Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1942_05_20 Town Board Minutes 5 REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING BY AND BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMRONECK, NEW YORK HELD MAY 20, 1942 At the Weaver Street Fire House, Town of Mamaroneck, New York. The hearing was called to order by Supervisor McCulloch at 8:15 P. 11. (Eastern War Time) . Present: Supervisor McCulloch Councilmen Bates, Brewer and Mandeville Absent: Councilman Griffin The presence was also noted of Town Clerk Payne, and Town Attorney Delius. The Supervisor requested the Town Clerk to read the notice of public hearing published May 8, 1942. The Torn Clerk presented the affidavit of publication and read the notice . The Supervisor asked if there was a representative of the Scarsdale Bus Company present. Mr. Thomas R. Fisher of Scarsdale stated that he represented the bus company. The Supervisor asked Mr . Fisher to describe the route to be followed by the proposed bus line . Mr. Fisher stated that the buses would leave New Rochelle at the corner of Church Street and Main Street, proceed along laain Street to Stevenson Boulevard, then on Stevenson Boulevard to Palmer Avenue to the Tovan of Mamaroneck and the Village of Larchmont line; along Palmer Avenue to Chatsworth Avenue, across the railroad tracks to Myrtle Boulevard to Weaver Street; along Weaver Street to the Scarsdale line; then along Palmer Avenue in Scarsdale to Mamaroneck Avenue in White Plains . He said that they were already operating a line from Wartine Avenue to Scarsdale . Councilman Mandeville asked Mr. Fisher what type of equipment his company had. Mr. Fisher stated that they had ttwo trolley type of buses ordered from the Iilack Company who have promised delivery this summer. Councilman Mandeville asked if the bus company had their assurance of delivery if the franchise was granted. Mr. Fisher replied that they did and that they also had assurance from the Ford Ilotor Company that they can have buses on ninety days ' delivery and an unlimited number. Councilman Mandeville asked what equipment the company has now Mr. Fisher explained that they have eighteen buses, prin- cipally , lack trucks . Mr . Mandeville asked whether or not they are the regular club type. Mr. Fisher stated that they have both types the transit and club types. When questioned as to the service to be furnished, Mr. Fisher stated. that if they were granted the franchise they would attempt to meet trains at the Larchmont Station and. would run two buses during rush hours . He said that the fare between any points in Larchmont and Mamaroneck either side of the railroad station would be 10 cents; from the south side of Larchmont Station in Larchmont to New Rochelle 10 cents; from the west side of Larchmont Station to Nev Rochelle 15 cents; southeast of Larchmont Station to Scarsdale 20 cents; and west of Larchmont Station to Scarsdale 15 cents and to White Plains 20 cents . "The 10-cent fare ends when the bus crosses the Scarsdale line at about the Donnie Briar Country Club", he said. Mr. Walter W. Brinckerhoff asked how frequently the buses would run. Mr . Fisher explained that the longest interval between trips would be 40 minutes and that they could not give any quicker service than every 30 minutes, but that they did intend to add more service during the day on Sundays and holidays . He stated that in addition to through service they intend to have extra trips in the morning to meet trains . Mr. A. Stirling Smith asked whether they intended to run the buses all night . Mr. Fisher answered that there would be a bus at leasttwice an hour or even more. The Supervisor inquired if the route was clearly understood by everyone and explained once more the route to be followed. He said that the town now has a local bus system which has beenoperating for several years but that the town board had received requests for bus service from New Rochelle to White Plains . He explained that the hearing was being held to discuss the question of routes and fares that have been suggested. He stated that no letters had been received opposing this bus line, but that a letter had been received from Mr. Page, suggesting that the bus run down Weaver Street and through Murray Avenue. He added that the board must have a very good reason for refusing to allow a bus to go through the town to White Plains . He then called for remarks from those present who were opposed to the route suggested by the Scarsdale Bus Company. Mr. Lawrence Ascher of 21 Homer Avenue stated that he thought that the bus line should be on Murray Avenue and expressed the wish that some bus be provided. Mr. T. B. Jewell, representing the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company and the County Transportation Company, asked Mr. Fisher whether the proposed route is an extension of a present route, is made to meet an emergency need or is to be perma- nent route. Mr. Fisher replied that they did not consider their applica- tion an emergency application since they are already operating one- half of the proposed route. He related that they were originally approached by people in New Rochelle to ascertain if they:would be willing to attempt to run such a route. He said that his company was willing to accept any reasonable termination of the franchise that the tovrn of Mamaroneck wishes to put into the franchise, provided it gives them enough time to amortize the cost of some of the equipment. Mr. Jewell asked what the running time was between New Rochelle and White Plains . Mr . Fisher said that they hoped to cut it dorm to one-half hour. Mr. Jewell informed Mr. Fisher that some years ago a similar application was made by the Yonkers bus Company to run a bus on Murray Avenue and at that time the sentiment of the ton board and those present at the hearing was opposed to the suggestion. "When you extend the service to Chatsworth Avenue and then parallel the railroad and our bus line into New Rochelle, we are opposed to that. We would not be opposed to going from Weaver Street to Scarsdale, " he said. Councilman Brewer asked Mr. Jewell how the railroad company suggested that people in Larchmont or New Rochelle get to White Plains. Mr. Jewell replied that they were not objecting to the route from Larchmont to White Plains . The Supervisor explained that a small portion of Palmer Avenue near the New Rochelle line is in the town and asked Mr. Jewell if he thought that the town board should. go to the extent of prohibit- ing this bus line even though Larchmont feels that they want the bus to New Rochelle. Mr. Jewell replied that he did. The question was asked of Mr. Jewell as to why the County Transportation Company did not want to extend their service to Heathcote . Mr. Jewell answered that they did not have the equipment to do so. The Supervisor stated that as he understood it, if the town board granted the franchise, the only traffic that would be taken from the County Transportation Company would be those people residing on d4eaver Street and Myrtle Boulevard who are now using their bus . Mr. Jewell stated that it is for that reason that they can not logically object to the route from Weaver Street to Scarsdale . He added that the remainder of the route would deprive them or revenues on their line to New Rochelle. The Supervisor asked Mr . Jewell if he would admit that New Rochelle would be entitled to running a direct bus to White Plains. Mr . Jewell replied that the town board and his company had fought that before. The Supervisor explained that the town board had opposed the former route because they did not want the bus on Murray Avenue; that they had not opposed the route as a bus line from New Rochelle but that they had opposed the route that was suggested. He added that if there is a bus route from New Rochelle to White Plains, it would have either to go over the Boston Post Road or Palmer Avenue. Mr. Jewell stated that they were opposed to any parallel route and that they did not see any necessity for it, because you can make the trip now by transfer. In answer to the Supervisorrs question as to whether or not they would not object to granting a franchise if the bus route stopped at the Larchmont Station, Mr. Jewell said that they would. not. Councilman Bates aksed if they viould grant transfers to be used on the other bus line. Mr. Jewell stated that that would have to be worked out with the other bus company. He called attention to the fact that Mr. Eastman, Director of State Defense Transportation, had issued a statement that no extensions of buses should be made except in defense areas where needed. Councilman Brewer stated that if the people can not use their automobiles, they have to get around some way. Mr. Jewell requested that the application, if granted, be restricted to the route from White Plains to the Larchmont Station and that it carry the same restrictions and taxes as imposed on the County Transportation Company. Mr. R. M. Page, 350 Vieaver Street, stated that he had opposed the Yonkers Bus Company' s application in 1938 because he did not think N it was necessary in the unincorporated section, but due to the war emergency he said that he did feel that some relief is necessary for people who live in remote sections or to assist the war effort as far as saving gasoline . He added that he thought that the route down Ifurray Avenue would be safer for school children even though it does go in front of the school house, because they are protected. by police- men. He said that the traffic hazards to children are very much greater because they would have two bus lines on Weaver Street. He voiced disapproval of the route so far as it runs down Weaver Street to Myrtle Boulevard and suggested that it be diverted to Murray Avenue. Mr. Laurice Libby, 24 Orsini Drive, stated that he thought many people would like to have the bus run dowan Murray Avenue and suggested that a vote be taken on that question. The Supervisor explained that the hearing had been called to discuss only the route down Weaver Street to Myrtle Boulevard and across Myrtle Boulevard to the station, and out of deferrence to those living on Murray Avenue, it would be unfair to take a vote on that. Mr. P. B. Kaiser, Weaver Street, expressed his opposition to the bus line running down Cleaver Street because of the danger to children coining through Colonial Avenue from school and stated that two more buses running every 40 minutes would create great hazards at that corner. Mr. V. J. Kraft, 246 Palmer Avenue, stated that on Palmer Avenue they have all kinds of buses and trucks, that both the senior high school and junior high school students use that street, and that there is no trouble there. He said that he was very much in favor of a bus going to White Plains on Weaver Street. Mr. Rufus K. Allerton, 74 Lansdowne Drive, related how it had taken him one hour and fifteen minutes to get from his home to White Plains while on jury duty. Added to this was the inconvenience of transferring to another bus line in order to get to White Plains, he said. Councilman Brewer inquired how much it had cost him to get to White Plains. Mr. Allerton answered that it had cost him about 40 cents. Councilman Mandeville commented that this bus line would cut the fare in half. Mr. Page pointed out that in normal times there would be a great many against this proposition but because of an emergency now he and many others would be in favor of it. He urged that the franchise be limited to the duration and six months after the war. He added that it was not fair to subject the people on Weaver Street to two bus lines when Murray Avenue is a more direct route. He em- phasized the traffic hazard when turning at the corner of Cleaver Street and Myrtle Boulevard. The Supervisor pointed out that the request to operate the bus lire on Weaver Street has been made because the route on Iaurray Avenue had previously been successfully opposed. He stated that a very good brief had been submitted to the Public Service Commission by the Town Attorney opposing the Murray Avenue route. Mr . Page commented that if the Weaver Street-Myrtle Boulevard route had been suggested as an alternative at the time the Murray Avenue route was considered, it would have had opposition. The question was as wed as to whether or not this bus line was being considered merely for the emergency. The Supervisor replied that the Board did riot so consider it, and stated that a route between Eew Rochelle and White Plains is a reasonable request and the Board can not forbid routes to go through the town. Mr. A. Stirling Smith opposed the line on Weaver Street from the standpoint of depreciation of property values. He asserted that if there is another bus line on ti'ueaver Street, they never would be able to sell property. He said that they were going to pay for it on Weaver Street . The Supervisor explained that the request had been made of the Board that they express themselves in favor or in opposition to the line and even if they opposed it, it could be taken to the Public Service Commission. He pointed out that the Board is not the final arbitrator. Mr. Kaiser asked if it was not the consensus of opinion that Weaver Street of all the streets in the unincorporated is one, if not the most, dangerous of streets . 63 Mr. Gustave Simons, 515 Weaver Street, cited the Bronxville case and expressed the opinion that the Board had a right to exclude this bus route. He said, however, that he was not against granting the franchise, but that he thought that the franchise should be limited either to a period of one, two or three years or the duration of the war. He stated that he thought that the franchise should be given with a definite time limitation and a definitely short one. The Supervisor stated that the Board in its discussion had had in mind a much shorter time than two years . Mr. Emil H. Fink, 12 Homer Avenue, remarked that in fairness to any line that would purchase buses, they ought to be allowed to run those buses until they saw, a profit on it. He inquired whether or not the Board of Education had made a final expresson on the bus route on Murray Avenue. The Supervisor informed him that the Board of Education had been notified of this hearing and no one was present to oppose the route being considered. Mr. Thornton Earle, 17 Althea Lane, stated that he was very much in favor of a bus line through leaver Street to the station, but that he wondered if it would do very much good when it would run only every 40 minutes . He stated that he thought it should meet every train in Larchmont . The Supervisor commented that he had understood Mr. Fisher to state that at rush hours they would run every 30 minutes. Mr. Fisher said that it was too far to Scarsdale to attempt to give this service to Scarsdale and that during the day they did not feel that there was enough traffic to warrant meeting every train. He stated that he did think that only those commuting trains in the morning and in the erening would be met. Some one asked whether the bus company had worked out a schedule. The Supervisor stated that before the Town Board granted the franchise they wanted to see the actual schedule and would insist that the schedule fit in with the most popular trains . Mr. Adrian Henigson, Griffen Avenue, expressed the opinion that it is the moral obligation of a community to supply outlying districts of the town with adequate transportation. Mr . Page said that he thought the Town Board should take up with the Board of Education whether or not there is any difference in the hazards on Weaver Street and Murray Avenue. Mr. Walter W. Brinckerhoff, 340 Weaver Street, endorsed what Mr. Page, Mr. Kaiser and Par. Smith had said concerning the pro- posed bus route and stated that he was opposed to it. He said that Weaver Street has the heaviest raffic of any street in the town and that he thought it only fair that we share other things as well as pleasures and benefits . He urged the Town Board to consider the traffic on Weaver Street and the danger of two bus lines, the curves 8 65 on Weaver Street and the dangerous turning point at Payrtie Boulevard and Weaver Street, the depreciation of property values oil Weaver Street and the fairness to the property owners . Stir. H. C. Smith of Scarsdale pointed out that the bus drivers today are much more careful than the ordinary citizen. He said that he used to live on Larchmont Avenue where buses ran every day and they never had an accident there. Pair. Anthony Russo, 31 Ellsworth Road, representing the Larchmont Gardens Association, stated that the executive board of that association had heartily approved of some bus transportation to White Plains. Mr. James H. King, 20 Bradford Road, Scarsdale, speaking for Ridge Acres, Scarsdale, stated that every one in that section trades in Larchmont and most of them attend churches and take trains in Larchmont. He stated that as a property owner and taxpayer in the Town of Mamaroneck he thought it would be a help in the town to have a bus line to the Larchmont Station. He said that the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company would lose traffic from Scarsdale on their railroad unless a bus line ere provided. He said that a bus line was a necessity now. Councilman Brewer asked for a show of hands regarding whether the bus line should be temporary or permanent. Mr. Kraft commented that real estate values would go up if a bus line was provided. Mr. King filed a statement with the Town Board. Mr. Haines frcm Scarsdale Meadows filed a petition signed by three hundred individuals in favor of the bus line . At 9:45 P. M. the hearing was declared closed. The Supervisor stated that it was in order to proceed with the regular meeting of the 'Town Board. It was agreed to hold the meeting in the Council Room of the Fire House. At 9: 55 P. 16. the meeting was called to order. The members of the Board expressed their regret that an injury had caused the absence of Councilman Griffin. The minutes of the meeting of May 6, 1942, were approved as presented. The Supervisor suggested that the meeting proceed with the reports of committees . Councilman Bates reported that the storm water drain in Mohegan Road was finished, also that the W. P. A. project for the glitters along Fenimore Road was progressing quite well and that the men were doing a good job. Councilman Brewer stated that there was nothing to report on home defense other than that it was very important to secure sirens . He suggested that if the 'Town could not get them from the county, the Town should purchase same . Councilman Mandeville stated that he agreed with Councilman Brewer and it was on motion by Councilman Mandeville, seconded by Councilman Brewer, upon roll call, RESOLVED, that the Supervisor be and he hereby is authorized to purchase and have installed the air raid wardning system known as Plan No . 2 approved at the Town Board meeting held May 6, 1942. Councilman Mandeville reported that the highways, sidewalks and gutters were in very good condition. 867 The Supervisor stated that the Highway Department should be commended for its work, also that good foresight had been used in doing the work while materials were still available. Councilman Mandeviile advised that the Highway Department had enough asphalt left over to last for a considerable length of time. Councilman Mandeville presented four petitions dated Play 20, 1942, received from the Assessor for the correction of the assessment roll so as to permit the apportionment of taxes . On motion by Councilman Mandeville, seconded by Councilman Bremer, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, the Assessor has presented petitions dated 1day 20, 1942, for the. correction of the assessment roll for certain years, pursuant to the provisions of Section 33 of Chapter 105 of the Laws of 1916, as amended, known as the Westechester Runty Tax Act; and WHEREAS, after due consideration this Board finds it desirable to grant said petitions for the correction of said assessment roll; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the assessment roll for the year 1941, school taxes of 1942, which shows property now appearing oil the roll as follows: Section Block Lot Owner Land Imp. Total 1 37B 338 to 348 G. Gianetti $9,950 $9,950 (122-387) be corrected as follov:,s, in accordance with the provisions of sub -division 5 of Section 33 : Section Block Lot Owner Land Imp. Total 1 37B 338 to 341 G. Gianetti $3, 600 $3,600 (122-387) 1 37B 342 to 345A G. Gianetti 31500 3, 500 (122-395) 1 37B 345B to 348 Vvl. A. Dunbar &; W 21850 21850 (122-403) FURTHER RESOLVED, that the assessment roll for the year 1941, school taxes of 1942, which shows property now appearing on the rolls as follows : Section Block Lot Owner Land Imp. Total 3 13A (333-1) Therese H. Semon $192,000 25,000 217,000 be corrected as follows, in accordance with the provisions of sub -division 5 of Section 33: Section Block Lot Owner Land Imp. Total 3 13A (333-1) Therese H. Semen $177,000 19,000 196,000 3 13A 1 11. H. Roseneau (333-836) Ors. 15,000 6,000 21,000 FURTHER RESOLVED, that the assessment roll for the assessment rolls for the years 1940 and 1941 taxes of 1941 and 1942 which show property now appearing on the rolls as follows: Section Block Lot Owner Land Imp. Total 6 33 8 to 11,12B) Deerland Realty 6,200 65200 19B,20,21 ) (604-109) 83 Transportation, School Census Auditing Legal Expense Cards, Reports, Attendance Officer etc . INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES Salaries, Teachers, Supervisors, and Principals ' Clerks Evening School Text Books Stationery and Teaching Supplies Commencement and Other Exhibits Record Forms, etc . Expenses of Principals ' Offices OPERATION OF PLANT Janitors ' Wages Fuel 300.00 500 .00 500.00 2,100.00 500.00 Principals, 489,250. 00 5,000 .00 7, 500.00 149000.00 700.00 800.00 250.00 Water Light and Power Janitors ' Supplies Telephone Trucking and Window Cleaning Maintenance of Plant Upkeep of Grounds, Repair of Buildings, Repair of Heaters, Repair of" Furniture, Other Repairs and Replacements idechanics Master Mechanic FINED CTI.?RGFS Pension Funds Insurance Taxes and Assessments DEBT SERVICE Bonds Interest on Bonds Collection Charges Short Term Interest CAPIT LL OU'T'LAY Improvement of Grounds and Buildings New Furniture Instructional Equipment Library Books Apparatus and Other AUXILIARY AGEI,,CIES Salaries, Librarians, Medical Inspectors, Nurses, Dentists and Dental Hygienist Library Expense Nurses ' Supplies, Dental Supplies and Glasses Bus, idilk and Lunches Health and Physical Education Supplies Parent Education Group GRAND 'TOTAL Less Estimated State School Money Less Cash Available 49,900.00 20,000.00 2,800.00 10,000 .00 6,000. 00 2;100.GO 2,400.00 31,400 .00 5,700:00 3,700. 00 36,200.00 7,800.00 11, 500.00 152,000.00 115,265 .00 275 .00 500.00 5,700.00 2,500 .00 2, 500.00 2,800.00 189320.00 200.00 400.00 2,000.00 3, 500.00 200.00 $1,039,031.00 165 ,000.00 874,031.00 15 ,000.00 T 859 ,031.00 The Supervisor also reported that he had received from the Board of Education of Scarsdale School District no 2, a part of which is within the 'Town of Mamaroneck, a certified copy of the budget of the school district for the ensuing school year. The budget rias ordered entered in the minutes as follows: El TAX BUDGET School District No. 2 School Year - July 1, 1942 to June 30, 1943 Town of Scarsdale County of Westchester To Mr . Bert C. McCulloch Supervisor of the town of Mamaroneeck, N. Y. I.B.M. Seymour Trustee of School District Number 22 of the Town of Scarsdale, N.Y. do hereby certify that at the annual meeting held Tuesday evening May 5, 1942 Mr B.M. Seymour was elected Trustee Miss Alice J. Kerr was elected Treasurer and Mrs. Lillian K. Storm was elected Clerk and that the total tax voted by such meeting was Twenty Thousand dollarss ($20,000) and that such tax was voted for the purposes and in the amounts indicated in this report - report. BUSINESS ADMlINISTRATION Items Totals School Elections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .00 Clerk' s office - salaries and expenses . . . . . . . . . 55 .00 Treasurer' s office - salaries and expenses . . . . . 400.00 Other expenses of business control. . . . . . . . . . . . . LO.00 5? 500.00 EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION Enforcement of coiipulsory education. . . . . . . . . . . . 25 .00 Census enumeration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 .00 Other expenses of educational control. . . . . . . . . . 3 .00 134. 00 EXPENSES OF INSTRUCTION Salaries of -principals and teachers. . . . . . . . . . . .85450.00 Other expenses of principals ' office . . . . . . . . . . . 45.00 Textbooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200.00 Other supplies used in instruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . 450.00 Tuition to other school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2,000.00 Other expenses o instruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.00 OPERATION OF SCHOOL PLANT Wages of janitors . and,other.employees . . . . . . . . ..1,0"80.00 Fuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450 .00 Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210.00 Light and power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150.00 Janitor supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 .00 General care of grounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 .00 Other expenses of operation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 .00 MAINTENANCE OF SCHOOL PLANT Upkeep of grounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Repairs and Replacements ofbuildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of heating, lighting, and plumbing. . . . . . . . . . . of apparatus used in instruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . offurniture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other expenses of :naintenai,,ce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AUXILIARY AGEIuCIES A: JID SUNDRY ACTIVITIES Books - repairs and replacements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;'!iedical inspection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nurseservice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dentalservice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otherexpenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -,,,al-.Ls ,00rtation of resident pu--pils Toyour own schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . To outside schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other auxiliarl- agencies and sundry activities . FIXED CHARGES 125 .00 150.00 40.00 20.00 10.00 25 .00 45 .00 150.00 250 .00 55 .00 20.00 750.00 850.00 35 .00 Pensions - State Retirement System. . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 .00 Insurance on transportation to your omn schools . . . . . . . . 50.00 on transportation to outside districts . . . . . . . 50 .00 other insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 .00 i1,245 .00 1,565 .00 370.00 2,155 .00 Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.00 758.00 DEBT SERVICE Redemption of bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 1,000.00 Redemption of short term loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633.00 887 Items Totals EXPENDITURES IN CAPITAL OUTLAY Improvement of grounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Old buildings and Equipment heating, lighting, plumbing, electrical. . . . building equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nevi apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . other capital outlay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . library books (not replacements) . . . . . . . . . . . TOTAL BUDGET NET BUDGET TO BE RAISED BY TAX 150.00 600.00 40.00 150 .00 200 .00 200.00 1,633 .00 1,340 .00 $20,000.00 A letter dated May 18, 1942, received from William S. Coffey attorney, concerning the property of the former Larchmont National Bank and Trust Company building, was referred to the Assessor and the Tours Clerk was directed to so advise Mr. Coffey. A memorandum dated May 18, 1942, issued by W. B. Folger, personnel officer of Westchester County, concerning the rules and regulations for the administration of civil service in the towns, villages and special districts in Vvestchester County, was received. the 'Town Clerk was directed to send copies to the members of the Board for study. A letter dated May 16, 1942, was received from B.P.O .E. M acuaroneck Lodge No . 1457 signed by B. J. Santoro, Chairman of the Flag Day Committee, inviting the members of the Board to participate in the parade in the village and in the services on the grounds of the lodge . A copy of the letter was ordered mailed as a memorandum to all members of the Board. The reports of the 'Town Clerk and the hiIamaroneck Health Center for the month of April mere received and filed. At 10: 55 P.M. the Board unanimously resolved to adjourn. Town Clerk