross over between the acceptable and non-acceptable materials – railroad ties seem to be unacceptable.    Distinction may become a problem.  He stated that he would like to know what the conditions of the permit would be.  

Village Attorney Waldman stated that there are three pages of tightly typed conditions in the old special permit.

Village Manager Herbek read the Planning Board recommendations that were recently submitted to the Village Board for additional conditions to the special permit, if approved.  

Mayor Elliott stated that they will make copies of this information available – the conditions suggested by the Planning Board in this recommendation are new conditions, over and above those of the previous special permit.

Mr. Johnston stated that he has heard Mayor Elliott speak very eloquently of the desire of this Board to make desirable use of the waterfront.  In his opinion, operating this type of facility in the middle of this is inconsistent with this plan.

A resident asked where the water that goes through the crushed stone drains.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that the water drains to a storm sewer, which runs out to the river from the manhole.

The same resident stated that the water carries any properties off the site.  It seems that if rain falls and wind blows, some kind of mixing of elements or substances is going to occur and is still going into the Hudson River.   All of this will have a cumulative effect and is going to be in our soil as well.  The residents of Croton do not want this operation here.

Mr. Wintermeier of 43 Radnor Avenue had two questions concerning monitoring of the site.  What will the Village do if they find something wrong?  Will they shut down?  Last time, nothing was done and it took the State to get it rectified.  One of the major problems, in his opinion, has been the smells that seem to emanate from the site – how will they control the odors?

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the operation from this point forward is limited to moving materials within 24 hours.  

Mr. Wintermeier asked how the Village would keep them in compliance with this requirement.  

Mr. Millspaugh replied that there is a requirement in the State permit -- under today’s permit with the State,  the applicant has to post a bond that the DEC can use to call in a contractor to come in and clean out the site if necessary.

Mr. Wintermeier stated that if contamination is done, it is already done - the bonds are generally not sufficient to cover the total removal of the problem.  He stated that he has heard Congress comment that they cannot afford to sue.  The bond would have to be in the millions of dollars.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the bond is something that the State will revisit.  If anything about the operation gives the State cause for concern, they can increase the bond amount.   In addition, requirements have been set forth for routine monitoring.  If there are contaminants, they will not be allowed to discharge to the State sewer and would have to manage the storm water another way.  He stressed that the applicant will be compliant with the State permit.

Mr. Steve Blust of Half Moon Bay stated that he would like to ask a few questions.  He asked where there might be another facility such as this in the area?  

Mr. Millspaugh replied that there is Suburban Carting in Mamaroneck, Carta Container in Peekskill – there is a State registry with several of these facilities throughout the State.   

Mr. Blust asked where the contractors would be coming from with the materials.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that Metro-Enviro intends to serve the container market which would involve roll up trucks with containers that would come into the site -- the market is generally within a 25-30 mile radius.

Mr. Blust stated that in all the years he has been involved with Half Moon Bay, it has normally been the Planning Board that issues the permit.  

Village Attorney Waldman stated that after the recommendation from the Planning Board, the Village Board then reviews it for consideration of granting the special permit.

Trustee Rickles stated that after the special permit approved, if the Village Board is completed with the applicant, the applicant will appear before the Planning Board for site plan approval.  

Mr. Blust asked if the site would go into operation tomorrow if they received their approval for special permit this evening.  

Mayor Elliott stated that he did not foresee that happening this evening, but in any case, the applicant would still have to appear before the Planning Board.  

Mr. Blust stated that he has lived in Croton for nine years.  He has seen the Croton ‘dump’ get ‘fixed’, sludge taken out by Metro North, whom Half Moon Bay has fought with as their neighbor.  His recommendation, even though the site has been cleaned up and looks very good, is not needed in Croton.  

Ms. Lisa Dashman of 6 Dailey Drive stated that she has had some experience with recycling plants.  There are very few things on the proposed sign that will not contain hazardous materials; paper, for instance, is coated with certain toxins., She would challenge anyone to consider the wood or the C & D debris as clean waste.  She would also like to say that she is involved in a U.S. Justice action against a company that was shipping non-hazardous waste to be recycled.  It appears that the truth is that the company was shipping hazardous and toxic waste for disposal.  Disposal can mean burial and incineration. There are many other ways in using that property - There are many creative and intelligent citizens of the community to investigate other avenues.  She urged the Village Board to reject the application.  

Mr. Clay Tiffany of Briarcliff spoke next.  He stated that he uses the river and has a vested interest in the river.  He asked the Board if he would be allowed to submit written material.

Mayor Elliott replied that this would be permitted.  

Mr. Tiffany stated that he would like audience to know that Mr. Apollonio has an operation in the black section of Ossining – Mr. Apollonio had a transfer station down there, and he has ignored the neighbors health and comfort.  Mr. Tiffany stated that he objects to these expansion plans.  Is the land owned, as his sources have indicated, to 75% by Mr. Matthew Hickey and 25% by Mr. Apolloniopolonio? It was shown in the mid 1980’s that there was crime involvement in the waste hauling industry, and he stated that he brings this up because Jimmy and Matt Hickey were mentioned in a study done by the Federal Government and he has friends in Federal investigation.  Mr. Jimmy Hickey is all over this operation and it is something for the residents to think about.  The clean-up that the residents have paid for is in the tune of one million dollars, which was secretly funded by Hickey.  Mr. Clay stated that he did some brief investigation, and has found that Hudson Waste has twenty liens out and has paid six of them.  For organized crime’s involvement, they should refer to the Rockland County Sheriff’s Department.  Valley Carting routinely bypassed the weight scales, which was observed by the Rockland County Sheriff’s department.  He stated that he can think of many reasons why they would bypass the weight scales.  Valley carting is owned by Jimmy and Matt Hickey and Tony DeMico.

Mr. Clay continued, and noted that in the mid 1980 public hearings, Jimmy Hickey subsidized the extensive cost for the clean up.  Why would Jimmy Hickey not want to come up front and center about this?  How was the previous owner allowed to dump so much debris over the years that it cost a million dollars to clean it up?  Mr. Clay stated that his sources say that he did not just have wood materials.  Yet there is all kinds of debris - this guy did not have the money to pull this stuff out of the ground.  Just recently the Federal police came and arrested a hit man who is living in a house in Bedford that was listed as being owned by Jimmy Hickey.  Has Mr. Hickey ever intimidated other people in the carting companies?  When the debris was removed, not all the interested parties were notified, according to the Riverkeepers lawsuit  In Ossining, Mr. Apollonio was not following the rules, and the Ossining Police Department covered this up.  There was much construction and demolition debris.  Mr. Apollonio has enough connections so the NYS DEC did not come down on him as hard as they should have.  According to the lawsuit, creosote railroad ties were burned.  The facility is polluted and will pollute the air.  He suggested to the concerned citizens that they get in touch with the Hudson Riverkeepers.  

Mr. Clay stated that he has several documents, including police department reports and it is shocking to hear that the carting industry is mob-related.  This is no longer a wood operation, it is a money maker when they take in construction debris.  Mayor Pataki is pretending he is an environmentalist - the rules are being re-written as we speak.  Once health is gone, what does it matter if Croton gets a few fines?  Why did Croton government allow this operation if they took in more than wood?

Mr. John Perillo stated that he is the owner of 43 Croton Point Avenue in Croton, and has received notice of this public hearing.  He noted that he had not had an opportunity to thank the Board for cooperating with him on the 43 Croton Point Avenue site.  It was a trying time for him and the community and he invested $500,000 in a 1,000 sq. ft. building.  He stated that he thinks that it is quite clear if you look at the Metro-Enviro site, it cannot be compared to any of the sites that this gentleman (Clay Tiffany) has mentioned and it should not be confused with the Carta operation, or the problem in Hastings-on-Hudson.  In his opinion, they have to talk about the legal obligations and what the new owner has to conform to; act on the applicant’s request and the requirements of the zoning ordinance.  He stated that this probably holds dear to his heart when he was going through his process.  43 Croton Point Avenue has not been taking away any business from any local business owners.  Mr. Perillo stated that he would like to have some answers and that he would be pleased if this community and the Board was empowered to request Harmon yards and Metro North to clean up the railroad property.  Regarding the rainwater on his site on Croton Point Avenue, it goes on the blacktop roads, into storm drains, and would ultimately go into the Hudson River, and this is a similar situation.  He felt that it is unfair for Mr. Tiffany to mention people and assassinate peoples’ characters unless there is proof regarding this matter.  Comments that were made go beyond the realm of public participation and into politics.  This is about an operation that has been taken over and cleaned up.  If the  applicant have addressed all of these issues, then he should get a certificate of occupancy or special permit.  Think all of the items have been addressed.  Mr. Perillo stated that he has a long term family that lives in Croton, and some work for the Village of Croton.  He urged the Board to consider the merits of the application.  The applicant is going through due process to approve the site.  He thanked God that the taxpayers of the community did not inherit the situation in Hastings or are entertaining a situation that is unsightly from Route 9 in Peekskill.

A resident in the audience requested that the application not go to a vote today -- one of the questions she has is in terms of the air control.  She is concerned because she walks a lot at Croton Point Park.  She is also concerned about the bird life.  Additionally, she has heard that there will be truck coming and going from the site – another one of her concerns is in regards to uncovered trucks going anywhere. Millspaugh - containers going tin and out are all covered.  Biggest source of dust was vehicular traffic on access road - Metro Enviro has pave the entire access road - largest source of dust -

Mr. Millspaugh replied that all materials will pass in and out of the site in terms of one day.  It is debris; not garbage, not sludge, not food processing waste, not any type of material that will cause odor.  

The same resident asked if there would be smoke from burning materials.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that there would be no incineration on site.

A resident asked how many trucks would come and go through the site per hour.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that there would be 40 trucks per day.

The resident asked how large the trucks would be.

Mr. Millspaugh explained that container trucks would go into the site, and tractor trailers would be leaving the site.  Approximately 35 containers trucks in, 5 tractor trailers out of the site.

Ms. Joan Doyle, a resident of the Village of Ossining spoke next.  She stated that she was a longtime friend of Paul Apollonio.  She stated that she is a very active member of the Village of Ossining, a former Village trustee and Chairperson of the Village Zoning Board of Appeals.  She stated that she would like to make a few comments about Mr. Apollonio and the kind of person he is.  She noted that she understood the concerns of the Croton residents.  She stated that she knew Mr. Apollonio from another side - he is a very good businessman, and she is sure that he did not undertake this operation in order for it to fail, for it not to comply, and not to address everything that the DEC is concerned and the Village Board is concerned about.   There are no violations on Mr. Apollonio’s site in Ossining and he has complied with everything on that site.  She then asked Mr. Millspaugh to elaborate about the plans to haul out much of the debris from the Croton site by rail.  

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the debris will be hauled out by rail and this part of the operation  will be completed in about ten months.  The connection to the main line is not completed at this point.  Initial operations will be done by truck. Once the operation is completed, material will be hauled out by rail, not truck.

Ms. Doyle noted that if Mr. Apollonio had any kind of political connections as were previously spoken about, it is foreign to her knowledge, and she would like to get to know him a lot better if those comments were true .  She stated that she knows how difficult it is for the Board to make this decision.  However, the Board has enabled the applicant to come this far and a lot of time, effort and money has been put into the site.  The Board must think cautiously and in a business like manner, balancing the quality of life for the Village residents.

Mr. Jim Moore spoke next, asking how the Planning Board can come though at this time with a system like this that will be detrimental to Croton?  How does the Planning Board push something like this through?

Ms. Leflore of 32 Wolf Road stated that she was very upset about having these people in her backyard.  She does not understand how the Village allowed this to get this far.  It would seem to her that everyone in the Village is obviously against this happening.  She agrees with what other people are stating – the community is obviously against this, and Croton has had its share of dumps here.

Mayor Elliott noted that there has been a total cleanup of the site.  

Ms. Regina Montana of Ackerman Court stated that she was astounded when she heard this application was being considered by the Board.  Croton has always been environmentally conscious.  When you think about something like this, it could be that none of this debris is going to touch our air or water; however, she has a lot of suspicions about that .  There used to be a Mrs. Germinaro that attended many meetings and was very concerned about the breast cancer rates in this area. The Board seems to be environmentally conscious, and she stated that she was astounded that they would entertain bringing this into the Village.  Again, she stated that it is possible that nothing will get into the water.  A lot of people are not aware of the implications of this application before the Board this evening.   She urged the Board to look carefully at this.  

Ms. Maura Quinn of Scenic Drive commended Mayor Elliott’s work with American Heritage Rivers and noted that she was very amazed that he would be considering a project that might damage our historic Hudson River, never mind the residents.

Mayor Elliott noted that there is a legal process here, and the applicant has a legal right to pursue this application.  

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy asked Mr. Millspaugh if all materials brought into the site will be removed in 24 hours.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that all the material that comes in gets removed on the slab.  They can store that for a longer period of time.  The materials that get regulated are left on the trucks.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy asked if the materials that should not be there will be removed within 24 hours.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that they are required to have several contractors on call and the material  is taken away within 24 hours.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that she would like to state her opposition to the application and would like to urge the Board to deny this application .  She stated that she would also like to know if notice requirements have any applicability here.

Mr. Gunshor stated that he has waivers from all of the property owners within 200 ft of the site to waive the requirement for notice.  He submitted these to the Board.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that there is another issue she would like to address; a document signed by Mr. Apollonio in regard to the number of vehicular trips.  The document states that there will be a maximum of 14 trips per hour.  She asked if the Liguoris would have any involvement in the operation of this facility.  

Mr. Gunshor replied that the Liguoris have a right to remain on the site until the contract expires on or about 4/8/98.  

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy asked if there were any plans for the Liguoris to continue certain functions while they are there.

Mr. Gunshor replied that the Liguoris are tenants only.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy asked if the Liguoris were assisting with the operations.

Mr. Gunshor repeated that they were tenants and that they were parking trucks from their business on site.  A ‘Roll-out’ business.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that this Board has a right to know what is going on down there at the site.

Mr. Gunshor stated that the Liguoris are not part of Metro-Enviro, and there is only a contractual arrangement that expires on 4/8/98.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that the years and years ago the Liguoris made application to the Zoning Board of Appeals asking in part that their use of the premises be considered  a permitted use.  The Zoning Board determined that the present use by the Liguoris was a conforming use.  Under the zoning laws, the Village Board may issue a special permit for a change from one non-conforming use to another non-conforming use. The Liguoris were only permitted process wood waste.   The use has increased with the addition of construction and demolition debris, and it is not something that is desirable in this community.  Over the past couple of years, the Village has had an increased focus on the waterfront, purchased a portion of the Seprieo property, and has a management agreement to operate the other portion of that property.  There is an additional development that will occur at Half Moon Bay.  All in all, an increased focus on the waterfront and what the Village wants to do for that waterfront and she thinks that now is the time for this Board to draw the line in the sand and to say ‘No More’ -- this use is an increase over the prior use.  The Village does not have to permit this and she encouraged the Board to deny this application – it should not be permitted in this community.

Mayor Elliott thanked Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy for her appreciation of the work done by the Village for the waterfront.

Mr. Nick Puto, an accountant for Paul Apollonio stated that he first would like to address the fact that Mr. Apollonio is a retired policeman, and well respected in the Town of Ossining. He runs an impeccable business, and the remarks made earlier are untrue.  There are no violations on his property in Ossining.  The business would be closed in this day an age if he were violating the environment.  He spoke of Mr. Perillo’s success at 43 Croton Point Avenue in Croton.  Before Mr. Apollonio bought this site, it looked like a dump.  He stated that he didn’t  know if over the years there has been pickets up there, coming to meetings, asking to have the site cleaned up.  It is a great testament from the people at Half Moon Bay that he did a great job and cleaned up the site.  Some of people against the application said that the site is a lot cleaner.  Mr. Apollonio is a fine businessman and member of  the community and will be a fine addition to Croton – his record is impeccable.  He stated that he will not sit here while Mr. Apollonio’s reputation is damaged, with someone stating that he is connected with organized crime.

Mr. Goetz asked what tax revenue the Village expects to get from this site.

Village Manager Herbek stated that he did not remember the figures.

Mayor Elliott stated that this information is not relevant to the application.

Mr. Goetz stated that they have spoken of trucks going through town, roads needing to be paved, and dust particles.  He suggested to the Board that if they procrastinate long enough, the applicant will go away.  

Mr. John Sarcone spoke next, stating that this is the tale of two mayors – one promoting the Greenway Vision Plan, and on the other hand, a mayor who calls for a public hearing immediately following a Planning Board decision to permit a recycling operation, which may be or not be in violation of the law.

Village Attorney Waldman stated that there are statutory requirements as to when they must hold a hearing.  The Village would be in default had the applicant not gotten the waivers for public notice.  Timing is dictated by New York State statute.

Mr. Sarcone spoke to the Mayor, stating that he did not notice him correct Mr. Puto when he declared the site a dump.  Every time he himself had previously called the site a dump, he was told by the Board that it was a recycling plant.   The Village was concerned when Exxon wanted to put their canopy up, when Ms. Gallelli was Chairman of the Planning Board and they denied the application, resulting in a lawsuit.  Exxon got their canopy.  Did the residents promote the Planning Board’s idea on that?  When Mr. Perillo tried to get his permits, how many years did it take for him to get  into operation?  

Mayor Elliott stated that the Village has followed the law.

Mr. Sarcone noted that the people that are cheering the advocates are not residents of the Village He then asked why the Village has not complied with SEQRA?  

Mayor Elliott reiterated that they are following the law.

Mr. Sarcone asked Mr. Millspaugh of  Spectra Engineering if he has a financial stake in this application.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that they get paid for their services.

Mayor Elliott stated that the NYS DEC had been working on the site prior to Mr. Sarcone bringing up the subject.  

Mr. Sarcone stated that the DEC permit dated 11/97 is not worth paper it is printed on --under the term unacceptable waste is incidental waste, which, for example is waste taking from nursing homes and is not listed under unacceptable, and could be said is then acceptable -- this could happen.  He would state right now that it should be spelled out in bold print that commercial waste is not acceptable as well.  How did the term recyclables slip in there?  Also, there will be  one truck every four minutes.  He suggested that the Village take a good hard look at what recyclables are -- What does the current permit allow for their daily allotment?

Mr. Millspaugh replied that he believed the permit was issued for 1400 cubic yards a day and Mr. Apollonio was restricted to less.

Mr. Sarcone read from the permit, stating that the facility may accept up to 1000 cubic yards a day.  He stated that in his opinion, no one will monitor the trucks as they come in, going through the material piece by piece.   He told the Board to reject this current permit and if they have to issue any permit, limit the applicant to the original permit.  

Mr. Rich Kilmer of Buchanan stated that he was an old friend of Paul Apollonio and wanted to clear an issue up about asbestos.  He stated that when a building is torn down, it is mandated that the asbestos be removed before the building is demolished.  

Mr. Huckvale asked if there would be any activity on the site from 8:00 PM until 6:00 or 7:00 AM.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that the operating hours are stipulated in the permit.

Mr. Huckvale stated that he has not heard from the Board what the benefit from this application is to the Village.

Mayor Elliott stated that the Board is required by law to have this hearing.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that there is a need for this type of operation and that landfills are closing all over the state.  The rail operation will enable Mr. Apollonio to send materials out of the State.

A resident asked where the money is coming from to implement the rail spur in ten months, since a comment had been made by Mr. Apollonio previously that he did not have sufficient funds to finish the rail spur.  There have been no residents of Croton that have spoken in support of Mr. Apollonio’s application.  The Board should be ashamed to be considering this.  She stated that she personally vehemently opposes this new construction, and anybody voting for this is committing political suicide.

Another resident stated that he is offended that someone states that this is good business.  To waive elements to what would affect human quality of life is offensive.  There was a lot of money put in on speculation on this site.

Mr. Perillo stated that due process permits him to be here as he owns property in Croton.  In regard to due process, and Mr. Sarcone’s remark, the process may work slowly for some and rapidly for others, fulfilling obligations and requirements.  He stated that he was taken aback when his mountain slid down at 43 Croton Point Avenue and there was a photo of it in a political ad.  At that time, Mr. Perillo stated that he voiced his opinion to Mr. Sarcone and asked him why he would trap him in middle of something political.  He stated that he has to defend his fourth generation name regarding this, and says these things seriously.  This all goes back to the public notice - there has to be a deep separation to listening to all of the concerns and a respect of all of  the concerns of the people in the audience.  He stated that he is not here to assassinate anyone’s character, but that it is his understanding that the principal that owns Carta Recycling is a personal friend of Mr. Sarcone, and that he would feel more comfortable if what Mr. Sarcone was saying was true -- Mr. Cartalemi has donated money to campaigns. It is his understanding that Mr. Sarcone contacted a gentlemen by the name of Al Ross, another by the name of Mike Annis and also contacted Joseph DioGuardi prior to this evenings meeting.  He stated that he was appalled that anyone would trap a local businessman into anything political.  He is also appalled that Mr. Sarcone wanted to sack this deal through those contacts that he just mentioned.  If Mr. Sarcone would take a deep scent, he stated that he too smells an odor, that of March elections of 1998.

Mr. Sarcone stated that Mr. Perillo is a personal friend of Paul Apollonio.  There is already another recycling center nearby and those residents in Peekskill are choking to death from the fumes.  He stated that he was going to bring this up as an example of what we don’t want in this community.  With respect to politics, he is baffled as to why Mr. Perillo would be saying ‘up yours’, we’re coming in, we’re going to cloud this issue with politics .  What the residents of Croton are saying is that they do not want this facility in Croton, and it is up to the Board whether Croton will have this facility or not.  

Mayor Elliott assured Mr. Sarcone that the Board is not rushing this application; they are merely complying with the law.

Ms. Jane Hallock of 50 Oneida Avenue asked if an independent engineer has been consulted as to the issue of the pollution that is there already at the site.  

Mr. Millspaugh replied that the NYS DEC has been to the site, as well as a consulting firm hired by the Planning Board by the name of Weston.

Ms. Hallock stated that it would make her happier if they could try to get an expert from very far away with absolutely no prior knowledge of this.  She then asked if anything was going to be burned on the site.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that there would be no incineration on site.

Ms. Hallock stated that she did not want to see an increased health risk from this facility.  She has a child with asthma.  She suggested that they just try to solve what they have.

Mr. Goetz stated that a young lady made a comment earlier in regard to diesel trucks emitting 30 to 70% more pollution than regular cars do.  He suggested that they could have 40 trucks on average coming though Croton.  He stated that he would not mind a lawsuit against this applicant and that he would stand behind it.  Every resident is willing to go to bat for that.  He stated that he is really concerned about the trucks.  The tax revenues are not worth it.  The last comment he has to make is that if this were a big Village and there was a lot of construction occurring here, perhaps they could use a facility like this.  However, they are a small Village and they just don’t have that kind of debris here.  There may be no pollution from the plant itself perhaps, but there will be from the trucks.  That is the key issue here.  It is the only way this stuff can come in.  Last but not least, he is also concerned about a bad accident occurring because of the increased traffic.

Mr. Gary Gorman stated that he was watching this meeting on cable this evening and felt that he had to come to the municipal building and comment.  He has seen the pictures and seen the site firsthand -- it does look like a dump.  Garbage is garbage, the Board is concerned and the people have spoken on behalf of Croton.  He noted that millions of dollars were spent to cap the Croton landfill.  Everyone knows that there were a lot of pollutants on that site.

Ms. Yurchuk-McCarthy stated that in regard to the issue of notice, she has spent numerous hours looking through the Ligouri files and would like Village Attorney Waldmans report on that part of this proceeding - there is no record of due notice.

One resident stated that if the Board is going to be hasty about anything, they should vote no on this application.

Ms. Kaufman asked how long would it take for this debris to be loaded on one truck.

Mr. Millspaugh explained to Ms. Kaufman the process in loading trucks - this process would depend on how many men and pieces of equipment are involved.  

Ms. Kaufman inquired as to what extent the contaminants are separated on site.

Mr. Millspaugh explained that in regard to the containers on construction sites, there is a stipulation that they be monitored.  For instance, they cannot put cans of paint, crankcase oil, or other similar substances in the containers.  They would be breaking the law should they put those kinds of things in the containers.  If those substances are incidental to the load, they will get picked off and separately managed.

Mr. Goetz asked where those type of materials get placed.

Mr. Millspaugh responded that they will be placed in the area for temporary material to be carted away.

Mr. Goetz stated that the site will be clean in the beginning -- however, they have not answered when and how fast the material will be removed.  Every truck is going to possibly have some of this hazardous stuff in it.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that he was on a similar site for 4 months - all in all, there were 6 or more tires, less than ten spent tubes of caulk, and one or two solvent containers - that was it.  That is the nature of this material.

Mr. Goetz voiced his concerns regarding the possibility of accepting radioactive materials at the site.  

One resident by the name of John asked about the time frame of 15 minutes loading the trucks and how this could be done.    

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the trucks may come in more in the morning at the rate of 5 trucks per hour.  They may fall a little behind in the morning.

A resident stated that the trucks will make the traffic situation worse in the morning during the rush to the train station.  He stated that personally, he would not like to see this come to Croton and did not think that they should have something like this in their backyard again.

Mr. Sarcone brought up the EAF (Environmental Assessment Form) submitted by this  applicant and compared it to what had to be submitted by an applicant for a subdivision approval.  He stated that this application requires further thought and consideration.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the Planning Board thoroughly evaluated this application, hired their own consultant, and had addressed all the issues raised tonight.  All of the impacts were thoroughly reviewed by the Planning Board.

Mr. Sarcone stated that what he just heard is turning his stomach.

Trustee Grant noted that the Planning Board has addressed concerns of the residents and it is not that the issues have not been raised, and it is not that those issues are not of concern to the Board.  There is nobody on this Board that is taking any money, and there is no one on this Board that is a personal friend of Mr. Apollonio.  They all live in the Village of Croton.  She stated that she did not know where all the anger is coming from

Mr. Sarcone replied that there is a lot of frustration.

Trustee Grant informed Mr. Sarcone that the NYS DEC was working on this a year before he came to the Board.  

Mr. Sarcone urged the Board to do the only thing that would be the sane thing to do for this Village.  He stated that he wanted the Board to call for a vote this evening on the application.

Trustee Grant stated that she is not going to call for a vote tonight -- she still has questions.

Mr. Scott Johnston stated that it was his hope that as a Board, they will listen to the residents of this community.

Mr. Puto came before the Board again to speak, noting that if it wasn’t for the accusations that were made, he would not have come forward.  He believed that the majority of those present conducted themselves in a good manner and that all of the people were sincere.  However, when Mr. Sarcone got up to speak, it would have been better if he had spoken as a concerned citizen of Croton, not the Republican Chairman of Croton.

Ms. Kaufman stated that this is a hot issue and it will be hard not to be emotional.  However, she noted that no one from Croton spoke in favor of this application.

Mr. Perillo stated that he is a taxpayer in Croton and he takes exception to those comments.  He applauds the Board.  He stated that he only protected his Perillo name when other people spoke about politics.

Mr. Sarcone stated that he did not feel that a number of issues were fully explored and discussed.  Trustee Grant and the other elected officials should listen to the people.

Mayor Elliott stated that they would stop taking comments at this time as the hour is late, and  adjourn this hearing to the next meeting.  People may make further comments at that time, or in writing to the Board.  

Trustee Grant moved that the public hearing be adjourned to the next meeting, seconded by Trustee Watkins and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.  

Trustee Daubney noted that the drainage system is not complete.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that the only portion of the drainage system that was not complete is that part of the rail that is not constructed.  Everything else is in place and functioning,

Trustee Daubney stated that the concrete pad itself is pitched to the side -- he asked what kind of storm event it could withstand.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that it was built to withstand a 20 year storm event.

Trustee Rickles inquired as to why the entire facility was not enclosed.

Mr. Millspaugh responded that the long term plan had always envisioned a building.  The previous applicant and the current applicant both have taken the position that the buildings would be financed out of the operating business.  Everyone feels that the building is the ultimate way to go.

Trustee Daubney stated that he would not want anyone to take in paper materials.  He noted that he had a chance to see large recycling plant run by the County.  This plant was indoors, but there was a lot of debris.  The previous owner had a problem keeping contracts for a method of disposal.  He asked if the Village could get assurance that this will not happen to Mr. Apollonio’s site.

Mr. Millspaugh replied that this is very do-able.

Trustee Daubney stated that a lot of different things can find their way into the materials.

Mr. Millspaugh stated that the DEC usually assigns three or four facilities to a monitor, who are employees of the DEC.  Metro-Enviro will have to maintain a balance of account with the DEC to pay these monitors.

Trustee Grant noted that the place that is handling the Village recyclables will not be doing so after May of this coming year.  However, she stated that she would not want any household recyclables going to the site.  It might be important to have a percentage of the materials determined in advance.  She would want to insist on unannounced site visits by the Village Engineer, the Village Manager, and Village Board members.

Mr. Gunshor stated that an invitation has been made to the Village Board and others already.  In the past, most visits have been unannounced.

Mayor Elliott stated that there will be ample time for further comments and discussions.  He then thanked everyone for coming to the meeting this evening.


Village Manager Herbek read the following correspondence (of which full text is available in the Village Office):

a)  Richard J. Campbell, re:  Retirement Letter:

Village Manager Herbek noted receipt of Village Treasurer Campbell’s notice of his retirement effective March, 1998.

b)  David Snyder, Snyder & Snyder, re:  Sprint Spectrum Special Permit:

Mr. David Snyder, counsel to Sprint Spectrum, approached the Board and stated that the Planning Board has made their recommendation to the Village Board regarding their application for special permit.  Mr. Snyder stated that he felt that the Planning Board made some positive recommendations in regard to additional information they would like submitted.

Mr. Snyder continued, stating that he would like this Board to make the decisions regarding where the visuals should be taken, after a comment made by Trustee Rickles that the Planning Board had asked these to be provided.  These areas include the Westwind subdivision, Warren Road, Route 9A both north and south, Scenic Ridge, Amberlands, one city block before Mike’s Fruit and Vegetable Stand, Senasqua Park and the clubhouse at Hudson National Golf Club.

Village Attorney Waldman suggested that the Village Board receive copies of the Planning Board minutes in this regard..  

Trustee Rickles stated that the proposal from Sprint for the combined consultants is only in the amount of $2500, which is not enough.  He suggested that this issue be revisited in the very near future.  He stated that all he sees happening now is that the lack of a reasonable proposal has been slowing this process down.

Mr. Snyder stated that they had two consultant names.  He had a problem with one, but no problem with the other.  He stated that he will recommend that an equal amount be agreed on for the environmental consultant.

Trustee Rickles noted that in terms of potential visual impacts, it is within the purview of the Board to examine those and the radio coverage gaps.

Mr. Snyder stated that he would like a public hearing to be set for this application.  

Trustee Grant noted that the Board will probably not complete the public hearing in one evening, and will most likely adjourn the hearing at the end of the evening.

It was determined by the Board to set the public hearing for the application by Sprint Spectrum for a special permit on January 20, 1997.  

Mr. Snyder noted that under federal law, these sites will get their permits.

Trustee Grant added that they may, but perhaps not in that location.

Mr. Snyder stressed that it is a public utility service.   

Village Manager Herbek informed Mr. Snyder that he would like to get a letter of authorization for up to $5,000 for each consultant.  

Mr. Snyder stated that in regard to the subdivision regulations cited by the Planning Board in their recommendation, he noted that he did not agree with Village Attorney Waldman’s determination that the Planning Board is correct in stating that a subdivision is required, but if it pleases the Board, the applicant will file a subdivision application.

c.  Carol Courter/Robert DeAllaume, Penfield Avenue, re:  Sidewalk Maintenance Program:

Village Manager Herbek noted that this correspondence, dated December 8, 1997 concerns the above referenced citizens view of the condition of the sidewalks in the Village.  He noted that a response to this will be on the Sidewalk Committee report.

d.  Lyn Roessler, re:  Centennial Calendar:

Village Manager Herbek read the above letter to those present which requested him to inform the residents as to the availability of the Croton Centennial Calendar which can be purchased in the Village Office.  In addition, the Opening Ceremony for the Croton Centennial will be held at 8:00 P.M. on Thursday, February 12, 1997 in the Frederick Blais Auditorium of Croton Harmon High School.

e  Karen Jescavage-Bernard, Jane E. Lytle Arboretum, re:  Waiving of Fees for Building Permits Needed for Bridge and Handicapped Accessible Boardwalk Construction:

Karen Jescavage-Bernard of the Arboretum advised the Mayor and Village Board by correspondence dated December 10, 1997 that Carl Grimm, Architect, of Croton will design a bridge and handicapped accessible boardwalk free of charge for the arboretum.  However, the structures will require building permits and review by the Water Control Commission.  She requests in the letter that the Village waive the filing fees for this construction.

Trustee Grant moved that the filing fees for all necessary applications for the above mentioned construction at the arboretum be waived as requested, seconded by Trustee Daubney and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.

f.  Albert J. Bauman, NYS Department of Transportation, re:  Parking policy at Harmon Lot -
    New Year’s Eve.:

Village Manager Herbek read the above referenced correspondence to those present, which requests that parking restrictions be relaxed on New Year’s Eve.  They noted in their letter that Metro North will be providing free parking at the facilities controlled by the railroad, starting at 6:00 P.M. on December 31st.

Mayor Elliott requested a motion to approve the request by NYS DOT, so moved by Trustee Daubney, seconded by Trustee Rickles and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.

g.  NYS Office of Real Property Services, re:  Residential Assessment Ratio:

Village Manager Herbek noted receipt of correspondence from the New York State Office of Real Property Services in regard to the Residential Assessment Ratio for the Village.

h.  Glenn Vogt, 5 Terrace Place, re:  Graffiti Problem on Buildings on Brook Street:

Village Manager Herbek stated that a letter dated November 26, 1997 had been received by the above referenced resident regarding graffiti problems on several commercial buildings located on Brook Street.

i.  Marc Shenfield, Hamilton Place, re:  Reimbursement for Sidewalk Replacement:

Correspondence dated December 1, 1997 was received by Village Manager Herbek from Mr. Marc Shenfield of 4 Hamilton Avenue regarding a request for reimbursement for expenses incurred for sidewalk repair, should the Village implement a fund for reimbursement to homeowners for sidewalk repair.

j.   Lewis Montana, 5 Ackerman Court, re:  Emergency Road Extension on North Highland Place:

Village Manager Herbek noted receipt of correspondence dated December 4, 1997 from Mr. Louis Montana of 5 Ackerman Court regarding the emergency road extension on North Highland Place.  He requests that in accordance with the resolution of subdivision approval for River Landing, the emergency road barriers be kept in place.

k.  Paul Taylor, Esq., 1 Penfield Avenue, re:  Cellular Antenna Law:

Mr. Paul Taylor of 1 Penfield Avenue submitted correspondence dated November 21, 1997 to Mayor Elliott regarding the Cellular Antenna Law and the cost of litigation surrounding local laws that are enacted.

l.  New Pavilion at Senasqua to be named “William McCaffrey Pavilion.”

Village Manager Herbek reported that a memorandum was submitted to him by Mary Zimmerman, Recreation Superintendent dated December 4, 1997 which stated that the Recreation Advisory Committee recommended at their meeting of 11/12/97 that the new pavilion to be constructed at Senasqua Park be named the “William McCaffrey Pavilion”.

Trustee Daubney made a motion to approve the following resolution.  The motion was seconded by Trustee Grant and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.

BE IT RESOLVED, that the new pavilion to be constructed at Senasqua Park in the spring be named “William McCaffrey Pavilion”.

m.  J. Peter Stillman, 210 Cleveland Drive, re:  Proposed Changes to Noise Law:

Correspondence from Mr. J. Peter Stillman of 210 Cleveland Drive, dated December 10, 1997 was submitted to the Village Board regarding his opinion of the growing noise levels in the Village.  He submitted with his letter a copy of a draft code to limit the use of outdoor power equipment for the Board’s consideration.

Mr. Stillman is recommending that tools such as leaf blowers be prohibited.  Trustee Watkins felt that this would be appropriate material for a work session.


Mr. Joel Klein, a resident of Old Post Road North stated that at the last Board meeting, there was a discussion regarding a $15,000 vehicle for the traffic enforcement officer.  He suggested that the Board could look into using existing resources for this purpose, rather than purchasing a new vehicle.  He noted that there are two Jeep vehicles that are not used on a consistent basis that could be used for this purpose.  

Village Manager Herbek replied that to take a vehicle like that and put it to use in parking enforcement would be a terrible waste of money.

Trustee Rickles stated that they went through the entire list of Village vehicles to see if there was a way to not purchase a new vehicle.  


a.  Budget Modification - Parking Enforcement Officer Vehicle::

Trustee Daubney moved that the following resolution be approved, seconded by Trustee Watkins and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Treasurer is hereby authorized to make the following budget modification:

Transfer From                                   Transfer To

1-1-1990.0400 Contingent Account                1-1-5650.0200  Off Street Parking


This transfer is for the purchase of a replacement vehicle for the Parking Enforcement Officer.  The vehicle to be purchased will be a compact car, a Chevrolet Cavalier, which will be purchased from the New York State Contract or local dealer, if the same or less expensive.

RESOLVED:  that the Village Manager is hereby authorized to purchase a 1997 Chevrolet Cavalier for use by the Village’s parking enforcement officer at a cost of $11,746.

Trustee Rickles moved to approve the resolution as amended (in italics) above, seconded by Trustee Watkins and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

b)  Rains & Pogrebin, PC, Retainer:

Trustee Watkins entered a motion that the following resolution be approved, seconded by Trustee Rickles and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

RESOLVED:  that the law firm of Rains and Pogrebin, P.C. of Mineola, Long Island, New York is hereby retained for professional services on all labor and employment law matters for a period of two years, from January 18, 1998 through January 17, 2000, at a fee of $4,000.00 per annum, payable in eight equal quarterly installments of $1,000.00 each to cover the expenditures of time up through twenty hours per annum, and that time expended in excess of said twenty hours shall be billed at that rate of $225.00 per hour for Terrence O’Neil’s time, $195.00 per hour for other partners’ time and $145.00 per hour for associate time.

c)  Support for Hudson River Reassessment of PCB’s:

Trustee Rickles entered a motion to approve the following resolution, seconded by Trustee Daubney and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.


WHEREAS, the health and beauty of the Hudson River is critical to the economic vitality of our community and the Hudson River is a treasured asset; and

WHEREAS, nearly 200 miles of the Hudson River - from Hudson Falls to New York City - are a federal Superfund site du to polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contamination; and

WHEREAS, PCBs are the most significant contaminant limiting full use and enjoyment of the Hudson River; and

WHEREAS, PCBs were banned in 1976 because of a variety of known and suspected impacts on humans and wildlife; and

WHEREAS, PCBs remain in the Hudson River exposing humans and wildlife to their effects; and

WHEREAS, an estimated $40 million annually has been lost over the last twenty years because of the closure of Hudson River commercial fisheries and restrictions on recreationally caught fish.  As a result, the Hudson Valley has lost an important cultural heritage and way of life and the economic vitality of the Hudson River region continues to be hampered by the limitations on recreational use of the River and the stigma of PCB contamination; and

WHEREAS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund officials determined February 1997 that PCB “hot spots” in the sediment of the upper Hudson are the “dominant source” of PCB contamination to the River, and that microbial breakdown will not rid the river of PCBs; and

WHEREAS, the EPA’s Hudson River Reassessment has determined that without remediation, present levels of contamination will continue indefinitely; and

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Croton-on-Hudson hereby expresses its support for the Hudson River Reassessment being conducted by the U.S. EPA under the Superfund, including evaluation of the feasibility of potential remedial action that can most effectively restore the Hudson River, including the evaluation of traditional disposal methods as well as innovative technologies that can be used to destroy PCBs.  Further, the Village of Croton-on-Hudson urges that the U. S. EPA complete the Hudson River Reassessment as expeditiously as possible.

d.  Designation of Hudson River as an American Heritage River:

Trustee Rickles moved that the following resolution be approved, seconded by Trustee Daubney and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.


WHEREAS, the American Rivers Heritage Initiative was announced by President Clinton on February 4, 1997; and

WHEREAS, the Hudson River has held a pre-eminent role in the development of the heritage of the United States influencing the settlement patterns of Native Americans, serving as a corridor of exploration, fortifying America during the Revolution, giving rise to the Age of Steam, inspiring the Hudson River School of Painting, facilitating the economic rise of New York and serving as a catalyst in the creation of the modern environmental movement; and

WHEREAS, the designation of the Hudson River as an American Heritage River will provide for the coordinated delivery of Federal services, enhanced opportunities for waterfront redevelopment, improved water quality, and further the goals and strategies already utilized by the Hudson Valley Greenway, and

WHEREAS, Governor George E. Pataki, on behalf of the State of New York is seeking designation of the Hudson River as an American Heritage River.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Croton-on-Hudson supports the application and urges the President to designate the Hudson River as an American Heritage River.


        Trustee Watkins reported that the Senior Class of Croton Harmon High School are doing well in regards to the colleges that they will be attending next fall.  He noted that one will be attending John Hopkins University and another will be attending Cornell University, etc.  This certainly says very good things about this graduating class.

        Trustee Rickels wished everyone Happy Holidays!

        Trustee Daubney had no reports to make this evening.

        Trustee Grant also had no reports.

        Village Attorney Waldman stated that he had no reports this evening.


There being no further formal business to come before the Board, Trustee Watkins entered a motion to adjourn the regular meeting and convene in an Executive Session of the Board, seconded by Trustee Daubney and carried unanimously by a vote of 4 to 0.  The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 A.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Donna M. Conkling, Secretary Pro Tem

Village Clerk/Acting Clerk

Corrections to the Minutes of the Meeting of December 1, 1997:

Page 2, 1st paragraph, second line, should read “....rates would go up.” (Trustee Grant)

Page 2, paragraph (f), 5th line, change SEQUA to SEQRA.  (Trustee Grant)

Page 3, paragraph (a), last line, should read “ bring all segments of the community together.”  (Trustee Grant)

Page 3, paragraph (d)

Page 3, Joe DeGenona (if spelling incorrect, correct spelling unknown)  (Trustee Grant)

Page 3, paragraph (e) should be Sarah Hardman

Page 5, paragraph (b) - Resolution was approved noting that Local Law #7 of 1997 did not have an impact - was 6A, not 6B.  (Village Manager Herbek)