The Road Use Agreement Law Public Hearing and Regular Town Board Meeting was held
September 14th, 2011
at the Lindley Town Hall, 637 US 15, PO Box 62
Lindley, New York 14858.
Official Minutes held at Town Clerk’s Office

Town Board Members Present:
Richard Biggio – Town Supervisor
Lloyd DeMun, II – Councilman
Gerry Simcoe - Councilman
Paul Mortzheim – Councilman
Paul Stermer – Councilman

Richard Johnson – Highway Superintendent

-attendance list
-Property Tax Cap information

• Meeting was called to order by Richard Biggio at @ 7:05pm.
• Pledge to the flag completed.
• Minutes of the prior meeting were accepted as amended.

Announcements by Richard Biggio:
• Reports were received by the Town Clerk, Town Justice, CEO, Historian, and the Chemung County SPCA
• Regarding the question to be put on the ballot this November about the Highway Superintendent position being appointed or elected: Because the position in question was open for election, and there was no candidate, the question needed to be submitted 150 days prior to the election. The question remains a law and will be placed on the ballot next year.

Public Hearing for the Road Use Agreement proposed Law, 7:25pm

Richard explained that the Road Use Agreement Law developed by Delta and Whiteman, Osterman, and Hanna was ready to be adopted by the Town. This law is to enable the town roads to be protected against unusual, excessive heavy road use by contractors for any future development (ie: gas drilling operations). The report is based on an analysis of all town roads at their current baseline of maintenance status and costs, and what a contractor would be required to do if they damage the current road conditions (the baseline). The Law would also determine the route contractors would be required to follow, because not all town roads are built to withstand heavy truck traffic. This protects citizens from bearing the cost of getting their own analysis done or paying for road repair because the Town has already completed that portion and will hold contractors liable for damage.

It was the Board’s responsibility to understand and foresee what might be coming to the Town. Law is well written and covers everyone. It is proactive and benefits/protects everyone.

Public Comments:

Key Points – This Law is a great idea and now the Highway Superintendent has a working document of the baseline of roads.

Road problems foreseen may include the gas industry, loggers, and so forth. This is not meant to be a punitive measure, but a guideline of what is expected.

Road conditions were considered to be pretty good for gravel and the rain we’ve experienced this year. This speaks well of the Road Crew. They are doing what they can with the resources they have.

A search of Town Laws regarding road use will be done, because in adopting this law, any other laws need to be specifically stated as being superseded by this.

Richard Biggio and Megan Thistle read the Law in it’s entirety. (the public may listen to Audio or read Law, in the Clerk’s office).

Paul Stermer raised the issue that this appeared to discriminate against local or commercial contractors delivering to someone building a garage, for instance. Discussion of various sections in the law that protect the roads but also allow for resident home improvement. With this law in place, taxpayers will not pay for undue damage, and for the most part local haulers understand what the town roads can withstand, and use common sense.

Paul Mortzheim asked who was responsible for damage to the road – the person who owns the land or the hauler? It doesn’t seem clear in the Law.

Other concerns raised:
• how often has road damage occurred and how this will be managed if it is adopted. This Law is designed as a protective matter, given the various industries that may come into town. Road signage will be placed; permits will need to be issued by the Highway Superintendent or his designee.
• Concern raised about how this seems like a big ball of wax… what the Highway Superintendent does is separate from the Town Board. However, 40 municipalities are following this type of law. The Pennsylvania road conditions from gas drilling lend support to adopting this law. It was commented by Dick Pierce that the penalties listed at the end of the Law would not be prohibitive, but just a part of doing business, so how does this protect the roads?
• Concern about how violations would be handled in Court. Most likely handled in the Lindley Town Court. Judge will receive a copy of the Law.
• Questions about current traffic on Steamtown, which remains 45 mph. Water trucks; empty dump trucks; also water trucks on Lindley and Morgan Creek Rd. Vince Spagnoletti recently addressed this issue and that seemed to help for a while. These are shortcuts and this Law will definitely help curtail that.

Paul Mortzheim asked that two points be addressed in the Law: Permits and who signs off on the business; and something being set up in the Law that would address Paul Stermer’s concerns so the local contractor isn’t discriminated against by this law. Richard indicated this was covered in the “baseline traffic” definition. However discussion of this definition indicated there was too much ambiguity in the definition. Richard would talk with Pam Gee about how to make this less ambiguous.

One idea for the logistics of a permit would be that the contractor would approach the Code Enforcement Officer for Residential Housing activities, then be directed on to the Highway Superintendent. The permit
could then be issued through the Town Clerk’s office, once approved. This way the Highway Superintendent could monitor and be sure contractors are operating within the guidelines of the permit. Discussion about this.

Paul Mortzheim also raised his concern with Page 4 Item C. Seems like a loophole and didn’t seem to say anything. Discussion. Also, Page 5 J, appears to state there is indemnity during construction/operation (for ex: A road is damaged while operation is ongoing, this causes an accident/death, and the contractor is not held liable?). Discussion. Richard Biggio indicated that page 5, H, ii seems to cover that.

Paul Stermer asked about permits for overweight loads, or rather, loads that the truck is capable of hauling. The local town roads are not capable of handling overweight loads.

Paul Stermer also asked about whether the Town would have to enforce the haulers to pay prevailing wages of workers. Discussion. The contractor would have to comply with NYS standards if a public worker. If workers are Town employees, prevailing wage is not required. Any worker within a construction company who is hired by the Town and who is not the owner of the construction company must be paid prevailing wage by the construction company.

Lloyd DeMun made the motion to table until all concerns can be addressed, and Legal can review. Richard Biggio seconded. Roll – all agreed.
Motion Carried

Regular Town Board Meeting – 8:56pm

Announcements by Richard Biggio
• Bowers and Co. – a CPA firm offers to do audits of Town Justice records.
• The Association of Towns annual dues will be $500

Old Business:

• JCAP grant clarification re-addressed – CPE will provide less expensive services for security including recording cameras. The current question is to go ahead with the 2 cameras or not. Town Board discussed and believed this would engender a false sense of security. Gerry Simcoe wondered how the work would get done if there are two people working but one is watching the monitor at all times.
• A door buzzer/controlled access would be better. Lengthy discussion about how cameras would allow Court Clerk to see who was coming in the door; greater security in the event of violence; potential to dissuade someone from engaging in violence. Board expressed concerns about the false sense of security, and about civil liberties being threatened with the presence of cameras. Even though cameras were everywhere, that doesn’t mean it’s right. Having them in the Boardroom felt like an infringement. Tracy Wilson indicated the monitoring could be limited and the camera in the Boardroom would be facing the Judge’s bench.
• Town Resident, Dale Salisbury, asked that the following be included:

o In essence, Al Salyerds, Town Resident, commented that the Town needs something because he sat near a gentleman at the last meeting who once took it upon himself to shoot his house all apart and thought aliens were after him, the troopers almost shot him. Who’s to say he

o doesn’t take offense to something you do and come wandering in and go at this place. If you make it well-known that behavior is monitored, that might stop some of the thinking but it won’t stop the lunatic. You would know later who did it.
o Gerry Simcoe stated that the same guy who came to the board meeting was messed up because of his medications, it wasn’t anything he did, and that could be true of any of us.

Richard Biggio expressed support for 2 cameras and made a motion to accept cameras as part of the JCAP grant. Gerry Simcoe seconded. Roll, Richard Biggio – yes. All others opposed.
Motion Failed

New Business:

• Ann Pfau, Chief Administrative Judge, sent a letter requesting a copy of the most recent resolution accepting the most recent audit of the Judge’s finances. This was already sent and Richard will see what she’s looking for, as the next audit will be in January 2012.

• There has been an announcement of a 2% Property Tax cap. This will affect the town in a negative way. The Town Board will know better during budget season. But the Town can supersede this decision with a motion by 60% of the Town Board.

Bob Nichols – County Legislator:

• Budget Process – the 2% tax cap exempts retirement system. It appears to be a game that the government may be playing so they look like the good guys by keeping taxes low, then local governments pass for higher taxes, making local governments appear to be the bad guys. The Senators supported the 2% tax cap, but I don’t know about Phil Palmesano.
• There are unfunded mandates for 2012 that will be a $700,000 increase over 2011. These included early childhood intervention, Medicaid, and probation officers.
• Obama’s funding to keep Medicaid costs down is gone. This will now cost Steuben County $1 million. This will mean decreases in things like construction work and sheriff road patrols. The Legislators are talking about overriding this.
• The reserve for the Health Care Facility in Bath will be gone in a couple of years and will need to be figured out. They could sell it to a private vendor, who can then pay their workers less. Currently, residents at the Facility get Medicare coverage for 10 days if they’re 65 years old and older. Then for 3 years it’s covered by their personal assets at $280 / day. Then Medicaid pays after that.
• Regarding Social Services – a great deal is mandated. For example, the time frame from the time of application for services, to the time of determination, is dictated. If that time frame isn’t met, the State fines the County and the costs are more than the cost for a worker.
• HEAP will see changes this year…. Available later in the year.
• Dog Licensing was given up by the State because it was not a money maker.

Bills were reviewed. Motion to pay bills made by Gerry Simcoe. Seconded by Lloyd DeMun. Roll – all agreed.
Motion Carried.

Motion to adjourn meeting made by Paul Mortzheim. Seconded by Lloyd DeMun. Roll – all agreed.
Meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Megan Thistle
Lindley Town Clerk
Lindley Town Planning Board September 19, 2011

At 7:00 pm the regular meeting of the Lindley Town Planning Board was called to order by Chairperson, Mary Lentzen. Board members present included Fran Woodring, Pat Simcoe, Earl Titus, Pat Clark and CEO, David Fuller. Six visitors were also present.

Minutes of the August meeting were read; a Motion to accept the Minutes as read was made by Earl, seconded by Pat C. and unanimously passed.

Thomas A. Neitz presented a drawing of a proposed Minor Subdivision for Tax Map #424.00-1-041.200. He proposes to subdivide 40 acres from an original 165 acres North of the new Route 15 (the former Paul Stermer lot).

A Motion to approve the Minor Subdivision as presented was made by Fran W., seconded by Earl and passed unanimously. A short EAF was filed and the $5.00 fee paid.

A Minor Subdivision was requested by Melvin Smith, 8770 Gibson Hill Road, Tax Map #387.00-01-030.110 to separate a 2.2 acre parcel with home from a larger 25 acre lot. The property buyer's bank will only mortgage the 2.2 acre parcel with home; therefore, a 2.2 acre subdivision from the 25 acre lot was requested. Mr. Smith will hold the mortgage on the remaining 22.8 acres. Yorio & Roche presented the application for Mr. Smith via mail.

A Motion to approve the Subdivision as presented was made by Earl, seconded by David and unanimously passed. A short EAF was filed and $5.00 fee paid.

Krystal Butler and Bernice Lauterborn asked the Board what needs to be done to place a single wide manufactured home on 85 acres. The Board indicated that a CUP and Public Hearing are required. All agreed they did not foresee any problems with placing the home on the 85 acre lot since set backs can easily be met. Perk tests are underway and Dave reminded them that the well must be placed at least 100 feet from the leach field. A Public Hearing will be scheduled for October 17, 2011.

Oct. 18 a training session will be held in Big Flats concerning Rural Planning, Revising Zoning, and CUPs. Mary, Pat S., Fran W., Dave Fuller and possibly Pat C. will attend.

Thursday, Sept. 22 at 6:30 pm the League of Women Voters will host the DEC environmental review of the Marcellus Shale at the Steel Memorial Library in Elmira.

The Planning Board received a letter dated August 25, 2011 from Dominion regarding Dominion Transmission, Inc. - Tioga Area Expansion Project Land Use Information Request. As Lindley's involvement was equipment modifications within existing Lindley Gate, no action was required by the Board.

Concerning the Hawbaker Mining property on County Rt. 120 (River Road), copies of the Hawbaker Mining Permit and the records from the previous Mining/CUP issued to Robbins and Tyjor were made available for Board review. The Board agreed since the CUP had not been used for more than a year, Hawbaker must file a new CUP. A stop order was issued in 2005.

Dave reported on his inspection of the Bending Rivers Trailer Park. The NYS Dept. of Health has issued the Trailer Park owners a warning they will be shut down if the State's requirements are not followed. Dave noted there has been an issue with campers placed in the trailer park section and trailers placed in the campground section which is not allowed. They are currently updating the park electric, water, and sewer; no building permit is required for these upgrades.

Campgrounds are licensed by the State. Dave stated the Lindley Zoning Law has minimal regulations regarding campgrounds, no limit on size or number of campers, just the restriction that camper living has a six-month limit. It was determined that the Town needs to regulate camping better and Board members need to determine what areas should be covered.

Kitty Pierce reminded Board of the Historical Society meeting scheduled for Thursday, Sept. 22.

Dave gave a permit to replace the burned out trailer on the Herrick property to Jeff and Jessica Neally. In researching the original CUP, Dave discovered the original CUP was issued May 17, 1999 as a temporary second residence to be renewed in two years. It has never been renewed. Dave will consult the Town Attorney for advice on how to proceed.

At 8:25 pm a Motion to adjourn by Earl, seconded by Fran was unanimously passed.

Respectfully submitted,

Janice Oberlander
Recording Clerk
The Lindley -Presho Historical Society will resume monthly meetings on Thursday -September 22nd 7 P.M. at the Lindley Town Hall.

Several new Family Histories and books that have been added to the Historian's files will be available for browsing.

I am bringing Dick Riffle memoirs that I purchased from him. He is working on a program so those interested can read it on line at home and print it out if they wish. (Hope to know more by the meeting .)

Other notebooks from the files will , also , be available for viewing.

We always have a good time when we just visit and share stories-so thought this meeting would be a good time to that again .

Hope you had a great summer .
The Public Hearing regarding the Highway Superintendent Position being elected vs. appointed was held August 31st, 2011 at the Lindley Town Hall, 637 US 15, PO Box 62
Lindley, New York 14858.
Official Minutes held at Town Clerk’s Office

Town Board Members Present:
Richard Biggio – Town Supervisor
Lloyd DeMun, II – Councilman
Paul Mortzheim – Councilman
Gerry Simcoe - Councilman

Richard Johnson – Highway Superintendent
Paul Stermer – Councilman

- attendance list
- Dick Pierce’s Commentary
- Al Schoonover’s Commentary
- Legal Opinion
- Sally Orr’s Commentary
- Star Gazette Article

• Meeting was called to order by Richard Biggio at @ 7:02pm.

• Pledge to the flag completed.

Announcements by Richard Biggio:

• Richard introduced the meeting, indicating this was not a debate but an opportunity for residents to express their input on whether they felt the Highway Superintendent Position should remain an elected position or become an appointed one.

• Richard stated that over the past year, petitions had been received both in favor of, and in opposition to, the position becoming appointed. The Board determined that action was warranted and the public hearing was to address both points of view and decide if it would go to ballot.

o Richard read an article posted in the Star Gazette written by the President of the NYS Supervisor of Highways, reflecting opposition to making the position appointed.

o Richard read the letter sent by Sally Orr, reflecting her concerns that sending the referendum to a vote would potentially remove the voters rights to vote on this position in the future.

o Richard read a legal brief on a Highway Superintendent position becoming an appointed position, and that this would be beneficial to a town.

• Richard commented that the town is losing a very good man for the job, who has put in untold hours over the past 34 years.

Public Comments:

Jack Smith: What was the Commission mentioned in the readings?

Jim Lundgren: This was Cuomo’s commission during his budget process. I would like the question of elected vs. appointed on the ballot in November. I am strongly in favor of an elected position. Our walls show pictures of people who served Lindley and they didn’t die so Lindley could give up their right to vote. This movement has been going on a long time. Our freedoms are being undermined as if we aren’t fit to vote. I’m fed up with my government telling me I shouldn’t vote. Ben Franklin was asked “what have you wrought”. He replied “a Republic, if you can keep it.”

Richard asked for an informal vote from the audience of who agreed with Jim’s sentiments. Large majority raised hands.

Dick Pierce: I have 39 residents on a petition to keep the Highway Position elected. We want to keep it elected. Dick Pierce read his comments: in summary: 1. Aware of Governor Cuomo’s Commission to reorganize NYS. The big push was to consolidate. 2. Abe Lincoln once said you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all of the time. Replace the word “fool” with the word “please” and you can appreciate Dick Johnson’s job. 3. I raised my right hand and swore to protect our constitutional rights. Please don’t give up your right to vote for our Superintendent of Highways.

Richard Biggio: We are here for the same reasons. We want better roads.

Al Salyerds: If it’s not on the ballot, will it stay elected? I’m against it going on the ballot.

Richard Biggio: Richard asked for a show of hands of who agreed that it should remain an elected position. Large majority raised their hands.

Discussion continued, with the following key points (audio is available for listening during Clerk hours):

• Qualifications of position – anyone can be elected in and then must pass the Civil Service Exam.

• A defensible plan developed by an engineer is needed.

• The 3-man crew for the past year has done an excellent job but is not best case for safety and snow removal.

• Pay and benefits currently stand at approximately $54,000. This is going to be reviewed during the budget season after September. Nothing has been discussed at this point. This job is salaried and so there is no overtime pay. Lindley Highway salary is comparable to most other towns. Current Benefits package is for 2 person home. Future benefits will be discussed during budget season.

• Al Schoonover: Three issues – Highway is the greatest expense and asset of the town. We’ve had the same Superintendent for 34 years in all kinds of weather, hours and health. He had 2 mentors, and he is responsible for: maintenance of 50+ miles of road; crew and staff; truck and equipment; repairs; paperwork; no extra pay; OSHA regulations; instruction of safe use of equipment; finances of $551,881/year which is 68% of the town budget.

• Discussion regarding if it’s appointed, there are 5 people vs. one person to manage all the above.

• Discussion of the absence of a current application. Richard Biggio is not running but would consult with the Board if asked. Cornell Local Roads also has a program that would greatly benefit the next Highway Superintendent. The Delta Engineers Road Use Agreement has looked at all roads and would be a good start. It wouldn’t take much to start improving the roads.

• At the current time there is no road plan. The Board went forward with the Delta Road study to prepare for future plans.

• Money is still allotted for Dust Control every year. The money used for the Delta project was not money taken from Dust Control. There is a surplus of money for Dust Control in the budget every year.

• If no one runs for the position this fall, someone will be appointed in January for 2 years. The individual previously interested should run. If he gets elected he can then see what discussions have occurred regarding benefits and salary. He can still keep his old job and decline the election if it doesn’t meet his needs. No meetings have occurred in public or private about the budget at this time.

• The salary and benefits would remain the same once determined at budget time, regardless if the position was appointed or elected.

• An appointed position would have duties that by law the Board cannot interfere with. An elected official has even more leeway. If appointed, there is a lot the Board can stipulate, but serves at the pleasure of the Board.

• If the appointed position gets elected through, it will remain an appointed position until the public goes through this process again and elects to make it an elected position.

Board discussed among themselves in the presence of the public. Paul Mortzheim made the motion that the Board pass a Town Law: the option to choose to make the Highway Superintendent Position an elected or an appointed position be placed on the November 2011 ballot. Roll: Gerry Simcoe – yes; Paul Mortzheim – yes; Richard Biggio – No; Lloyd DeMun – yes.

Motion Carried

Richard Biggio called for an Emergency Meeting at 9:00 pm to write the local law voted on in the Public Hearing.

Resolution to Place the Highway Superintendent Elected vs. Appointed Question On the November 2011 Ballot

Whereas: the Town Board recognizes the local petitions supporting that the position of Highway Superintendent be placed on the ballot as a permissive referendum and,

Whereas: the office of the Highway Superintendent will be an appointed position for the term of two years, effective the general election of November, 2013.

Now Therefore be it resolved: the Town of Lindley in Steuben County, New York, puts forth on the 31st of August, 2011, Local Law #2 of 2011 entitled The Town of Lindley Highway Superintendent Referendum, to become effective during the next General Election in November, 2013.

Gerry Simcoe made the motion to adopt the Resolution. Richard Biggio seconded. Roll – all present agreed.

Resolution Passed.

NOTE: The following day, clarification from the Board of Elections was sought, regarding how the question needed to be stated on the ballot. During this conversation, it was discovered that because this position was up for election this year, the Town Board needed to file the question 150 days prior to the election. This question will not appear on the General Election Ballot of November 2011.

Respectfully submitted,

Megan Thistle
Lindley Town Clerk
9/11 Anniversary Memorial & Remembrance Service

The Presho United Methodist Church Invites you to attend a very Special 9/11 Anniversary Memorial & Remembrance Service at 9:00am, Sunday, September 11, 2011.

We will come together to remember the 9/11 victims, survivors, and the many that rose in Service in Response to the 9/11 tragedy, including First Responders. We will honor the members of the Town of Lindley's Fire Department for their Service as our own First Responders. Catherine Pierce, Town Historian assisted by Sally Orr will share the history of our Fire Department with photos and stories of their dedicated service.

A special Brunch will be served immediately following the service. All Brunch donations will be presented to our Fire Department. Hope to see you! Contact Sandy Hall (523-7236) or Brenda Criss (523-8083) for further information.