Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968_05_15 Town Board Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK, HELD MAY 15, 1968, IN THE AUDITORIUM OF THE WEAVER STREET FIREHOUSE, WEAVER STREET, TOWN OF MAMARONECK. CALL TO ORDER The Supervisor called the meeting to order at 8 :15 p. m. ROLL CALL Present: Supervisor Kane Councilwoman Helwig Councilman Chalif Councilman Faiola Councilman Nagel Absent: None Also Present: Mr. Gronberg - Town Clerk Mrs. Brewer - Deputy Clerk Mr. Johnston - Town Attorney Mr. Altieri - Comptroller Mr. Widulski - Engineer APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the regular meetings of April 18th and May 1st, 1968 were presented and on motion duly made and seconded were approved as submitted. OLD BUSINESS 1. Progress Report - Weaver Street Sidewalk The Clerk presented a Progress Report addressed to the Supervisor by the Town Engineer under date of May 13, 1968, which was ordered received and filed for the record. The Supervisor advised the Board that letters regarding the acquisition of such property as was necessary for the construction of the proposed walk had been mailed to the property owners affected as of this date. 2. Application for Swimming Pool Permit - C. P. Greer (Letter withdrawing application) The Clerk presented the following letter addressed to his attention by June Harris, Aqualine-Harris, Inc. under date of May 13, 1968 : "In accordance with our conversation today, this is to confirm the withdrawal of the application for the Greer swimming pool from the May 15 Town Board Agenda. -1- "Mr. Harris will be in touch with Mr. Paonessa regarding a future date. "Thank you. " The Board accordingly deferred the application as request- ed and ordered the foregoing letter filed for the record. 3. Proposed Protano Subdivision, Village of Mamaroneck The Clerk presented a report addressed to the Board by Fred L. Maggini, Chairman of the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board, on the Village of Mamaroneck cluster housing project proposed along Fenimore Road which recom- mended that the proposed subdivision be limited so as to conform with all the requirements of the existing R-6 Zoning in the Village of Mamaroneck, which was herewith ordered received and filed. The Engineer, upon recognition by the Chair, advised the Board that Mr. Joseph R. Potenza, who represented the Westchester County Department of Planning, had attended the last meeting of the Town Planning Board and would for- ward to him in writing a report of the observations he had made at the said meeting. The Supervisor then advised the Board that he had today addressed a letter to the Hon. Board of Trustees of the Village of Mamaroneck conveying the Town' s deep concern about the proposed attached structures in the Protano subdivision application and requesting that Honorable body' s deep consideration of this application in view of the provisions in Section 179-p, subdivision (b) of the Village law. He stated that a copy of this letter would be forwarded to the local press and all civic organizations. NEW BUSINESS 1. Application - Swimming Pool Permit (Mrs. Edye Weitz, 31 Emerson Road) The Clerk presented a memorandum addressed to the Board by the Building and Plumbing Inspector under date of May 6, 1968, submitting the application of Mrs. Edye Weitz of 31 Emerson Road, Larchmont, for the installation of an above-ground swimming pool at the above address, which was herewith ordered received and filed for the record. The Supervisor stated that in accordance with usual prac- tice, the neighboring property owners would be notified of the application and the members of the Board would personally inspect the site for the pool prior to the Board' s action on the application at its next meeting. 2. Request for Bond for Court Clerk (Mrs. Lois Rissler) Pursuant to request that Mrs. Lois Rissler, Court Clerk, -2- 169 be bonded addressed to the Board by Judge Munn Brewer under date of May 3, 1968 herewith presented and filed for the record, it was on motion by Councilman Nagel, seconded by Councilman Faiola, unanimously RESOLVED, that pursuant to Town Law, a bond is required for Mrs. Lois Rissler as Court Clerk of the Town of Mamaroneck, conditioned for the faithful performance of her duties including the depositing of all funds or monies of the Town received by her pursuant to Section 25 of the Town Law, upon which the National Surety Corporation is surety in the penal sum of $10, 000. for a period from May 15, 1968 through December 31, 1968. COMMUNICATIONS 1. Petition - Revaluation The Clerk presented a petition signed by residents of the Town of Mamaroneck disapproving the new assessment of properties in the Town of Mamaroneck by Valuation Associates, which was herewith ordered received and filed for the record. Mr. Vincent Ciardullo, upon recognition, at this time submitted additional sheets which were ordered added to the aforementioned petition and filed therewith. 2. Notice of Meeting, Larchmont Village Board of Appeals The Clerk presented a Notice of meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, which, upon advice of requiring no action by this Board, was ordered received and filed. REPORTS The Town Clerk - - The Clerk presented the Town Clerk ' s report for the month of April 1968 which was ordered received and filed for the record. The Supervisor - - The Supervisor stated that he had no report to present at this time. Councilwoman Helwig - - 1. Reappointment, Recreation Commission (Mrs. O. R. Steffens) Councilwoman Helwig announced that the present term of -3- .'7 office of Mrs. O. R. Steffens, member of the Recreation Commission, would expire on May 19th, and with great pleasure placed her name in nomination for reappointment to the said Commission. She stated that Mrs. Steffens had served on the Commission from the date of its incep- tion, and that throughout the years of her terms of office, she had made many extraordinary and outstanding contributions to the Town of Mamaroneck. Since there were no further nominations, on a motion offered by Councilwoman Helwig, and unanimously seconded following an expression of tribute to Mrs. Steffens by each of the Councilmen, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that Mrs. O. R. Steffens, whose term of office as a member of the Recre- ation Commission expires on May 20, 1968, be and she hereby is reappointed a member of that Commission for a term of office of five (5) years, beginning May 20, 1968 and terminating May 19, 1973. Councilman Chalif - - Councilman Chalif stated that he had no report to present at this time. Councilman Faiola - - Councilman Faiola stated that he had no report to present at this time. Councilman Nagel - - Councilman Nagel stated that he had no report to present at this time. The Town Attorney - - The Attorney presented a proposed new Swimming Pool Ordi- nance (Article 23 of the Building Code) , a copy of which had been furnished to each member of the Board for review and consideration, and requested that a date be fixed for the Public Hearing thereon which was required by law. Whereupon, on motion by Councilman Chalif, seconded by Councilman Faiola, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that a Public Hearing be held before this Board at its next regular meeting on June - 5, 1968, at 8:15 p. m. in the Council Room of the Weaver Street Firehouse, Weaver Street, Town of Mamaroneck, for the purpose of consider- ing the repeal of Article 23 of the Building Code (Swimming Pool Ordinance) and in place -4- 171 thereof, the adoption of a new Article 23 as set forth in the Notice of Hearing; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk be and he hereby is authorized to publish in the official newspaper of the Town of Mamaro- neck, "The Daily Times " , Notice of such Hearing as required by law. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Property Revaluation The Supervisor then stated that the meeting would now be open to hear those who wished to address the Board. He requested that each person use the mike at the front of the room and identify himself or herself clearly for the record. The following persons were heard: Mr. Edward Cerny, Jr. , 43 Vine Road Mr. Cerny asked if the Town' s decision to assess property at 45% of true value while the Village of Mamaroneck assesses at 40% would result in the residents of the unin- corporated area paying a higher school tax. Councilwoman Helwig replied that school taxes are computed on the basis of the Town Tax Roll for the entire Town in- cluding all of the Village of Larchmont, the unincorporated area, and that part of the Village of Mamaroneck which lies in the Town of Mamaroneck. Mr. Cerny observed that he felt it important that revalu- ation not lead into another spiral of tax increases. He conceded that Town taxes had risen slowly but school spend- ing had jumped sharply. He voiced fear that spending would "create another middle-class wasteland if we continue with profligate increases in taxes which eventually would have a depreciating effect on land value. " Mr. Hayden W. Smith, 8 Lafayette Road Mr. Smith, Co-Chairman of the newly formed Coordinating Committee of Civic Associations of the Town of Mamaroneck said the group was "born in great part as a result of the furor and controversy brought to the Town as a result of revaluation. " He described the revaluation project as "if anything, long overdue" and suggested that the roll be kept up to date with more frequent, regular and periodic revaluations. At -- the same time he said that when there were more than 7 , 000 individual properties assessed in a limited interval of time there would inevitably be errors and inequities and that some people might have been treated unfairly. He then said that those who felt, rightly or wrongly, that -5- 172 they had been treated unfairly had not been given a hear- ing adequate to the magnitude of their complaints. He further stated that widespread dissatisfaction was indicated by the turn-out at the Valuation hearings and the circulation and filing of petitions requesting the Council to disapprove the new valuations set by Valuation Associates. He said that such a disapproval following the expenditure of some $58, 000. would be the worse of two evils but added that some action was needed to correct existing errors and inequities as quickly as possible. Further he advised those present that if they, as indivi- duals, thought their assessment was wrong, they should be given a costless opportunity to have their grievance heard speedily. He suggested as one means of providing such hearings, that this new Committee enlist the aid of Real Estate brokers to confer unofficially with those taxpayers concerned since they would be able to judge whether or not a taxpayer had a legitimate case to present to the Board of Review. Mr. Smith then used his personal assessment increase as an example - explaining that while his assessment had been raised substantially, it was at a level very close to the sales price of properties in his neighborhood, and, therefore, while he did not like it, he must agree that the proposed assessment was fair. He remarked that his homework on the Town budget showed that the Town had increased its taxes (part of which went to the State, County, Judicial, etc. ) only 3% per year _ for the past ten years. However, the upward spiral of the total tax, due to the school taxes, had risen more than three times as fast as the Town tax during the past ten years, adding that 50% of taxes went to the Board of Education. He then said that he felt the general dis- gruntlement was due to the school tax caused primarily by the educational costs of the Mamaroneck School System. Mr. Smith concluded stating "I am pleased to pay but I insist that the tax load be shared equitably . . . and that anyone not satisfied should be heard. " The Supervisor thanked Mr. Smith, stating that as he was sure all the persons in the room were aware the sole pur- pose of revaluation was to assess all properties on an equal basis so that the tax load would be equitably shared by all property owners. Mr. Cerny then stated that as he understood it the rolls would be closed on June 1st. He inquired whether the new assessments would then be open for everyone to observe. In reply, Mrs. Helwig stated that the law requires the Assessor to file a tentative roll by June lst and the final roll by September 15th. In the interim the Board of Review (a three-man citizen Board)- which sits annually to hear complaints, this year would sit during the third -6- 173 week in June, on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, the 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st from 10:00 a. m. until Noon and from 1:00 p. m. until 4:00 p, m. and possibly this year for further time if necessary, provision for which had been made in the 1968 budget. She further stated in reply to Mr. Cerny ' s question that as of June lst a tax- payer could go to the Assessor' s Office to observe his own card and the entire roll. Mr. George Schuler, 70 W. Garden Road -" Mr. Schuler asked why the Town assessed at 45 rather than 40 or some other percentage. In reply, the Supervisor said "Actually, it doesn 't matter what percentage of full value is used, but the prime reason is because the State equalization rate is 44%. Mrs. Helwig stated that the 45% had been recommended by the Town Assessor as seeming to be the fairest rate or ratio to full value, and the most equitable in that it did not shift the burden from special franchises to indi- vidual taxpayers. Several questions as to why this was the first time revalu- ation had been done, what formula had been used, why the sudden zealousness to correct inequalities all at once instead of spreading such a correction over the years, etc, were asked by Mrs. Mary Farrell, Mr. Joseph Morris- sey of 19 Jochum Avenue, Mr. John W. Hinchcliffe of 10 Carriage House Lane, and Mr. Otto Scheuble of 3 Rock Ridge Road. Mr. Harry Vinograd, 531 Weaver Street Mr. Vinograd complained about the information given by Mr. George Dobson, President of Valuation Associates, at the May 8th meeting. "There is a no-man ' s land here", he said, questioning the entire revaluation procedure inas- much as judging from what had happened to date he did not believe that anything other than the new assessment figures becoming the new tax roll would result from atten- dance at the meetings held by Valuation Associates, appeals to the Assessor or the Board of Review. Mr. Maury Medwick, 1000 Fenimore Road Mr. Medwick, co-chairman of the new CCCA with Mr. Hayden Smith, stated that the Town might be guilty of negligence in public relations on revaluation, but called to atten- tion that no taxpayer had spoken out when the project was being considered nor when it began. He stated that the Coordinating Committee would make every effort to see that any inequities were corrected, and urged residents of the community to attend Civic Association meet- ings so that they would be informed themselves on what pro- jects the Council proposed and would be able to make known their approval or disapproval before their inception. -7- 174 Mr. Medwick further stated that the Coordinating Committee would do its best to assist any dissatisfied resident if such resident would so advise the Committee. He added that the Committee would attempt to engage a lawyer if the injured party was unable to pay for same or to advise said party in every way possible, i, e. through arranging a conference with a real estate broker, etc. Mr. Owen A. Mandeville, 15 Kenmare Road Mr. Mandeville, former Town Supervisor and professional realtor, defended the revaluation project pointing out that inequalities in assessments produced a roll that was indefensible in court. He stated that he thought a few things should be explained, that he did not think this Board or any Board would hire any group to revalue pro- perties that was not adequately and professionally quali- fied to do so. He explained that the percentage fixed by the State came into existence from its annual "spot check- ing" program with the properties accordingly on the roll at 44% of what they were actually worth. With the present roll indefensible in court, this Board found itself in the position of being forced to bring in experts to create a new assessment roll. In reply to some miscellaneous questions from the floor as to whether assessments on apartments were going up or down, and as to the number of increases and decreases on properties, Mrs. Helwig replied that no complete survey was possible until completion of the tentative roll. She did say that there was an indication most apartments would be about the same dollar-wise. In reply to a question as to how many homes had not been inspected interiorly, Mrs. Helwig advised that Valuation Associates had reported inspection of 92% of properties. Mr. Alfred R. Schneider, 65 Shore Drive Mr. Schneider stated that as he understood it the reassess- ments were made by an organization retained by the Town Board, then referred to the Assessor for acceptance or adjustment. He asked whether the Town Board had to accept these assessments posing his question mainly because of those homes that had not been entered. Councilman Chalif replied stating that there was no issue before the Board this evening as to acceptance or rejec- tion of the valuations since the Board could not reject or accept any assessments. Further, he explained that if Mr. McEvoy, the Assessor, and his staff were to undertake what the professional company had been retained to do in a short time, it would take years, which would thus defeat the very purpose of revaluation since any revaluing of all properties in a given community must be done within a given unit of time, i. e. 3 months, 6 months or 1 year, etc. to be effective. He further stated that opportunities had been provided for citizens to discuss their individual pro- blems with Mr. Dobson or members of Valuation Associates, -8- 175 and that they still had recourse of appearing before the Board of Review. He stated that following receipt of Notice of Tentative Assessment which would be mailed on June lst, the tax roll would be open to study, and any individual would have the privilege, if he still so desired and upon filing a Protest Form, of appearing before the Board of Review. He concluded his statement with the comment that, in the final analysis, the only thing this Board, the Town Board, could do was to decide whether to revaluate or not to revaluate. Mrs. Helwig explained that the Assessor, Mr. McEvoy, reviewed each card as it came from Valuation Associates and that each card was then again reviewed jointly by both Valuation Associates and the Assessor. Mr. Blaise Fatone, 711 Forest Avenue Mr. Fatone stated that earlier this evening it had been suggested that real estate help be obtained, asking what good that would do now. Councilman Chalif stated that it would be any one ' s pre- rogative to go to a real estate broker to ask for deter- mination of a fair value on his property. Mr. Smith said, "I think this question deserves a little more consideration than Mr. Chalif would like to give it. " Our suggestion (the COCA) is that if you think your assess- ment is too high, you should be given an opportunity to have your grievance heard speedily and fairly; thus we -- suggest to such persons that they go to a real estate broker as one who would know the market value and could therefore advise whether or not the new assessment was fair. Mr. Guy Capecelatro, 57 Elm Avenue Mr. Capecelatro inquired what percentage of the homes had not been inspected to which Mrs. Helwig replied that Valu- ation Associates had reported inspection of 92% of the Town properties. She further stated that a card had been mailed to every one in the unincorporated area and the Village of Larchmont, and that a record had been kept of the number of inspections made, the number of recalls, etc. Other people addressing the Board along the same general line included Messrs. Joseph Mirabella, 23 Holly Place; Frank Claps, 120 Laurel Avenue; Charles Byrne, 50 Myrtle Boulevard; Joseph Colgan, 17 Cherry Avenue; Robert Mar- cus, 30 Villa Road; Gerard Murphy, 37 Cooper Lane; Edmund B. Van Hook, 198 Weaver Street; Vincent Ciardullo, 118 Laurel Avenue and George Dennis, 13 Kenmare Road. The Supervisor thanked all present for coming this even- ing, and thereupon since there was no further business he declared the meeting adjourned at 9:55 p. m. to recon- vene on June 5, 1968. -9- 176 BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS The meeting of the Board of Fire Commissioners was con- vened immediately upon the adjournment of the Town Board meeting. 1. Claims Commissioner Faiola presented for approval and authoriza- tion of payment the Fire Department claims, and thereupon on his motion, which was seconded by Commissioner Helwig, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the following Fire Department claims as audited by the Comptroller and ap- proved by the Fire Chief are hereby approved, and the Supervisor and Comptroller hereby authorized to pay the same out of the Fire Department budget for 1968: Atlantic Exterminating Corp. $ 7. 00 Con Edison 5. 00 Dri-Chem Extinguisher Co. 341. 38 Barney Epstein, Inc. 1,484. 00 Homelite 460. 00 Nicholas G. LaRussell 128. 83 McGuire Bros. , Inc. 7. 00 New York Telephone Co. 35. 75 Sherry Enterprises, Inc. 25. 20 Suburban Fuel Oil Service, Inc. 68. 94 Village of Larchmont 41. 82 Westchester Joint Water Works 2, 740. 00 Total $5, 344. 92 2. Reports There were no reports to be presented at this time. 3. Communications There were no communications to be presented at this time. 4. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the meeting, on motion duly made and seconded, it was declared adjourned at 10 :00 p. m. - T 1errkk -10-