►
Description
Legislation Passed: Ordinance 17.101.19; 18.101.19, 19.101.19, 21.101.19, 25.101.19, 27.101.19, 31.101.19, 36.101.19, 38.101.19, 39.101.19, 40.111.19. 41.111.19, 42.111.19, Res. 1.11.20(MC) (Kimbrough), Res. 88.122.19R (Law), and Res. 90.122.19 (Doesschate).
A
C
B
Like
to
welcome
everyone
and
say
Happy
New
Year
to
everyone
on
behalf
of
myself
and
Albany
Common
Council
members
to
our
first
meeting
in
January
6
2020
also,
the
chair
would
like
to
recognize
our
newest
councilmember,
miss
Sonya
Frederick's
from
the
first
ward
at
her
first
meeting
of
the
year
first
meeting
of
the
council
members.
So
welcome
and
with
that
being
said,
can
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
E
F
C
G
H
B
Now
we'll
move
on
to
our
public
comment
period,
each
speaker
and
you
come
to
the
table.
Please
state
your
name
and
your
address
for
the
record.
You
will
have
five
minutes
to
speak
upon
any
subject.
You
would
like
to
speak
upon
at
that
time.
Council
members
can
will
not
answer
any
of
your
questions.
Our
comments
at
that
time.
So
please
address
all
your
comments
to
me,
mr.
president
or
chair
and
please
be
respectful.
B
We
ask
that
the
public
comment
period
that
you
do
not
single
out,
council,
members
or
I
will
have
to
stop
you
and
also
when
you
make
your
remarks
once
again,
we
cannot
answer
any
questions
or
comments
at
that
time.
If
council
members
choose
to
do
so,
they
will
make
their
comments
later
and
a
later
part
of
the
meeting.
So
with
that
being
said,
can
the
clerk
please
call
the
first
speaker.
I
Alondra
client
29
Glenwood
1
to
208
now
one
to
203
I'd
like
to
begin
by
welcoming
Sonia
to
her
first
council
meeting.
Welcome,
as
anyone
can
tell
II,
can
tell
you.
I
was
firmly
on
the
side
with
Dorsey
on
many
of,
if
all
the
issues
so
I
look
forward
to
seeing
what
you
can
do
in
any
new
ideas
and
I'd
also
like
to
congratulate
Jamel
on
your
appointment
to
chair
of
the
Human
Resources.
I
I
realized
this
council
can
do
that
are
all
middle
to
nothing
other
than
issuing
a
resolution
supporting
socialized
medicine
at
the
state
level
or
the
federal
level,
but
socialized
medicine
or
socialism
is
simply
a
buzzword
that
people
are
scared
of.
They
use
it
as
a
fear
tactic,
mainly
going
back
to
the
50s
as
people
on
this
side
of
the
banister.
Maybe
not
the
other
side
of
the
banister
might
know
or
know.
I
B
J
She
states
that
these
decisions
are
pursuant
to
the
city's
lawfully
enacted
zoning
and
planning
laws.
The
u.s.
do,
however,
was
rushed
into
approval
by
virtue
of
the
restrictive
covenant.
The
decision
of
approval
of
the
project,
563
New
Scotland
Avenue,
ignored
Joseph
igoe's
call
to
the
Common
Council
for
an
environmental
study.
The
discretionary
powers
of
the
Planning
Board
to
override
the
us
do
in
favour
of
developers
negates
its
usefulness,
mostly
most
importantly,
the
563
New
Scotland
Avenue
project
does
not
comply
with
the
u.s..
J
Do
we
in
one
way
the
us
do
directs
that
only
one
principal
building
shall
be
on
an
RM
zoned
law?
There
are
two
principal
buildings
on
the
proposal:
a
two
and
Hirschberg
and
Hirschberg
sewer
engineer's
report
revised
on
August
9th
2019,
was
falsified
in
the
description
of
the
building
and
proposed
lot
to
my
page
three
to
make
it
look
like
one
building.
J
J
It
was
at
this
meeting
that
word
spread
about
the
restrictive
covenant
which
had
been
discovered
by
some
concerned
citizens
to
look
at
this
restrictive
covenant
in
another
light.
Fm
promontory,
Capital
LLC
does
not
immediately
financially
benefit
from
the
covenant.
The
city
and
the
Planning
Department
benefit
by
the
expedient
passing
of
the
USD
yong.
It
benefited
it
benefited
them
in
moving
forward
in
targeting
mu,
NC
neighborhood
centers
for
oversized
expensive
mixed-use
complexes.
Instead
of
targeting
X
buildings
long-neglected,
the
residents
of
the
west
side
of
West
Lawrence
were
not
aware
of
the
covenant.
J
They
put
their
trust
in
south
rosenbloom,
a
developer
in
the
CFO
of
rosenbloom
companies
to
have
their
best
interests
at
heart.
How
did
seth
Rosenblum
benefit?
He
had
the
assurance.
He
thought
that
the
building
heights
would
not
interfere
with
the
selling
of
his
property
of
524
West
Lawrence
Street.
It
may
or
may
not
be
relevant
that
on
September
19
19
2017
he
and
his
wife
emerita
rosin
bought
property
at
197
homes
Dale.
J
They
received
permission
from
the
Board
of
Zoning
Appeals
to
tear
down
the
house
and
rebuild
that
appears
on
the
Planning
Board
agenda
for
October
19,
2007,
teenth,
Hirschberg
and
Hirschberg.
Were
the
engineers
Case
Files,
zero,
zero,
zero.
Four
three,
the
house
and
call
a
McMansion
was
built
in
June
2019.
J
They
sold
their
house
at
524,
West
Lawrence
without
the
impediment
of
present
construction
and
563
New
Scotland
and
September
10th
2019
FM
promontory
Capital
LLC
revoked
the
first
portion
of
the
restrictive
covenant
yet
having
served
its
purpose
to
squelch
the
opposition
to
the
rezoning,
but
they
retained
the
last
portion,
which
involves
the
height
of
building
in
the
northeast
corner
and
the
setbacks.
Why
keep
this?
If
the
covenant
was
unenforceable,
yeah.
J
It
refers
to
textmate
parcel
number
64.85
and
formerly
Goodman.
This
lot
is
530
West
Lawrence
a
property
currently
languishing
on
the
market.
If
the
restrictive
covenant
was
a
mere
private
contract,
FM
promontory
Capital
LLC
to
itself
what
bothered
to
keep
it.
Are
we
to
believe
that
the
Commissioner
of
planning
would
not
have
consulted
with
corporation
council
in
2017?
J
Are
we
to
believe
that
leading
second-generation
developers
in
the
city
of
Albany
would
not
know
the
difference
between
a
valid
or
an
invalid
contract
on
November
20th
2019
at
a
presentation
for
a
proposed
project
on
crumb
kill
dan
Hirschberg
promised
the
neighbors
that
he
would
protect
them
with
a
restrictive
covenant.
They
wanted
nothing
to
do
with
the
project,
nor
anything
to
do
with
him.
Joe
I
go
in
town
who
he
attended.
This
meeting.
B
K
It
is
a
very
significant
project,
and
so,
when
you,
when
you
think
about
the
restrictive
deed
covenant
that
F
M
promontory
/
Francis
McCluskey,
entered
into
I,
believe
the
counsel's
office
is
trying
to
downplay
it
as
just
a
simple
private
document
and
that's
the
the
intent.
There
are
two
things
about
it.
The
intent
and
the
impact
of
it
are
what's
really
most
important.
In
my
opinion,
and
the
intent
upon
talking
to
some
of
the
members
of
the
Common
Council,
who
were
there
at
the
time
was
to
suppose
it
was
to
get.
K
It
was
to
a
swage
neighbors
and
the
common
council
members
to
restrict
the
restrict
the
height
of
the
buildings
on
these
parcels
to
three
or
three
and
a
half
stories,
and
that's
very
consistent
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood
and
that's
why
they
did
it,
because
the
neighbors
did
not
did
not
want
a
five
or
a
five
and
a
half
story,
building
right
in
front
of
their
property
and
and
that's
where
that
was
really
the
that
was
the
intent
of
it.
And
if
I
could
just
real
quickly
built.
K
There
is
a
deed
restriction
in
place
and
by
the
way
you
know
it
runs
with
the
land
and
it
runs
with
it
with
the
successor
owners
and
by
the
way
it
runs
for
75
years.
So
you
would
take
that
upon
good
faith,
that
you're
not
gonna.
Have
this
huge
five,
five
and
a
half
storey
building
right
in
front
right
behind
or
in
front
of
your
house,
and
that
really
that
really
was
the
intent
and
the
I
read
you
the
it's
instructive
to
read
to
two
more
things
from
this.
K
K
So
this
is
the
owner
developer.
Jenna,
comma
companies
are
FM,
promontory,
agreeing
that
the
city
should
enforce
this,
and
we
think
that's,
we
think,
that's
critically
important
and
at
the
time
of
its
filing,
we
think
the
Commissioner
of
planning,
Chris,
Chris
Spencer,
would
have
run
this
by
the
corporation
counsel
and
and
received
some
assurances
or
some
approval
that
it
was
okay
for
him
to
get
involved
in
this
and
help
and
help
getting
it
getting
it
formed.
K
And
so,
lastly,
some
have
some
have
been
concerned
that
the
city
might
get
sued
by
the
developer
for
doing
this,
and
so
it
would.
It
would
be
the
situation
where
a
developer
would
sue
the
city
for
a
deed
restriction
that
he
that
he
put
in
place
in
the
first
place,
and
that
to
me
is
just
simply
not
common
sense
and
that's
absurd
and
that's
why
the
Common
Council
should
pass
this
resolution
tonight
and
if
it
does
pass
like,
we
hope
the
Common
Council
should
explain.
K
B
L
M
N
M
M
We
know
that
we
have
neighborhoods,
as
many
of
them
are
quite
strong
at
the
present
time,
but
other
neighborhoods
are
in
a
very
endangered
status,
and
the
strict
enforcement
by
the
city
of
this
restrictive
covenant
will
help
to
strengthen
our
neighborhoods
and
promote
development
in
both
our
stressed
neighborhoods
and
also
our
highly
desirable,
stronger
neighborhoods.
So
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
make
these
comments
this
evening.
Thank.
O
They
come
back
and
they
want
to
take
the
three
and
a
half
story
building
and
make
a
five
story.
Building
out
of
them
or
people
are
dead,
set
against
that
this
covenant
was
signed
by
three
people
were
signed
by
first
Frank
mcklusky
second
Chris
Spencer,
who
represents
the
city.
He
is
the
Commissioner
of
planning
and
then
Hirshberg
not
only
signed
it,
but
he
notarized
it.
Making
this
a
legal
document
keep
in
mind
that
this
us
do.
This
is
the
book
that
was
given
to
you
couple
years
ago.
O
I
said
it
had
to
be
passed
right
away
and
it
was
passed
within
two
weeks.
Nobody
knew
what
they
were
passing,
but
this
was
what
the
city
was
going
to
go
by
for
any
type
of
construction.
That
was
going
to
happen
in
the
city,
and
we
should
stay
by
that.
If
it
was
passed,
it
was
passed
and
and
in
the
us
do
it
says
that
no
buildings,
three
and
a
half
story
it
can
be
for
an
heir
story,
but
they
have
to
meet
certain
criterias.
O
So
when
you
go
to
vote
today,
I
want
you
to
think
about
the
us
do
and
what
it
means
to
your
area,
because
if
it
doesn't
mean
anything
to
the
new
Scott
on
avenue
airy,
then
it
doesn't
mean
anything
any
of
the
other
areas.
So
if
you,
if
a
developer,
comes
up
to
you
and
tells
you
he's,
gonna
put
a
three
in
here
story.
Building
there
and
the
next
thing
you
turn
around
he
comes
just
is
he's
gonna,
put
a
five
story
and
halo
it.
What
the
hell
is
the
sense
of
the
US.
O
Do
it's
no
sense,
not
much
more
I
can
say.
I
do
want
to
tell
you
at
the
committee
meeting
the
planning
committee
meeting
I
do
want
to
tell
you
that
Chris
Spencer
was
asked
to
come
and
clarify
this
document.
He
refused
it.
Income
he's
the
guy
that
represents
the
planning
department,
he's
the
man
that
did
the
us
do
and
he's
the
man
that
did
not
show
up
to
talk
to
the
five
council,
people
that
were
there.
O
R
Q
It's
a
very
small
step
and
what
promises
to
be
a
major
challenge?
New
data
collected
by
researchers
at
Brandeis
University,
show
that
Arbor
Hill
is
one
of
the
lowest
opportunity.
Neighborhoods
in
the
country
for
kids,
a
quarter
of
the
buildings
are
abandoned,
green
space
is
limited,
unemployment
and
poverty
are
high
and
97%
of
the
children
who
live
here
are
black
or
Hispanic.
S
Q
Gang
member
Justin
Gaddy
sees
the
consequences.
Firsthand
he's
with
an
anti-violence
group
called
snug,
which
stands
for
should
never
use
guns.
Italia
on
his
office
wall
shows
it's
been
only
14
days
since
the
last
shooting
here,
which
happened
right
near
the
new
park.
Caddies
group
is
trying
to
keep
neighborhood
kids
from
becoming
the
next
statistic.
Some.
S
Q
Q
Q
Chaotic
but
they're
learning
how
to
organize
events.
They
also
have
internships
of
local
businesses
and
talked
a
lot
about
careers
and
their
futures
15
year
old,
a
days
or
right,
wants
to
go
into
marketing.
She
says
the
program
helps,
but
the
real
eye-opener
for
her
came
when
she
attended
private
school
for
a
year
in
a
wealthier
part
of
town.
She
said
she
was
one
of
the
few
African
Americans
and
only
poor
girl
in
her
class
and
was
constantly
amazed
by
the
things
she
saw
and.
T
T
Q
Seniors
come
from
around
the
city
to
a
day
care
program
in
the
basement
of
a
church
in
Albanese
Buckingham
Lake
area.
It's
a
far
cry
from
Arbor
Hill.
The
church
is
surrounded
by
neat
single-family
homes.
20%
of
households
here
are
headed
by
a
single
parent
compared
to
86%
in
Arbor
Hill.
The
median
income
is
three
times
higher
and
most
of
the
children
are
white.
Harris
Oberlander
says
the
area
was
a
great
place
to
raise
his
kids
because
it
had
so
many
resources.
There.
U
Q
Q
E
G
I'm
one
of
the
signers
amongst
14
other
people
who
support
the
project
under
Scotland,
Avenue
and
I
thought
we'd
already
put
this
to
bed,
but
I.
Guess
we
didn't
and
so
I'm
just
down
here
to
talk
about
the
bigger
picture
of
development
in
Albany
from
someone
who
was
going
to
live
right
next
to
it,
which
I
knew
for
years.
Something
was
going
to
happen
there
and
I've
been
on
that
block
for
32
years
and
I've
reluctantly
accepted
the
fact
that
we
need
tax
base
in
Albany.
G
We
need
redevelopment
and
it's
a
question
of
what
kind
of
development
and
who's
it
for
and
all
the
important
issues,
and
so
the
process
has
gone
down
through
planning
board
approval
and
all
those
other
steps.
I
know
we're
I'm
hearing
some
of
my
best
friends
talking
about
height,
and
that
is
something
that's
an
important
issue,
but
I
guess
how
I've
come
to
accept
this
project
is
I've.
G
Looked
at
Park,
South
and
I
understand
that
the
two
biggest
industries
in
this
new
Scotland
happen
to
be
hospitals,
and
so
I've
resigned
myself
to
the
fact
that
you
can
have
height
on
do
Scotland
the
14
people
that
we
signed
were
on
West
Lawrence,
we're
all
single
family
homes,
and
so
the
developers
agreed
to
do
low-rise
around
where
we
are,
which
is
more
consistent
with
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
I'm.
Of
course,
I'm
very
concerned
about
ambient
lighting
noise
parking
all
those
kinds
of
things.
G
B
L
A
Ryan
Jahnke
I
live
in
Gilda
in
New
York
I
am
the
the
developer
for
the
proposed
project.
We
did
a
extensive
review
by
the
city
of
Albany
took
probably
over
a
year
and
a
half.
So
far
we
went
through
countless
meetings
with
the
Planning
Board,
the
Board
of
Zoning
Appeals.
We
did
endless
traffic
studies,
environmental
reviews
and
we
spoke
to
neighbors
at
neighborhood
planning
meetings
to
to
tell
them
about
the
project
variations
we
had
and
what
the
process
was
for
us.
A
A
neighborhood,
we
had
a
three-story
building
in
the
rear
that
we
decided
to
move
to
a
two-story
building,
just
like
the
previous
speaker
said
to
make
it
more
attractive,
had
to
keep
it
in
in
line
with
the
neighborhood
and
then
the
West
Lawrence
people,
the
declaration
being
being
discussed
here
today,
there's
a
personal,
is
a
personal
restriction
which
was
a
revised
by
the
current
land
owner
to
be
to
be
consistent
with
the
approvals
by
the
city.
This
was
a
a
restriction
put
on
by
the
previous
landowner
for
a
project
he
was
looking
at
to
get
approved.
A
This
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
project
that
you
know
we
we
had
a
we
brought
to
the
city
to
retract.
This
declaration
would
be
to
avoid
any
and
all
permits
and
any
and
all
permits
and
approvals
granted
by
the
city.
A
previous
speaker
said
that,
again
that
this
is
a
very
significant
project.
He
is
correct.
Again.
A
We
spent
a
year
and
a
half
looking
at
endless
studies:
environmental
traffic
height
ambient
lighting
noise
pollution,
everything
that
the
city
that
the
Planning
Board
requires
us
to
do
before
we
move
forward
during
the
process,
the
Planning
Board.
Yet
even
as
the
the
for
clarification
from
corporation
council
about
the
previous
restriction
that
everyone's
talking
about-
and
you
know,
we
were
advised
that
that
would
not
be
be
an
issue
for
us
as
it
is
not
it's
not
an
enforceable.
A
L
W
W
Don't
let's
say
I'm
I'm,
hoping
that
the
Balu
will
vote
in
favor
for
the
resolution,
and
so
anything
for
this
no
way
I
can't
read
my
own
writing
just
give
me
a
second
I'm,
hoping
that
you
will
vote
in
favor
of
the
resolution
authorizing
the
City
Council
to
enforce
the
27
deed
restriction.
I
would
like
to
thank
you
for
this
time
and
the
opportunity
to
speak.
Thank
you.
Thank.
L
X
Good
evening,
I
hope
hope
you
can
hear
me
I'm
speaking
close
enough
to
the
microphone.
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
having
this
hearing
and
thank
you
for
entertaining
comments
from
from
the
citizens.
My
name
is
John
Sipos
and
I'm,
an
Albany
taxpayer
and
resident
and
I
live
near
the
New
Scotland
in
Allen
streets
near
st.
Peters
near
the
site.
X
X
I
have
had
some
opportunity
to
look
at
the
restrictive
covenant,
and
it
too
is
clear
and
I
should
also
note
that
I
with
what
mr.
Toohey
said
earlier,
I
am
NOT
opposed
to
development.
I
understand
the
need
for
a
tax
base
and
to
to
protect
and
expand
the
tax
pace,
but
given
the
restrictive
covenant,
given
this
restrictive
covenant,
which
is
very
clear
on
its
face,
four
and
five-story
buildings
should
not
be
constructed
it
in
this
neighborhood
and
I'd
I'd
suggest
that
you
stand.
X
I
went
out
for
a
walk
a
few
nights
ago
and
I
stood
on
the
corner
of
Allen
and
New
Scotland
and
I
looked
across
at
st.
Peters
and
yes,
st.
Peters
is
a
tall
building.
You
know
6
6
plus
stories,
but
that
is
what
it
is.
It's
been
there
for,
probably
you
know
50
or
80,
and
look
at
count
up
how
high
three
stories
is
count.
X
How
high
four
stories
is
and
then
turn
your
gaze
and
look
at
where
the
post
office
is
where
this
development
site
is
and
imagine
what
a
five-story
structure
would
look
like
there
and
again.
I
suggest
that
this
deed,
that
this
restrictive
covenant,
which
talks
about
three
and
three
and
a
half
storey
buildings,
is,
is
clear
and
four
storeys.
Five
storeys
is
too
much.
It
will
affect
ambient
light.
X
It
will
increase
noise,
it
will
increase
traffic
and
it
will
most
definitely
change
the
character
of
the
neighborhood,
most
definitely
I've
reviewed
the
two
January
three
2020
memos
from
MS
Levine
and
mr.
Spencer
at
but
I
do
not
think
those
memos
should
dissuade
this
Common
Council
from
supporting
the
resolution
that
is
before
you
tonight.
The
memo
is
really
are
not
in
point
and
in
fact,
they're
remarkably
off
point.
The
restrictions
and
covenants
that
that
appear
in
this
document
were
developed
and
implemented
with
the
assistance
of
city
employees
before
the
rezone.
X
So
the
sequence
is
very
important
here.
These
memos
really
speak
to
the
situation
where
something
is
occurring.
Some
some
some
event
is
occurring
after
a
building
ordinances,
a
development
ordinance
is
passed
and
in
this
case
the
Covenant.
This
restrictive
covenant
was
developed
before
and
in
concert
would
that
rezone?
So
it
really
is
part
it.
It
does
run
as
it
says
it
runs
with
the
land
and
it
was
there,
the
property
owner
to
the
developer,
the
city
planner
mr.
Spencer.
They
all
went
into
this
with
their
eyes
wide,
open
and
I.
Guess.
X
Echoing
a
question
that
was
asked
earlier,
I
mean
what
was
the
purpose
of
the
restrictive
government
covenant
if
it
was
not
enforceable.
So
in
closing,
I
would
ask
this
council
not
to
turn
your
back
on
the
individuals
and
the
citizens
who
live
in
this
neighborhood
and
I
would
ask
the
Common
Council
to
take
all
steps,
all
necessary
and
proper
steps
to
enforce
the
Covenant
and
indeed
vigorously
enforce
the
Covenant
again.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
Thank
you
for
your
service
on
this
council
and
happy
new
year.
Thank
you.
L
H
My
name
is
Jonathan
tinguely
I
am
with
the
law
firm
of
Gilchrist
tinguely.
Our
office
address
is
251,
River,
Street
and
Troy.
We
represent
the
property
owner
at
issue.
The
it's
FM
promontory,
Capital
LLC,
which
has
office
address
at
18,
Locust
Street
in
Albany,
I
practice,
land
use,
including
litigation
arising
out
of
land-use
disputes.
H
My
entire
legal
career
I
do
have
a
letter
to
submit
because
I
do
need
to
post
the
record
and
make
sure
that
this
counsel
is
on
notice
of
the
legal
impacts
of
pursuing
enforcement
of
a
declaration
of
restrictions
and
Covenants
that
has
been
amended
by
the
property
owner,
in
particular,
I'm.
Speaking
with
respect
to
resolution
90
point
one
to
two
point:
one
nine
are
and
I
am
respectfully
requesting
on
behalf
of
the
property
owner
that
the
city
that
the
Common
Council
disapproved
that
resolution
this
evening.
H
That
declaration,
that
is,
that
issue
was
executed
in
May
of
2017
and
it
was
executed
in
connection
with
a
prior
project
proposal.
That
project
was
never
approved.
In
fact
it
was
withdrawn.
There
were
no
approvals
issued,
there
was
no
construction
undertaken
and,
most
importantly,
there
was
no
transfer
of
any
interest
or
right
or
title
in
any
part
of
that
property.
H
H
It
also
adopted
a
negative
declaration
under
seeker,
which
means
that
that
project,
as
determined
by
the
lead
agency,
would
have
no
potential
significant
adverse
environmental
impacts,
and
that
includes
with
respect
to
traffic.
The
city
of
Albany
has
no
interest
or
title
in
any
of
the
property
that
was
subject
to
that
May
2017
declaration.
H
In
fact,
no
third
party
had
any
interest
or
title,
and
what
that
means
is
that
FM
promontory
capital
LLC
as
the
owner
was
fully
entitled
to
revoke
that
declaration
completely,
which
means
it
necessarily
had
the
authority
to
amend
it,
and
it
did
so
in
accordance
with
the
approved
project
that
Jenko
presented.
That
was
thoroughly
reviewed
by
the
Zoning
Board,
thoroughly
reviewed
by
the
Planning
Board
and
for
which
fourteen
residents
of
West
Lawrence
Street
signed
a
letter
and
support,
in
particular
of
the
building
height
along
New
Scotland
Avenue.
H
H
It's
an
effort,
this
lawsuit
would
be
an
effort
to
undermine
an
appropriately
reviewed
project
that
was
approved,
and
this
council,
as
I
understand,
has
been
advised
by
its
council
corporation
council
that
the
legal
claim
that
would
be
pursued
lacks
legal
merit
and
I'll.
Allow
the
council
to
rely
on
that.
H
You
a
lot
of
the
council
that
rely
on
its
own
corporation
council
for
that
opinion.
But
with
that
opinion,
I
agree
the
city,
if
it
adopts
a
resolution
authorizing
enforcement
of
a
declaration
that
has
been
amended
proceeds
at
its
own
risk.
All
necessary
approvals
have
been
obtained
and
this
project
is
shovel-ready.
H
L
Y
Thank
You
mr.
president,
members
of
the
Common
Council
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
tonight.
My
name
is
Zachary
Simpson
I
reside
at
175,
homestead
Avenue
in
the
city
of
Albany
I
am
vice-president
of
the
Upper
Washington
Avenue
Neighborhood
Association
I
serve
on
the
executive
committee
of
council,
evolving
neighborhood
associations,
I
support
resolution
90.1
at
22
point
19
are
directing
the
city
of
Albany
corporation
council
to
enforce
the
restricted
deed
and
covenant
that
was
executed,
notarized
and
filed
with
the
Albany
County
Clerk's
office
in
May
of
2017.
Two
weeks
prior
to
the
passage
of
the
us.
Y
Do.
I
am
here
tonight,
United
with
other
members
of
the
public
who
support
this
resolution.
I
was
unable
to
attend
the
Planning
Economic
Development
land-use
committee
meeting
last
week,
where
the
resolution
was
discussed
at
length.
However,
I
did
listen
to
the
entire
audio
recording
of
that
meeting.
Y
This
restricted
deed
and
covenant
was
truly
an
instance
where
promises
were
made
and
these
promises
need
to
be
kept.
They
need
to
be
kept
to
the
Albany
Common
Council,
which
ultimately
voted
to
adopt
the
us
Co
2
weeks
after
this
restricted
deed
was
filed
and
they
need
to
be
in
the
promises
need
to
be
kept.
The
citizens
of
the
city
of
Albany
I
promise
was
made
by
a
fine
parameter,
II
capital
in
direct
consultation
with
planning
Commissioner
Chris
Spencer.
Y
It
was
memorialized
in
this
restricted
deed
in
covenant
to
limit
the
number
of
stories
of
development
on
these
parcels
for
75
years.
These
promises
need
to
be
honored.
They
need
to
be
honored.
Now.
Therefore,
I
respectfully
request
that
the
Common
Council
fully
support
this
resolution
in
its
entirety.
Tonight,
two
other
things
I
just
wanted
to
mention.
Y
Chief
Hawkins-
is
coming
to
speak
to
council
of
Albany
neighborhood
associations.
This
Wednesday
at
6:30,
at
the
Albany,
Public
Library
I,
hope
some
of
the
Common
Council
members
can
attend,
and
hopefully
you
can
tell
your
constituents
about
the
meeting.
There's
been
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
way
in
which
the
reorganization
of
the
police
department
was
rolled
out.
So
I
think,
if
you're
interested
and
asked
some
questions
and
listening
to
what
the
chief
has
to
say,
I'd
like
to
see
you
all,
there
also
I
had
a
very
disturbing
incident.
Y
Y
Fortunately,
the
pedestrian
did
not
get
killed,
they
did
get
injured,
but
the
problem
is,
there
is
no
sufficient
lighting
in
the
intersection.
There
is
a
street
light
attached
to
a
utility
pole
several
feet
before
the
intersection.
There
is
a
street
light
attached
to
a
utility
pole
several
feet
after
the
intersection.
There
is
no
light
on
the
intersection,
so
councilmember
Michael
Bryan,
my
council
member,
he's
aware
of
this.
So
we're
gonna
take
a
look
at
this
issue
and
see
what
we
could
do
so.
Thank
you.
Thank.
Z
Hello
and
thank
you
for
allowing
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
tonight.
I'll
be
brief.
My
name
is
Margie
Sheehan
I
live
at
32,
Buckingham
Drive
in
the
city
of
Albany.
My
husband
and
I
have
lived
there
for
20
years
and
we've
been
taxpaying.
Happy
taxpaying
citizens
all
that
time.
We
love
the
city
of
Albany.
I
am
here
to
speak
tonight
in
in
support
of
the
resolution.
Ninety
point
one
twenty
two
point:
nineteen
are
we
do
believe
in
development
in
the
city
of
Albany,
but
we
believe
in
proper
development
that
fits
within
existing
neighborhoods.
Z
It's
clear
to
us
that
interest
other
than
just
the
good
of
the
neighborhood
are
at
play
and
I
think
what
is
significant
tonight
is
that
a
lot
of
people
came
down
here.
A
lot
of
us.
This
has
become
a
second
job
to
us
because
we
have
to
come
so
often
and
there
are
people
that
should
be
here
and
an
art,
and
one
of
those
is
us
Chris,
Spencer,
I'm,
not
sure
why
he's
not
here
tonight.
With
regard
to
the
the
covenant
restriction,
he
was
intimately
involved
in
creating
it
and
I.
Z
Think
people
here
probably
have
a
lot
of
questions
for
him
for
which
they
won't
get
answers
because
he's
not
here.
We
do
believe
that
the
resolution
was
a
promise
made.
You
know
I've
heard
people
here
tonight
saying
that
it
was
for
a
very
specific
project.
Why,
then,
was
it
for
75
years
on
a
piece
of
property,
no
matter
whose
hands
that
property
was
sold
into?
That
doesn't
really
seem
to
jive,
with
it
just
being
for
one
project.
Z
We're
not
understanding
why
it
seems
to
us
clear
that
a
promise
was
and
now
is
not
being
kept
two
years
ago.
This
happened.
This
wasn't
20
years
ago.
This
was
two
years
ago,
two
weeks
after
it
happened,
the
USDA
was
enacted
now
in
September
of
this
year.
The
restriction
was
rescinded
and
changed,
and
you
know
they
said
well,
it
doesn't
matter
it's
not
binding,
because
you
know
that
there's
no
legal
counsel
that
looked
at
this,
it's
very
hard
for
us
to
believe
that,
because
Chris
Spencer
is
the
Commissioner
of
planning
for
the
city.
Z
So
how
could
he
possibly
have
helped
to
put
together
something
like
this
and
not
had
any
council?
Look
at
it,
I'm,
not
an
attorney,
but
it
doesn't
seem.
You
know
serious
at
all
to
me
that
that
would
happen
so
I'm
just
here
to
ask
respectfully
that
you
consider
the
resolution
and
please
pass
it
in
favor
of
honesty
for
the
people
of
the
city.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
E
AA
L
C
L
U
AB
AA
L
Ordinance
authorizing
certain
purchases
by
the
city
of
Albany,
New
York,
at
a
maximum
estimated
cost
of
two
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
and
authorizing
the
lease
financing
or
the
insurance
of
two
hundred
fifty
thousand
dollars
serial
bonds
of
said
city
to
pay.
The
cost
there
of
planning
illuminated
pedestrian
underpass
Livingston
ass
is.
AC
I
AB
B
B
L
AA
L
An
ordinance
authorizing
certain
purchases
by
the
city
of
Albany,
New
York
at
a
maximum
estimated
cost
of
$500,000
and
authorizing
the
lease
financing
or
the
issuance
of
five
hundred
and
five
hundred
thousand
dollars
of
serial
bonds
of
said
city
to
pay.
The
cost
ere
of
planning
pedestrian
vehicular
corridor.
Dri
is.
AC
AC
AC
G
G
G
AA
L
B
AC
AC
AC
AC
O
B
L
AC
AC
AC
G
V
AA
L
AC
AC
AC
V
V
B
L
B
AC
AC
AC
AC
V
V
AA
L
L
AD
B
AC
O
O
B
AA
L
AC
S
V
AB
AB
AA
L
Ordinance
authorizing
certain
purchases
by
the
city
of
Albany,
New
York
and
a
maximum
estimated
cost
of
a
hundred
thousand
and
authorizing
the
lease
financing
or
the
issuance
of
a
hundred
thousand
serial
bonds
of
said
city
to
pay.
The
cost
there
of
planning,
Hudson,
River,
waterfront
gateway
during.
AA
AC
AC
G
B
AA
L
Ordinance
authorizing
certain
purchases
by
the
city
of
Albany,
New
York,
at
a
maximum
estimated
cost
of
three
hundred
eighty
thousand
one
hundred
dollars
and
authorizing
the
lease
financing
or
the
issuance
of
three
hundred.
Eighty
thousand
one
hundred
Serio
bonds
have
said
City
to
pay
the
cost
there
of
planning
brownfield
opportunity,
area
stud.
So.
AC
AC
AE
V
AB
AB
L
AC
AC
AE
D
AA
L
AF
L
AC
AC
AE
V
AB
B
B
AC
AE
V
AB
B
B
V
L
AC
AC
AE
AB
W
AD
AD
AD
AD
The
mayor's
office
has
incorrectly
stated
that
the
issue
is
you
moot,
because
the
development
complies
with
the
restrictive
covenants,
but
it
clearly
does
not.
Mr.
Spencer's
memo
completely
ignores
the
first
provision
in
the
restrictive
covenant
regarding
the
height
allowable
height
of
buildings,
but
that
has
not
been
addressed
by
the
Planning.
Board
has
not
been
addressed
by
the
BCA
has
not
been
addressed
by
the
Planning
Department
I
want
to
note
that
some
people
have
talked
about
14
residents
on
West,
Lawrence
Street,
signing
a
petition
supporting
this
particular
development.
AD
AD
AD
AD
AD
It
has
been
suggested
here
tonight
that
somehow
or
other
were
not
talking
about
the
same
parcel
of
land
attached
tonight,
because
it
was
a
different
project.
I've
attached
to
my
resolution,
covenant
that
specifically
lists
20
parcels.
It
says
they
are
to
be
known
as
New
Scotland
village
and
actually,
when
you
look
at
some
of
the
records
in
the
ITA
and
the
tax
abatement
that
has
been
requested,
that
is
what
the
current
project
is
referred
to.
It
doesn't
matter
really
whatever
it
might
be
called
in
the
development
process.
AD
Essentially,
it
was
an
inducement
to
the
property
owners
to
drop
their
objections
and,
personally
to
me,
and
perhaps
other
common
council
members
to
vote,
the
us
do
with
these
properties
being
zoned
as
they
are
RM
there
was
discussion.
I
had
had
a
conversation
with
mr.
glass,
specifically
regarding
what
other
possible
zoning
might
be
appropriate
for
this,
and
it
was
discussed
that
maybe
there
should
be
a
different
type
of
zoning
category,
but
because
the
zoning
ordinance
needs
to
be
passed
quickly,
it
was
suggested
that
the
restrictive
covenant
would
address
residents
concerns.
AD
The
covenants,
spirits,
the
restrictive
covenants
specifically
says
it
shall
be
deemed
a
covenant
that
shall
run
with
the
land
and
shall
be
binding
upon
all
future
owners.
It
says
that
any
deed
of
conveyance
of
the
property
or
any
portion
thereof,
shall
recite
that
such
conveyance
is
subject
to
this
declaration
of
covenants
and
restrictions.
It
says
it
shall
expire
in
seventy
five
years
after
the
abduction
of
ordinance.
AD
26
point
31
point
17,
which
was
the
proposed
us.
Do
it
says
it
shall
be
applicable
only
if
ordinance
26
point
31
point
17
is
adopted
to
rezone
the
area
of
New
Scotland
village
into
two
areas
that
are
to
be
mixed
use,
neighborhood,
center
and
multi-family
residential,
and
it
was
filed
with
the
County
Clerk's
office
as
a
deed
would
be
filed
suggesting
this
was
nothing
more
than
an
unenforceable.
AD
AD
AD
There
has
been
some
argument
made
regarding
we're
contracting
away
our
rights,
the
case
that
I
provided
council
members
with
an
Court
of
Appeals
case.
It
says
that
there's
no
state
law
on
that
and
we
did
not
contract
away
rights,
because
the
Covenant
itself
provides
that
we
have
the
city
has
the
ability
to
enforce
it.
AD
This
this
restrictive
covenant
clearly
does
not
allow
any
buildings
on
these
Lots
above
three
point:
five
storeys,
most
of
them
only
three
storeys.
The
restrictive
covenant
was
filed
just
two
weeks
in
advance
of
the
passage
of
the
u.s.
do
to
address
residents
and
common
counsels
concerns
that
allowing
four-story
buildings
on
these
prices
would
adversely
affect
the
quality
of
life
for
homeowners
in
the
areas
and
was
not
in
keeping
with
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
AD
There
would
be
no
other
reason
for
the
owner
to
have
filed
the
restrictive
covenant,
but
then
to
ensure
these
protections
to
and
to
also
ensure
that
he
received
the
benefit
of
the
zoning
that
he
thought
that
he
was
interested
in
having
that
also
raises
an
argument
that
can
be
made
in
court
regarding
the
equity
of
the
homeowner.
Now
after
we
passed
with
the
zoning
to
now
decide
not
to
comply
with
those
particular
restrictions.
AD
Again,
I
want
to
emphasize
that
the
restrictive
covenant
expressly
authorizes
the
city
to
enforce
the
terms
of
the
restrictive
covenant,
and
why
would
that
turn
the
provision
be
in
there?
But
for
the
fact
that
that
is
exactly
what
was
intended,
and
that
is
what
this
resolution
is
asking
the
council
in
the
city
to
do
by
the
clear
terms
of
the
u.s.
the
of
the
restrictive
covenant
became
effective
upon
passage
about
the
u.s.
do
with
these
parcels.
Zoned
as
r
m
and
m
unc.
AD
The
owner
in
equity
cannot
then
revoke
the
restrictive
covenant,
having
gained
the
benefit
of
the
rezoning.
It
expressly
says
that
it's
binding
on
all
future
owners
who
consent
who
also
consent
to
enforcement
by
the
city
of
Albany.
The
city
should
enforce
the
restrictive
covenant,
as
it
was
clearly
anticipated
at
the
time
of
the
u.s..
AD
Do
I
note
that
the
case
law
is
clear
that
the
owner
of
a
property
that
seeks
to
be
relieved
of
an
obligation
from
complying
with
a
restrictive
covenant
has
the
burden
of
proof
that
should
occur
to
a
declaratory
ruling
in
Supreme
Court
or
by
another
legal
mechanism.
Neither
this
body
nor
the
council,
nor
the
planning
departments
or
the
boards
should
be
making
a
determination
regarding
the
enforceability
of
the
RC
that
was
filed
to
induce
this
body
to
act
in
a
certain
way.
AD
So
the
threats
that
have
been
made
here
tonight
with
regard
to
potential
liability
are
unfounded.
I
asked
for
all
of
my
fellow
council
members
to
support
this
resolution,
which
is
simply
doing
what
the
restrictive
covenant
says
that
the
city
can
do
and
should
be
doing
based
upon
the
history
here.
Thank
you.
Thank.
AE
Thank
You.
Mr.
president,
this
has
been
one
of
the
most
difficult
decisions
to
make
because,
on
one
hand,
I
just
think
about
if
I
was
the
developer
and
I
went
through
all
of
these
steps
and
invested
all
my
time
only
to
get
to
this
point
to
be
told
otherwise,
so
I
struggle
with
that.
But,
as
an
elected
official,
you
always
have
to
hear
the
words
of
the
people
and
I
will
say
that
from
a
lot
of
people,
I
think
I've
heard
from
more
than
14
people
that
are
in
opposition
I
would
think
about.
AE
If
I
was
that
person
that
was
living
next
door
to
the
development
I'm,
pretty
sure
that
I
would
have
some
concerns
about
it.
So,
when
I
got
appointed
to
this
position,
when
I
got
elected
to
this
position,
my
first
interaction
with
the
Planning
Board
I
was
acting
for
consistency
without
have
a
knowledge
of
other
projects
and,
as
I
stand
here
today.
I
think
that
it's
only
right
that
we
have
consistency
in
the
process.
AE
AA
I'm,
so
bad
at
this
microphone
it
just
I,
just
I,
want
to
say
I,
believe
in
growth
and
I
believe
in
development
very
strongly.
I
understand
the
need
for
an
increased
tax
base.
I
think
that
that's
actually
the
path
forward,
and
that
happens
through
development,
but
we
cannot
grow
and
we
cannot
develop
when
our
planning
arms
are
not
operating
in
a
transparent
and
information-sharing
manner.
I
went
into
our
planning
committee
meeting
with
an
open
mind,
although
I
do
not
represent
the
area
of
563
New
Scotland
Avenue
I
like
a
lot
about
that
project.
AA
AF
AG
Thank
You
mr.
president,
I
will
be
voting
against
the
resolution.
I
also
voted
against
it
in
committee,
sending
it
to
the
full
council
for
a
vote.
I
felt
very
strongly
that
a
lot
of
this
discussion
really
needed
to
take
place
in
the
committee.
Yes,
we
didn't
have
the
planning
department
there,
but
we
did
have
counsel
there,
who
prevented
presenting
some
very
strong
arguments
about
this
restrictive
covenant
and
how
it
was
not
enforceable.
I
think
that
you
know
again,
we
should
we
should
have
pursued
this
more
in
committee.
AG
We've
heard
some
very
strong
arguments
tonight
by
in
caucus
by
corporation
counsel
by
our
own
attorney,
the
council's
own
attorney
about
the
problems
with
this
covenant,
and
you
know
the
attorney
for
the
developer
as
well
prove
it
presented
a
very
strong
argument.
I
think
this
is
this
is
something
that
we
should
have
taken
a
much
closer
look
at
and
so
I
will
be
voting
against
it.
Thank
you.
Thank.
F
D
You,
mr.
president,
you
know
I've
heard
both
sides
as
it
relates
to
this
resolution,
going
back
and
forth
as
a
relates
to
how
I
was
gonna
vote.
But
I'm
really
concerned
the
the
legal
aspect
that
the
legal
ramifications
that
the
city
of
Albany
can
face
here
in
a
year
out
we're
in
a
12.5
million
dollar
budget
deficit,
where
accident
begging
the
state
for
a
new
funding.
And
we
have
something
here
that
we're
gonna
be
voted
on
that.
Potentially
the.
D
D
Some
of
the
members,
particularly
the
council
members,
who
represent
that
neighborhood
I,
have
yet
to
hear
what
their
positions
are
and
I
know.
Many
of
us.
We
talk
about
respect
and
our
colleagues
and
respecting
their
opinions
when
it
comes
to
projects
and
these
type
of
votes.
Yet
to
hear
councilmember
igoe's
position
on
this
resolution.
D
I
know
that
I've
yet
to
hear
councilmember
Jack
Flint's
position
on
this
resolution.
You
know
earlier
this
year
when
we
had
this
conversation
about
the
Skyway
project.
People
thought
about
Oh.
What
is
the
Third
Ward
council
members
in?
But
what's
the
fifth
Ward
council
members?
What's
the
fourth?
Why
don't
we
have
the
same
respect
for
those
council
members
who
represent
that
district
who
pride
this
project
is
going
to
impact
your
accent
just
to
buy
some
time.
So
we
can
have
a
serious
conversation
with
the
chair
planning
and
also
to.
D
Understanding
of
what
this
will
mean
legally
for
the
city
of
Albany,
but
instead
this
is
being
rushed
through
there's
some
people
that
say.
Oh
you
know
some
days,
I'm
against
being
rushed
through
some
days,
I'm
for
being
rushed
through
consistency.
No
that
pretty
general
wasn't
was
rushed
through.
You
know,
but
this
one
is
not
rush
doing
right.
Of
course,
this
is
rush
to
and
I
think
that
all
of
us
we
have
to
start
being
consistent.
You
know
one
day
we're
saying
that.
D
Well,
let's
listen
to
council
members,
opinions
and
another
day
is
like
you
know
what
let's
go
through
with
it:
I'm:
okay,
either
way,
but
let's
be
consistent,
don't
cry
wolf
and
there's
some
people,
that's
like
oh
I'm,
pro
development,
but
I
don't
like
the
way
this
is
going
about.
I
mean
you
see
that
you
Pro
development
or
you're,
not
there's
no
in-between!
It's
been
a
year.
The
developer
has
gone
through
this.
We
empower
the
bza.
We
empower
that
idea.
We.
AC
D
A
Planning
Board
to
make
decisions
on
our
behalf
and
then
a
year
later,
take
a
look
at
this
I
mean
what
kind
of
message
are
we
sending
to
developers?
The
people
want
to
turn
our
city
around
we've
come
a
long
way
and
I
speak
to
developers
all
the
time
and
I
speak
to
individuals
who
are
looking
to
do
business.
The
bill,
kradic
red
tape
has
been
cut.
The
city
of
Albany
is
open
to
business,
and
that's
why
you
see
the
was
wanted
to
work
with
the
city
and
build
here.
D
Let's
face
it,
some
people
in
the
upper
Ward's.
You
can't
afford
to
say
no
to
development.
You
could
afford
to
say
no
to
a
business
coming
into
your
district,
but
there
are
certain
neighborhoods
in
the
city
that
cannot
afford
those
same
privileges.
I
have
two
projects
that
are
happening
close
to
my
district.
We
have
the
palladium
project
and
we
also
have
the
Western
'equal
project
that's
taking
place.
D
D
D
We
can't
empower
the
BCA,
the
Planning
Board,
we
can't
empower
them
and
then
when
they
make
a
decision
on
a
project.
All
of
a
sudden
we're
saying
well
well
well.
Well,
well,
did
you
look
at
this?
Did
you
look
at
that,
and
you
know
my
colleague
the
sponsor
this
legislation
said
you
know,
you
know
if
this
resolution
is
passed,
the
legal
system
can
make
a
determination
either
for
it
or
against
it,
and
that
you
know
know
nothing
is
going
to
happen.
If
it
is
a
favor
of
it,
the
project
will
continue.
E
X
D
D
And
again,
I
bring
it
back.
The
council
members
who
district
this
isn't
I've
heard
a
memo
from
them.
Saying
named.
It's
supported
this
resolution.
I
haven't
heard
a
text
from
them
saying
that
they
supported
this
resolution.
I
haven't
heard
a
phone
call
saying
that
they
in
favor
of
this
resolution
and
I-
think
that's
council
members.
We
should
have
respect
for
our
colleagues
when
these
type
of
projects
are
in
their
district.
D
I
am
Petty
and
I
am
you
know,
I'm
glad
that
this
is
not
in
my
district,
because
I
would
have
been
really
upset.
I
think
that
we
should
consider
our
colleagues
concerns
on
this
resolution
and
I
will
be
voting.
No
I
have
yet
to
speak
with
mr.
Flint
I'm,
yet
to
speak
to
mr.
Igoe
I've,
not
know
where
they
stand
on
this
issue,
but
to
vote.
Yes
is
setting
the
wrong
message.
I
urge
all
my
colleagues
listen
you're,
not
a
vote.
AH
You,
mr.
president,
I'll
keep
my
remarks
brief.
As
a
representative
of
one
of
the
probably
the
most
underdeveloped
wards
in
this
city,
you
know
I
I,
welcome.
You
know
all
development
in
the
city
and
I
think
that
development
is,
is
great
and
is
good.
However,
the
community
has
to
have
a
voice
in
the
process
and
the
the
few
development
problems
projects
that
we
did
have
in
our
our
community.
The
community
felt
like
they
were
not
largely
involved
and
they
were
very
upset
that
a
developer
came.
AB
He
was
saying
that
we
should
trust
them
well,
we
did
trust
the
director
of
one
of
those
agencies
and
he
said
he
enticed
us
basically
to
vote
for
the
us
do
and
specifically
for
that
category
of
zoning
that
dismiss
Kotlin
Avenue
project
is
mixed,
use
neighborhood
center,
and
he
was
aware-
and
we
were
aware
of
the
concerns
that
neighbors
that
were
bringing
to
us
and
that
director
whom
we
entrusted
and
who
we
empowered
and
trusted,
said
a
restrictive
covenant
that
will
take
care
of
it.
That
will
make
good.
AB
We
were
asked,
we've
been
given
all
sorts
of
device.
One
of
the
pieces
of
advice
we
were
given
was
have
to
look
within
the
four
corners
of
the
document.
Well,
a
reading
was
in
the
four
corners
of
this
document,
and
it
says
this
declaration
is
in
shall
be
deemed
a
covenant
that
shall
run
with
the
land
and
shall
be
binding
upon
all
future
owners
of
New
Scotland
village
and
shall
provide
that
owner
and
it's
successors
and
the
signed
consent
to
enforcement
by
the
city
of
Albany.
That,
to
me,
is
pretty
clear.
AB
In
fact,
I
am
a
lawyer,
but
I
don't
think
you
have
to
be
a
lawyer
to
understand
what
the
meaning
of
that
is
and
it's
right
square
here
in
the
middle
of
the
four
corners
of
the
document.
But
now
we're
saying
no.
You
know
that
really
didn't
mean
what
it
says
and
we
also
or
we've
also
looked
at
case
law.
This
Town
of
Islip
had
a
situation
where
they
were
doing
a
rezoning
and
neighbors
came
to
them
and
said
gosh.
AB
This
rezoning
isn't
quite
appropriate
for
this
area
and
the
town
said:
ok
as
a
condition
of
the
rezoning,
we
will
require
the
owners
to
execute
and
restore
and
record
restrictive
covenants
as
to
the
maximum
area
to
be
occupied
by
the
buildings
and
as
to
something
in
February.
Surely
these
conditions-
this
is
the
Court
of
Appeals
speaking.
AB
So
Court
of
Appeals
had
the
opportunity
to
change
the
law
and
they
did
not.
They
enforced
it.
I
I
don't
share
the
consent.
You
know
to
me
as
a
council
if
we
think
that
something
inequitable
is
being
done
in
any
of
our
neighborhoods
or
by
any
of
our
commissioners.
I
think
we
have
the
right
to
speak
and
I'm,
not
afraid
to
speak
and
enact
some
form
of
a
statement
putting
that
to
a
whole
council
vote
to
say
that
this
does
not
sound
right.
AB
It
smells
and
it
does
and
to
me
the
consequences
of
not
voting
for
this
or
having
a
Planning
Director
who's
going
to
make
promises.
Tell
us
that
they're
enforceable
not
even
show
up
when
we
twice
and
buy
them
to
cover
in
front
of
the
can
so,
and
he
won't
show
up
why?
Because
he's
probably
embarrassed,
he
probably
doesn't
want
to
have
to
admit
he
actually
really
made
all
these
promises.
AB
Whether
or
not
his
specific
signature
appears
in
the
four
corners
of
this,
and
as
as
Judy
had
mentioned,
you
know
our
courts
are
not
just
courts
of
law,
they're
courts
of
equity
and
they
really
do
look
sometimes
if
it's
brought
to
their
attention
they
will
look
outside
to
see.
Well
was
the
counsel
really
enticed
by
its
planning
director
to
two
weeks
later
vote
for
this,
because
the
planning
director
said
it
was
a
private
solution
to
it.
I
think
they
would
look
at
that.
AB
C
C
C
C
So
I
put
my
money
where
my
mouth
is
now
that
doesn't
mean
if
their
lease,
if
they
come
back
to
me
with
a
5:1
it
out
of
Bill
I,
can
go
back
and
say
whoa
well,
I
agreed
to
these
terms,
thinking
that
you
weren't
gonna,
keep
the
heat
so
hot.
Oh
I,
agree
to
these
terms,
thinking
that,
based
on
the
electric
rates
and
the
heating
rates
of
the
previous
year
and
these
years
way
to
hide
so
now,
I'm
not
gonna
cover
what
I
put
on
my
lease.
C
E
C
Them
to
sign
a
lease
I
held
them
responsible
to
delete,
and
if
they
don't
pay
me,
my
rent,
there's
consequences
and
I
hold
myself
responsible
to
my
obligations.
To
that
least,
that's
what
will
happen
for
you.
This
was
pushed
forward
very
clearly.
It
states
it
by
Tonya
on
page
two,
it
states
if
the
reason
is
adopted.
C
These
two
are
linked
on
paper
they're
linked.
This
was
packed.
This
body
agreed
to
disk
because
people's
minds
were
made
it
easy
with
this.
We
can't
say
now
that
this
doesn't
count,
but
this
doesn't
matter.
Maybe
machine
have
done
this
at
all.
A
lot
of
my
questions
to
our
Commission's
we'd
be
like.
Why
did
you
recommend
this
as
a
solution
to
people's
concerns
about
this?
If
this
has
no
balance,
but
I
didn't
get
to
ask
a
question
and
we
were
at
a
planning
for
hours.
C
C
Be
here
we
never
got
to
add
such
questions,
so
this
is
not
about
development.
I
want
to
make
this
very,
very
clear.
This
is
not
about
this
specific
project.
This
is
not
about
it
being
for
stories
and
five
stories
or
hundred
stories
to
me.
This
is
about
keeping
your
world
when
it's
hard,
not
just
when
it's
easy,
because
when
they
agreed
to
this
they'd
lead
to
this,
because
the
current
laws
were
more
restrictive
than
this.
C
E
W
E
C
V
V
V
Most
attorneys
that
are
talking
about
this
are
saying
it's
because
there's
only
one
party
to
this
agreement,
the
developer.
The
thing
is
our
planning
department
and
part
of
our
legal
department
here
in
the
city
shepherded
this
process,
they
they
you
know
oversaw
this
process,
so
I
would
argue
that
if
there
wasn't
a
second
signatory
or
person
signing
to
that
agreement,
I
would
say
planning
in
the
city
had
a
responsibility
to
the
neighborhoods
and
to
us
as
a
council
to
make
sure
eyes.
God
died
at
t--'s
got
cross
to
make
sure
it
was
enforceable.
V
Okay,
so
I
have
a
problem
with
that,
with
planning
and
the
developer
from
the
onset
to
get
this
going
placed
the
restrictions
of
covenants
and
then
when
we
got
down
the
line
and
there
were
some
issues
they
removed
them
that
doesn't
seem
right.
Then
you
seem
fair,
I'm,
I'm,
sure
it's
legal,
but
but
I
have
a
problem
with
that
and
for
those
reasons
I
will
be
supporting
this
resolution.
Thank.
AD
K
AD
AD
AD
Specifically,
when
a
developer
is
authorized
to
add
a
story
in
exchange
for
a
commitment
for
providing
affordable
housing
to
people,
it
has
been
suggested
the
way
we
ensure
that
that
is
enforced,
long
term
and
that
future
owners
understand
that
is
to
require
a
restrictive
covenant.
If
that's
not
going
to
be
enforceable,
then
we
should
know
that
before
we
keep
on
going
down.
AD
So
that's
one
of
the
benefits
of
now
looking
for
something
that
we
all
went
into
thinking
that
it
was
enforceable
and
was
the
recommendation
of
the
Planning
Commission
err
we'll
see
whether
or
not
this
is
actually
enforceable.
If
the
administration
is
going
to
decide
simply
we're
not
going
to
enforce
restrictive
covenants,
we
should
know
that,
as
we
have
made
our
decisions
so
again,
I.
Thank
you
for
supporting
this
resolution.
AE
V
AH
AA
AB
AB
Then
the
issue
was
raised.
Dave
Galan
raised
the
issue
about
oh
well.
We
have
to
somehow
look
at
the
list
again
that
we
get
from
capitalistic
transportation
committee
before
we
give
that
make
those
final
decisions.
I
mean
that's
not
been
the
case
before
we
normally
by
the
time
we're
asking
for
the
bonding
we've
had
the
street
repair
list,
we've
had
input
on
it
for
some
reason.
This
year,
that's
dramatically
different
Richard
raised
the
issue
and
I
think
it
was
an
excellent
point
that
when
we
passed
the
equity
agenda
we
have
a
specific
section
in
it.
AB
That
requires
a
dgs
and
the
division
of
engineering,
keep
an
electronic
record
of
requests
made
for
enhancement
of
existing
streets
and
sidewalks
and
the
installment
of
new
sidewalks
and
walking
paths,
and
that
an
update
on
those
who
request
be
included
in
the
street
paving
less.
That
probably
does
not
apply
to
this
year,
because
the
mayor
offered
a
budget
I
believe
before
maybe
maybe
I'm
wrong
on
this.
AB
There
I
think
it's
something
we
have
to
pay
attention
to
because
I,
you
know
I've
made
requests,
particularly
we
have
dear
to
come
up.
We
had
a
pedestrian
hit
last
week
on
of
not
properly
lit,
Street
and
I've
been
raising
issues
about
improperly
lit
streets
that
people
out
to
walk
on,
let
alone
within
a
designated
path
and
I
haven't
gotten
any
any
answers,
and
that's
been
about
for
three
years
now.
So
I
like
this
idea
that
when
I
make
or
anybody
makes
a
request
that
it
gets
documented,
it
gets
recorded
in
some
kind
of
popular.
AB
You
know
compilation
and
it's
not
just
in
some
general
queue
that
we
don't
know
where
the
hell
it
is
or
what
its
priority
is,
and
I
also
wanted
to
know
that
when
we,
the
other
thing
which
we
have
to
address
is
when
we
were
encouraged
to
you
SeeClickFix,
because
it's
a
nice,
automated
thing
and
I
think
it's
a
great
idea.
The
problem
is
with
SeeClickFix
the
city
put
an
absolute
caveat
in
there.
You
cannot
click
the
button
to
register.
AB
That's
equip
fix
until
you
click
the
button
that
said,
you're
waving
it
as
any
official
notice
to
the
city
of
Albany,
and
so
maybe
SeeClickFix
is
out
of
compliance
with
the
equity
agenda.
That's
something
which
we
have
to
look
at
and
I
think
we
really
need
that
conversation
with
these
folks
to
make
sure
we
are
engaged
in
getting
compliance
with
this
as
soon
as
possible.
AB
I
absolutely
agree
yet,
but
I
think
there
is
one
suggestion,
because
the
ward
lines
changed
you're
going
to
dramatically
change,
but
neighborhood
lines
do
not
change
as
dramatically
or
arbitrarily
as
word
lines.
So
we
think
we
need
to
do
some
tweaking
on
the
equity
agenda
and
have
you
know
so?
We
can
make
the
calculation
of
equity
based
on
neighborhoods,
not
necessarily
on
arbitrary,
changing
word
lengths.