HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968_03_08 Town Board Minutes NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
TOWN BOARD
TOWN OF MAMARONECK, NEW YORK
Pursuant to Section 62 of the Town Law, I hereby call
a special meeting of the Town Board, to be held in
the office of the Supervisor at the Town Offices,
158 West Boston Post Road,Village of Mamaroneck,
at 7:45 p. m. on Friday, March 8, 1968, to seek a
Bill by way of Home Rule which would allow the Town
of Mamaroneck to avail itself of certain exceptions
to Section 151 of the Highway Law so as to permit
construction and maintenance of sidewalks along
County roads or State highways within the said Town,
as a Part Town charge.
Peter F. Kane
Supervisor
March 8, 1968
WAIVER OF NOTICE
of
SPECIAL MEETING
of the
TOWN BOARD
TOWN OF MAMARONECK
We, the undersigned, hereby waive all notice of
the attached Notice of Special Meeting called by
the Supervisor on March 8, 1968, and consent that
this meeting shall be held as therein stated.
Supervisor
Councilman
Councilman /
,�V t'�`=�,�� d^� 'fit%'�.iF�✓�
Councilman
Councilman
Dated: March 8, 1968.
96
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF
THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK, HELD MARCH 8th, 1968, IN
THE OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR, TOWN OF MAMARONECK
OFFICES, 158 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK,
NEW YORK.
CALL TO ORDER
The Supervisor called the meeting to order at 7:45 p. m. in ac-
cordance with the Notice of Meeting and Waiver of Notice here-
to appended for the record.
ROLL CALL
Present: Supervisor Kane
Councilwoman Helwig
Councilman Chalif
Councilman Faiola
Councilman Nagel
Absent: None
Also Present: Mr. Johnston, Town Attorney
Mrs. Brewer, Deputy Clerk
SUPERVISOR KANE
The Supervisor stated that as recited in the Notice for this meet-
ing, it had been called so the Board could consider further Coun-
cilman Nagel's request that the sidewalk along Weaver Street be
constructed as a Part Town rather than a General Town charge.
At his request, the Attorney again explained that if the proposed
construction were to be a Part Town charge, legislation by way
of a Home Rule Bill must be obtained in Albany which, were
this the Board's pleasure, necessitated a resolution and atten-
dant memorandum as had been set forth to him in his several
telephone conversations with Mr. Felman, Counsel to Senator
Gioffre.
Councilwoman Helwig said there were several questions she
would like to ask. First, since the construction time tables
prepared by the Attorney and Engineer stated that a minimum of
six to seven months was required for constructing the walk as a
General Town charge as previously determined by the Board,
she asked what effect, if any, obtaining the bill required for con-
struction as a Part Town charge would have on the time schedules
hereinabove referred to.
In answering, the Attorney outlined the procedure detailed to him
by the Senator's Counsel, advising that while no one could pos-
sibly say with any certainty, it might be safe to estimate a min-
imum of eight weeks if all went perfectly and if a companion As-
sembly bill were reported out at the same time as the Senate
bill, etc.
Mrs. Helwig then recalled last year's procedure with the Home
Rule Bill for the Land-under-water grant in the Hommocks,
which land the Town had not yet acquired after some eleven
months delay.
_1_
7
Councilwoman Helwig next asked what things could not be done
until it was determined which route (Part Town or General
Town charge as previously fully explained by the Attorney) was
to be taken, and further asked what the Town's procedure
would be under Part Town charge since the proposed construc-
tion had been placed under General Town in the 1968 budget.
The Attorney replied that the proposed construction was sub-
ject to a Permissive Referendum either way and that certainly
only the preliminary steps could be taken (engineering survey
of properties to be acquired, appraisals thereof, necessary
maps, etc. ) prior to the expiration of the Per-
missive Referendum period.
Councilman Chalif exclaimed that he had not understood that
there would be any delay in the construction if it were a Part
Town rather than General Town charge with Councilman Nagel
stating that he, too, had the same impression and had so under-
stood.
Councilwoman Helwig then remarked that the Engineer's time
table denoted 16 weeks for the actual construction following ac-
quisition of land, advertising for bids, award of contract, etc.
Councilman Nagel asked whether construction could not com-
mence as soon as a contract was awarded and just go along, and
Councilman Chalif asked whether the specifications could not be
prepared and released. The Attorney advised that the appraisals
and maps were being made now which was all that could be done
prior to determination of the financing.
Councilman Nagel then inquired whether the Town could go back
to a General Town charge if unable to obtain a Home Rule Bill
which was answered in the affirmative. Councilwoman Helwig,
however, pointed out that there would still be the Permissive
Referendum at the time of return to the General Town charge,
under which if a petition is filed, a special election would have
to be held for the public.
Mrs. Clark - Murray Avenue P. T. A.
Mrs. Clark addressed the Chair stating that from what she
gathered the Attorney had checked with the Senate, asking if it
would not be wise to check with the Assembly.
Mr. Johnston asserted that it would be and that he would do so
on Monday.
Mrs. Clark then asked whether she was correct that Mr. Travia
had killed all Home Rule Bills last year. She was answered in
the affirmative. She then asked when the date for introducing new
-- bills would expire - - and upon being told about the 20th of the
month supposedly as far as the cut off date for the Senate went,
she inquired about the Assembly. The Attorney replied that he
knew of no cut off date in the Assembly.
Councilwoman Helwig then called attention to the time needed
once a bill reached the Governor's desk for signature into law
or veto - - 10-day bills if the legislature was in session and
3.0-day bills after that.
-2-
E -
9
Councilman Faiola suggested that a count of the number of school
children from both of the villages who would use the sidewalk be
obtained with the thinking that this might tend toward making the
construction a General Town charge more equitable.
The suggestion was discarded however in consideration of the
time element concerned - - and also because the number of
children from the villages would not have any bearing on the
location of the proposed walk which, as Councilman Nagel pointed
out, was entirely within the boundaries of the unincorporated area
and consequently to him should logically be a Part Town charge.
Councilwoman Helwig asked whether the Town could advertise
for bids when the Permissive Referendum period was over, to
which the Attorney replied in the affirmative.
Councilman Chalif then observed that it seemed to him in view of
what had been said this evening regarding the legislature and
timing that a decision must be made this evening. He further
said that the situation seemed now to be resolved to two alterna-
tives - - 1) to stay with the principle that the cost of this side-
walk should be a Part Town charge since it was completely in
the unincorporated area - - or 2) to get the sidewalk in by the
opening of school this fall which would seem to be possible only
if it were a General Town charge. He added that he sympathized
with Councilman Nagel since he agreed with his stand on principle.
Mr. Nagel said that he had to consider only two things - - getting
the sidewalk in as a Part Town charge (which he felt it should be)
with the odds against obtaining the necessary legislation in time
to accomplish the objective - - or proceeding as a General Town
charge in order to get the job done. He recalled that he had voted
for this construction as a General Town charge some six to seven
weeks ago but stated that he now felt he had been wrong then as
he was unable to see any justification for charging the villages for
construction taking place wholly within the unincorporated area.
However, he continued, there now seemed to be no choice since
the sidewalk must get in.
Councilman Chalif suggested that the Board proceed to have the
specifications prepared so that bids could be advertised for at
the earliest possible moment, saying that he could see no disad-
vantage to this procedure since all bids could be rejected if
necessary.
Following further discussion, during which Councilman Chalif
reiterated his thinking saying that although he was in sympathy
and support of Councilman Nagel's position on principle, he did
not see how the Board could afford to wait in view of the legis-
lation picture, Councilman Faiola returned to his former sug-
gestion of obtaining a count from the schools as a means to
help justify the complaints he felt would come from the villages,
and Councilwoman Helwig pointed out that the sidewalk would
serve many persons other than school children and that not a
single person from either village had appeared at the Public
Hearing to protest the proposed Local Law which made the
construction a General Town charge, on a motion by Councilman
Faiola, seconded by Councilwoman Helwig, the following
-3-
99
resolution was offered:
RESOLVED, that this Board will not seek
legislation by way of a Home Rule Bill so
as to permit the construction of sidewalks
adjacent o County roads and State high-
ways within the Town of Mamaroneck and
make the same a Part Town charge.
The vote on the foregoing resolution was as follows:
Supervisor Kane voting aye
Councilwoman Helwig aye
Councilman Chalif aye
Councilman Faiola " aye
Councilman Nagel " naye
Councilman Nagel requested that the reasons for his "no" vote
be noted in the record to the effect that he could not see the
logic or justification for the villages to have to pay for any
part of the cost of the construction of a sidewalk lying entirely
within the unincorporated area of the Town and further that he
stood on the principle of his request that this be a Part Town
charge.
The motion was therefore carried by a vote of four (4) ayes to
one (1) naye and declared duly adopted by majority vote.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was declared
adjourned at 8:30 p. m.
4.J
-4-