Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-02-10 - Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2009-7:30 P.M. AGENDA 7:00 PM– State of the Village Address ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC HEARINGS: (1) Public Hearing to consider a Tier III Home Occupation permit for a psychology practice at 387 North Ridge Street (2) Public Hearing to consider a special use permit and site plan approval by MetroPCS for a telecommunications facility at 211 South Ridge Street RESOLUTIONS: (1) Considering a Tier III Home Occupation permit for a psychology practice at 387 North Ridge Street (2) Considering a special use permit and site plan approval by MetroPSC for a telecommunications facility at 211 South Ridge Street (3) Referring a proposed redevelopment plan of the Rye Town Hilton to the Planning Board for a sketch plan conference (4) Considering an amendment to modify a July 24, 2007 resolution approving a site plan submitted by K&M Realty Group, Ltd for development of ten (10) residential units on Bowman Avenue west of South Ridge Street, Rye Brook, lots 1-1 and 1-1.1, Block 26, Section 141 Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 1 (5)A resolution authorizing the issuance pursuant to section 90.10 of the local finance law of refunding bonds of the Village of Rye Brook, to be designated "Public Improvement Refunding (Serial) Bonds" and providing for other matters in relation thereto and the payment of the bonds to be refunded thereby (6) Modifying the Financial Policy regarding bank depositories (7)Approval of Minutes: November 12, 2008; November 25, 2008; December 9, 2008 ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT OLD BUSINESS: (1) Hidden Falls pond dredging (2) Trustee term limits NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION ITEMS: (1) Follow-up on status of expired building permits, certificate of occupancy and TCO matters (2) Potential co-terminus Town/Village of Rye Brook (3) Status of REVAL and Rye Brook tax assessments ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS SUBJECT TO THE CONSENT OF THE TRUSTEES PRESENT AT THE MEETING THE NEXT REGULAR TRUSTEES MEETINGS: February 24 and March 10, 2009 BOARD: Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Trustee Michael S. Brown Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Trustee Dean P. Santon Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 2 STAFF: Christopher J. Bradbury, Village Administrator David Burke, Assistant to the Village Administrator Gregory Austin, Police Chief Edward Beane, Village Counsel Victor Carosi, Village Engineer Fred Seifert, Public Access Coordinator Paula Patafio, Secretary Mayor Joan Feinstein called the February 10, 2009 regular meeting of the Board of Trustees to order. She noted that a State of the Village Address was given at 7:00 p.m. Information on this speech could be obtained on the Village's Website. Mayor Feinstein called for the first matter on the agenda: PUBLIC HEARINGS: (1) PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A TIER III HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT FOR A PSYCHOLOGY PRACTICE AT 387 NORTH RIDGE STREET On a motion made by Trustee Dean Santon, and seconded by Trustee Michael Brown, the public hearing was declared open. Mr. Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator, noted that Dr. Bergman has submitted an application for a Tier III Home Occupation permit for his practice at 387 North Ridge Street. Trustee Dean Santon noted that this application is a pretty straight forward. He questioned whether there would be parking and alterations within the house to accommodate the home occupation. Mayor Feinstein noted that this is an application for a Tier III for a psychology practice for three days per week and no more than 15 hours per week. No improvements will be made to the property. Currently there is an office and a waiting area, and sufficient parking on site. It is not anticipated that there would be more than one car at a time, but there may be a time when two people, with two cars, come at the same time, i.e.: family counseling or overlapping clients. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 3 Dr. Scott Bergman noted this is a second office for him, and that he intends to split the work week between the two offices. The hours would start at around 4:00 p.m. until about 8:00 p.m. Occasionally a patient may come in later. Mayor Feinstein asked if the approval could be based upon the 15 hours per week, with the hours of operation running from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Trustee Michael Brown noted that he also felt that a limit should be placed on the number of hours. If things changed, and the applicant needed more hours, he could come back and request additional hours, if necessary, at a later date. At this point the Board could limit the hours to 20 hours per week. Trustee Santon noted that the Village's Code has specific criteria for Home Occupations. After reviewing the application, he noted that this is clearly a Tier III use. He wanted to be sure that the terms of this application did not change without Village approval. The use at this time is low impact, however, he felt that without benchmarks and criteria things can change. It was also noted that the permit will run with the applicant and not the property/land. Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano congratulated Dr. Bergman for coming forward and applying for a permit. She stated that she appreciated the fact that he took the time to make this application. She felt that the applicant should be given some flexibility when it comes to hours of operation and stated that 20 hours per week, in her opinion, seemed fair. Mayor Feinstein agreed, noting that twenty sessions at 45 minutes each would be a fair amount of hours for a part-time office. Trustee Paul Rosenberg asked Dr. Bergman if he felt that twenty visits per week was fair. Dr. Bergman said that it would not be a problem. On a motion made by Trustee Sanders Romano, and seconded by Trustee Santon, the public hearing was closed. Mr. David Burke, Assistant to the Village Administrator, called the roll: Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 4 Trustee Michael S. Brown Voting Aye Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Voting Aye Trustee Dean P. Santon Voting Aye Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Voting Aye Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Voting Aye Mayor Feinstein asked that the resolution on this matter be taken out of order. RESOLUTIONS: (1) CONSIDERING A TIER III HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT FOR A PSYCHOLOGY PRACTICE AT 387 NORTH RIDGE STREET Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION CONSIDERING A TIER III HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT FOR A PSYCHOLOGY PRACTICE AT 387 NORTH RIDGE STREET WHEREAS, Scott Bergman Ph.D. the owner of 387 North Ridge Street desires to receive a Tier III Home Occupation Permit for the use of residence as a psychology practice as a solo practitioner with no employees; and WHEREAS, Dr. Bergman has submitted a Tier III Home Occupation Permit Application to the Building Department; and WHEREAS, Dr. Bergman has outlined the number of visits, hours of operations, number and location of parked cars, special equipment and trash generated for the proposed Home Occupation in accordance with the Village of Rye Brook Code; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was set for February 10, 2009 to consider the Tier III Home Occupation Permit under the terms and conditions set forth in the Village Code. WHEREAS, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook hereby grants a Tier III Home Occupation Permit to Scott Bergman, Ph.D. for a psychology Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 5 practice at 387 North Ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY in accordance with Village Code. On a motion made by Trustee Sanders Romano, and seconded by Trustee Santon, the resolution was approved. Mr. Burke called the roll: Trustee Michael S. Brown Voting Aye Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Voting Aye Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Voting Aye Trustee Dean P. Santon Voting Aye Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Voting Aye Mayor Feinstein called for the second public hearing on the agenda: (2) PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL BY METRO PCS FOR A TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 211 SOUTH RIDGE STREET On a motion made by Trustee Sanders Romano, and seconded by Trustee Santon, the public hearing was opened. Daniel Laub, Esq., of Cuddy and Feder, addressed the Board as legal counsel for the applicant. He noted that MetroPCS is a new a carrier to the market. The proposed facility would be for a total of six panel antennas mounted on the roof of the building located at 211 South Ridge Street. An equipment shed would also be constructed on the roof top of the building. The applicant has appeared before the Planning Board and the Technology and Communications Commission, and the applicant has been reviewed. A site visit with Michael Musso, the Village's Consultant, and Mr. Carosi, Village Engineer, has also taken place. Comments have been submitted. One issue addressed was the screening of the facility. Currently the Nextel equipment is in the basement/garage area. The applicant was asked to discuss the equipment shed with the landlord to see if there was room for it in the garage area. The applicant learned that the Building is fully tenanted and the parking spaces are all Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 6 assigned. There is no area available to place the equipment. Overall the application before the Board minimizes the visual impact with additional screening. Photo simulations were presented to the Board. Mr. Michael Musso, Village Consultant, addressed the Board. He noted that he performed a technical review of the application, and he submitted a report to the Village on December 4h. Wireless applications are reviewed with respect to visual aspects, operations and justifications for the sites. Alternative sites and health and safety conditions are reviewed. The structural considerations of setting of the equipment was also reviewed. The initially proposed antenna mount was a bracket, which has been changed. The suggestion was to make it conform with the Nextel equipment. The building itself is located in a C-1 zone. Background information on MetroPCS was requested and it was learned that this is a new carrier in the area. Visual impacts were reviewed and additional information was gathered regarding the structural analysis and alternate sites. A memo was sent to applicant in June, noting all comments and questions, and all open issues were completed by November. Metro PCS no other sites at this time. There are two sites within Port Chester that are being proposed, and other locations have been reviewed. The report by Pennacal Associates was reviewed. The maximum permissible exposure level was close to 50 times below the safety level for the general public. It also was noted that secondary bracing would be done by the applicant. There have been some discussions about adding screening of plywood around the equipment cabinets. Mr. Musso noted that a protocol should be developed. This is a small roof. A plan should be put in place for when this equipment needs to accessed. Any proposed modifications to the facility would have to come back before the Board for review. Trustee Rosenberg noted that frequencies are addressed in the report. He also noted that two sites have been approved in Port Chester, and he asked what other sites would be needed in the future. Mr. Laub noted that the frequencies are licensed by FCC. As noted in the report, the frequencies that this carrier is operating on are not unique to them. Mr. Musso noted that no additional sites are being proposed in Rye Brook. Trustee Santon wondered beyond Rye Brook, what other sites are being considered. Mr. Laub responded that additional sites have to do with Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 7 customer base and turn over. Mr. Laub confirmed that the Harrison Executive Park application near the Rye Brook border was approved. Trustee Santon asked what other applications were pending and where? Mr. Laub responded that this is a new network. Two applications have been submitted in Harrison, a few in Port Chester, New Rochelle, Larchmont, and Mamaroneck. There are also sites being reviewed in Connecticut. As the business grows, additional locations will be required. As far as the Rye Brook location, Mr. Laub noted that Rye Brook encourages co-location, and the South Ridge Street offers the applicant the ability to co-locate. The applicant has responded to all of the comments from the Village's staff and consultants. Trustee Santon questioned height restrictions for the building. Amanda Kandel, Esq., Village's Counsel, noted that this building is an existing non-conforming. The triangular peak extension is already taller than allowed. Mayor Feinstein questioned what has been done so far in order to deal with the structural analysis. Mr. Laub noted that a structural analysis will be completed in a few days. He also noted that the Village's Building Inspector will evaluate the structure. Trustee Sanders Romano noted that the equipment is tall and narrow. She asked if the applicant could see if there was a way to reduce the height of the cabinet by making it wider versus taller. Mr. Musso noted that the equipment is raised off the ground about 1 /z". He stated that a different shaped cabinet would be researched further. Mr. Musso also noted that they have been in touch with the Structural Engineer of MetroPSC. Trustee Santon asked if the equipment cabinet could be made smaller. Mr. Musso noted that over the years the cabinets have been made smaller. Mr. Laub stated that he could have an answer for the Board within the week. Mayor Feinstein called for members of the public wishing to address the Board regarding this application. There being none, she noted that she would like the additional information before the matter was put to a vote. She asked for a motion to keep the public hearing open. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 8 On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Sanders Romano, the public hearing was adjourned to the February 24th Board of Trustees meeting. Mr. Burke called the roll: Trustee Michael S. Brown Voting Aye Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Voting Aye Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Voting Aye Trustee Dean P. Santon Voting Aye Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Voting Aye Mayor Feinstein noted that the resolution on this matter would also be adjourned to the February 24th meeting. Mayor Feinstein called for the next matter on the agenda: RESOLUTIONS: 3) REFERRING A PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE RYE TOWN HILTON TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR A SKETCH PLAN CONFERENCE Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION REFERRING A PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE RYE TOWN HILTON TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR A SKETCH PLAN CONFERENCE WHEREAS, Ashford Hospitality Trust and the Rye Town Hilton have proposed a redevelopment of the Rye Town Hilton, a master redevelopment plan and proposed zone change or text amendment to provide for a Hotel Planned Unit Development District (HPUD). NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees hereby refers the proposed redevelopment sketch plan to the Village Planning Board for review and comments. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 9 On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Brown, the resolution was considered. It was noted that a team has reviewed the Rye Town Hilton and a master plan has been put together. Albert Pirro, ESQ. appeared in behalf of the applicant and has estimated that there is somewhere between 27 and 30 millions dollars needed to redevelop this site. At this time the applicant is looking for feedback from the Village Board. Trustee Santon asked for an overview of the proposed plans and the current ownership of the Hilton. The Hilton was initially owned by the Hilton family, and then ownership transferred to a franchise. Remington, a firm that is in the hospitality business, is working for Ashford Hospitality — the investor/owner -- on this project. Mr. John Sullivan, of Sullivan Architecture, the architect for the proposal, addressed the Board. He noted that he was very familiar with the Hilton site, stating that this 36 acre parcel is uniquely located. Currently there are approximately five acres of existing parking. The building was constructed in the early 1960s, and the Hilton has occupied this facility since 1988. They have evaluated the existing site in terms of access — and both access points have been considered in the review. The first is the main entrance. The second is the service entrance. Site modifications have been made over time. The existing hotel room count is about 430-450 rooms, with 15 of the rooms conforming to the Americans with Disability Act. Of the 36 acres, the hotel structure occupies approximately 5.3 acres. There is a good amount of screening surrounding the hotel and the parking areas. The roadway itself is screened by heavily wooded buffers. The parking lots are fragmented and radiate around the building. There is a high quality existing landscape buffer around the site. The first area reviewed was reorganizing the parking areas. The existing entrance would be maintained as would the service entrance. Additional buildings and parking structures are being proposed. One building will be a spa; other buildings would be townhouses for long term stays. The existing Hilton building is expected to remain. There will be a parking garage with between 634 to 1200 parking spaces. Other structures will be open to residential uses. The applicant has met with Dr. Donald Carlisle of the Port Chester School District briefly. The impacts on the school district was discussed. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 10 Mayor Feinstein noted that this would be a very dramatic change to a unique parcel of land. The Hilton is nestled in the center of this property, which gives the appearance of open green space. Westchester Avenue is a gateway into Rye Brook. She noted that she had serious concerns about traffic in the area, especially on Westchester Avenue. She was also concerned about the impact that 285 residential units would have on the Port Chester School District. This project is very different from any other project in Rye Brook. There are residential homes surrounding this property. She felt that a senior component and a medium income component for teachers, firefighters, etc. should be considered. She also raised her concern about the mass of this project. Trustee Santon concurred with Mayor Feinstein. He noted that the Rye Town Hilton did not fit the typical profile of the Hilton Hotels. There is modest housing that went up after WWII surrounding the Hilton property on Lincoln Avenue, Beacon, Maple Court—they already have a view of the structures on the Hilton property. The Hilton is at a higher elevation, while the adjacent Avon Rye Ridge condos property is sunken down which brings with it concerns of flooding. He stated that he was extremely concerned about the massing. The townhouses proposed would be about the same quantity as Bellefair (240) or the Arbors (250). Both of these developments as dense housing, and neither had a spa or hotel constructed on the same site. He noted that he could not imagine a six story structure set on this property as it would be visible from all around. This property is surrounded by residential properties, and the residents' quality of life must be considered. The hotel use of this site was welcomed into the community back in the 1970's because of the landscaped buffer. Trustee Santon felt that this was very ambitious project and he concerned with the environmental impacts. Trustee Sanders Romano felt that it would be extremely unfortunate to loose the green space. This is the entrance to the community. There are plenty of apartment buildings in Westchester — especially in White Plains. She did think that a senior living facility would be a good goal, but she noted that she had a lot of concerns with the concept. Mayor Feinstein noted that this project is conceptual. When people downsize and they look for something affordable in Rye Brook. She noted that she was not against residential components, but she was very concerned about mass and type. The character of Rye Brook needs to be preserved. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 11 Trustee Brown stated that he would like to see some median income residential homes constructed. Trustee Paul Rosenberg stated that he liked the initial plans. So many important events have taken place at the Rye Town Hilton, he hoped that the integrity would be preserved because of the importance of this facility to the Village. It is understood that the hotel itself needs to be updated, but a six story building is definitely too high for Rye Brook. In the long run, Rye Brook will reap the benefits of these improvements. It was noted that the Village Board is amenable to working out a conceptual plan with the applicant. The Village hopes that this project can be completed in an environmentally friendly manner. Mayor Feinstein felt that sending this proposal to the Planning Board for review at this time was premature. Trustee Sanders Romano made a motion, which was seconded by Trustee Brown, to withdraw the motion to refer the application. The applicant will return with a project that does not have so much mass. The Board thanked the applicant for the presentation. Mayor Feinstein called for a brief recess. 4) CONSIDERING AN AMENDMENT TO MODIFY A JULY 24, 2007 RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN SUBMITTED BY K&M REALTY GROUP, LTD FOR DEVELOPMENT OF TEN (10) RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON BOWMAN AVENUE WEST OF SOUTH RIDGE STREET, RYE BROOK, LOTS 1-1 AND 1-1.1, BLOCK 26, SECTION 141 On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Sanders Romano, the matter was tabled. Trustee Michael S. Brown Voting Aye Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Voting Aye Trustee Dean P. Santon Voting Aye Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Voting Aye Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Voting Aye 5) A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 90.10 OF THE LOCAL FINANCE LAW OF REFUNDING Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 12 BONDS OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK, TO BE DESIGNATED "PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING (SERIAL) BONDS" AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS IN RELATION THERETO AND THE PAYMENT OF THE BONDS TO BE REFUNDED THEREBY Mr. Bradbury read the resolution: WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook, Westchester County, New York (the "Village") heretofore issued an aggregate principal amount of $3,200,000 Public Improvement (Serial) Bonds, 1995, dated November 15, 1995, pursuant to a bond certificate of the Village Treasurer dated November 20, 1995 (the "1995 Bond Certificate"), and the bond resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees identified therein, as more fully described in the 1995 Bond Certificate (the "1995 Bonds") and maturing or matured on November 15 in each of the following years and amounts; Year Amount Year Amount 1996 $100,000 2006 $160,000 1997 100,000 2007 165,000 1998 105,000 2008 170,000 1999 110,000 2009 180,000 2000 115,000 2010 190,000 2001 125,000 2011 200,000 2002 130,000 2012 210,000 2003 135,000 2013 220,000 2004 145,000 2014 235,000 2005 150,000 2015 255,000 WHEREAS, it appears that it would be in the public interest to refund the $1,490,000 outstanding principal balance of the 1995 Bonds maturing in the years 2009 through 2015, thereof(the "1995 Refunded Bonds"), by the issuance of refunding bonds pursuant to Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law; and Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 13 WHEREAS, such refunding will result in present value savings in debt service as required by Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook, Westchester County, New York, as follows: Section 1. For the object or purpose of refunding the $1,490,000 aggregate outstanding principal balance of the 1995 Refunded Bonds, thereof, including providing moneys which, together with the interest earned from the investment of certain of the proceeds of the refunding bonds herein authorized, shall be sufficient to pay (i) the principal amount of the 1995 Refunded Bonds, (ii) the redemption premiums on the 1995 Refunded Bonds at their respective call dates, and(iii) the aggregate amount of unmatured interest payable on the 1995 Refunded Bonds to and including the date on which the Refunded Bonds are to be called prior to their respective maturities in accordance with the refunding financial plan, as hereinafter defined, (iii) the costs and expenses incidental to the issuance of the refunding bonds herein authorized, including the development of the refunding financial plan, as hereinafter defined, compensation to the underwriter, as hereinafter defined, costs and expenses of executing and performing the terms and conditions of the escrow contract, as hereinafter defined, and fees and charges of the escrow holder, as hereinafter mentioned, (iv) the redemption premium to be paid on the 1995 Refunded Bonds which are to be called prior to their respective maturities, and (v) the premium or premiums for a policy or policies of municipal bond insurance for the refunding bonds herein authorized, or any portion thereof, there are hereby authorized to be Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 14 issued not exceeding $1,650,000 refunding serial bonds of the Village pursuant to the provisions of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law (the 'Public Improvement Refunding Bonds" or, sometimes, the "Refunding Bonds"), it being anticipated that the amount of Refunding Bonds actually to be issued will be approximately $1,585,000 as provided in Section 3 hereof. The Public Improvement Refunding Bonds shall each be designated substantially 'PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING (SERIAL) BOND", including a year, and a series designation if appropriate, shall be dated April 1, 2009, or such other date as shall hereafter be determined by the Village Treasurer pursuant to Section 3 hereof, shall be of the denomination of$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount of each respective maturity, and shall mature annually on November 15 in each of the years 2009 through 2015, both inclusive, or such other dates as the Village Treasurer shall hereafter determine pursuant to Section 3 hereof, and shall bear interest payable on May 15, 2009 and November 15, 2009 and semi-annually thereafter on May 15 and November 15, or such other dates as the Village Treasurer shall hereafter determine pursuant to Section 3 hereof, at the rate or rates of interest per annum as may be necessary to sell the same, all as shall be determined by the Village Treasurer. The Refunding Bonds shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity. The Refunding Bonds shall be issued in registered form and shall not be registrable to bearer or convertible into bearer coupon form. Principal of the Refunding Bonds shall be payable to the registered owners as shall hereafter be determined by the Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 15 Village Treasurer. Principal and interest on the Refunding Bonds will be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. The Refunding Bonds shall be executed in the name of the Village by the manual or facsimile signature of the Village Treasurer, and a facsimile of its corporate seal shall be impressed, imprinted, affixed or otherwise reproduced thereon and may be attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the Village Clerk. In the event of facsimile signatures by the Village Treasurer and, or Village Clerk, the Refunding Bonds shall be authenticated by the manual signature of an authorized officer or employee of a bank or trust company acting in the capacity of the fiscal agent for the Refunding Bonds, and the Village Treasurer is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement or agreements containing such terms as he shall deem proper with a bank or trust company to perform the services described in Section 70.00 of the Local Finance Law. The Refunding Bonds shall contain the recital required by subdivision 4 of paragraph j of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law and the recital of validity clause provided for in Section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such recitals, in addition to those required by Section 51.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the Village Treasurer shall determine. It is hereby determined that it is to the financial advantage of the Village not to impose and collect from registered owners of the Refunding Bonds any charges for mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged, and, accordingly, pursuant to paragraph c of Section 70.00 of the Local Finance Law, no such charges shall be so collected. Section 2. It is hereby determined that: Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 16 (a) the maximum amount of the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds authorized to be issued pursuant to this resolution does not exceed the limitation imposed by subdivision 1 of paragraph b of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law; (b) the maximum periods of probable usefulness permitted by law at the time of the issuance of the Refunded Bonds for objects or purposes for which the Refunded Bonds were issued are, in each case, thirty years, as shown on the attached Schedule A; (c) the last installment of each series of the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds will mature not later than the expiration of the period of probable usefulness of the object or purpose for which the Refunded Bonds of such series were issued in accordance with the provisions of subdivision 1 of paragraph c of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law; and (d) the estimated present value of the total debt service savings anticipated as a result of the issuance of the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds, computed in accordance with the provisions of subdivision 2 of paragraph b of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law, is as shown in the Refunding Financial Plan described in Section 3 hereof. Section 3. The financial plan for the refunding authorized by this resolution (the "Refunding Financial Plan"), showing the sources and amounts of all moneys required to accomplish such refunding, the estimated present value of the total debt service savings and the basis for the computation of the aforesaid estimated present value of total debt service savings, are set forth in Schedule B attached hereto and Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 17 hereby made a part of this resolution. The Refunding Financial Plan has been prepared based upon the assumption that the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds will be issued in the principal amount of$1,585,000 and that the Refunding Bonds will mature,be of such terms, and bear interest as set forth in Schedule B. This Board of Trustees recognizes that the amount of the Refunding Bonds, maturities, terms, and interest rate or rates borne by the Refunding Bonds to be issued by the Village will most probably be different from such assumptions and that the Refunding Financial Plan will also most probably be different from that attached hereto as Schedule B. The Village Treasurer is hereby authorized and directed to determine the amount of the Refunding Bonds to be issued, the dates of such bonds and the dates of issue, maturities and terms thereof, the provisions relating to the redemption of Refunding Bonds prior to maturity, if any, whether the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds will be insured by a policy or policies of municipal bond insurance, whether the Refunding Bonds shall be sold at a discount in the manner authorized by paragraphs e and f of Section 57.00 of the Local Finance Law, and the rate or rates of interest to be borne thereby, and to prepare, or cause to be provided, a final Refunding Financial Plan for the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds, and all powers in connection therewith are hereby delegated to the Village Treasurer; provided, that the terms of the Refunding Bonds to be issued, including the rate or rates of interest borne thereby, shall comply with the requirements of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law. The Village Treasurer shall file a copy of his certificate determining the details of the Refunding Bonds and the final Refunding Financial Plan with the Village Clerk not Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 18 later than ten(10) days after the delivery of the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds, as herein provided. Section 4. Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph a of Section 56.00 of the Local Finance Law, the power to determine whether to issue the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds having substantially level or declining annual debt service, as provided in paragraph d of Section 21.00 and in paragraph c of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law, is hereby delegated to the Village Treasurer. All other matters relating to such Public Improvement Refunding Bonds to be issued by said Village and having substantially level or declining annual debt service, is hereby delegated to the Village Treasurer. Section 5. The Village Treasurer is hereby authorized and directed to enter into an escrow contract(the "Escrow Contract") with a bank or trust company located and authorized to do business in the State of New York as the Village Treasurer shall designate (the 'Escrow Holder") for the purpose of having the Escrow Holder act, in connection with the Refunded Bonds, as the escrow holder to perform the services described in Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law. Section 6. The faith and credit of said Village of Rye Brook, Westchester County, New York, are hereby irrevocably pledged to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds as the same respectively become due and payable. An annual appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds becoming due and payable in such year. There Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 19 shall annually be levied on all the taxable real property in said Village a tax sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds as the same become due and payable. Section 7. Unless the date for delivery and payment for the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds is determined to be May 15, 2009, all of the proceeds from the sale of the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds, including the premium, if any, but excluding accrued interest thereon, shall immediately upon receipt thereof be placed in escrow with the Escrow Holder for the Refunded Bonds. Accrued interest on the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds shall be paid to the Village Treasurer to be expended to pay interest on the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds on May 15, 2009 or such other interest payment date as may be determined in accordance with Section 3 hereof. Such proceeds as are deposited in the escrow deposit fund to be created and established pursuant to the Escrow Contract, whether in the form of cash or investments, or both, inclusive of any interest earned from the investment thereof, shall be irrevocably committed and pledged to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Refunded Bonds in accordance with Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law, and the holders, from time to time, of the Refunded Bonds shall have a lien upon such moneys held by the Escrow Holder. Such pledge and lien shall become valid and binding upon the issuance of the Public Improvement Refunding Bonds and the moneys and investments held by the Escrow Holder for the Refunded Bonds in the escrow deposit fund shall immediately be subject thereto without any further act. Such pledge and lien shall be valid and binding as against all parties having claims of any kind in tort, contract or otherwise against the Village irrespective of whether such parties have notice thereof. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 20 Section 8. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, so long as any of the Refunding Bonds shall be outstanding, the Village shall not use, or permit the use of, any proceeds from the sale of the Refunding Bonds in any manner which would cause the Refunding Bonds to be an "arbitrage bond" as defined in Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and, to the extent applicable, the Regulations promulgated by the United States Treasury Department thereunder as then in effect. Section 9. In accordance with the provisions of Section 53.00 and of paragraph h of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law, the Village hereby elects to call in and redeem on May 15, 2009 , or such later date as shall be determined in accordance with the final Refunding Financial Plan, all callable 1995 Refunded Bonds maturing after May 15, 2009. The sum to be paid therefore on such redemption date shall be 100% of the par value thereof and the accrued interest to such redemption date. The Escrow Agent for the Refunded Bonds is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of such call for redemption to be given in the name of the Village in the manner and within the times provided in the Escrow Contract. Such notice of redemption shall be in substantially the forms attached to the Escrow Contract. Upon the issuance of the Refunding Bonds, the election to call in and redeem the callable Refunded Bonds and the direction to the Escrow Agent to cause notice thereof to be given as provided in this paragraph shall become irrevocable, provided that this paragraph may be amended from time to time as may be necessary in order to comply with the publication requirements of paragraph a of Section 53.00 of the Local Finance Law, or any successor law thereto. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 21 Section l O.The Refunding Bonds shall be sold at public or private sale to a purchaser to be determined by the Village Treasurer, upon advertisement using a notice of sale or otherwise, and said purchaser may publicly offer the Refunding Bonds or hold them for investment(the "Purchaser"). The Refunding Bonds may be sold for a purchase price to be determined by the Village Treasurer,plus accrued interest from the date of the Refunding Bonds to the date of the delivery of and payment for the Refunding Bonds, subject to any approval of the terms and conditions of such sale by the State Comptroller that may be required by subdivision 2 of paragraph f of Section 90.10 of the Local Finance Law. After the Refunding Bonds have been duly executed, they shall be delivered by the Village Treasurer to the Purchaser in accordance with a purchase contract between the Village and the Purchaser, which shall be in form and substance satisfactory to the Village Treasurer. Section 11. The Village Treasurer and all other officers, employees and agents of the Village are hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the Village to execute and deliver all certificates and other documents, perform all acts and do all things required or contemplated to be executed, performed or done by this resolution or any document or agreement approved hereby. Section 12. All other matters pertaining to the terms and conditions of issuance of the Refunding Bonds shall be determined by the Village Treasurer and all powers in connection thereof are hereby delegated to the Village Treasurer. Section 13. The validity of the Refunding Bonds may be contested only if- Board £Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 22 (1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said Village is not authorized to expend money, or (2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the dates of publication of this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the dates of such publication, or (3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution. Section 15. A summary of this resolution, which takes effect immediately, shall be published in full in The Journal News, the official newspaper of said Village, together with a notice of the Village Clerk in substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Brown, the resolution was adopted. Mayor Feinstein noted that this matter has to do with the bond that was put in place during the construction of Village Hall. At this time the Village Board is suggesting that a new bond, with a lower interest rate, be issued. This would result in a cost savings of approximately $125,000 over the next seven years. Mr. Bradbury stated that the Village expects that the new bond would have a rate of 1.88%. The Village's hope is to have this refinancing completed by May 15t". Mayor Feinstein corrected a few typos on the resolution, and then asked Mr. Burke to call the roll: Trustee Michael S. Brown Voting Aye Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 23 Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Voting Aye Trustee Dean P. Santon Voting Aye Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Voting Aye Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Voting Aye 6) MODIFYING THE FINANCIAL POLICY REGARDING BANK DEPOSITORIES Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE FINANCIAL POLICY REGARDING BANK DEPOSITORIES RESOLVED, that the Webster Bank is hereby added as a designated depository for the Village of Rye Brook; and be it further RESOLVED, in addition to Webster Bank, Wells Fargo; TD Bank; JPMorgan Chase; Hudson Valley and HSBC Bank, are also hereby designated as depositories for the Village of Rye Brook. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Brown, the resolution was adopted. Trustee Michael S. Brown Voting Aye Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Voting Aye Trustee Dean P. Santon Voting Aye Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Voting Aye Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Voting Aye 7) APPROVAL OF MINUTES — NOVEMBER 12, 2008; NOVEMBER 25, 2008; DECEMBER 9, 2008 Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 24 Mayor Feinstein noted that this item was tabled until the next meeting to allow the Trustees additional time to review the summaries. Mayor Feinstein offered to take the next item out of order to accommodate the residents that were in attendance for the discussion. She called for the discussion on the Village's Travel Baseball League. Mr. Lawrence Digiansante of Betsy Brown Road addressed the Board on behalf of the Rye Brook Travel Baseball League. He noted that the league was formed one year ago. The Rye Brook Travel Baseball League was formed to serve the needs of the community. The members of the Board League's Board are proud of the success and enjoyment shared with the children. Rye Brook Travel Baseball began as a sub-contractor. At the conclusion of the 2008 season, Rye Brook Travel Baseball was told that it would be privatized. An error in judgment was made by board members who never previously navigated the Village's rules and procedures. At the November 2008 meeting Mr. Bradbury handed over a spreadsheet over to the board members but no one realized the impact that paying for the fields would have. In 2008 the operating costs ballooned from $8,430.00 to an excess of$30,000.00. Rye Brook Travel Baseball could not and would not pass this burden onto the families and children. Rye Brook was approached and came back with $15000.00 to cover the cost of the fields. This number was still almost double the previous season. Rye Brook Travel began to look elsewhere and negotiated with SUNY Purchase, who offered to accommodate Travel Baseball for $8,000.00. Rye Brook counter offered with $11,000.00 to keep this program in Rye Brook. Mr. Dan Wurtzel of Meadowlark Road did not realize was that the use of the High School and Ridge School fields was not included in the $11,000 figure. Now Rye Brook Travel Baseball had to negotiate with the Board of Education for those fields. Each family would be asked to pay double for playing on the same teams with the same coaches. Although Rye Brook Travel would like to keep Rye Brook's children playing in Rye Brook, it is no longer possible. Only the subcontractor status could keep the program in Rye Brook where it belongs. It was the desire of these volunteers to keep Rye Brook Travel in Rye Brook. Trustee Rosenberg, Village Board liaison to the Recreation Council, noted that there was too much misinformation floating around. He stated that he took umbrage to some of the statements. The spread sheet handed to Rye Brook Travel by Mr. Bradbury showed the cost of the fields if they remained as subcontractors. The use of the fields was never free. The Village must maintain the fields whether Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 25 they are used or not. The Village never demanded $30,000.00 from Rye Brook Travel for the use of the fields. The fee schedule presented was based upon the number of hours of use for each of the fields. These fees are posted on the Village's website. The Village wants to work the Travel Baseball Group, as well as the Travel Soccer Team, and offered a discount to create equality to each of the two groups. The Blind Brook School Board controls its own fields. In December there was a meeting held and the $11,000.00 fee was discussed, coupled with the statement that the Village cannot guarantee fees for the School District. It was noted that the school district must be included in the discussions. The offer that the Travel Baseball received would take only part of the program. The Village of Rye Brook would take the older boy's program and bring it back under the Recreation Department's direction. If something is truly a Recreation Department run program then Rye Brook does not pay a fee for the fields. Mayor Feinstein noted that there was a discussion a week ago Monday on the $10,000.00 fee, which did not include the older boys' team. The Village of Rye Brook has been very happy with the Travel Baseball Group. As of last Tuesday the Village Board was informed that nothing has come before the School Board. The 13 year old program would have to be an oversight program of the Village of Rye Brook. Our goal is to keep our children in Rye Brook. No one wants residents to go out of district. The Travel Baseball Team was supposed to do fundraising in order to mitigate the costs of running the program on its own in the next year. The first year was a transitional period. Mr. Bradbury noted that there have been discussions regarding the older children programs. This program cannot stay a Travel Baseball Group program. The Travel Baseball Group was supposed to reach out to the School District in December. There are two sides to every story. The Village has bent over backwards to keep baseball in Rye Brook. The Village can, and is willing, to reconstitute its travel baseball. Trustee Rosenberg noted that he was upset and distressed that he was singled out. Rye Brook is losing money on the fields and could not lower the fees any more. Mayor Feinstein stated that the Village Board wants travel baseball to be successful. They were looking forward to a good Vendor/Vendee relationship. The Village Board is here to help solve the problems faced by the league. Trustee Santon noted that Trustee Rosenberg and Mayor Feinstein were the BOT liaisons for Rye Brook Travel Baseball. Everyone must be mindful of some of the facts. First, Travel Baseball was pitched to Village as a private program. Private Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 26 groups pay field rental fees. No one forms a business without looking ahead a year, or two, or five. It would be incredulous to not run numbers and consider what the costs would be. The Village did not know how many hours the Travel Baseball Group would need. These discussions should be all about the children playing baseball. Trustee Santon noted that none of the travel baseball league's board members were in attendance at this BOT meeting. Regarding the school district's fields, there may be scheduling conflicts. Only the school district can tell when the fields are open. When you are running a business you must take initiative and project your own costs. Trustee Santon felt that this issue has been blown out of proportion. SUNY Purchase is an alternative for negotiating purposes. Last year the school district was doing the Village of Rye Brook a favor but they felt abused by the way their facilities were treated. Everyone is in favor of doing whatever it takes to have baseball here in Rye Brook. Hopefully everyone will learn from this experience. Mayor Feinstein noted that 15% of the total program is the older children program. The Village is trying to problem solve by offering to take this portion of the program back under the purview of the Recreation Department. Mr. Bradbury noted that if the Village Recreation Department takes over the older boys' program the Village still needs to discuss this and receive approval from the school district. Trustee Santon pointed out that soccer is low maintenance. Baseball field maintenance takes more time. He hoped that there would be better communication, starting with tonight's meeting. Trustee Brown noted that fundraising is very difficult with the economy the way it is now. Everyone is hurting. The Village is not privy to what fundraisers where held and how much was raised for the travel baseball team. To the extent that it was a successful 2008 maybe the costs can be subsidized. Everyone wants the program to work and everyone wants the children of Rye Brook to have the opportunity to play. Trustee Sanders Romano felt that there was an incredible amount of energy and work done last year to make the program a success. Now there is a lot of finger pointing and making people uncomfortable. She hoped that some of the energy would be used to come up with a solution for the children. Everyone needs to take a step back and remember what we are here for. Trustee Santon noted that the school district covered a lot of the business issues at hand in its February 9, 2009 meeting last night. He learned that they have the Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 27 lowest cost of Travel Baseball in Westchester and Fairfield County. Travel Baseball is an expensive proposition, and the Village Board is trying to be fiscally prudent. The parents should question what the Travel Baseball Group's financials are. How much did they raise? Mr. Digiansante apologized to Trustee Rosenberg. He noted that all of the Board members of the Travel Baseball Group appreciate the efforts made by all members of the Village Board, and Village staff. Mayor Feinstein made it clear that the Village Board understands that the Travel Baseball group's board is a volunteer board, and reminded everyone that the Village Board members are volunteers too. No one is putting blame. There needs to be more dialogue. Trustee Santon felt that all future discussions should be done with the full Board of Trustees and not just 2 out of the 5 members. Mr. Digiansante stated that he would speak with the members of his board. Everyone understands that time is of the essence. Mayor Feinstein called for a brief recess. Upon the Board's return, Mayor Feinstein returned to order of the agenda. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: Mr. Bradbury noted that the Village's offices would be closed Thursday for Lincoln's Birthday. Mr. Bradbury noted that the surveyors would be at the Edgewood basin until next Thursday. This project is moving forward. It was noted that Election Day was approaching. Two of the Village Board members, Paul Rosenberg and Michael Brown, were running unopposed. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 28 OLD BUSINESS: 1) HIDDEN FALLS POND DREDGING Mr. Bradbury noted that this project has a history to it. This pond has needed dredging for some time, however, it is on private property owned by Hidden Falls. There have been discussions between the Village and the Hidden Falls Homeowners Association. The Village has been asked to contribute towards this project. Grants have been applied for. Trustee Santon noted that you cannot spend public funds on private property. He noted that 90% of the waterways in the Village are on private property. These are existing stream beds that have been there forever. He questioned whether or not dredging was a remedy. The Hidden Falls private properties surround the pond and the Village does not have any guarantee that they protect the water quality. He wanted to be sure that if taxpayer money is used it would used towards the correct solution. Mr. Bradbury noted that public funds cannot be put into private property unless there are easements. These issues must be resolved before the Village can go down this road. The Hidden Falls siltation does come from upstream and some of the water quality issues do come from neighboring properties. The majority of this work is the responsibility of the Homeowners Association. The Village can try and capture floatables upstream. The Home Owners Association has hired an engineer. Trustee Santon wanted to make sure that no precedent was set by assisting the Hidden Falls Homeowners Association. Mr. Bradbury noted that this is a pond that has not been silted in decades. An agreement can be entered into and easements will have to be granted. It will cost anywhere from $225,000.00 and up to dredge this pond. Trustee Santon noted that in the 1950's the County spent county money to do some improvements when this was Price's Pond. Mr. Bradbury noted that he approached the County six years ago and they said because it is private property they would not touch it. Mr. Bradbury noted that Hidden Falls representatives have met with Congresswoman Nita Lowey's office regarding grants. They were trying to see if work at Hidden Falls will help the residents of Avon. Mr. Bradbury stated that he would contact Hidden Falls and get more information. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 29 3) TRUSTEE TERM LIMITS The discussion on this item was deferred to the February 24th meeting of the Board of Trustees. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1) FOLLOW-UP ON STATUS OF EXPIRED BUILDING PERMITS, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND TCO MATTERS Trustee Santon noted that the Village is focusing on this as an enforcement matter. There are more than 100 building permits that have expired and that still do not have a Certificate of Occupancy. There is a safety issue that needs to be addressed. There are pools that have not been inspected that are in use and should not be in use. There are structures in use that have not had electrical inspections. He was looking for a better way to give people incentive to do the right thing to close out their permits. Mr. Bradbury noted that the Village's Assistant Building Inspector is tackling the list of open C of Os. There are 80 to 100 people on the lists. They have all received letters and no one responded. Now people are being served with violations; six to seven per week. The positive thing is that we are targeting this problem and it is a higher priority now. There is a process where the residents are served and then a court date is set. It is unfortunate that the Village has to go through the court system. Maybe heavy fines that escalate could be the next step. Amanda Kandel, Esq., noted that the court must administer the fee, they cannot be set by the Village. Mayor Feinstein felt that closing these permits out is a high priority in the Building Department. This is a matter of safety for the residents. Mayor Feinstein requested that Attorney Kandel look into matter and report back to the Village Board. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 30 2) POTENTIAL CO-TERMINUS TOWNNILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Trustee Santon noted that Mamaroneck has studied the concept of co- terminus when they hired Pace University. He felt that someone should reach out to Mamaroneck and see what their thinking is. He also suggested that discussions with the Village of Port Chester should be included. Mayor Feinstein noted that Trustee Rosenberg chaired a Co-Terminus study. She noted that she had discussions with Port Chester's Mayor Pilla on this matter. Mayor Pilla and Supervisor Carvin are interested in further discussions regarding this matter. Mayor Feinstein noted that she would like to move forward with a grant application and include Port Chester. Mr. Bradbury was instructed to do additional research on this matter, and look into what professional help is available to the Village. Mayor Feinstein called for the final item on the agenda 3) STATUS OF REVAL AND RYE BROOK TAX ASSESSMENTS Trustee Santon addressed this matter. He noted that it has been a year since the promise was made by the Carvin administration that REVAL needed to be fixed. Many residents feel that REVAL is flawed and needs to be revisited. He suggested that the Tax Assessor be asked to come to a Village Board meeting and give a report on the status of the REVAL. Mayor Feinstein stated that she would be happy to have a meeting on this matter. Issues such as what can be done differently and what residents expect can be reviewed. She suggested that a meeting be scheduled for the end of February. Mayor Feinstein called for members of the public wishing to address the Board. There being no one she noted that the next regular Trustees Meetings were scheduled for February 24t" and March lot" On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Sanders Roman, the Board went into an executive session. The regular meeting of the Board of Trustees was adjourned at 11:50 p.m. Board of Trustees Meeting February 10,2009 Page 31