[Work Session meeting on December 22, 2025.]
[00:00:07]
CALL. YEAH. COUNCILMEMBER. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. KOZUB. PRESENT. COUNCIL SUPERVISOR.
BRZEZINSKI. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER ELIZABETH FARRELL. PRESENT. AND THEN CALL THE OTHER TWO AND YOU HAVE TO REPORT THEIR ATTENDANCE. MEGAN COMERFORD, COUNCILWOMAN NOT ATTENDING. AND COUNCIL MEMBER FRANK MAGALSKI NOT ATTENDING. NOPE. OH. THERE'S MEG. OH, NO.
YES. NO, SHE'S GENTLEMAN, AND I WAS HOPING. DECIDED THAT WAS TOOK PRECEDENCE OVER. WELL, DEFINITELY. OKAY. ALL OF YOU. SO YOU'RE GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO. SO COUNCILWOMAN COMERFORD IS PRESENT. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR.
LITIGATION PERSONNEL AND CONTRACT. SECOND. OKAY. ALL IN I LOVE YOU. READY? OKAY, SO JUST A FOLLOW UP FROM THE PREVIOUS TOWN BOARD MEETING, AND EVERYONE ON THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED MY EMAIL ABOUT THE ROOFTOP UNITS AT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG ICE RINK. JUST TO QUICKLY SUMMARIZE, THE ICE RINK HAS TWO OVER 20 YEAR OLD ROOFTOP UNITS. THEY ARE OVER WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS THE WARMING AREA, WHICH IS THE LOBBY AND OFFICES, AND THEN OVER THE OLDER LOCKER ROOM WING, THE UNIT OVER THE WARMING AREA DOES NOT FUNCTION. IT HAS BROKEN. IT IS NOT REPAIRABLE. WE CAN NO LONGER GET PARTS, SO IT IS JUST NOT RUNNING. THE UNIT OVER THE OLD LOCKER ROOMS IS RUNNING POORLY AND OCCASIONALLY AND REGULARLY LEAKING. THE PNG FOLKS THERE HAVE DONE WHAT THEY CAN, BUT THAT UNIT IS ALSO ON ITS LAST LIFE. SO JUST QUICKLY TO SUMMARIZE ROOFTOP UNITS, THEY PROVIDE THE VENTILATION, CIRCULATION AND FILTRATION. SO THEY ARE YOUR SOURCE OF FRESH OUTSIDE AIR. SO THE BOILER WILL HEAT THE BUILDINGS. THE ROOFTOP UNITS CIRCULATE THE AIR. THEY DO HEAT ANY AIR THEY BRING IN FROM THE OUTSIDE ENOUGH JUST TO NOT CAUSE YOUR HEATING SYSTEM TO HAVE TO WORK TO ADDRESS COLD AIR. THEY DO FILTER THE AIR SO THAT YOU GET A BETTER AIR QUALITY IN YOUR BUILDING. BUT MOSTLY IT IS ABOUT THEM CIRCULATING THE AIR AROUND IT, CREATING THAT MOVEMENT OF AIR THROUGH YOUR BUILDING, AS WELL AS BRINGING IN THAT FRESH AIR FROM OUTSIDE YOUR BUILDING.
THIS ALSO HELPS TO BE SURE THAT THE FRESH AIR IS NOT COMING IN THROUGH LEAKS AND CRACKS AND ANY OLD, ANY PATHWAY THAT THEY CAN FIND IN THE BUILDING. IT PUTS THE BUILDING UNDER A POSITIVE PRESSURE SO THAT FRESH AIR IS BEING BROUGHT IN. SHOULD THAT UNIT FAIL, THERE WILL BE PROBLEMS IN THE BUILDING ALREADY. THERE ARE A LOT OF HUMIDITY ISSUES. I HAVE NOT ASKED ANYONE TO CHECK THE AIR QUALITY, BUT OF COURSE WE'RE NOT GETTING AS MUCH FRESH AIR INTO THE BUILDING. I THINK THIS IS A CONCERN AND IT CONCERNS ME THAT WE COULD SEE IN THE NEAR FUTURE THAT SECOND UNIT BREAK DOWN ENTIRELY AND BE UNSERVICEABLE. SO I'D LIKE THE TOWN TO CONSIDER, AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO 2026, DOING A CAPITAL PROJECT THAT WOULD REPLACE THOSE ROOFTOP UNITS AND GET US ANOTHER 20 OR MORE YEARS OF SERVICE ON THAT BUILDING AND THE HVAC SYSTEM. WE DO HAVE ESTIMATES FOR THE WORK, BUT THEY ARE TWO YEARS OLD. SO MY FIRST STEP IN 26 WILL BE TO GET UPDATED COSTS FOR WHAT THAT WOULD TAKE, AND THEN COME TO THIS BOARD TO DISCUSS POSSIBLY A CAPITAL PROJECT. I WAS GOING TO SAY I THOUGHT WE DISCUSSED THIS ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. WE DID TALKING ABOUT IT, AND EVERYONE LAUGHED AT ME BECAUSE I SAID THAT THAT BUILDING WAS BASICALLY DILAPIDATED AND I HAD SOME RESERVATIONS ABOUT SPENDING ALL THE MONEY ON THE ON THE COMPRESSORS AND THE BOARDS. AND BECAUSE I REMEMBER IT WAS WHEN I WAS A KID AND OUTSIDE RING AND THEN THEY PUT IN BASICALLY CINDER BLOCKS AND THEN THEY WONDER WHY THE HVAC DOESN'T WORK. WELL. WELL, IT WAS POORLY DESIGNED. SO I SUGGESTED WE BUILD A NEW RING AND THEY SAID, WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO NAME IT THE TAJ BUGALSKI. I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER THAT. AND I SAID, I SAID IF THEY LET ME, I WOULD LET THEM DO IT. BUT ANYWAY, IF THEY LET ME NAME IT THAT I WOULD, I WOULD. BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS WHAT WHAT IS THE ACTUAL ICE RINK? THOSE SYSTEMS WERE UPGRADED. SO IF YOU ARE IN THE ACTUAL ICE RINK AREA, THE DEHUMIDIFICATION, THE SYSTEMS, THE ICE SYSTEM, THE HVAC IN THE RINK ITSELF, WHICH AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, IS DIFFERENT THAN THE BUILDING BECAUSE OF HOW IT HAS
[00:05:04]
TO CONTROL BOTH ICE TEMPERATURE AND EVERYTHING. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OLD BARRACKS THAT ARE ATTACHED? YES. BASICALLY WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER THAT FRONT LOBBY AND THEN THE WING, THAT IS THE OLD LOCKER ROOMS AND OLDER SHOWER ROOMS. THOSE ARE THE AREAS NOW THAT HAVE THE OLD SYSTEMS. AND I'M JUST IDENTIFYING LITTLE WINDOWS IN THE LOCKER ROOMS. IT'S NOT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT'S NOT INTENDED TO BE AN OFFICE BUILDING. SO IT'S DESIGNED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. IT'S REALLY DEPENDENT ON THOSE ROOFTOP UNITS CREATING AIR CIRCULATION.AND AS WE ALL KNOW, LOCKER ROOMS DON'T SMELL THE BEST AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES WITH THAT.
SO FRESH AIR IS OFTEN A MUCH NEEDED IN THOSE BUILDS IMMUNITY FOR THE CHILDREN. AND ALSO THINK ABOUT LIKE THE THE CONDENSATION AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU GET WITH ALL THE CHANGING TEMPERATURES. THAT'S ALL DEPENDENT ON THAT SYSTEM. AND RIGHT NOW THAT SYSTEM IS STRUGGLING. DO WE HAVE AN ESTIMATED LEAD TIME FOR HVAC SYSTEM? SO ROOFTOP UNITS HAVE QUITE THE LEAD TIME. AND THAT'S THE OTHER CHALLENGE. AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO START TALKING ABOUT THIS SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT SEASON AND SCHEDULE WHEN IT COMES TO ANYTHING IN THE ICE RINK. SO MY BELIEF IS WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT SIX MONTHS. BUT AGAIN, THAT WAS TWO YEARS AGO. I WANT TO CONFIRM THAT THOSE ARE THE CURRENT LEAD TIMES BECAUSE THOSE ARE LARGE ROOFTOP, SINGLE CONTAINED UNITS. THEY ARE NOT QUICK TO COME. THEY THEY YOU HAVE TO PLACE THAT ORDER AND YOU SPEND WEEKS AND MONTHS WAITING FOR THEM TO COME IN. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO BE READY TO INSTALL THEM BECAUSE YOU NEED A CRANE AND YOU NEED TO GET IT ON. AND ONCE THEY'RE ON SITE, HOW LONG IS INSTALLATION PROCESS TAKE? I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE. I BELIEVE THE CONSTRUCTION WAS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT TWO MONTHS, BUT THAT DOES INCLUDE UPGRADING THE ROOF SYSTEM BASED ON THE WEIGHT OF THE UNIT. THE NEWER UNITS ARE TEND TO BE SMALLER, BUT HEAVIER, STRANGELY ENOUGH. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE AN OLD UNIT A LITTLE BIT DENSER, PROBABLY WE HAVE TO GO INTO THE CEILING AND THE ROOF SYSTEM AND BE SURE THAT WE PUT THE RIGHT SUPPORTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SO THAT CAN BE DONE IN ADVANCE OF THE UNITS ARRIVAL. THIS SOUNDS LIKE IT'S 8 TO 10 MONTHS, PROBABLY FROM THE TIME WE PLACED THE ORDER UNTIL THE PROJECT IS FINISHED, THAT IT WOULD BE HOPEFUL AND TEN MIGHT GIVE YOU ENOUGH OF A BUFFER. THAT WAS MY. AND YOU WOULD ALSO STRUCTURALLY SOUND ENOUGH TO TO HOLD THE WEIGHT, AND YOU WOULD INCLUDE THAT IN YOUR ESTIMATE. YES. ANY OF THOSE NEEDS LOOKING AT FROM THE ENGINEER PROVIDING THE ROOF DESIGN, THE PROPER UNITS, GETTING A BID, GETTING A CONTRACTOR, THAT IS THE NUMBER THAT THE ORIGINAL NUMBER FROM TWO YEARS AGO WAS SEVEN, 752,000, AND THAT INCLUDED THE UNIT AND ALL THE STRUCTURAL STUFF. OKAY. BUT THOSE WERE EARLY BUDGET ESTIMATES, JUST BASED ON WHAT WE KNEW AT THE BUILDING AT THE TIME. I WANT TO GET A BETTER IDEA OF COST NOW, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THESE PAST TWO YEARS, WE ALL KNOW THAT PRICES AND MATERIALS HAVE GONE UP AND LABOR HAS GONE UP. I'M THINKING TO AT THE 8 TO 10 MONTH WINDOW, THE INSTALLATION TIME IS GOING TO COINCIDE WITH WHEN THAT SITE IS ALREADY BEING HEAVILY USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. SO IT ACTUALLY MIGHT BE MORE IDEAL BECAUSE THAT AREA IS JUST PRETTY MUCH GOING TO BE SHUT DOWN FOR SAFETY REASONS. RIGHT? BUT THEN THAT BACKS IT UP. AND AS FAR AS FOR ORDERING THAT, THAT'S WHY YOU'RE BRINGING THIS TO US NOW. AND THAT'S WHY IN JANUARY, RIGHT? IF WE ARE AIMING FOR, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF HOCKEY SEASON, YOU ARE PROBABLY LOOKING AT THE SUMMER OF 27 TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS WORK, BECAUSE THAT LOBBY AREA AND THOSE LOCKER ROOMS, LARGE PORTIONS OF IT WILL BE SHUT DOWN FOR TWO MONTH PERIOD OR SO. SO IT MAY BE TOO LATE TO GET IT DONE BY APRIL. CORRECT? EVEN IF WE ORDERED THE EQUIPMENT TODAY, I DON'T THINK IT MAY BE SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE DOING THAT. THAT'S WHEN THEY MELT THE ICE. AND YES, IT MAY BE SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE DOING THE STRUCTURAL WORK. BUT IF I DO FIND OUT THAT THOSE ARE NOW 8 TO 10 MONTH DELAYS, I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE CAN'T WE CAN STILL PURSUE THIS FOR. YEAH, BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS A REASON WITH THE STRUCTURAL THAT WE MOVED AWAY FROM GETTING A NEW AIR CONDITIONING UNITS AND STUFF. WELL, WE. SO THE NEW THE PROJECT THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW, THE PHASE FOUR, THOSE ARE ALL SEPARATE UNITS BECAUSE WE WERE REALLY WORRIED ABOUT TYING INTO THE OLD SYSTEM. SO THOSE ARE WHAT YOU CALL SPLIT UNITS. SO THOSE ARE SPECIFIC TO THOSE ROOMS ONLY. SO WHEREAS BEFORE ALL THE CONCESSION AND MAIN AREA WAS ALL UNDER THAT ONE ROOFTOP UNIT, THAT'S THE WARMING AREA. THOSE ARE NOW ON THEIR OWN SYSTEMS. SO THOSE ARE FUNCTIONING WELL. BUT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE OLDER PARTS. THE OTHER OPTION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO DO THE ENTIRE THING AND THEN CONNECT EVERYTHING TO THE OLD SYSTEM WITH NEW UNITS. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S HAD A PRICE TAG TO IT THAT AT THE TIME WE WERE LOOKING AT THE NEW LOCKER ROOM TO OTHER THINGS. YEAH. OKAY.
OKAY. SO THE NEXT STEP IS YOU'LL GET US UPDATED ESTIMATES. AND ONCE I HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT THE CURRENT COSTS ARE LOOKING AT AND THE CURRENT TIMELINE, I'LL COME BACK TO THE BOARD WITH MORE INFORMATION AND WE CAN GO FROM THERE. OKAY. THANKS, TAMMY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MR. GOGAN. YES, HE'S TUCKED AWAY IN THE CORNER THERE. THERE. JOE'S NEXT RIGHT. HUM,
[00:10:17]
HUM. I. THIS IS THE ABANDONED. ABANDONED? DO YOU HAVE IT? YEAH. YES. IT'S INTERESTING. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT TWO. WE'VE GOT TWO OF THEM. OKAY. SO THIS IS IN REGARDS TO THE HPC RECOMMENDATION FOR DESIGNATION OF 3800 HOOVER ROAD. AND THE CONCERNS I HAVE AS THE ATTORNEY AND FRANK WILL UNDERSTAND, THIS ATTITUDE IS I DON'T HAVE A A POSITION ABOUT HOW THE BOARD WOULD VOTE ON SUCH A RESOLUTION. MY CONCERN IS FOR MY CLIENT AND PROTECTING THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCEDURE IS DONE CORRECTLY. AND I THINK THAT THE BOARD NEEDS TO BE INFORMED ABOUT SOME THINGS IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT PROPER DECISION PROCESS. THE CURRENT STATUTE, AND I MENTIONED IT BEFORE THAT SECTION 30 1-5 TALKS ABOUT THE. MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. AND THIS WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TRIED UPDATING BACK IN SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER 8TH. WE HAD A ITEM ON THE AGENDA TO PASS A RESOLUTION TO HAVE A HEARING ON THE PROPOSED AMENDED SECTION 31, CHAPTER 31 OF THE TOWN CODE.UNFORTUNATELY, THE WAY THE CODE CURRENTLY IS DRAFTED, IT SAYS THE PRESERVATION COMMISSION SHALL BE THE SAME AS THE PREEXISTING PROVISIONS, BUT THOSE WERE NEVER ENUMERATED IN THE NEW CODE. SO IT'S ABSENT. AND SO THE STRUCTURE OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ITSELF MAY BE CALLED INTO QUESTION. THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT THAT WE HAD AS AN ATTORNEY. THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT WAS ALSO ASKED ABOUT WHETHER THE TOWN BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ACT, REGARDLESS OF THE HPC AND THE LAW ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMES FROM GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW IN NEW YORK STATE THAT SAYS THE AUTHORITY LAYS WITHIN THE TOWN BOARD TO DO SO. HOWEVER, IT'S STILL NOT WHETHER IT CAN DO IT, BUT WHETHER IT IT HAS ALL THE INFORMATION NECESSARY TO MAKE THAT DECISION. THERE ARE PARTS OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CHAPTER IN HAMBURG THAT TALKS ABOUT. THE POWERS OF THE COMMISSION SHALL INCLUDE THE ADOPTION OF CRITERIA FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC, ET CETERA TO CONDUCT SURVEYS OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS, ETC. AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT, AGAIN, WERE NOT PRESENTED IN THE HEARING, MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THE BOARD TO MAKE THAT DECISION, BUT IT'S STILL SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER. THAT SHOULD POSSIBLY BE PART OF THE RECORD. IN ORDER FOR THE BOARD TO MAKE A VOTE ON THOSE ON THAT RESOLUTION, THERE'S ANOTHER SECTION OF THE CURRENT CHAPTER, AND IT'S INTERESTING IN THAT IT REFERS TO APPEALS. THAT'S 31, SECTION 3115. IT SAYS ANY PERSON AGGRIEVED BY A DECISION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RELATING TO DESIGNATION, HARDSHIP, DEMOLITION, ETC. THEY CAN FILE AN APPEAL WITH THE TOWN BOARD. WHICH CREATES AN ISSUE OF, AGAIN, THE RECORD AND THE CRITERIA. AND ONE OF THE PHRASES IN THERE IS THE DECISION MUST BE BASED ONLY UPON THE RECORD AND CRITERIA UTILIZED BY THE COMMISSION TO RENDER ITS DECISION. EVEN THE DECISION OF RECOMMENDATION, THAT IS, A DECISION OF THAT OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. I BELIEVE THAT'S ENOUGH FOR NOW. IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE RESOLUTION FROM SEPTEMBER 8TH? I'D FORGOTTEN THAT THAT WAS PULLED. SO IT WAS IT WAS TABLED AND NEVER READDRESSED. OKAY. SO IT NEEDED IT NEEDED TO BE PUT BACK ON AN AGENDA AND COME BACK. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE STILL ADVISING THAT WE DO? MY CONVERSATION WITH THE TOWN ATTORNEY AND WITH BRIAN ATTIA, THE ATTORNEY FOR THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE, IS THAT THEY DID REQUEST THAT THAT PART OF THE CODE BE AMENDED AS WRITTEN IN THE IN THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD DO NOW, OR DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON IT? IT WOULD REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.
[00:15:02]
OKAY, SO I UNDERSTAND, I GUESS. YOU WERE SAYING LIKE WE HAVE THIS COMMISSION, RIGHT? CORRECT.BUT THE DECISION IS ULTIMATELY UP TO THE BOARD. IT IS SO I WHEN I'M, I'M, I SPENT TWO HOURS THIS MORNING IN FEDERAL COURT TALKING ABOUT RULE SIX OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO GET TO THE TO THE MEAT OF IT. AND THIS IS WHAT I, WHAT I HAD SAID TO, TO THE JUDGE WHEN I WAS MAKING THE ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT. SO WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH IS THIS IS BEFORE US AS A RESOLUTION, MEANING DESIGNATING BAYVIEW AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
CORRECT. WHERE DOES THE WHERE DOES THE COMMISSION COME INTO PLAY? IF IT'S UP TO US, AS SOON AS THE COMMISSION MAKES THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DESIGNATION, THERE IS A STAY ON ALL ACTIVITY.
SO THE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OR THE DEVELOPER CAN DO NOTHING. IT CREATES AN ABSOLUTE STAY UNTIL THERE'S A DECISION BY THE BOARD. SO THAT IS THE POWER OF OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG. AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION HAS FURTHER AUTHORITY AS DRAFTED CURRENTLY, THAT THE TOWN BOARD HAS DELEGATED TO THE HPC THE ABILITY TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS. SO WHENEVER A DEVELOPER WANTS TO, EVEN IF IT'S DECIDED BY THE TOWN THAT IT'S A HISTORIC LANDMARK, A DEVELOPER HAS TO GET PERMISSION FROM THE HPC, NOT FROM THE TOWN BOARD. OKAY, BUT YOU WERE SAYING EARLIER THAT THE ACTUALLY THE COMMISSION MIGHT NOT EVEN EXIST BECAUSE IT WASN'T FORMED PROPERLY OR SOMETHING. IT EXISTS, BUT THERE'S THE QUESTION OF ITS AUTHORITY BECAUSE THAT ONE SECTION OF OF LAW, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE IF IF WE SAY WE PASSED THIS, GIVING THE DESIGNATION WITH THE NUANCE OF SAYING THAT ANY MINOR REPAIRS ARE IS WILL WILL NOT NEED THE COMMITTEE'S SAY SO, YOU KNOW, FOR MAKING MINOR REPAIRS OR THINGS AS LONG AS THEY DON'T CUT INTO ARE THERE ARE PROCEDURES FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS. THEY STILL HAVE TO. THEY CAN'T DO IT AUTOMATICALLY. IT HAS TO BE BROUGHT. WHAT I'M SAYING, IF WE PASS THIS, CAN WE WRITE THAT INTO THE THE DESIGNATION? AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THE RESOLUTION COULD SUPERSEDE THE SECTIONS IN THE IN THE CODE ABOUT UNLESS SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED ABOUT EMERGENCY REPAIRS STILL HAVING TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO TO DO ANY WORK ON THE PROBLEM. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, LET'S ASSUME YOU SAID YOU HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONDITION AND HOW IT WAS ESTABLISHED, RIGHT? BUT NOT ESTABLISHED? NO, ITS AUTHORITY BECAUSE THE IT'S A WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT? I GUESS IT'S A POSSIBLE TARGET FOR ANY LAWSUITS AGAINST THE TOWN. WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHAT REASON? THAT THE THE COMMISSION DIDN'T HAVE PROPER AUTHORITY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO. STATUTORY AUTHORITY, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T CREATE THEIR BOARD ACCORDING TO RULES, BECAUSE THERE ARE NO RULES ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OF THE OF THE COMMISSION. OKAY. SO WHAT WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING FROM YOU IS YOUR SUGGESTION TO US IS WE SHOULD TAKE IT OFF THE TABLE, PUT IT BACK UP FOR PUBLIC HEARING. OR ARE YOU THE LAW THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT UP FOR PUBLIC HEARING, THE RULES REGARDING MEMBERSHIP? IN THE MEANTIME, WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT, WE HAVE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE SUBMIT ANY DOCUMENTATION, BECAUSE WHATEVER DOCUMENTATION WE HAVE ON THE RECORD IS WHAT THEY CAN USE FOR APPEAL, BUT IT'S ALSO WHAT WE CAN USE TO DEFEND OURSELVES ON AN APPEAL. SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WHATEVER INFORMATION WE HAVE TO MAKE IT LOCKED TIGHT NEEDS TO BE THERE, BECAUSE IF THERE'S ANY AMBIGUITIES OR THERE'S ANY INFORMATION OR DATA OR EXPERTS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED THAT INFORMATION IN, WE CAN'T PULL IT IN. ONCE THE APPEAL IS FILED. YOU'RE KIND OF LIKE YOUR HANDS ARE TIED. THEN YOU HAVE TO PLAY WITH THE CARDS YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU. CORRECT. MY POSITION IS THE ATTORNEYS. I WANT A STRONG A CASE AS POSSIBLE. SO WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING IS IF WE PULLED IT OFF THE TABLE, COULD WE PULL IT OFF THE TABLE TONIGHT TO SCHEDULE IT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING? SO IT GOES UP FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY. AND I KNOW THAT'S A REALLY RIDICULOUSLY LONG MEETING, AND I APOLOGIZE TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR SUGGESTING IT, BUT TO MOVE IT FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE COULD PUT THIS ACTUAL PROJECT THEN UP FOR A VOTE EXPEDIENTLY BECAUSE WE ARE FIXING THE MEMBERSHIP ISSUE, GETTING THAT TAKEN CARE OF. THEN JUST WAIT, PLEASE. I WANT TO HEAR WHAT HE HAS TO SAY. SO IN OTHER WORDS, LIKE I'M TRYING TO THINK THROUGH HOW WE'RE GOING TO DOT OUR I'S AND CROSS OUR T'S, SO THIS IS PROTECTED. IF THE BOARD WANTS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, THE BOARD CAN STILL, YOU KNOW, TABLE THIS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO MAKE THEIR DECISION, KNOWING THAT THE DEVELOPER STILL CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DID MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION, WHICH PAUSES ANY ACTIVITY. THE DEVELOPER CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THE PROPERTY. AND CURRENTLY AND AGAIN, I'M ALSO THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PLANNING
[00:20:01]
BOARD. AND I KNOW WE'VE SPOKEN TO JOSH ROGERS, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT MADE ANY APPLICATION TO THE TO THE TOWN FOR ANY SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY. SO THAT'S NOT EVEN IN QUESTION.THERE'S NOTHING PENDING RIGHT NOW BEFORE THE TOWN. SO THIS GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO PAUSE AND KIND OF CLEAN UP OUR HAND, LIKE MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR CARDS ARE WHERE THEY NEED TO BE. SO IF I'M HEARING YOU CORRECTLY, BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, IT'S IT'S BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT. CORRECT. WHICH GIVES US THE TIME TO FIX THE LAW, THEN BRING THIS BACK FOR THE DESIGNATION SO WE CAN GET THE DESIGNATION DONE AFTER WE FIX THE LAW AND EVERYTHING IS ON PAUSE ANYWAYS, UNTIL WE GET ALL THAT DONE CORRECT. AND I KNOW THERE WAS WORK DONE ON THE THE WINDSHIELD SURVEY BY PRESERVATION STUDIOS AND MR. YACHTS WAS HERE, SO I KNOW THEY'RE ACTIVELY INVOLVED. I DON'T KNOW THE STATUS OF THAT WINDSHIELD SURVEY. I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR THEY'VE GOTTEN WITH. I IMAGINE SOME OF THAT INFORMATION MAY BE HELPFUL TO US AS WE FORM OUR I WOULD AGREE, REASONING. DOES THAT HELP TO BUILD THE I. I'M SORRY, I KNOW HE WAS HERE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE RECORD. DOES THAT BUILD THE DOES THAT BUILD THE RECORD FOR US SO THAT WHEN WE MAKE THE DESIGNATION IT'S. YES. BECAUSE SPECIFICALLY IN IN THE TOWN CODE EVEN SAYS TO CONDUCT SURVEYS OF SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC, ARCHITECTURAL AND CULTURAL LANDMARKS. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THE THINGS THAT THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS EMPOWERED TO DO TO BUILD A RECORD. BUT WHAT I HAVEN'T HEARD, THOUGH I'VE HEARD FROM MY COLLEAGUES WHAT THEY SAID YOUR CONCERNS ARE, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM YOU.
LIKE, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU THINK IS WRONG WITH, IF ANYTHING, LIKE WITH THE COMMISSION? I MEAN, WHAT WHAT WHERE DO WE GO WRONG AS A BOARD? I WANT TO KNOW. THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT IN 2022 AND IN THE 2022 AMENDMENT, THERE WAS LANGUAGE THAT WAS ADDED. AND THE LANGUAGE SPECIFICALLY SAYS THE MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA. THIS IS SECTION 30 15B, THE MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA, PROVISIONS OF THE ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON, TERMS OF OFFICE FOR MEMBERS AND OTHER CRITERIA FOR THE PRESERVATION COMMISSION SHALL BE THE SAME AS THE PREEXISTING PROVISIONS. OKAY, BUT THEY WERE NEVER ENUMERATED. BUT THEY DID EXIST.
BUT THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE NOT IN THE CURRENT CODE. THEY'RE NOT ENUMERATED. WHY IS THAT PROBLEMATIC? YOU'RE SAYING IT DOES BECAUSE IT BECAUSE THE CODE ITSELF IS REFERRING TO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT CODE, AND IT'S NOT INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE EITHER. RIGHT. WHEN THEY WHEN AMENDED THE CODE, THEY COMPLETELY REPLACED THE PREVIOUS ONE WITH THIS 1 IN 2022, WHICH NOW HAS A HOLE IN IT, UNFORTUNATELY. AND THEY DIDN'T REFER AND THEY DIDN'T ENUMERATE IN THE CODE UNFORTUNATELY THE PLANE. SO IF YOU'RE I'M JUST TRYING TO SPIN IT HERE, LIKE AS IF I'M A LAWYER REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER THAT WANTED TO CHALLENGE IT AND SAY, OKAY, WELL, IT'S VOID FOR VAGUENESS. I MEAN, LIKE LIKE BECAUSE IT BECAUSE THE STATUTE IS SILENT. I MEAN, THAT IS THAT IS ONE THAT IS THAT POSSIBLE? I MEAN, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. THAT IS ONE POSSIBLE TARGET, I MEAN, VOID FOR VAGUENESS. I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF WHERE IT WOULD BE DEFICIENT. BUT I MEAN, BUT THEN WHERE I'M STRUGGLING WITH IT IS HOW DOES IT WORK? SAY THERE HAS TO BE OTHER TOWNS. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE OTHER TOWNS THAT HAVE SIMILAR, VERY SIMILAR LAWS. WHAT DO THEY DO? WHAT I WANT TO KNOW, LIKE SITTING ON THE BOARD, IS BECAUSE I'M NOT SAYING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DESIGNATE SOMETHING AS A HISTORICAL LANDMARK, WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS WHAT OTHER TOWNS DO AND WHAT WORKS WHERE WHERE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DESIGNATE. HOW DO WE DO THIS IN THE PROPER WAY? ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY? MAYBE. UNFORTUNATELY I'M NOT. I READ ONE TODAY. IN FACT, I DID THINK, AS YOU WERE THINKING AND WENT TO TO SEARCH OTHER TOWNS. I CAME ACROSS GRAND ISLAND, TOWN OF GRAND ISLAND. THEY'RE THEY'RE SPECIFIC HISTORIC PRESERVATION DRAFT LOOKS. LOOKS EXACTLY THE SAME AS AS OURS, EXCEPT FOR THE SECTION WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT. LET ME GET THE EXACT SECTION. HEY, JOE, CAN I JUST ASK? I'M SORRY, DAD, I APOLOGIZE. I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP WITH THIS LINE BECAUSE I'M ASKING HIM AND HE'S RESPONDING TO MY MY QUESTION. SO, SO IT'S IT'S OUR SECTION 30 1-6 IN THE OURS SAYS THE COMMISSION MAY RECOMMEND DESIGNATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY IN THE TOWN OF GRAND ISLAND. THEY ADDED, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE OF THE OWNER. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY LANGUAGE WHERE IT'S A JOINT REQUEST BY THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. SO THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE. MR. BUGALSKI, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE OTHER TOWNS.
IT JUST HAPPENED TO BE ONE WHERE I SEARCHED SOME SOME KEYWORDS AND I ENDED UP WITH THE TOWN OF GRAND ISLAND, AND THAT'S HOW THEY APPROACH IT. SO EVERY TOWN CAN CAN DO IT, MODEL LAWS AND DO WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH IT. BECAUSE, I MEAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND I MEAN, I GUESS
[00:25:01]
THERE'S SOME SOLACE BECAUSE I SEE THE PEOPLE HERE FROM THE THAT WORKED ON VERY HARD THIS.ABSOLUTELY. AND I UNDERSTAND I MEAN, I WANT TO LOOK AT ALL SIDES OF IT. MEANING WHEN YOU SIT ON, ON, ON A BOARD, I'M USUALLY I'M IN A POSITION AS AN ADVOCATE, LIKE I'M A LAWYER, I REPRESENT SOMEONE IN A CASE. IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT I SIT SOMETIMES. I'VE BEEN CURCIO COUNSEL IN DIFFERENT ROLES WHERE COURT EVALUATORS WERE YOU'RE NEUTRAL, BUT USUALLY FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF ADVOCATE. SO I RESPECT THE PEOPLE FROM THE COMMISSION AND THE WORK THEY'VE DONE. BUT I ALSO LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THEN THE CITIZENS. BUT REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER DECISION WE HAVE TO MAKE, IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANYONE, WHETHER REGARDLESS IF WE VOTE 5 TO 0 AND I'M SUPPORTING THIS DESIGNATION AND THEN THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANY GOOD. BUT WITH THE COMFORT OF KNOWING PEOPLE THAT ARE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THIS, THAT THERE COULD BE NOTHING DONE TO IT, BECAUSE OUR LAWYERS ARE TELLING US THAT IT'S STAYED, THAT THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING. NOW THAT IT'S BEEN RECOMMENDED TO THE BOARD.
CORRECT. THAT'S I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION. IT IS BECAUSE IT'S STAYED, BUT MEANING REGARDLESS OF HOW ANY OF US WERE TO VOTE ON THIS, IF WE ALL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY AND WE IT WOULD BE, IN THE LEGAL TERMS, VOID, AB INITIO VOID FROM THE BEGINNING. IF THE STATUTE WERE FOUND TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. ONE OF THE PROVISIONS IN ANALYZING A STATUTE IS VOID FOR VAGUENESS LIKE MEANING THEIR STATUTES ALL THE TIME THAT ARE FOUND TO BE AMBIGUOUS, BECAUSE THE THOUGHT IS YOU HAVE TO PUT SOMEONE ON NOTICE OF WHAT IT IS. SO IN THIS CASE, YOU'RE A PROPERTY OWNER. WELL, WE WERE NEVER NOTIFIED OF HOW THE COMMISSION WAS TO BE CREATED OR DESIGNATED BECAUSE IT IT DIDN'T EVEN INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE, BUT DIDN'T LIST IT AS AN EXHIBIT. ANYWAY, I COULD SEE THERE BEING THAT'S JUST AND THAT'S JUST ONE ONE ISSUE THAT I'M POINTING OUT. AND AGAIN, MY POSITION AS AN ATTORNEY IS, IS I DON'T ALWAYS PICK WHAT MY CLIENTS DO. I DON'T ALWAYS AGREE WITH WHAT THEY DO. THAT'S NOT MY JOB. IT'S TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE PROTECTED. AND IF IF THERE'S A CHALLENGE THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, MY MY CLIENT.
SO WE CAN STILL BE MOVING TOWARDS THE DESIGNATION, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO BUTTON DOWN EVERYTHING WE HAVE TO BUTTON DOWN AND THEN DO THE DESIGNATION. SO THERE'S NO ISSUES BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN ASSURED THAT IT'S STAYED RIGHT. NOW THERE'S A PAUSE. CORRECT.
OKAY. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID THE THE ONE LAW WAS VACATED OR GONE. THEY TOOK IT AWAY AND THEN THEY CREATED ANOTHER ONE. WHEN THE TEXT WAS REVISED, RIGHT, IT DELETED A SECTION OF TEXT AND REFERENCED IT BUT DIDN'T INCORPORATE. SO YOU BUT YOU'RE BORED. BUT WE HAVE TO. YOU SAID YOU. COULD IT BE AMENDED WITHOUT GOING THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING OR. NO, NO. IT REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND ANY LOCAL LAW WITH LEGISLATIVE EQUIVALENTS.
AND YOU DID SAY THAT IT DID GO THROUGH CODE REVIEW. BRIAN ATTIA LOOKED IN ALL OF. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD TO US IN SEPTEMBER WAS READY TO GO. THAT WOULD HAVE REMEDIED ALL OF THIS? YES, I BELIEVE SO. SO WE CAN BRING THAT. AND THERE WAS A PERSON THAT WAS UNPOPULAR THAT. TRIED TO GET PETITIONS TO STOP THE COMMUNITY CENTER, AND THEY WERE FOUND ON A TECHNICALITY. I MEAN, SOMETHING TO CONSIDER A VERY, YOU KNOW, TECHNICALITIES IN COURTS, DETAILS ARE IMPORTANT. SO BEFORE AGAIN, THAT SEPTEMBER 8TH RESOLUTION THAT WAS BEFORE THE BOARD WASN'T TO ADOPT THE LAW. IT WAS TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING. I BELIEVE THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION CALLED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SEPTEMBER 22ND BOARD BOARD NIGHT. AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT PEOPLE WHO OBJECTED ANY PARTS OF THE CODE COULD HAVE COME FORWARD ON SEPTEMBER 22ND. THE BOARD COULD HAVE TAKEN IT UNDER CONSIDERATION, ADVISEMENT, AND THEN TWEAKED THAT PROPOSED CODE. ANYWAY, THE BOARD FELT APPROPRIATE AT THAT TIME, BUT WE NEVER EVEN GOT THAT FAR, SO THAT CAN STILL BE DONE NOW. IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE IS QUESTIONS OR THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED, IT COULD STILL BE DONE. YES, BECAUSE IT'LL REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY, OKAY. MISS HAHN. YEAH, I'M GOOD WITH. YOUR GOOD. OKAY. HI, I'M LAURA HAHN. I'M WITH THE HAMBURG HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT I DISAGREE WITH. I DO NOT GO ALONG AND HAVE THE VOTE RESCHEDULED. WHEN WE INITIALLY THAT RESOLUTION THAT WAS PULLED OR TABLED DID NOT DEAL WITH ANYTHING THAT HE SAYS THAT HE CITED. AS FAR AS MAKEUP OF THE MEMBERSHIP. WE HAD ASKED FOR THAT TO BE ADDRESSED, BUT THAT
[00:30:01]
WAS THE ONE THING HE DIDN'T ADDRESS IN THAT NEW THING IN THE NEW RESOLUTION. AND HE EVERYTHING WAS CHANGED FROM THE DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION TO THE TITLE OF THE COMMISSION. AND SO WE OBJECTED WITHOUT SOME EXPLANATION UNTIL WE COULD TALK ABOUT IT. AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS PULLED. CAN THAT STILL BE DONE? CAN IN OTHER WORDS, WE ARE OPEN TO DISCUSSION. BUT WE ASKED AT THAT TIME IF THE CURRENT LAW WAS IN EFFECT AND WE WERE TOLD, YES, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE ARE HEARING THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM. WHO TOLD YOU THAT'S A PROBLEM? WHO TOLD YOU IT WAS OKAY? WELL, WE'VE HAD MEETINGS ALONG. WE'VE BEEN PLANNING THIS SINCE THE SUMMER, AND THIS IS THE FIRST WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT. AND SO THAT'S UPSETTING. THAT'S A PROBLEM.I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE PRESERVATION COMMISSION, AND I WANT TO READ WHAT I HAVE READY. AND I'M I'M SORRY. I'M UPSET. I'M ANGRY. BUT I'M GOING TO READ WHAT I WROTE AND THAT'LL BE IT. BOARD MEMBERS, TONIGHT YOU WILL BE VOTING ON WHETHER TO DESIGNATE THE FORMER BAYVIEW HOTEL, NOW KNOWN AS THE COWBOY, AS A LOCAL LANDMARK. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DECISION AND THERE ARE MANY FACTORS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER. HAMBURG IS FORTUNATE THAT ELLICOTT DEVELOPMENT CHOSE TO INVEST IN OUR COMMUNITY. THEY HAD MANY OPTIONS AND WE'RE GRATEFUL THEY SELECTED OUR TOWN. SHOULD LOCAL LANDMARK STATUS BE APPROVED, THEY WILL BE THE STEWARDS OF ONE OF HAMBURG'S MOST BELOVED HISTORIC GEMS. YOU HAVE OUR COMMITMENT TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND WITH YOU, THE TOWN BOARD, WHO HAS THE FINAL SAY. WE WILL STRIKE A THOUGHTFUL BALANCE BETWEEN HONORING OUR HISTORY AND MOVING FORWARD. WE WANT THEM TO BE SUCCESSFUL. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? MR. MAHONEY? WELL, IT'S A WORK, A WORK SESSION. IT'S NOT PUBLIC HEARING. OH, WELL, HE'S RAISING HIS HEAD, SO HE'S ALWAYS READY. THIS ISN'T GARBAGE, BOB. SO WE PROBABLY HAVE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK BEFORE THE MEETING STARTS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE EXECUTIVE WORK SESSION.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.