Month: February 2025

by

RESOLUTION OF THE COALITION OF WATERSHED TOWNS SUPPORTING A TOWN OPTION TO PROPOSE LAND ACQUISITIONS BY THE CITY OF NEW YORK Feb 17, 2025

RESOLUTION OF THE COALITION OF WATERSHED TOWNS SUPPORTING A TOWN OPTION TO PROPOSE LAND ACQUISITIONS BY THE CITY OF NEW YORK

WHEREAS, the Coalition of Watershed Towns (Coalition) has been negotiating with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), New York State Department of Health, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and environmental stakeholders over a new water withdrawal permit which will authorize the continuation of DEP’s land acquisition program; and

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to a Collaborative Stream Acquisition Program (CSAP) which will redirect DEP’s land acquisition efforts towards riparian buffers that complement stream management and flood hazard mitigation projects while preserving areas for responsible development and that require the approval of the host municipality for DEP acquisitions; and

WHEREAS, on October 7, 2024, DEP offered to significantly reduce the scope of its current land acquisition program to only pursue acquisitions in Priority Areas 1 and 2 and to cease solicitation and acquisitions in Priority Areas 3 and 4. DEP also proposed that it could acquire properties in Priority Areas 3 and 4 if the such properties were proposed for acquisition by the a town or village and the property met water quality criteria; and

WHEREAS, an option for municipally proposed acquisition would preserve the opportunity for each town or village to identify property for acquisition that could promote local comprehensive plans, public uses and preserve locally important property from development. Acquisition by DEP could also keep property on the tax roll in contrast to acquisition by tax-exempt land trusts; and

WHEREAS, the Coalition has always recognized the wide range of opinions amongst its members and strives to respect those views and to protect the rights to home-rule; and

WHEREAS, by resolution dated January 22, 2025, the Delaware County Board of Supervisors expressed its position that the new water withdrawal permit should not contain a provision allowing Delaware County municipalities to propose land for acquisition by DEP; and

WHEREAS, the Town Boards of Ashland, Denning, Jewett and Windham have adopted similar resolutions objecting to a permit provision allowing town-initiated acquisitions by DEP; and

WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of the Coalition of Watershed Towns supports the principle of home-rule, which empowers municipalities to make decisions that best suit their unique local needs and priorities, including the option to opt-in or opt-out of parcel purchase agreements with DEP. While recognizing Delaware County, Ashland, Denning, Jewett and Windham’s position relating to municipal proposals for DEP acquisitions, the Coalition maintains that its other members should retain the flexibility to propose parcels for acquisition when it aligns with local objectives and public interests; 

NOW THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, the Executive Committee of the Coalition of Watershed Towns, recognizing the home-rule rights of its members, supports a provision in the forthcoming water withdrawal permit that allows towns and villages, with the exception of  Delaware County municipalities and the Towns of Ashland, Denning, Jewett and Windham, to propose property in Priority Areas 3 & 4 to DEP for acquisition; and

LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED that within 180 days of the effective date of the next Water Withdrawal Permit, each municipality shall decide whether it wishes to have the right to propose parcels for acquisition and every five years thereafter during the duration of the water withdrawal permit to have the right rescind or exercise the right to propose land for DEP acquisition in a manner similar to which municipalities vote to allow DEP acquisitions in hamlets and villages under the current water supply permit.

Motion by:      David Kukle

Seconded by:  Glen Faulkner

Adopted unanimously February 17, 2025

by

Executive Board Meeting – Jan 20, 2025

Location:  CWC Headquarters (Arkville, NY)

Present:  Ric Coombe, Scott Grey, David Kukle, Steve Walker, Bud Gladstone, Ed Snow, Glen Faulkner, Ritchie Gabriel, Jeff Gearhart,  David Edinger, Greg Vurckio

Others:  Jeff Baker, Tim Cox, Jason Merwin, Jessica Fiedler, Michelle Yost, Nick Carbone, Bruce Dolph, Heidi Emrich, Mary Crisafulli, Cher Woehl

1.  Call to Order:  Ric called the meeting to order at 6:20 pm.

2.  December 16, 2024, Meeting Minutes Approval:  Motion to approve the minutes made by Ed Snow and seconded by Steve Walker. Motion carried.   

3 & 4. LAP/SAP Negotiations/Status of Amended City CE to State: Ric opened this discussion by emphasizing to the members that we are here to provide guidance to Jeff regarding the proposed language for the municipal option for city acquisitions.   He asked Jeff to explain to the members the language CWT is considering.   Jeff explained that the proposed changes to Core LAP would include a provision for the Towns/Villages to propose specific parcels in Priority Areas 3 & 4 for acquisition by the City.   If a Town/Village determines that a particular parcel should be offered to the City, because it benefits the community in some way, the municipality can ask the City to consider a land purchase.  The language would also include an option that would allow the Towns/Villages to opt into this provision with the opportunity to revisit their decision every 5 years.   This proposed language gives the Towns/Villages the most flexibility on their land and on their participation.  Jeff did share that the City is open to this provision. 

Steve asked if the proposal included parameters, such as the size of the land or the inability to sell agricultural land.  Jeff said, at this point, the basic water quality criteria apply, including the 10 acres provision.  He stated that any additional parameters would be up to the Towns/Villages to set, allowing this to be controlled locally.

Glen reiterated his understanding that with this proposed language advocates the sale must be a benefit to the Town/Village as well as the owner and the City before any transaction can occur.  

Glen asked Jeff to explain further the 5-year option.   Jeff explained this allows the Towns/Villages to make the decision every 5 years as to whether they want the ability to propose property to be purchased by the City as stipulated in this provision.  The 5-year term allows the Towns/Villages to make their decision as they look forward to their future demographics and needs and to revisit it periodically as local conditions may change.  This is like the existing provisions in the Water Supply Permit for villages and hamlets which gives them the right to exclude city acquisitions and waive some of the water quality criteria.  Tim Cox and Jason Merwin explained what CWC does regarding watershed villages and hamlets for the 5-year review.  Currently CWC sends letters to the Towns/Villages reminding them its time to review their hamlets.  These letters usually go out 6 months in advance of the deadlines, with the letter outlining what the Town/Village chose to do previously.  If the Towns/Villages choose to keep it the same, they do not need to respond.  However if the Towns/Villages want to propose a change, they must pass a Town/Village resolution to make the change happen.   Ric suggested we try and line up the ability to propose lands for city purchase with the CWC timeline. 

Delaware County’s opposition to the proposed language was discussed.  David K. raised a concern regarding the language opposing the proposed provision.  He shared that the opposing language states that no sales of land in areas 3&4 can be offered to the city, however the sales of land can be offered to non-profit organizations.  The concern with this is that non-profits do not pay property taxes to the Town/Village, eliminating a revenue stream, but the City would be paying property taxes.  He cautioned the members to read the opposition language thoroughly to fully understand what it is proposing. 

Ric reiterated that with the CWT proposed language, the Towns/Villages have the flexibility to say NO to any sales.  He also said that even if the Towns/Villages decide to sell, the City may say no they do not want to purchase.  

Bruce Dolph raised the issue that Delaware County is completely opposed to the proposed language.  Jeff shared that he has not yet seen a resolution from Delaware County that states this.  Glen shared that he doesn’t believe the 5-year option has been presented to Delaware County yet.  Bud agreed and stated that Delaware County Board Members must perform their due diligence and share the proposed language in its entirety with Delaware County Board of Supervisors before any county resolution is made.  Ric agreed and asked that the CWT Delaware County Board Members meet with Delaware County prior to our February meeting.  This issue needs to be resolved in the February  meeting so that Jeff can proceed with finalizing the negotiations. 

On the State Wetland Regulations, Jeff reported that the regulations have been finalized.  He shared that the mapping system does not appear to be as cumbersome as originally thought to be.  He stated that the next steps are to work with NYC on how their regulations are going to coordinate with the new State Regulations.  

5. CWC Report:  Jason provided the statistics on the septic program, sharing that they completed 282 septic projects in 2024.   He then gave an overview of the 5 contracts they are currently in negotiations with DEP.  On the Community Vitality Study, Jason shared that the bids would be due on January 23.  The issue CWC is facing is that there is no contract with the City yet, which may hinder proceeding with the Community Vitality Study.  Jeff noted that the study is included in the FAD.   One final update Jason provided was on the CWC Annual  Meeting which is scheduled for April 1st.

6.  Warrants and Treasurer’s Report:  Bud reported that as of December 31, 2024,
the checking account had $8,489.05,
the savings account had $103,174.81 and
the CD had $50,000. 
David Edinger made the motion to accept the Treasurer’s report, seconded by Ed Snow.  Report accepted.  
Bud presented warrant #113 in the amount of $3,363.55 for payment of December legal fees and administrative support fees. Greg raised the question regarding the supporting invoices for the warrant and the totals did not match the warrant amount.  After reviewing the info, Cher realized she had inadvertently included the wrong invoices in the Board Members packages.  She did confirm that the amount of Warrant #113 was correct as presented.   
Steve Walker made the motion to pay warrant #113, seconded by Glen Faulkner.  Motion carried.   
Cher did provide Board Members with the correct invoices via email.  

7.  Adjourn:  Motion to adjourn was made by Greg Vurckio,  seconded by Ed Snow.  Motion carried.  The meeting adjourned at 7:20 pm.