- By Dan Veaner
- News
Print 
Click the microphone to hear Dave Vieser and Dan Veaner discuss this story
That summed up in a nutshell the feelings expressed by 14 of 15 Lansing residents who spoke at a packed public hearing Wednesday at Lansing Town Hall. The proposed law would have reduced the term of planning board members and alternate members to the board from seven years to three. In addition it would have empowered the chairman of the Planning Board to appoint alternates on an as-needed basis, and affirmed the Town Board's authority to choose the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Board.
 Town Board (Left to right) Scott Pinney, Connie Wilcox, Marty Christopher, Matt Besemer, Bud Shattuck |
"This is not unique," explained Town Attorney Guy Krogh. "Many towns have modified term limits for planning board members, and many have them for ZBAs. Based upon research and consultation with the Attorney General, a review of the Attorney General's opinions, and consultation with the Association Of Town's council -- it's legal."
But residents said that legal or not, the law would destroy the Planning Board's independence , reduce public confidence in local government, and reduce the level of knowledge and experience on the board.
"My concern is not about what is legal, but what is good practice for the Town of Lansing," said former Planning Board member Larry Zuidema. "As a resident I want to live in a town whose government uses best practices and procedures to improve the quality of life of its residents. Furthermore, I want a well-trained and independent planning board that provides a public forum to encourage orderly development and deal with concerns and issues that inevitably come about."
 Planning Board Chairman Lin Davidson |
Planning Board member and former Chairwoman Nancy Longto felt so strongly about the proposed law that she hired attorney at her own expense Scott F. Chatfield to write an opinion, which she read to the Town Board. Chatfield is a planning and land use lawyer, and a trainer with the New York State Planning Federation. Chatfield challenged the wisdom and legality of the law. "The ability to make such sweeping changes by a singly constituted town board is exactly the evil that the state law seeks to prohibit," he wrote.
Lansing attorney Susan Brock also challenged the legality, suggesting that a permissive referendum would be needed before passing the law. In one of the few humorous moments in the meeting Brock suggested that a vote might be required because the Town Board sought to reduce its own power to appoint planning board members from a seven year term to only three.
Many residents read from prepared statements while others spoke from the heart. "High sounding prose, bluster, and the reasons above don't mitigate the chilling impact of this law," said Planning Board Chairman Lin Davidson. "This local law runs against New york State law. You will go to court. The Lansing taxpayer will pay for the lawsuit. And you will lose. Just imagine if this group tonight was here to work on the concept to implement a town center, or get broadband Internet to unserved areas instead of trying to prevent our great Town of Lansing from walking off a cliff."
Town Board members say that the law was prompted by a recent search for new planning board members when town officials found it hard to find qualified people who were willing to sign on for as many as seven years. They pointed out the law was not intended as a reflection on any current planning board member and noted that they had, in fact, reappointed planning board members who wanted to serve additional terms. With no term limits, Town Board members said that planning board members could potentially serve as long or longer as they would serving seven year terms.
Years of enmity and distrust between the boards exacerbated the problem. Both boards lament their inability to communicate. Planning Board members have repeatedly complained that they get no feedback from the Town Board, while Town Board members say that they are rebuffed when they try to communicate. After the vote there was what may the the most frank public airing to date of the breakdown of communication between the two baords that many privately see as the root of the problems the two boards have faced.
 Some of the 15 speakers were (left to right) Nancy Longto, Bill Demo, Tom Ellis, Ruth Hopkins, and Dan Konowalo |
"The previous supervisor set up meetings with the Planning Board and they always ended badly," noted Deputy Supervisor Connie Wilcox. "Any time you want to speak with the Planning Board face to face they (act as if) we're confronting them, and that's not true at all. It's very hard to communicate on one side. We're willing to have that communication, but I don't like being personally attacked at times by certain members of the Planning Board, so it's hard to communicate when they don't want to communicate."
After the public hearing was closed Town Board members Marty Christopher and Bud Shattuck said that they had been swayed by arguments made against the law both at the meeting and in the week preceding it. "I listened to everybody, Christopher said. "I really appreciated what about three quarters of you had to say. This has caused me to reconsider my thoughts regarding this law. I am not saying our intentions weren't right, but perhaps (the law) has to be looked at again, or just be forgotten."
Christopher encouraged townspeople to participate in town matters as they did Wednesday more often, not just when a controversial issue arises. Shattuck said that the level of participation and engagement by the public in Wednesday's meeting influenced his vote.
"I can tell you that in the six years that I was the liaison to the Planning Board there was none of this acrimony," Shattuck said. "They were a well old machine. They did what they had to do. Coming in today I could have easily been in favor of a three year term based solely on the fact that we didn't have enough people interested, because seven years is a long time. This is a mobile community. After hearing what I've heard through the last week, not even getting into tonight, there was no way I was going to vote for it. At this point I wouldn't even consider a five year term."
Supervisor Scott Pinney offered a motion to turn down the law, seconded by Christopher, which passed unanimously. Jubilant residents congregated in the lobby, discussing the night's events, some saying that government had worked because the Town Board listened. Longto later told the board that her letter would not be disseminated any further.
That leaves the issue of communication. Resident Marcy Rosenkrantz noted that the County's Community Dispute Resolution Center is available to municipal bodies than need moderation, but whether the boards will be able to get past their deep seated antagonism remains to be seen.
----
v5i9