Loading...
2007-01-27 SPMTOWN CLERK CHRIS MASTERSON TOWN OF WAPPINGER TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE 20 MIDDLEBUSH ROAD WAPPINGERS FALLS, NY 12590 (845) 297-5771 FAX: (845) 298-1478 WAIVER OF NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TOWN 130ARD OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER DUTCHESS COUNTY, NEW YORK The undersigned, being members of the Town Board of the Town of SUPERVISOR JOSEPH RUGGIERO TOWN COUNCIL VINCENT BETTINA MAUREEN McCARTHY JOSEPH P. PAOLONI ROBERT L. VALDATI Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York do hereby waive notice of the time and place of the holding of a Special Meeting of said Town Board, and do hereby agree and consent that the same be held on the 27th day of January, 2007, at 9:00 AM of that day at the Town Hall of the Town of Wappinger, 20 Middlebush Road, Wappingers Falls, Dutchess County, New York for the transaction of all business which may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment thereof. "UPEISOR COUNCILMAN — 1st Ward COUNCILMAN — 2nd Ward COUNCILTNOMAN -- �rd Waxd UNCILMAN — 4th Ward 1 Town of Wappinger 20 Middlebush Road Wappingers Falls, NY 12590 Special Meeting townofwappinger.us Minutes ^ Chris Masterson 845-297-5771 Saturday, January 27th, 2007 9:00 AM Town Hall A. Call to Order Supervisor Ruggiero called the Meeting to order at 9:09 AM. Attendee Name Organization Title Status Arrived Joseph Ruggiero Town of Wappinger Supervisor Present William Beale Town of Wappinger Councilman Present Vincent Bettina Town of Wappinger Councilman Present Maureen McCarthy Town of Wappinger Councilwoman Present Joseph Paoloni Town of Wappinger Councilman Present Michael Bufi Swartz Architectural Group Present Tom Davis Town Attorney Present George Kolb Director of Code Enforcement Present Joseph E. Paggi Town Engineer Present Graham Foster Highway Superintendent Present Discussion Carnwath Emergency Situation BEGIN TAPE 1 JR: We're waiting for Don Swartz to call and thank you for coming in last minute. As you know Monday we had a presentation by Don's office at the Town Board Meeting, going over the status of the Master Plan, the Mansion roof, the first floor stabilization of the Mansion, the Mansion porch demolition, Chapel water intrusion, the Dorm Building water intrusion, the Carriage House and the Chapel air conditioning. And you had a memo to the effect of the potential capital dollars we need to invest into this facility. It came up at the meeting... Councilman Beale suggested that we send... the architect send a structural engineer out there. And he did and we got the report literally yesterday at about 11 O'clock in the morning, Bill and I were meeting and Don walked in and handed us his report dated the 26th, and he reports that the conditions (Supervisor Ruggiero reads from the memo) "described below should be considered to be unsafe conditions requiring immediate repair and the building is in danger of collapse - with both the Mansion and the Carriage House". So, we're here this morning to make some tough decisions and discuss what we need to do as a Board, but... Mike Bufi is here.... (Addressing the Town Clerk): Chris why don't you make a list of who is here of the professionals. Mike Bufi, Tom Davis, George Kolb, Jay Paggi and Graham Foster. Phone rings. Don Swartz is calling in and is put on speakerphone. JR: This is probably Don right now. Good Morning Town of Wappinger. (Speaking to Don): Hi, I'm gonna put you on speakerphone .... everyone is here. Alright, hold on. JR: Don, can you hear me? DS: Yes. JR: Alright... DS: Good morning everyone. ALL: Good Morning. JR: The whole Town Board's here. Jay Paggi, Tom Davis, George Kolb and Graham Foster as well. The Board is.... DS: Has the structural engineer called in, Joe? JR: Is that a Pat Conlon? DS: Yeah. JR: Yeah, he did call in but I don't have the ability to conference him simultaneously with you. DS: Oh, Ok. Town of Wappinger Page 1 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: I don't know how to do that. JayP: You don't? JR: No, I don't.... I'm using.... DS: I think you have the same phone system as we do. If you put me on... if you press the conference button... that's like conference hold... Michael, you know how to do it. JayP: On this... this is Jay, Don... on this... extension doesn't have the conference. DS: Oh, OK. JayP: Because we have the same one, but we have a conference button. JR: I could probably do it from Gina's office. DS: That's OK ... I guess, I mean we could call him if we need to. JR: Alright. He's the structural engineer? DS: He's the structural engineer. VB: That's what I want. JR: You wanna talk to him Vinny? So let me see if I can get him. VB: I'd like to talk to him, I mean, Don I walked down there. I was like... I didn't take a close look at the Carriage House but I was down there with one of my guys walking around out there. This is Vinny Bettina talking. And, just from being a builder and looking at it, I don't see how you can repair this thing... take it apart and fix it. I just don't see it. DS: Well it's gotten more extensive in the floor certainly, Vince. VB: Well I didn't see inside, but I'll tell ya, the pilasters are cracked and there's brick... I mean, it's gonna go and I don't want another Coldenham on my hands. And, I tell ya, everybody likes to save everything, and I've done restoration renovation jobs, but this thing is pretty big and I also think you got a serious problem on your hands with this one. DS: What pilasters did you see that were cracking? VB: They're cracked on the corners. I've seen two of them that splits probably more than an inch and a half. DS: But where though? What pilasters? I'm not sure where you mean "pilasters". VB: When you're walking down the building that... we saw cracks coming through the brick. I don't know if there's pilasters on the other side. I would think it's tied in. I don't know if there's any inside pilasters. We didn't see any outside, but... I'm saying that if there's pilasters ... (inaudible) ... because there's cracks clearly in the brickwork. DS: The best as we can tell ... I mean it's typical old style building bearing brick masonry. I ... down on the first floor wall, there are probably a good foot and a half thick of solid brick. So, if there is a crack, then that crack would probably be going all the way through, although I don't remember seeing anything on the interior plaster. But it may be, I'm not sure where you are talking about, it may be an area where there's woodwork inside and you don't see that. I don't know. VB: OK. DS: As we had spoken about back, I think it was in August, at the last meeting, if there was a possibility or a consideration to attempt to save or resurrect the building, obviously it would be in varying degrees of a gut rehab. The ambulance chasing approach, where we're going after this piece and that piece, is something that, while we will hit the primary components potentially, there's always going to be continued degradation of the structure. VB: No, the band-aid approach doesn't work. DS: You know, I mean ... And that's what I was mentioning to Joe yesterday when I dropped off my letter. It's really time to make a commitment one way or another, to ... if you're going to really save that building, to invest the monies (funds) that you would need to do that. As far as how that would go... again... our concept at this point in time is that, basically, especially with the mold infestation that was in this building, because behind and inside these walls, regardless of what... there may or may not be a reading now, mold was present and the spores are still in this building. If you remember our readings back probably three or four years ago, before the temporary roof got put on, were... I won't say catastrophic, but monumental; certainly on the first floor. And as we cleaned out the basement and done some drainage work, it has modified that I'm sure. But, my understanding, and Michael, correct me if I am wrong, from QuES&T Environmental, is that the spores are always there and they can be reactivated with the presence of moisture. So I think the thing to do would be to... if the decision was to save the building, would probably best be... instead of treating it... really removing most of what is existent in terms of wood. The wood work would be sent out, be stripped and brought back. It would be clean. But basically, we would have a masonry shell and raise the floor back up in the historic footprint, but also making accommodations for things such as an elevator and the like. But that would be... that would obviously be the most extreme situation to do that. There are probably other approaches that could be taken, but I don't Torn of Wappinger Page 2 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 know, in the end, if any of you ... and I know Vince, I'm sure you've been involved in renovations of old buildings. What you end up, what you think was the project is nothing like what the project ends up being at the end. VB: Don, I think you're leading at people that aren't in this business. When you do a guy rehab... you're exactly... you don't know what you're gonna run. I've done three of them. And people get very angry when you get in there and you tell them, "Hey look, it's gonna cost more than we thought once we open the patient up." And, you know, we estimate and we throw a lot of guesswork into it. You know... And we try to give them some allowances to try to be fair. But, you know, you and I both know, when you do a gut rehab ... (inaudible)... something is unstable... something's worth... you can rip out more, there's more work done there. It's not like you can put a finite number on a gut rehab and I think people need to know that. DS: Right and that's why I think the most extreme situation would be assuming restoration of the exterior masonry shell in terms of replaning and some structural work in one area or another if you've seen cracks. But then really taking the entire interior of the building and removing it and reconstructing inside the historic shell. VB: I agree with you on that. Absolutely. It's the only way I can see it happening. DS: And again, it's like building a car from parts versus buying a new car. You know, the roof which costs us now, at our latest estimate, I believe was a million eighty-nine thousand or something. You know, that certainly would be cheaper with the economy of scale of doing an entire project, but then the entire project is gonna be far in excess of the cost of that roof work that were about to do. VB: It's a sad situation. No, I couldn't agree with you more. DS: So, you know, as far as the mansion, just to touch on it, that is the situation... that the mansion... the floors have gotten worse. Michael, I believe it was brought to your attention by one of the maintenance. MB: Yes. Two maintenance people out there had brought me into the mansion and... you know, I had been in and out of the building for five years or so now and I had to agree with them that the floors had dropped further. DS: And that was then when we brought the structural engineer back in after he prepared his plans... about this time or a little bit later this time last year. And he, after what he saw, wrote the report that you have before you for the mansion when he toured it on Thursday. Similarly, down at the Carriage house, not to jump from the Mansion to the Carriage �... House too quickly, but we have a similar situation down there in terms of the urgency. If you remember back a number of year ago, maybe two... I don't think it was three... I think probably two years ago, we had to do some emergency stabilization work in there because when we were repairing the piece that had fallen off into the driveway on the east side, where the fascia and some of the brick had fallen down... We had the opportunity to go inside the building. And when we did that we noticed that, above the garage, there's kind of a man -started hip type construction. Michael can ... I'm sure you know what it looks like, but Michael can sketch it if you need that. One of those primary members was rotted completely off at its bearing point which landed on that tower. As you look at the front of the building, the tower to the right. That ... If that let go, I would almost unquestionably think that that would lead... Vince you can comment... I think that would lead to a total collapse of that primary structure to the left of that stair tower. VB: I absolutely agree with you 100%. DS: So what we did is, we went in and shored... if you've been in there you've seen there's an 8X8 member that starts at the concrete slab, goes all the way up through and to the roof. And then there was some secondary shoring around the corner in the wing that runs over towards the river. We had done, I think, some temporary patching of some valley flashings... and some wall flashings on the south side of that tower. And those have either gotten worse; the roof has moved... something. But that's opened up. Water is continuing to pour into that building to the point where, on the east side of that tower, in that hip area that I was originally talking about... it appears that the floor has become .... undennined - the floor that is supporting this temporary post that we have in there... to the point where it's sunken ... what Michael, five inches or so? Four inches probable across the slab? MB: Yeah. Yes, about that. VB: Five inches? MB: Yeah. Maybe a little less. Maybe three or four inches. DS: So, that one is really kind of in, I would say ... as emergent as the mansion is, because that ... you have people in there on a fairly regular basis. I don't know so much this time of the year, but certainly in the summertime with the Highway, or with the parks people. And that really needs... again, if the decision is to salvage that building, that needs some immediate investment in terms of really repairing that structural roof and the problems, Town of Wappinger Page 3 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 which are water infiltration up around that tower, in a significant way. Again, frankly, I don't think that that roof ... just as the decks on the mansion weren't ... I don't think that roof is safe to put someone on right now. So, I... You know, it would involve more than just some quick roof repairs. It's going to be a bit of an involved project. The west wing of that building then also continues to degrade because ... I think two years ago we pointed out to you that the gutters and fascias were missing. In many areas, water was coming in. There's chimneys up on the second floor of that carriage house on the lett side. And they are kind of supported by wood flooring and some brick arches. Although brick arches have started to fall because of the water that's come in around the perimeter of that building. So, it also ... You know ... In general, that building is also in dire need of some attention. VB: It sounds like to me, just from a contractor's standpoint versus a layperson... you've got some serious renovations... some safety concerns there that I don't know if you really can mitigate. And there's nothing there to support the debt service to these buildings anyway as far as leases. And now were in a situation where... an unsafe situation... You're gonna have to notify the insurance companies that it's an unsafe situation. You've got people working in the area which can't be there any longer. I don't know how it definitely affects the museum which we have a lease with. And with the elements and the cold weather and the water coming in, you've got a real dire situation here. DS: Yeah, and especially with the temperature extremes that we've been experiencing this year. I think that tends to accelerate things when it's 70 one day and then a week later ...and wet ... and then its 10 degrees with a north wind blowing. That just really amplifies the problem because of the thermal extremes that the materials are going through. VB: Well I don't want another Coldenham here either. And that building didn't have the damage this one had. So you gotta worry about wind flexion too, no? DS: Yes. As the members continue to deteriorate you do have to worry about wind, yeah. VB: Thank you. GF: What about a major snow storm? DS: (Inaudible) VB: (Inaudible)... you've got flexion and you've got a snow load like Graham brought up, which was a good point... and that definitely could exasperate the situation. I was gonna talk to Bob Smith and I was gonna talk to, obviously, George here with the Codes division to come and look at it. But I didn't know that you had a structural engineer, so I don't think that there's a reason for that. Not that I'm saying, from an architectural perspective, the presentation was very good... and I agree with everything that you've said. JR: Don... VB: I just know, from a contractor's point of view, and a cost ... because it's not gonna be low bid. You know... We're gonna have to go out... prevailing scale I would imagine... trying to put this thing together. Those numbers are gonna be pretty extravagant. JR: Don, what would it take to stabilize these buildings and shore them up so they don't collapse? DS: We ... really Joe ... we'd have to do a more thorough investigation than was done in the couple hours that we were there on Thursday. We'd need to identify as much as we can on both buildings as to what the ... you know ... what the situations are. But it certainly will not be as economical as they were before, because the deterioration has continued. I would need probably a week to ten days to get that together with the engineer and with, I would assume Joe Manfredi, to put some numbers to it in terms of some emergency work. We do have the one number from Joe, which was the first floor of the mansion. And Mike, will you confine that he is still viable on that number? MB: Yes, and he is ready to mobilize immediately on that as well. JR: And what is that number? MB: That number I believe was eighty-nine thousand for correction of all the floors in question. JR: In the mansion? MB: In the mansion on the first floor. DS: And then there was a QuES&T component to that too. There was some abatement work that needed to coincide with it I believe. MB: That's correct. There's another seventeen thousand for asbestos abatement on the ... (inaudible). VB: About a hundred grand. MB: So it's about a hundred grand. And those areas on that floor that are addressed in that proposal are similar to the areas that we just re-identified in our brief visit the other day. It's the same areas. Town of Wappinger Page 4 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: Alright, now just ... that's just the floor stabilization. What is that in terms of the integrity and the structure itself of the Mansion? DS: Well that's the beginning Joe. We've got then to look at... really thoroughly look at the other areas in the building up on the second and (inaudible) floors... particularly on the south center area where the roof had taken in the most water. Kind of up and to the left of where that floor is falling, because there is further damage on the upper floors in those spots. And then lastly we need to get up to the roof, because... you know, you can see that the fascias and soffits are kind of rocking and rolling all the way around the building as well. Based upon what we've seen, we can't obviously get into many of those areas. We think what we have proposed in terms of the roof reconstruction will be sufficient, but... With that said, when you get up and you strip the roof and you open up the w.�. plywood ... or remove it where it needs to be replaced, there may be some additional structural work that needs to be done up there. At that point, the first floor deck would be stabilized. There is some minor grading work, which we spoke about with Jay and Graham at the Town Board Meeting the other night that would need to be done. And the goal would be, with the roof on that building, to take water away from it. We'd stabilize the first floor, redo the roof, repair that... and then we would really be concentrating on those other peripheral areas that have some levels of structural damage... and how much we don't know... from what I've seen ... it is not of the magnitude, because of the square footage, that we have to deal with on the first floor. But there will be similar procedures that need to be conducted. There will need to be some shoring placed up through the building and floors in certain areas replaced in total, both on the second and third floor. Do you agree with that Michael, from what you saw up there? MB: Yes ... most of the damage appearing around the first floor. JR: So, is fixing the first floor removes... DS: ...is a large step towards... JR: ...it removes this statement this building's in danger of collapse. DS: Fixing the first floor will be the first part of removing that statement. The second portion will be... and the largest portion of it, I would expect... unless we find something else. The second piece though, will be the second and third floors, primarily in that back corner... again in that south -center little court where the building kind of dives back in. Again, that had over... you know, it had to have been over a decade or more ... decades perhaps ... had taken on significant water in that area. VB: Don, you got here "Stabilization is no longer an option ... the level of deterioration has continued to progress to its current state." I mean, you're just trying to "band-aid" this thing so the whole thing doesn't collapse. That's what I'm hearing right now? JR: No, I don't think... this is actual ... I don't know what word you would use. This isn't called stabilization, but... DS: It would be reconstruction, basically, in selective parts. JR: And that was what the report that we got on Monday was - some major parts that we would have to do some reconstruction on... DS: Correct... JR: ... beyond just minor, you know, roof repairs... and you're talking roof replacement and first floor replacement. DS: Yes. That is correct. I mean, that is the way, at this point in time, on both buildings, the way we have to go. I think our days of propping and shoring and trying to, you know, to hold it up or put a temporary roof in both situations are gone now. VB: That's my point. OK. Thank you. MB: I think it should be understood that it's not the entire first floor. We're looking at select and specific areas that are in question. But a lot of the floor is in very good shape. JR: A lot of the floor is in very good shape MB: ...very good shape. As we walked through.. VB: (inaudible)... the main floors down below... MB: The main first floor ... as you walk through the basement, and I walked through there with the structural engineer this past week. As you look at the framing, a lot of it is in very good shape and then, you know, without testing it any further, from an appearance standpoint, its... as Don said... its that back corner and a little bit in the front where that little... VB: But you're posting down to that floor where it's deflecting though, right? JayP: No they are posting down to the basement. VB: Right. And did you say there was deflection in the basement or just on the main floor? MB: That was the Carriage House. VB: You have flexion in the basement it's moving... JR: Don, I'm gonna put you on hold. I'm gonna try to get Pat Conlon on the line to bridge you in. Hold on please. Town of Wappinger Page 5 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 MM: Vinny, you're talking... he's talking Mansion you're talking Carriage House. (inaudible chatter followed while Supervisor Ruggiero attempted to contact Mr. Conlon) JR: Don, why don't we... VB: We're in the War Room... JR: Yeah, we're in the War Room. Why don't you go over the... Don, why don't you question Pat... what he found and what we need to do... DS: Pat, basically, what the discussion is right now is, we're having a general discussion about what it would take to stabilize or... repair I guess, not stabilize ... to repair, reconstruct the building in the areas that you've seen, and what you think the inherent risk might be if any... after the work that we've spoken about is done. The first thing that we're aware of are the drawings that you've prepared for the first floor reconstruction. I've let the Board know that those drawings were prepared last May and that we would most probably need to... I won't say reevaluate and re -prepare drawings at this point, because we know at least that much work needs to be done, but there may a scope expansion once we get in there, dependent upon what we see. Beyond that then, we've worked on... our office has worked on drawings for the roof, along with Trevor from your office. So we would be really reconstructing and repairing the roof, and the question is, "What other open ends are there in the building"... At this point in time, I know that we're aware of some damage, or some fairly significant damage for... roof/ceiling damage on that south -center area. But beyond that, I don't know what else we were looking at, and if you had any inclinations, or had seen anything that would cause you concern in other areas... one of the Town Councilman, Vince Bettina, is also a professional builder in the area, and he toured the site and had said that he had noticed... and correct me if I'm wrong, Vince... there was some significant cracking in the masonry. VB: I saw some cracks in the masonry work and I was wondering if water's in there ... is any deflection in there; any movement at all. I can't see how deep it... because I couldn't go inside. I'm just a little concerned about Coldenham... the wind sheer and snow load there could cause a significant problem... especially in the disrepair... and report, when you say "Stabilization is no longer an option"... I'm a little concerned... I wasn't able to get inside, but, just taking a look at some of the cracks in the brickwork, that's all. DS: So the concern, Pat, is basically that we're going to be doing reconstructive work on the building, in this condition, that we just throwing good money after bad. Or if we decided to go the option of... and I don't know how much I've discussed this with you Pat ... but woo if we decided to go the option of really removing the architectural woodwork and preserving it, and then going in and doing a complete gut of all structure of the building, shoring the brick walls and reconstructing the interior of the building from scratch, which is obviously the other end of the spectrum. And, basically, that the Town is looking for any direction or any comments that we would have on... probably the first, but either of those two scenarios. PC: Well it's hard for me to make a case right now on reconstructing the entire building interior. I'll be honest with you; I haven't done a thorough evaluation of the second and third floor framing. We did walk through it the other day, and, you know, it's plain to see there's some spots that are in need of, at the very least, shoring, if not whole areas of reconstruction. But, I haven't done a thorough enough evaluation of those two levels to really say, you know, the whole thing needs to be replaced or just be patched and repaired. I haven't really looked at the exterior of the building much either. What I have done is focus on the first floor areas back in May, which ... there are areas that we identified at the time needed to be repaired. Fortunately, what we saw the other day... DS: I'm sorry, fortunately or unfortunately? PC: Well... fortunately, what we saw the other day was... the same that were in need of repair were the same areas that were in the worst condition back in May. Those areas had just gotten worse. I didn't see new areas of the first floor that had ... that were not in bad condition in May. JR: So just to refresh the Board's memory, Don... Back in May, we authorized a structural engineer to do this `cause the first floor stabilization was the known project several months ago. We got that thick status report from you... DS: Correct. What had happened, if you recall, is that, again, the Town's people were going into the basement... the parks or whoever... maintenance... going in and attempting to service the boiler. The plaster ceilings were falling. They were bearing on electric lines. It was becoming dangerous for anyone to go into the basement. But we knew the first thing to do was to remove the plaster ceilings and then evaluate the floor, because, at the same time, they had reported, and we had seen evidence in the one room where it had fallen even further, which happened to be over the boiler... that the floor was starting to sag in that area. It was a two-step process last May, where we... our office had removed Town of Wappinger Page 6 Printed 10115/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 the plaster ceilings and reworked the electrical down there... and then Di Salvo, Pat's office, had come in and done a structural evaluation of the floor, knowing that in certain areas, that we now could see, because we couldn't before with the old plaster ceiling up. We knew we had damage in some. We didn't know to what extent, and that was the investigation upon which Pat prepared those plans last May. He did bid those, and those were the numbers that were given to you, I think... I don't remember when that was... if it was in June or May, or when the heck it was... JayP: August. DS: But that was Manfredi's number. At that point in time, when he removed the plaster ceilings, he had also done some temporary shoring on his own, just for his own safety when he was down in that area working. JR: So Pat, back in May when you saw this deterioration, at that point you did not feel this building was in danger of collapse... at that point? PC: Not at that particular time. If I had thought something was immanent, I definitely would have told somebody about that. What I saw the other day was significantly worse, in particular, the area above the boiler. It looks like that entire section of floor wants to drop at any point in time. And that wasn't the case in May. JR: And if this floor drops, the building collapses from totally within? Or just that floor is collapsing. VB: (Inaudible) PC: It's incredibly complex to predict. You have to have such a thorough understanding of the internal construction of the building. You know ... You just simply can't make a definitive statement that a collapse of a certain area will precipitate the collapse of the surrounding areas. It's possible, but I can't tell you definitively that it will or won't happen. JR: So it runs the risk of a total collapse PC: Certainly, anything is possible. I mean ... You walk inside the building and, you know ... the building... you know, it's a little worse for ware. You know, and ... It is throughout the building. It's conceivable that a weak spot that collapses could potentially connect with other weak spots and you get what's called a zipper effect, one thing pulls down another. It's conceivable, but I can't say definitively that you do run the risk of this. It's certainly a high probability. I can't say that. VB: My question to you how's it gonna be affected with any wind shear -snow load. You saw what happened at Coldenham. We know the floor's cracked and moving and...I wonder if there's any shifting inside. What's your thoughts about that? We're on the river there. Don mentioned it earlier from a building standpoint, I got real concerns on that as a builder. PC: Well I haven't evaluated the roof structure, although it's plain to see that the roof has been exposed to the weather for an extended period of time. And I think it's safe to say that there's gonna be a fair amount of rot of the primary roof structural members. You made a situation where a heavy snow load could put the roof in a state of distress at a minimum if not collapse portions of it. It's certainly possible. JR: Don, now that we took the porches off and we just had somebody on the roof visibly doing work repairing up what the Town Board fixed several years ago. What was it...Did we here anything from them that it was spongy? Or... DS: Michael, did we hear anything from Manfredi's men that there was any areas that is like they shouldn't be walking there? MB: No the issues up on the roof have been the gutters around the perimeter. We've been telling anybody going up there, and I've been up there, we just stay away from the very perimeter. The main body of the roof, in all the time I've been up there, appears sound. You don't know what the condition is of the framing underneath, but.... VB: Have you walked the roof? MB: Yes, over and over. JR: They just had workers there about a month ago... finishing up. MB: Yeah, it's a .... As long as you're not in the gutters which are part of the overhang, then you're fine on the body of the roof. I know my experience up there, I've never found a spongy spot or anything like that. JR: Don you said only portions of the first floor are, or Michael said, portions of the first floor are in total disrepair. How much of that floor... is it two-thirds of the first floor? Is it '/z? Is it `/? DS: Pat, do you remember? Is it about 50%? PC: I was thinking about 50%. Certain areas, I guess it's near the north end, although I might be mixed up on directions. I get disoriented in that basement. There's one end that doesn't really look all that bad, but the areas above the boiler room and immediately surrounding the boiler room were in the worse case. I would guesstimate that that's Town of Wappinger Page 7 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 about 50% of the floor. JR: Do you think because we've been running the boiler over the last few years, and the steam that comes out of those pipes, we've helped accelerate the damage under the first floor? PC: Well that's ... again that's kind of a double edge sword - that question. Because, if we did nothing and didn't heat the building, the wet moisture, mold and everything else that would have ended up bringing the building down eventually, because the wet rot just from the water and everything, that would have done it. With heating the boiler, or with installing the boiler and heating the building, I don't think, in general, where the structure was in good condition, heating the building certainly probably prolonged its life. Where the structure was fully saturated, when it dried out it didn't help it any and it may have accelerated it directly above the boiler, because that is a fairly significant boiler and it sheds quite a bit of heat and we've noticed that the worst damage is over that but then that damage could have begun fifty or sixty years ago with the original boiler that was down there, because such significant heat was given off in that area. JR: The reason I am asking this, the first floor by far is clearly the worse and you are talking about hundred and eight thousand dollars to reconstruct that and then your saying ...you're qualifying saying, well we don't know how much damage is on the second and third floor, but if the first floor got a hundred and eight thousand, is the worst, and if those were equally as bad on second and third floor could we assume its another hundred and eight thousand dollars per floor? MB: Pat, you can pipe in here, but I think, based upon what we've seen at this point in time, unless we uncover something that we haven't seen, I don't think that it would be that extreme, but that would certainly probably be a cautious number to go in with at this point in time. Pat would you agree? PC: Well, I agree in the one sense, but there's a caveat. Walk around that first floor from above. With the exception of the South parlor above the boiler room, there are many signs of distress on that floor, for the most part. You walk around and the house is a mess, but there are gaping holes, you know, there might be some sags, but those are not necessarily signs of an overall structural failure. Its really not until you view the exposed floor joists from below and you probe them with a screw driver, that we were able to find that there were large areas of that floor that were in need of reconstruction. We haven't had the opportunity do that kind of probing of the second and third floors, so it's conceivable that if an extensive probing operation were done that we might find areas similar to the first floor on the second and third level. VB: That still needs to be done. DS: At this point in time, if the plan were to be to attack just those areas which were visibly damaged, and, as Pat says, not expose those ceiling joists as we did in the basement then we wouldn't know that. Now we're only going to be able to fix what we can see. JR: Well, you know, you're giving me... and I understand you were given a task this week to go out there and say is the building... what needs to be done and now you did part of a job you got the first floor and you ... right from there you said it's danger and we understand we got to address it. However, in order for us, like I asked before, if we did just the first floor, is the building still in danger of collapse and answer is... MM: "We don't know." JR: "We don't know but most likely yes". MM: Oh, I didn't hear that. I heard... VB: They did say that. He said ... Don said earlier with wind shear and snow it could be in plans of collapse. JR: Don is that correct? DS: Until such time as everything would be exposed, Joe, you know and that's, and I don't want to say that's an unfair question, but until everything is exposed, neither Pat nor I can tell you exactly what is gonna happen in a 150 year old building because we can't evaluate everything that we can't see. What we do see is what we can repair. So, and that's what bought me back to the original statement as to a gut rehab where everything was removed from the building, because then you can see what it is you're talking about. now MM: But before... DS: Until you see everything, you cannot make that judgment and we can't ... we can't ...while I understand the quest for a black and white answer, there is not a black and white answer in this situation. JR: But, Don, I'm not understanding. One breath, I hear you're saying you want 100% reconstruction of the entire... gut the entire building inside, leave a shell and rebuild it from the inside and then the other part you're telling us... MM: You don't know what's upstairs. JR: 50% of it. Town of Wappinger Page 8 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 DS: I am not saying I want that. What I am saying is, the way that you can get a 100% bill of sale that there is not going to be a problem is if the building is reconstructed. MM: Can I ask a question? DS: Yes. MM: What will it take ... how long will it take to go into that mansion and examine the entire house so we know whether we even have to tear down the second floor. JR: Or gut the whole building. MM: Or gut the whole building. PC: It took us a full day to do an evaluation of the first floor framing. It took two people a full day to do that. DS: I am sorry, but Pat, it also took a contractor three weeks to clear out the plaster so we could make that evaluation. PC: That's what I would have to say that, now with the (inaudible) benefit of having the entire ceiling removed... JR: So, the entire ceiling is removed where, on the first floor? DS: On the basement. Remember the plaster... JR: The basement. PC: ... is falling so then we could see the first floor structure. MM: So, if we asked you to go in and look at the mansion in its entirety and report back to us on the structural soundness of the other floors... DS: It would involve removing interior finishes to do that. MM: And how long would it take? DS: How long would that take, Pat? PC: It could take... I don't know Michael what do you think? At Manfredi's pace. MB: Yeah, I think Manfredi could remove the ceilings on the second and third floors probably and get the material out of the building in about a week to two weeks. DS: I think that might be optimistic. I would say perhaps three to four weeks tops by the time... because there's gonna ... there may very well be abatement component to this as well. JR: But let me ask you, is that two weeks of just study time that the building could collapse in those two weeks. Is it safe to do that? PC: Well, I can add that, you know, I wouldn't put a crew of guys working on that first floor at this point in time, but moving around any material and enough debris. I wouldn't sign off on that. JR: So you're saying that you can't even begin to do the study work for the second and third floor, yes? PC: I would recommend, I think before you start putting crews of guys in there working, you need to shore up that first floor, undoubtedly. JR: So we're back to... maybe it's me, I'm a little slow this morning. Your saying, in one breath you're saying I gotta gut the entire shell to rebuild it, or I can just redo the first floor which is 80% of the problem. I mean is it partial reconstruction... DS: You're asking separate questions, Joe. The first question that you're asking is, will, if by doing the first floor have we significantly repaired the building? Once we repair the first floor, we have significantly repaired the first floor of the building. The second piece is, what will it take to make sure the building is completely safe? And that second component would be a thorough investigation of the balance... MM: Don, can I just ask a question for clarification based on the structural engineer's report. The statement that there unsafe conditions requiring immediate repair. If we go in, reconstruct the first floor, would that remedy that statement? Would it then deem that building no longer having unsafe conditions that would then allow you to go in with a level of comfort to examine the other two floors? DS: Pat? PC: If the first floor repairs were completed, at that point in time I would feel comfortable having a small group of people going in and do a more thorough evaluation of the second and third floors. MM: So, Pat, just to be clear, if the first floor repairs, if the first floor reconstruction happened, so we're just not shoring, we're reconstructing, you would, based on the limited inspection that you did, feel that that building was safe? DS: To continue. Well... MM: Safe to continue someone to being in there to examine it. Safe enough. Here's my... I'm not asking you to deem the building safe for general public and for use. What I am saying is, based on what you evaluated, if the first floor reconstruction happens would you feel comfortable sending people in there to do the work needed on the second and third floors to get a really thorough assessment of the rest of the building? PC: What I would do... Torn ofWappinger Page 9 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 MM: This is like yes or no. JR: (inaudible) MM: OK, go ahead Pat. Go ahead. VB: It's not a yes or no. PC: Let me explain how I can answer the question MM: Okay. PC: Okay, not knowing as much as I'd like to know about the condition of the second floor framing, it... I have a hard time answering the question and saying, "Yeah, you can send a crew of people up to the second floor and start pulling down the second floor ceiling so I can look at the third floor". I have a hard time doing that. What I could say is if first floor were to be repaired or reconstructed... MM: Right PC: OK, at that point in time I would say it is okay to get a crew of people in there to start the examination of the second floor. MM: OK PC: After the examination of the second floor was complete, we could report our results of our examination and make recommendations at that time. MM: OK PC: Once those recommendations were executed, at that time we could then move up to the third floor, more fully evaluate that and proceed up the building. MM: Terrific. Now did I hear you correctly, you or Don, say that Manfredi was ready to move on our direction. They're ready to go and there quote is the same ... for the first floor. MB: That was confirmed last week. MM: Terrific. JR: A Hundred and Eight Thousand Dollars for the first floor. MM: For the first floor, to reconstruct. PD: Your questions here, what's the roof? 1.1? MM: No, it's Hundred and Eight Thousand for the first floor. JR: Hundred Eight Thousand... PD: The Roof, the roof. JR: The Roof... 1.1 Million. PD: Okay. And a Hundred Thousand Dollars for the first floor? JR: Yeah. PD: So, you're at 1.2? JR: Well... PD: What's 1.4 if you have to reconstruct those other two? Just assume worse case scenario. You make your decision what you're gonna do on that. I mean it's simple stuff. You don't have to do studies or anything like that... GF: You're gonna have to strip the ceiling on the third floor... JR: Hold it ... guys GF: ...find out what the roof is like. PD: I am just throwing this out there. What's the difference between 1.2 and 1.4 if you're going to bond this to do it? JR: Point 2. PD: That's a decision your going to have to make .... well, no, it is. I understand that, but if you're gonna go 1.1 or 1.2, what's 1.4 if you have to go the other two floors? So, that's what you're making your decision on. You don't have to beat the studies to death. GF: Don, does the roof restoration expose the roof rafters? DS: Uh, no Graham, it won't actually. It's going to only expose where we see rotted plywood from up above. The way to really and thoroughly evaluate the roof framing is to remove the third floor ceiling. GF: So, you don't want to put the roof on til you know the roof rafters are stable, right? DS: Definitely GF: I mean you would have to probe them. DS: We will, we would be able to, again, find out much of the damage from the top, where the plywood has been deteriorated and, frankly, we're removing back up in to the roof, around the perimeter, as we reinstall the soffit overhangs. We're going back in the primary structure. So we would be exposing from above, all the perimeter bearing conditions. As far as anything that may have happened interior, we wouldn't be seeing that from that perspective. That would have to be evaluated again GF: I don't think we want to put a million dollar roof... JR: Guys. Don, are we piecemealing this by doing this floor by floor or... definitely. Well talk Jay, I can't read lips. JayP: Well everybody's talking and stuff. JR: Yeah Torn of Wappinger Page 10 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JayP: I think you need, I think what Pat was saying... Don, this is Jay talking. I think I think what Pat was saying is, you have to stabilize before you go up to determine... JR: I understand that. But I'm saying... the options, one of the options that I'm hearing is: "gut the inside and leave a shell, reconstruct it and then build it right from the basement all the way to the roof - redo it. And I'm, you know, saying what Phil just said, if we do floor by floor plus the roof... maybe 1.4 million, 1.5 million. But if we woulda just gut the whole shell and then rebuild each floor with the new roof, what would that cost be? I'm trying to compare costs to methods... and are we being silly just doing it floor by floor and in the end... JP: Do it right the first time. JR: If you gut it, it's gonna cost us the same just to gut it, why don't we just accept that fact. That's what I am saying, what does it cost to gut the building, leave the shell like we talked about when they renovated the White House and then rebuild the in interior. DS: Well, that's definitely a more costly way to go. But, what your doing is you're, you know, you will be and, I won't kid you, you will be replacing good structure at that point in time, because everything in that building, from a structural standpoint, doesn't have to go. JR: Alright. DS: But, with that said, and as I mentioned when we first got on the phone, unfortunately we don't have Larry from... JR: From Quest DS: From Quest. There is also that mold component. And, if you remember we sat down in your office with Mr. Mold there back quite some time... JR: Yeah, but, I know that whole mold issue. You know part of the mold issue is the water coining in, the heat, the cold... I mean, if you start to dry out the building. DS: Those spores will come back to life is what he told us. VB: I gotta question for you Don. JR: I got mold in town hall and it's been operating twenty-four hours a day for last twenty years. DS: I, Joe I am trying to give you all sides of the argument, that's all. VB: Don, my question is, obviously if you stabilize the first floor `cause you got things coming down, you're bearing on it, you're gonna cut the ceilings going through each time to look at, to make sure from a safety perspective, okay.... You're really going to be going through that just to see how intense the damage is. Otherwise, we have to go through the whole building, rip it all apart and gut everything inside of it. We're trying to figure which way is more cost effective but we don't know how, without tearing and looking at the beams as you go across, how safety is gonna be anyway doing the job. So you got to do that from a safety standpoint. Am I right or wrong? DS: Pat? JR: At least when we do the floor by floor approach, at least you have an opportunity of maintaining stuff that doesn't need to be thrown out. DS: That's correct. MM: Right. JR: And that might in itself... MM: ... be cost effective. JR: Jay what. JayP: Don, Pat, looking at, and having been in there, as Pat said, the majority of the visible, and I underscore visible, deterioration is in the south end of the building. DS: Correct. JayP: Alright. And I think it was stated... and from what I've seen I kind of agree that, and again this is all we've seen, you know we can't look through the floors or the ceilings, but I would think just to make the statement that we're going to go in there and gut the entire interior and rebuild from the basement up, I don't know if that would be an appropriate course of action. If we find that 50%, 40%, 60% of this structure is sound I would think then you're throwing good away. VB: That's my point. JR: So, you, Vinny you feel the floor by floor approach is the best approach. VB: My approach as a contractor, okay, and so often architects will say to me, "well this is what the code says - what's it going to cost". They really don't know. They were going off the means method these guys, estimating a lot of times. I mean from my purposes looking at it, I think the safe way of doing it, and you heard the structural engineer say, "Look we gotta stabilize it". He didn't even feel comfortable sending guys in there unless you stabilize that and then go floor by floor by floor and sees what he has to work with. Then at that point, I think you can ascertain as to what the total cost is gonna be. DS: And at that, yes, at that point, you can make an educated decision as to if it's financially Town of Wappinger Page 11 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 viable for the Town, because you will have exposed your risk at that point. VB: Thank You. That's exactly my point. JR: Alright. VB: So what's it gonna cost us to do that? DS: Well again, from a budget standpoint, if you replicated the cost that you had on the first floor, as Joe just said, up through the building, I think that's probably a worst-case scenario. JR: So if we would borrow a half million dollars to do this, I mean we're spending a half million dollars and you'll have first floor reconstructed. Then you'll be able to determine the second floor, and if that comes out 20, 50, 100% bad, you have the money for it. And then if you get to the third floor ... but then should we also be clearing the third floor ceiling and checking the roof? VB: Sure. DS: Yes. MM: Absolutely. JR: So a half a million? DS: Pat? That probably would be right, don't you think? PC: Well, based on hearing $100,000 for the first floor, well if we've got two floors plus a roof, and you wanna assume that the same costs for each floor, then yeah it sounds correct. But I'm not a cost estimator and... DS: No, exactly, but assuming though that, again, from what we've seen, that the worst damage, because we don't see largely dropping floors on the second floor, is that it would be worse than that. It's a tough call to say, but I... probability would have it that we would probably be in that ballpark on the upper floors. JayP: Don, the only thing you would need to add to that, because the $107,000 for the first floor stabilization, assumes a couple of things. It assumes Manfredi has already gone in there and cleared off the basement ceiling, which he's done. And you need to do that as you go up. So you'd have to add that three times. And you've also, the Town has also already paid for soft costs to generate the plans for that $100,000. So you'd have to duplicate those three tasks three times. VB: A million dollars? JayP: Correct? DS: Yes. Michael, do you remember what he charged on that first contract to remove... MB: The basement? DS: Yeah. MB: Thought it was around... Was it 20,000 ... roughly 20,000. And there was an electrical component for that because we rewired the... DS: Right, well there'll be an electrical component to this too. JayP: Yeah JR: Alright. VB: Well, I got a question a different way. If we don't do this and we take the building down and remove it, what's it gonna cost me to take that building down and demo it. JR: $75,000,000, right? VB: I hardly think so. I looked at the YWCA to take that down. And it was 142,000. I was gonna do that job. So, what's it gonna cost to take that building... JayP: That was 20 years ago, Vin. VB: No it wasn't. It was three weeks ago in Poughkeepsie - YWCA - we bid it out. JayP: Oh, YW... VB: YW in Poughkeepsie. JayP: That's a wood frame building, one floor... JR: Alright... MM: Alright... JR: Don, how much... Don... Jay, Vinny.... Answer Mr. Bettina's question. How much would it take to demolish the building? DS: Again, not having demolished a space or a building of that height... I think we looked... Michael, we had a number on that... was it in the $400,000 range? MB: I gotta believe it's all of that. JR: We studied that. MB: I don't have anything ... DS: Yeah, we did look at that. VB: The only reason why I'm throwing that out there is I'm trying to figure out which way is gonna cost to put this back together in its entirety, so it's usable...versus taking it down and just piecemeal it. JR: Well if we invest the half a million Dollars and we were able to actually really stabilize each floor, and then later on invest in the roof ...even though its not pretty on the inside, Town of Wappinger Page 12 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 we have a physically sound building that we at least are now able to go out, lease it, get somebody else to come in and redecorate it... VB: Wait, wait... just... hold it ... I need just to make sure we're on the same page. JR: Yeah VB: If these guys go in and gut this thing... they're just gutting it to see that the structural integrity's in place. Are you telling me with that money we're gonna go in ... that money that we just talked about going through is gonia finish it? JR: Yes MM: They're not going in to gut it. VB: They're - I understand... MM: They're going in to look at how structurally safe it is. BB: ...To reconstruct the floor platform... VB: Is that all we ... all we're doing is going in for mitigation to see what's there. JR: No, I thought we... the $107,000 is for reconstruction - the first floor. MM: Yes. DS: Not an architectural finished reconstruction, but to put plywood back on the floor with floor joists. MM: Right. JR: Right. VB: Right, ok... So, my other question... so that's just clearing... cleaning it out ... putting plywood sub -floors in... JP: Safe enough... VB: ...walls exposed... JP: Safe enough... VB: ...right, so it's a safe situation, but it's not... it's gonna be like for storage. JayP: It's not finished. ALL: (inaudible) JR: I have got a structure now though... VB: That's what I wanted to hear. JR: ...like right now we're in negotiations with these caterers. These caterers wanna spend a hundred and something thousand Dollars to redo the Chapel. Who knows what business would ... we have a physical sound structure that you can say to, you know, Marriot or whatever, "You want a Mansion to host parties and stuff? You redecorate it now". MM: Right. JR: You beautiful it. There is a sound, safe building... MM: ... and finish it. Right. VB: What's the chance of functional obsolescence? Ya gonna heat all that or we just gonna leave that exposed with plywood. Where are we going with that Don? DS: I didn't hear the questions. VB: Don, if we got it all cleaned out - the asbestos out of it. I mean obviously, if we got dry floors, and the studs are open ... ok... after shoring it up ... where do we go from there? What's the cost to finish this thing? DS: It depends on the level of finish and where we're going and what we have left after we get done taking stuff down. I don't know how far we'll go down, but... I mean I would venture to guess that if you were... restore the interior of that place... you're many millions of Dollars. VB: How many millions of Dollars, Don? Because I gotta amortize to figure what the cost the debt is to support... MM: Well, wait a minute... VB: From a contractor's standpoint versus a layperson... throwing numbers ... I look at things when we gut something - we build and put it back together - I gotta look at the debt, to support that debt that's out there to do it, so... MM: I understand, Vinny, but you're talking about ... He's giving you the millions and millions of Dollars for the Town to refinish that... JR: Right down to wallpaper. MM: Right down to wallpaper and paint, and that's VB: It depends on the level of finish. Our specifications... MM: not what we are at yet. And he said that it depends on the level of finish. So the many millions of Dollars now that you're talking about are completely... it's "done/host a party" finish. JR: Don, didn't you give us... VB: No... that's not true. (Inaudible)... the specifications are regular drywall and, cut the specifications back. We're not talking about the grandeur finish of a... MM: Right, but the million... JR: That's what we're saying. Town of Wappinger Page 13 Printed 1011511007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 MM: That's what he said ... you said, "How many to be done". VB: I'm trying to get an idea of what it would cost to finish it. JR: We had a report earlier this year that the number was five million, yes? DS: Yes JR: Five Million. VB: OK MM: Right. JR: And that mansion would look like... DS: I believe it would look... I believe... Jay, did you find that number? VB: That's ok... DS: I believe it was between five and six actually, but I think it was closer to five JR: I remember five million MB: Don, I had found that paper we were talking about yesterday and... based on a meeting ... back in July of last year, with Jay and I believe it was you and Joe, we looked at renovation costs of about five to about five and a half million JR: Right DS: Right VB: How long ago was that? JR: That was earlier this year. MM: A few months ago. VB: OK JR: This is what we, cause then at that time, we discussed if we were to knock down the entire mansion and rebuilt a mansion ... that came in like at seven million, I remember. DS: Right MM: Right MB: That's correct, Joe. Six and a half to seven. VB: Yeah, but we're building it to today's code versus trying ... (inaudible) JR: Bill? BB: I think we have to remember today also that the Carriage House is also in dire straights. I know we're talking about the Mansion right now... JR: I know, we gotta get to that too. BB: ...Just keep that in mind. There's more than just one building here. JR: Right. But that's... Right, the Mansion is... VB: So that's the next step: Where do we go with that. MM: Well can we finish with the Mansion... JR: Yeah. BB: Yeah. I just wanna... DS: So, are you giving us direction on the Mansion then? JR: Well, let's go through the whole thing and then we'll start giving direction. JayP: Joe, before we get off the Mansion. The number's thrown out five hundred thousand. When you were busy making copies, I think there's other components that need to be looked at. That we've already spent to get to that hundred and seven thousand. That's Manfredi's removal number and soft costs. If 1 were budgeting right now, I would budget that... per floor, about a hundred and fifty. Because there was removal... so, instead of five hundred, I would go one -fifty fimes four... about six hundred. You have to do... VB: Give yourself some fluff. JayP: Yeah. Well, it's not so much fluff, because Manfredi's gotta get there take everything down. Then you do your assessment... JR: Well, are you including... you're not including the porches and stuff in that. JayP: No, I'm not. No, I'm not. JR: Because don't forget, the Board ordered... authorized the bond earlier in the year... about three hundred twenty-five thousand, VB: We use all that? JR: We used a good part of it. Because we did the porches, we did some roof, and we recovered some prior work that we did with that. JayP: Right JR: So I gotta look on the accounting of that, but we have... MM: We have a little buffer, is what you're saying? JR: No. MM: No. BB: Doesn't the roof have to be done also. If you're gonna reconstruct these floors, you're gonna have to redo the roof or else you're gonna have water issues on the newly constructed floors. VB: Every building I've done, we've actually shored our roof up to protect water protection Town of Wappinger Page 14 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 going inside. So, I mean, we're taking these floors going up... I mean (inaudible)... is that roof in good shape to protect us? That's not what I'm hearing. MB: Well, the south corner needs to be addressed. JR: We just... hold on ... the roof ... we did a $50,000 repair several years ago, and that started to fail. They just finished, like a month ago, re -closing that problem. So the roof right now, in terms of weather-wise, should be sound, not structure -wise, not a permanent... VB: Just weatherized. JR: Right, Don? Am I speaking... DS: Exactly. It's weatherized. BB: I just don't want us to get a snowstorm here with a snow load and next thing ya know we have a roof problem after we've invested this money into the floor reconstruction. VB: I agree with that. MB: We've got open fascias. There's water coming in. On a wind driven rain, you're gonna get water coming in from the fascias. VB: That's a problem. JR: Alright, then that's part of the problem. George, you have your hand up? GK: Yeah, I just got a couple of questions. Don, this is George. You made the statement here that the building's in danger of collapse. Can you just be pretty specific on what you're talking ... are ya talking about the interior floors or... is this a pocket construction building? Where ya have the floor joists that under the... DS: Pat, George is citing those statements came on your report, and as far as being in danger of collapse... I assume... well GK: Let me ask this question. Is this pocket construction? DS: I can't hear you, George. VB: He wants to know if its pocket construction. If your joists are inside ... your mortar right inside there. Is it pocket construction with the floor joists? DS: Right... yeah, I believe that the floor joists, Pat. But what we've witnessed on the basement level anyway is that there are interior columns, its bearing on top of interior masonry bearing walls, and then it is pocketed in the exterior perimeter walls. GK: OK. So... JR: Right now the park is entirely closed. The gates are closed. No one can get onto the park. GK: I know I'm just... BB: Just so you know that though... JP: Let him finish. GK: Let me finish my questions here. Don, your statement that it, in collapse... are you saying that if that floor collapsed there's a possibility of pushing that brick outward and the... for the exterior walls to collapse? DS: Pat, I assume that's what you were indicating. GK: OK, so that's what... PC: Yeah, I mean it's... Look. It's possible. And it's possible for a couple of reasons. VB: Guys, guys... PC: The floor that break from the wall, and ...where's a portion of the floor that break from the wall collapses, and the wall is no longer braced, and it goes from a 10 foot free- standing wall to a 20 foot free-standing wall, which could precipitate the collapse of the wall. That is certainly a possibility. GK: OK, ok. I understand. My next question would be then, would it make sense to post down from the basement, clear through the three stories to the roof... cut back two feet on each ceiling, and reframe inside. It seems like that would be much more cost effective to do that. That would ensure that the building will not collapse. JR: What do ya mean, do ya like build a skeleton inside the building? GK: Yes. VB: Yeah, ya just take it all to the top and bear it all the way down to the bottom... GK: Post all the way down to the basement, clear through to the roof. It would give you opportunity to do the investigation on each and every floor. It'll secure the building. It'll take the collapse part off. JP: How much does that cost? JR: But how much does that cost? GK: Well that's what you have to have these people... JR: But I'm saying... Is that just money that can go towards a longer... GK: I believe you're gonna have to do that regardless, even when you rebuild the floors. That work is going to have to be done, I think. I mean that... JR: Pat and Don, what do you think about that? VB: I couldn't agree with ya more. DS: Pat, did you understand what George Kolb was... Toren of Wappinger Page 15 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 PC: No. I gotta be honest with ya. There's a lot of ambient noise around me right now and I'm having a hard time understanding what everybody's saying. DS: Again, George Kolb, the Building Inspector... What he was saying is ... is it prudent to, since the structure appears to be pocketed in, in the basement, if you assume that that is the case up through the building, to secure the perimeter of the building, would it make sense to go through and shore from the roof structure, all the way down, every floor down to the basement, around the entire perimeter. I personally think that would be a massive undertaking. VB: But rom a safety perspective... PC: Yeah, I don't wanna tell ya to do that without having had looked at ... (inaudible)... It's such a big undertaking, I can't tell you to do that at this point in time. VB: My question is... since it's pocketed ... I mean, George is saying ... from my point as a...it's pocketed in the brick ... we have flexion... if that's falling, how ya gonna keep that (inaudible) and stabilized and keep that load going down? JP: Right. JR: Well, how much... at some point we're gonna send a work crew in here to do some work. How long is it gonna take them to reconstruct this first floor. Are we dealing with a ... is there any way to temporary shore up the building as they're reconstructing it to make sure it's safe ... that there's not collapse while they're building it. I think that's what the Building Inspector's saying. DS: Pat? JP: So, in the five hundred thousand that we're gonna be bonding for, is that gonna be included? And if it is, then it's not so massive. I mean, if you're gonna pay $500,000, and that's not gonna be done but eventually has to be done, then what are we spending the $5,000 for? JR: Yeah, is that gonna be an integral part of what you do anyway? VB: Ya gotta make it safe, right. DS: Depending on, and Pat, you can correct me, depending on the magnitude of what is exposed once the plaster is dropped, Yes, in fact, that may very well be done. I don't know if it will be done, but it may very well have to be done. JP: But that's not included in that five hundred thousand. DS: Shoring around the entire perimeter of this building is not included in that five hundred thousand. JP: So it's a possibility that could be an additional cost. DS: Again, remember we said, when you get in here and in each floor, its gonna be dependent upon what we see. Based upon what we saw on the first floor, that is a logical assumption... That that would be a good estimate to go up through the floors. JR: So you're saying... DS: If something... in a renovation project, and it happens, is found beyond that, then it would need to be an additional cost. JR: So you're saying there, what George has suggested, it's possible... DS: Is it an eventuality; a potential eventuality? It is. It's ... I think it's probably an extreme one, but it is a potential. VB: I'd rather err on the side of safety than the side of not safety, the building's going down. JR: But how long would it take to build such a framework and is that the same timeframe where the first floor could have been redone anyway? 1 don't know, I'm asking. DS: To build an entire interior perimeter support system around the exterior walls, could take many weeks, because you have to expose structure everywhere to do that. As far as reconstruction of the first floor of the building, I would guess that they would probably do... at the rate that Manfredi works ... he's probably looking, four weeks, three weeks. I think it would take all of that to put up the exterior perimeter. JR: We're gonna let ... you know what ... This is something that, if we authorize Manfredi to go ... I'm more that sure, if we need to do that interior skeleton, he would come back and tell us that, wouldn't he? Would Joe know, as a part of construction technique, that that needs to be done? DS: Well, and as Vinny can tell you, Yes, because we as professionals, and you as the Town, are not responsible for shoring means and methods. So, when he agrees to go in and reconstruct this floor, he is responsible for shoring up the building around him while he's doing that... (inaudible) VB: Not unless I cross that line out and let AIA make you responsible DS: We don't warrant it. You don't warrant it. It's his responsibility. Is that correct, Vince? VB: Well not unless I cross that line off the AIA doc and make you responsible for the measurements... (inaudible)... DS: Yeah, well... VB: ...and I do that every day. I put it on you, you're the professional. Town of Wappinger Page l6 Printed 10/!5/2007 ..w Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: But the contractor, as typical matter of business, would take on this job, and if it got to that point, then that would be his responsibility. And would that be part... DS: I mean, he did just that, Joe, down in the basement now. Those posts and things that you see down there... We didn't design them, Pat didn't design them. Joe put them in as he was going through, `cause he saw an area he was concerned with. JR: Alright. You have any more questions on the Mansion before we discuss the Carriage House? GK: Don, the only comment I wanna make, the reason that I had suggested that is because I'm hearing two things here. I'm hearing that the building is in danger of collapse. And I'm hearing that you can't give the Board... its difficult to give them a firm number on these repairs because you can't see inside the walls. I understand all that. In order for you to give, or the structural engineer to give you, somewhat of a firm and a scope of what has to be done, you're telling me that there's parts of the building that are sinking. In order to investigate that, you're gonna have to do these things regardless. So, I mean, I think you should... it makes sense to put the skeleton in. It allows you to do that investigation. And it also allows you to give the Board a firm number and exactly the scope of the work that has to be done clear through to the roof. DS: But we don't even know ... we don't even know, George, if we're able to, in certain areas, get good structure until it's exposed. I mean, we have no idea what we're even looking at. So there's absolutely no way a firm number could be given to put the skeleton up around the interior. Because if its ... once the plaster is removed, if there are no floor joists, we just found another job. So there's absolutely no firm numbers given outside of the number that we now have from Joe Manfredi... VB: This is a cat in a bag. DS: ...for the work that Pat has detailed. JR: Alright guys... But George, I don't think what they're doing, this floor by floor approach, is any different that what you're suggesting. MM: Right. JR: I mean, they're gonna go floor by floor and they're gonna say, "Look guys, this is a mess. We need to build a skeleton." They'll tell us as they do the study work. Am 1 not understanding that correctly? And we're budgeting as "loosy-goosy" as it is about $150,000 a floor to do something. It may well end up be more. Bill? BB: Don, Bill Beale. Question for you. Is it fair to say that if this floor by floor reconstruction is done, the roof has to be done in order to maintain the integrity of the new construction? DS: Yes, that is a given. And that's why I said, when I saw you yesterday briefly at Joe's office, the first decision that you have to make is: Are you keeping the building or are you getting rid of the building. Because if you are keeping it, you're about to unleash a series of financial expenses. JR: Well, Don, in fairness, this is not a surprise. DS: No, I know that. JR: Alright, we've been discussing this roof since 2003. We went out and got a grant. We've done specs. You've been authorized to do design. The roof was always a project that we were working towards. DS: Correct. JR: The first floor for that last 6-7 months was a project we were working towards. DS: That's correct. JR: The difference now, is it's not a discretionary project if we wanna keep the building. DS: That is correct. JR: OK. VB: It's a safety situation. JR: It's a safety issue and the decision before the Board is: Save the building - Demolish the building. If you're gonna save the building... MM: Make is safe while you're... ,r,.. JR: You gotta then invest in those permanent assets capital infrastructure things. And that's it. DS: That is correct. JR: So, we've been working towards that and we're here, unfortunately. BB: But if you're only budgeting half a million Dollars... JR: I'm not. I'm just trying. Right now I'm just trying to get a feel for this scope of the project. You know, we may not be the Board that finishes this Mansion in terms of hanging the drapes. BB: I just don't want thi building to fall down on its own, number one, and the last thing I want is for it to fall down while people are working in it. JR: Well these are professional contractors in construction and they know how to go in and Town of Wappinger Page 17 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 the onus is gonna be on them to create a safe work environment, with OSHA and all the other regulations that any other contractor, working on any other type of project like this. I mean, we can only provide the funding and then we're gonna rely on the professionals and the expertise of these contractors doing their thing, under the best safe construction methods that they know of. So, is there any other question on the Mansion so we can get into the... JP: We need an action item here. I don't wanna revisit this again. JR: We're not. I wanna discuss the Carriage House so we have a sense of what our decision are here today. I mean I... JP: So we don't have an action item on what to do with the Mansion yet. JR: I think the direction we're moving in, if we're going to save it, is to do this floor by floor approach. JP: But we haven't ... Have we decided that? JR: No, but that's... MM: I support that JP: So, well, that's what we need to decide. BB: I understand where you're coming from, but I think the Carriage House needs to be discussed first before we come up with an action item for the Mansion because I think that there's a lot of underestimation in the Carriage House at this moment before we get into it with Don. JP: But they're two separate structures. MM: Right, maybe the Carriage House (inaudible) something that we... I'm just saying conceptually JP: We could save the Carriage House. We may not be able to save the Mansion. VB: We've got these guys on there, ok. I think what we've gotta do is, first of all, before I spend any money, just for my ten cents, I mean, I'm willing to let these guys go in and take a look at what's there. `Cause I think we have to take a look and then make a hard decision. I'm not willing to spend just to spend money to save something. I spent money and bonded it to save the open space. You know, from a building contractor's point of view, I've done a lot of gut rehabs and they don't come in on budget. These guys are always putting 15... You don't work on a 15% profit margin as a contractor. Yet, we're throwing 10-15% contingencies and things in there. The issue is, I wanna look at it from a safety... I wanna err on safety, so we can try to support the asset that's in place. If it becomes cost prohibitive, where we can't, and we're just trying to protect a dream, then we have business decisions to make. But I also think we owe it to the asset, to take a look, have these guys go in, and see the worst case scenario before we go with it. JP: That's what the six hundred thousand is. MM: I think from my perspective, knowing how long we've been tossing things around relative to the entirety of Carnwath, I think the only way we're gonna actually move forward on anything is to take these decisions building by building; give an action for each building instead of the whole project as a scope. JP: They're two different related projects. MM: Because, although it's not... it was never my intent to not rebuild any building on that property, the reality is, the Mansion is the jewel. The Mansion and the Chapel are the jewel. And the Mansion and the Chapel, to me, have the most potential to generate revenue for the Town. The Carriage House, hopefully, that will be something we'll be able to save and prosper with as well. But I know, the more we sit around and "what if, what if, what if', the bigger the project that we're "what-if-ing", the less momentum we're gonna have to make a decision, give direction and actually get something done. So, I'm requesting that we do this action building by building. JP: But the Mansion and the Chapel are different buildings as well. MM: Right, but I'm just saying. BB: Do you wanna... my point before was do you wanna hear the total picture on the Carriage House JR: Yes. BB: ...before we make a decision on each structure? JR: And I agree with that. BB: That's where I'm coming from. JR: I would like to hear... TD: Before you move on, can I just say one thing. If you're thinking of an emergency allocation for this, emergency bond or emergency to get outside the bidding process, I don't know that you're gonna be able to justify all three levels of the building as an expenditure on an emergency basis. JR: Why not? TD: Because, that statute is very tight, and what's an emergency really needs to be a real Town of Wappinger Page 18 Printed 1011512007 a" Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 "right now" emergency. I don't know what the length of time is it would take to get a bid for the second floor or the third floor. MM: A month. JR: It would take 30 to 60 days by the time you do designs and everything else. You could really, if we heard from the architect and the structural engineer that just fixing the first floor is not making the building... removing that statement, "In danger of collapse." So as far as I'm concerned, I will take the responsibility for declaring with the Board: First, second, third is all emergency work that needs to be ... go one right after another. To Bill's point, I think we do need to discuss the... BB: Carriage House. JR: Carriage House because that is also in danger of collapse. And there is a cost if we're going to demolish the danger ... the Carriage House, what is the cost to demolish that historic building. The two buildings, though the Mansion is the centerpiece, so to speak, of the property, it's just as historic to me as the Carriage House. And if you're gonna do this, like Vinny said, to protect a dream or protect a vision, I think the Carriage House has just as much potential... JP: No one's saying we don't wanna discuss it... JR: No JP: ... but coupling them together just... JR: But the emergency... JP: confuses the decision. MM: I'm not saying that you can't add the costs together... JP: Right, we don't... MM: as an emergency, I'm saying... JP: But the decision could be different on one versus the other. JR: Absolutely. BB: Correct. JR: All I'm saying... JP: So, I'm just saying is that let's move forward on a decision. We've been battling this around for seven years now; six and a half years. We bought this in '99. And it's not a rash decision... VB: Quite frankly, I've gotta leave in a half hour. I've got clients... JP: ...but we've gotta make the hard decision. It's really been... we're getting estimates here, we're getting estimates there. Is this a cash sink? I'm hearing five million to... BB: Rehabilitate JP: ... renovate and seven for brand new with new code. Somewhere along the line... JR: Fine JP: ...we need to decide whether we save it or not. JR: Than I would move to authorize a bond for $600,000 to do the stabile... Well, I don't know what you call this... reconstruction of the first, second and third floors of the Mansion to ... in the name of this emergency work outlined in this letter. MM: I second it. JR: Discussion. BB: Well, I thought we were gonna discuss the Carriage House work before we make a decision on the Mansion. JR: Correct. BB: I think we need to see the whole picture here. We can vote on each structure individually, however... MM: That's what we're saying. That's what we're saying. We're just voting... BB: I understand that. But I'd like to hear what the engineer ... or what the ... yeah, the structural engineer and the architect have to say about the Carriage House before I make a decision on either structure. JP: I agree. I didn't think we were going to vote for money tonight. JR: Well you're asking for... MM: We have to vote money tonight. JP: We don't have to vote for money yet. I haven't seen it yet. I came here prepared to go down there just to... I'm not gonna vote for money right now. I'm not ready to vote. JR: You were asking me for an action. JP: No. I'm just saying an action: Do we have this guy give us more costs on estimates or do we just decide whether we wanna keep this thing or not. I mean I haven't got ...I don't think we've really sat around, other than informally, deciding whether we really wanna keep the Mansion. JR: Alright. Well, that's what were kinda here for today, because... JP: But I mean just to say we'll vote six hundred thousand or not, do we wanna keep it or not. Town of Wappinger Page 19 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: I wanna keep the Mansion and Carriage House. MM: I wanna keep the Mansion... if it's viable. BB: I wanna keep the Mansion too. Don't get me wrong. However, I need to be sold on a number, number one. I need to have an educated opinion on... JP: That's what I'm looking at. Right. BB: I need to know where we're going here. I don't wanna throw $600,000... JP: Thank you BB: ...and have this meeting again in a year. JP: Thank you, thank you. BB: That's where I'm coming from. I want this Mansion to stay. I wanna be on the record saying that. That is the obvious reason why it's called Carnwath Farms, because of that Mansion. However, we need to be sold on exactly where we're going. We need a timeline. This is just a temporary fix. I understand the emergency statute is very specific. And that's why I said we should discuss the Carriage House and know where we're at with the Carriage House... JR: Alright BB: ... before we vote on each structure. JR: Fine. MM: So let's go to the Carriage House. JR: That's what I wanted to do, but he wanted an action on it. BB: It was a miscommunication. JR: Let's discuss the Carriage House and the structural problems VB: So right now, you got a motion and a second to spend $600,000. JR: I'm withdrawing my motion right now. JR: But, I just wanna make one last comment. JR: Sure. JP: In the absence of better information on renovating versus... brand new versus renovation. Right now, I'm leaning towards demolition. VB: Look, ya know. I've been in this. I've looked at it. I'm not looking at a "cat in a bag". `Cause that's what I see here is a "cat in a bag", to be quite frank with you. Taking these buildings, seeing if we can do something with it. I don't have a use, we'll maybe if Marriott comes up ... maybe if we get this... JP: Alright, I'm working on that. VB: Yeah. By the same token, I don't know where we're going with this thing. And how deep and how continuing to keep pouring money ... taking good money and throwing in bad money. I mean, we preserved the land. If this thing is so cost ... so much money to do this ... I don't know. I'm starting to wonder. I mean, ya know ... take it down. MM: We won't know until they get in there. VB: But I think the $600,000 to make an educated guess to take a look at it, but I'm also not gonna just keep throwing money in it. I mean, I think it's... JR: The $600,000 is more than just an educated guess, Vinny that is actual... MM: ... starts reconstruction. JR: reconstruction. That's what you're committing to. If you go with the $600,000... it's not just a study of $600,000, they're gonna open it up and ... first floor, we already know the ... the hundred and eight thousand rebuilds the first floor. And we're being told by the engineer, the structural engineer and the architect that is a lion's share of the problem with the Mansion. Then we need to ... they qualified it by saying we need to know the structural integrity of floor two, which means they open up the ceiling of floor one. And then they see what needs to be done. And then that portion of the six hundred thousand, if it's 1/3 or 2/3 or whatever that second floor can be redone... VB: But we still have the roof to put on. JR: Right. And that's the million dollars. JP: Can I ask what these guys think? Is that OK? What are your opinions? VB: I'm not saying anything. GK: I gave my opinion. I think this is what should be done. JayP: I don't think that's what Joe's asking. JR: No, we understand that George. JayP: Do you want my opinion? JP: Yeah, I want your opinion. JayP: As an engineer or a taxpayer? JP: Both. As both. JayP: As an engineer, I would... I'm definitely in favor of saving the Mansion, and as a taxpayer. JP: OK, OK. And to George. You don't have to answer if you don't like. GK: No, I think there's a way to save the Mansion; to stabilize the Mansion, which I Town of Wappinger Page 20 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 expressed my concern. I just feel that you as a Board really should get as much information as you possibly can before you spend any of that money. VB: That's what (inaudible) saying. BB: I agree. JP: Kinda what I was saying for an action item. PD: The $600,000 is not a study. The $600,000 is a step toward putting that building back together. JP: But he said before... MM: It's both. JR: It's both. JP: And that's actually what I'm looking for, Phil MM: It's both Phil PD: It's... JP: That kind of thing MM: It's both PD: It's a study to see how much it's gonna cost to do the rest of it, but once you drop that $600,000 down, you've committed yourself to rebuilding the building. Because you're doing the floors. MM: But not dropping the $600, commits us to demolishing the building. PD: No, the $600,000 commits you to saving the building. MM: Not spending $600,000 commits us to demolishing the building. PD: Right, but... absolutely. BB: Right, that is correct. However, $600,000 is like exploratory surgery on someone without closing them up. `Cause it does not include the roof. JR: Right, (inaudible) MM: Well we planned on the roof all along. BB: I understand that. However, we have to look at the bigger picture here, because if this construction is done, and it is construction ... it's not just shoring. That roof has got to go on. And that's at least million dollars. JR: Nobody is... JayP: A million one JR: If you're spending the six hundred, you're gonna have to spend the million. Otherwise, don't spend the six... BB: That's my point. JR: I totally concede your point. JP: That's all I'm trying to do. I really woulda liked the flavor ... I know you're new on the Board ... (inaudible) BB: I've been at the meetings and I've ... as the Fire Chief ... when the Town JP: OK, good. BB: (inaudible)... However, we have to make an educated decision. I understand that you wanna bite the bullet here and save something that is a jewel for the Town. I agree with that. But let's make it... let's make it make sense... JR: It's gonna make sense BB: ...for the taxpayers. MM: It's gonna make sense, and if they get to the second floor and say, "This is a complete waste of time because from here on up the building's dead", the roof never gets spent. JR: That's not true. JR: I mean I think... MM: If... I'm just saying... JP: It's not necessarily... JayP: May never get spent. MM: May never get spent. JP: It may... yeah... it's not necessarily a guarantee being once you go through that door. It's sort of like... MM: You're not gonna put a new roof on... JP: It's a gamble. MM: a rotten... you know what I'm saying? JR: But I think... JP: ...it's a gamble I think what Maureen is trying to say. JR: It is a gamble to a point. But I don't think it's a unrecoverable... I don't think the building is not fixable. MM: Right. JP: I wish I felt that way. And I guess what I'm saying, as far as an action, I'd like to be able to feel that way before I say, "Take the six hundred..." VB: I don't have "warm and fuzzies"... Town of Wappinger Page 21 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JP: I don't have a "warm and fuzzy", that's all I'm saying. VB: To be able to roll the dice for the taxpayer. I don't wanna spend money. MM: The both of thein have told us that the bulk of the building is in good shape. MM: They have both told us repeatedly the majority of that building is in good shape. It's the south end that is the tumor. JP: I wish I felt comfortable with that. BB: Right, but however, on a structure like that, yeah, it looks nice and a lot of it is still good. If one floor gives out, if the second floor gives out, that building's coming in. VB: You hear what George said about (inaudible)... it twists the building... MM: Well, when they go in and start to reconstruct, they're rectifying that potential of collapse. BB: Right. I agree... MM: So, I think that we can run ourselves in circles talking about "what if, what it, what if'. To me, sending them in to reconstruct abates the problem of the collapse. Because they're gonna go in, and because they're engineers, and their people are working in there, and they have professional responsibilities. They're gonna make that building sound to work in. They're gonna reconstruct the first floor and they're gonna work their way up. And so we end up with a nice safe shell. VB: George, would you condemn that building... JR: (inaudible)... more than a shell. MM: I know. I'm just saying... VB: I didn't hear that ... excuse me. George, would you condemn that building if that was a private building right now? GK: Based on this letter, yes. Based on this letter I have to do something Monday morning. VB: It would have to be condemned. JR: Well the Town Board is going to preempt you by making a decision today. MM: Right. And I would like ... that's why ... when Joe was talking about action, I would like to be able to tell them, "Get in there and start working on it so that we don't condemn the building, so that we're not automatically taking a wrecking ball to this Mansion." GK: Well no ... I'm not (inaudible)... MM: And we can sit here for hours and go round and round in circles, at some point... GK: I'm not saying that. JR: Just be careful what you're saying. MM: ...you have to say "Go!". And here are the limitations with which you have to work. You have a fixed amount of money... VB: Doesn't mean take it down. MM: ...report back to us regularly. Do you understand what I'm saying? Where my frustration is coming from? BB: Yeah. I hear... MM: We can sit here `til three o'clock in the afternoon. BB: I hear where you're coming from. However... MM: Give some direction. BB: ...we can't live in a fantasy world here. We cannot... MM: No one's in a fantasy... BB: Let me just... and I don't wanna be negative here. However, we know after we approve, if we were to approve $600,000 to start this work, we already know that there's a roof that needs to be done. It has to be done. MM: We've known that for years. BB: I understand that. That's a million Dollars right there plus the $ 133,700 for the abatement. JR: Alright. Let me ask this question. If the first, second and third floor were fine, we weren't here this morning, and this roof project, as scheduled, was ready to take off, which it was about to do, which is why we were doing the work we've been doing since May, would you vote for the million Dollars to fix the roof? MM: Yes. JR: Alright, that's one. VB: First of all, Joe, do we know what it's gonna cost to finish the inside of it. Because if we put the roof on... say we don't have the safety factor... MM: Answer the rhetorical question. JR: Hold on. Let him talk. VB: I think I got some issues, `cause I'm in the contracting business. Ok? I've done these things. These guys make recommendations every day I've been in the buildings. Every day. And you know what? At the end of it, I gotta go back in, "Oh, we missed this", ya know, "The line wasn't right." I've been through this. I've through it with engineers too. `Cause we're on the other end building it. The issue is a very (inaudible) situation where, Town of Wappinger Page 22 Printed 10//5/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 a) we have to spend the million bucks for the roof, and if everything was safe inside, I wanna know at the end of the day what's it gonna cost...'cause I'd like ... if we're gonna use this jewel, let's use it. Let's not just take a pretty picture and look at it. I wanna use the asset for something, so that it derives income. It's usable (inaudible). So my question is, "What's it gonna cost to put the roof on to finish this thing?" Are we saying it was about five million, Joe (inaudible). JR: No. Five million was to totally... MM: Gut it. JR: ... gut it and rehab it. VB: What's it cost to put it in service with a nice finish? Seven million? JR: No. Seven million was to knock down the entire thing and rebuild a brand new Mansion... JP: Or to any design you want, not even... VB: Alright, Let's just back up. Maybe we can... since we got some brick structure and ... what would it take to finish this thing? I mean to make it... JR: You wanna bring it to the end. JP: Yeah JR: Like, say if you ideally... VB: Well, for seven million to knock it down and do it, it's gotta less... it doesn't have to be seven million... well, that's wrong... because we all know new construction is a lot cleaner and less ... JR: No. Don. Don, did you not give us a report earlier this year, to the Town Board, that if we... it's five point five million to redo the entire Mansion to "soups and nuts" and if we were gonna knock it down and rebuild that Mansion today, it was a $7,000,000 figure? DS: Those are the budget numbers that I believe we gave you back in August of last year, yeah. JR: August of '06. VB: So, seven million to tear it down and build something new. Five and a half, five point five, to fix it the way it is. And how much to just to rip it down and level the ground so we have green grass there. How much was that? DS: Well, that's what I... I mean that's what we were roughly talking about before. Beginning to discuss the (inaudible) JP: Four hundred thousand? VB: About four hundred thousand just to level it and have grass in there, correct? DS: I'm sorry? VB: You said about $400,000 to knock it down and... DS: I'll just say between that and five probably, yeah. VB: So, we're spending five hundred thousand to go in there and take a look and see what we can do versus $500,000 and completely take it down. JR: But you keep saying, "Only to take a look at what you're doing." That's brick and mortar money. That's not just study money. That is brick and mortar money. BB: To reconstructing floors one by one at that six hundred thousand. VB: Yeah, they're trying to hold it together. BB: But if it's gonna cost five hundred thousand to knock it down and six hundred thousand to rebuild the first three floors... MM: Three floors. JR: Well it's the only three floors. JP: But you don't have a... BB: A roof JP: ... building ready to use yet. You need a roof. That's another million Dollars. BB: It's not gonna cost you half a million to knock it down. JP: And another million to build a roof to get it into usable shape. I'm not saying... GF: You still can't use it. JP: Right. VB: Right. You still can't use it. MM: But... ALL: (Inaudible) JR: Folks. The building is usable. It's just not pretty. And then you have an asset that you can do something with to turn it around. JP: And the options are... I don't know what the options are under that scenario. I've been looking for a number of things: Marriott, Hilton, golf courses, golf course manufacturers, as a clubhouse. And nobody's biting any bullets here. I mean nobody's biting any bait... whatever the hell. BB: A hard decision and that's why its gonna take a few minutes... JR: I mean we, I... One of the big things, we've been going back and forth and .lay's been Town of Wappinger Page 23 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 part of these discussions. We had these caterers in, and the biggest question is, "What are you guys gonna do with the Mansion, `cause we don't wanna invest hundreds of thousands of Dollars into an eyesore." JP: Into the Chapel, if you have to walk by the Mansion. JR: Right, and... VB: Joe, what would it do if we took the building down and we gave them a long term lease and they built what they wanted? And they built it to what they want. JR: I don't think they would spend the $7,000,000 to build something there, because... JP: Well, for a 99 year lease, and we just basically ask them for the 2 million we paid for the property, plus, well maybe more - 4 or 5 million - because really we got it at a discount. Then they could renovate; they could do what they want. And that's what I would have thought, with a golf course manufacturer... VB: They could build ... maybe building something new is better than doing renovations. OK. Renovation can rip it and then put it back. And you're building inside of a box JP: Right, but it's in their ... the corporate world is handling this. The burden's not on the taxpayer. VB: Well, what I'm saying is if you knock it down and let somebody build it to their specifications and what they want for new use, or their maximum use versus trying to work with inside our design (inaudible) JR: I'm not going to vote to knock down the Mansion. VB: OK MM: Nor will I. Until they... BB: How ... go ahead, sorry. MM: At this point in time, with what I've been told, I'm not voting to knock down the Mansion. Because I think it has potential and I think the $600,000 and the million to put the roof on, based on what I've heard and what I've read is not gonna be a waste for this town. BB: How viable is this catering company? MM: Very. BB: Is this gonna definitely happen or is that just... JR: I don't know. They still wanna build a pad... VB: Do we have a lease with them? JR: Nothing. We have nothing. BB: Nothing yet. JR: But they wanna build a pad on the property to at least do... start doing tent weddings in the spring and the summer up on top of the hill overlooking the river. Because they wanted to do tent weddings there, they were gonna renovate the entire Chapel, put ornate lighting, renovate the first floor of the dorm building, and with the understanding that we were gonna try to beautify the outside of the Mansion, even keep it as ... just like a Hollywood set so the Mansion doesn't look so ... haunted. JP: They could do that without a Mansion there, right? They could still do that without a Mansion. JR: But they always felt the Mansion was the magnet. JP: Well yeah, but ... it's a nice picture, but... But that's (inaudible) expensive picture, $5,000,000...I hate to destroy the place too. I would have thought that a brick building would take more than 150 years to start coming down. I don't know. BB: I think that the water ... (inaudible) VB: The water ... the water and no heat. The windows are shot. You don't have thermal pane windows. (inaudible) JR: That ... but when we took it over, it had not had heat since 1984 in there. JayP: Yeah, that building has been shut down since the early 80's that I know of. VB: You got functional obsolescence going on to the max in that thing. Especially... (inaudible) JP: Functional obsolescence ... that's a great word. VB: That's the term where we use when buildings when they're shot. (inaudible) BB: Do you wanna talk about the Carriage House first? JP: Yeah, we have to. JR: Yes. Alright, Don. What's... stick the knife all the way through now. What's going on with the Carriage House? DS: Again, we've done probably less studies at the Carriage House than we have at the Mansion (inaudible). There's been more projects that have gone on at the Mansion... ALL: (Inaudible) DS: But with that said, even just a simple walk around the perimeter of the Mansion, all the fascias all the way around the building, and I don't think it's an overstatement, all the fascias are gone. They ... or in various stages of disrepair to the point that water's coming Torn of Wappinger Page 24 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 inside the brick masonry. It's destroying the brick masonry. It's causing other pieces... again, the wood framing which is pocketed into it ... to rot. It's causing some brick and some other components from the second floor on the west wing to fall down into the first floor. The roof, in the... over the central garage is again kind of gonna ... this king pin up in the center of the hip structure... and there is... if you see that photograph in Pat's report, there is a pile of sawdust underneath that, so something is eating away at the structure. We don't know how bad that is. And underneath... at the bearing end of that beam, on the low end, and I think it's the same beam where the sawdust is coming from ... Pat, what would you say, that beam is probably 12X18 or something... at least. PC: (Inaudible) DS: It (inaudible) completely rotted away. I mean that had taken decades to get to the condition that it's in. While, maybe, they were heating the Mansion, doing something to it `til '84, I think little to nothing has been done to this Mansion for decades. The only work that the Town has done there was some of this temporary shoring when we were called down there to look at the collapse of the fascia into the driveway on the east side. And that was when we noticed that this hip member was gone and that there was tremendous amounts of water coming in on the roof. Again, I think there was some temporary patching done around the backside of that tower, but much of the structure that is in and around that tower area as well as other places ... mind you, it was a barn. The first floor's a slab, the second floor's a wood deck. It was not well maintained at any point in time. You walk through there and many of the floors are stringy. But, what is imminent right now, I think, is the condition of this primary hip and the water infiltration on the roof, and then the continued penetration of water around the entire perimeter. That is a very large undertaking, and I'm sure the next question will be, "Well, how much will that cost." The other day, I tossed out a number of 2 million. It would be all of $2,000,000, I would expect, based upon our other experiences, being what we've gotta do at the Mansion to... I don't wanna say shore, because it's gonna be again ... or stabilized... it's gonna be reconstruction of various components. But to get a new roof system and in areas primary structural system on that building. It's woes are much the same as at the Mansion. The roof failed. Nobody did anything about it a long time ago. Now it's gotten to the point where it's affected primary structure and even affected the temporary shoring that was put in. So, in a nutshell, that's where that building is at. MM: Don... VB: Doesn't sound good. MM: What if... JR: Are these buildings on the historic register? DS: I didn't prepare your report... VB: Even if they are (inaudible) DS: however (inaudible)... I believe the site is. I don't know if each individual building is listed individually. They are probably contributing structures. But I think, all bets are off if you have a building condemned, and George, you may be able to step in on that, I don't know. I'm sure that that one has no different designation than the Mansion does. VB: I agree DS: Because it was an original structure, and it is architecturally... I mean as an architect, it is, or was, an incredible building. JR: And is. JP: It is nice. VB: Well, you got wonderful grant money in the real world out there and you got some philanthropic person wanting to pay and having deep pockets, wanted to throw money away, I'm all for it. But, you're gonna be buried in debt is debt. I happen to know for a fact, that because something is historical doesn't mean it can't be taken down. And that's reality too. MM: Don, could you just re -explain for me, because I was reading part of the report as you were talking. What is the most unsafe aspect of this building? The inside beams that are being eaten away or the brick work that's not stable? DS: Well, the brickwork that's not stable out on the street side ... on the east side ... is something that is a relatively simple fix; I mean take down the bricks that are falling and just put an aluminum cap on. I mean that's kind of a couple a days quick fix. Bricks are falling, most probably, in other areas on that building, but they're out in the woods and no one is around it right now. That one area just happens to be right on the street. MM: OK. DS: The primary structure, because of the failure of the roof system, in particular around the... that tower and that stair tower to the right front, is what is causing the greatest concern, combined with now this infestation in that same beam. MM: And the two million that you referenced... Town of Wappinger Page 25 Printed 10/15/2007 I Meeti Minutes January 27, 2007 DS: And that's... please... that... no money... MM: I understand. DS: ...no real estimation has been done on that. VB: It's a guess. DS: Again, predicated upon what I have seen... MM: I hear ya. DS: ...to be all of that. MM: I hear ya. VB: That's a guesstimate. MM: That would ... That would encompass... that would encompass what? DS: That, I mean... what we would need to do is ... we would ... and Pat, I don't know... we had not evaluated that one hip beam; that massive beam. If, depending on the degree of infestation and how we would detail a connection down at the end, that hip beam may need to be replaced, or perhaps somehow repaired in the air. I don't know how we would do that. But certainly it would involve really primarily roof reconstruction work and a new roof and gutter system. VB: So you're saying it's about two million bucks to do that? MM: For the roof, the beam and the gutter system? DS: Yeah, please don't hang on that number, but it could be all of that, yes. MM: No, no, no ... we know you're just... JR: No. You'll hang on it though. DS: I know that. VB: That's a guesstimate. Before a contractor puts his pen to it... MM: Don, how many square feet is the Carriage House? DS: Michael may know that better than 1. MB: I don't know offhand. MM: Just an educated guess. DS: I would guess that it's probably about six thousand feet, Michael? JayP: 80 square? MB: Yeah. Gotta be all of that. MM: OK. DS: Vinny, what do you think? I mean, you've seen... have you seen that building? VB: I looked at it, but I didn't even... I basically went by the Mansion. I didn't really take a close look at that... DS: From a contractor's standpoint, there's, again, there's an abatement project that has to happen here, because asbestos (inaudible) and (inaudible) have been used on it. VB: Well Jay,...Listen, Don, excuse me ... the difference in my numbers, I'm looking as a contractors and what I pay the subs out, there obviously... this is gonna have to be paid at union scale to do this. The numbers are gonna torque. JP: What do you mean by that? JR: Prevailing wage as we always have to... VB: Well it's prevailing wage plus benefits because of the program that we passed. JR: No, it's because of the State Law. JayP: No, that's State Law. VB: Prevailing wage, we had the union put in there for the apprentices. They're not... JR: NO. Prevailing wage is State Law, regardless of Apprenticeship Program, Vin. VB: Joe, I know prevailing wage. I bid prevailing wage. The thing is, when you go above and beyond that, ok... JR: We don't. Jay? JayP: When you pay prevailing wage, is ... the Apprentice Program is in there. Dave Alexander... you have union contractor... he has an Apprentice Program. VB: I understand that. But when you have guys like (inaudible) paying prevailing wage, they don't have to (inaudible) or anybody else. So it's a different in cost, `cause they're not paying their (inaudible). Correct? JP: Yeah, they do pay... JR: Yes they do, Vinny. That's part of prevailing wage. VB: The issue is, the contractor, bidding this out, because you're paying... it's gonna be a lot more than a regular normal... JR: Because it's a public works project, bottom line. VB: Right. That's what I... So the numbers ... My numbers, Don, would be a lot different than the numbers there. I'd have to go back to the book and look at it. JR: Alright. Which it ... that has nothing... VB: I'm just saying, it's not just a bottom line situation in the outside world. It's gonna be more expensive. JR: It always is. We're a government. Town of Wappinger Page 26 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 VB: That's right. JR: It has to be, by the law. VB: So I couldn't give you a number on that, Don, to be fair with that. But, obviously, if you're looking at, you're not holding at two million... if we say two and a half, we throw two and a half in, and we got five and a half in the other building. Well, were $8,000,000 for these two buildings is what I'm roughly hearing if we don't run into a problem. BB: Keep in mind, there is work that needs to be done on the other structures. VB: Well, wait a minute... JR: What? VB: ...that is fixing the other structures. BB: No, talking about... DS: Well, there's the dormitory which has the same gutter problems the Chapel had. JR: But guys look... BB: They're not in immediate danger of collapse. JR: Look. You have major assets out there. We've bought them. Alright? Unless we're gonna raze every single building out there, at a cost, and just have a beautiful sprawling field of 100 acres, you have major assets out there. OK? Town Hall, the biggest money pit we own, is the building we're sitting in. JP: Right, so... (inaudible) JR: OK? I spend $50,000 a year on a freaking boiler I should blow up, OK? The roof leaks. We got rats in the building. Highway Garage, you got a roof to do. You have assets. OK? Now, the question is: "What do ya wanna do with the assets." The Carriage House has a purpose. You have to store all this mowing equipment and other things. And we have a plan that we show ... a Master Plan that it ... we ever rent out the Carriage House and renovate it, it could be a restaurant whatever. That's down the road. Future Boards can deal with that. Are we gonna save this structure and still have and an entity out there? I say "Yes". VB: Is there any buildings out there that don't need a lot of work that we could save... JR: The administration building is the only building. And you're getting a proposal from Recreation to convert the third floor to be a caretaker's apartment. So there's investment there. It's what you guys wanna do with that property. Just saving the open space is part of what we did in 2000. Now we have to deal with the other parts of it. We have the Museum that we only bring in $500 a month. They've been looking for a home for 30 years. They could quickly be homeless again if you wanna tear down that building. I mean, you got a Chapel we've invested in. It's got potential great open space interior. There's no other public room like that in any Town government. You have the best Town park out of any municipality, with beautiful facilities there... VB: Joe, what are we doing now with this open space? Are we putting barbecues out? Do we have people that like using it? Or we ... I mean... JR: We have no use for it yet, right now, Vinny. Because we are in that transition stage. I wanna move the senior citizens center into the bottom... the basement of the Chapel with the classroom and they got a much larger facility than what they have now. And you're gonna have to invest in Town hall to expand the Building Department. I mean, the Town is growing. What do we got... we just got $400,000 to knock down the big building and what do we got to take out the Carriage House, Don? DS: Well, it would be all of that again. VB: So that... GK: Even more than that. JR: So you'd spend $1,000,000 to raze buildings JayP: Plus. Plus. JR: Then you have no facilities... potential facilities to do future growth for programming. And then what are ya gonna do... you gonna put a ... what do ya call those tin buildings that they drop... JayP: Butler buildings. JR: You're gonna put a butler building out there to house Recreation's equipment... BB: No. JR: And what's that? Six hundred thousand? JayP: Yeah. JR: Half a million? JayP: Yeah. MM: And they're ugly JR: So you'll... let's put a ugly... MM: Ugly, ugly. JR: warehouse building out there. VB: No. (inaudible) ugly building. You could build a nice building out there. You can Town of Wappinger Page 27 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 build... JR: Yeah. VB: I'm hearing for $7,000,000 you can build a ...nice building. And that's not a butler building. That's $2,000,000 more and that's a building... state of the art building that's out there. So, I'm trying in my mind, factor if I'm gonna spend $7,000,000 or five and a half to fix this supposedly... ya know... hold somebody's feet to the fire that it's gonna be a beautiful building when it gets done. Or spend the four hundred, take it down, have open space... let the other buildings bite the bullet and let them spend the money, like you said, in the future... JR: The only thing... right... the only thing I'm disagreeing with you on is spending entire five million to redo this Mansion to get it into living condition when we can totally... VB: Joe... JR: ...make the building waterproof and make them structurally sound. VB: My thought is, either we use it and we get tenants in there to support the debt, or I don't wanna band-aid something just to clean it up and just leave it there so somebody can break in; there's a fire. It's gotta be used. And insurance companies... OK, you're here... Typically, insurance rates are a lot higher in vacant buildings than buildings that are in use. Correct, Mr. Attorney? TD: Yes. VB: Thank you. So, from a point of view is they always ask, the insurance company, is the commercial building vacant? Is it not vacant? They raise your rate. OK, so, from my point of view is, I either wanna bite the bullet, spend the five million bucks and make it usable... and suppose these people will come in and use the space. Same token ... if that's not reality, then, in my point of view, is to level it. JR: Well, but... just hear me out. If you were to structurally make it sound, put the roof on... VB: That's a million -six. JR: Hold on. What's to say, that our forces... you got all these carpenters working in Recreation. You got other people that can't go around and redo the first floor of the Mansion. Make it usable. Make it presentable. Where you can start leasing it out. VB: How many carpenters do we have. JR: Three MM: And someone else puts the money into it. VB: Pardon me? MM: And let someone else put the money into restoring it. JR: With the lease. MM: With the lease. So we save money. We save a beautiful building. JR: It was just like what we were thinking about next door in the ambulance building, when it didn't look ... we didn't know if TransCare was gonna go in there or not. We then looked at the viability of making that (inaudible) rentable space. Ya know, and somebody else could came in and they say, "Oh, we want the floor spaces knocked down ... all the interior walls." We would have said, "Fine. Do what you want. Knock it down." You know... MM: Maybe someone will look at that building and say, "What a beautiful bed and breakfast this would make." Talk about hooking up with the caterer for weddings. You know, I'm... part of me personally would love to have that building restored. Just automatic "do it". JR: We all would MM: Put the curtains up. BB: Well there's definitely potential... definitely a potential. MM: But, as a Councilman looking at the best decision, to me, getting it in a condition where there's potential to recoup some money and to not bear the full burden of restoring that building, is, to me, a sound decision. JR: It's like the City of Poughkeepsie taking over the old Lucky Platt building and putting there money into ... I mean I know they're getting some other grant monies and stuff but... they're taking a major building, a historic building, in their city, renovating it, and now, it's gonna open it up to be rented and used and... you know... they bit the bullet on doing something. And I think, to lose two major historic buildings that we own 100% ... there are a lot of buildings we don't own in this County or in this Town that are historic by nature, by their age or otherwise, we don't control ... they get demolished. They go away. The land is gone. This is totally under our control. And I think, I, as expensive as it is and, in the end, is it raising tax Dollars seven, eight Dollars a year, per home, or $50.00 per home? I don't know .... have to crunch the numbers. But in the end, I think we're gonna have a hard case to sell to the public after all the public attention we brought to these two ... this property, in particular these two buildings... that we're the Board that razed them. I really think that's a hard case to sell. Town of Wappinger Page 28 Printed 10/15/2007 7-^ Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 MM: I think it's a good investment. JR: I'd rather make the argument in the case and explain the rationale that it's gonna cost a million to raze them, it costs a couple million to save them and forever protect them. I'm willing to lay my job on the line for it. I... VB: What's it cost to fix the Carriage House? Do we know to shore that up? MM: Two million he said. BB: Two plus ... two plus million. Is there an option where we can save the Mansion and put a six foot fence around the Carriage House... VB: Why can't we ... I mean ... Hold that thought, Bill. Save the Mansion by shoring it up—just, let's talk about it...which is the six hundred... Well, no it's not. It's... BB: No, it's more than that. JR: 1.6 million. JayP: It's two million JR: It's two million for each, basically. VB: It's two million for each, just to put them in dry space. Just to dry, not finished. Correct? That's just to dry it out so it's a safe situation you could walk in, two million. MM: No ... The Mansion's JR: Don, the two million for... VB: We got the roof and the six. JR: I mean, what are we gonna be ... we spend the 1.6 million, do the roof, do the three floors ... what are we gonna see? Gutted out walls? DS: In spots, yes. JR: In spots. Like we... DS: There'll be some paneling left. There'll be ... It will not ... it's not gonna look, I hate to say as good as it does now, because it doesn't look great, but it's not gonna look as finished as it looks now. JR: But what about all the historic wood and staircase? Is that all getting ripped out? DS: No, that would ... unless we find something that would cause it to, that will stay in place. What will come out will be some of the flooring, like in that room where it's collapsing. That floor will be gone. JR: Alright, but... DS: You'll have plywood. But, you'll still get a flavor of what the Mansion is, yeah. VB: And you're replacing all the window too, right? JayP: Not for the two million... DS: Not in that number. JayP: Not in that number you're not. VB: So I got all windows and sitting in that thing... JR: But, the... How many of the windows are the problem in there. I mean... DS: Well the windows, I mean, the windows are covered and... JR: Yeah. MM: Yeah. JR: We've already invested in that. You got them all covered, Vinny. All the windows are boarded. We spent money years ago to protect each of the windows during the winter and... MM: I think it's a good investment. And I'm not gonna sit here and beg people to jump on the $5.5 Million for the Mansion. I am more than willing to support the rationale that Joe so beautifully articulated. I would rather defend the expenditure to save that building and the potential of the building and the history of the building, then to defend spending the money to just knock it down for a field for what. So that maybe somebody buys the land and builds something ugly on it? JR: I think that our decision... VB: Open space is what we ran on, and that's what we bought. MM: I understand. And we can do both this way, Vinny. VB: I didn't vote to fix old buildings. MM: I'm not talking about... JR: Well, then you didn't, but now you do... MM: So, if we're polling where we stand, I support the money that we talked about , the six hundred and the roof money for the Mansion, and the money for the Carriage House. I think it's a good investment. VB: How much are we talking about in the Carriage House? MM: About two million. VB: We don't have a hard number on that yet, right? DS: No we don't. VB: That's a guess... JR: Could we get a better number on this? Town of Wappinger Page 29 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 DS: Yeah, we would be able to get Joe Manfredi down this... VB: I don't wanna do that until I have some hard numbers. DS: ...first part of the week and then try to a more... MM: We have an emergency decision to make. DS: definitive number. Pat... MM: Emergency decision to make. DS: ...it would need to be ... Pat you still there? PC: Yeah, I'm still here. DS: OK. It would need to be in coordination with you, because we need to kind of brainstorm in the field as to what some of the potential structural issues are and what the repairs might wanna be. PC: Yeah. (Inaudible) probably do that next week. BB: Don, can we take a look at the foundation of the Carriage House to get a better idea of where that's going, because the impression I got from you is that it shifted about three to four inches down in the one corner? DS: The slab did. Yes. We would need to go down into the basement on the west wing. The upper level on the driveway side appears to be slab on grade, and then that wing that goes out towards the river has the full basement underneath it. So we would be able to at least look at the wall that is the east side of that basement ... to see if there was any signs of compression or rotation or impact from that load up above. JR: Don, to be clear, you told Bill Beale and I, in my office yesterday, the Carriage House is in much more danger than the Mansion. DS: The Carriage House, in many respects, is much more imminent of a total collapse, and Pat, correct me if I'm wrong... From what we saw, because, at the Mansion we're looking at an interior floor, and ... for an interior floor may or may not impact the entire structure if it went down, but when ... with the problems that were looking at at the Carriage House, that is a primary structural member that, if it were to go, would bring down the roof on the Carriage House. Is that correct, Pat? PC: Yeah. That hip beam ... it's like burning the candle at both ends, in that hip beam. VB: Yeah. PC: Both ends of it, as far as I can see, have disintegrated. I'd like to get an opportunity to probe the upper end, above that pile of sawdust to see if, indeed, my suspicions are correct. DS: But the question... PC: ...the lower end of that thing is in pretty bad condition. DS: And the question though is, that ... with that situation there, that is much more imminent in terms of a potential total collapse based upon what we can see now than the Mansion is. VB: OK. PC: But the primary structural members' holding up a big portion of the roof. You'd have a big collapse if we lost that, yes. DS: That would be something that perhaps would happen internal to the building and maybe not affect the rest of it as is the case in the Mansion. If that beam went, then a chunk of that building is coming down. VB: So ... take the Carriage House down and try to hold on to the other one. PC: The roof structure, it kinda tends to span to across the entire space. The Mansion has a little bit more redundancy. In a sense, you've got bearing walls criss-crossing the space. BB: Yes, yes. Not in this building PC: The Carriage House has got major roof trusses that span across the entire house, the entire building. And, if you lose one of those trusses, you're gonna lose the whole roof. BB: Well, what's the feasibility to the Town Board? What is the feasibility of taking on the Mansion, ok, and then just not allowing any use of the Carriage House? Just keep it the way it is with a fence around it so no one can access it. Just freeze it in time. Is that an option? Or is it gonna fall down? DS: Again, with that, you run the risk of committing that to something that may be beyond repair. But I would also ask ... Is the Town Attorney there? JR: Yeah, Town Attorney's here. DS: I would also ask him, if that, by posting and putting a fence up, if that would really relinquish the Town... JR: Absolutely not. DS: ...from liability. BB: It's just a question. JR: We've been put on notice of a major emergency, we have to act to make it safe and just posting it to the public that it's dangerous is not making it safe. DS: Right. So, putting a fence up and putting a sign, I don't know that's gonna solve your Town of Wappinger Page 30 Printed 10/1512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 concern as far as exposure there. GlenK: Then you're gonna have to post a cop there now, from now until you get it fixed. BB: Yeah I agree. TD: I don't know that you have to go to that level but ... but a fence and a sign is only as good as the fence and the sign and the enforcement of the fence and the sign. JR: That's the point. VB: (Inaudible)... somebody falls on the property you're liable, correct? GlenK: Right now.. . MM: We get it. GlenK: closing the front gate MM: We get it. ,,am GlenK: is not sufficient. MM: We get it guys. JR: I think... BB: Brainstorm here a little. JR: I feel... MM: We get it. JR: First of all, that's a very tall structure... BB: Well, it's a one and a half times the size of the structure, is where the fence would have to go out. If that's gonna block your road, then it's not gonna make any sense. I just ... I'm trying to think outside the box here to try to save these structures, that's all. JR: Right. Saving the structure is... BB: If we can't save the structure, we can't save the structure, Vinny. But you gotta at least put the time and effort in here to look at all the alternatives. VB: Bill... MM: I hear ya. VB: As a contractor... BB: I know you're a contractor. VB: ...I've looked at it, and from my point, I'm willing to go with trying to save the Mansion, but I'm not saving the Carriage House. I'm taking it out. I mean that's my vote. It's gonna go. I mean this guy's already telling you this, that ... he don't even know. The Carriage House gotta go. I will try to meet half way and fix... PD: Can I ask you a question. What's a $4,000,000 bond cost? The taxpayer? MM: Right. JayP: Well, I just asked the Town Attorney, "What is the term of the bond?" If you're building a sewer system, a water system... JR: Thirty years. JayP: Well, that's not the answer I got. JR: Twenty? JayP: That's not the answer I got. TD: 15. JayP: 15. JR: 15? TD: Bond counsel gave me a ... well first of all there's two parts to this. If you're gonna do an emergency... PC: Guys, can I interrupt for a second? MM: Yes. JR: Yeah. PC: I'm talking on a cell phone here, and I'm gonna lose power in a few moments. Can I call you back from a land line or ... Do you think you're done? BB: Do we have any more questions? JR: Do we have any more questions for the structural engineer. MM: No JR: No, you're done... ,,.,. MM: Thank you. JR: Thank you Pat. Have a good day. VB: Thanks a lot. BB: Thank you, Pat. VB: Thanks a lot. PC: Ok, yeah, I'm glad to call you back. I just, you know, I'm gonna lose power in a second. VB: Yeah, get his number, Joe, in case... JR: Well I have his cell phone number, but... VB: No, no, no ... a land line because his battery's shot. PC: Yeah, I'll give you my land line, its (Pat Conlon reads off his phone number for the Board). Let me verify that. Hang on a second. Town of Wappinger Page 31 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 DS: That was the number you gave me yesterday, Pat. PC: (Reads off phone number again). JR: Thank you. PC: OK, guys? MM: Thanks, Pat. VB: Thank you very, very much. PC: OK. Take care. PD: Back to my question... JR: Alright, hold on one second, Don. Don, you there? DS: Yes I am. JR: OK. Hold on. Don? DS: Yep. JR: Yep. MM: What did you want to offer, Don? JR: Don, were you gonna say something? DS: No. No. I was just confirming I was there. TD: Going back to the bond question, if you wanna spend money in the next 30 days, then we can only approve a 5 year bond. JR: Well that's typical BAN. Right. TD: Right. Then we can refinance it.... JR: You don't refinance it. TD: ...bond Counsel told me that the finance time period on this is 15 years. JR: What did you tell him we were doing. TD: I told him we were doing some work, at... basically what you're gonna do ... the $600,000...I didn't give a number, but I went through the emergency repairs to the building... JR: I don't think it's a 15 year bond. From what we've... JayP: I asked the question, and when Tom gave me the 15 years, I just... JR: No. JayP: To myself I said that's... JR: That doesn't seem like... Who'd you speak to? Doug? JayP: Yeah. JR: Doug Goodfriend? "Cause when we... We talked about this this past year when we were restructuring... JayP: With Sal. JR: With Sal. And we were told 20... JayP: I thought we were told 40. JR: 40 for water. 20 to 30 years for the building. So if we were talking about the long term bonding project for the roof, `cause we were anticipating it and we were trying to work it into the budget. And I was told ... maximum 30, but... JayP: Preferably 20. JR: Preferably 20. Not 15. I could almost guarantee, `cause the usable life of these things are more than 15 years. PD: Back to my questions. What is a $4,000,000 emergency bond gonna cost us? JR: Well, it's gonna cost less than... JayP: Let me say this. A $10,000,000... I'm just working with round numbers. PD: Well I just figured... JR: Go to the 4 million MM: Just throw it out there. JR: Do the 4 million MM: Throw it out there. PD: 4 million. What... MM: 4 million PD: ...would it cost to shore up that... JayP: $4,000,000 bond... PD: What's this gonna cost... JayP: For 20 years at 5%, which you can get now, is... JR: Vinny, use Gina's phone if you need a phone. JayP: A hundred and tewnty eight thousand in principal... JP: Now do it for 7 million JayP: $328,000 per year... JR: Principal and interest. JayP: (Inaudible) debt service. JP: Alright, now do it for 7 million. Turn key... PD: Around double that. Town of Wappinger Page 32 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JP: Well ... yeah. JayP: 24 in principal. 7 times 5...350 and ... 774. JP: Now did the ... get a extension on the term if it's new construction versus renovation. I don't know. I never... JayP: Well, now that was the question I asked: "What is the max term..." JP: For new construction vis-a-vis. JR: Yeah but if we roll it in with the... guys... if we do long term... guys... if we do long term bonding, we're gonna be doing it in March to roll these bonds, and you do the preponderance of borrowing, which would come out of water, `cause the water's got the $10,000,000. Then you get the average useful life, which goes up to 27 years, `cause we did that calculation when I was doing the budget. JP: Well that makes both options cheaper then. JR: That's right. And you gotta remember that, in 2008, we're gonna drop close to a hundred and something thousand Dollars in bonding charges that are in the A fund, because the hundred and fifteen thousand comes off for the reval, and then about $40,000 comes off because of the computer technology BAN has been paid for. So that frees up monies that are already being taxed to the people for bonding. So you're not gonna be whacking them... JayP: That's a good question: "What fund is this going to?" JR: "A" JayP: That's correct. What is ... To answer Joe's question, if we did a $4,000,000 bond in A fund, you have an annual debt repayment principal and interests about 328,000. What is the A fund (inaudible)? JR: The A fund budget is about three something... three million? JayP: Three and change? And what does that equate to in tax? I can't... JR: Yeah, but what you... JP: The rate's gonna change with the assessments. It's totally... JR: Yeah, but the tax levy... We look at... JP: Levy. JR: ...the tax levy. And if you're taking the hundred and fifteen plus 145,000, so you're adding about another $200,000 to the tax levy. You're talking a 7% tax increase. JP: And not only that, it's not really... PD: That's what I wanted to know. MM: Right. JayP: Wait. Wait. Hang on. What were those numbers again? JP: This is about good finance. It's not about how you pay for it. JR: Right. JP: So, you know... We don't need to know "A Fund" or who's (inaudible). Good financially feasible or it's not. That's what we're talking about. So you gave him the numbers and that's good enough. We need to know where it's coming from. MM: Sounds financially feasible (inaudible) JayP: Joe, how did you get that 7%? JR: Because the tax ... hold on, let me get my budget... ALL: Inaudible chatter about installing the fence around the buildings took place while Supervisor Ruggiero leaves the room. BB: That's a good point though. I mean, the other issue though... JR: I don't disagree with you. BB: While you're looking up your numbers, you know, one of the questions that needs to happen is, during the construction process, assuming that we approve the Mansion, OK... There needs to be, obviously, a fence as it is a construction zone... JR: Right. BB: That fence, in my recommendation, should be outside any potential collapse zone. Now is that gonna impede the roadway? JR: Yeah. Sure it is. BB: So we need to get... JR: That's the tightest... BB: OK. JR: Part of the roadway. BB: Just wanted to make sure that we know that the access to the Carriage House is cut off. JR: And the access to the remainder of that property is closed too. G1Kr: Central Hudson has ... has gas and whatnot in the back and electric coming up, so right now they could be going through the gate to go check their meter. JP: Right. And I think that we could... We're gonna do that anyway. Aren't we gonna do that anyway? Put a fence around? Or no? Torn of Wappinger Page 33 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: Yes. We have to. MM: Right. JP: So then... that should be irrespective of this decision. If we're gonna agree to put a fence up, I don't see why, like you said, it wasn't... G1Kr: No, if you, I don't know, I'm just saying, we're ... you're saying emergency so ... I mean ... (inaudible) digging through a fence. JP: Right. So why isn't... JR: No. JP: Why can't we just... JR: We just gotta put construction tents like we did around... GIKr: No. It can't be little orange construction tents. JP: I'm a little confused on why we... G1Kr: It's gotta be a permanent... VB: You gotta put a permanent fence... (inaudible) JP: I think we can agree to do that. JR: But, I'm saying, we should put something up immediately that can be done, then... G1Kr: If that building was anywhere else in the Town, or any other residence, you woulda have to immediately knock it down already. JR: No we wouldn't have. G1Kr: I've been to several fires already where that's happened. JP: Well can't we have him do that and then he can go on his way? Or ... I mean, I don't see the two connections... VB: If we can put a fence up and... JP: ...spending six hundred, demolition, fence... VB: we can put a fence up and... JR: Right, correct. VB: There's a lot of contracting jobs where people have materials stored ... it says "No Tresspassing"...they put a... these companies that go out, put an automatic fence up around it, and then (inaudible)... you put that up immediately and that'll keep people out of the area. MM: But you don't need direction from the Board... JR: No... G1Kr: No, that (inaudible)... MM: You don't need our direction. G1Kr: ...(inaudible) I don't care ... (inaudible) ... that's all your decision. MM: Right. G1Kr: On my standpoint, VB: (Inaudible) G1Kr: I was thinking about right now, somebody could be in there. JR: Right. MM: Right. GIKr: The Town Patrol could be opening the gate to go drive through and it could collapse on his car right now. And that's what I'm... BB: It's a valid point. G1Kr: That's what I'm looking at. MM: And we're don't disagree with you, but you don't need our direction to do that. That's... BB: He'll take care of it. JR: Right. MM: OK. JR: We closed the park yesterday... MM: Right. JR: ...when we were told... JP: Right. JR: ...knowing what we were gonna do this morning... MM: Right. JR: So... BB: Does the Town, not to get on a tangent, does the Town Patrol actually go in there or no? JR: Yes. BB: OK. JR: They've caught people in the past. JayP: Do they know it's closed? JR: You know ... I don't know if they know. VB: From a liability standpoint, even if we put the fence up, you put a six-foot or a eight -foot fence up, the Attorney'll tell ya, if somebody gets in there... BB: Right. Town of Wappinger Page 34 Printed 1011512007 rr_ Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 VB: ...and gets hurt, we still are in trouble because... JayP: But having put the eight foot fence up (inaudible)... G1Kr: Exactly, exactly. JayP: And appropriately signed, appropriately signed. JR: Right. JP: And even if we agreed to something... BB: From a common sense standpoint... JP: ...it's not gonna mitigate you from a liability... VB: Jay, let me tell you right now. The City of Poughkeepsie... we had barricades up... (inaudible) ALL: (Everyone in attendance begins to yell to be heard) r... JP: (Inaudible)... agreed today to do six hundred thousand or renovate or (inaudible)... JR: It's the whole thing, its... JP: Right. (Inaudible)... same danger. It's not incremental to the decisions we have to make. VB: (Inaudible)... broke their ankle. MM: No. VB: (Inaudible) JP: (Inaudible) BB: (Inaudible)... figure out a way to move forward here. MM: Well, I think having the figures about what a $4,000,000 bond, what impact it has to the debt service, to me, even confirms my support for both the Carriage House and the Mansion. JR: What? JayP: I still don't know how that number... you came up with that 7%. I'm not quite... JR: The total ... you're gonna have the net debt... JayP: No... JR: You have... What was the total... JP: Tax levy. JayP: For a $4,000,000 bond, over 20 years, was about three hundred twenty eight thousand. JR: Three hundred twenty eight thousand. And I said about a hundred fifteen thousand plus maybe another fifty thousand... MM: Comes off... JR: ...comes off the books in `08 fd " JayP: But... JR: So we wouldn't pay any interest or principal... well we might pay some interest this year ... but you wouldn't pay any principal payments on the bond `til '08. So the hundred and fifteen plus whatever comes off, and then as we go to fully put that part on, we got a net of what... one fifty you're adding ... to the budget ,roughly. JayP: One seventy (inaudible) JR: Alright. MM: Yeah. JR: The whole tax levy is 1.6 million in the A Fund... JayP: 10% JR: It's less than 10%. And then what the, you know, then when you do the, you shuffle what we're about to go through, the reval and stuff, the rate is meaningless at this point. JayP: But it's about a 7 to 10% increase? JR: Assuming we don't realize any additional State Aid. Assuming we realize... you know, whether we realize mortgage tax and other things. You know, they're gonna change the formulas this year. The Governor said he wants to put more State Aid ... so we don't know what you're gonna get. The potential of up to another 10% in the tax levy is there. How it's distributed, because of the new reval, but it's nothing over... unsurmountable. MM: Don's (Inaudible) BB: Now the $4,000,000 would include what? MM: The roof, the Mansion... JR: 2 million for the Mansion, 2 million for the Carriage House. VB: Just shoring it up and give me a dry... BB: `Cause you can theoretically spend five million and rebuild the Mansion, couldn't you? MM: No, that was 7. JR: No. Five million (inaudible)... BB: Five million to gut the interior... JR: ...on the Mansion alone, plus another 2 million for the Carriage House. So you're talking 7. VB: (Inaudible) JP: But then Phil's point, what's seven million bonded over 30 years? JP: The question is: "How much does the five go to the seven?" and "When do you cut it Torn of Wappinger Page 35 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 off?" Say the five..."ooh we found this this, we found abatements and asbestos, this (inaudible)..." We don't know that. We don't know how much... VB: Those are all guesstimates they put in anyway. JP: Right. But seven probably is a little bit more hard of a number, but if the five went to, you know, five million costs to renovate and save the... that... you know, the way it looks now, it goes to six or seven, would you have made the same decision that you're gonna make shortly, in the next week or so. And that's really to me, what really needs to be ferreted out. But, say if it went to nine million to renovate. Now that may be ridiculous. I don't know. I don't know. JR: You may be absolutely correct. But all I know is I can only base the decision on the facts I know right now. And so far, every time Manfredi has done something for us, it's pretty much come on budget ... with the gutters, the abatement, the work in the basement, the porches... porches there's a little extra thing something happened, but ... For the most part, every time we've been given a quote and this is ... mostly this is a time and material job, and he's been estimating. You know, we haven't done ... we're not doing this for a lump sum. This is time and material and we feel we'll be able to work within this budget. He has. So, he's given us a hundred and eight thousand for the first floor, and that includes QuES&T and QuES&T has been in budget for each one of these things. I'm pretty confident that the contracting team that we have out there, or potentially have out there, is probably the best in the County to do this stuff and they've delivered for the Town many times. So, I'm (inaudible) confident in the construction numbers to a point, but, like you said, what we thought was two million could be... Look, we're doing the landfill. We were told when we started the landfill project, six municipalities would be six million. Well, it went to ten million. We had to bond more. And, you know, because it was gonna go to ten million, could we back out of it? No. Once you commit, you're gonna commit, and that's the point. VB: It's not like a contractor thing ... you build a new building (inaudible). You're in a situation here where you don't know what you're gonna find. These are guesstimates. Rehab is clearly a guesstimate. JP: Yeah, but, new construction is less of a guesstimate. VB: Absolutely. It's more of a finite measurement. JR: I don't know about that. We've had a lot of new construction where we had a lot of change orders. JP: I'm not saying none. I'm just saying there less... VB: (Inaudible)... a contract... There's definitely a difference between a guy doing new construction versus restoration work. No doubt about it. MM: But I think beyond that, you have to look at the heart of the project - the point of the project. We're not just taking, you know, a raised ranch and deciding that it's not worth renovating and razing it and building a new raised ranch. JR: (Inaudible) JP: (Inaudible) VB: You're talking about something different than a raised ranch. You're talking about a commercial building and trying to.... MM: We're talking out ... no, no, no, Vinny. I want you to step out of your construction hat for a second and look at the property. Look at the history of the property. Look at what that... what that as an individual piece if property, Vinny. And it makes it ... to me it makes a little more palatable... JR: (Inaudible) MM: ... when you look at how... VB: Maureen... MM: ...unique that property is Vinny... VB: Maureen... MM: ...not just the number... VB: Maureen, when I voted for that property, to keep that property... At first, I was adverse to it. I took a look at my district and it was a beautiful piece. We're the first Town to step up. There was nobody else doing it. And we bit the bullet and we made it happen. Now, when I voted for that, I didn't vote to keep fixing old buildings. OK? I didn't vote for that. I voted to save the property. The property's a pristine piece of property they could use for ... I'd like to see people go down there with their families, having a barbecue or concerts. That's what I looked at. OK? Now, I'm a realist. I am a realist. I'm not, "maybe this could happen, maybe we could get this", because I look at things pretty black and white. Taking risk is something we gotta take a look at. MM: But... VB: I think we should put the fence around it ... today. Or, get that fence up ... limit the liability that our attorneys told us about. And I think the second thing is, I really want to Town of Wappinger Page 36 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 Torn of Wappinger Page 37 Printed 10/15/2007 know... What I'm saying is, I am concerned as to (inaudible) cap these numbers and really bring these numbers in at that, or it's a cat in a bag where you're like throwing things up on the wall... MM: And I hear that Vinny... VB: And that's a concern that I have. MM: And I hear that clearly, and what I'm... I guess what I'm saying is, beyond whatever decision we come to today, money doesn't get spent unless the Board approves it. VB: That's correct. MM: Do you understand? VB: You need 4 votes to bond it. MM: So I understand where you're coming from. And I understand the need to look down the ,r road, big picture. But to me, the immediate decision that we're facing about the bang for the buck, and being able to salvage two beautiful buildings instead of one, for a negligible difference, long term ... That's what I'm asking you to think about when you're looking at your financial and your construction decision. I'm asking you to step back. It's not just a house. And for... VB: Maureen. MM: ...the negligible (inaudible)... VB: Maureen. MM: ...that's all I'm asking. VB: I deal with commercial buildings... MM: I'm not doubting your talents, Vinny. VB: So when you tell me, "It's not just a house"... Maureen, when you take a building and you gut it, it's like me telling you, "You do Heart surgery or you do IV's". OK? It's still the medical profession. I'm on the construction technology program in the curriculum for Dutchess Community College. We've got architects that sit on staff (inaudible) to teach these kids how to do it. There's no doubt, no doubt, rehab costs a lot more than building something new. JR: That's not what we've been told. MM: That's not what we've been told. VB: I guess the point I'm trying to make is, it's no different when he gives me a (inaudible) or he tells me so much, and it doesn't work, I look at it and they go, "Well, it's the best I got." Excuse me, I've seen the engineers (inaudible). So I've been in that situation. And to some of them have got sued for crappy work. OK? Now, I'm gonna tell you something. I'm looking at something, and I'm looking at if from the perspective that I wanna know at the end of the day, and (inaudible) but we all look at the big picture. I mean measurements and take -offs, we can do it digitized, take it ... The issue is at the end of the day, "Do we wanna take these two buildings and just shore them up so maybe another Board or somebody down the road can use them." Or do we wanna turn around and say, "Well, we'll take them down and build new ones; to something the way we want it; the vision that we may have, which I don't know what that is yet, you talk about our Master Plan." Or, (inaudible)... turn it into green grass. And let another Board down the road decide. You gotta take a look at the numbers and what it's gonna cost us and I think we gotta make a educated decision. That's all I'm saying. JR: Alright. But, having heard all that from both of you, we're here. The time is now. MM: We have to make a decision today. JR: They... JP: Why do we have to make a decision today? MM: Because it's an emergency. JR: You have two... JP: No, the emergency is already gonna be mitigated by the fence. MM: No. JayP: No. JP: I don't see that... ,■,,,. JR: You're telling this Town Board Attorney that putting a fence around resolves our emergency situation today? JP: For the day? VB: Well they're not gonna do any work tomorrow. And they're not gonna do any work Monday. TD: You've got two parts to the emergency. One part of the emergency is the danger to people walking around. But the other part of the emergency is, the building may collapse. And then you've lost the asset without making the decision. JP: Right, but that doesn't (inaudible) today. JayP: Well... JP: It could be don't tomorrow. Torn of Wappinger Page 37 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JayP: If you get a snowstorm... JP: It could be done Monday. JR: Gentlemen and ladies. If the Board fails to take (inaudible) decision today regarding the emergency, I will declare a State of Emergency and authorize the spending of the money to shore up the buildings. MM: To me it would be irresponsible not to make a decision today knowing the potential danger of those buildings. VB: For one thing, you've gotta put the fence up today anyway. MM: How can you sit here and say, "Well, maybe next week we'll make a decision. We'll put a fence around it and maybe next week we'll make a decision and think about what we're gonna do. And let's pray the building does or doesn't collapse. That's irresponsible. Whatever your vote is, yes or no, you have decide something today. There has to be direction today. JP: What's the likelihood of (inaudible) in the next week? JR: They don't know, Joe. MM: (Inaudible) JR: The letter says, "In danger or collapse." Don? DS: Yes. JR: What's the... JayP: Still there? VB: He's still there. JR: Hang in there, Don. Don't go nowhere. VB: You gotta be on a hardline (Inaudible). I want your batteries. DS: (Inaudible)... this is gonna collapse or not. I can't... and you know I can't answer that. JR: That's my point. (Inaudible) the risk we're running... VB: You got great batteries, baby. JR: ...is failure to act could be loss of the asset and destruction of property and life. END OF TAPE ONE Estimated time lapse between tape one and tape two - 15 minutes. BEGIN TAPE TWO JR: ...emergency is no longer an emergency...'til I get a report from the structural engineer and the architect, telling me, "Mr. Supervisor, this building is now safe once again", the emergency will cease. Until that time, the emergency will be ongoing. It's no different then we have a water restriction in the community because we have a drought. So at such time the water restrictions get removed, is when the drought no longer exists. Same thing with these two buildings. TD: But my analogy is, with the Mansion building, you're not gonna approve in this authorization, the roof. Because you have the time to go out... JR: Absolutely correct. TD: ...to bid. MM: Right. TD: Are there parts of that 2 million that you're gonna spend on the Carriage House, that will come later in this securing process that you (inaudible) time to bid. MM: No. He said that it would cost 2 million to do ... well wait a minute, let me see... He said the 2 million is for the roof, the beams and the gutters. But to me, the roof ...let me just... JR: But look... MM: Don said the 2 million is for the roof, the beams and the gutters. OK? JR: I think you're causing more of a problem with the minutia of dissecting this than what's at hand here. We have a huge problem in the Carriage House, OK? We're not gonna be repainting the interior to make it look beautiful. This ... they're gonna get this into a ... they don't know the scope of the work involved. We're authorizing them up to $2,000,000 to get that building up and ready and authorizing a contracted, under time and material... MM: Don? DS: Yes. JR: Don's there. Don, am I say anything out of... DS: No, that's correct Joe. And you're saying it exactly right. It may not be the standing seam metal fascia gutter system that we put on the Chapel, because if you're giving us a budget of $2,000,000, the first thing that we'll attack will be the structural repairs. The second thing that we will do will be the fascia and soffit reconstruction and the roof. The Town of Wappinger Page 38 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 fascia and soffits will be the piece that will probably bite the budget bullet the biggest. And it may be something as rudimentary as what we put on the east side just to keep the water out of the building for a future date. BB: So Don, you're saying that the water intrusion problem on the Carriage House will be solved. DS: That's... Well that is the direction. I mean there wouldn't be any sense in spending... VB: Well, my question is, if I'm going $2,000,000, that's it. DS: ...the money, if we weren't going to stop the water from coming in and... MM: That's what's making it unsafe. DS: ...destroying the structure. BB: That's what needs to happen. The water needs to be kept out of that particular structure... VB: Don, are you... BB: ... for me to vote for this. VB: Don are you ... I want some guarantees. You're tell ... Can you guarantee this number? `Cause I'm going out to bond with this and (inaudible) that I spent this money. I wanna know. Is this money ... Is this realistic in what you're saying? Or is it pie in the sky? DS: I cannot guarantee you that it is $2,000,000. VB: Then I'm not voting for it until I know what it is. It's unreasonable for people to make assumptions, not know what numbers are and just throwing things up on the wall. JR: Well... MM: Don? DS: Yes. JayP: They can't get in there to determine what it is until you do some of this work. MM: Do you... you know. Vinny, someone... you could give someone an eyeball on an estimate, and they'll go, "Can you guarantee it?" You're not gonna guarantee it `til you get in there either so... Don, do you think it's reasonable to think that you could make the buildings safe and sound for about two million. DS: I think... I think that it, based upon what I see today, Yes, that it is reasonable that we do that. It may not have a permanent roof on it that will last 40 years. It may not have a permanent fascia and gutter system. But it will be something that will stabilize the building so you can lift your ban and we have our time to continue on with use of the building, yes. Now MM: That's all we're asking. VB: (Inaudible)... two and a half million Dollars. Would that give you a little more comfort? DS: Two and a half would. Yeah. Sure. Three would give me more. I mean... MM: He just said, "Two million would do it." DS: ...you know better than I do. Until we open it up and see what we've got. You heard the structural engineer. We don't know without ... if that sawdust is just a little localized problem or something that travels the length of that hip. We just ... we don't know. I mean ... we have a ... we will establish a list - a list of priorities - and repair those components in that order. And, you know, from a budget standpoint, as we go down that list, the resultant money will be the level or the quality of the repair that is done. And, obviously, the primary structural repairs will be first. Second will be the roof membrane. And third will be those peripheral components that can be done to a lesser quality standard. MM: And didn't he just ... did anyone else hear him say that he thinks it's very reasonably that for $2,000,000 they could do the work that's needed to lift the ban on the property. Did anybody else hear that? BB: Yeah. No, I heard that. That's important. However, relevant to the Carriage House, just a question... theoretical question, so that it's consistent with the Mansion. How much would it cost to raze the Carriage House and rebuild it from scratch? Just give me a round number. Just so that we can be consistent with our numbers from the Mansion. MM: A guess. ,. JayP: To rebuild as what though? BB: As the Carriage House. VB: Bring it back to where it was. BB: Not a butler. JR: Take a nice picture of it and knock it down and rebuild it. BB: Are we talking fix or six million... DS: (Inaudible) on that one... to answer, and it's gonna go down the same logic, as Vince said on the other, typically new construction is more cost effective than renovation work. The reason it's a Mansion and... basically, you know what the inside of that building looks like. The reason at the Mansion that we were able to say that reconstruction of the Mansion from scratch would cost more is because we would be building it back to the Town of Wappinger Page 39 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 level of detail that is in that house. And you do not typically build that level of detail. What we would have been able to do in a reconstruction basis on that house is take out many of those components and reuse them. And that's why the renovation was going to be less than to knock it down and build it just like it is from scratch number. BB: So to rebuild the Carriage House as the Carriage House, what are we talking? $7,000,000? JR: They don't build buildings like that anymore. DS: Yeah. All of that, yeah. BB: It's an 80X80, right? Is that what it is? DS: Yeah, the... I mean there's just incredible detailing ... I mean... BB: I'm just trying to put things in perspective. VB: (Inaudible) DS: You look at the flashings ... the flashings are a work of art on that building. VB: (Inaudible) DS: I mean it's just an incredible detailed building. JR: This is like ripping down Grand Central Station. MM: Yeah, you can't... JR: I don't... MM: ...you're comparing apples to oranges... BB: I'm not saying to rip it down. JR: No, I know you're not but... BB: I'm trying to say... MM: You're comparing apples to oranges and I think... JR: No, he's... MM: ...given the detail... JR: he's... I don't disagree with his... MM: No, no, no. I'm not disagreeing with his logic either, Joe. But I think what ends up happening is, instead of listening to the comments that Don makes about detailing and workmanship, all people end up hearing is money. And money's as important as what the detailing and craftsmanship is. And ... and... BB: I agree, but we have to be able to justify this expense. MM: I understand that. BB: That's the bottom line. VB: And a return on investment. BB: I mean I'd love to live in a perfect world where we can sit here and money's not an issue, and I don't have to worry about people calling me at my house and saying... MM: I never said money's not an issue. BB: "What the hell did ... what'd you do?" You know... I need to make sure that in order to make an educated decision, we're looking at this from all angles. And I think we're doing a pretty good job of that. That's all. I understand where you're coming from. I just need to... JR: It's not an easy discussion. BB: ...just need to look at this from different angles. JR: No. I appreciate all of your comments, because they're all 100% valid. I don't... DS: Our first step on the Carriage House will be Tuesday or Wednesday, whenever Joe Manfredi can make it ... get him down there to evaluate much of what it is... JR: Jay, can you call some fencing company right now and see if someone can go out and (inaudible) a fence around these buildings today. DS: we're talking about. He is not really being given the direction or the authorization to go down there and look at it in this light. JR: Who can we get? DS: Simultaneously, we'll be getting the structural engineer in to further evaluate that beam and see how much of that needs to be replaced, if any, you know, or if it needs to... if it can be just stabilized in its current position. BB: Will the foundation of the Carriage House be addressed under that particular Dollar amount? DS: We ... well... BB: Or at least a slab or something? DS: Assuming, you know... That's assuming that we are not going to have major problems in that foundation wall. I have not seen any evidence that we have a major foundation problem there. BB: OK. TD: How long will these efforts on the Carriage House that you've outlined this morning take from beginning to end? Time wise. DS: For implementation? Or for ... Until start to finish? Torn of Wappinger Page 40 Printed 1011512007 Una Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 TD: Yeah. DS: It could take several months. Michael, how long did the Chapel ... the real work at the Chapel take? A month? MB: Yes. About 4 weeks. DS: OK. This building is much less accessible and in much worse condition than that was. So, it could easily be several months. MB: Yes. BB: I just don't want to get into a situation where we decide on a certain Dollar amount and then they uncover, you know... DS: That will be the risk that you run on that, depending... Again, we will... MM: Then it stops... DS: ...do everything we can... MM: It either stops or it continues... DS: ...to work within that two million... MM: ...but not without our authorization. DS: ...and I believe we will be able to achieve... MM: You understand? DS: ...the majority, if not all, of what we have to do based upon our knowledge of the building right now. I have not seen evidence of other problems. That is not to say that we will not uncover them, but I have not seen that evidence at this point in time. JR: I think everyone has brought tremendous thought into what they're trying to do in wrestling with this decision. I think the historic nature of these two buildings, and the significance of what we've been trying to do to these two buildings, speak to that. I just don't see how we can... In the end, when you leave two shored buildings... and they've been here for 150-160 years, our $4,000,000 investment... you've just extended their live several more decades, and I think that's significant. If people didn't invest money in Vanderbilt Mansion, that would have collapsed (inaudible). If they didn't do the monies to Roosevelt Mansion... I mean obviously they had large historic significance that maybe this one doesn't have, but this is ours and I just... Ain't walking away from it. BB: Is it feasible for us to choose between these two structures... choose, you know, the Mansion over the Carriage House? I mean how do you feel about that? JR: I think it's both or none. MM: I think it would be foolish to... JR: I think... MM: ...given the ... given the ... what it'll end up costing us, I think it'd be foolish to throw one... JR: To raze both buildings for a million Dollars and walk away and leave grass ... To spend four million and still have these structures... And you're gonna be spending that million Dollars for the next 20 years to mow this grass seventy-five million times over, I just... MM: Nothing else ... No other monies gets spent unless the Board approves it. And if Don finds something along the way and says, "Whoa, baby. We have a major problem here." JR: We do ... (inaudible) MM: Then we readdress it... VB: Yeah, but you've already committed the money. You've already spent... MM: It's not a carte blanche. VB: But you've already spent the money MM: What I'm saying is, if a million Dollars into the Carriage House, he finds something significant, it's not like we're... JR: Hold on, hold on... MM: ...living in a vacuum. JR: Don, is the... I kinda think that's... You guys are gonna go out to the Carriage House and you're gonna start... DS: We'll have... Yeah, we should have a very good idea of the primary components that are going to make up the project prior to starting it. JR Before you spend a million Dollars. MM: Yeah. JR: I'd be really pissed you spend a million and tell me that, "Oh, guess what? It's $6,000,000." MM: But that's (inaudible) my point. It's not like ... it's not like we're... JR: We're gonna know that early on, Right Don? VB: I could see going in to preserve this one building. I'm not voting for this Carriage House until they do some kind of (inaudible) BB: I need a better assessment on that Carriage House. To be honest with you ... It's... JR: Well, what are we gonna do about the emergency then? BB: Well, we can approve, based on certain criteria. I mean... You know, approve a Dollar Town of Wappinger Page 41 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 amount based on the fact that the architect, or whoever looks at that Carriage House, doesn't decide there's $6,000,000 of work that's needed. You know what I'm saying? VB: Right. JR: Don, alright. If we authorize up to two million, and you tell us initially, Don, it's gonna be more than two million, then you can't spend the two million and you gotta come back. DS: Yes. I mean... And again, before we spend much of that money ... I mean, it will really be the predominantly soft costs. We will have evaluated and probed that building to have a fairly good scope. Obviously, when things are uncovered that we can't see ... that's where the contingency or the additional money will come in, but we will be fairly comfortable, once we get into that building to see what the $2,000,000 will do for us before you spend most or all of it. BB: i.e.... i.e., the foundation issue. If you get in there and figure out that there's a foundation issue under that slab, and it's a major expenditure, that's what I'm nervous about. DS: OK. Well, I mean, a simple solution there... We get Joe Manfredi in for, you know, a day for a guy with a concrete saw, and we cut out a couple of blocks of that. We look at it down below and we look at it from up above... VB: Before we spend $2,000,000... DS: You're gonna have a (inaudible) good idea of what's going on in the foundation area. VB: Hey Don. Before we spend $2,000,000, what do you think it's gonna cost for you to go in there and do an assessment before I give you a cap of money. Because you know what, I'd rather give you some money to go exploratory tell me what you think it's gonna be, and then decide if we're gonna do it right or we're not gonna do it at all. I don't wanna just put money out there...'cause you know a contractor sees that money out there, things are a little slow, he's gonna try to grab for it. So you know what, I don't wanna get two million..."Oh, we're short guys, we need more than that"... You know, "This came up". I mean, I know how that works in this business, OK? It's like the general contractors, "It's the change orders... Grab the change orders". Look at the spec the architect missed, or the engineer missed. I know how it works. So ... And you and I know how that works. DS: Yes. VB: I'm willing to... Oh, you agree? DS: Yep. VB: Thank you. DS: But, I mean that... VB: We all know there's laypeople here and they're not people in this business. DS: I don't know that it's... I mean, Joe has (inaudible) JR: You know, you keep referring to us as laypeople. We're not imbeciles either. VB: Joe, nobody's saying ... (inaudible) JR: I just wanna say that because I've heard your pontificate ... I heard your pontificate for 10 years of being a contractor and entrepreneur... BB: Hold on, hold on, hold on ... Listen, listen. He's in the business.. JR: I understand he's in the business. VB: (Inaudible)... JR: (Inaudible)... I didn't crawl under a rock yesterday either. MM: Time out! Time Out! BB: Joe, we need a certain amount of insight here in order to make an educated decision. JR: Fine. MM: What I've heard Don say... BB: You're taking it personally. MM: What I've heard Don say... JR: Well, after a while, you know... MM: Wait a minute. What I've heard Don say more than once is ... we're not gonna go in... VB: I just wanna ...(inaudible) MM: Well, let me finish, Vinny. VB: Well, I was talking to him before somebody blew up, so it's my dime. MM: What I've heard Don say more than once is, "I'm not gonna go in there and spend two million Dollars. Before I spend much at all, I'm gonna have a very good handle on what the final cost will be. BB: So we can set the Resolution with criteria, maybe... VB: Right. That's what I'm saying. BB: ...that says, "Don't spend the $2,000,000 on the Carriage House after you do the initial assessment of the building and find out it's gonna cost $6,000,000. JR: But we've not done that... VB: That's not what I'm saying. Town of Wappinger Page 42 Printed 1011512007 Wo" Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 BB: That's what I'm saying, you know what I mean. JR: We've done that on every project. VB: What I'm saying, Joe, is I would like, because we used the word "$2,000,000", OK, all I'm saying is, is it fair to give him $100,000 to the professionals to go in there and say, "Look, this is what it's gonna cost" to give me a report like they did with this? BB: Yeah, but if they find... VB: That's what I'm doing. And they say... and then at that point there, we're gonna put a fence around it, Don's gonna go ahead take a look at it with the structural engineer, come back in ... so I know what I'm spending rather that just saying, "Here's two million", and not knowing if it's gonna be more or what. I don't wanna put the carrot out there. I wanna know what the reality is. That's all I'm saying. BB: But under the emergency protocol, if it is ... requires $2,000,000... VB: Then we come back and vote it. MM: No, you have to take action on it. BB: I don't know if you can. You can't really justify it's an emergency if you comeback and vote on it. MM: Here... We... You forget that we have an unsafe building... TD: It's an emer... The terms of emergency... the only thing that makes it an emergency is, you don't have time to bid it out. BB: Right. TD: (Inaudible) JR: You have to react quickly. MM: Vinny, we have an unsafe building you want people to walk around and do an assessment in, but then you're tying their hands as to being able to take action to remedy... JR: To mobilize. BB: Right. MM: ...the unsafeness of the building. BB: You could put a stipulation in the Resolution that states, you know... MM: "Do not spend beyond X amount of Dollars without approval from the Board. I mean, it's not like we've not ever done these... VB: Maureen... MM: ... before. VB: 12 Years, I've seen it... MM: I know, Vinny. VB: I've seen it 4 years on the school boards too, how it works... MM: I know. VB: That's 16 of government service. MM: I know. VB: So my question here is, all I wanna do is protect, at least... MM: I understand that. We all do. VB: my dime, is that I know there's an upside to this thing. It's not just an open-ended, let's - throw -it -against -a wall. MM: I know, Vinny. VB: That's what I'm looking to find. MM: I know. JR: You're correct. MM: I know. VB: I'm not dealing with emotion. JR: But... MM: I know. VB: I'm dealing with reality MM: I know. JR: But he's saying, from his best guess, and it is a guess... VB: Right. JR: To, in order to salvage the (inaudible), it's gonna be around $2,000,000 not to make it safe, it's (inaudible) save it. VB: Joe, is the two million to make it safe and just tighten it up? Is that what we're saying? JR: Don, what does the two million give the Board for the Carriage House? DS: We're trying to stop it from further falling apart and so you can lift your emergency. VB: So that's just water intrusion (inaudible) DS: It's water intrusion of the primary structure. BB: Correct. JR: Is the building usable after the $2,000,000. Can Recreation come back ... is it a temporary? DS: That is our (inaudible), that we will make the building so that Recreation can store the Town of Wappinger Page 43 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 tractors in there. JR: Is this a temporary fix, or is this a... A temp... I'm not talking like a permanent fix that it's beautiful, you know, everyone's going '`Ooh" and "Ahh"... Is the building structurally sound to be used on a long term basis? Could we leave it in that ... How long can we leave it in this condition after $2,000,000 is spent? DS: I... Not knowing what I'm fixing for the $2,000,000, I would anticipate that it would be several years that you would be able to leave it in that condition. MM: OK. BB: Reconstruct various components of the roof. Correct? DS: Correct....for a long term. BB: The beams, the gutters... you're in essence keeping the water out of the structure so you can store ... we need to make sure this structure is able to be utilized to keeping the water out of the structure.... Does it include window replacement? DS: No. BB: Does it include any... DS: We will be boarding up (inaudible)... BB: Boarding up windows. DS: ...it would not include window replacement. BB: And if you determine there's a foundation issue with this structure, you're gonna advise the Town Board before we have to put any... DS: But that would not... I mean ... a foundation issue... a significant foundation issue could skew that number drastically, so we need to evaluate that... BB: We'd have to come back to the table on that. MM: He just said that he would come back. BB: We'd have to come back to the table... DS: We would come back to you with that information, yes. JR: But that ... But this is the protocol we've always operated under with these... DS: Yes. JR: with these ... all these projects. He gives us a budget, he goes out there and he comes back and say, "It's totally doable from the estimate now. We've verified it. We're gonna proceed." Every single one of these that we've done out there, not one of them we've been surprised by, once we finally give them full authorization. If it is a major foundation issue where the building cannot be saved, then we'll have to deal with that. BB: But is that gonna be after we spend the $2,000,000 on the root? JR: No. MM: No. BB: OK... JR: He said... BB: I just want... JR: He said... BB: I just want to get that on the table. PD: And then also, by the bond, you'll have a half million Dollar to raze the building at the point... MM: Right. PD: That will already be there. VB: Well, the difference is, if we're not spending the two million, and we know what the upside's gonna be, then at that point... JR: You could readdress it. VB: Right. So we have on the table, how much money? We have $2,000,000 to maybe fix this and then we have to make a decision. It's not there to be spent. The two million's there earmarked and a guesstimate... BB: They have up to $2,000,000 to reconstruct the roof, the beams, the gutters ... make the Carriage House usable. If they cannot do that, based on the investigation, the $2,000,000 is not being spent for that particular structure. Is that correct? VB: (Inaudible) MM: (Inaudible) BB: That is the educated way to do this. VB: Alright. The second thing that... MM: That's how its ... that's the standard. That's how it's done. VB: ...now, let's go back now ... ok, so we know we're all understanding that. Let's go back to the Carriage House... or the ... BB: Mansion. VB: Mansion. Ok. We got a million plus on the roof, and we got $600,000 for exploratory to do the work... BB: It's not exploratory. $600,000 is reconstruction per floor, you understand? It's Town of Wappinger Page 44 Printed 1011512007 no. Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 actually... VB: (Inaudible) BB: ...done work, it's done work. They're gonna most likely find some issues that need to be corrected based on that per floor reconstruction. Am I correct saying that? DS: Yes. BB: But it's gonna at least give us the ability to stabilize this structure, correct? DS: Yes. And we will, as we're opening up floors, again, if we, if we uncover something that is going to make that number go skewed, we will let you know before we proceed with that, because there may be a point in time where you decide to cut bait. BB: OK, that's important. VB: We'll you already have six hundred grand into it... JayP: No, you wouldn't have six hundred at that point... MM: No. DS: You may not have six hundred grand into it... ALL: (Inaudible) BB: 150 per floor we planning here, Jay? Is that... JayP: Hard and soft, yeah. BB: And now, the roof is the last stage here, correct? DS: I'm sorry? BB: The roof is the last stage of the Mansion. DS: Yes. BB: You don't do the roof until you can tell us that the building can support it. DS: That the... everything else is in sound condition. VB: Alright, so what's the ... so... BB: So, you're talking $4,000,000 committed to both structures. Up to $4,000,000. VB: And what's the terms of the bonds on that? MM: 20 years. VB: And what's the tax... What's gonna cost us? MM: About 7% ... of the budget. Joe went through the whole budget impact and debt service reductions in 2008. VB: So when you talk about 7% of the budget, how much is that? How much money is that? JR: You're adding about a hundred and fifty thousand to the budget.... probably more than what we're paying having all these professionals in the room ... we probably spent that already today. JayP: Oh, that hurt. JP: We're gonna have to bond for that. VB: Hey, they gotta eat, you know. BB: That's his cell phone bill. VB: Batteries, probably. BB: So when you say 7% of the budget... JR: 7% increase in the tax levy... not the total budget ... tax levy. BB: And how does that wash with the... I know you explained this before, but real quick... JR: Sure. BB: ...how does that wash with the subsidy we're getting from the State for the new CAP Assessor Program? How does that all wash... JR: We'll what you have, you have a five year BAN that you're gonna be paying off in '08. That is $115,000. You have the computer technology BAN, which comes off the books in '08. That frees up about $150,000 a year. So you're gonna be immediately replacing that hundred fifty, plus another hundred fifty on top of it, would give you an additional net of a hundred fifty thousand in debt service... going forward. JayP: The two of them ... they're each a hundred and fifty, Joe? JR: No, you said roughly, total bond for this payment is what, 325? JayP: 328. JR: Yeah, 328. So I have a hundred and fifteen plus I have another thirty to forty thousand in other minor BANs that are gonna peter out in '08, according to that chart we have... VB: (Inaudible) JR: ... and if... we have to work with Sal Pennini, and if we could roll this into the preponderance of the other bonding, with the water and everything else... With the long term master bond for the Town in... VB: Can you add that into that, you think you can? JR: It depends on when we ... I don't know how we ... he'll have to work with us to do that. Then we get a longer life than the 20 years. GK: Hey Don, can I just ask you a quick question, `cause I've gotta leave here... Best case scenario, if this gets approved and you start the work, how much time are we looking at before, approximately, that we can lift, or you can issue me a letter that the building is not Town of Wappinger Page 45 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 in danger of collapse? If you had to guess... DS: Well, if...I guess the question is, is this emergency legislation able to be individualized to the specific buildings, because I think the solution is gonna come much quicker at the Mansion than it is at the Carriage House. JR: Yeah. Each building is its own emergency. DS: OK. Well, I would say... I would say we're probably about... Michael, did Joe act is though he could start immediately? MB: Yes. He can start immediately. DS: I mean... MB: Within a week... (inaudible) DS: ...what do you think, Mike? I'd guess he's got the better portion of a month or a little bit more at the Mansion. GK: OK. So, conceivably, if the work was started immediately, two months before we could lift that approximately? DS: On the front building, I'd say... I'd say between one and two months, but I think it's probably closer to four weeks, at the pace that he works. GK: OK. DS: We'd need to, obviously, impose upon him the gravity of the situation and... GK: Right. DS: ...I mean you can't even safely get your people up to that maintenance... or to the house on the hill, with that building in its current condition. GK: So, you're assumption is we'd start with the Mansion and then that way we'd be able to lift that danger so that... DS: I'd like to run them both simultaneously, and we have to talk to Joe about his work force availability, but usually he's able to staff jobs pretty well. So, I would expect that he would be able to work both of them at the same time, though ... you know, again ... a month or so on the Mansion, and it would probably be all of three or more months... four months on the Carriage House ... as we go through that. GK: OK. Thanks, Don. DS: I assume... I mean... I assume, although everyone is liable until the emergency, or until the danger is passed, I assume that it would bear great credence, you know, on the behalf of the Town and its professionals, that once work has begun and there's obviously a forward movement on the issue, that it's no longer a negligent act if there's fence up and there's forward movement. JR: That's right. That's the difference. DS: Alright. JR: Knowing and failing to act and... DS: That's the problem. JR: If there's, God forbid, an accident as we're carrying out our duties, then that liability is different. DS: Right. JR: I mean you could get sued... VB: For nothing. JR: (Inaudible) DS: Yeah VB: (Inaudible) law suits now, so (inaudible) JR: Well, I don't want no one dead. (Inaudible). That's the big thing. Excuse me. DS: And just so I understand, Joe, at this point the park is closed and will remain closed? JR: Yes, but we're gonna have to take up... we're gonna have to put fencing around the buildings. JayP: Buildings. JR: Buildings. That's what I said. VB: So we got somebody down there watching that all the time, don't we? JR: No. I mean we don't have anyone living there. BB: The only issue with the fencing is, I have a problem with... JR: I told Recreation they weren't allowed to go on the property as of yesterday. They go in every day. VB: Yeah, but (Inaudible). JR: Yeah, but then that's (inaudible) BB: The issue I have with the fencing is that, the fencing for the Mansion is gonna have to impede that roadway which prevents access to the Carriage House and to the Administration building. GF: You can go over the top with a 4 wheel drive. BB: I'm just saying that, if God forbid, there's an emergency... GF: ...there is a road (inaudible) Town of Wappinger Page 46 Printed /011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 BB: ...or a fire or something. JR: Well we're gonna have to give you guys emergency (inaudible) JayP: The gate's there with... GF: Worst case, Billy, you go through the gate and you go through the fence. The fence is not something that would hold back a fire truck, I wouldn't think. I mean, you take your bolt cutters and snap off the (inaudible) BB: Right, I just wanted to make sure that... JayP: Bill, maybe you and Glenn could work with the fencing company to put up something there that... VB: (Inaudible) GF: You could get through. BB: I just wanna make sure that there's access because, God forbid, somebody does get into the Carriage House in the meantime, and it falls down on them, and we can't get a vehicle in there, this is a discussion that needs to be had. GF: You could get a utilities truck over the top ... you won't get an engine up there. BB: OK. GF: You won't get an apparatus up at the top. TD: How involved would alarming the two buildings be? BB: There used to be an alarm... PD: You'd have to get in them. And they're unsafe to be in. BB: Well, there was a fire alarm at the dormitory. 1 don't think it's hooked up... VB: Is there juice in all those buildings? MM: Isn't there something the fence company can (inaudible) with you guys? VB: (Inaudible) DS: I think there are (inaudible) in all the buildings. I think they're only local, but there are alarms in them, because I know that panel was always going off at the Carriage House. BB: Must not be hooked up anymore. It used to be... Greystone used to have it connected to ... The Dormitory was connected. We used to go there... DS: The Central Station? BB: Yeah. From the central station in the office when you walk in there. DS: Yeah. BB: It used to be connected to a dialer. DS: OK. BB: But when they disconnected the phones, that's probably what happened. DS: Graham, am I correct in assuming that you will be taking, or the Town will be taking care of installing this fence then? If that's not something we're doing with Manfredi, is it something the Town is doing, or should we... BB: Joe, has left the room for a minute. He can probably clarify that. MM: I think Joe has asked Jay to see if he could get a fence company out there, and Jay suggested that we speak to you about that. JayP: No. MM: Oh, no? GF: The problem is, Don, you got a foot of frost on the ground right now. Whoever's gonna go out there... DS: Is there really a foot? GF: ...needs to have equipment. MM: Is it really a foot? He wants to know. GF: Yeah, we've got a foot of frost... PD: Can I make a suggestion? (Inaudible)... got the contractors gonna have to work around this fence also. Maybe you might wanna talk to Manfredi about the fence. BB: Good point. PD: He's the one that's gonna have to work around (inaudible) MM: Excellent. Excellent idea. ALL: (Inaudible) JayP: Maybe the ... Don? DS: Yes. JayP: Don, Michael, maybe the fence should go... very good point ... the fence should go through Manfredi. VB: Absolutely. DS: OK. PD: Because he's the one that's gotta be dealing with it more than anybody. BB: Yeah. Put Manfredi in touch with the Fire Chief... PD: Absolutely. DS: Michael, I will be out Monday. You need to get in touch first thing Monday morning, with Joe on that, OK? Town of Wappinger Page 47 Printed 10//5/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 MB: Absolutely. MM: Isn't there some concern that the fence needs to go up tomorrow? Or... GK: Yes. MM: The fence really needs to go up today or tomorrow. DS: I don't, myself, have the ability ... then that's why I was asking if you were taking care of it, because I don't have the ability to get a hold of Joe on a weekend. I don't. MM: Do you? DS: I don't know how to do that. PD: I think you would be hard-pressed to get somebody out there on a Sunday, especially... BB: Well, at this particular moment, the gate is locked. You know, I mean... We're moving as quick as we can here. Monday, obviously... PD: Yeah, Monday, I mean... MM: OK. Well I heard concern from... "me DS: Maybe it would be good if the Town just went and posted signs for the situation or something (inaudible) GK: Yeah, Don... DS: "Keep Away". DS: Don, what I'm gonna do (inaudible)... I'll just post both buildings. At least it's an attempt to do something. PD: Realistically, I mean, a fence company (inaudible) be able to get material tomorrow ... to put up a fence. MM: Yeah. GK: Who has the keys for that? There's no other way to access... GF: Recreation. GK: Recreation. So, I need to leave here... MM: Don, I hope you're on a landline. DS: Yes, I am. MM: OK, good. VB: I'm leaving in 15 minutes. BB: We're just waiting on Supervisor Ruggiero to come back in the room. DS: OK. MM: Have we all... BB: So, where we at with every... MM: (Inaudible) ...everybody weigh in on this? BB: Where we at with everybody here? Vinny? VB: I know where I am. BB: OK. Where's that? Let's get it out in the open right now. VB: From my perspective, I question spending that kind of money, $4,000,000. That's me. BB: The only way I can look at it is this way. OK. It's gonna cost a million Dollars to knock these buildings to the ground. OK? We've inherited these two structures... VB: I didn't hear... JP: I didn't hear that. VB: ...cost a million Dollars. I didn't hear that MM: He said five hundred for each building. VB: He told me four hundred ... he said it was four hundred... MM: At least. VB: ...to take .... He said it was four hundred to take down the main building. I didn't hear what he said take down the Carriage House. DS: That would be all the same, Vince, to take down that Carriage House, I'm sure... VB: So you're saying it's eight hundred thousand Dollars to level those buildings? Is that what you're saying, Don? DS: I'm sorry? VB: You said it's eight hundred thousand? DS: Between eight hundred and a million to take down both of them, I would expect. Yeah, because of the magnitude of foundation and concrete work on that Carriage House. VB: OK. """ BB: Well, that's what I'm looking at, it's gonna cost a million Dollars to take the buildings down. It's gonna cost $4,000,000 to properly secure both structures, and make the Carriage House usable. VB: I agree. BB: Do you understand where I'm coming from? VB: Yep. BB: `Cause I want at least one of these structures usable. VB: Well, wait a minute. If we... let me ask you a question. If the $4,000,000 includes the roof anyway, that includes putting a roof on the other building. Town of Wappinger Page 48 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 BB: That includes a roof... VB: So, can we use that... I'm just hypothetically speaking... if we were go through and put the roof on this thing, what could we ... use that for storage or anything in there? BB: The Carriage House? VB: No, the main building. DS: George, I don't know if you would allow that to happen, would you? GK: Well, I'm gonna wait to see what you're gonna... what you're gonna give me as far as documentation and I'll make that call... DS: No, but I mean, if that building is dry and clean on the inside... I mean, what can... what can the Town... what can you logically allow the Town to use it for? GK: If you're assuring me that it's structurally sound, yeah, I have no problem with it. VB: OK. JR: Nothing wrong with it. GK: I do have to leave. I apologize. JR: Bye, George. MM: Bye, George. VB: OK. GK: Joe, just so you know, I'm gonna be contacting Recreation. I will be posting the buildings today... JR: Alright. GK: ... do that when I get back. JR: Jay, did you get a hold of Joe Manfredi see if he can put this fence up? JayP: OK. BB: But, while you were out of the room... JayP: (Inaudible)... a hold of Joe Manfredi. JR: What? JayP: I don't know how ... I didn't get a hold anybody, no. MM: Don't know how to get a hold of him on the weekend... MB: I can get a hold of him Monday morning. JR: Well, we got 48 hours between now and Monday. I need a fence up. I mean we got... VB: So, it's a $4,000,000 deal. BB: Right. DS: Would that be the reason that, again I don't know if the Town has the capability, but would it be something that Highway could handle .... if it's... if we're unable to get a hold of Joe and you've only got 48 hours... JR: Can you put a snow fence around it until we get a permanent fence? PD: Have him put a snow fence up until Monday. GF: I don't have any snow fence. BB: Yeah, but the thing is ... the park is closed right now. It's got a lock on the gate, OK? Monday morning, in my opinion, would be the earliest time you can feasibly have Manfredi put a fence up. MM: (Inaudible) JR: (Inaudible) BB: I understand that, but... I understand that, but he doesn't have... I don't think he understands that the gate is not just closed. It's locked with a chain. MM: I think we're just trying to respond to the concern. (Inaudible) JayP: We also don't wanna put up a fence today that would impede Manfredi on Monday. MM: Right. BB: Correct. JR: I understand that Jay, but let's... VB: Put your signs up... JR: I wanna put a snow fence up. GF: We can see if (Inaudible) got something, he might be able to go out there. PD: See if Tommy ... (Inaudible) Tommy Marshall? GF: I don't think Tommy's got that (inaudible) JayP: He can't react that quick... BB: The fencing theoretically needs to be... GF: (Inaudible) JayP: You need thousand... you need a thousand foot fence. BB: You need a lot of fence. I mean it has to be... JR: Too much? How much... JayP: No... I don't know somebody has that in their back yard. PD: Yeah, that's the problem... DS: It's thousands of feet (inaudible) BB: It might be, Joe, it might be better to wait `til Monday and have Manfredi put a fence up, Town of Wappinger Page 49 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 professionally, in concert with the Fire Chief so that access to the other buildings is not impeded. DS: And, you know, by the time Joe gets it up, it may be Tuesday, by the time they muster up that much material too. TD: In the interim, (inaudible) tell the constable to just get down there as frequently as he can, but stay away from the building itself. GF: Yeah, put the Town Patrol down there. VB: (Inaudible)... gonna cost to put a sheriff down there.. JR: Alright. I'll call the Sheriffs. VB: Yeah. JR: To block the building... VB: It's cheaper to have a Sheriff car down there looking around, right Joe? And you still can put your signs up. GF: (Inaudible) PD: Yeah. No one's gonna climb over the police car. BB: As long as he doesn't drive between the buildings... VB: Well, I guess he'll have to bring his 4 wheel drive... BB: Tell him he can't go anywhere. He has to sit there and not move. VB: That's fair. You can have ... you put the police department... BB: Alright. So, we're talking a $4,000,000 investment here, Vin. I really don't think there's any other option here. We knock these buildings down for a million Dollars. We're gonna have nothing left. JR: To show for your million Dollars. BB: And the money that was put into it prior to today. There was a lot of money put into this before I was on the Town Board, which was considered an investment. And it ... you know, if it's gonna cost you a million Dollars to raze these two buildings, and $4,000,000 to stabilize them properly, you tell me the right decision. JP: Well, the seven million to build brand new any way you want includes a million to knock it down, I assume. BB: That's another angle. JP: So, now you're down to six. Now you're down to six. JR: Is that true, Don? DS: I didn't hear that. JR: Joe Paoloni just asked the seven million to rebuild the building, does that include the million to knock it down? Or half a million to knock down the Mansion? DS: To rebuild which building? JR: The Mansion. JayP: Mansion. JR: You knock down the Mansion and you rebuild it. Does that $7,000,000 figure have the half million in it? DS: I believe it did, yeah. In rough terms, I believe it did. BB: And then you still have the Carriage House to deal with. DS: Right. VB: And you say to bring it back to at least the outside of facade would look good, but like type A class office space inside there, what do you think that costs to do that? DS: I'm sorry? VB: In order to do a finished inside there, OK, just like office space inside there, you know. Bring in the sheet rock, sheet rock returns, all that jazz... DS: Once you have a sound shell, you can probably go back inside and that.... 75 to 85, $90.00 a square foot once the core building is in place, to set it up with just carpet and drywall. VB: OK. So how many square feet you have there? DS: Michael, was it 6,000 in the Mansion? MB: Yes, 65... VB: So, what you're telling me is if... if you, and you think that's prevailing scale... you think 80 bucks a foot... DS: Well, that's probably... that's a good point. VB: I'm sorry... DS: ...(inaudible)...a hundred bucks. But so (inaudible)... six hundred a floor? VB: Yeah, it's... GF: 18,000 VB: So you're saying 600 a floor, ok. GF: (Inaudible)... a million eight? VB: It's a million eight, yeah. Well, you know, as crazy as it may sound, but at a million eight, and they're saying its $4,000,000 there... so you're saying he's at 5.8 million, but Torn of Wappinger Page 50 Printed 10115/2007 a" Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 that's finishing... that's just shoring up the Carriage House, but it's finishing... Don, you hear me? DS: (Inaudible)... It's kinda breaking up a little bit. VB: What I'm... I think what I'm hearing you say is... you're saying is, if it's six hundred G's and put the roof on it, ok. So, at a million six, and you're saying to finish the inside of that ... class A office space... drywall... sheetrock return ... you know, things like that... (Inaudible)... myself, it would be about how much more do you figure inside on that drywall and maybe putting the windows in and some, you know, not real high-end finish? DS: Well, I mean, you're talking two different things now. The interior (inaudible) for office space is gonna be probably upwards 200 bucks a foot. But then we've got some other work that needs to... JR: Office space? DS: ...be done on place such as the exterior replaning and windows. VB: Well, you finish the inside of it with sheetrock, carpet on the floors, and such so it looks nice inside the Mansion. That's what I was just saying. JR: Oh, you're just using that as a... VB: Class A space would be like what you're (inaudible) JR: So it's not gonna be an office right? VB: No. But It would look, (inaudible), you would have... I'm just trying to get a ball park number of sheet rock and carpet in there. Just trying to bring it back so you can use it. I mean... there's no elevator... there's no elevator in that building. DS: Yeah, well, you ... there's gonna be an elevator. I mean that's gonna be 50 grand right there. VB: Right, `cause the ADA standard you gotta go with, so you gotta put the... JR: Why are we putting... MM: We're beyond the scope of the vote though. BB: If it were an office space. JR: Oh. VB: If you use it for any space, you gotta have the elevator for handicapped access. BB: If we're using just the first floor... JR: Just restrict the first floor. BB: If you're using just the first for wedding stuff ... (inaudible) VB: Well, the question I have is, Don, how does that work with the ADA standard. I mean, do they have to have access to all the floors, or they restrict them? DS: You will as you develop them, yeah. VB: That's right. BB: Yeah, but they're... only for public access... DS: (Inaudible)... If your plan is to... JR: For public access, Don, right? If we're not gonna ... if we restrict upstairs to the public, do they need ADA? DS: No. It's... Joe, I guess the question was, "In the long term picture, are you gonna need access to the upper floors if you're gonna utilize them?" Yes, you will. If you're gonna restrict access to the first floor, no, you don't. BB: What about if you're gonna have employee's offices on the second floor, do you need an elevator for that? DS: Yes. VB: You have to have ADA access to anyone that's in there. BB: Alright. Well, look at all angles here. JR: Now if we had gone through the State Historic Preservation, and we restored it and we're gonna put employees offices on the second floor, would we still be required to do and elevator? DS: Yeah, the historic... excuse me ... the historic designation on the building doesn't give you necessarily the ability to circumvent the building code. So, you know, I would expect... JR: Except when the State tells you to... DS: ... that they would have allowed you to go in and open up somewhere and put in an elevator. They can't grant a variance. Only the State Board can grant a variance. VB: Well, they could go to the Division of Codes and try to get a variance on that, right? DS: They could. VB: `Cause I got one on a building. JR: Yeah, I think the elevator is such a minor issue. I don't wanna cloud what we're doing here. VB: It's only 50 grand, when you're throwing 4 million around. What's 50 grand to be able to use the whole building? DS: Right. Exactly. I mean, in the scope of what you're looking to do, that, not that it's a little bit of money, but it's not the biggest expense you're gonna have. Torii of Wappingers Page 51 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 VB: We'll be throwing that in soft cost studies. DS: Now, I mean, you're gonna also need the sprinkler, `cause you got a three story wood frame building, so you're gonna need to sprinkler that. VB: That's right. BB: Jesus. How much is that gonna cost? VB: Sprinklers are expensive. BB: You're gonna have to put up a damn tower... VB: Yeah, but you don't have enough pressure anyway. BB: Actually there is a (inaudible) GF: (Inaudible) VB: (Inaudible) JP: (Inaudible) PD: (Inaudible) JR: We have a tank. PD: (Inaudible) JR: We already have that. BB: There's the... JP: (Inaudible)... pressurized now. BB: Yeah. JR: Yeah. We have ... (inaudible) GF: (Inaudible) BB: (Inaudible)... the standpoint on the dorm. JR: Alright. Again. We're taking a major step here as it is with the $4,000,000 to save these buildings and really say we've save them. And I understand what you're trying to say, Vinny: "If we've gone four million, go the whole way and (inaudible) an end product. That's what you're saying? VB: Well the numbers aren't gonna go down. I mean the numbers are only gonna go up. I mean, minimum wage went up two bucks. I mean, we're gonna sit, it's gonna continue to go up. I'm just trying to bite the bullet with the bonding down for a million bucks. I mean, I'm just talk throwing it out. JR: No, I understand. VB: That's all I'm doing. DS: Well before... If that's the direction you're going, again, I think it might be prudent to be a two step process. But we should really look at a cost evaluation for (inaudible) for entire building to make sure all those components are included if you're considering a bond for the entire thing. VB: And... your soft costs ... and your... DS: Right, exactly. I mean, you got (inaudible) costs, you got testing... all kinds of things. MM: But that could be the second step. Really... DS: Yes. MM: What the emergent issue before us is the safety issues... VB: To shore it up. MM: ... and the monies that need to be designated to make these buildings safe. So, I support Vinny exploring the second step, but right now we've gotta come to some decision on the two buildings that are in front of us. JR: I feel like we're ... you know... and I understand we're just thinking out loud, but ... going from the emergency to picking out china patterns... BB: Look, that's gonna do more than... we wanna see an end product at some point... JR: I understand, but... MM: Right, but I don't... BB: ...If we're gonna commit $4,000,000 to it, we wanna have some sort of a timeline, in my opinion, that there's gonna be something feasible in that Mansion. MM: And I understand that, but I don't... I think ... one part of that we have to decide today. The other part we could sit down and hash out next week. You know what I'm saying? BB: No. I'll be on vacation so... JR: Well, no. (Inaudible) "" MM: Well then (Inaudible) JR: Step 2 of this doesn't have to be us doing this. Not so much as us as a Board, but us as the government entity paying for it. It could be ... That might become real... PD: (Inaudible) JR: rentable space. MM: Yeah. JR: That's what I'm saying. MM: And if we do decide that it is us that wants to do it for the Town, we have some time to really discuss it. What my concern is, that we're ... we keep stepping away from... Torn of Wappinger Page 52 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: Emergency. MM: ...the emergency issue here. JR: Tom, I'm looking at these Resolutions you prepared. TD: The time period should be changed... JR: Nowhere does it say in the ...the resolved part, the Town Board declares this an emergency. And ... Oh here it is. But we should be declaring, you know, that State of Emergency exists. And we also need to add... you got Carnwath Mansion, but you don't have the... MM: Carriage House. JR: ...Carriage House. TD: Are you looking at the Bond Resolution? JR: I'm looking at the Town Board Resolution, not the Bond. BB: (Inaudible) You know? VB: I agree. JR: What's that Bill? BB: He was referencing on the report where it says, "Stabilization is no longer an option as the level of deterioration has continued to progress to its current state." Now, the way that I take that, is that we can't continue putting shoring in there. MM: Right. BB: We can't keep throwing these big 8X8's in there and walking away from this structure. We need to actually reconstruct these particular floors... MM: Right. VB: You know, when George was in there and shoring it up, I'm just... we're gonna know obviously, you have up to X amount of Dollars to spend, which would be the money allocated. And then at that point, you're gonna give us a report as we go along? DS: Vince, as you were talking to me... VB: Don, yeah I'm sorry, Don. Obviously we have a cap on the money to be spent. And we're going through exploratory, trying to make the necessary repairs inside the Mansion going through there. You're gonna give us... as Manfredi goes through each floor ... where we're at with that? We're gonna get a report on that? DS: Yes. We can do that ... and Joe's very good... Manfredi... on giving us daily progress reports and everything else. VB: I would like to have daily progress reports sent to the Council finding exactly what's going on, as we go on. DS: Hey, Michael? Second on that. VB: I mean, obviously, if we earmark this money, we're going through, and it just is more than you guys... that we think, I don't wanna get a situation, "Well, we spent this much, now we gotta spend that much." And it's like a never ending battle for truth, justice and the American way here. It's like spend it. I mean, I'm trying to figure out where this ends or ... I mean if we start going through a couple of floors and it looks pretty rough, I'm saying to myself, "Well do we bite the bullet and finish it?" I mean and do the whole... you know what I mean. DS: Yeah. BB: Under an emergency pretense though, we can't do that. VB: No. BB: We can do a phase 1I though. VB: We can... come back and... JR: Well, I think Phase II is in a non -emergency state. MM: Right. BB: Correct. JR: And, from what they've told us today, Phase I is emergency, and floor one is definitely part of the emergency, and possibly floors two and three. It may be that you get floor one done and there's some work to do to floor two and just some work to do to floor three, and you may not spend the whole six hundred thousand. DS: That is correct. BB: Well, I mean... JR: Then you may have... BB: ...that's fair enough. JR: ... an authorized amount that MM: Not to exceed amount. DS: And that goes back to your comfort level with Joe Manfredi as your contractor and perfonnance on past projects. VB: And, well ... if we have the understanding... the Resolution states that, you know, you can't go beyond, and you gotta give us reports at it going on, and... what the impacts are gonna continue to be. Town of Wappinger Page 53 Printed /0/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JR: We've used Joe for several emergency work, including the restoration of Town Hall when it was destroyed, and came in within budget. Came in withing budget on the... VB: That's fine. JR: ...the basement project for the Mansion. DS: Ceiling on the community and the meeting room. JR: Right, I mean we... MM: Yes. VB: I know Manfredi, yeah. I have no problem with his work. The issue is, Jay, I want sent to the Council people, a report every... as it's going through I wanna see that. I don't wanna wait for a Monday night meeting. I wanna make sure we get that, see what's going on. BB: If we need to sit down like this on a... VB: Right. BB: ...you now, on a last minute basis, I think it's worth our time to do that. JR: We could (inaudible) VB: In case we have to, you know what I mean? JR: ... Organize ... we could get a committee of the whole meeting once a week and go over this project alone. That would be the only item on the agenda. When we were doing... VB: If he runs into a problem. JR: ...When we doing the 99(2)(R) water project, and we were having tremendous problems with the water contractor, Graham, myself, Jay, Al ... would meet weekly, every Thursay morning with that guy Harry, to the point where, you know, I'm not saying we're gonna have this problem with Manfredi, we were trying to really get a handle on the project, because we knew the contractor was out in left field. And we eventually had to fire him. We're not gonna have that with Joe, but a weekly status of where this is, I think would be totally fine. VB: That... if it goes beyond the scope, or there's a problem that's gonna go beyond the scope... JR: Well, I think initially you guys wanna know right up front, day one, day two, day three..."Yeah, it looks like we're within what we told you." VB: Yeah, I (inaudible) we know. JR: Right. VB: If you think it's gonna be beyond the scope with that, then we have a meeting. BB: Yeah. VB: (Inaudible) JayP: (Inaudible)... have the meeting anyway. And that way, you know... MM: No surprises. JayP: No surprises. BB: I definitely... That is my biggest concern here... a major surprise in one of these structures, and I think the way that this being formulated, we're not ... you know, we're not leaving this open-ended. MM: Historically, Don has been excellent at communicating with the Board before he takes a step on his own. BB: OK. JR: He doesn't take any step on his own. It's always been our... MM: Right. BB: OK. JR: We have the Resolution for... you have the two Resolutions. One is the bonding Resolution, which is a... it's a really like BAN anticipation notice... temporary borrowing as you know. We go to permanent financing... in the amount of... I guess we're saying $4,000,000? MM: Correct. JR: Someone wanna ... This is a Resolution authorizing the reconstruction of buildings at Carnwath Farms, for the Town of Wappinger, at a maximum estimated cost of, fill in the blank of $4,000,000, and authorizing issuance of $4,000,000 in serial bonds thereof. Do I have a motion... TD: Joe, I'm sorry. Before you do that, we have to make a SEQRA finding. So, what... we can just do that verbally. That would be the first step, and then we can do the bond and then the Resolution. JR: Alright. TD: If you don't mind, (inaudible)... JR: Do you wanna just explain to us, Jay, this... You mentioned it earlier to me, this SEQRA thing ... how it... JayP: I'm looking for Part 617. I can't find it on here. JR: What are you looking under, Zoning? Town of Wappinger Page 54 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JayP: No, Part 617 State Law. VB: The DEC of an action. JayP: To see what kind of action it is. VB: Right. JayP: A repair may be an unlisted action. VB: I think it is. JayP: And I'd like to know that (inaudible) JR: It is. JayP: It is? JR: `Cause we've done them before. VB: I don't think it... I don't think it is a listed action. JR: Is that what you're... JayP: You're saying it's, you don't think it is? VB: Look, I'm not an attorney. From my experience I think it is, but he's the... JayP: 1 think it's an unlisted action. VB: ...he's the one that does it. I think it's an unlisted action. TD: You know, Jay, I'm just gonna leave it kinda vague, so... MM: If it's unlisted, what does that mean? TD: ...if you need to fix it... VB: It means you don't have to... TD: ...a few days from now, you can fix it. MM: You don't have to declare anything. VB: You don't have to do SEQRA, but, you know what, let's let him double check. PD: (Inaudible) MM: Yeah, I didn't think we declared anything for SEQRA when we did the other... JR: It's always... PD: An unlisted action, you don't have to worry about listing leading agency and what have you. JR: It's usually in the Resolution. MM: OK. BB: Right. PD: You just go right to the next (inaudible). TD: It's a preference to the bond, that's the only reason that... MM: Yeah, I was just... I wasn't... don't have a lot of experience with that. Where are you vacationing, Bill? Someplace hot I hope. BB: Florida. MM: Bring some sun back. JR: Bring some money back, (inaudible) the sun. MM: Yeah I want the 70 degrees back (inaudible) BB: (Inaudible) prevents us from making more of an effort to raise money. That's where you're going towards Phase II. Not saying grant money, I'm just saying... benefactor. PD: Fundraisers, what have you... (inaudible) BB: If we can be inside the structure, after this investment, it would make it easier to do those things that we did in the past... JR: Yeah. BB: (Inaudible) Well, it would make it possible to do those things. The Venetian Christmas. JR: You guys (inaudible) law library? You wanna go into the law library? BB: Bottom line is something has to be done. That's the bottom line. MM: Yeah. Graham, how you doing? I was so sorry to hear about your accident. VB: (Inaudible) was in an accident, Graham? (Inaudible) GF: I got rear-ended. VB: Oh, man. Bad? MM: (Inaudible) GF: Nancy's out of work... (inaudible) PD: No, it's good as far as I'm concerned. VB: Oh, Nancy was... GF: She's gonna be out of work for a month. She's... something with ... (inaudible) VB: So you guys were out ... it wasn't work related, it was personal. GF: Yeah, it was, yeah, my personal truck... MM: Rotator cuffs are (inaudible) GF: We were stopped on Vassar Road and a kid was adjusting his radio, didn't see us stopped turning left and he came right into us. VB: I had a guy hit me at the red light right there at Jackson Street in Fishkill, but I had that Tahoe. And I must have just let off the break for a second... I was rolling and "boom". His car was pretty smashed up. That Tahoe is pretty good. Torn of Wappinger Page 55 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 GF: I went down to see Phil. I thought he was gonna tell me he was sorry and he's ... no snow this year. Phil's slow. PD: You know, Vinny you'll appreciate this. I don't believe in traffic studies. VB: I'm sure ... I like that. I like that. GF: He likes moveable Stop Signs. PD: Yeah. GF: Put them in, then take them out when nobody's expecting ...(inaudible) PD: I think our lights at intersections should have two greens and a yellow. VB: You like it when it rains and he likes it when it snows. That's the best thing for you. Business is good. BB: One of the reasons why ... one of the reasons why I wanted Glenn here was because, you know, there is a real potential for collapse. That's something that he needs to be aware of, and at least now we can... PD: Just assure him about the fence and we'll have (inaudible) BB: I'll just have... While we're waiting... JR: (Inaudible) was making a motion to do it, but you scuttled it. BB: (Inaudible) fencing for Manfredi? Is that correct? JR: That's gonna be the motion we're going for, yeah. BB: OK. BB: (inaudible) the other structures ... (inaudible) ... the fencing is gonna have to be a certain perimeter around the building renovation. You know, collapse zone basically. So, it's gonna impede that roadway. So, if there's a way that the fencing (inaudible) traffic getting through there. JR: Well, they're probably gonna make that so they can get their construction vehicles through anyway, so ... their not gonna do (inaudible) MM: Fire truck vehicle will get through if that construction vehicle (inaudible) BB: This bond over ... did we decide on a number of years here? JR: No. What happens with that ... that's the law that decides that. Right now, (inaudible) five years in it gets rolled into permanent financing. And then, when... whatever we're doing with our other bonding at the time ... that's how it gets (inaudible). BB: (Inaudible) bottom line standpoint, what are we talking about, tax wise? Not the ... you were saying something about 15... 14 or 15% ... what were you saying? MM: 7. PD: (Inaudible) BB: That bottom line number, is that before ... 7% increase before we receive these other ... you know how this year, we're gonna have an end to a couple other bonds or whatever? JR: Jay said there's about $328,000 in debt payment that you're adding to the budget. And at the end of '08, you're gonna see, or ... coming off your debt schedule about $150,000. So, you're actually adding two hundred thousand maybe to your debt schedule. Little less than two hundred thousand. Which then adds, if it's only gonna be paid through the property tax, you're adding two hundred thousand to the tax levy ... little less. So, you're adding about 9% to the tax levy, which then would probably wind up being the 7% increase in the rate. But you can't go by the rate anymore, `cause the rate... VB: It's gonna change. JR: ...it's obscure. BB: So, yeah. It's all relative now because of the reassessment. So... PD: But if you're paying $1000 in Town taxes, (inaudible) BB: There's really no choice here though. You know, we've inherited... well, I know I've inherited, I haven't been here, but... We've inherited this property with these buildings. We are obligated to act. JR: It's part of your ... our stewardship here. And... BB: I'm just trying to look at it from all the different angles that's all. JR: It's not easy to spend this type of money and, in the end, not see the full benefit of that expenditure... BB: We'll if we start... JR: ...immediately. BB: Well if we start aggressively talking about a Phase II, maybe we can at least get the Mansion in shape to do events there and host events there and allow some fruition here to people that... VB: How long have we owned this, Joe? (inaudible) JR: 2000. BB: '99, right? JR: 2000 we bought it. BB: Oh, 2000? Town of Wappinger Page 56 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 VB: 2000? JR: We closed on it October 2000. VB: As far as activities here, other than the Christmas thing we do and the... JR: We've been limited, `cause it was under construction. MM: Yeah. VB: Yeah, but I'm saying, we haven't had (inaudible) functions there, other than the Christmas thing. PD: But this might open it up to that. `Cause right now we can't. JR: I mean we just finished the Chapel job. So that... the Chapel is off limits `cause you had the asbestos issue. That's been resolved. We got the Mansion doing... not the Mansion ... the Museum doing its thing in and out, you know, and that's minimum. You know, I got a call from the library the other day. They wanted to tour the upper two floors of the dorm. The may wanna look at doing something with us. But we haven't been in a position and then we're going back and forth negotiating with this caterer who wants to do the tent on the property and something in the Chapel, but he ... you know... BB: Do we have the parking to facilitate that though? JR: Yeah. VB: Before we talk to this guy, I mean, you know, it's like the guy with the horse the petting zoo. I wanna look at somebody's financials. I mean, it's... JR: No, but we've been doing all that due diligence. And I haven't brought it to you yet `cause we haven't really come to a... I felt what's a real deal. You know what I'm saying. And when ... once I get something I think that's palatable, then I'll bring it to you guys. But, you know, we haven't met with him in a couple months. BB: What's the status of that pool up there on the property? (Inaudible) still there. JR: It's our wetland experiment area. GF: I don't think anybody's uncovered it to actually see what kind of (inaudible) JR: You don't have to. There's all the weeds growing through the cover. VB: It's a bog to preserve. JR: That's right. It's (inaudible) PD: (Inaudible) We use those for sensitive areas. JR: That's right. We take them and relocate... PD: "Look, there's one now." (Inaudible) very handy. BB: Be nice to have a town pool. MM: It would be great to have a town pool. BB: Up there, that would give people, automatically, a higher, you know, regard for the Carnwath. You know, I'm trying to think of psychological things. People can say, "Oh Carnwarth, that's the place with the pool" or "Oh Carnwath, that's where they have those concerts in the summer.) JR: (Inaudible) MM: How about a dog park? PD: Not to (inaudible) but, you know, we did, through the Comprehensive Plan, we did all mailings and what have you. And we actually had Rec come down and (inaudible) pool, and they went on and on and on about the pool. So we put that in the Comprehensive Plan. Then when the mailings went out and what have you, we also had a thing about town trails. And Rec was, "No, no town trails... way down at the bottom". But when the mailings came back, they put... not only they flip-flopped, trails went to the top, pools wasn't on the list. BB: Really? Interesting. PD: Pools wasn't even there. So what it is, when you're hearing about pools from people, it's a select few people who are very vocal about pools. The Town as a whole, you know what, most of the people have pools in their backyards. MM: Right. PD: So, just so you know that, the Comprehensive Plan actually showed that, yeah although there are a few very vocal people about pools, the Town as a whole is not interested in a pool. JR: Jay, Tom, where are we with this part 617? VB: Put those trails in, you have these guys riding Ski-Doo's during the winter on those trails. MM: What did he say? JR: It's an unlisted action. Why don't you come in here, Tom, Tom, Jay, why don't you guys make your motion? Guys, we're gonna make voting... TD: I guess that the proposed motion would be that the Board makes a detennination that SEQRA is not a listed action. JP: What does that mean? TD: That means that it's not something that requires the extensive SEQRA process. JR: A full Environmental Impact Statement. Town of Wappinger Page 57 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JP: What's not something that requires... JR: The bonding. MM: The bonding. PD: (Inaudible) VB: Doesn't fall under the guidelines of (inaudible) JP: Bonding for what? JR: Money. Period. JayP: An action to be... JP: For repair or demolition. MM: For... JayP: An action to be... JR: Doesn't matter. PD: Doesn't matter. JR: Borrow. The act of borrowing, right? JayP: An action to be studies under SEQRA would not include the maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in existing structure or facility. JP: Wait. Say that again. JayP: An actions to be studied under SEQRA do not include maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in existing structure or facility. JP: So, if we were gonna demolition... TD: Then you would definitely need to do that. JayP: That's... that's... JR: You'd need a Full Environmental Impact Statement. JayP: Well, it's a Type I action. JP: So then... JayP: ...Long form EAF at a minimum. JP: So then I would vote no or yes, if I was in favor of demolition? TD: To this? JP: Well why don't I... PD: Vote "no" to the funding, `cause the demolition is automatic. TD: Why don't I give the formal Resolution that you might want to consider. JP: I'm not in the building business. TD: The formal Resolution would be: The Board having considered the work outlined in the report of January 26`h, 2007, by Swartz Architectural Group and DiSalvo Ericson Structural Engineers, makes a determination that the work outlined therein is not a listed action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. JR: Don, you still there? DS: Yeah, I can't really hear what's being said. JR: We're talking about the ... that this is not listed action under the SEQRA. DS: The SEQRA (inaudible) MM: Yeah. JR: Yeah. Does someone wanna move Tom Davis ... Chris did you... MM: Move. JR: Maureen. Do I have a second? Do I have a second? BB: What is this again? Clarify. MM: SEQRA. What this state... I'm moving his statement about SEQRA. PD: (Inaudible) MM: That we don't need SEQRA... JR: We don't need an environmental assessment. MM: ... for this bonding. JR: And under emergency actions, Part 617, (inaudible) does not apply..."for the preservation of life, health, property or natural resources, so this whole thing..." MM: All the Resolution is, the Resolution I've moved is his statement saying that this emergency bonding does not require SEQRA. Waiting for a second... BB: However demolition would. PD: No. No JR: No. Emergency action (inaudible) from all of it. PD: It's an emergency, it's... JR: It's a moot point. BB: OK. JR: There's a motion, do I have a second? JP: Is that right? If I was in favor of demolition, I would vote what? JR: Are you voting against the bond? JP: Yes. JR: You are? Town of Wappinger Page 58 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 MM: You don't need SEQRA without... you don't need SEQRA for demolition either apparently. It's an emergency action. JP: OK. So, if I'm voting against the bond, where do I vote here? TD: I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. If the intention is to demolish this, I wouldn't ... if that was your feeling than you would vote "no" on this... JP: Alright. MM: OK. JR: Is there a second. BB: Well, I'm (inaudible) second. I just don't... I wanna understand 100%... JR: Second. Discussion. BB: Hang on for a second. Hang on. I'm not seconding. JR: Oh, I'm sorry. BB: If I were to second, I want to understand 100% what we're talking about here, and I don't. JR: OK. BB: Can you clarify that for me? JR: Sure. What happens is, anytime a government body - Planning Board Town Board or Zoning Board - sometimes takes an action... subdivision, spending money and stuff, New York State Law requires us to assess the impact. BB: Correct. JR: OK. And it's all under the Environment... State Environmental Quality Review Act. That's SEQRA. That's what that stands for. We have just gone through this very long discussion today, and under State Law, the actions which we are deciding to take today, under this emergency action, does not require the Full Environmental Impact Statement that you would need to have the Planning or the Engineer to write up and then we would adopt our findings of what the environmental impacts (inaudible). OK? Because of that, we need to formally declare that we reviewed the action in front of us, and we found, based on counsel opinion, that there is no negative impact in the environment according to State Law. Then that clears us to go to the next step, which would be bonding. If we found that we needed to do that, that assessment would have to be done first before we could go to bonding. The Constitution makes us go through that process. BB: Yeah. JR: Did I say that correctly? TD: Yes. It's really just a technical first step to the bond. MM: But what you're saying is, if you're not supporting the bond, then you'd vote "no" on the SEQRA statement. JR: You can. BB: You don't have to. JR: You could vote... you could vote ... you could vote "yes" on the SEQRA statement, `cause you... MM: I thought that's what you just advised Joe. JR: Well, `cause Joe asked (inaudible) TD: (Inaudible)... but I mean, if you gonna vote "no", then (inaudible) JR: Joe's gonna vote "no" across the board so... MM: OK. BB: So... MM: Just so we're all clear. BB: I... based on the professionals, that's how you feel, correct? TD: Yes. JayP: It's... TD: It's not subject... JayP: It's an unlisted action. It's not subject to SEQRA. JR: The State Law just read... Jay, read the emergency section part that you just showed me. That will make it very clear. TD: There's only certain actions which you do have to go through the process. There's an exception for repairs. So, we don't even have to go through this process. But we have to make a finding that we don't have to go through... JR: And then there's a further exemption for emergencies. TD: Right. JayP: Emergency actions. The Part 617 ... Part 617 rules also exempt emergency actions immediately necessary on a limited and temporary basis for the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural resources. BB: And, Jay, you feel that this meets that criteria, correct? JayP: I definitely do. BB: I'll second the motion. Town of Wappinger Page 59 Printed 10/15/2007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JayP: The first motion. MM: The SEQRA. BB: That's what we're talking about right now. MM: Right, the SEQRA. BB: I'll second the SEQRA. JR: Discussion on the SEQRA. BB: What's the problem? MM: No, we're just... we were just waiting for it to be clear... BB: I understand that. But now we have it open for discussion. Why ... is there ... why are we hesitating here. Is there an... MM: No. (Inaudible) PD: No. (Inaudible) That's procedure. JR: (Inaudible)... procedure. A motion and second I always have to call for discussion. BB: I understand that, but obviously there's some hesitation coming from some of our Board Members. Is there further discussion we need to have here? VB: This is just a right to make a decision that it's in that class action... BB: OK. I just wanna make sure we're on the same page here. VB: This is not the bond. This is not the authorization to go ahead. BB: Right. VB: Either one. All this allows us to do is the action. It doesn't allow you to bond it, it doesn't let you make the repairs. It just... JR: The bond's still ... (inaudible) BB: I understand that, but... JR: We could have the... when we get to the next vote... BB: I understand that... JR: ...the bond (inaudible) BB: ...I just wanted to know if we're ... if I'm missing anything. MM: No. BB: OK. MM: (Inaudible)... call the vote? JR: All in favor say I. MM: Aye. JR: Aye. BB: Aye. JR: Opposed? JP: Opposed. JR: Paoloni. VB: I'm a "aye" with that as far as the action's concerned. JR: OK. Now we have the bonding Resolution in front of us. TD: I filled in a couple of blanks on this. It should be a "Special Emergency Meeting of the Town"...the date (inaudible) obvious. I filled in the four million and I'm changing in section 3 that 15 to 30. JR: What are you talking about? MM: 30 years. JR: 30 years? VB: It says 15 years. Now it's 30 years? TD: Well, I think we discussed that it probably is 30 years. I think if we put an outside number there, that gives us... JayP: (inaudible) flexability. TD: Right. VB: You don't know that for sure, right? TD: I'm giving you my best opinion as non -bond counsel today. Your best scenario is to change that to 30. JR: Right. (Inaudible)... Remember we had bonding early in the year where we wrote ... the bond was drafted wrong and we had to go back and revisit... revise the bonds? MM: Yes. JR: Because they weren't giving us the right life. At least if we have the (Inaudible)... if it is less than 30, then that will be adjusted as the time comes. TD: If ... if ... I'm gonna go over all this stuff on Monday with bond counsel. If there's any procedural error... VB: Well, I'm not gonna vote on it `til I know... TD: Nothing's gonna happen other than the fence by Monday morning, so then... VB: Well, the fence is... the fence is one thing. But no, it's a 15 year bond or a 30 year bond definitely affects my vote. JR: But Vinny, right now you're voting on a 5 year BAN. And when we go to permanent Town of Wappinger Page 60 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 financing, it can be up to 30 years or up to 15 years. Alright? At least 30 would cover both. VB: But 15 doesn't. Right? BB: Up to 30 years. Right now we're voting on a 5 year bond, based on. MM: BAN. JR: BAN. BB: Excuse me. MM: Bond anticipation note. BB: Right. Based on the emergency funding needs. MM: Right. BB: When we refinance, that could be a decision we make at a later time, correct? It's not (inaudible) to the 30 year. JR: You don't technically vote to refinance. What happens is, you go from temporary financing into permanent financing. And you... first 5 years, you keep it temporary, and you pay what you use each year. Then when ... after year 5, you must go into permanent financing. That how it goes... and it's all... by you adopting this, after 5 years, the Town Supervisor and Comptroller are authorized to move it into permanent financing. VB: Five years later, right Joe? JR: You could do it day one. I could draw down the four million tomorrow and go into permanent long term financing. BB: Do we know if that's gonna be a 30 year decision or a 15 year? Is that something that happens at that time? JR: We try to get the maximum life of the structure... of the useful life. And there seems to be a discrepancy whether that's 15 years or 30 years. MM: What I heard you say later was that you would try and get the longest period of time. JR: Well, what happened is, if we put down the wrong year here, we would have to come back and further amend it. So, Tom is suggesting put down 30. That way, if it is 20-30, you're covered. MM: Right. JR: If it's 15, you're still covered. But if it is really only 15, then Councilman Bettina says, that's an important decision he needs to know. MM: OK. VB: That's all I'm saying. BB: But at this point. VB: I don't know. BB: It's... we're talking five years at this point, correct? On the BAN? JR: Like... initially all borrowings start off that way. TD: The reason to do the 5 years is because, if you do over 5 years, then it's subject to permissive referendum. So you wouldn't be able to spend any money for 30 days. BB: Right. That'd defeat the purpose. TD: But like bond counsel said, you can turn around and... to use a colloquialism, you can sort of refinance this out to the 30. MM: And this is how all of our bonds are (inaudible) JR: Absolutely. Do I have a motion for the Resolution authorizing the reconstruction of the buildings at Carnwath Farms in and for the Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York, at a maximum estimated cost of $4,000,000 and authorizing the issuance of $4,000,000 serial bonds of said Town to pay the costs thereof. MM: Move. JR: Mrs. McCarthy. Do I have a second? Do I have a second? I'll second it. Discussion. Hearing none, do I have a roll call vote please? CM: Councilman Beale. BB: Aye. CM: Councilman Bettina. VB: Aye. CM: Councilwoman McCarthy. MM: Aye. CM: Councilman Paoloni. JP: No. CM: Supervisor Ruggiero. JR: Aye. I gotta do one more. There's a Resolution in front of you: Resolution authorizing allocation of funds for the emergency repairs to Carnwath Farms. The Clerk will assign a Resolution number and put it in MinuteTraq, but... TD: Again, I... sorry to interrupt, Joe. JR: Sure. TD: I made some changes as we were sitting here. I've added the Carriage House property to Toren of Wappinger Page 61 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 the second... Carriage House at the property to the second "Whereas" paragraph there. And I've also made specific reference to the recent field inspection, the date and people that prepared that. And then in paragraph 2, should say "also and consultants to the Town". Now I didn't put anything in here regarding those reports you talked about, so... JR: But (inaudible)... we can handle that, I mean, administratively. CM: Who's gonna edit these? TD: I can change it when I get back to the office, but... CM: Alright. JR: Alright. But you got it into the record... Why don't I... do you have the... CM: As amended? JR: I'll read it into the record. (Inaudible). MM: Do you want the ... do you need the microphone? JR: This is a Resolution authorizing allocation of funds for emergency repairs to Carnwath Farms. "At a Special Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Wappinger, in Dutchess County, New York, held at Town Hall, 20 Middlebush Road, Wappingers Falls, New York, on the 27th day of January, 2007, at 9:00 AM in the morning, the Meeting was called to order by the Supervisor and present were Council Members Beale, Bettina, Paoloni, McCarthy... Whereas the Town of Wappinger previously purchased a 99 acre estate property located on Wheeler Hill Road in the Town of Wappinger commonly known as "Greystone Estate", also known as "Carnwath Farms", pursuant to Resolution 2003-144, adopted at the Town Board Meeting held on May 27th, 2003; and Whereas one of the primary structures is the Carnwath Mansion, a three story mansion constructed in the mid -1800's, which is listed on the State and Federal Register of Historical Places, and the Carriage House at the property; and Whereas the Town has planned long term rehabilitation of Carnwath Mansion and the Carriage House; and Whereas recent field inspections dated January 26th, 2007, by Swartz Architecture Group and DiSalvo Ericson Group, Structural Engineers has revealed serious defects in the structural integrity, basement and foundation of the aforementioned premises included in the Mansion and Carriage House therein, creating a dangerous and hazardous condition; and Whereas corrective measures must be immediately undertaken to cure the aforementioned dangerous and hazardous conditions and address the structural integrity of the premises; and Whereas the Engineer to the Town and Associated Engineering Consultants, Don Swartz and Patrick Conlon, P.E., has recommended to the Town Supervisor that interim emergency measures be perfonned; and Whereas it is the intent to pay for such corrective emergency measures through the creation of capital account to be funded by a bond. Now therefore be it resolved as follows: The recitations above set forth are incorporated in this Resolution as if fully set forth and adopted herein; and two, The following Town Officers and employees and/or professionals are hereby directed to take whatever steps are needed to coordinate whatever repair work is required to the cure the aforementioned dangerous and hazardous conditions, address the structural integrity of the premises and undertake further analysis with respect thereto: Fire Inspector, Building Inspector, Town Clerk, Superintendent of Highways, Engineer to the Town, Bond Counsel, Attorney to Town and consultants... and other consultants to the Town. The Town Board authorizes the creation of capital account to address the aforementioned hazard and dangerous condition, authorizes bond counsel Doug Goodfriend to establish a bond not to exceed $4,000,000 for the funding of such capital account. The Town of Wappinger procurement policy is hereby suspended for the purposes of making such interim emergency repairs, purchases and expenditures to address all potential violations associated with aforementioned dangerous and hazardous conditions. Do I have a motion to accept? MM: Move: JR: Mrs. McCarthy. Do I have a second? BB: Second. JR: Mr. Beale. Discussion. JP: So a support of remedying the problem with demolition would be a "no" vote here, I assume. Even though you're not voting against remedying the problem you're voting... TD: This is a motion (inaudible) to make emergency repairs. JP: OK. So ... emergency repair, not demolition. So, I would be constrained to vote "no" even though I recognize the emergency. MM: (Inaudible) JP: Is that right? MM: 'Cause ... (inaudible) JR: No, your "no" says you're voting against this Resolution. JP: I'm voting again... I'm voting for demolition. JR: Not... That's not an option in the Resolution. Town of Wappinger Page 62 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 JP: not against... not against repairing BB: If you support demolishing these buildings, you don't support the initiative that we've approved. JP: Is that... JR: Right. Roll call, unless there's any other discussion. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to cut off discussion. Roll call please. CM: Councilman Beale. BB: Aye. CM: Councilman Bettina. VB: Aye. CM: Councilwoman McCarthy. MM: Aye. CM: Councilman Paoloni. JP: No. CM: Supervisor Ruggiero. JR: Aye. I will ask for a Resolution authorizing Manfredi Construction to undertake the emergency repair work just authorized. MM: Moved. JR: Mrs. McCarthy. Do I have a second? VB: Second. JR: Mr. Bettina. Discussion. BB: Can we include the fencing in that? Is that... JR: That's part of the... MM: Part of the (inaudible) JR: Yes, absolutely.... is part of... BB: Make sure the fencing got included and that the fencing is installed in conjunction with the Fire Chief? JR: Absolutely. Jay, sit down. Motion and a second. All in favor say "Aye". MM: Aye. JR: Aye. Opposed? JP: I would have to abstain. I mean, I want the fence, but ... (inaudible) ... can't say I'm voting against the fence, so I abstain. JR: OK. Any other discussion gentlemen and ladies? This has been a very long... GF: Michael is going to arrange with Manfredi, Monday, for the fence? MB: Yes. I'd like to get (inaudible) GF: If they need some support help (inaudible) contact me. MB: Sure. Thanks. GF: I'll have some people come down there to help support them if they need... MB: OK, Graham. GF: ...move material around the site with equipment or manpower... BB: Is the gate gonna be remained locked on the park... JR: Yes. I am gonna... what I'm gonna try to do, Bill, I'm gonna try to get a hold of Sheriff's Department today, get our guys out there all day and stay around the clock `til Monday morning. BB: I think a key... a key for that particular gate needs to go to the Fire Department. It's been requested in the past and has not been given to them. JR: Not through me, it hasn't. BB: No. Through the Code Enforcement office. But can we make sure that they get, you know, just in case there's a structural collapse and... they need to be able to get in there. JR: You have my permission to drive through the gate. Honestly. BB: OK. JR: Do 1 have a motion to adjourn? MM: Moved. JR: Do I have a second? BB: Second. JR: All in favor say I. BB: Aye. MM: Aye. JR: Aye. Town of Wappinger Page 63 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 III. Resolutions Motion To: authorize a bond for $600,000 to do reconstruction of the 1", 2°d and 3rd floors of the Mansion RESULT: WITHDRAWN [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Joseph Ruggiero, Supervisor SECONDER: Maureen McCarthy, Councilwoman AYES: Ruggiero, Beale, Bettina, McCarthy, Paoloni Motion To: make a determination that the work outlined in the Swartz report of 01-26- 07 is not a listed action RESULT: ADOPTED 14 TO 11 MOVER: Maureen McCarthy, Councilwoman SECONDER: William Beale, Councilman AYES: Joseph Ruggiero, William Beale, Vincent Bettina, Maureen McCarthy NAYS: Joseph Paoloni RESOLUTION: 2007-12720071 A Resolution Authorizing the Reconstruction of Buildings at Carnwath Farms, in and for the Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York, at a Maximum Estimated Cost of $4,000,000 and Authorizing the Issuance of $4,000,000 Serial Bonds of Said Town to Pay the Cost Thereof. WHEREAS, all conditions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter described, including compliance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, have been performed; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the total voting strength of the Town Board of the Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York, as follows: Section 1. The reconstruction of buildings at Carnwath Farms, in and for the Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York, including original furnishings, equipment, machinery, apparatus, appurtenances, and other incidental improvements, expenses and emergency work in connection therewith, is hereby authorized at a maximum estimated cost of $4,000,000. Section 2. It is hereby determined that the plan for the financing of the aforesaid maximum estimated cost is by the issuance of $4,000,000 serial bonds of said Town hereby authorized to be issued therefor pursuant to the provisions of the Local Finance Law. Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid class of objects or purposes is thirty years, pursuant to subdivision 12(a)(2) of paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law. It is hereby further determined that the maximum maturity of the serial bonds herein authorized will not exceed five years. Section 4. The faith and credit of said Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York, are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such bonds as the same respectively become due and payable. An annual appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds becoming due and payable in such year. There shall annually be levied on all the taxable real property of said Town, a tax sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds as the same become due and payable. Section 5. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law, the power to authorize the issuance of and to sell bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of the serial bonds herein authorized, including renewals of such notes, is hereby delegated to the Supervisor, the chief fiscal officer. Such notes shall be of such terms, form and contents, and shall be sold in such manner, as may be prescribed by said Supervisor, consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law. Section 6. All other matters except as provided herein relating to the serial bonds herein authorized including the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, within the limitations prescribed herein and the manner of execution of the same, including the consolidation with other issues, and also the ability to issue serial bonds with substantially level or declining annual debt service, shall be determined by the Supervisor, the chief fiscal officer of Torn of Wappinger Page 64 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 such Town. Such bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in Section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law, and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such recitals, in addition to those required by Section 51.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the Supervisor shall determine consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law. Section 7. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested only if: 1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said Town is not authorized to expend money, or 2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the date of such publication, or 3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution. Section 8. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes of Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no monies are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose described herein. Section 9. This resolution, which takes effect immediately, shall be published in full or summary fonn in the official newspaper of said Town for such purpose, together with a notice of the Town Clerk in substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law. The foregoing was put to a vote which resulted as follows: ✓ Vote Record - Resolution RES -2007-12720071 El Adopted Yes/Aye No/Nay Abstain Absent El Adopted Amended Joseph Ruggiero seconder Q ❑ El as Defeated William Beale Voter El ❑ ❑ ElEl 11 Tabled Vincent Bettina Voter 0 El El ❑ Withdrawn Maureen McCarthy Initiator Rl ❑ ❑ ❑ Joseph Paoloni Voter ❑ El ❑ ❑ Dated: Wappingers Falls, New York January 27'h, 2007 The Resolution is hereby duly declared adopted. RESOLUTION: 2007-12720072 Resolution Authorizing Allocation of Funds for Emergency Repairs to Carnwath Farms WHEREAS, the Town of Wappinger previously purchased a 99 acre estate property located on Wheeler Hill Road in the Town of Wappinger, commonly known as the "Greystone Estate", also known as "Carnwath Farms" pursuant to Resolution No. 2003-144 adopted at a Town Board meeting held on May 27t", 2003; and WHEREAS, one of the primary structures on the property is the "Carnwath Mansion", a three story mansion constructed in the mid -1800s which is listed on the State and Federal Registrar of Historical Places and the Carriage House at the property; and WHEREAS, the Town has planned the long term rehabilitation of the Carnwath Mansion; and WHEREAS, recent field inspection dated January 26th, 2007 by Swartz Architectural Group and DiSalvo Ericson Group, Structural Engineers has, however, revealed serious defects in the structural integrity, basement and foundation of the aforementioned premises including the mansion and the carriage house therein, creating dangerous and hazardous conditions; and WHEREAS, corrective measures must be immediately undertaken to cure the aforementioned dangerous and hazardous conditions and address the structural integrity of the premises; and WHEREAS, the Engineer to the Town and Associated Engineering Consultants, Donald Swartz and Patrick Conlon, P.E. have recommended to the Town Supervisor that interim emergency measures be performed; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Town to pay for such corrective emergency measures through the creation of a capital account to be funded by a bond. NOW, THREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: 1. The recitations above set forth are incorporated in this Resolution as if fully set forth and adopted herein. 2. The following Town Officers and/or employees and/or professionals are hereby Torn of Wappinger Page 65 Printed 1011512007 Special Meeting Minutes January 27, 2007 directed to take whatever steps are needed and to coordinate whatever repair work is required to cure the aforementioned dangerous and hazardous conditions, address the structural integrity of the premises and undertake further analysis with respect thereto: Fire Inspector, Building Inspector, Town Clerk, Superintendent of Highways, Engineer to Town, Bond Counsel, Attorney to Town and Consultants to the Town. 3. The Town Board authorizes the creation of a capital account to address the aforementioned hazardous and dangerous conditions and authorizes bond counsel Douglas Goodfriend to establish a bond not to exceed $4,000,000.00 for the funding of such capital account. 4. The Town of Wappinger Procurement Policy is hereby suspended for the purposes of making such interim emergency repairs, purchases and expenditures to address all potential violations associated with the aforementioned dangerous and hazardous conditions. The foregoing was put to a vote which resulted as follows: ✓ Vote Record - Resolution RES -2007-12720072 ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Yes/Aye ' No/Nay Abstain Absent Adopted Joseph Ruggiero Voter 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Adopted as Amended William Beale Seconder 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Defeated Vincent Bettina Voter 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ -- ❑ Tabled Maureen McCarthy Initiator El❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Withdrawn Jose h Paoloni Voter ❑ ❑ ❑ Dated: Wappingers Falls, New York January 27t1i, 2007 The Resolution is hereby duly declared adopted. Motion To: authorize Manfredi Construction to undertake the emergency repair work just authorized RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Maureen McCarthy, Councilwoman SECONDER: Vincent Bettina, Councilman AYES: Joseph Ruggiero, William Beale, Vincent Bettina, Maureen McCarthy ABSTAIN: Joseph Paoloni IV. Adjournment Motion To: Adjourn at 1:03 PM RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Maureen McCarthy, Councilwoman SECONDER: William Beale, Councilman AYES: Ruggiero, Beale, Bettina, McCarthy, Paoloni The Meeting Adjourned at 1:03 PM. f �• 04, j-o-Sn C. M terson Town Clerk Town of Wappinger Page 66 Printed 1011512007