It's happening ceremony.
Is there a issue?
It's a cuter issue, actually. We need a new hard drive.
Okay.
Carol, if you would read the roll call, please.
Present.
Here.
Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda is a one-public hearing.
We have a public portion for public comment.
Looks like we have about ten people who have signed up.
If you haven't signed up, don't panic, give you a chance to raise your hand when we're
finished with the people who signed up, if you'd like to speak to the board.
And then we have our town resolutions to consider.
So let's begin first with Mr. King, who would like to share a few words of wisdom to begin.
That was good, right, Hugh?
Yeah.
Was that taken 14 months or something?
Remember you?
Are you up for re-election?
Yeah.
I'm working on it, you know.
I understand, Mr. Supervisor, you saw Stuart, or you talked to Stuart.
I'm glad you brought that up.
I got a chance to see Stuart Vorpal a couple of days ago.
He looks much better, he was in great spirits, and he's eager to get back to speaking
before the camp board and we pray that he will soon.
He said he's not up to his usual horsepower yet,
but he does wish you good luck in all your endeavors tonight.
One other thing I'm going to talk about this next time.
This is the anniversary of the Spring's Fire Department this year.
I believe Councilman Overton is an original member of the Fire Department,
formed in 1898.
Oh, no. Thank you.
Now, it's 19, this is the 50th anniversary of the Springs Fire Department.
Okay, the subject of a town landing field for airplanes was brought up for the first time in the summer of 1930.
A field used by Robert Appleton on further lane near the present two-mile hollow beach was being used by private planes,
and the people in the vicinity objected to the noise and low-flying planes.
Sound familiar? In October, a group called the East End Associates petitioned the
town board to find a suitable place for a landing field. The Ladies Village
Improvement Society lodged a protest against further noise on further lane
and asked for a more secluded spot. Two possible sites mentioned were Hog Creek
and Nappy Beach. Can you imagine Hog Creek? That would have been neat.
In 1932, Winter Gardner suggested the town lease its 80-acre clearing between Gardner
Dock in 3 Mile Harbor and Dub Creek for a municipal airport.
No action was taken on this proposal.
In 1934, Leonard Edwards and J. H. L. Grower of the Civil Works Administration spoke of
the possibility of obtaining federal CWA funds for the construction of the airport.
All the construction labor costs were paid for by federal funds.
The town would have to buy or lease an upland for two runways 300 feet wide and 2,500 feet
long.
The total cost would be $74,000, with the federal share amounting to $52,000 and the town share
$22,000, mostly for equipment rentals.
The figures varied later on, but the federal government paid for the lion's share of the
construction.
However, as we shall see, government money means government control.
In December of 1934, it was suggested that the town by property between Fireplace Road
and Akabana-Kiway, a tax sale land for an airport, a legal hitch developed with the lands
of the town abandoned the idea.
Judge Merton Edwards, who was on the town board, how can that be?
Remember years ago the town board consisted of the four justices of the peace and the supervisor.
It wasn't until Lady Ecker was elected councilman in 1955 or 1965 that we had councilmen.
Mert Edwards then proposed the town choir land at Midhamptons and applied to the federal government for funds to establish an airport.
Most of the land was tax-fail property. Where's Midhamptons?
That's where the airport is right now.
Right. Okay.
For the next two years, Town Clerk Richard T. Gilmartin, Town Engineer John Whitby, Leonard Edwards,
Murt Edwards, George Miller, Superintendent of the Highways, Juan Tripp, President of Pan-American Airways,
Supervisor Perry Durie and another supervisor, William A. Green, along with others,
wandered in and about the Mayhampens, searching for an appropriate site for the airport.
The town originally planned to purchase 500 acres, but the federal government thought this was too much.
So half the land went back to the county. I believe most of this land was tax sale property.
Next, the Civil Works Administration, official in charge of building LaGuardia Airport,
as well as East Antman Airport said there had to be three runways instead of two.
This was agreed to by the town, and the fall of 1936 work began.
Over 100 men were employed working on the field.
A new entrance under the railroad track was constructed,
constructed, and the Wayne Scott Northwest Road
was diverted around the airfield instead of running through it.
By April of 1938, the airfield was almost ready to use.
The Town Board had hoped for a ceremonious opening
to tie in with National Air Week.
Town Clerk Bill Martin hoped a special stamp may be issued.
But for reasons not apparent in the minutes of the time
that was never a grand opening. The county agreed in November of 1942 to cooperate in
obtaining more land for the airport through condemnation proceedings. This was six years
after the town board originally obtained ample land only to be told by the federal government
that they were not needing. And that is the beginning of the airport and this is the
beginning of this meeting. Have a good one.
No comment.
You know we had an airstrip in Spring too, right?
No.
It was one of his farm fields on a regular basis and take off from there, left his plane there,
and also when, I believe it was Murray Ossarisi, when he moved back into Spring,
he also flew in and out of there on a fairly regular basis.
Wasn't there an airplane on Long Lane?
in east Hampton. It may have been just a farm dirt, you know, a farm field.
I guess what this was, a farm dirt farm field.
I'll
have a good one.
Section 247 of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York
and the provisions of the East Hampton Town Code,
the Town Board of the Town of East Hampton will hold a public hearing
in the Town Hall Meeting Room.
159 Pannonville Road, East Hampton Thursday.
APM were as soon thereafter as this matter may be heard
concerning the following Granite Scenic and Conservation Eastman
to the town of East Hampton. The grand tour is Matthew Nadell and Amy Saminsky, scenic
and conservation easement dated February 18th at 18 San Piper Lane in Amagansett, Suffolk
County Tax Mat 300 175 47 and the reviewing agency is Izzy B.A.
Elaine Jones, Reg Cornelia, Jeremy Samuelson, Cindy Herbst and Bruno Schrecht.
But
I do know that this has been a contentious issue in East Hampton, at least since 1980.
It goes back a long ways.
I've been involved in trying to solve this problem for 17 years myself, kind of hard to imagine,
older than my children.
I know you are keenly aware that there is some...
Significant disappointment on the part of many because one of the proposals that had been
tabled in February for a weekend ban on helicopters is not going to move forward tonight. I just
want to make clear, if it's not already clear for the public, that this is not because anyone
has concluded that the problem is not as serious or confounding as we had believed,
But in fact, because it is more serious and more confounding than we had believed.
The decision not to go forward with that one proposal is out of concern about possible diversions to other airports in the area,
in West Hampton, in South Hampton Village, and most important in Montauk.
And what this tells us is that no one in this community is prepared to tolerate this noise.
It's no one, not in West Hampton, not in South Hampton, not in Wayne Scott, not in East Hampton and not in Montauk.
Ultimately, it is going to be brought to an end. It's just not clear standing here tonight how that is.
I want to say also to the helicopter companies, some of whom are represented here, they've in effect gotten a reprieve because of this decision.
They have another opportunity, one more year to demonstrate to this community that their
claims that it is possible to solve this problem with voluntary measures of various kinds is
actually true and possible.
They now have one more opportunity after 2014, which was a big failure, to demonstrate to
us that their voluntary measures can succeed, and I heartily invite them to do that.
But if that doesn't work, sooner or later, it's us or them.
And we live here and we're not going anywhere.
Thank you.
Hey, Vincent Covello.
Good evening.
My name is Dr. Vincent Covello.
My wife and I have been residents in East Hampton for three decades.
We both serve on several boards, local boards.
I'm a member of the World Health Organization Ebola Emergency Committee.
I flew here yesterday to be able to address you.
We'll now thank you to moving from the town of East Hampton.
We're also questioning as many others if this is the type of town
that we want to live in for the rest of our lives.
Last month, my wife and I wrote a letter published in the East Hampton Star
thanking you for the work related to airport noise.
We believe now that that thank you letter may have been premature.
We are deeply disappointed by your decision to drop the ban on helicopter traveling during
the weekends.
I know you have heard many arguments born against excessive noise from the airport.
I would like to add several, but perhaps you have not heard before.
First, families who live in northwest woods are currently being advised by their real
estate agents to not sell their property until the noise issue, particularly helicopter
noise, is fully resolved.
If it is not resolved by this summer, real estate agents are advising people to hold
on selling their property, as it will get much less than the property is worth. If this
happens, the blame will be placed squarely on you, the Board. Families are also being
advised to apply for property tax reduction and to consider other legal action against
the Board. If property relief is not is granted and if production has become widely
known, this will have a huge impact on the town's budget.
Second, the families who live in the historic Black neighborhoods of Sac Harbor, affected
by last year's routing of helicopters over their homes, are meeting to consider filing
a civil rights case against the town if the routing is identified again for this summer.
I remind you that if you allow helicopters on weekends, you will have to deal with the
routing issue again.
Given that the town can't advise the airport manager, as did the town board member that
the only last year to advise pilots to take a preferred route.
The historically black neighborhoods of Sag Harbor are prepared to file a claim of racial discrimination if this reoccurs.
Third, Dan's paper last week compared the helicopter noise with dog poop.
The recommendation of one flight a week by the nosy planes would be equivalent to saying a person can have dog poop once on my property
and not pick it up as long as it is only done once a week.
this is patly absurd. Fourth, the diversion issue related to South Hampton is
considered by many to be a smokescreen at best and perhaps a cover-up at worst.
South Hampton can limit helicopters on the helipad if there was an overflow
from the east Hampton. Please do not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.
Fourth, we deeply distrust the aviation lawyer advising you, Mr. Peter
Perkersh. Mr. Kerr served previous administrations and helped create the press current mess. He
is tainted, compromised, and has conflicts of interest. Please dismiss him.
Finally, if there is another horrible somber helicopter noise caused by the dropping of
the weekend ban, there will be so much outrage among the affected populations that voters
will likely turn their anger onto the two board members of the reelection. I ask you,
Are you willing to take the risk? Please have the courage to do what you know is right. Thank you.
What
do you have of all of us that...
That there is noise emanating from aircraft, but I believe as does the memorializing statement
that you folks are going to vote on a little bit later in the existence of a safe,
well-maintained, efficient, well-paying airport. And to that end, I want to address
some of the statements on the town website, which provides openly a great amount of information
that we can all glean through. However, there is a statement attributed to
Councilwoman Burke Gonzalez from April 7th about the airport. This document, posted
on the town website, claims to offer a well-maintained safe airport entirely supported by user
groups, not costing the taxpayers anything, refusing $0.95 on the dollar from grant funds
while establishing true input for non-stakeholding towns, reducing noise, fighting lawsuits,
and moving forward on capital improvements. This is smoke reflected in distorted mirrors.
That can't be. The claim is made that operations will be reduced by approximately 25%.
percent. Conversely, it's claimed that sufficient revenue remains to fund all desirable airport
expenditures. But all things for all people claims in this statement, which is mirrored
in upcoming Resolution 418, memorializing goals for the East Hampton Airport do not coincide
with reality. It is stated that East Hampton's 2015 adopted airport budget assumes a decrease
and landing fee revenue. In reality, the Town Board passed a budget that increased the budgeted
revenue for landing fees from $1,130,000 in 2014 to $1,446,000 in 2015 and anticipated
27% increase of the year before, or 314 grand.
From time immemorial, the town board has been conservative on revenue projections, but not this year.
The airport as a whole is budgeted to bring in 18% more revenue in 2015.
Housewoman Burke Gonzalez goes on to say that unanticipated costs can be covered by the $321,000 budgeted for contingency.
Unfortunately, any shortfalls in revenue would impact that very contingency fund.
The only money coming in to pay for the airport is going to come from the squeezed users.
The same non-existent revenue cannot be used twice.
There is a pledge to fight litigation, one ever and wherever.
One has to wonder whether that pledge applies to the actions of the anti-airport zealots
who have cost the town so much over the years.
That expense, so hastily adopted, can be a festering sore for years.
Inevitably, there will be a recourse to the existing surplus gained through conservative
budgeting, which will diminish.
Already, the operational lines in the budget are being committed.
The subcontract line in the budget may have only $200,000 unencumbered of its original
$681,000, which is being expended on data collection.
History says this is not how to fund safety and maintenance.
The point of exposing the false statements made about the airport is to show that the
town board is deluding itself in its ability to fund an operational airport unless it
considers that its actions have consequences.
These consequences have not been adequately considered or reviewed and one of East Hampton's
major assets is being needlessly endangered at great potential future costs to our town.
Thank you.
Talk
about something completely different than the airport.
I only did it once before and I was, because I'm here to talk about a different three
events, was wondering what kind of tone to take and so I'm a little relieved to
know that I'm probably not going to be the most urgent sounding person.
I am a resident of Dolphin Drive. It is my primary residence.
I vote here. I may
not have been following the story.
This is the street in Amaganza, 20 feet wide, where after 40 years
of signs that said no parking anytime in August, the highway department came
and changed the signage to parking by town permit overnight.
It was a surprise, I'm told, to the members of the board here.
They knew nothing about it.
Somebody else gave the order.
The board has only compensated for that action
or taken action on our distress about it
by removing all signage in December.
A resolution to restore the no parking signs
has not to this day been voted on.
I'm here tonight because we are about less than six weeks away from Memorial Day.
And if we go into the existing state of no signage whatsoever, it is going to be a disaster for that street.
I'm not here tonight talking about politics. I'm not here talking about beach access.
I am talking about what will happen if I call an ambulance and it cannot get through.
If you visit my street and you take a look at him narrow, it is and try the experiment as we have done
I showed you the picture when I was here last time of what happens when you park a car in a ordinary sized car on
Either side as your own police chief also informed you in his testimony
You will not be able to get an ambulance through or a fire truck. That is not a tolerable situation
We're here tonight talking about the
the welfare and safety of your constituents, and that has got to outbalance any other consideration
that there is.
So I am here making the appeal to you that you step up and do the right thing and restore
the signage to Dolphin Drive for the summer season, regardless of the political process
going on in the background.
It doesn't prejudice you in any way in terms of creating a management plan for the nature-preserved next door.
It simply protects the people that you're responsible for from the consequences of not having any signs whatsoever.
It's a matter of common sense that a complete lack of signage communicates that anybody can park anywhere at any time with or without a town permit.
You yourselves have dealt or tried to deal in the past year or so with the issue of party
houses in this town, share houses.
Share houses, as they have been universally throughout the town, have been a significant
and growingly visible problem on our beach in Amaganset.
You can take a walk anytime during the season and you will see groups of people, alcohol,
You will see the remnants in the mornings of illegal bonfires and so I'm very frightened that the status of dolphin drive
without
signage and
With the word going around like wildfire will be
That it will become the party beach the sharehouse Beach
Might as well change the name of the street
To sharehouse parking street. That's what we're going to see in the summertime
You guys have the authority to prevent that from happening and I am here tonight asking you to exercise that authority. Thank you.
Thank you, Jonathan.
Greg Mansley?
Thank you very much. I'm Greg Mansley from Aberdeen. I came out here originally in 72 when we both had dark care, okay?
Back in the day of mortels.
Can we raise a little more hell in those days, I think, right?
I know about you. We've got pictures. Anyway, I'd like to thank everyone for having me up here tonight.
And before that, I really came from an area called the Five Towns. The Five Towns is basically you at Woodmere and so on.
And I grew up under one of the approaches for, at that time, IdaLog Airport, all right, when they first came out with the jets, all right,
had prop planes before that. And yes, there was a tremendous uproar about jet engines
because the new 707s, when racing in hell when they took off, when they landed and put
the frost reverses on, racing in hell could go miles away. That changed. And technology
does change things. That's something we have to know about. I think that the second
point of that is, somebody is mentioning about the fact that the house values will
low poverty. The one in real estate, I worked with the main realtors in New York at developing
properties, we had a big sized U.S. company, and right now I can tell you, in the five
towns in New York, was there any suffering of the value of the houses? No. We're talking
one of the five top zip codes in the United States. I think they challenged tag-a-ponic
at times in so far as the value of the homes, the income of the people, and the
and then I taught school with Bob Elby out here.
What we really need to look at here, in my opinion,
is I came up here to speak about one specific topic.
Yes, it's true. The house values will come back.
There's no issue in my mind about that.
There's no issue in my mind that technology will probably
be able to work something out with the helicopters,
but that's not today.
However, I would encourage some sort of action saying,
Okay guys, you want to land on a weekend, have one of the new helicopters that they have, I think in Germany or wherever.
Not much quiet in the ones we have here, all right? They're more expensive, but you know what?
That's the price of admission, all right? If you want to be here, that's how you have to do it.
And it's feeling more than enough money here to do that.
The thing I'm really concerned about is, and the doctor brought it up well, is enough for Southampton.
How well the research was done.
I've worked with big companies, doing heavy research,
working with Jack Welch, maybe we need a little Jack Welch here this time.
And the thing is, why at this point in time, if the years and years and years,
are we finding that we're pulling back something?
I've had unspoken consequences.
If that's the case, did anybody really do their homework?
And that's what you're elected to do.
You're going to do the homework for us.
has that been done? I'm not sure and I'm concerned. If the things you're trying to
power it past today, if the things you're trying to put through today are based
upon false assumptions or incomplete work, why pass them? Especially when
safety is concerned. From what I understand from the article in the East
tempestar, the Americans understand the diversion of aircraft from East Hampton to South Hampton's
Heliport, which is 10% of what we have, my statement from the paper, the 10% will more
than double what they have. And they do not have, apparently, the safety equipment or
the air traffic control required to do this. All right? What are we doing? All right?
Are we setting up a disaster?
I don't know.
That's my point.
Have we done the work that needs to be done?
Or should we start to look at this and say,
guys, it's time to think about it again?
Thank you.
Thank you, Greg.
Elaine?
Elaine Jones?
Good evening.
I'm very short.
As I go to many meetings all over our town,
and I've done it for many years,
I notice that the town doesn't have the room
for many of these meetings.
The trustee's room is so small,
you either feel like a sardine or have to stand out in the hall where you can't hear.
Amicants of Citizens Committee meetings are held at a little room in the library, and as
long as there are only a few people there, it's okay.
Many of our buildings were neglected by the past administration, and although there
was a money situation, there was no excuse to let go of the very people who could
have kept these buildings repaired.
The
senior citizen centers are desperate for a new building.
The present building is a perfect example of the neglect and is dilapidated.
I met with Fred Theol on Tuesday and he suggested to me there is a very,
there is a way, although we purchase it with CPF funds to buy back the building on 555,
which is the former principi property.
That building is approximately 8,000 square feet and I am told that it would not only
service the senior citizens, it would also be a public community center or whatever
you want to make it in Eastampton. This building,
I can't even read my own writing,
this building is a gem and it's beautiful and it is beautiful.
Everybody I've talked to said it's a beautiful building.
You do have the property, and this is my suggestion, it's only a suggestion,
you do have the property where the present senior citizen center is now on Springs Fireplace Road,
which could be sold to help defray the cost.
I know someone who paid almost $4 million for a piece of property presently on Springs Fireplace Road.
On one hand, you have the opportunity to give an 8,000 square foot building to special interests,
Or you can use that building and create a new citizen center, community center.
This board would then have a legacy for supporting the entire community.
You would have a legacy that you supported the entire community from Montauk to whatever.
It would be a nice meeting center for people.
One thing before you decide though is please, please have a public hearing.
Thank you.
Thank you Elaine. Reg Cornelia?
Not like you move as fast as you used to. That's
for sure.
My name is Reg Cornelia. I just want to address a follow-up, actually a
couple of previous comments. The film in the movie Top Gun, whenever our time
cruise would say, I feel the need for speed, his navigator would just
You go, no, ma'am, don't do this, don't do this.
And of course, it would always lead to some sort of problem
for them down the road.
Excuse me.
I just feel that this is being rushed through.
You need to restructure.
I don't believe the financial part of Kathy's letter.
I just don't believe that those numbers work.
I don't believe they're on no account.
The list of things that you're going to consider, I'm sorry, the list of things that you're
going to consider as memorialized is a good one, except that's what we should be discussing.
We're going to spend a lot of time on this already.
But I think to very least, at this point, with the ban on helicopter traffic, which
is obviously going to cause you to know, I think that you're hurrying it up unnecessarily.
I think the unintended consequences, you mentioned technology on your last point here on the
goals, but it doesn't mention what Mr. Lansley mentioned, which is improving the technology
of the aircraft, particularly of the helicopters themselves.
I think these are the kinds of things that need to be considered.
I think this is rushing it a bit.
Thank you.
Just hang on there, Reggie.
I'm in a good mood.
I'm in a good mood tonight.
No, I wanted to mention.
I understand that you recently escorted a group of
Normandy,
so many things that you've
done on behalf of veterans, and I also understand that two of the veterans who went were World
War II veterans who served and fought at Normandy, if I'm correct, and they were Gene Beckwith
and Joe de Christefauro.
Is that true?
Absolutely.
And say a little prayer for Joe right now.
The last two days of the trip, he was my roommate, so I'm very aware of his circumstances.
There's these rules on these boats are pretty small.
He is suffering a pretty severe bokeh thing right now.
He was in South North of the hospital for a few days,
just came out yesterday, but I call him today again.
He's still feeling a little under the weather,
but can I elaborate on that trip a little bit?
I have a cell phone which I'm going to get to you
so they figure I had to get him out of my smart camera,
which I'm not smart enough to operate.
They, I have pictures of Joe at the D-Day Memorial
and at these cemeteries, which, I mean,
that you can't help it. You just see row on row. You go over the hell and there's just
more rows on this. Anyway, we had some very moving moments on that trail. I didn't escort
them. I was just part of the troop.
I'm sure you're helping out.
Yeah, we did what we could. But it was very, people were coming up. Joe had his World
War II veteran head on. People were literally coming up, schoolgirls kissing him. He
got kissed more than anybody, including married guys. I guarantee you that. So thank you
for your consideration.
Next.
Then we have Cindy Herbst and Bruno Schreck to follow.
Good evening, Jeremy Samuelson. Concerned citizens of Montauk.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed airport legislation.
You know, look, the Frank reality is that we have a noise problem now,
And we're still going to have a noise problem after this legislation goes through.
This is not a magic wand. You haven't pitched it as such, and I don't think anyone who wants to be forthright would describe it that way.
What you have done is proposed a series of measured steps.
This is not a perfect solution.
The first attempts at addressing a problem that, as we heard earlier, goes back to the 1930s.
First attempts to deal with problems of that magnitude rarely get the whole thing right out of the gate.
So I want to remind you of a couple of commitments that you've made in conversations
and ask you to stand by those as you go forward.
As I understand it, you have agreed to monitor the impacts of this proposed legislation not
only after the season, but on an ongoing basis.
And I would ask you to confirm that because, you know, I think whether you live in Wayne
Scott or Montauk or Southampton, it will go a long way to have some assurance for
the board that if there are unintended consequences of the proposals that you're passing
this evening that caused us to spiral out of control, you have the ability to pull back
on the reins.
If we need to modify our way through the summer, the proposals that are on the table now, you've
indicated in conversations that you're willing to do that, and I would ask you to reaffirm
that.
In addition, I would ask you to continue along the road that you've started down
with the diversion study.
You know, when these proposals were first put on the board, or put out by the board,
I should say, you know, the organization that I represent raised concerns about potential
impacts to Montauk, and the response was to come up with the idea of a diversion study.
And I think that was a good first step, but it's not a complete step, and again,
to be fair, you haven't described it as a complete step.
But the data that we have now coming into this season isn't full.
We need to continue to develop data throughout the season, and there's a couple of very specific
ways you can do that.
One is to modify the noise complaint line that the town currently maintains to ensure
that data that comes in, fresh data, is able to be tracked by Hamlet, and if it's
outside of Eastampton Town as it currently does track that as well.
Now, as I understand the system's current configuration, it wouldn't necessarily isolate complaints
that come out of Montauk for potentially new helicopter traffic that's out there.
That should be a pretty easy fix.
If we don't make a fix like that now, we're going to look back over our shoulder in a
couple of months, and we're going to say, wow, we probably should have taken a couple
of proactive steps to ensure that the data that you're recording this summer that's
going to inform your future decisions actually allows you to break out Montauk and the airport
out there from the East Hampton airport. So that's something you've indicated in conversation
that you're willing to do and I would ask you to follow through on that.
Similarly, I think as you went, started to go down the road of the diversion study,
there was a long list of things that you wished you had access to in terms of data,
you know, final destinations. Where do people go? You know, when they fly in here,
Where are they really going?
How many are Sagaponic?
How many are Britchampton?
How many are Montauk already?
To the extent that you have some ability
to think outside the box and start generating that data,
I think you will be thankful when you take that look back,
whether it is midway through the season
or after the season.
We are not gonna solve this problem here tonight.
I would suggest that the steps
that you have proposed are reasonable steps.
They're balanced steps.
There's two options here.
Either folks, nobody's completely happy because this thing is entirely wrong or nobody's completely happy because nobody got everything.
I'll vote for the latter and suggest that these are reasonable, well-measured, balanced
proposals that you've put on the table. I'll thank you for your time in creating them, but
we'll ask you to offer some assurance that you're going to take that look back and modify
as necessary and do so with the benefit of additional data that you will have the
ability to reflect upon because you take steps in advance of this summer. So, thank you
for your time.
Thank you. You're on me. Cindy Herbst. The
audience is waiting.
Good evening. I'm Cindy Herbst. I'm here tonight on behalf of Sound Aircraft Services.
As you are aware, Sound Aircraft is one of the fixed-based operators at East Hampton Airport.
I've expressed my concern about the impact that the resolution is providing for a curfew
and extended curfew for noisy aircraft and a one-trip-per-week limit on noisy aircraft
during the season we'll have on Sound Aircraft and on the airport overall.
The purpose of my comment tonight is not to restate those concerns.
Earlier this week, it came to my attention that the Town Board intends to notice a public hearing to consider a local law amending Chapter 75 Airport of the Town Code, clarifying penalties, provisions and definitions in the law, and providing for an evaluation of the effectiveness of the restrictions.
The additional proposed law relates to the three restrictions I just referenced.
Tonight I'm here to urge you to table a vote on the curfew, the extended curfew and the one trip per week restriction
until such a time as those restrictions can be considered with the related proposed law
which provides the definition necessary to interpret the three restrictions.
Whether the definitions are adopted will dramatically impact how the restrictions can and will be enforced.
Therefore, it's only fair that the four proposed laws should be considered together.
Thank you.
Thank you, Cindy.
I'll reflect on
unintended consequences.
What does that reflect?
It reflects something that's not fully thought out.
Consequences, there are some, they're not known.
And yet, even though we had four proposals,
there's only the suggestion of pulling back on one of them.
The other proposals have presumptions built in.
One of the presumptions is that the airport was always intended to be for small amateur
pilots, so I forget the exact term, but basically not for commercial purposes, written right
there in the proposal when, meanwhile, we know that it was paid for by the Department
of Commerce and has always been used for commercial purposes in some sense, even having
airlines flying.
So the idea of unintended consequences doesn't even reflect the proper research of what's been going on and what should go on out here.
The idea that we're going to survey only noise is another way to turn you back on half the issues.
We didn't survey, never, passenger volume, who they are, where they live, what value they bring to the community.
We know there's value.
But instead, we have some people who will say it's only 100 pilots that we're talking about, 100 pilots.
The 100 pilots are transporting 8,600 people out here, by my estimate, but the town has never found out whether that could be true.
But it complains about the number of flights. It says 25,000 flights.
Well, are they all empty? There must be a volume of people that see the benefit of that airport.
The next thing, it has always been said that it won't affect the small local pilot.
Even the people opposed to the airport have always said,
oh, it's not about you guys with the little single engine plane.
And now the proposal that you're about to rule on says that you can't fly in from 11 to 7.
You can't fly in.
You could be stuck with weather out west and you're going to show up a half an hour late because of the weather.
You can't get home without paying $1,000 fine.
And how many times in the summer do we have bad enough weather that you're not going to be paying $2,000 the next time, $3,000 the next time?
That's what you're proposing.
So it's about even the small planes, even the local people.
And anyway, it sounds like we're about to rule on something that hasn't been fully thought out.
It's a rush to judgment, and we're going to pay a price, and we don't even know what it is.
Thank you.
Thank you, Bruno.
Anyone else who has not been heard like Charles?
Months and months and years and thousands and thousands of hours of your time
and your advisory committee's time have gone into this.
So for the three proposals that I think about to enact, do it.
And with respect to the, and of course, along with that,
the notion that you're going to continually monitor what's going on.
And we would endorse the notion that you should monitor starting the first day
that these laws are in place, and perhaps be prepared to make changes during the summer.
And we would argue that you should keep an open mind that one of the changes that you
might adopt during the summer, if the data supports it, would be the ban on helicopters
that would have been your item number four.
With respect to the unanticipated consequences,
I'd like to speak to just one point.
It's been asserted that, including one comment here tonight,
that a possible divergence from East Hampton to South Hampton might double their traffic.
Well, whoever talks about that doesn't note that the heliport at South Hampton is subject to
complete control on the part of the village of Southampton.
They have never had federal money.
They have at least as much control over that heliport
as you have here.
And they have imposed over the years restrictions.
And they could completely avoid that increase
if they were to do so, if they wanted to do so.
They have the legal authority to do it.
So the stuff that you've heard from the Southampton
people about that is pure baloney and I thank you. Thank you Charles. We'll get back to
anyone who views
after we get there.
No prepared remarks. Again, I want to compliment Kathy
Berkins-Alles in particular and the whole board for taking a huge step forward in terms
of noise abatement. It's been a long time coming.
And I want to respond to something
that Mr. Samuelson said, and really take it a couple of steps further, the non-system
from Vector that you're going to vote on tonight gives you the ability for the first
time to correlate complaints with actual flights. And that's huge. I mean, the landing,
The data we were getting from Vector last year was landings only because that's what they were billing for, that was their purpose.
We now will have the ability not only to look at landings but departures and to correlate those with complaints.
Just speaking much more broadly, I think that it's important to develop a study protocol
even before the summer starts to decide what it is you really want to look at during the
summer and after the summer in the event that you feel the need to make amendments
to the law is going forward, and I haven't really thought through how to put that together,
but I think there are a number of people in this room who should participate in that.
And one other housekeeping item, there is one, according to the whereas clauses in here,
there is one public meeting at a place in the year 3,014, so you might want to correct that.
October 30th, 3,000, 14th.
First of all, I want to thank
Town Planning Director Marguerite Wilson for reminding all of us
that we have an awesome master plan. It's a plan many of us
worked on, long and hard, and it's a plan that points out
that our economy relies on our environment and not
how many helicopters we can land on a Friday afternoon.
People don't come here. They don't rent here. They don't buy here, based on how fast they can get here.
They come, they rent, and they buy here, because it's really nice here.
And each summer, each season, gets a little less noise.
Because there are no rules that are appropriate.
None. Zero. Zeroch. Nada.
The noted statesman, Dominic Stanzione, once said.
Yeah, just step back on the mic.
Sure.
Just a little.
There you go.
Out there?
That's perfect.
I can do it without a microphone.
I'm sure you can.
I'll just go for it here.
The noted statesman, Dominic Stanzione, once said that when it comes to airport noise
we should all share the pain.
Probably don't need to remind us that in the town board election shortly after Stanzione's
John's remark, the one-term Solomon of the skies finished to distant last.
As it turns out, Mayor Mark Epley of Southampton Village doesn't want to share the pain.
And the Throne Host, supervisor of Southampton Town, doesn't want to share the pain.
Jeremy Sammelson, Concerned Citizens of Montauk, they don't want to share the pain.
It amazes me that instead of looking for volunteers to share pain, these and other politicians
like you, can't simply say, there's no need for any pain.
There's no need for commuter helicopters on the East End.
Snake oil salesman from Saqqaq is one to sell his ferries, helicopters, submarines.
We've heard it all. We'll fly friendly. We'll fly higher. We'll fly over water.
None of it happens, and some of it is, in fact, impossible.
Noted, Geographer Barry Raybeck asked, how is it possible to have an overwater route to a landlocked airport?
Like others, I'm torn between disgust at the lack of ability to follow through now on what we all know has to happen
and joy at the fact that we are finally doing something.
So for now, I'll just say thanks for doing something.
Let's keep working towards doing the right thing.
I just wanted to say two things about things that people have said rushing this through.
Well, I was on the noise abatement committee, and we met every other week for hours and hours on end,
for more than a year. Hours of questions, data, research, answers, alternatives.
Now, the pilots had a committee as well, and they had the same opportunity.
They met once and concluded they were better off not being part of the solution,
waiting until the process concluded, now showing up and then arguing against the process
because they fail every time, dealing with the facts.
As for CCOM, almost three years ago,
Quiet Sky's founders went out to Montauk, met with them, and offered them a place at the table.
CCOM said, not our problem. I guess it is now.
The solution is very clear here.
No commuter helicopters, meaningful curfews, real noise abatement.
Good
evening,
information on who owns Southampton Heliport.
Jeff, could you just state your name for the rest?
I'm sorry, Jess Smith with the Eastern Region Helicopter Council.
I think there needs to be more looking into who owns Southampton Heliport
and how the restrictions are going to impact that.
Estimating how operators will react to the proposed restrictions
involves a high degree of uncertainty.
The initial estimates are based on experience from other new ways impacted general aviation
airports but do not reflect survey data or other direct information from HTO operators.
Surveys are unlikely to provide reliable information about potential responses because of competition
among carriers providing air service and privacy concerns among their passengers.
As a result, the estimates are subject to change in the future as additional data
becomes available.
I did not say this. This was a new report sent to you from Peter Stump, your diversion study consultant. Thank you.
Thank you, Jeff.
Good evening. I want to start by thanking you for the proposals that you guys have considered.
And even bringing that up is an important step.
And that can't go overlooked by anybody here, and I don't think it is.
But, as Mr. McDivin said...
You could just identify yourself.
Oh, Walker Braggman, 26 years old, registered voter in this town.
And I grew up here.
And as I got older, I saw a lot of people that I cared about move away because they could no longer afford to live here.
And every time somebody has come to this town and said, we have to do this or else, the economy will suffer.
Well, and we do it. The economy suffers anyway, and the community suffers anyway.
and people that we know for years leave.
And I don't like that trend.
And the airport issue is another issue like that,
where one side has told us,
we need to keep it the way it is,
we need it unregulated,
because otherwise the economy will suffer.
Well, guess what?
No, it won't.
It absolutely won't.
This is the Hanson's.
We have the beaches.
We've got quiet.
And people are going to come here no matter what.
They've been coming here for years.
And the weekend ban on helicopters is a great idea.
It's a great idea, and it's something that we need.
But if this board doesn't have the ability to pass that now,
then it should strongly consider it in the future.
Because who does this town really serve?
Who are we in this town?
Are we a Washington Aviation Lobby, or are we a community?
I think we're a community.
And that's really all I've got to say. Thank you very much.
Thanks for being here, Walker.
Anyone else who has not been heard that would like to be heard?
Purple Blouse.
Looking around, thinking I'm pointing to somebody else.
I'm pointing to you.
And then I think we had Edwin.
Edwin, did you have your April at worst of wisdom for us?
Before I start my little tirade that I wrote down, that's where I'm late.
I'm sorry, could you just state your name please?
John Palumbo from Montauk.
And in the old days I had commercial pilots raiding.
My first cross country was from Amityville to your airport over here in East Hampton.
When I got out of my airplane, there was Cliff Robertson, and that just like made my day.
I thought this was so groovy.
But in those days, back, I don't know, many, many moons, it was only civil aviation here.
I flew out of Long Island.
I needed a flying service, which was in competition with republics, so we had quite a to-do over there.
and it was always small airplanes except a couple of guys had patrol aircraft which came
in and made a big-noise statement.
Anyway, this is what I wrote down.
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen and elected board members.
My name is Joan Palumbo and I speak tonight on behalf of myself, my family, and unbeknownst
to them some citizens in Montauk.
I have a few questions and a few points to make, so I wish that you will bear with me.
If East Hampton Airport is closed to air traffic between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.,
does that mean that between 11 or 1 p.m. and 6.59 a.m.,
Montauk will be receiving the consummate noise and potential accident effluent?
How will passengers be transported to and from their destinations?
Route 27 through Amagansett is dark and congested at night.
In fact, there was a man killed there last year.
The forest through Deer Park Disney World is perilous.
And Montauk, which is party-hardy in the middle of town on Route 27,
is awash with bodies all night long.
Montauk is a working community with a capital W,
which stands for working, which I guess requires no sleep.
The Long Island railroad diesels that discourage throughout the South Fork are parking-lotted year-round in Montauk
with their pulsating engines this past week starting at 4 a.m. in the morning,
as if they were jets that never take off.
The noise deflects off of Fort Pong Lake into everyone's bedrooms
as you know water does not absorb sound waves. Would that these were these
entitled disturb- disturbers of the peace parked all night in East Hampton I
would assume there would be tumultuous human cry. Montauk also has a severe
summer long spring break atmosphere that issues from anything for buck joints
with noise, noise, noise. These lists go on and on that there are concerns beyond the
auditory rampage. Besides your ears, does anyone have eyes? Look up and look for a pure
blue sky with sometimes billowy clouds. What do you see? Do you see? What are those planes
doing up there using our sacred skies to mark them with graffiti as if they were
subways. What are they spraying wherever I go? Florida, Maine, the Smokies,
Albuquerque this past year, this afternoon in Montauk. These are not
contrails which dissipate in a few minutes. They remain and coalesce and
blur together to create an almost constant haze. The analysis of the makeup is not pretty
unless you believe that aluminum and barium etc are good for you, our dear earth and all
that struggles to survive on it. I have just one more little thing. I know it's off the
point but it has to do with our health. Another 30 seconds of the play. We are paying for
this poison. Why don't you know anything about what you're paying for? When I travel, I ask
questions. Sometimes people know what I'm talking about and are very helpful. Sometimes they
will tell me which airfields these pilots are flying out of. Sometimes I stop at Native
American reservations or what Russell Means used to call before he died concentration
camps and what many are aware of these many people know what's going on. I do
believe that this endless weather modification almost preempts all of
our other whiny disquietude. Thank you for your time.
Thank you Jane.
April?
I just want to tell you that the airport was built by the three seas in
late 1930s. I don't think that comes under the Department of Commerce. The
three C's were not set up to be operated by the Department of Commerce. I don't
think, do you? I don't know. I don't think so. Anyway, it provided the airport
provided jobs for a lot of men in this town during the deep depression when
there was just nothing for anyone. And they were the ones that laid the
tracks in the runway originally. I wanted also my main purpose for standing up
here is that I want to protest the discourtesy of aircraft owners who fly
over my house regularly at 4 a.m. I probably have a rotten disposition
because of them.
I'm also furious with those who think it's fun to fly at 2 a.m.
They do, and they come right over my house. I don't need more studies or
examinations, or tests, or experts, or any other type of thing, to know how much these
planes and copters are interfering with my life.
And I urge immediate adoption of this much needed legislation, and I thank you for all
your work.
It's not a big speech. It's just to answer the ladies question.
I want to get into a back and forth.
It was the Department of Interior, Department of Commerce that paid for it.
I don't know if the CCC, they provided labor, but it was Department of Commerce money.
And I based this on an article in the East Hampton Star in 1937.
It was one of the articles on my big poster.
And it's still available online.
Were it part of the WPA program?
Well, yeah.
But it's under the auspices of the Department of Commerce.
And it was the Department of Commerce people that flew in and the town board showed
up at the airport to thank them for the money.
Thank you.
David.
for
the second opportunity.
I just want to correct the record about something, changing hats.
It's been said here this evening that you have rushed to judgment.
I want to reiterate part what Charles said.
The committee that I chaired has been meeting every two weeks for more than a year, about
14 months, produced 13 sets of findings and a final report.
You've had, I think, no less than four professional studies on which you are basing your actions.
There was a committee parallel to my own of aviation interests that met as frequently as it chose to.
And what not everyone is aware of is that there was also a financial advisory committee
chaired by Arthur Malman, in which there were both aviation representatives and community representatives.
That committee concluded a year ago, back in April, in a motion that was adopted unanimously.
It was moved by Tom Toomey before his very unfortunate death and seconded by me.
And that resolution advised the board that the airport could be financially self-sustaining
without any helicopter traffic at all. And that finding still stands.
The reason is that contrary to what you heard here tonight,
it is not the case that the airport landing fees were $1.1 million last year,
they were $1.7 million last year.
And the airport has more than enough money at its current level to sustain
all of the capital expenditures that it needs to pay an extravagant litigation budget.
Yes, if traffic is reduced, something will have to be done to replace that revenue.
I'm quite confident that the very well-heeled travelers to East Hampton can pay a modest increase.
It would be for a small aircraft $6 per landing.
For Gulfstream 5, it would amount to three additional minutes of travel time, the equivalent cost.
I'm sure that can be sustained and that the finding of a year ago that the airport is financially self-sustaining
without any helicopter traffic at all will certainly be true now that there's
going to be still substantial helicopter traffic. Thank you.
Susan has not spoken, Susan.
Am I far enough away? You can hear me?
I had not planned to speak. I'm Susan McGraw-Kieber. I live in Eastampton.
You all know me. Thank you so much for having the meeting this evening for the public.
I just have a quick question because this came to my mind today,
and I am wondering if anybody else has wondered about it, I'm sure you have, but the helicopters
are the single most egregious aircraft for our home in particular.
The other things I can deal with, but the helicopters are the main disturbance over
our house, and I'm wondering, since I have been looking up the helicopter companies
that are taxi companies for commuters, I believe that we're going to be able to
record their numbers when they land, and that's a way that we'll know that they
come in once a week, but many of them don't own their own aircraft. They lease
them, so
It seems to me that they'll just start rotating, and that means one per week will be 10 per week or 20 per week.
I don't know how many aircraft are owned by each of these companies.
So is there a way that you have already thought about, you know, how to address that?
I don't know. But it came to mind, and I'm trying to figure this out because it does...
I'm sure they're going to figure out a way to get around that.
So I don't know. It's just a thought, and I wanted to pass it along because I am...
No
one else who has not been heard that would like to be heard.
Okay, I think completed
our public.
Resolution 2015-401 is approval of claims for warrant 4b for totals $1,551,348.32
and utility warrant that totals $141,310.66.
Second.
September
a mini bus driver Debra Morici to the Human Services Department at the hourly rate of 30 second
Nation
for five bond resolutions the acquisition of equipment for the police department acquisition of equipment for the town
Acquisition of tandem yard semi tractor acquisition of heavy-duty
on resolutions the Southlake well replacement in Montauk
The water main replacement and the head of Harbor dock and Springs storage shed buildings and grounds
reconstruction of highway truck and acquisition and installation of bleachers again these capital
projects are class
H14006 it's the semi-annual contract for the supply
to extend another contract
EH14042 again the semi-annual contract for the supply and delivery of groceries this was from
october 2014 number
11 is to adopt local law amending chapter 75 of the town code regulating
night-time operation of aircraft at East Hampton Airport.
Second.
2015-412 is to adopt local law amending Chapter 75 of the Town Code, regulating evening, night-time,
and early morning operations of noisy aircraft at East Hampton Airport.
Second.
2015-413 is to adopt local law amending Chapter 75 of the Town Code, regulating operation
of noisy aircraft at East Hampton Airport.
This is the one trip a week, and this is where Peter found on page 35 we need to
correct, the third whereas it's the October 30th, 2014, 24th.
Seconded as amended.
We'll have a roll call on that.
Thank you.
Thank you for giving me a chance to speak.
I'd like to start by thanking Kathy and all of the airport
committees and the various attorneys for getting us
to this point.
It's a very deliberate and exhausting process.
And I appreciate that my colleagues are trying very
hard to achieve a balance between restrictions at the airport, operations, and the needs
of the community. I believe that for the two of the restrictions, the balance requires
that we impose nighttime, evening, and morning curfews. I also appreciate that there is no
clear answer to the balancing and that our job as town board members is to review
the data and to reach the conclusion that we believe is best after reviewing the
data, I do not believe that the balancing requires the two operations per week restriction.
This restriction will seriously inconvenience airport users, and I'm not yet convinced that
it will produce as many benefits as my colleagues believe.
I would prefer to conduct the balancing in a manner that slightly favors the users
at the airport.
I respect and support the concept that the town board should reevaluate restrictions
after the end of the 2015 session, concerned that politically it will be difficult for
this Board to relax restrictions that are already in place.
Therefore, I favor an approach which does not try to adopt all the possible restrictions
at once.
Instead, I favor an incremental approach.
Let's impose the fewest restrictions possible, and if it proves unnecessary, we can impose
additional restrictions next year.
I think that that approach is politically more realistic than the possibility that the
Town Board will reduce or eliminate restrictions at the end of the 2015 season.
I remain concerned about the diversion of traffic to other airports.
I appreciate that no one can, no one advance exactly how airport users will react to the
restrictions.
But I am not as willing as my colleagues to take a risk that traffic will be diverted
to other airports.
And finally, we need to be realistic about litigation. Simply stated, I believe that
more restrictions we adopt, the greater the cost and complexity of litigation. We cannot
prevent litigation, but we can reduce the number of parties who would have an incentive
to sue. I believe that we will reduce our litigation exposure if we adopt just the
curfews at this time and not the limit of two operations per week.
I. Councilman Alburton. No. Supervisor Cantlow. Aye.
15-414 is to amend the 2015 Grant
Agreement with Family Service League. The grant is still $50,000. We just had to revise Schedule
A. Second. All those in favor? Aye.
15-415 is to authorize an order on consent with the
Suffolk County Health Services in the amount of $2,250. Second. All those in favor? Aye.
So carry.
Force 16 is to pay a prior invoice to ECHO Lab for a dishwasher rental in the amount
of $122.95.
Second.
To
authorize three appraisals of the industrial park and one to
memorialize eight goals for
the East Hampton Airport to maintain the airport is safe and efficient, to enact the
local laws, study the effectiveness of
an advisory committee, coordinate with the
congressional delegation, partner with Eastern Region Helicopter Council, work
with the FAA on flight tracks. Second,
various cap will improve.
Councilwoman Burke on dollars.
Aye. Councilman Vance Goya.
Aye. Councilwoman Overby.
Aye. Councilman Overton.
Aye. Supervisor Catwell.
All
right, refinancing. The town will save over $2 million over the life of those bonds.
And in addition to that, that bond offering received a $2 million premium in the market,
and that $2 million will go towards reducing the total indebtedness of the town.
When the board took office in 2014, January of 2014,
one of these tampons had $119 million of total indebtedness.
The debt service, the annual payments on that,
caused
the total indebtedness of the town by $10 million.
The
state
that also our bond rating has been increased
and our percentage rate as a result of that.
The next resolution is 2015-420 and this is a bond for $50,000 for a tandem yard semi-tractor.
Councilwoman Burke Gonzalez.
Aye.
Councilman Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton.
Aye.
Supervisor Cantwell.
Aye.
2015-421 is a bond for $150,000 Reconstruct Heavy Duty Truck Highway.
Councilwoman Burke Gonzalez.
Aye.
Councilwoman Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton, Supervisor Cantwell.
2015,
Construction and Improvements to various town buildings.
Councilwoman Burke-Gonzalez.
Aye.
Councilman Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton.
Aye.
Supervisor Cantwell.
Aye.
2015, 423 is a bond for 255,000.
Councilwoman Burke-Gonzalez.
Aye.
Councilman Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton.
Aye.
Supervisor Cantwell.
Aye.
424 is to appoint part-time recreation aides to the Recreation Department
Retur-
$6,000 for contingency to radio line. Second.
All those in favor?
I
raise a budget adjustment, insurance recovery for Hill Cemetery in the amount of $2,100.
Second.
15-429, pay previous year invoice for FP,
the downtown Montauk Recycling Bend project.
This
is the work session and we decided to go forward. There was some discussion that
There is currently a plan to management plan for
Montauk Avenue.
Resolution 448.
Position of a boat for the Marine Patrol.
Councilwoman Burke-Gonzalez.
Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton.
Aye.
Supervisor Cantwell.
450 is a bond for $75,000 for additional monies for record digitization system.
Councilwoman Burke-Gonzalez.
Aye.
Councilman Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton.
Aye.
Supervisor Cantman.
Hi.
Honest to the approval of various mass gathering permits.
Defense Club, Arts and Crafts Fair, September 5th and 6th.
Devon Yacht Club, Club Sailing Regatta, August 12th.
American Heart Association, Ride, May 16th.
Devon Yacht Club, End of Season, September 26th.
Devon Yacht Club, Dinner, July 25th.
Devon Yacht Club, Fourth of July, Fireworks, July 4th.
Eastampton Rotary, Run, August 1st, Mooded Warrior Soldier Ride, July 18th, Montauk Sports Triathlon, June 13th,
National MS Society Bike Ride, September 12th, Ross School Starlight Ball, May 9th,
and Nick Antoni's Farmers Market, Fridays from May 22nd through September 4th.
Yes.
52 is to amend building permit fees.
53 is to accept bid EH-15-009. It's the annual
contract for the Supply and Delivery of International Truck Parts. 2015, SCIOSIC truck sale
contract
for the Supply and Delivery of Hino Truck Parts. 2015, Gabriel Gabrieli. Truck sales,
2nd.
All those in favor?
Aye.
455 is the accept bid, EH-15-010.
It's the annual contract for the supply and delivery of Mitsubishi truck parts.
2015, Siasat truck parts.
Bloomberg-Gondolas.
Aye.
Councilman Vance Goyak.
Aye.
Councilwoman Overby.
Aye.
Councilman Overton.
Aye.
Supervisor Cantrell.
The 8th is a bond resolution in the amount of $535,000.
Vance Goyak.
Councilwoman Overby.
Councilman Overton.
Supervisor Campo.
And this is not a CPF acronym.
Gonzalez.
Councilman Vance Goyak.
Councilwoman Overby.
Councilman Overton.
F1s are done by Scott and these other ones are...
Down trustees have agreed, and we will
retain George Walbridge surveyors for the
Flora Nature
Reserve to
survey to locate the eastern edge of the pavement along Dolphin Drive and to find
the property line every 125 feet and keep-