[0:41] Probably. On your good. All
[0:51] right, well, we're ready. I'd like to call the meeting
[0:58] to order. Please rise and join me in the pledge.
[1:00] Of Latin, I believe. To the flag of the United
[1:05] States of America. For which it stands. One nation under
[1:11] God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you
[1:16] for coming, everyone. Madam Clerk, would you please read the
[1:20] role? Present.
[1:33] Here. All right. Thank you. I moved to approve the
[1:41] minutes of the regular town board meeting of December. 9,
[1:44] 2025. 2nd. All in favor? Aye. I moved to approve
[1:48] the minutes of the regular town. Board meeting of December
[1:51] 18, 2025 2nd. All in favor? Aye. And moved to
[1:56] approve the minutes. Of the town board's organizational meeting on
[1:58] January. 5th. 2026. 2nd. All in favor? Aye. All right.
[2:03] Madam Clerk, would you please read the communication? Certainly. We
[2:07] have received the following communications in the office of the
[2:09] tower clerk. We have received public notices. For many years.
[2:13] Association of Towns for notice of 2026 nearly elected town
[2:17] officials school. In January in Albany and also other dates
[2:22] and corners. New York State Department of Public service notice
[2:26] of 2026 Winter preparedness workshop webinar. New York State Liquor
[2:31] Author Authority 30 day advanced notice from the listed entity.
[2:36] Notice of adoption. Household notice of public hearing. There was
[2:42] a. Village of West Hampton beach. My mic is on
[2:51] now. Zoning Board of Appeals hearing for 104 Main Street,
[2:58] West Hampton beach. Correspondence regarding the following topics planning board
[3:02] matter of 94 Dune Road, East Quag. Speeding traffic, old
[3:06] country road, East Quag and the Zoning Board of Appeals
[3:09] application to be heard on January 15. For Percy Avenue,
[3:13] West Hampton. The following bid and RFP submissions were received
[3:17] on Wednesday, December 17 a bid for 2025 water meter
[3:21] replacement. And a bid for 2025 tree clearing at plant
[3:26] number three on Thursday, December 18. An RFP for 93
[3:31] Butter Lane Bridge, Hampton Farming proposal was received as well
[3:35] as an RFP for 834 townline road, sagaponic farming proposal.
[3:41] In that concursive communications for this meeting's agenda. Thank you.
[3:47] I have two walk on resolution. The first is town
[3:51] board resolution id number 2026 one five nine. To authorize
[3:56] the supervisor. To execute a contract with all island testing
[3:59] Associates, Inc. For professional services related to special building inspections.
[4:04] At the West Hampton Community Center. And the second is
[4:07] town board resolution id number 2026 one six two. Which
[4:12] is the warrant? Number one. First one of the year.
[4:16] And I moved to add these two resolutions to the
[4:19] agenda. Second. All in favor? Aye. That brings us to
[4:24] the public hearing. Madam Clerk, would you please read the
[4:27] notice of the first. Public hearing. Public hearing number one
[4:31] to consider the acquisition of 1950 Meadow Lane in the
[4:34] village of Southampton and Amend CPA project plan and CPF
[4:38] management stewardship plan to include the property.
[4:48] Good afternoon and happy new year. Town board, madam supervisor.
[4:52] Nice to be here today for this specific property. Jacqueline
[4:56] Fenlin, CPF manager for the town of Southampton. Today we
[5:01] are here. As. Town clerk. Shermeyer provided for the property
[5:07] at 1950 Meadow Lane in the village of Southampton. This
[5:12] is known as Suffolk county tax UMP number 9421 111.1.
[5:18] So the owner is Francis arcatz. They have expressed interest
[5:22] in selling the property for 25,800,000. Dollars to the town
[5:26] of Southampton. This property is not included in the project
[5:30] plan, so this public hearing is also before you here
[5:33] today to include this in the project plan. It is
[5:36] a recommendation that this property should be included in the
[5:39] community preservation project plan designated under the village in hamlet
[5:42] Greens parks, recreation and open space target area. This property
[5:46] is unique because it contains maritime dunes, maritime beaches, and
[5:50] will preserve valuable shoreline along the Atlantic Ocean, which is
[5:54] serving coastal resiliency objectives and will further provide public access
[5:58] to the beach and Atlantic Ocean, thereby providing active and
[6:02] passive recreational opportunities for town residents. This. Also will help
[6:07] maintain the coastal dune system. If you can see on
[6:10] the aerial behind me, the village owns properties to the
[6:13] east and to the north. So by preserving this pattern,
[6:17] we are also assembling more protected area within the vicinity
[6:21] and. Building upon the existing. Coastal dune system, and it
[6:28] is very healthy, other than obviously the existing disturbance related
[6:31] to the house. The dune system is unique and very
[6:35] and contains rare species. This also is very important because
[6:39] of general state requirements and state recommendations for coastal resiliency.
[6:45] Some may have heard of coastal retreat. This also helps
[6:48] build and protect residents from further impacts from sea level
[6:52] rise or possible storm impacts as well by reducing wave
[6:56] generations during those times. So this is very helpful on
[7:00] many fronts. We're getting recreation, we're preserving coastal maritime dunes
[7:04] and also coastal resiliency strategies for the town. So we're
[7:08] in a rare opportunity where we can get this done.
[7:11] And I'm very excited to present this property to you
[7:13] today. Director Fenlin, would you. Mind just elaborating on the
[7:18] concept of coastal retreat really briefly. Yeah. So it's a
[7:22] general recommendation. Due to higher storm events and more catastrophic
[7:27] storm events. Obviously one of the most recent ones that
[7:30] was very catastrophic was Hurricane Sandy, even though that didn't
[7:34] have as much of an ocean. Impact we did see
[7:36] very high. I guess it would be like high tides
[7:40] associated in wave impact. So the general concept for coastal
[7:43] retreat is to remove any human impacts or human structures
[7:48] from that area. To allow, basically nature to help calm
[7:52] those storms, basically. And then move people out of harm's?
[7:55] Way. So basically removing elements of structural and even utilities.
[8:01] The whole concept is try to retreat. From that so
[8:03] that we don't have to. Spend millions to rebuild, possibly
[8:07] in those locations. And I would just say in terms
[8:09] of what this board, the conversation that this board has
[8:12] been having. We've been talking about ways we can target
[8:16] our CPF program to advance some of these coastal resiliency
[8:19] issues. And certainly what we're doing with the Sim project
[8:23] as well. It's exactly what we're doing and this project.
[8:28] Is not within the per se. It's a little bit
[8:31] east of it, but it's. On the east side of
[8:33] the Shunikak go canal inlet, but. It's certainly similar type
[8:40] of analysis and situation. Jackie, could you just go into
[8:45] a little bit for the future of this property? When
[8:48] we take title to it, sure. Who's being able to
[8:52] use it, what it's going to become, what's the future
[8:55] for it. Yeah. So as it's being preserved with CPF
[8:59] funds, it is. Very important. One of the aspects of
[9:01] CPF legislation and the town code is to provide public
[9:04] access. So we envision this, and this has been discussed
[9:07] with the town board that this will be an access
[9:09] in a small parking area for town residents. We have
[9:12] to work after the acquisition and the closing. We'll have
[9:15] to work on the demolition of the residents. But we
[9:17] are choosing. To facilitate the parking in the areas of
[9:21] disturbance associated with the residents and pool and accessory structures.
[9:25] So this will be available for parking for town residents,
[9:28] and then. We are going to maintain the existing walkway
[9:32] and obviously, possibly improve it with access to the beach.
[9:35] But you can see that there's already a significant walkway,
[9:38] so we would like to kind of retain that existing
[9:40] beach walkway to basically be pedestrian access to the beach
[9:44] at this location. So there would be no drive on
[9:46] access, but there would be parking, and you would be
[9:48] able to walk over to the beach. But there is
[9:51] driving, right? Alongside. Yes, there's currently Gary Max Way, which
[9:57] is formerly known as Road F, so that I'll just
[10:00] point to that. But that is currently a drive on
[10:02] beach four by four. Access. So this beach. Will be.
[10:09] You'd need to park and walk on. Yeah. So what?
[10:12] The vision is to have a parking area, a small
[10:15] parking area in the area of disturbance here, and then
[10:18] build upon the existing raised walkway that's in fairly good
[10:22] condition to allow for pedestrian access to the beach. That
[10:26] parcel next to it to the east, owned by the
[10:29] village. Is that just open space or is that used
[10:33] for beach access also? I believe it's just open space.
[10:35] But if you can see Gary Maxway, that drive on
[10:39] beach access doesn't. Quite follow the road right of way,
[10:43] but right now, and I don't think I talked to
[10:46] mayor manger. There's no intent for any additional improvements in
[10:50] alloc. Allocation. So currently it is just passively open space
[10:53] and preserved area. I don't have, like, the deed, binding
[10:57] deed information on that, but I can get that. For
[10:59] you, if you'd like. But any plans would be.
[11:12] Brought to back to us so we can show the
[11:14] public. Yeah. First phase is to formally acquire it. Get
[11:18] this on as a public CPF acquisition and. Then next.
[11:23] We'll have to gain multiple estimates and put it out
[11:25] to bid for the demolition of the structure. But I
[11:29] think what is well suited is we'll be removing the
[11:32] environmental impacts of the residents. And then with that disturbance
[11:35] area, we'll be able to utilize that for a small
[11:37] parking area. So we'll work on the design with the
[11:40] town board, and then we can. Always obviously have a
[11:42] public work session once those plans have been finalized, and
[11:45] it's absolutely worth noting that this would be the only
[11:48] town beach. In the Southampton village area. And that was
[11:52] something that the town board wanted to make available for
[11:56] town residents because it's village residence only in the vicinity.
[12:02] So to give additional access to town residents in this
[12:04] location, which I would say would be very beneficial also
[12:07] for members of the Shinococc nation. All right. Then let's
[12:15] take some cards. We have several on this topic. Don't
[12:18] go anywhere. Jackie. Thank you, Jackie. First speaker is Tim
[12:21] Corwin, and after Tim is Donna Bennett. My name is
[12:26] Tim Corwin. I'm a resident of Southampton town. I live
[12:30] in the North Sea area. For those that don't know
[12:33] me, I have been involved with conservation pretty much all
[12:36] of my life. And for the last ten years or
[12:39] so, my real push has been Southampton's trail. Trails. I'm
[12:48] a member of the Southampton Trails Advisory Board. I'm on
[12:50] the board of Southampton Trails preservation society. And I'm also.
[12:55] The volunteer in charge of maintaining all 350 miles of
[12:58] hiking trails in south Hippton town and if anybody would
[13:02] like to volunteer to help me, I'm always used to
[13:04] help. Find my contact information on southamptontrails.org website. All right?
[13:10] Love to hear from you. Either call or text. I
[13:13] just like to say I'm really excited about this. Having
[13:16] grown up in Southampton. As a kid. I grew up
[13:19] in the village. We always used to go to coopers.
[13:21] That was the place to be. Now, unless you have
[13:25] the ability to have a village permit, which is $600.
[13:29] If you don't have some kind of n, you can't
[13:32] go to. Southampton village beaches. This will be for the
[13:35] village and for the town, so it's really. Really exciting
[13:39] to see. And I'm very impressed that the whole board
[13:42] is behind this. I'm also impressed that we have the
[13:45] money to do it, and basically it is a gift
[13:48] from the rich people that were able to do this.
[13:51] So I just like to say, let's go for it.
[13:54] Thank you, Tim. From all the residents that pay transfer
[13:58] tax. But yes, and we're very fortunate to have the
[14:01] fund to be able to do this. The jana bennett
[14:05] and after donna stephanie mcnamar. Hi. I'm Donna Bennett. I'm
[14:11] sorry for the glasses, but I'm light. Sensitive. I want
[14:14] to say thank you. This is the first time I
[14:17] feel like you guys have been really trying to find
[14:19] a way to do something for us here. I mean,
[14:23] I love that. Beach. I also know how overcrowded it
[14:26] is, so I. Want to say thank you. Thank you.
[14:30] Thank you. However. Every time Miss Fenlin brought up the
[14:37] parking lot that will be there, the word small was.
[14:40] In front of it. So I want to ask you
[14:43] because. Southampton town goes all the way to the other
[14:48] side of West Hampton. There's no other. Beach. Anywhere but
[14:53] here in Southampton village, where you drive on. Can we
[14:58] please? Try and find another gift, if that's what Tim
[15:02] wants to call it, from the rich. People over on
[15:04] the other side of the canal. Because all the screaming
[15:09] that the people do about all the people that are
[15:11] down there on that beach. Never consider the fact that
[15:15] a lot of them come from the other side of
[15:18] the canal. I want to ask you to please consider
[15:22] this is the best thing you've done for the locals
[15:24] in this community that I can remember. I was born
[15:28] and raised here. I love this town. I'm tired of
[15:31] feeling like they're pushing us out, and this is the
[15:34] first time. I actually feel good. All of you together.
[15:38] Bravo. It's about time. And this is about. The locals,
[15:44] so please. Try and understand that Southampton goes all the
[15:48] way to the other side of Wayne Scott, too. We
[15:52] need more. Open park, beaches. Where town residents can go
[15:58] because there's quite a number in the village. Each village
[16:02] you go to. We always cater to that. But those
[16:05] of us that have grown up. Forever in the town
[16:08] are asking you please don't stop here. One last thing.
[16:12] I can't say. Mr. Pell. You and Mr. Iselli last
[16:16] year. Told me you were working on the garbage bags.
[16:19] It's been a long time in the bag still suck.
[16:23] But we got your beach. We got your beach. All
[16:27] right. Stephanie McNamara. And after Stephanie is Christopher Sargent. Hi.
[16:33] Madam Supreme Town Board. Thank you. My name is Stephanie
[16:36] McNamarma, resident of Southampton. My family and I would like
[16:40] to express our full support of this CPF purchase at
[16:43] 1950. Metal Lane. This was the first house built on
[16:46] that stretch of drive on beach and therefore significance. To
[16:49] secure and continued four by four beach access. For local
[16:54] town residents is greatly appreciated. What is needed at Gary
[16:57] Maxway is the parking area. For four by four vehicles
[17:01] when the plovers prevent us from accessing our drive on
[17:03] beach I'm hopeful the town will provide resident only. No
[17:07] nonresident, no day passes. Ideally four by four stickers. In
[17:11] other words, a simple parking area so that. We can
[17:14] access Gary, Maxwave and the clovers are present. We've been
[17:17] prohibited from. Use use of this speech for far too
[17:20] many years. This purchase will allow us once again to
[17:23] enjoy access to our beloved beach while allowing the provovers
[17:26] to nest. The village has only allowed those able to
[17:29] purchase village stickers at a cost of some $300 to
[17:32] park at Road G, a price unattainable for many locals
[17:35] who use the drive on beach. Each year we have
[17:38] had to request the special clover parking exemption resolution for
[17:41] road G for the village. Therefore, we implore you to
[17:44] make this property a simple parking area for. Town residents
[17:47] to use. During the clover shutdown. Once again, this is
[17:50] a monumentally positive CPF purchase, for which we give offeral
[17:54] support and gratitude. After listening to. I'm sorry, Jackie. After
[18:01] having written this, I do have a little bit of
[18:03] a concern. As you are well aware, we have been
[18:07] struggling to maintain our four x four access to the
[18:09] beach for probably close to ten years now. And prior
[18:12] to that, starting with this house, a long time ago.
[18:15] So while I understand that the whole idea of this
[18:18] is to give town access, if you could please consider.
[18:23] It sounds, from what Jackie was saying, that now this
[18:25] might reduce our four by four access and that's very
[18:28] concerning, because if you're going to make this property here,
[18:33] Town. And I thought I heard something about not driving
[18:37] on that area. So perhaps the compromise to that situation
[18:41] would be since this is all open space, you can't.
[18:44] Drive past here. Maybe. If you're going to open it
[18:48] for town, walk on. Other than during clover season. That
[18:51] perhaps that could be the designated area. That's access. And
[18:55] then leave the four by four stipulation where it is
[18:58] from row g all the way to the Shunnekok. County
[19:01] park, so. It's concerning that we could be reducing four
[19:04] by four. And I hope and pray that that's not
[19:07] the case, but I do fully support. The purchase. 30
[19:11] seconds. I just wanted to clarify that it's not our
[19:14] plan to shut. Down the four by four, as you
[19:17] said. This parking area would be open for Southampton Town
[19:20] residents throughout the season, just like any other town. Beach
[19:24] is. As you stated, people could do, knowing that when
[19:29] you go over, that's drive on beach. They are free
[19:31] to walk to the left, to that village in front
[19:33] of that village property which as you know, the four
[19:36] x fours are not allowed there, and they can enjoy
[19:38] the beach of the pedestrian, so I think there's room
[19:41] to cohabitate. I think we did this. I was trying
[19:44] to get another beach open for drive on. In Hampton
[19:46] Bays. It was next to an existing it was right
[19:48] next to hot dog beach at the end of Triton
[19:50] Lane. We deemed it was the people that utilize hot
[19:53] dog beach have historically used it as a pedestrian only
[19:57] beach, and they fought against, even though they loved the
[20:01] idea. Of having another drive on, to have it there
[20:03] so close in proximity they didn't want it, but. This
[20:06] historically is the other side of the coin, right? This
[20:09] is historically the drive on beach we are all aware
[20:11] of that, and it would remain so, and they would
[20:14] have to go to the left as a pedestrian or.
[20:18] As you know, there's people come down when we're driving
[20:20] on and they cohabitate very beautifully. And just as the
[20:24] village does, where they make, say, Dune beach, the only
[20:28] resident beach, if you could please consider making this resident
[20:32] only. No day passes, no non resident. Agreed. This is
[20:35] something that we need because we have been denied access
[20:39] to our beach for the better part of ten years.
[20:40] Now because of the clover. So in order for us
[20:42] to cohabitate with the clovers, and. Be respectful of that.
[20:46] This is a great plan, and I'm hopeful that this
[20:48] is going to solve our problem and we won't have
[20:50] to walk as far on road g it's quite a
[20:52] hike. It was a little, Gary Maxwell is a little
[20:54] bit smaller, but again, from my family. This is a
[20:57] blessing because. When that first house was built, which is
[21:00] this one. Three minutes. Thank you so much. We are
[21:04] trying to figure that out. About the day passes. No
[21:07] day passes. Just for the residents only. Because this way,
[21:11] you don't need to have somebody there checking stickers either.
[21:13] You don't. Need. What do you call one of the
[21:17] ticket takers or whatever, just keep it simple. Just keep
[21:21] it simple. Maybe portal life would be great. And beyond
[21:23] that, keep it simple. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Christopher
[21:28] Sargent. All right. Thank you, Chris. I think I'm a
[21:37] town resident, not a village resident. I first came to
[21:41] this era in 2002, so I was one of the
[21:44] early victims of the CPF. And whilst people have spoken
[21:48] about some of the benefits that they see from this
[21:50] proposal, the thing that I want to point you guys
[21:52] to is. This is not what was talked about when
[21:56] the CPF was first introduced. What I remember being talked
[22:00] about was what we were trying to do was to
[22:01] stop over development of the area. So the idea was
[22:05] that the CPF could go out and buy farmland, stop
[22:07] it being developed, have less properties in the area, we
[22:10] would all benefit. And when it was explained to me
[22:13] at the time, I thought, well, I don't know. About
[22:15] that. But perhaps it'll work. And perhaps it has. I
[22:17] understand the town's bought a large amount of acreage, and
[22:20] maybe that has been worthwhile. I don't. Know, but once
[22:23] you start doing things like buying the lobster in and
[22:25] buying a supposedly decent restaurant, and basically shutting it down,
[22:29] creating a load of derelict outbuildings, clearly. We've gone off
[22:32] scripts and I do not believe for a minute that
[22:34] that's. What the CPF was originally intended to do, and
[22:37] nor is it what it's intended. To do now. And
[22:39] I think we've got the same situation here, and I
[22:41] think you really need to look at this and say,
[22:43] do we want to be the people who are buying?
[22:45] Oceanfront mansions from billionaires and knocking them down with taxpayer
[22:49] money. I mean, how's that going to look in the
[22:52] New York Post? This is what you've got to think
[22:55] about. And whilst I understand some of the benefits that
[22:59] people are talking about. I think you've got to try
[23:00] and find other ways of doing this, because if this
[23:02] is truly the best thing you can do with CPF
[23:05] money, you need to shut the CPF down. So I'm
[23:09] just going to say that I 1000% want to be
[23:12] the person. No. You're finished talking, sir. I'm not having
[23:14] a conversation. I'm just making. A point. And my point
[23:16] is that I 1000% want to be the person that
[23:20] uses CPF. To restore access that was lost to development
[23:23] in the past. When I first. Bought Oceanfront property to
[23:32] the board. I went to Fredfield. Next. Fred, can CPF
[23:37] buy? Property along the ocean. For people, for access, for
[23:43] people to use. And Fred said, yes, 100%. That's what
[23:48] it's for. It's a gift back from the wealthy people.
[23:53] For the local people, and it gives access. That's what
[23:55] CPF is all about, access. And preserving property. If it
[24:00] doesn't matter if it's on the ocean. Or. It's a
[24:05] farm in Bridge Hampton where we just paid $40 million
[24:08] for with one. House. We tear the house down, and
[24:10] you have 40 acres or 50 acres out there. Okay,
[24:14] how many people are actually going to use that you
[24:16] drive by, but. This beach. My kids are going to
[24:20] use it. My grandkids are going to use it. Jackie's
[24:23] kids are going to use it, and her grandkids are
[24:25] going to use it. Okay? And that's what it's all
[24:28] about. Us. Helping this town survive if we don't have
[24:33] access to the ocean? For the people who come and
[24:35] visit. How many people? Do you live on metal lane?
[24:39] No. You don't live automotive, you live up. So how
[24:41] are you going to go to the beach if it's
[24:43] finally closed off? Okay, you can't and that's what we
[24:46] have to do. I just want to add. Preserving access
[24:54] to the waterways. And the beaches. It's critical responsibility, in
[24:58] particular of the trustees, and I want to commend Councilman
[25:02] Powell for really taking the leadership on this particular issue.
[25:07] From the get go and helping to work with CPF.
[25:10] And Jackie and Dan, thank you for your coordination with
[25:12] us because the preservation of properties like this are going
[25:15] to last generations. Thank you for your team. I took
[25:21] some guff from a piece of property we bought on
[25:23] Shore Road. Access. We're going to tear the house down.
[25:27] I'll leave the house up. Who? Knows. Okay, but that
[25:30] gives that neighborhood access to that creek, and if I
[25:34] can do it in. Every neighborhood where there's a creek
[25:36] or a pond, give those people access. And the whole
[25:43] town access to that area. To use that waterway, it's
[25:45] a great thing. It doesn't matter. If you're just going
[25:47] down to have a sandwich, what Mr. Holden used to
[25:50] do. The old survey. He's quite old. He used to
[25:54] come down and have a sandwich. Peanut butter jelly sandwich.
[25:57] Conscious point. I used to see him down there. Or
[26:01] he's a stand up board or go swimming or go
[26:03] fishing. Or put a boat in the water. It's the
[26:09] right of people of this town to use the water.
[26:11] And if. You cannot. Get to it because we did
[26:16] not take the opportunity to buy a property in that
[26:18] neighborhood to give the access. Jackie. I want to buy
[26:23] more property on the water. Get all you can. Well,
[26:32] I don't have any more cards on this public hearing,
[26:35] but. Peter. Andrew. Is there anyone on Zoom? You got
[26:39] one person. All right. Bring them on.
[27:05] Okay. Hi, I'm Alex King, chief of Southampton Village Ocean
[27:10] rescue, and I wanted to say. That we are fully
[27:13] in support of the acquisition of the Medalayan property. This.
[27:19] Expanding the parking for beach access. Will significantly increase public
[27:26] use and will magnify the need for our ocean rescue,
[27:30] life saving services. I would like to take this opportunity.
[27:35] To express our interest in expanding our ocean rescue services
[27:38] throughout the township of Southampton. Our jurisdiction right now is
[27:44] currently limited to the village of Southampton. To reiterate, we
[27:50] are. Fully volunteer first responders. Our dedicated team is made
[27:56] up of certified ocean lifeguards on call 24 7365 days
[28:01] a year, dispatch through 911. The fact that being on
[28:05] call, we patrolled during high ripped current times. We lifeguard
[28:10] charity ocean. We certified over 50 lifeguards this summer. We
[28:15] had. 75 children. In our junior lifeguard program. We have
[28:19] an adult swim program. We have a swim program. For
[28:23] young adults with on the autism spectrum. And this coming
[28:27] season, we have our program to learn to swim program.
[28:32] For families on the reservation. Our mission has always been
[28:36] to prevent drownings and to protect lives and support the
[28:40] community whenever and wherever we're needed. We have heard the
[28:44] public outcry for more ocean rescue throughout Southampton, and we
[28:50] want to say that we want to be here for
[28:52] you. Our volunteer services. Let me say that again. Our
[28:56] volunteer services minimally impact taxpayers. I hope that we can
[29:01] set up a work session with supervisor Moore and the
[29:05] council as soon as possible. So we can discuss. The
[29:10] growing need for ocean rescue life services throughout the township
[29:12] at unguarded beaches and find a solution that benefits the
[29:16] entire community. The East Hampton Ocean rescue first response team
[29:21] has had a long time proven track record of saving
[29:25] lives. There's no price you can put on safety. Southampton
[29:30] town deserves to have ocean rescue at their disposal. Thank
[29:34] you for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Sure. Yeah.
[29:43] Carl, you have some comments? Carl benicas. I'm the attorney
[29:47] for the current owner and seller. I just want to
[29:50] again reiterate, thanks to Jackie and Dan for their professionalism
[29:54] as we worked on terms that were agreeable to all
[29:57] sides of this transaction. Speaking for the seller and her
[30:06] family, her children and her grandchildren, I can say this
[30:09] parcel was incredibly important to them as a family, and
[30:12] they are very excited to see the future of this.
[30:15] Parcel as being one used and enjoyed by the public
[30:18] both for conservation and for. Both. As the representative for
[30:24] the applicant and as a member of this community, I
[30:26] wanted to thank the board for this acquisition. Thank you
[30:29] very much. Thank you. And the best part about it,
[30:32] if they have sold it to another wealthy person to
[30:35] tear down and build a bigger house. Their kids could
[30:38] never come back and use the beach. Now their grandkids
[30:41] could come back. And say, this is where my grandparents,
[30:43] my great grandparents grew up. Absolutely. And that has actually
[30:47] been discussed by them. We talked about that. I just
[30:51] wanted to let the other people know. Okay. Well, thank
[30:54] you. Thank you. Participation in helping us to put this
[30:57] together. Of course. It was a pleasure. Thank you. Thank
[30:59] you. No other comments. Then I moved to close the
[31:05] public hearing. Second. All in favor? Aye. Very good. Thank
[31:11] you.
[31:45] Joe is trying to get out. Yeah. What?
[32:03] 's continue. Madam Clerk, would you please read the notice
[32:06] for the second public hearing? Public hearing? Number two to
[32:10] amend Town code chapter 312, vehicles and traffic, article 15,
[32:14] turning movements, section 312 72.2. Right. Turns prohibited.
[32:25] Who's here to talk to us about this one. Our
[32:33] highway superintendent. Good afternoon. Thank you. Tomboy. Tom Nealy. Welcome
[32:39] aboard. Thank you. My name is Charlie McCall. The highway
[32:42] superintendent. Here to talk about public hearing on a town
[32:52] code. I want to start off with just a few
[32:55] things I have in front of me right now. Is
[32:57] the final draft of the traffic mitigation. Task force, which
[33:03] most of you know. Me and Tom Neely were the
[33:05] co chairmans of. That this was the brainstorm brainchild of
[33:09] Michael Icilli, and I have to give him credit, he
[33:12] put together what I would call pretty much an all
[33:14] star team of people on the board. From. State, county,
[33:20] town and village lawmakers. To police chief from the town,
[33:25] police chief from the village. To Department of Transportation commissioner
[33:30] myself and several other people, including Maria Moore. Let me
[33:36] just read a few things from the report. If I
[33:39] could. In the introduction. Just a brief thing. The task
[33:43] force was not merely intended to provide an examination. Of
[33:46] the underlying causes of these traffic related issues and solutions,
[33:51] but also to enact the bottom up approach to its
[33:54] functionality, directed through public. Comments and concerns. The scope of
[34:00] the task force work included, but not limited to the
[34:03] analysis of current traffic patterns. Infrastructure limitations. And the efficiency
[34:09] of existing traffic enforcement measures. Ultimately, the task force goal
[34:13] was to identify the issues and formulate a spin and
[34:17] variable solutions that could mitigate the problems faced by residents,
[34:22] ensuring safer and more efficient. Roadways throughout the entire community.
[34:28] The task force would identify and examine known heavy traffic
[34:31] corridors. County Road 39. Whether primary or secondary roadways. Collect
[34:38] information from the public, collaborate with town highway public safety
[34:42] law enforcement town engineering departments regarding potential solutions. As the
[34:47] report continues. In the conclusion, it says, the Traffic Mitigation
[34:51] Safety Task Force embarked on the comprehensive, multifought faced investigation
[34:56] into the complex traffic challenges that impact Southampton town. This
[35:01] involves the process of data analysis. Composing traffic flow patterns,
[35:07] crash statistics, and infrastructure capabilities. Today. And that brings us
[35:14] why we're here today. Part of the afternoon traffic. Pattern
[35:20] that we've changed includes some changes, some add ons. Today
[35:24] we have the turns on Henry road and Tucker Hole
[35:27] lane. And quite honestly, even if. We didn't have this
[35:31] new traffic pattern in place. Those two restrictions should have
[35:34] been in. Place years ago. They're both dangerous. Turns to
[35:37] come out onto 39 in the afternoon. Is very dangerous.
[35:42] Now. You probably will hear some from people. That live
[35:45] locally that might be opposed to the changes because it's
[35:48] an inconvenience. They have to drive around to add a
[35:52] few minutes to their time, but I'd like the board
[35:54] to consider these changes. And think about the greater good
[35:58] of what we're doing out there. Thank you. Thank you.
[36:08] All right, well, I do have one card on this
[36:11] Rachel Verno.
[36:21] Good afternoon, everybody. Rachel Burnout. I'm speaking as a resident.
[36:29] Not as the sheriff. Today. Although I would like to
[36:32] say on behalf of our CAC, thank you to the
[36:34] supervisor. And councilman Neely and Janice, for all attending our
[36:38] meeting yesterday. I think it was a great meeting. And
[36:41] I know everyone. On our committee appreciated it, and I'm
[36:45] looking forward to the other board members coming to some
[36:47] of our meetings this year. So I was a member
[36:50] of the Towns County Road 39 Land Use committee back
[36:53] in 2014, and I reckon the. Benefits of the highway
[36:58] superintendent just mentioned. Of reducing curb cuts onto the highway,
[37:03] as well as the importance of getting motorists to use
[37:05] a light in order to safely make turns onto the
[37:07] highway. I also understand why the town is considering limiting
[37:11] access off of Henry and Tucker. Hoe onto County Road
[37:13] 39. But I would ask the board to share the
[37:16] data connected to the pilot programs. That support these closures.
[37:20] Specifically how much time is saved on County Road 39
[37:23] when access from these streets is limited. Where are the
[37:26] vehicles that have been taking these roads redirected to? Are
[37:29] these closures creating backups on other roads. And does there
[37:32] need to be adjustments made to lights at north C?
[37:34] And McGay. Currently, there are so many varying opinions regarding
[37:38] the pilot program on county road 39. I think it's
[37:41] important to have all the data connected to these road
[37:43] closures provided. And I'm asking the board to make that
[37:46] information available to the public. I'll mention that the town
[37:50] has an access management plan for County Road 39. That
[37:54] makes a very different recommendation for Tukalo Holain. So even
[37:58] more reason to have any of this new data made
[38:00] available. If the road closures aren't data driven, I'd ask
[38:04] the board if they. Could explain the criteria being used
[38:07] for these type of road closures. What exactly are the
[38:10] benchmarks that needs to be met in order to trigger
[38:13] a decision to close a public road. Lastly, I'd ask
[38:17] the board if they could explain the methodology and. Cost
[38:21] for implementing and enforcing all of these road closures. Over
[38:24] the summer, the highway department had someone stationed at the
[38:27] entrance to Diamond Court from 06:00 a.m. to ten. 30
[38:30] a. M. On a regular basis. Is this the same
[38:33] methodology going to be used for the afternoon closures on
[38:36] Henry and Tuckaho? I appreciate that. The resolution states there's
[38:40] no financial impact for these closures. You're not contracting McClain
[38:44] to reengineer these roads, but I'm. Assuming there's a cost
[38:47] associated with these closures in terms of manpower, I hope
[38:51] the board will consider sharing how much was spent in
[38:53] 2025 for these road closures and what the projected costs
[38:57] will be going forward in 2026. As always, I thank
[39:01] you for the opportunity. To speak this afternoon, and I
[39:03] look forward to getting. Any of that information. Thanks. Thank
[39:06] you. Peter. Andrew. Is there anyone on zoom for the
[39:10] second public hearing? No one has their hand up. Superintendent
[39:19] McCarthy. I just had one question about the lights, if
[39:22] you don't mind coming back. Up. Well, I know I'd
[39:28] like to support what your idea is because. This is.
[39:34] A big risk that you were taking to try to
[39:37] make a change. For the better and. If you need
[39:42] a few more pieces to fall into place. I support
[39:45] that. Is there something, though, about the lights? The flashing
[39:48] or blinking lights? As Rachel just mentioned. I'm not exactly
[39:54] sure what she was referring to. McGee street and Tukaho
[39:59] Road. We had asked the county to put those lights
[40:03] in a position where. They are the longest possible in
[40:08] Green on County Road 39. Timing the timing and how
[40:13] long they are green. Not sure why, but they have
[40:18] been struggling with that Tucker ho road is set perfectly,
[40:21] I think. It's at four minutes, which seems like a
[40:23] lifetime if you're not in the green. McGee street has
[40:28] changed from two minutes to three minutes to two minutes,
[40:31] so we're trying. To get a handle on McGee Street.
[40:35] But the reason why we're asking. For this town code
[40:38] to be put in places so we don't have to
[40:41] extend manpower. To physically block these roads. If people adhere
[40:46] to the town code, then nobody will be making that
[40:48] right turn, which causes the traffic on 39 to back
[40:51] up. The goal has always been we'll continue to be,
[40:55] to get people on county road 39. And again I
[40:59] fight gps all day long. You save 1 second. You're
[41:03] going to go down a side street. Because people are
[41:05] so in tune to the GPs. But the goal is
[41:09] to keep them on County Road 39, and if we
[41:11] could prevent any backup. By people entering 39 at certain
[41:15] locations. We will do that. Can I have a question?
[41:20] Rather than do a timed right term restriction on Tucker
[41:23] Hoe, would it make more sense to just make it
[41:26] right turn at the light. You can't. No. Right turn
[41:28] on red, period. At Tucko Road. Tucker Ho road. Well,
[41:34] people need to cross to go from the college to.
[41:36] The golf course. That's what I mean. You could still
[41:38] have a right turn, but only. What? The lights. So
[41:40] just make it no. Right on red. The right turn
[41:44] at Taco Road. To be honest, Malkin, maybe back me
[41:46] up on this. By then. The traffic is moving pretty
[41:49] good, so you are taking your life into your hands,
[41:51] but. You can make a right, and I don't think.
[41:55] It really. Causes traffic to back up when you have
[41:58] that line of people cheating that come from the north.
[42:02] And they end up on Tucker Hole Lane. And they're
[42:04] lined up and only it's. A one for one to
[42:06] come out. It backs up 39 and we can't recover.
[42:09] So again, these are pilot programs. We're asking to put
[42:12] them in place and would take a good look. It
[42:16] may also be worth mentioning, Charlie, that there's a lot
[42:18] of ongoing discussions about what you're doing as a pilot
[42:22] for the short term here on 39 with also the
[42:25] village. And some of their engineers. We are in daily
[42:31] conversation with the village, and again. They get better. We
[42:34] do. On 39. The village gets the benefit because there's
[42:37] less people. Cutting through the village. But they are in
[42:41] favor of it. We did a lot of work. Mock
[42:42] did a lot of work on McGee street. They made
[42:45] a turning lane that is now extends for a couple
[42:48] of hundred. Feet. People can get in that turning lane.
[42:53] And can get onto 39 as quick as possible. But
[42:55] again, the timing of the lights is important. And just
[42:57] get back to the comments. This is to make it
[43:01] so we have less manpower. If these restrictions are in
[43:04] place, we don't have to physically be there. I just
[43:07] got it. It's not so that people can't make a
[43:10] right one. It's to that they don't even go down
[43:12] that road during three and seven. Well, it would be
[43:15] almost impossible to go east from there. I think. If
[43:20] I can jump in. To Charlie's point and to this
[43:24] request. Right turns onto a road, or more dramatically, left
[43:29] turns onto a road, create friction. They slow the other
[43:34] cars down. I mean, there has been a lot of.
[43:38] 20 years, we've been wrestling with what to do about
[43:40] County Road 39. There have been restrictions. For example, there's
[43:44] been discussion of restrictions on Hill station road. No. Right
[43:48] turn coming east in the morning. We don't really talk
[43:51] about the mornings anymore. We're focused on this afternoon. Westbound.
[43:55] But I think to Charlie's point, and the request here
[43:59] is. Right turns coming out, coming south, making the right.
[44:04] You're creating more friction on 39 and. I think that's
[44:08] the point. Of trying to eliminate more of the word
[44:11] friction. Engineering term. You're making more people slow. Down. I
[44:14] think you can debate. It's already congested. How much worse
[44:19] is it having to make the right that's? Again, debatable.
[44:23] If someone does not obey the law, they would have
[44:25] to be pulled over on County Road 39. Which. Takes
[44:29] the bad situation and makes it worse. So there are
[44:33] issues here, but in light of the fact that I
[44:35] think. We're still talking about this as a pilot program.
[44:40] Maybe sitting down in a month or so since the
[44:42] chainslers were made, what, November 12? I know it's been
[44:46] tweaked on and off in different ways over the past
[44:49] three months or whatever it is. I think in the
[44:52] spirit of trying one more thing. To see if this
[44:56] might help. In that sense, I think it makes sense
[45:00] it may be something that stays permanently regardless of what
[45:03] happens, but my thought is in a month. Because we're
[45:08] in January. We're going to be getting to march and
[45:11] April and May and not too long. I think in
[45:14] a month or something, we have to sit down and
[45:16] say, have these adjustments. Are they working? To Rachel's points.
[45:22] I think you ask a lot of good questions. We
[45:24] can't. Answer them all here today, but I think there
[45:27] are a lot of good questions that we do. Have
[45:30] to discuss further and wrestle with a little bit. But
[45:32] to the immediate issue, I think in the spirit of
[45:35] trying. To one more arrow in the quiver or whatever
[45:40] to try to give you something that you think will
[45:42] help under this situation, I would say. Let's give it
[45:47] a shot. Appreciate it. Where my question actually comes from.
[45:54] Is personal use of that road. And we had generally.
[45:58] When I ran the lawn accounts, we had accounts west
[46:03] of Tuckerhoe Road. We would go back. To taco road
[46:05] with the truck and trailer to make a right with
[46:08] the light rather than trying to make that right off
[46:11] of because it was just horrendous to make that. Right
[46:13] with the trailer. Michael had emailed me. And I think
[46:17] it was Tom's idea about trying to get some of
[46:19] these roots into the website, the changes. Now, you know,
[46:23] at Tukaho Lane, it's just as easy. To if you
[46:28] want it to go west. Believe it or not, you
[46:29] could just as easily go. Past the school and merge
[46:32] on to Sandy Hollow. And now. You're in traffic and
[46:36] you're going west again. You don't have to. Make that
[46:39] dangerous turn. Or you can actually go further. I know
[46:42] people don't like us. Directing people down Sabanic. But you
[46:45] can go down sabonic to get out down. Below. Well,
[46:48] no. We would be past taco on Sabah. It would
[46:52] be quicker for us to. Go out sabonic, but the
[46:54] turn. Is such a hard right with the trailer that
[46:58] we would go back to Tuckerhoe. At the boat showroom,
[47:01] right? Yeah. You can't see anything. No, not the boat
[47:03] showroom. We would go. Oh, that's where you're doing it?
[47:07] Yeah. Tuck a ho. I'm thinking the golf course road.
[47:10] No. Takaholane, Taco Lane. Take everything I said and throw
[47:15] it out the window. So. Go. Lane is. I was
[47:17] talking about the light at Tucker. Hopin has. Right. I'm
[47:21] sorry. I don't know how the county let them, but
[47:24] there's a retaining wall for. That building you can't see.
[47:28] Okay, agree 1000%. Now that I know of my and
[47:30] I did speak to some of the local town cops
[47:33] and about the issue, like I try to tell them.
[47:35] Don't pull anybody over on 30,000. Not to get away
[47:38] with anything, but the quick response to that was they
[47:41] would stand in the Goldberg's driveway and just wave people
[47:45] into the driveway and take care of if they had
[47:47] to issue a ticket. What they've always said the driver
[47:50] has to make the decision or maybe the police can
[47:52] help them make the decision to get into a parking
[47:54] lot rather than stopping. On 39 again. I appreciate the
[47:58] board. 's support. Going forward? Anybody else going to rely
[48:01] on signage to accomplish this? Have you spoken with the
[48:04] chief? Maybe they can put some cars out there just
[48:07] initially to get people to make sure they. Spoke directly
[48:11] to the officer that covers that area. They said they'd
[48:14] be on it and I'm sure highway would post at
[48:16] the head of these two streets. You don't. Want them
[48:19] going down. You don't want them going down and then
[48:20] finding out, right? Anyway, thanks very much. Thank you, Charlie.
[48:25] Thank you, Charlie, for the work. All right, well, if
[48:33] there's no other questions or comments, I moved to close
[48:36] this public hearing second. All in favor? Aye. Madam Clerk,
[48:44] would you please read the notice for the third public
[48:46] hearing? Public hearing number three, amending town code chapter 312,
[48:50] vehicles and traffic, article three. Stop sign intersection section 312
[48:56] nine Eastwag, Tyana and Hampton Bay's hamlets to Shinnecock canal
[49:01] subsection a north of Montek Highway. All right. Who is
[49:11] going to speak to us about this? I thought. Your
[49:20] backup. Charlie McCaultle, highway Department pretty much what she read.
[49:29] It's needed. I do think it's important to note that
[49:35] an engineering study was done. Correct. We're talking about this
[49:40] intersection. Yeah. Valid old country. An engineering study was done
[49:44] which does so this. Intersection in particular, as we know.
[49:49] And clearly Cindy knows is the East Quag elementary school
[49:53] is right around the corner. And we asked the engineering
[49:56] department to come up with. What intersection would serve best?
[50:02] To have the stop sign. And most people would be
[50:04] like, of course, the one where the school is. And
[50:06] they came up with the theory that. No, we'll go
[50:08] a little bit further. Because it's two spots where people
[50:10] will now slow down. You have the crosswalk for the
[50:12] school. And now the stop sign a little bit up.
[50:15] Unveil old country road. Has been a racetrack for many
[50:21] years, going way back, so hopefully this will just calm
[50:25] some traffic. And that's pretty much it. Looking for everybody's
[50:30] support. Yeah. Some letters on it, right? We did. We
[50:33] did get community support letters for this. There has been
[50:36] I believe we have support from the east club civic,
[50:39] the east clog Board of Education. Many community members. They
[50:43] were asking for this when I was chair of the
[50:45] CAC and. The question. You were right. The question was
[50:48] they wanted Central, but central, I think, is too close.
[50:52] To Lewis that it's not really. You're not getting enough
[50:55] speed up and sometimes. Traffic backs up through that intersection.
[50:59] You also have the parents that pick up the schools,
[51:02] the kids at school, and that backs up. Right off
[51:04] of there. The other ones on this, too. The three
[51:08] yield signs that would be different. You'll be back. Tom
[51:15] mentioned there was an engineering report, and it indicated that
[51:18] the stop at this intersection is reasonable. And would be
[51:21] helpful. It may not solve the speeding problem because traffic
[51:27] engineering tells you that stop signs don't. Stop speeding on
[51:30] a mile and a quarter long road. But. It does
[51:35] perhaps help solve other problems. And one of the questions
[51:38] or thoughts I had looking at the study. I believe
[51:40] the sidewalks go all the way to veil. Might this
[51:44] be an appropriate place? For you folks to put in
[51:46] a crosswalk. Since it's now going to be a protected
[51:50] intersection. Something for you to evaluate, think about. We did
[51:55] it. Got a few phone calls, a lot of emails
[51:57] about this. It's a good idea. Okay. I have two
[52:04] cards on. Christine connolly. And then Christine Grant.
[52:16] I think this has broad support with everybody, I hope,
[52:19] but I made some remarks. Good afternoon, everyone. Happy New
[52:29] year. Mr. Neely, congratulations. It's fortuitous that we. Have a
[52:33] traffic issue. And thanks for your email. Absolutely. Appreciate that.
[52:38] So I'm here today. Speaking on behalf of the East
[52:40] Quag Civic and Eastwa Beautification Committee in vehemently. Supporting numerous
[52:34] anecdotal reasons that these signs would improve the quality of
[52:37] life in east Quag, including slowing traffic near our elementary
[52:40] school or making GPS navigation route traffic through our main
[52:43] street that came up. In another thing, we have a
[52:46] lot of issues with GPS. People live and die by
[52:49] it. Montauk highway has been the de facto road, but
[52:52] with GPS, people just.
[53:09] Get onto old country because it saves them 10 seconds
[53:11] or something. According to ways. But I suspect that Christine
[53:16] and others, or just us, could speak about that more
[53:19] eloquently than I could instead, because I'm a huge nerd
[53:22] and I had nothing to do this morning. I'd like
[53:24] to look at this from a scientific perspective and refer
[53:26] to the 2025 edition of the Manual on Uniform traffic
[53:30] control devices, published by the USDOT and the Federal high.
[53:34] Highway administration. So, interestingly enough, the manual, right. It frowns
[53:39] upon this idea you've got. A major road and a
[53:41] minor road. So to add stop signs that are just
[53:43] arbitrary. It's not actually something that they want to do.
[53:47] And we look at a road like old country road.
[53:49] The best data I could get was like 6600 vehicles
[53:52] per day. You wouldn't. Typically need this, but it lists
[53:56] three very specific circumstances when you would want to add
[53:59] a stop sign to a major road meeting. A minor
[54:02] road. Factor one, elevated crash history. So from the meteor
[54:07] reports we could find on 27 east, as well as
[54:09] speaking with first responders. There have been five documented accidents
[54:12] on Old Country Road in 2025, including a DWI. Hidden
[54:15] run on June 29, 2025. The vast majority of these
[54:20] accidents are single vehicle accidents. The manual says that stop
[54:24] signs can help in those scenarios. It specifically mentions installing
[54:29] stop signs or stoplights in that. So factor two that
[54:32] comes up in this manual is called site distance failure.
[54:35] Old country road curves south and decreases in elevation immediately
[54:38] after veil when traveling eastbound. It's also an area of
[54:43] the road that's experienced numerous vehicle versus tree accidents. Over
[54:46] the years. The manual recommends normally fixing sight lines as
[54:49] best practices. Or changing the grade. But when it's impossible
[54:54] due to grade homes or vegetation, like in this situation,
[54:57] it recommends installing stop signs, lights and other traffic control
[55:00] devices. And then there's the third factor, which is when
[55:04] an intersection is operating as two important streets, basically, or
[55:08] there's. Heavy pedestrian crossing demand, so pedestrian crossing demand. Exists
[55:12] because we have kids walking to school. There's one of
[55:14] the only sidewalked roads in east Quag was old country
[55:17] road, so we have. Heavy pedestrian traffic there in the
[55:20] morning. Crosswalk. Great idea there. And then others would argue
[55:25] that Vale is also an important road people live. Unveil
[55:27] that hate me for saying this, but. Many people who
[55:30] live east of Vale might cut through veil to get
[55:32] to old country road to get riverhead or sunrise highway.
[55:35] So those are the three factors to install stop sign.
[55:39] Signs on roads when they don't normally meet that normal
[55:42] equation, and I hope to never have to read this
[55:45] book again. 30 seconds. And other than that, I'm just.
[55:50] On a separate note, thank you guys for purchasing that.
[55:53] Property. In Southampton town for the new beach. It's wonderful
[55:57] and it's absolutely to go. Against that other gentleman. It's
[56:00] absolutely in the spirit of the CPF fund. And when
[56:02] he said victim. I'm proud to pay CPF on IPA
[56:05] piece of property because of what keeps our community, our
[56:08] community. Thank you, guys. And I just say I appreciate
[56:11] your mentioning the MuTcD because I held back. From talking
[56:15] about it. Yes, it's on my favorites bar on the
[56:18] computer, so I appreciate you referencing it? Thank you for
[56:22] your research. All right. Christine Grant.
[56:36] Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Christine Grant. I'm the
[56:39] secretary of the East Quag. Citizens advisory committee. But today
[56:43] I'm here as a concerned resident, neighbor and mom. I'm
[56:52] respectfully asking the town to approve a three way stop
[56:54] at the intersection of Vale Avenue and old country road.
[56:57] Old country road is notorious for speeding, and given its
[57:00] close proximity, to the East Quag elementary school that Sweden
[57:04] is particularly dangerous. This intersection sits along a route used
[57:08] every day by many families. Children walking to and from
[57:11] school. Parents with strollers, kids riding bikes, neighbors walking dogs,
[57:16] everyone trying their best to show the road. Safely. There
[57:21] have already been numerous accidents on old country, and residents
[57:23] are rightfully concerned about safety in the area. A three
[57:26] way stop is a simple, practical step that would slow
[57:29] traffic and make that area. Much safer for everyone, especially
[57:33] our kids. I appreciate your time and consideration, and I
[57:36] hope you'll move forward with approving this. A three way
[57:39] stop and help protecting our community. Thank you. Thank you.
[57:44] Okay. So, Peter, Andrew, is there anyone on Zoom for
[57:53] this third public hearing? No one has their hands up.
[57:58] Have you seen your hand? All right. Just no other
[58:04] comments. Then I'll move to close the public hearing. I
[58:07] will just say that the reason why? The Bale crosswalk
[58:10] wouldn't work is because. It continues. The sidewall continues to
[58:15] fail, and then it crosses. Further down. There's no sidewalk
[58:19] on that side of the street, so either we would
[58:22] have to look at expanding the sidewalk, which I don't
[58:24] think the houses there would allow for. Because they're right
[58:28] up there. I would just like to say it's great
[58:31] to see the board taking a lot of proactive measures
[58:34] lately on some traffic mitigation and safety. And thank you
[58:37] to the highway. Department really appreciate everybody's collaboration. Thanks for
[58:43] bringing these to us for consideration. And I'm proud to
[58:47] support this. Me, too. So I need a second to
[58:52] close this. All in favor? All right. Madam Clerk, would
[58:56] you please read the notice for the fourth and final
[58:59] public hearing? Public? Hearing number four for a local law
[59:03] to enact a new article six B entitled hotel development.
[59:07] Overlay. Within chapter 330, zoning of the town code and
[59:11] add sections 34.5 through 34. Point ten to enable the
[59:16] discretionary review of small scale tourist accommodations in highway business
[59:21] zoning districts. The yield signs are on for adoption. We
[59:25] already had the public hearing. Go read that book. Yeah.
[59:34] You're up. Good afternoon. Welcome. Council member
[59:43] Neely share, our town planning and development administrator. I was
[59:48] not here for the hearing at the special meeting on
[59:51] this, but happy to answer any further questions or discuss.
[59:57] This floating hotel development overlay code with you. You weren't
[1:00:02] here that day. Yes. Didn't realize it was amid. We
[1:00:07] were just waiting for comments, I believe. Yes, with your
[1:00:10] tips. And we did get some comments. From the planning
[1:00:12] board. We're not very favorable, actually. And. Try to appear
[1:00:20] with them and kind of talk about it. But. It
[1:00:25] really comes down to how do you confer a land
[1:00:28] use? Right? You have some options. This is a tool
[1:00:32] for you to use if you don't like the tool.
[1:00:36] You don't have to do it. So. It's either permitted
[1:00:42] use. A special exception. Use right. Those things happen through
[1:00:44] the planning board. A zoning action is a case by
[1:00:48] case basis. So you're saying this isn't? Something that just
[1:00:51] goes to the planning board. This is something that. We
[1:00:55] want to comprehensively plan and do it on a case
[1:00:58] by case basis. Of course it's still in the highway
[1:01:01] business corridor. So it comes up and someone says, how
[1:01:05] about here? And we go, well, how many other hotels
[1:01:08] are near here? And what is this going to do?
[1:01:09] To the does the community like it? Do we want
[1:01:12] this? And you can discretion use that. Discretionary power to
[1:01:16] say, yes, we do want to move forward, or no,
[1:01:19] thanks. And so that gives you. Added scrutiny and ability,
[1:01:24] not less, and it is comprehensive. In its approach, so
[1:01:28] I just want to point that out. So I just
[1:01:31] want to comment because I did read their comments and
[1:01:34] ironically, they were sent to me. At the same time,
[1:01:36] I received their comments on this as well as their
[1:01:39] comments on the floating zone for the community housing fund
[1:01:43] and so on. This one they said they do not
[1:01:45] favor the use of floating zones for planning. But in
[1:01:48] the housing overlay district, which is another floating zone, they
[1:01:51] fully supported it. So those two kind of conflicted. And
[1:01:56] I think there was a comment that I read that.
[1:02:00] It was too close to a PDD. And we got
[1:02:02] rid of pdds. And the reason why we're revisiting these
[1:02:06] floating zones as zoning tools is because there is no
[1:02:09] mechanism for things like this that benefit that broad community
[1:02:12] sport and benefit the community. So. We're looking at a
[1:02:16] way to narrowly. Allow these things with a lot of
[1:02:20] discretion. And. Yet after they went and said PDD is
[1:02:25] no good. One of their suggestions was that we cap
[1:02:29] it at 40 units, but allow up to 65 with
[1:02:31] community benefit, which was part of the whole reason why
[1:02:35] pdds were done away with, right? Because community benefits were
[1:02:38] seen as arbitrary and it became a give us this.
[1:02:40] We'll give you that kind of scenario. We're saying? We
[1:02:44] don't want that in the picture. We want to be
[1:02:45] able to very narrowly take a use that right now.
[1:02:49] Our code doesn't really allow anywhere and decide where it's.
[1:02:52] Appropriate. And so to me, that's a very sensible thing
[1:02:57] to do, and. I found it odd that. Wholesale did
[1:03:01] not like this floating zone, but fully supported the housing
[1:03:04] overlay district, which was also a floating zone. They had
[1:03:09] their reservations, and I agree with you that. It didn't
[1:03:13] entirely add up. In my view. Well. Could one say,
[1:03:17] though, that. Between the two uses. Affordable housing. Which is
[1:03:25] pretty limited and narrow as well. In comparison to this
[1:03:30] particular measure. The implications of the use are much different.
[1:03:36] Whereas with respect to the hotels, there's other things to
[1:03:39] consider. A lot of those hotels are going to yield
[1:03:44] a lot more additional traffic. Some of those hotels are
[1:03:49] going to have more amenities. That would again yield additional.
[1:03:59] Interaction and public use. But it's a good point. I
[1:04:06] think. Perhaps. The planning board has some reservations because also,
[1:04:12] this is another tool that. They typically have at their
[1:04:15] disposal, and we're sort of kind of saying, hey, We're
[1:04:19] going to. Now do it. I think they're reasonable. I
[1:04:23] understand where Councilwoman McNamara is coming from. I also do
[1:04:26] think that some of the, their concerns were reasonable. Sure.
[1:04:29] I mean, they have some valid points. I'm just not
[1:04:34] sure what you want to do. So crafting a tool
[1:04:37] that you can use at your discretion. I mean, we've
[1:04:40] got more pushback on increasing density for community housing, then
[1:04:43] we've gotten for economic development, right? So. You're definitely consistent
[1:04:48] with the comp plan because the comp plan tells you
[1:04:51] to. Provide more small scale tourist accommodations. So that number,
[1:04:55] first and foremost is consistent. When you go to land
[1:04:58] it. You're creating a tool that exists in the code,
[1:05:02] but it doesn't. Exist on a piece of until we
[1:05:04] vote. Till you vote to land. Correct. And it's. Been
[1:05:08] test. Tested in the courts. This is a valid method.
[1:05:11] And we did start by looking at the entire. Zone
[1:05:15] and saying, can we craft a code to allow it
[1:05:17] as a special exception in this zone? And it was
[1:05:20] just too prolific. And this is, like our only tool
[1:05:25] that we have to be able to say we're not
[1:05:28] going to allow it everywhere. We're going to only allow
[1:05:30] it under very certain circumstances. Where it makes sense. So
[1:05:36] the floating zone thing that people are skeptical of is
[1:05:39] just another tool for you to be creative, be flexible
[1:05:43] and promote the general welfare of the public. Who says,
[1:05:47] hey, we want to reuse this property for this hotel
[1:05:50] use. Wouldn't that be great? And you go, what? No.
[1:05:53] It's not allowed. You could say. Well, it might be
[1:05:57] allowed. Is it big enough? Is it so situated that
[1:05:59] it makes sense? You get to start to ask those
[1:06:02] questions and make a decision, it may be yes, and
[1:06:05] it may be, no, but at least. You don't just
[1:06:07] foreclose on the opportunity to take a look at it
[1:06:10] when the community. Is asking you to, so. You're just
[1:06:15] creating something that you can use at your will, and
[1:06:18] I'm not. Trying to be harsh on the planning board.
[1:06:21] The two contradictory things were. Yes, in this case, we
[1:06:23] support it, which I can see their point. Of maybe
[1:06:26] the community housing they see as a community benefit in
[1:06:29] itself, but I see economic development as a community benefit
[1:06:32] as well. I think I'm in the somewhat unique position
[1:06:37] of having been on the planning board when those were
[1:06:39] comments were drafted. And now being on the town board,
[1:06:43] and I don't want to sit here. Right now and
[1:06:48] try to explain all of the comments that were provided
[1:06:50] by the planning board. I don't think. That's appropriate. I
[1:06:53] think maybe at some point now. Or some point should
[1:06:57] go through those points. I can tell you, however, There
[1:07:02] was, and I think you kind of alluded to it
[1:07:04] there. The community housing. I believe the board felt. There
[1:07:11] is some compelling need to keep that process moving. That
[1:07:14] there is. A need. To work on the community housing
[1:07:18] aspect. I don't believe such a great sense of urgency.
[1:07:25] For the hotel overlay district and that there was a
[1:07:28] sense that it needed some more work. For example, I
[1:07:31] know question that came up, the description. Is. Small to
[1:07:37] mid size. Whatever the phrasing was we were talking. The
[1:07:41] legislation talks up to 64 units. 64 units. I believe
[1:07:46] everybody on the planning board felt like that's more than.
[1:07:50] A small hotel. There is no relationship. Again, we talked
[1:07:56] about this. There was no relationship between the size of
[1:07:59] the property. And the number of units that might. Be
[1:08:04] approved by the town board. There is. It has to
[1:08:08] be a minimum of two acres. Right? But it could
[1:08:11] be 64 units. On two acres or 64 units? On
[1:08:15] ten acres. On ten acres. I think there was some
[1:08:18] concern that? 64 units on two acres, I believe again,
[1:08:22] Janice, from the meeting we had. Current regulations allow. What,
[1:08:26] four units per acre or something? That's why you have
[1:08:30] no hotels, because that's not going to work for anyone.
[1:08:34] So what's the magic number? This is our question always.
[1:08:37] What is the magic number? The industry says 75. So
[1:08:42] anything for up to 75 is quote unquote small from
[1:08:46] the rating system of hotels. We took ten off of
[1:08:48] that and said 65. When you pick these numbers, there's
[1:08:52] a certain level of. I hate to say arbitrary. We're
[1:08:56] picking a number 65. Is not small, but. 40 is,
[1:09:00] but no one's going to build one if it's 40,
[1:09:02] because it's not economically feasible, then it's. The planning board
[1:09:07] was concerned that the town board, which doesn't deal with
[1:09:10] site plans and in essence, this is approval. Of a
[1:09:15] lot of aspects related to a site plan. The town
[1:09:19] board. Would approve 50 unit on a two acre piece
[1:09:23] of property and kind of give it to the planning
[1:09:25] board and say, make it work. If we go through
[1:09:28] a full trial. Plans either way for each board. So
[1:09:33] you're coordinating and collaborating? I've been involved. As a planning
[1:09:36] board member with, I believe, two hotel or motel applications.
[1:09:43] And was part of the whole planning board, and they
[1:09:45] were very involved, and there was a great deal of
[1:09:47] work that had to be done on both of them,
[1:09:49] and a lot of questions. Sure. And that still is
[1:09:52] under the purview of the planning board. What happens here
[1:09:55] is that you're conferring the ability to have that use
[1:09:58] conceptually, and then they go, the planning board and you
[1:10:01] work out all the details. Conceptually with. It's 25 units.
[1:10:06] It's 50 units. Somehow you. 're now a legislator and
[1:10:12] this board, you tell me what the magic number is,
[1:10:14] and I'll put it in the code. If you want
[1:10:16] a different number, it will be the number. You want,
[1:10:19] whether or not that will result in any actual. Something
[1:10:23] is another case to be decided. Their question was allow
[1:10:28] 40, but allow up to the 65 if they give
[1:10:30] you community benefit. So you're still allowing the 65, but
[1:10:35] with community benefits. But what are those community benefits to?
[1:10:37] Me. The community benefit is the economic development. It's the
[1:10:44] influx of money into Hampton Bay has lost a lot
[1:10:46] of when nightclubs were shut down. Like it. For good
[1:10:50] or bad, they lost a lot of economic development. And
[1:10:54] to have something like this come back in and to
[1:10:56] set the parameters where we did, where. They don't become
[1:11:00] transient housing. And the whole situation that happened with Bel
[1:11:03] Air and seeing down the line and making sure that
[1:11:07] that doesn't happen. But then also having enough units where
[1:11:10] I guess maybe because we see that I think the
[1:11:12] planning board doesn't have the benefit of the conversation that
[1:11:14] we had. With the developer, whereby in order to have
[1:11:18] a name brand behind this hotel to make sure. It
[1:11:22] doesn't become. Long term housing, you have to have a
[1:11:26] certain number of years. They won't even look. At you
[1:11:28] if you're under 40 units or lower, because you just
[1:11:31] won't get that brand recognition and you won't get also.
[1:11:35] The long term benefit and the brand's reputation for not
[1:11:39] allowing that hotel to become something that the community was
[1:11:42] told they're not going to get. Plus you already do
[1:11:45] have that in 330 34.9 a. These are your findings,
[1:11:49] it says in determining whether to land a hotel development
[1:11:52] overlay to townboard. In addition to its usual discretion in
[1:11:56] considering a change of zone, which means you have all
[1:11:58] the discretion to just say this. Isn't going to work
[1:12:01] here. Shall also consider the amount of existing hotel accommodations
[1:12:05] in the immediate area, the appropriateness of the site environmental
[1:12:09] considerations the proposed development design to accommodate the number of
[1:12:13] guest units proposed so. We hear a lot of people
[1:12:17] say, You're £750 into a test. If you see that
[1:12:20] that's happening, you. Would slim that number down, right? The
[1:12:24] need for additional community benefits or offsite improvements. So in
[1:12:28] the zone change realm, you don't need a PDD to
[1:12:31] get some off site improvements as a mitigation or otherwise,
[1:12:35] so you can do that anyway. And in addition, the
[1:12:39] town board shall find the development is consistent with the
[1:12:41] recommendations of the comp plan and will be beneficial, compatible,
[1:12:44] harmonious with the surrounding land uses and not have a
[1:12:47] significant impact upon the environment. So all these things come
[1:12:51] under your purview to even say, does this make sense
[1:12:54] in this location? If it doesn't make sense? You say
[1:12:58] it doesn't make sense if you said it makes sense,
[1:13:00] but say not at 65 only. What if we knocked
[1:13:03] off these units? And kind of reconfigured. You always have
[1:13:07] the referral power to the planning. Board to get that
[1:13:09] coordinated input, which is important if you're a lead agency.
[1:13:14] It's for you to debate, decide. I could rewrite it.
[1:13:17] Do whatever you like, however. You want? I just want
[1:13:20] you to know. I'm not averse to changing anything if
[1:13:25] you want to. My suggestion might be now that the
[1:13:30] town board is looking at those comments and has responses
[1:13:34] to some of the comments, maybe dialogue. Through you to
[1:13:38] say, well, like we do in federal applications and things,
[1:13:42] you have to here's? The comments. Here's our responses. Maybe
[1:13:47] there's a need to go back and. Say to town
[1:13:50] boards, discuss these, and these are our feelings somehow. Well,
[1:13:54] you would anyway. In the secret analysis. So when the
[1:13:57] town board does its secret, it's called reason supporting. This
[1:14:01] determination and you would have that maybe narrative that describes
[1:14:05] your thought process, that even though we read these recommendations,
[1:14:10] these things, and you have the chance to collaborate and
[1:14:12] write that on your behalf. If I can be of
[1:14:16] further assistance or any changes on here. Thank you. Thank
[1:14:20] you. Well, I don't have any cards from the present
[1:14:26] today, but how long has this been? Open for. We
[1:14:30] had a work session, and I think this is the
[1:14:32] first time it's on. December 9 1st public hearing. Then
[1:14:38] it was tabled and brought back at the special meeting
[1:14:41] in December. Then it was tabled again to today, if
[1:14:45] I'm not mistaken. We didn't put a notice of adoption
[1:14:49] in the packet, so that would be coming forthcoming. If
[1:14:54] it's a will of the board. So we had a
[1:14:57] meeting on December 9, and then we got the comments
[1:15:00] from the planning board. And now we're having another public
[1:15:03] hearing on the 13th. And the county has determined it
[1:15:06] to be local determination. Would we be open to just
[1:15:09] holding it open for one more meeting? I am. Just
[1:15:15] so that it's not on for adoption today. No, I
[1:15:17] understand. Just so that people. Can. Review this if they
[1:15:21] have not heard it and have the opportunity to speak
[1:15:23] once more. I mean, that way we know. Where does
[1:15:27] the community stand on this? Because this is the third
[1:15:29] public hearing. I think we've gotten. But if we're going
[1:15:32] to make changes, All over again anyway, so we might
[1:15:36] as well hold it open in case. There's any other
[1:15:40] changes from the board based on the planning board's comments,
[1:15:45] okay. So you'll let me know if you want changes?
[1:15:48] Thank you. So we're keeping open for written comment, or
[1:15:51] are we having another fourth public? Hearing. For two weeks.
[1:16:02] I just feel as though. There's some additional discussion that
[1:16:09] should be had. So we can have another work session,
[1:16:13] but we can hold this open. I think if we're
[1:16:17] having a work session and we're going to make major
[1:16:18] changes. We may as well close this now. And I
[1:16:21] re noticed a new public so here's. My position. I'll
[1:16:23] just make my position known. I just think because. This
[1:16:27] is a big process change, right? It's currently situated where
[1:16:32] applicants are going before the planning board. Right, Tom, you
[1:16:35] could comment on that. Now we're saying they could come
[1:16:38] to us because. You laid it out very nicely about
[1:16:42] how this happened. I'm just thinking maybe it requires. A
[1:16:45] little bit more time just to review, make sure this
[1:16:49] is all set up in a way. That works for
[1:16:51] everybody. Because it is a big change that the town
[1:16:56] of Southampton would adopt in terms of our development. Procedures.
[1:16:59] We've had it open for two months, but if you
[1:17:00] want to keep it open. It's fine. Made me a
[1:17:05] little uncomfortable. Initially, I thought, okay, hotels are allowed in
[1:17:09] highway business. But it's so unreasonably restrictive that nobody can
[1:17:16] actually put a hotel there. Right. So that's why we're
[1:17:20] going this way, rather than just allowing them with restrictions.
[1:17:26] I feel a little uncomfortable about the way we're approaching
[1:17:30] this, especially since. That's what I had said before. And
[1:17:34] now the planning board staying too. And I don't know
[1:17:38] why we can't just. Have. Zoning allowing for the hotels
[1:17:45] with certain restrictions. And I know you said, well, this
[1:17:48] could open us. Up to a proliferation of hotels, but
[1:17:51] I think the market forces controls, things like that. In
[1:17:56] a town like Southampton. That's on you. If you would
[1:18:00] like to do that. We did an analysis, and there's
[1:18:02] over 1400 parcels that would be eligible. So if that's
[1:18:09] your will, that's fine. Just going into it with eyes
[1:18:12] wide. Open. That. The market forces are competition. So where
[1:18:18] one goes, another goes. And you would never be able
[1:18:20] to say you can't be there. And you're there because
[1:18:23] this one's there. And you're putting them all in hamlets
[1:18:25] because there's none in villages. So that's our concern, and
[1:18:29] that's a valid concern because. We're not trying to open
[1:18:33] the floodgates and have hotels everywhere, either. We just. Want
[1:18:36] to have the ability to put one as a conditional
[1:18:40] use, basically. If you want one there. But outside of
[1:18:44] that. It's really not an as of right or. Sort
[1:18:51] of land use. That's just conferred by. It's confirmed by
[1:18:55] a board. Like the planning board is a confirmatory board,
[1:18:57] meaning you. Meet the criteria, you get the use. You
[1:19:00] have the discretionary powers to say we don't. Even want
[1:19:03] to deal with this right now. We don't like it.
[1:19:05] The community is not happy. And so you have that
[1:19:08] added layer of scrutiny and structure. So it's not a
[1:19:13] big departure. We have lots of zones like this. We
[1:19:16] have many. We have other overlays that are the same
[1:19:20] way. For this reason, MF 44 SC 44. All your
[1:19:24] zoning floating zones. They're only landed when you want them
[1:19:28] to be otherwise. Nobody can just go to the planning
[1:19:31] board and ask for. Yeah, see, something just doesn't. Seem
[1:19:34] right about that, that you can say yes to it.
[1:19:38] In one location. And then just refuse to consider it
[1:19:41] in another. It's a zoning change. So you have discretionary
[1:19:44] power. Right, Jim? In this one particular location. It's okay.
[1:19:50] But down the street, we're not looking at it. It
[1:19:53] just seems. As though. It's. I don't want to say
[1:19:56] spot zoning, but it seems as though we're. Just saying
[1:19:59] yes to this spot, no to that one, instead of
[1:20:01] saying, here's a zoning district where it's allowed under these
[1:20:05] conditions. We don't want any more pharmacies, so we're going
[1:20:10] to tell you. Where the pharmacies can go instead of
[1:20:12] saying, I mean, people aren't going to you're not going
[1:20:13] to put ten pharmacies in one community because they're not
[1:20:17] going to be able to sustain themselves. If you pick
[1:20:21] the spot where one, that's a traditional way of zoning.
[1:20:25] It's sort of becoming more antiquated because of the fact
[1:20:27] that. We get challenged when we say only here. And
[1:20:35] then. If I said okay. Right here is the hotel
[1:20:39] zone, right there. Everybody else goes. What about me? Where's
[1:20:44] my hotel zone? So. You can absolutely do what you're
[1:20:48] saying. It's just a way of approaching it. Again. I
[1:20:56] am not pushing my way on you. I'm giving you.
[1:20:59] A more scrutinized way of doing it that gives you
[1:21:02] more protection, not less. If you want to do it
[1:21:05] the other way? It's still able to be done, but
[1:21:08] then when. With lots of applications come flooding into the
[1:21:11] planning board. It turns into, oh, my God, we need
[1:21:14] a moratorium. We have to stop. We need to redo
[1:21:18] this again. And so that's why I'm saying, isn't a
[1:21:20] case by case, still on the highway, still over two
[1:21:23] acres, still so situated that you have these parameters. A
[1:21:28] little more. I think that's more Southampton than any other
[1:21:31] way. Being very judicious in how it goes. But. It
[1:21:38] is totally. Completely up to you how you want to
[1:21:41] approach this. We tried it the other way. We said,
[1:21:44] wow. It could get a lot of them. Let's try.
[1:21:49] The way. That's like, just a little bit. What were
[1:21:52] the criteria used? The first go? Round. Again. Anything, anywhere.
[1:21:58] Well, we would just expand. Just say. In Hb allow
[1:22:04] hotels. As a use in that category, se. Right. And
[1:22:09] then we went through that up to 60. So make
[1:22:13] it a special exception. We did that already. And now
[1:22:15] we're coming full circle. Back to the beginning, because if
[1:22:18] you do it the way, if you do it that
[1:22:19] way with a special exception. You're talking about 1400 parcels
[1:22:23] outside of villages that could have hotels on. Them. That's
[1:22:27] not going to happen. But you can't say that's not
[1:22:28] going. To happen. Because we don't know that. Because. Criteria,
[1:22:37] right? And if they made it, they made it. Then
[1:22:40] you don't have any discretion. But if they do hit
[1:22:42] it, you have to give it to them, right? If
[1:22:45] they meet the conditions, then. You're very limited as to
[1:22:50] not approving something in a special exception, but I think
[1:22:53] this has been a very healthy discussion. I think this
[1:22:56] board can do it legally. You're legally sound either way
[1:22:59] you want to. Do here. Listen. There's no resolution for
[1:23:04] adoption on today. You can let me know. Take a
[1:23:07] look at the code again, we can talk offline, tell.
[1:23:10] Me how you want to fix it. I'm happy to.
[1:23:13] I think we all know that. The four units per
[1:23:14] acre. Can't have. I mean, that's not. You might as
[1:23:17] well, just throw out planning board does say that those
[1:23:19] standards don't make sense and they should be revisited. What
[1:23:23] did you just say? Special exception standards themselves as they
[1:23:28] are today. Would still be there. You'd have to still
[1:23:32] revisit them. This is a way. To go forward, at
[1:23:36] least in the short term, with something that you know
[1:23:39] you want and allow for it if you do right,
[1:23:42] the boardy barn process. We know we have something that
[1:23:46] wants to be a hotel, and we say, how do
[1:23:48] we confer that use. It's not allowed in highway business.
[1:23:51] Let's give it to everybody. Everywhere in highway business. Or
[1:23:54] let's find a way that they can avail themselves and
[1:23:56] not just for them, but other people, too, where we've
[1:23:59] mapped out, like, a reasonable amount. It's not just a
[1:24:03] class of one. It's across the town. But not overwhelming.
[1:24:11] That's the concern. If you want to do it the
[1:24:14] other way. We already had that drafted and we said
[1:24:16] that's. Kind of overwhelming. There's three hotels on 39, and
[1:24:20] I can guarantee you there would be more if they
[1:24:22] were allowed 100%. So that's the concern, is to be
[1:24:27] more discretionary. Sort of slowly and see how this leads
[1:24:34] versus. Kind of open it up. But again, the decision
[1:24:40] lies with you. You want to do it that way.
[1:24:43] That way is another way. There's more than one way.
[1:24:46] So there's the way that I have said, which is
[1:24:48] a floating zone, and you only take it and use
[1:24:50] it when you want to. The other way is to
[1:24:52] create a special exception. And it's just those standards. But
[1:24:55] anyone can avail themselves. They don't come to. You, they
[1:24:58] go to the planning board. If they meet those standards,
[1:25:00] they get the use. Or. There could be. The only
[1:25:05] other thing is, like, a use variance, which is, like,
[1:25:08] practically impossible. So those are our tools. We're looking at
[1:25:12] the toolbox going, how do we build? This. We only
[1:25:14] have these three things. So it's up to you. Guess
[1:25:18] you could try to refine the special exception standards. To
[1:25:22] make it even that much more narrow. But even you
[1:25:24] can only go so far with that. You can only
[1:25:26] go so far with that, and, I mean, you can
[1:25:28] do that, but. You probably will do that with the
[1:25:32] comp plan updates and then you can extinguish. The floating
[1:25:35] zone if you had enough. We're not there yet. So
[1:25:38] what do you do between now and a comp plan
[1:25:39] update. That's what this solution provides you. But again, I
[1:25:47] don't want you to think I'm pushing anybody onto anything
[1:25:49] because I'm just trying to give you. What you're saying
[1:25:53] you want. We appreciate that you're working with us and
[1:25:57] trying to come up creative. Trying to come up with
[1:25:59] something that we're allowed to do. The state says you're
[1:26:02] allowed to. Do it this way. You are a creature
[1:26:03] of the state, and New York state says this is
[1:26:05] a valid tool. So despite whatever, the planning board doesn't
[1:26:10] favor the use of it, it is a valid planning
[1:26:12] tool. It's been tested in court, and it is absolutely
[1:26:15] permissible. So let me know. Given that it doesn't seem
[1:26:21] like it should be. But you're saying that it is.
[1:26:24] If the state. I think I even sent you the
[1:26:27] case. It ends up being a case by case basis,
[1:26:29] as long as you apply reasonable standards and you give
[1:26:33] justifications for your decision on any particular application, then you
[1:26:37] certainly could be legally sound. Yes. But is a valid
[1:26:43] reason. To. I mean, I know we were saying before,
[1:26:47] if one goes in one location and then another. Is
[1:26:51] just half a mile down the road, and we think.
[1:26:54] That's too close. That, to me, might not be a
[1:26:56] valid reason. Because isn't that anti competition, right? That's what
[1:27:02] you're. Case by case. You're not prohibiting competition. You're saying
[1:27:08] the second one, perhaps, is not promoting the general welfare
[1:27:12] because people have come out and said, you can't put
[1:27:14] that there, that's, near whatever. Somebody is going to have
[1:27:18] an argument as to why that's not a good idea,
[1:27:21] and the general welfare. Is that the population of that
[1:27:25] area is pointing to it saying, we don't want that.
[1:27:30] They want to be able to do that. When it
[1:27:32] comes to playing board, it's very difficult to do that
[1:27:34] when it's just permitted or special exception use, whereas when
[1:27:38] it's. Discretionary. It's much easier. So that's why I'm saying
[1:27:42] put it with you. Because you have more power, discretionary
[1:27:45] power, because you're the legislative body. Makes sense. Yeah, it's
[1:27:49] a little bit more kin to the powers of the
[1:27:52] changes zone. It's the power of zoning. Yeah, definitely. You
[1:27:56] have the power to amend your zoning ordinance. In as
[1:27:59] much as it would promote general welfare. And we're not
[1:28:03] talking about. Competition clauses or anything like that. I'm not
[1:28:07] an attorney, but I'm just saying. We're talking about promoting
[1:28:10] the general welfare. If you have a proliferation of hotels,
[1:28:13] is that promoting the general welfare? Probably not. So you
[1:28:17] would use that as your reason why you're not going
[1:28:19] to have three more. Or something along those lines, but.
[1:28:24] If you say everybody thought, like, we love whatever it
[1:28:27] was, then you could say it does. So. It really
[1:28:31] comes down to your discretion, and that's what this is.
[1:28:34] I understand the supervisor's. Concerns. Me too. Certainly. We can
[1:28:39] go further. There's always the possibility that someone will bring
[1:28:43] an action against whatever. You say and say, and you
[1:28:45] know that firsthand. So, yes, somebody always has the possibility
[1:28:50] to appeal. Thank you. Thanks. Well, I mean, you're right.
[1:28:58] If we're going to change it, it's. Going to be
[1:29:00] a big change, so it would have to get re
[1:29:02] noticed. So I moved to close the public hearing. Leave
[1:29:05] it open for two weeks. Comments. All right. All in
[1:29:09] favor? Aye. Thanks, Janice.
[1:29:19] All right, so that brings us to public portion, and
[1:29:22] we have a card from Eileen McFalen. Eileen, are you
[1:29:26] still with us and want to speak? Thank you. Very
[1:29:33] patient. Yes. Given all that was said, I don't know
[1:29:40] three minutes is going to make it. From him to
[1:29:43] base. I'm just speaking on behalf of my own thoughts,
[1:29:46] not Pacific association today. I'm just going to refer to
[1:29:51] what you were talking about with the floating zone, right?
[1:29:52] Here. I'm not comfortable with it after hearing about it
[1:29:57] over just the last couple of weeks. And I appreciate
[1:30:02] the fact that you're thinking to hold off on something
[1:30:05] that you're. Going to make a zoning code law rule
[1:30:10] that will be on the books for a very long
[1:30:11] time. So with the Indigo Rest hotel in Riverhead, when
[1:30:18] the hotel owner came in, showed us the plans and
[1:30:21] talked to the civic association last year. We had a
[1:30:25] great attendance of people. I'd say there were about 70
[1:30:28] people there. And we took a vote. Who liked it?
[1:30:33] Everybody agreed it would be a great idea, and we
[1:30:35] were all excited. Boardy barn was going. And so what
[1:30:40] was going to place it? This seemed like a very
[1:30:43] good. Beneficial community business to have there. And then it
[1:30:49] never happened. And so we come to find out it's
[1:30:52] a zoning situation. And then when I'm listening to the
[1:30:55] floating. I'm like, Well, what is this business owner really
[1:31:01] waiting on? That the zoning. Is not what he needs
[1:31:05] for approval now. But you have discretionary. Thoughts on whether
[1:31:11] it could be at this time. Or you do not.
[1:31:16] So I don't even know what the hold up is,
[1:31:18] and I'm wondering if they even know what the hold
[1:31:21] up is before we completely lose them. Then the board
[1:31:26] agreed. In the community. I believe everybody is supportive of
[1:31:30] the hotel as the Borty barn location. But it's not
[1:31:33] allowed under the current code, so we were going to
[1:31:36] amend the code. But then the concern to allow the
[1:31:40] hotels in that district. But then the concern was, oh,
[1:31:44] if we do that, maybe there's going to be too.
[1:31:46] Many. So. Let's try doing this floating zone where we
[1:31:51] can put it as we see fit and now, there's
[1:31:55] concerns about that kind of discretion. That's the summary. Of
[1:32:04] the hold up, okay? Well, I have to agree. You
[1:32:08] shouldn't rush on something that's going to remain. There for
[1:32:10] a long time, but I don't think we ever have
[1:32:13] to worry about. In 13 towns, 1400 applicants. At 100
[1:32:18] hotels per town. I don't think that's ever going to
[1:32:21] happen. So thank you, number one, for all the efforts
[1:32:25] that you do to improve Hampton Bays very much. Appreciated
[1:32:29] and it is definitely noticed. I'm here to talk to
[1:32:35] you about. Situation and an issue that I'm not really
[1:32:39] sure if you're talking about and. Working with yet, but
[1:32:42] I was at the planning board the other night. And
[1:32:47] it's about the propane depot that would like to bring
[1:32:51] its business into Hampton. Base. So. I just want to
[1:32:55] enlighten you. What you may not be aware of. First
[1:32:59] of all, I don't even know how the proposal. Gets
[1:33:07] started. I don't know if it started with the planning
[1:33:09] board, and that's. The initial way to start. What they
[1:33:14] want to do and where it goes from there. But
[1:33:16] if it started before the planning. Board. I don't know
[1:33:19] how it even got to the planning board. I did
[1:33:22] use the word ridiculous. Thought that it could go where
[1:33:26] it is. The other day I'm going to continue with
[1:33:28] that. It is a ridiculous thought to think that that
[1:33:33] type of business can go where they're asking to go.
[1:33:38] So where they want it is right next door to
[1:33:41] another propane storage facility. The facility now has been in
[1:33:46] business for 70 something years. They've been in that position
[1:33:50] for 15 years. They have never had a safety issue.
[1:33:54] Never. They've got 80,000 gallons of propane on their property.
[1:34:01] But propane depot wants to have $80,000 store 80,000 gallons
[1:34:08] of storage. Right there on the same property, so. It's
[1:34:14] not miles away. It's right there. So I did talk
[1:34:18] to the owner of Quugs and Claire and I said,
[1:34:20] well, It's the fact that you don't have enough, you
[1:34:23] don't service enough. Do you plan on getting more storage
[1:34:27] tanks? And I said, absolutely not. We're good with what
[1:34:30] we've got going. We have a plan. We don't plan
[1:34:33] on adding more. In the future. So does that mean
[1:34:36] propane depot just plans on taking over all of. Quad
[1:34:40] Sinclair business. If, in fact, it tries to, that means
[1:34:45] you are agreeing to put. A local business owner out
[1:34:50] of business for somebody who doesn't live there. So what
[1:34:55] benefit is it to our community? In opinion of not
[1:34:59] just mine, but many people. Zero benefit. So why approve
[1:35:04] it? 30 seconds. This is not before this board, right?
[1:35:08] That's. In the planning board. So just to keep in
[1:35:13] mind that. Rapid recovery moved. And so with them moving,
[1:35:19] we've got less traffic in that very exact intersection, which
[1:35:23] is a good thing. Medical center built, going to open
[1:35:27] up eventually, so we're going to have more traffic, maybe
[1:35:30] not so much trucks, but we're going to have a
[1:35:32] lot of traffic in and out. So now you put
[1:35:34] propane depot. There with trucks and cars all congested in
[1:35:38] that very small space. Ridiculous. It's the only word I
[1:35:43] can think that makes sense. Time is up. Safety. Yeah,
[1:35:47] I already talked about that. So that's what I wanted
[1:35:51] you to be aware of in case it comes to
[1:35:54] you. And we appreciate all you do. Thank you very
[1:35:58] much. Thank you. All right. Andrew. Peter, is there anybody
[1:36:04] on Zoom for public portions to another program? Someone just
[1:36:09] raised their hand. Okay, bring them on.
[1:36:30] No.
[1:36:41] But.
[1:36:51] Can you hear me? Hi. Yes. Welcome, councilman, welcome. Hello,
[1:36:58] my name is David Lee, so I'm calling you. No
[1:36:59] official capacity at all. I'm the calling. I try to
[1:37:03] get on for the public hearing. Number one, I apologize.
[1:37:06] I could not do that. But I can't keep for
[1:37:08] the time to speak. Now, my name is David Lees.
[1:37:12] I'm calling from your neighboring couch at the beast. Hansen.
[1:37:14] I'm calling you. No. Official capacity. At all. I'm calling
[1:37:18] my own behalf. Dear supervisor Moore, a distinguished supervisor. More
[1:37:22] than other distinguished members of the town council, I'm calling
[1:37:25] the capacity as a former member of citizens for access
[1:37:27] rights and advocate of public beach access and safe, enjoyable,
[1:37:31] beast driving. Beach Access is a regional importance and regional
[1:37:35] southeastern and east tape combined. In that. The continued and
[1:37:40] increasingly need for public reach, access to our beaches and
[1:37:43] waterways. It's a ripeness and desired by our residents in
[1:37:46] 1686. Your potential actions, on length, I believe, are harmonious
[1:37:50] with the town's comp plan and also the general obligation
[1:37:53] law of the CPS as far as coastal resiliency and
[1:37:57] open space and providing recreational opportunities. You will be providing
[1:38:01] the future generations of opportunities to recreate a southeastern town
[1:38:05] species in perpetuity I commend all of you for your
[1:38:08] fort sight, courage and dedication to continue. The efficacy of
[1:38:11] the public's desire to access the greatest natural resources that
[1:38:15] our towns have. Is speeches. I thank you again for
[1:38:18] allowing me to speak. Have a nice night. Thank you.
[1:38:22] And thank you for your comments. Thank you council, for
[1:38:24] participating. All right. There's no other comments. I
[1:38:33] moved to close public portion. I have one comment. Oh,
[1:38:37] please. Go ahead. Turn your mic on. Since it's a
[1:38:43] public portion, I just want to wish the other council
[1:38:46] person happy birthday. Thank you. Thank you. Had a very
[1:38:52] nice birthday. Very far away from here. Are you ready
[1:38:59] to go back to work? I am. You can close
[1:39:03] it. Thank you. All right, I need a second. 2nd
[1:39:06] all in favor? Aye. All right, let's move ahead with
[1:39:09] the resolution. Town Board Resolution 33 of 2026. Award and
[1:39:16] authorized supervisor signed contract with Quintel contracting. Corp. For tree
[1:39:20] clearing at plant number three. Second. All in favor? Aye.
[1:39:26] Town Board resolution 2026. Authorize purchases from WB Mason Company
[1:39:32] incorporated using Suffolk county and eastern Suffolk bo seas contracts.
[1:39:37] Second all in favor? Aye. Town Board resolution 43 of
[1:39:41] 2026. Award and authorized supervisor to sign a contract with
[1:39:44] sax utility Solutions, LLC for water meter replacement. Second. All
[1:39:49] in favor? Aye. On board resolution. 2026. To authorize the
[1:39:57] acceptance of a donation of abandoned vehicle from the police
[1:40:00] department, second and co. Sponsor, Madam Clerk. All in favor?
[1:40:06] Aye. Town Board resolution 2026. 92 to authorize the supervisor
[1:40:14] to sign any and all documents with iWork Systems Inc.
[1:40:17] For Cloud hosted software. All in favor? Town Board resolution
[1:40:22] 2026. To authorize the supervisor to sign any and all
[1:40:27] documents with source pass contemporary, LLC to provide immediate assistance
[1:40:32] on a bank hours basis to resolve town's network connectivity
[1:40:36] issues. Second, all in favor. Aye. Board resolution 94 of
[1:40:41] 2026, authorize the supervisor to execute any and all documents
[1:40:44] pertaining to the 2026 transportation contract with Suffolk county office
[1:40:48] for the agent second. All in favor? Aye. Town? Board
[1:40:53] Resolution 95 of 2026 authorized supervisors execute a contract with
[1:40:57] Supa county office for the aging for the home maintenance
[1:40:59] repair program. Second. All in favor? Aye. Town board resolution
[1:41:04] 2020. Six. Authorized supervisor. Signed contract with Al McClain, associate
[1:41:13] engineer survey DPC for professional engineer service associated with design
[1:41:18] permitted for stormwater quality improvement at shore Road and yacht
[1:41:22] drive in reps and second. All in favor? Aye. Town
[1:41:28] Board resolution 2026. Authorized to change order professional service related
[1:41:34] to the engineer service. At Penny park with Alkay McLean,
[1:41:39] association engineer and survey second. All in favor? Aye. We're
[1:41:44] getting closer. Town Board resolution 98 of 2026 recalling Amend
[1:41:49] Town Board resolution number 2025 1529. Authorize the supervisor to
[1:41:54] execute an agreement with Long island telecommunications and Electronic Services,
[1:41:57] Inc. For the portable radios the Hampton Bays Water District
[1:42:01] second. All in favor? Aye. Resolution 2026. 99 authorized supervisors
[1:42:09] dismit a grant application for the 2025 26 local government
[1:42:13] official grant program for Regent Marine operates insurance. I asked
[1:42:18] other town board members if they would like to co
[1:42:19] sponsor this with me. Sure. 1 second. Yes, thank you.
[1:42:27] All in favor? Michael. Town Board Resolution 2026 100 authorized,
[1:42:34] supervised to submit a grant application for the 2025 26
[1:42:39] local government efficient grant program to Regent stormwater. And maintenance
[1:42:44] share service project second and co sponsor. Yes. I like
[1:42:48] the whole town. Would it do? This. Please be glad
[1:42:50] to know. And these two grants are. Yes. These two
[1:42:55] grants, what we applying for? Rescue barge and a backpack.
[1:43:05] With other. Villages. Yeah. And it's really great for shared
[1:43:11] services. We'll all benefit from that. Yes. All in favor?
[1:43:15] Aye. Aye. Town Board resolution 103 of 2026. Recall and
[1:43:20] Amend Town Board resolution 2020 511 eight authorize the supervisor
[1:43:25] to sign a contract extension with York Analytical Laboratories Inc.
[1:43:28] To provide water analysis to the Hampton based water District.
[1:43:30] Second, all. In favor? Aye. Town Board resolution 2026.
[1:43:41] 108 authorized pushes of road salt and treated salt and
[1:43:46] emergency standby. Road salt from New York State OGS contract
[1:43:50] from Atlantic Salt Inc. And appliance, LLC. Second. All in
[1:43:58] favor? Aye. Reservoir Finn 2026. 0109 authorized who fires the
[1:44:05] sign contract extend with United Metro Energy Corp. For ultra
[1:44:10] low diesel fuel second. All in favor? Aye. Town Board
[1:44:15] resolution 2026 co sponsored with Tom Naily. 2026.
[1:44:25] For 2026. Notice submitted for glass crusher at North Sea
[1:44:29] Transport station. All second. All in favor? Aye. Town board
[1:44:38] resolution. 2026. Notice the bidder for street sign
[1:44:48] blanks and trucked seats and traffic mocking second. All in
[1:44:54] favor? Town Board resolution 81 of 2026, co sponsored with
[1:44:59] council person Pell authorized first time home buyers down payment
[1:45:02] assistance funding from the community housing fund. Second. Town board
[1:45:08] resolution 2026. I cut you off after you called for
[1:45:11] the vote. Was it just you being. I just asked
[1:45:17] to add myself. You always want to add. Yes. Can
[1:45:20] I get added to that too, please. Hear what's going
[1:45:24] on at the other end. Did you want to be
[1:45:25] added or your voting or. What are you doing? Want
[1:45:29] to be added to the first time home buyer resolution.
[1:45:32] Okay. Yeah. Okay, so the whole board. I can't hear
[1:45:37] what you're saying. Yes, for me, please. Okay, so I'll.
[1:45:41] Just add Tom. Then we just need to vote. All
[1:45:44] right. All in favor? Aye. Sorry. Town Board resolution 2026.
[1:45:52] To authorize the town attorney to accept settlement from National
[1:45:55] Union Fire Insurance Company for damage to a Southampton town
[1:45:59] playground. Second. All in favor? With
[1:46:09] these? Yes. Sponsor with Michael Isil. At Town Board resolution
[1:46:18] 2026. Resolution to adopt the Mantown code. Chapter 312. Vehicles
[1:46:24] and traffic, article five, turning movement section 312. 72.2 right
[1:46:31] turns forbidden. Second. All in favor? This one I'm going
[1:46:37] to have to amend on the floor. It's co sponsored
[1:46:42] with Mike Azilla. Again, councilman resolution 2026. Resolution to adopt
[1:46:51] the man Town code 312 vehicles and traffic. I moved
[1:46:56] to amend for. The subscription error on page 35. The
[1:47:02] two changes that indicated north and south should say south
[1:47:06] on page 37 where it indicates. Should be. Second to
[1:47:14] the amendment. Just one amendment. Page 37. It's 35 and
[1:47:22] 37. Boredom drive and lynn road. Three new stop signs
[1:47:29] in Hampton Bays, south of Montreal Highway. So, all in
[1:47:34] favor to the amendment? Aye. As amended. As amended. Same
[1:47:41] second. All in favor? Aye. I'm going to abstain. I
[1:47:44] wasn't part of the board during the public hearing process
[1:47:47] for that, so I'll abstain.
[1:48:03] Again sponsored with Michael Azilla Town Council. 2026. After three
[1:48:10] crawl vehicles and traffic for purpose of removing three yield
[1:48:14] intersection enhancement south and Montrock highway second. Thank you. The
[1:48:22] rooms being replaced with the stop sign. Yes. All in
[1:48:27] favor? Aye. I'll abstain again. I wasn't at that public
[1:48:30] hearing. Wasn't on the board. Again co sponsor, councilman Michael
[1:48:38] Azilla. Resolution 2026. Resolution to adopt the Mentown code. Chapter
[1:48:45] 312, vehicles and traffic, article three stop sign, intersection 312
[1:48:50] at East Cork Tyana and Hembase Hamilton. Section north of
[1:48:56] Montok highway. Second. We had the public hearing. Yes. All
[1:49:03] in favor? Town Board resolution 2026. Conic Bay Region Community
[1:49:11] Preservation Fund Tax refund to thoroughbred title Services LLC regarding
[1:49:17] a tax overpayment. Second. All in favor? Town Board resolution
[1:49:23] 44 of 2026, co sponsored with council members Tell and
[1:49:27] Ayasilli authorizing an installation of three new street lights on
[1:49:31] Noyak Road and Noyak second. All in favor? Aye. Town
[1:49:35] board resolution 2026. To appoint Frank Belson to custodial worker
[1:49:42] two, and municipal works second. All in favor? Town Board
[1:49:46] resolution 2026. Craig Carroll to maintenance mechanic. Two in municipal
[1:49:53] works second. All in favor? Aye. Town Board resolution 2026.
[1:50:02] To appoint Robert McConnell to custodial worker. Two in municipal
[1:50:06] work second. All in favor? Aye. Town Board resolution 2026.
[1:50:13] To appoint Brandon Martinez Jimenez to sanitation helper in waste
[1:50:17] management. Second. All in favor? Aye. And Town Board Resolution
[1:50:23] 2026 10 one to accept the retirement of Eric Benson.
[1:50:28] Second all in favor. Congratulations to everyone. Town Board resolution
[1:50:34] 105 of 2026 resolution co sponsored with council members Pell
[1:50:39] and Aya silly. And supervisor Moore resolution setting a public
[1:50:43] hearing to amend chapter 111 in connection with special parking.
[1:50:46] Permits. Second on the motion. This is to amend the
[1:50:51] town code. And to continue to allow East Hampton town
[1:50:56] residents that live in the village of Sag Harbor. To
[1:51:00] purchase permits. That allow them access. To Long beach, but
[1:51:06] they will no longer be permitted to. Buy passes that
[1:51:11] allow access to our ocean beaches of W. Scott, Cameron,
[1:51:14] Sagmain and Mecox. Beach. We have found that the lost
[1:51:19] revenue on those. Is quite a lot of money and.
[1:51:25] Also, Scott W. Cameron is a resident only beach, and
[1:51:29] those beaches have become very crowded. And so it doesn't
[1:51:33] seem right to take access from town residents away and
[1:51:37] sell access. To east Hampton Town residents, they will still
[1:51:41] have access to Long beach because that was in the
[1:51:43] deed for Long beach that they have to have access.
[1:51:45] But if they want to enjoy our the town, ocean
[1:51:48] beaches. They have to buy a non resident permit. But
[1:51:51] we love our east ham. Hampton neighbors. Yes. That's on
[1:51:55] for January 2727. 2nd. All in favor? Aye. Downboard resolution
[1:52:02] 2026. 10. Two to authorize the acquisition. Of cosponsored by
[1:52:09] council member Aya Silly to authorize the acquisition of an
[1:52:12] historic preservation and conservation easement on property located at eleven
[1:52:16] Walnut Avenue in the hamlet of East Quag and to
[1:52:19] amend the community Preservation project plan and the CPF management
[1:52:23] and stewardship plan to include said property. Second, all in
[1:52:26] favor. And then with the two walk on. Town Board
[1:52:35] resolution id number 202-6159 co sponsored by council member Pell
[1:52:42] to authorize the supervisor to execute a contract with all
[1:52:45] island testing Associates, Inc. For professional services related to special
[1:52:49] building inspections at the West Hampton Community center. Second, they
[1:52:53] have to test the concrete. And their compaction. Make sure
[1:52:56] everything's being done properly. Better to test it now and
[1:52:59] deal with it later. All in favor? Aye. We should
[1:53:04] tell them a quick brief about the meeting we had
[1:53:06] up there on Monday. Had a progress meeting. With all
[1:53:10] the contractors, and they're all very motivated. The footings have
[1:53:13] been poured and. Now they're putting up the rebar so
[1:53:17] they can pour the foundation. This was the week to
[1:53:19] pour. They were putting the Friday moles. Molest Town
[1:53:29] Board resolution id number 20261. Six two. Yes, the warrant.
[1:53:35] Number one. Capital number one. CPS number one of January
[1:53:39] 13, 2026. 2nd all in favor? Aye. That's it. Anybody
[1:53:45] got ale? Anything else? All right. There's no further business.
[1:53:52] Then I moved to just can't wait one more last.
[1:53:54] Time. Just can't wait to go use that on new
[1:53:57] beach. Yeah. Next week. A couple of weeks. All right,
[1:54:04] so I moved to close the meeting. Second. All in
[1:54:07] favor? Thanks, everyone. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. It's interesting
[1:54:11] that dave.