Popular Searches
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Copake increases police force, tables outdoor boiler law
Local law on motor vehicle storage also tabled until Oct. 8
By Paul Crossman
Hudson-Catskill Newspapers
COPAKE — Nearly 50 people crowded into the Copake Town Hall on Saturday morning to have their voices heard on a variety of issues, ranging from outdoor wood boiler legislation to budget cuts for the local police force.
Two local laws — one involving a three-month moratorium on the woodboilers, and the other involving junkyards and motor vehicle storage — were tabled until the next meeting, and by a slim vote of three to two, the local police force shifts were raised from four to eight a week.
The first big issue to be brought up was whether or not to pass a local law to modify the definition of a “motor vehicle storage area,” and revise fencing requirements and establish a maximum number of vehicles that would be permitted to be stored there.
The law would establish that any place with more than one unregistered vehicle in a residential area, and more than five in a business district, would be considered a motor vehicle storage area. The area would be required to meet certain conditions, such as an eight-foot fence which all unregistered cars would have to be behind.
Any establishment with more than 50 unregistered cars behind the required eight-foot fence would be considered a junkyard, and have to register as such.
Many community members found the way the law was incomplete, and that much more work was needed before the town could enact the law.
“Throw those letters of recommendation out,” said one community member. “They don’t have anything to do with the actual law.” Another man agreed, saying that the proposed law didn’t take into account all the recommendations that were made anyway.
Though the town board members did not react quite this strongly, they did decide that more work and revision was needed before the local law could be passed. They left the public hearing open for ideas until next month’s meeting.
Boiling over
A law temporarily banning the use of outdoor wood boilers, which have become a controversial item lately, was also discussed, and met with mixed feelings.
Proposed Local Law No. 2 would enact a three-month moratorium to decide what the best course of action would be to deal with the boilers.
Many residents, including one who mailed a letter to the board, believed that it would be unfair to deny people the right to use outdoor wood boilers to heat their homes, and that the new boilers weren’t any different than burning wood in an indoor furnace or fire pit.
“I’ve got a real problem with it and I’ll tell you why,” said Supervisor Reginald Crowley. “The units being sold now meet all EPA standards. If they thought it was an issue, why didn’t they do anything?”
Councilwoman Linda Gabaccia agreed, saying that with the heating season coming up it was a bad time, and she just couldn’t support the legislation.
“Why can’t you support it?” asked one community member angrily. “This was brought to you way back in April, when it wasn’t the beginning of the heating season.”
Another member of the crowd backed her up, saying that just because the EPA hasn’t done anything doesn’t mean the town shouldn’t take action.
Deputy Supervisor Joe LaPorta agreed that something definitely needed to be done to regulate the boilers, but that a moratorium wasn’t necessary.
“Why don’t we just put the restrictions (chimney height, distance from neighbors, 85 percent efficiency) into a local law right now?” he asked. “Then in October you can pass them and they take effect.”
Though the board said that such an action wasn’t possible at the present time, they did decide not to enact the moratorium as of yet.
Police heat
The third, and possibly most heated matter discussed at the meeting was the cutback of funds for the Copake Police Department, which had recently been cut from eight shifts a week to four.
Many people were worried that the force would be done away with completely, and voiced their feelings that without a local police force, the reaction time of either the state police or the sheriff’s office would just be too long, stating specific examples where the local police had been a great help.
Others though, like Councilman Robert Sacks, disagreed, saying that having a part-time police force meant only being safe part of the time, and that it should be all or nothing, adding that he believed the best solution would be to bring in a full-time substation of the state police or sheriff’s office in order to solve the problem.
This though, said Board Member Daniel Tompkins, was very improbable, because of the economy and the current hiring freeze.
Though many people seemed to approve of the idea of a state police or sheriff’s office substation, a good portion still seemed to be uncomfortable with the possibility of doing away with the local police force.
Community member Lisa DeRocha countered Sacks’ “all or nothing” argument by saying that a part-time police force often changes, and does not publish the times they patrol, which means that people would still be much more deterred from committing a crime than if they knew there was no police force at all.
“Even if it’s not full-time, it gives the illusion of being full-time,” she told the board. She also said that a local police force does things which would not be done by troopers or the sheriff’s office.
“When we had the big ice storm this winter,” she said, “[the local police] really came through. One policeman came to make sure my neighbor, who was disabled, was OK. You’re not going to find that with the sheriff’s office.”
After much debate, both between board and community members, a motion was made to increase the hours of the Copake Police from four shifts a week to eight, and it was passed by the slim margin of 3-2.
The next Copake Town Board Meeting will be at 7:30 p.m. on October 8, with the continued public hearing on motor vehicle storage and junk yards at 7 p.m.
To reach reporter Paul Crossman call 518-828-1616, ext. 2266, or e-mail pcrossman@registerstar.com.
Two local laws — one involving a three-month moratorium on the woodboilers, and the other involving junkyards and motor vehicle storage — were tabled until the next meeting, and by a slim vote of three to two, the local police force shifts were raised from four to eight a week.
The first big issue to be brought up was whether or not to pass a local law to modify the definition of a “motor vehicle storage area,” and revise fencing requirements and establish a maximum number of vehicles that would be permitted to be stored there.
The law would establish that any place with more than one unregistered vehicle in a residential area, and more than five in a business district, would be considered a motor vehicle storage area. The area would be required to meet certain conditions, such as an eight-foot fence which all unregistered cars would have to be behind.
Any establishment with more than 50 unregistered cars behind the required eight-foot fence would be considered a junkyard, and have to register as such.
Many community members found the way the law was incomplete, and that much more work was needed before the town could enact the law.
“Throw those letters of recommendation out,” said one community member. “They don’t have anything to do with the actual law.” Another man agreed, saying that the proposed law didn’t take into account all the recommendations that were made anyway.
Though the town board members did not react quite this strongly, they did decide that more work and revision was needed before the local law could be passed. They left the public hearing open for ideas until next month’s meeting.
Boiling over
A law temporarily banning the use of outdoor wood boilers, which have become a controversial item lately, was also discussed, and met with mixed feelings.
Proposed Local Law No. 2 would enact a three-month moratorium to decide what the best course of action would be to deal with the boilers.
Many residents, including one who mailed a letter to the board, believed that it would be unfair to deny people the right to use outdoor wood boilers to heat their homes, and that the new boilers weren’t any different than burning wood in an indoor furnace or fire pit.
“I’ve got a real problem with it and I’ll tell you why,” said Supervisor Reginald Crowley. “The units being sold now meet all EPA standards. If they thought it was an issue, why didn’t they do anything?”
Councilwoman Linda Gabaccia agreed, saying that with the heating season coming up it was a bad time, and she just couldn’t support the legislation.
“Why can’t you support it?” asked one community member angrily. “This was brought to you way back in April, when it wasn’t the beginning of the heating season.”
Another member of the crowd backed her up, saying that just because the EPA hasn’t done anything doesn’t mean the town shouldn’t take action.
Deputy Supervisor Joe LaPorta agreed that something definitely needed to be done to regulate the boilers, but that a moratorium wasn’t necessary.
“Why don’t we just put the restrictions (chimney height, distance from neighbors, 85 percent efficiency) into a local law right now?” he asked. “Then in October you can pass them and they take effect.”
Though the board said that such an action wasn’t possible at the present time, they did decide not to enact the moratorium as of yet.
Police heat
The third, and possibly most heated matter discussed at the meeting was the cutback of funds for the Copake Police Department, which had recently been cut from eight shifts a week to four.
Many people were worried that the force would be done away with completely, and voiced their feelings that without a local police force, the reaction time of either the state police or the sheriff’s office would just be too long, stating specific examples where the local police had been a great help.
Others though, like Councilman Robert Sacks, disagreed, saying that having a part-time police force meant only being safe part of the time, and that it should be all or nothing, adding that he believed the best solution would be to bring in a full-time substation of the state police or sheriff’s office in order to solve the problem.
This though, said Board Member Daniel Tompkins, was very improbable, because of the economy and the current hiring freeze.
Though many people seemed to approve of the idea of a state police or sheriff’s office substation, a good portion still seemed to be uncomfortable with the possibility of doing away with the local police force.
Community member Lisa DeRocha countered Sacks’ “all or nothing” argument by saying that a part-time police force often changes, and does not publish the times they patrol, which means that people would still be much more deterred from committing a crime than if they knew there was no police force at all.
“Even if it’s not full-time, it gives the illusion of being full-time,” she told the board. She also said that a local police force does things which would not be done by troopers or the sheriff’s office.
“When we had the big ice storm this winter,” she said, “[the local police] really came through. One policeman came to make sure my neighbor, who was disabled, was OK. You’re not going to find that with the sheriff’s office.”
After much debate, both between board and community members, a motion was made to increase the hours of the Copake Police from four shifts a week to eight, and it was passed by the slim margin of 3-2.
The next Copake Town Board Meeting will be at 7:30 p.m. on October 8, with the continued public hearing on motor vehicle storage and junk yards at 7 p.m.
To reach reporter Paul Crossman call 518-828-1616, ext. 2266, or e-mail pcrossman@registerstar.com.
Share this Article
 |
 |
|
| Chatham hosts town-wide farm tours | Labor Day weekend DWI report light |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of registerstar.com.
CampGreyGoose wrote on Sep 14, 2009 9:05 AM:
" After having my 11 Year old Autistic son who had "wandered" away from us found QUICKLY & SAFELY due to the quick response and actions of Officer Duntze of the Copake Police Department (as well as others in the community) on September 3rd. I can only say that I am grateful that the Copake Police Department still has 8 shifts. In response to the above comment (about an alleged "speed trap"?) If in fact people are speeding isn't the Police Department supposed to issue tickets and be there to protect? I would rather have tickets issued and police presence than safety of myself, family, and friends who spend a lot of time in Copake jeopardized. I will always be grateful to The Copake Police Department for their prompt action in my time of need. "
ziggy wrote on Sep 15, 2009 1:36 PM:
" During the weeks that the police cover by Copake was reduced I saw the State Police in Copake in numbers, quietly doing their job-in town to boot, not out on Rtes 22 & 23.. Could be the remarks by Mr Crowley about them being slow to respond stepped on some toes?? In regard to the vote by the town board on the reinstatement of police cover-Mr. Tompkins should have recused himself-after all is he not still a county police person??? "
grantdine wrote on Sep 16, 2009 8:59 PM:
" I misspoke. It was not a speed trap, but I believe they stopped cars to check for insurance, and licenses, etc. Jan Near and give you more facts. He reported how many cars were stopped, tickets issued, etc in the Independent. Merchants went to the town board meeting to protest. At the next meeting the police chief announced the protest fizzled and offered no apology. It was all about collecting fines and not about supporting the community. Have you tried to purchase a pound of fresh hamburger in Copake lately? "
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
grantdine wrote on Sep 13, 2009 7:56 AM: