G. Corso: There is a bit of clay in that low lying area. That would be a potential reason that those materials would stay behind and not get leached.

N. Madden: I just wanted to jump in again. I understand their concerns and I guess all we’re saying is we’ve provided all the information to the Department of Environmental Conservation who are the Lead Agency with jurisdiction. If they say do more work either investigating work or re-mediation work we’re obviously going to do what they direct us to because they’re the agency with jurisdiction.

G. Monaco: I would love to think that the government was working for us. With the drainage, I was wondering how that is going to be monitored? Will the Department of Environmental Conservation be going to monitoring those?

R. Burns: No. The detention basins will manage all the water on the site.

G. Monaco: Dick, what’s the process?

D. McGoey: They do not monitor. What they do is they review their storm water management plan and they determine whether they’ve used the best management practices in their design. They have to make sure their construction is completed in accordance with that approved document. It’s not like sewerage. They don’t go out and sample and do testing.

T. Hamilton: They don’t take a sample through the aquifer?

D. McGoey: No.

G. Monaco: Can there be a note in place to have this sampled yearly or every two years just to find out if the conditions have changed?

D. McGoey: It’s unusual. I don’t think the Department of Environmental Conservation would not place that condition on them.

T. Hamilton: Back on that small contamination site. Why, Dick, can’t we as a Board representing the Town, I don’t like the idea of let’s leave it there. Let’s take it out of there.
You have a project that’s worth a lot of money coming in to do this whole site, get rid of it. Take it out of there. Why leave it sit there that we’re going to have to worry about it all these years and something may happen. Why not suggest removal? It’s not significant enough for the Department of Environmental Conservation to worry about it, but it’s there. Let’s take it out.

D. McGoey: Well, the only reason that we stayed away from it is because it is a regulatory problem that the Department of Environmental Conservation has to deal with and not the Town. I’m not sure that we should be undertaking those types. It could become a liability if the Town undertakes some kind of a regulatory role that we’re not supposed to undertake.

G. Barone: The Town Planning Board may not have the jurisdiction to do that.

G. Monaco: Maybe we exceed their . . .

G. Barone: They exceed their thresholds but what the Department of Environmental Conservation does to require the applicant to do something is their problem.

G. Lake: Wouldn’t we be liable if something happens?

G. Barone: We don’t have the jurisdiction to go in and do anything. The applicant can turn around and say you don’t have that jurisdiction. We’re not going to accept that as part of our approval.

N. Madden: I would just like to step in and say one thing is we’re here under the SEQRA statues and we’re here tonight talking about SEQRA. In the SEQRA statue and it’s in the SEQRA rights. One line is nothing in SEQRA changes the jurisdiction among agencies. I understand the concern. We’re not trying to ignore the concern but on behalf of the applicant I would have to say the Department of Environmental Conservation is the agency with jurisdiction. If they say, do this and do that, we’re kind of stuck with that because they are the people we have to deal with. We will report to you what they advise. I just wanted to make that point once again.

T. Hamilton: On the social impacts. I’m still having a problem with who pays for the water and sewer especially after hearing the Governor’s budget on how it’s going to affect the Town with the Town paying half and the State only paying half. Also with the subdivision that was before us that now it isn’t. How does the Town now obtain taxes for that parcel if it isn’t in the so-called pilot plan? How do you figure that out when it’s completely surrounding the building? I would like tog et some kind of input from the Town Board on can we afford to pay that or are we going to pay it if the budget isn’t there? If we can’t do it, who is going to pay for it? I don’t want to pay for it down here.

N. Madden: Mr. Janiszewski from Empire State Development might be able to address part of that or all of it.

J. Janiszewski: The Times Herald Record article I guess you were referring to was mis-leading. The fact of the matter is that the projects certified after January 1, 2004. That is highly unlikely here. There’s every intention to certify this company within a couple of months under the Empire Zone. It has very low probability of applying here unless some very unfortunate circumstances result in major delays in this project. Right now there is no reason to think that’s going to happen. The other thing is the subdivision is not required to delineate between that portion of the parcel that’s in the Empire Zone and that portion that’s not. That’s frankly something for the Town Assessor.

T. Hamilton: That’s what I was saying. I’m looking for something from the Town to tell me what our taxing is going to be for that parcel that’s surrounded which is a lot of wetlands.

J. Janiszewski: As a matter of fact there is a pilot agreement that’s going to apply here. It will be done through the IDA. The IDA can frankly divide that up anyway they want.

T. Hamilton: I thought that the imaginary line for the building itself was only strictly the pilot
and the rest wasn’t pilot. That’s what I’m talking about.

J. Janiszewski: You can do it either way.

N. Madden: Actually there is, there are specifics on what the pilot arrangement would be. The pilot arrangement for the project would be as follows. Considering the footprint of the building what we are now learning the Assessor we believe could handle administratively. The pilot payments would be I think it’s 1.2 x 1.1. I guess it’s 1.3 million. That’s the pilot payment which is a payment that would be made each of ten years starting with the time the facility received it’s Certificate of Occupancy. Further the pilot agreement provides that those funds, the first use of the funds that are received by the IDA and they would be directing those funds to the Town Water and Sewer District to pay the debt service on the water and sewer district that would be created to service the project. The intent is that those funds would be coming from the pilot program to pay those over the ten years and pay off those water and sewer districts. At the end of the ten year period, the property is assessed for what ever it’s assessed for under usual assessment practices. That’s paid by the applicant. The rest of the site for the pilot payment I believe indicates what ever the regular assessment would be.

T. Hamilton: In the ten or eleven years on the pilot program, that’s just for this project. That doesn’t include the other areas that are going to use the water and sewer?

N. Madden: It’s irrelevant.

D. McGoey: They will pay a benefit charge. There will be a regular water and sewer tax bill sent to them for their share of the project.

T. Hamilton: That will also pay for the maintenance and upkeep or expansion they need?

D. McGoey: Yes.

T. Hamilton: They will pay if there is a needed expansion at the sewer plant?

D. McGoey: They will contribute to that.

T. Hamilton: What do you mean contribute?

D. McGoey: They will pay just like everyone else.

J. Janiszewski: A pilot agreement can only apply to one taxpayer. The pilot agreement with Wal-Mart cannot provide any relief to surrounding properties.

N. Madden: Again I would like to say it’s in the control of the Town Board to determine the district and whether it’s going to be paid off ten or eleven years.

T. Hamilton: I was wondering with the water and sewer being put up in that area to accommodate more than just your project if for some reason the development doesn’t occur there, is what you’re paying going to be enough to cover if there’s no growth in this ten year period?

D. McGoey: The answer is yes. It’s in the document.

N. Madden: It’s a good question. The fact that others benefit it, it’s fine but that’s not our request. It is a request of the Town and obviously in a sense of good planning. We’re glad to be part of it.

G. Monaco: You said it would be treated as any other.

G. Lake: Actually we can be here all night on this. Maybe you can sit down with Mr. McGoey some time and go through the whole process. It’s quite lengthy.

A. Dulgarian: We’re just accepting the document.

G. Lake: That’s all we’re doing tonight.

A. Dulgarian: There are a lot of Site Plan issues yet.

G. Lake: Do you have anything else to add?

A. Dulgarian: I apologize for being late. I think the rest of the Board has brought up some good issues. I can’t quite understand the water or sewer yet. As far as the document, I have no problem with it.

T. Hamilton: I would just like to compliment on the format of questions and answers. I mentioned it to Mr. McGoey that after seeing that we should used it as a model because we’ve always had problems in the past. It really worked out well.

MOTION to accept the FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT as complete made by G. Luenzmann and seconded by T. Hamilton.

A. Dulgarian: Aye

R. Carr: Aye

T. Hamilton: Aye

G. Monaco: Aye

G. Luenzmann: Aye

G. Lake: Aye

MOTION CARRIED. 6 AYES

D. McGoey: I think the applicant wants to request a Special Meeting to consider the Site Plan and finalize the Statement of Findings.

N. Madden: The request would be if the Board was so inclined to have a Special Meeting two weeks from tonight on February 26th. This obviously is dependent upon first of all the proposed findings being provided to the Board and to the Engineer and Attorney by next week and also the overall Site Plan issues that the Town Engineer has already raised. Our reason for it is in connection with the timing of the options we have to acquire the property. We have some deadlines to exercise those options. We would like to be able to have the approvals in hand if it’s at all possible in time so that we oculd not have to negotiate new extensions.

A. Dulgarian: What is the deadline?

N. Madden: The deadline we believe we now have is March 27th. The reason I’m asking for February 26th approval is if there is any possibility of litigation over what I would hope would be the Board’s approval decision, if anyone wants to bring a lawsuit, they have thirty days to do so. We would like to know before we have to exercise and commit ourselves to buy the property that the approvals have been had and that the time for anybody to challenge has passed without a lawsuit being commenced. That’s our rationale.

D. McGoey: I will give you my position. You know how our meetings are and to have this on a separate night with the questions that have been generated particularly with respect to the Site Plan I think it would behoove us to have in on an off-night. I really do.

T. Hamilton: Yes, but besides being that close. We have a meeting every Wednesday as it goes along now.

R. Carr: I don’t have a problem with it. It’s a unique project and good for the Town.

G. Lake: I know we forward everything to you from everybody.

D. McGoey: They’ve been answering the Site Plan questions since they received them last week.

T. Hamilton: Department of Transportation, Department of Environmental Conservation and all that paperwork?

D. McGoey: They’re not going to get their approvals.

T. Hamilton: Then how can we give them?

D. McGoey: Because we always have conditions of approval. They’re not going to get any

permits from anybody until they get a Site Plan approval. The Department of Transportation was here today and I don’t think they have a problem.

A. Dulgarian: When would they come back?

D. McGoey: They are seeking the Statement of Findings, etc.

A. Dulgarian: We do know that the landscape plan is insufficient and you talked about anything that’s not blacktopped is going to be grass. Well, I was concerned about natural planting and, of course, the landscaping. I’m just saying that now because if we don’t have much time. I thought we would probably have a meeting in between to go over the Site Plan and one for approval. One issue for me is about the view from Route l7K. The first thing that’s going to be out there, let’s set a precedent. Let’s have it really nice. I kind of echo Mr. Carr’s comment that I really don’t have a problem with this Special Meeting but I just seem to feel it is being jammed down our throats.

T. Hamilton: If we had a Special Meeting a little further away but it’s too close from tonight.

A. Dulgarian: I don’t have a problem with it being too close. Between now and then I would like to get together with Mr. McGoey and possibly the Town Board and review all the issues that were brought up tonight so when i0t does come to the Final Site Plan meeting. I just wish we had something in between to answer some of our questions.

T. Hamilton: You’re going to have questions for that night of that meeting that they’re going to have to answer.

A. Dulgarian: We can approve it subject to.

G. Luenzmann: The bottom line is we always exercise the process. I would take the lead of the Chairman as to what they want to do because I understand the importance of this project.

G. Lake: I don’t have a problem with it providing you’re ready. Don’t get me wrong when I say this but obviously you can see the Board is really tossing around with this coming back so quick. I will poll the Board.

A. Dulgarian: I don’t have a problem with it provided it could be started at 7:30 P.M.

R. Carr: Yes.

G. Luenzmann: I don’t have a problem.

G. Monaco: No.

T. Hamilton: Too soon.

G. Lake: I don’t have a problem.

N. Madden: We realize we’re asking for a major accommodation here and we appreciate your willingness to do so.

MOTION to schedule a SPECIAL MEETING for February 26, 2003 at 7:30 P.M. made by A. Dulgarian and seconded by R. Carr.

A. Dulgarian: Aye

R. Carr: Aye

T. Hamilton: Nay

G. Luenzmann: Aye

G. Monaco: Nay

G. Lake: Aye

MOTION CARRIED. 4 AYES, 2 NAYS