Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLL-1990 #02THE FOLLOWING LOCAL LAW WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 13, 1990: LOCAL LAW NO. 2 - 1990 A Local Law in Relation to Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Chapter 48 (Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse) of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: 1. Section 48-4.B is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Effective April 1, 1990, in addition to the fees established in Section 48-4.A of this Chapter, there shall be a fee of two cents ($0.02) per pound on Io~ds containing the following: II. This Local Law shall take effect upon its filing with the Secretary of State. 3/27/90 Municipality Please be advised that the above-referenced material was received and filed by this officeon _ _ _ 3/23/?0 . Additional forms for filing local laws wilh this office will be forwarded upon request. RECEIVED MAR 2 9 1990 NYS Department of State Bureau of State Records {Please Use this Form tor Filing your Local Law with the Secretary o! State) Text of law should be given as amended. Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use italics or underlining to indicate new matter. X~T'~yXXA~ Southold ......................... own v. ................................ Local Law No ......... .2. .............. ;of the year 19 .9.0. ....... Aiocallaw In Relation to Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse (insert title) Be it enacted by the Town Board .................. o! the {Name of Legislatix'e Body) --- Town o! .S.°.u.t.h. 9]-d ........................................................ ....... as ~ollows: Chapter 48 (Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse) of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: 1. Section 48-4.B is hereby amended to read as follows: Effective April 1, 1990, in addition to the fees established in Section 48-4.A of this Chapter, there shall be a fee of two cents ($0.02) per pound on loads containing the following: II. Thi~ Local Law shall take effect upon its filing with the Secretary of State. {If additional space is needed, please attach sheets o! the same size as this and number each) (1) {Complete the certification in the paragraph which applies to the filing of this local law and strike out the matter therein ~'hich is not applicabl,e.) 1. (Final adoption by local legislative body only.} I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No .... .2.... of 19.9..0 ..... of th f...S, outb.oJ0 ..... was duly passed by the .. T.o.~ ~ .Board .......................... (Name of Legislative Body) on ....M..a..r..c.h....l..3.,. .......... 19.9..0. .... in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. (Passage by local legislatiYe bod.~ with approval or no disapproval by ElectiYe Chief ExecutiYe Officer,* or repassage after disapprmai.) ! hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No... ' ...... of 19 ........ Count>' .. City olmeTown of ................ Village on 19 ........ was dub' passed by the ......................................... (Name of Legislali~ ¢ Body) not disapproved and was approved repassed after disapproval by the ............................ Elective Chief Executi~ e Ofhcer" and was deemed dui>' adopted on .................................. 19 ......... in accordance with the applicable provisions of la~. (Final adoption by referendum.} I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated a~ local law No ......... of 19 ........ Count3' of the City of ................ Town Village on ............................. 19 ........ was dui>' passed by the ......................................... (Name of Legislati~ e Bod.~ } no(disapproved and was approved repassed after disapproval by(he ............................ E|ecfi~e Chief Executi~ e Officer' ' on ......................... ; ........ 19 .......... Such local law was submitted to the people by reason of a mandatory. . ~eferendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors voting permissive :' · general thereon at the special election held on ............................. 19 ......... in accordance with the applicable annual provisions of law. 4. (Subject to permissbe referendum, and final adoption because no valid petition filed requesting referendum.} I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No ......... of 19 ........ County · City ofmeTown of ................ Village was duly passed by the ......................................... (Name of Legislative Body) not disapproved and was approved repassed after disapproval by the ............................ Elective Chief Executive Officer' on: ........................... 19 ......... Such local law was subject to a permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of ............................. 19 ......... in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. · ~cer means or includes the ch ef execut~e ofhcer of a Electi~ e Chief Executive Off .... ' ' ' count)' elected on a county'-wide basis or. if there be none. the chairman of the count) legislative bo{I), the mayor of a eft) or v|llage or the supervisor of a town where such officer is ~esled ~ ith po~er to appro~eor ~eto local laws or ordinances. 5. (City local la~- concerning Charter revision proposed b)* petition.) l hereby certify that the local }aw annexed hereto, designated as local law No ......... of 19 ........ of the City of ................................. having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the ~36 provisions of 2t7 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a special. majority of the qualified electors of such~city'¢'0ting thereon at the general election held on ............ ............ 19 ......... became operative. 6. (Count) local las' concerning adoption of Charter.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No.. ........ of 19 ......... of the County' of ..................... , State of New York, having been submitted to the Electors at the General Election of November ............ ,19 ....... pursuant to subdMsions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majorit:y of the qualified electors of the cities of said county as a unit and of a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit voting at said g~neral election, became operative. (1 f any other authorized form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certifica- tion.) 1 further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom and of thc whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in thc manner indicated in paragraph ............. above. Date: March 13, 1990 L~ererk of the Couq:> i~gislative body, City. To~n or,),~age Clerk or of hoer designated by local legislative b6~ Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk {Seal) (Certifica £ion to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or other authorized Attorney of locality.) STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF ..$.U. EEQLK ................ 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the' foregoing loca! law contains the correct text and that all proper proceedings have been had or taken for the enactmenj, of the 19~al law annexed hereto. Signature Matthew G. Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney Title Date: March 13, 1990 Town of Southold (3) PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD February 6, 1990 8:05 P.M. IN THE MATTER OF A PROPOSED "LOCAL LAW IN RELATION TO GARBAGE, RUBBISH & REFUSE". Present: Supervisor Scott L. Harris Justice Raymond L. Edwards Councilman George L. Penny IV Councilwoman Ruth D. Oliva Councilwoman Ellen M. Larsen Councilman Thomas H. Wickham Town Clerk Judith T. Terry Assistant Town Attorney Matthew G. Kiernan SUPERVISOR HARRIS: This public hearing is a "Local Law in Relation to Garbage, Rubbish & Refuse. At this time, the notice will be read by Councilman Penny. COUNCILMAN PENNY: "Public Notice is hereby given that there has been pre- sented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 23rd day of January, 1990, a Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse". Notice is further given that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York on the 6th day of February, 1990, at 8:05 o'clock P.M., at which time all interested persons will be heard. This proposed "Local Law in Relation to Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse" reads as follows: BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: 1. Chapter 48 (Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse) of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: 1. Section 48-4.B is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Ef~ctive April 1, 1990, in addition to the fees established in Section 48-4.A of this Chapter, there shall be a fee of two cents ($0.02) per pound on loads containing the following: II. This Local Law shall take effect upon its filing with the Secretary of State. Copies of this Local Law are available in the Office of the Town Clerk to any interested persons during business hours. Dated: January 23, 1990. Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk." I have an affidavit of publication from the Suffolk Times, a like affidavit from the Traveler-Watchman, a notice of posting by the Town Clerk, that this has been posted on the Town Bulletin Board for the appropriate time. We have the following communication from the Greenport Southold Chamber of Commerce. "Dear Supervisor & Town Board Member: As you are aware, the Greenport-Southold Chamber of Commerce has been a proponent of the concept of economic impact statements. As such, we have submitted proposed legislation to the Code Committee (modeled after County and State legislation) requiring that the economic impact of actions taken by the Town be fully evaluated and disclosed before that action is taken. Understanding that this legislation Pg 2 - PH Garbage, Rubbish ". Refuse has not been enacted yet, the Board of Directors would, nevertheless, request answers to the following questions with regard to the proposed doubling of the landfill fees from $20.00 to $40.00 per ton. What is the rationale/purpose of doubling the fees? How much revenue is anticipated to be collected? How will this revenue be used? General Fund? Dedicated? What impact will this fee have on other taxes? Schools? Property? Special groups? What group or groups will be directly affected by this fee? What group or groups will be indirectly affected? e.g. higher prices? What amount of business will be lost due to doubling the fee? What is the cost of correcting non-compliance? e.g. Result of illegal dumping? What other sources of revenue are available in lieu of doubling fees? Additionally, the Board of Directors would like the following comments noted: In November of 1988 the Chamber of Commerce opposed this fee, when it was first introduced at the current price. One of the primary reasons for its' opposition was the belief that in general, Town operations should not be financed by "user fees" in lieu of taxes. It is unfair for one segment of the poFulation to along bear the cost of services that benefit the entire town. The Chamber of Commerce accepts the cencept of "user fees" but only when those fees are dedic~ed to providing the services for which the fee is paid and not made part of the general fund. Consideration should be given to a six month waiting period before this should become effective, so as to not penalize those who have signed contracts or ourstanding bids with charges fixed at the current rate. Very truly yours, Richard Caggiano, President, Greenport-Southold Chamber of Commerce on Behalf of the Board of Directors." There are no further communications. I would like to add a few editorial comments at this time, as to the purpose of the Town Board doing this. I don't know that I would hit upon every point, that is registered by this letter here (tape change) the fact that our neighboring towns have raised their fees to this exactly, and to prevent vehicles from indiscriminately crossing the town line, and trying to dispose of waste in our landfill at a lower fee. This would keep us on an even par with even towns, so that people would be tempted to do this. They have in past. I personally followed trucks from Riverhead, who have tried to get into our landfill, just for the fact that they felt that we were more relaxed than Riverhead or other towns. How much revenue is anticipated to be collected? About three quarters of $300,000.00, which is about $225,000.00 That is the amount of money, that we collected through these fees last year. I would assume that we hopefully could collect close to that amount. About $225,000.00. Tonight we, also, passed a resolution hiring an engineering firm for $287,000.00. That's where the money is going. There's just no question about that. So, is this going to the general fund? Yes. Is it going to be spent in this area? Yes, absolutely. There's not enough money in our 1990 Budget to cover the expenses for the consulting fees. For some reason, our consulting fees have not been as high as they should be in our budget, and last year it cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars, and put us a little bit in arrears going into this year. What is the impact on the taxes? I would say, personally, and I'm only giving you my personal observation on schools and properties, special districts? None. This is strictly a user fee. The Town Board has felt by imposing this fee, that they're putting the burden of this segment of the landfill directly on the users, and nobody else. As a matter of fact, when we first passed the $20.00 fee, a year ago, some of the carters, or some of the haulers came up to us and said, we really don't care what the amount of this fee is, because we're going to pass this on to our customers. That was the attitude that prevailed. I think that was probably one of the quietest public hearings, that we ever had, back when we put in the orginal $20.00 fee. What we have to remember is, that on December 18, 1990, construction debris will no longer be allowed, according to law, in the Southold Town landfill. Construction debris will not be accepted in that landfill under Pg 3 - PH Garbage, Rubbish & Refuse the law, as it exists right now. Now we are making appeals. We're trying to get that law extended, but at that point, we will be in the same position that Southampton, Easthampton, already are. There is no construction debris going into their landfills. It is being sent into private operations. Without mentioning any specifically, they're charging anywhere between $25.00 and $45.00 a ton to process this material. So landfills generally, are doing away with this fee. Us being a shallow recharge area, we have the landfill space available, and we're utilizing it up to that date. But after December 1990, this Town Board can not guarantee as of today's date,that we're going to be able to accept construction debris in our landfill in the first place. As for some of the other questions? As to what are the effects of the fee? That's strictly up for speculation, without going out.. People have the choice right now, they'll..possible, places that would accept the landfill debris, if they accept it, they maybe cheaper, they may be more expensive than us. But that's up to the individual to research themselves. What other sources of revenue are available in lieu of doubling fees? On that, in fact, will be raising taxes. I've tried to cover a lot of the general comments, but the Town Board put a lot of thought into this. One of our main concerns is that we're going to become a dumping area for other areas, because our fees would be lower. If people can sneak in here, they going to be taking up our valuable landfill space with a lot of construction debris, and we're trying to prevent that, also. Thank you. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Thank you, George. At this time, I'd like to open it up to the general public to comment on this proposed local law. I'll start my left. Anybody? FRANK CARLIN: Frank Carlin. Southold TaxPac. Laurel. One thing in this town, we have good taxpayers, and I want to explain why. Whenever the Southold Town Board gets into a financial situtation, in this case it's the landfill, they always seem to come up with a solution, and that is, no problem, we'll increase the landfill fees. We'll double them. Double landfill fees to the residents, the taxpayers, and the garbage companies, who pick up the garbage. No problem, they pay for it. Now, I pay $11.83 a month for my garbage to be picked up once a week. You're going to go from $20.00 to $40.00 a ton, and naturally I can't blame the company for increasing their fees to me. So that means my garbage is going to go up. In other words, they're going to have pay more a ton, $40.00 a ton, they're going to send that back to the customer, and increase mine, my rates. That's normal. I can't blame them for that. Plus I'll be paying double the amount to take whatever I want to, to the landfill. So no matter how you look at it, people like me are the ones that are going to have to pay for it. I thing we're being carried away with too many fees in this town. $15.00 for a yard sale. $15.00 for a permit, a year, for that. Now it's 2 cents a pound for landfill fee dumping. Two cents a gallon to pump out your cesspool, which was a ridiculous law to start with. I think it's $3.00 for a shellfish permit. $2.00 for a landfill permit and beach parking. The building permits have doubled. You're getting out of hand with this. Where is it going to end? Where will it end? We hear that, because Riverhead is increasing their fees, we should increase ours. We don't have to do everything Riverhead does. Supervisor Janoski decides to climb up on the water tower and jump off, that doesn't mean our Supervisor has to climb up Greenport's water tower and jump off. If that's the case, we want to do everything that Riverhead does, then we shouldn't be charging $15.00 for a yard sale, because they don't charge anything. You can get as many as you want. It sort of scares you to see what's going to happen here with only one month into January, and we're already increasing landfill fees. What's going to happen when we get this plan that we're working on, this so pg l~ - PH Garbage, Rubbish & Refuse called alternate plan, that we had in October, that we don't see yet? What's going to happen when we really get into operation here that we find a system? You're going to come back and say, look now, there's more money we need for the landfill, and as far as controlling the landfill, my God, you go in there, your registration,the guy don't know you don't belong in Southold Town by your license plate, he puts you in the computer. There's no problem there, people coming in from outside. There shouldn't be no problem there. It's right in the computer. You drive in, you need a sticker permit, the guy puts you in the computer to see if you're a resident or not. What's the problem with people from Riverhead sneaking into the landfill? There's no problem there. Shouldn't be. Just getting out of hand. I don't think it's right. Like I said, people like me, and other people, we're going to be paying twice. I have one more thing here. Last August, I went down to the landfill with a load of brush. I got the computerized papers here. I went in with a gross weight of 4,900 pounds. I come out with a net weight of 4,500. Fine. It cost me $4.00. I went down an hour later with another load, same truck, at 10:25, with a gross weight of 4,720 pounds. I went out with a net weight of 4,520. $2.00. I went down with the same truck, same configuration, maybe in fact less gas, and yet I'm 20 pounds. What I'm trying to say here, how are these scales calculated? Are they calculated by the weights and measures, and they're calculated at the accurate? I could never figure this out, how I went in with the identical truck, identical situation, configuration, and I'm 20 pounds difference going out on net. It's minor, but food for thought. Food for thought, because everytime 20 pounds, 20 cents adds up. I'm not saying that somethings wrong, but I'm just saying that something don't add up there, you know. I have to have a computer to add this up. Same configuration, even I'm three pounds less. I've used a half a gallon of gas. It's three pounds. I didn't fill up the gas tank. It's the same truck, same everything. I don't understand that. But like I say, you keep going with these landfill fees, and this cesspool fee, that's ridiculous thing, that I argued here, the Board with, making the people pump out their cesspools every two years. It's ridiculous. You people keep on with that stuff, and you know what's going to happen in the future? I'll tell you what's going to happen in the future. I'm sorry to say this. A lot of us senior citizens in this town, are going to call up the Social Security people, and tell them, send their checks right to the Town Board, because we're not going to be able to us it. They need it there, to pay for their bills. Thank you. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Carlin. Anybody else on my left? State your name, please. MERLON WIGGIN: Merlon Wiggin. A couple of thoughts. One is economical, one is environmental. There's existing contracts, that I know of. l'm sure there's others I don't, that have already been signed, perhaps related to affordable housing, as far as construction debris, and I don't know how the Board could do this, but that would create a hardship on something that you really want to bring to · especially if the contracts are signed, and the amounts are already in place. The second thing is, there's always a degree of illegal dumping, and I'm sure this will tend to promote that, and I think the thought is how we can control that, or the town control it. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Anybody else on my left? In the center, anyone like to comment? JOHN COSTELLO: John Costello, from Greenport. First of all, I'd iust like to say simply, that I'm opposed to these increases. I'm opposed to it happening so fast. Number one, I feel as Mr. Carlin feels, that this user fee is sort of a newly discovered form of taxation, that is being implemented everywhere. Pg 5 - PH - LL, Garbage, Rubbish & Refuse Increase in taxes is suicidal for politicians. The user fee is being implemented everywhere, every town throughout the east end of Long Island. I believe it's a form of taxation. The people it hurts are the young people, that clear lots, businesses that need revitalization, and this town has many of them, people with fixed incomes, retirees. These are some of the people it effects, and I can give you instance, I have several large contracts out, a couple in this town. I've been to jobs. I hope he doesn't sign the contract. One of them, I allowed for approximately $10,000.00 fees to go into Southold Town dump. I would hate to have him sign the contract right now, and me implement that job. I'm just one small businessman. If it comes to I think this Board should take into consideration of possibly raising these fee~. Up them $.25, advertise, let people throughout the Town know. I know that many people aren't here, that have small businesses. If you advertise, and tell them it's going up 25%, then going up 50%, you'll have your fees. We all know the cost of living is increasing, but I'll tell you, a 100% jump on that one job for me in the amount of $10,000.00 would be hard to bear. As a matter of fact, I probably wouldn't want the job. It would handicap a couple of those businesses, because it's going to cost more. I think the repercussions will have a trickle down affect to the taxpayers of Southold, and right now it shouldn't happen. Thank you. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Yes? State your name for the record, please. RICHARD CAGGIANO: Richard Caggiano. I'm President of the Greenport-Southold Chamber of Commerce. I'd like to thank Councilman Penny for responding to the questions, that we had initiated in the letter, that we had sent, and l'd just like to repeat that the purpose of the letter was to bring out the fact that the Chamber has always been in favor of an economic impact study, to release the types of information that we requested in that letter, so the public is aware of the types of charges, or fees, or results of those charges and fees would be made on the public. I do appreciate your response on that, and I just want to correct one thing, initially you said environment impact studies. Although we are in favor of that, this particular letter tells of the economic impact study of it. COUNCILMAN PENNY: I stand corrected. RICHARD CAGGIANO: Okay. The second thing is on user fees, generally the Chamber has no objection to that, but we really do feel that it's essential that if a person is charged with doing, or partaking of a particular service, that the fees generated'by that fee dedicated to that particular service. Although you can lump in the general fund, which generally does happen, and say it's for such and such, it tends to be the tendency all the time, that maybe shift it to something else, because another point in time, it may be more important to fund another activity, rather than the one you originally intended to. I don't don't know that the ramifications or the procedures of making it possible to dedicate a particular fund in the way the law is set up. If there's a possibility of doing that, we would like to see that done, if not can you investigate the possibility of doing this with a law change, or whatever. Set up some for a dedicated fund type of activity. The last thing that I'd like to emphasize, is the fact that as Mr. Costello, and some of the others have said, the point is contractors may already be in contract, and maybe having to eat this increased fee, because a signed contract has already been done. We would advocate the possibility of maybe extended the effective date for this, to a six month period, to allow those people to not be penalized by the implication of this law. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Anyone else? Pg 6- PH - LL, Garbage, Rubbish & Refuse JOHN DIVELLO: John DeVello. Mattituck Sanitation. I want to first go on record, that the statement that George made on the fee of $20.00 a ton, the carters say, we don't care. Whatever it is we'll just pass it on. I didn't make any statement like that. COUNCIl_MAN PENNY: John, certainly commercial haulers, and I'm not talking the garbage peoplet the people that this impacted most, which is the people that at landfill debris contractors. JOHN DIVELLO: I'd like to read a statement, if I can, in opposition to this increase. It is not my general character to correct people. If they want to do things incorrectly, let them, as long as they pay for their own mistakes, but the increase in the current tipping fees at this time from $20.00 to $40.00 a ton, is wrong. The mathamatical reason being Riverhead increased to $40.00, we'll increase to $40.00. We might as well get that extra money. I never considered Southold to be a copy cat town. We don't need two Town Boards. We'll do what- ever Riverhead says. To use the reasoning that it will deter people from bringing debris accross the line is a fallacy. All it does is penalize everyone for the actions of a very few. Yes, the increase we have will be passed on, but passed on to who? Real estate is in a slump, and that energy to build new, or resale to create alterations, to put the trades to work, is below it's normal lull for this time of year. We, the local businessman, talk to people, and people are in trouble financially, and all the increase in tipping fees will do, is add to that financial burden. Thank you. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Anybody else in the center? JOHN DIVELLO: is that right? I just want to...April 1st, the $40.00 fee is not for garbage, COUNCILMAN PENNY: It's never been for garbage. SLIPERVISOR HARRIS: Please come for forth. State your name for the record. BOB PFLUGER: Bob Pfluger. B.P. Wreckers, Southold. I just want to ask one question on the..you're saying on the dump fee and stuff, that demolition and stuff after December 18 of this year, will be no longer taken in the Town of Southold. Is that correct? COUNCILMAN PENNY: As the law stands right now. BOB PFLLIGER: Same with garbage? COUNCILMAN PENNY: That is very possible. That's what we're working on right now. BOB PFI-UGER: I can't understand, demolition is going to do anymore harm to the groundwater, than our garbage is. I think garbage is going to do more harm, than building material. Correct me if I'm wrong, and I don't understand in the sense of garbage, I Know they, some garbage men and stuff, are saying they have to increase the tipping fees, and increase their fees to the customers and stuff, with the increase of the tipping fees. However, they're not being charged to dump garbage. Any compactor or container sent as garbage to the dump, is not charged, yet what about...you said you were going to list, you were going to tell us what was in that thing of different types of material that can come into the landfill without being charged. I'd like to know what they are · Pg 7 - PH - I_L, Garbage, Rubbish & Refuse SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Mr. Pfluger, after the public hearing, the statements are read into the record, and we close, then we'll be glad to respond to this. BOB PFLUGER: One thing I don't understand is why you say household garbage is no charge. I don't understand why something like something like resturants, or King Kullens, or something like that, to me that's not household garbage. I think it's commercial stuff, and I think they ought to be charged just like any- body else. That's my personal opinion. The same with anybody else, that has garbage and stuff, other than garbage, that goes into a compactor, and doesn't get charged for it. But if somebody had a business, that didn't have a carter picking it up, and they brought it in a pickup truck, they would be charged. I don't feel it's right. Thank you. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Thank you. Anybody else in the center? Yes? RONNIE WACKER: I'm Ronnie Wacker. North Fork Environmental Council. I don't want to say that I favor the increase, because it seems to me, it makes perfect sense, that if you have a lower rate than your neighboring towns, that the people from those towns are going to bring over their garbage. It would be crazy not to. Now, I don't know if the computer can check out those people who are residents, so that we have a way of determining who is and who isn't, but if that isn't possible, as Mr. Carlin suggested it was, then I think we should go ahead with an increased fee. It's just being sensible. Thank you. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Anybody else in the center? JOHN DIVE~-LO: My name is John DiVello, Mattituck Sanitation. I'd just like to say that, Riverhead hired the firm Dvirka and Bartilucci, and they really didn't do much for that Town. As far as I can see, I mean, they told them what they already knew~ and I can't see spending the taxpayers' money just for that, you know..just to have them say what they're bringing in and what's our town garbage. They didn't tell them something they didn't already know. It came over the scale. I even went up with them with bringing my haul up. I spent Saturdays down there. They went through the garbage. I mean, it was really just..it nothing you don't already know. I can't see raising the fees, because you're hiring a consultant firm. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Anybody else in the center? Anybody on my right? WILLIAM PELI_: Another thing that was said tonight, why the raise to help I asked myself, when you first in January, when you first posted the hearing for tonight, why so soon? You only passed the budget six weeks ago. Six weeks after you passed the budget on November 14, eight weeks after that, already you're to the taxpayers to raise another $300,000.00 . $225,000.00 George corrected tonight. Why in 1990, when the budget was made up, didn't you anticipate this and put in the budget? Why give us a fee at this time? 1 picked up Newsday, and I'll quote from Newsday. The proposed increase in commercial dumping fees, which would raise about $300,000.00 a year, would increase the cost of dumping garbage in Southold to $40.00 a ton from $20.00. Town officials said their rates are currently lower than other townships. I~nd of quote. Aren't you proud of that? Aren't you proud, if I were you people sitting up there, that we can operate our dump at a lesser fee than the neighboring towns do? George and you people congratulate yourself. It goes on, back to Paul, again, and about the increase is designed to keep out of town carters from using Pg 8 - PH - LL, Garbage, R'.bbish & Refuse the Town landfill to save money. We have scales up there. We have computers up there. We have people at the gate. Can't they do their job? Why must we have another fee on the people of this Town, because the people up there perhaps need guidance from the Board to keep people from out of town dumping garbage in our dump? Also, I'd like to go back to another vote from Supervisor Harris, the town to control the problem, will require immediate action, he said. He has met with several private recycling firms, who are interested in handling the Town plastic materials, paper, construction, demolition and landclearing debris. Are any of those firms interested in coming out here, and taking it? I ask you, when you have time, to respond to that. George said tonight, that it won't effect special tippers, such as schools. Schools go to the dump. I served on the Greenport School Board for ten years. We've remodeled classrooms up there, changed partitions around. Yes, we did take construction debris to the landfill. It will affect the schood district. That is not household garbage, that comes from the classrooms. $287,000.00 of contracts authorized tonight, with D & B, consultants. That's fine, but we have to pay for it. It should have been in the Budget. If it wasn't, perhaps somebody was lax, but now we've got to pay for it. But why make a statement of people in town, that D & B is working for the entire township, everybody. Why put it on people like Mr. Costello, the carters in town, the landfill people in town. They're working for everybody. Let the town charge, not a select group charge. Thirty-seven dayst this new Board. In January, we got hit with a $60,000.00 bond to repair the Police Station. ~onight you have in there to raise $200,000.00, $300,000.00. I ask you,January the bond, February the land fee, what are you going to do to us in March? I find it kind of difficult to realize that we're in this tough shape, the Town for money. I brought you an article out of Suffolk Life. 11/25/89. Mr. Penny claimed there was several places in the budget, that could have been reduced, total spending, a half a million dollars. We have a half a million dollars Mr. Penny feels in excess of the budget that was passed. He voted against itt him and Judge Edwards. He still feels that a half of million is there, at this time. Why do we need this increase now? I find it hard to comprehend at this early stage in the 1990 budget, that we are in such dire physical shape that we have to go to a new user fee. Basically, the man in the White House says no new taxes. Remember, he said, read my lips? I guess we're trying to ask you nice. Read our lips. No more budget increase, please. SUPERVISOR HARRIS: Is there anyone else, who would like to address the Town Board? (No response.) At this time, I'd like to close this public hearing. Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerl~ ~ 'L~O~ICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON LocAL LAW pUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that there has been pre- sented to thc Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New york, on the 23rd day of ]anua~], 1990, a Local Law entitled, "A Local Law I n Relntion to Garbage, Rub- bish mild Refuse". NOTICE IS FURTItER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southrdd will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York on the 6th day of Februmry, 1990, at 8:05 o'clock P.M., at which 6me all interested persons will be heard. This proposed ~Local Law in Relation to Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse" reads as follows: BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Chapter 48 (Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse) of the Cede of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as foEows: 1. Section 48-4.B is hereby amended to read as foUows: B. Effective April 1, 1990, in addition to the fees established in Section 48- 4. A of this Chapter, there shall be a fee of two cents ($0.02) per pound on loads containing the following: II. T~is Local Law shall take cf- feet upon its filing with the Copies of this Local. Law are DATED: January 23, 1990.. sOUTttOLD TOWN CLERK. STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Patricia Heaney of Mattituck, in said County, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly published in said Newspaper once ea~Ch week for 1 weeks successively, commencing on the __] st __ day of February 1~0 Principal Clerk COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ss: STATE OF NEW YORK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR- ING ON LOCAL LAW PUBLIC NOTICE is ber~by given that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southoid, Suffolk County, New York, on the 23rd day of January, 1990, a Local Law entitled, "A ~ ~ ia Relation ~ Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse." NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a puMie h~ on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, ' New York on the 6th day of February, 1990, at 8.'~ o'clock P.M., at which time all interested persons will be heard. Tins proposed "Local Law in Relation to Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse" reads as follows: BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Chapter 48 (Garbage, Rub- bish and Refuse) of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: I. Section 48-4.B is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Effective April 1, 1990, in .addition to the fees established m Section 48-4.A of this Chapter, there shall be a fee of two cents ($0.02) per pound on loads containing the following: II. This Local Law shall take ef- fect upon its filing with the' Secretary of State. Copies of this Local Law are available in the Office of the Town Clerk to any interested persons during business hours. DATED: January 23, 1990. JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK lX-2/l/9O(lO) Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County~ and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman once each week for ........... / weeks successively, commencing on the da " '~/ Sworn to before me this ..................... day of ........... · .~.' .~-'~.~'-/., 19 Notary Public ,~ .~ A t,'~ A SCHNEIDER i'.{.3 :;8('3346