By RITA FERRANDINO
Staff Writer

The town board meeting in Springfield Monday night kicked off the way the planning board meeting ended last week — with a conflict between the board leaders.

Jim Willsey, chairman of the planning board, stood up during the public comment portion of the meeting and apologized in advance in case he took up a lot of time.

"You ain't got a lot of time, remember," town supervisor Tom Armstrong said.

But Willsey didn't let the comment stop him.

"When you passed the site plan review law it was like throwing a bomb into the town. We have no motives other than trying to do a good job," Willsey said.

Willsey said that his intention was to start coming to the town board meeting and briefing the board on the status of the applications before the planning board and other related business.

Armstrong headed that one off at the pass.

"We're not gonna do that," he said. "We don't want to get involved with the planning board. We'll read the minutes," Armstrong said.

Willsey decided to go ahead and fill the town board in on planning board business. He told them that Glimmerglass Opera had been sent a stop work order because they were putting fill down despite having been turned down after requesting an exemption from the escrow to which all developers are subject. He talked about some other businesses slated for development in the upcoming months, like an antiques store and a pottery studio.

Willsey then requested that the town board adopt a three-month moratorium to prevent the board from having to pass or reject a cell tower proposal slated for the Kraft farm. Willsey said that the tower will block a view of the lake for "at least ten houses."

Town attorney Paul Elkan said that a moratorium would "stop everything."

"The community thinks that because you passed a site plan review law it controls everything. But it doesn't. I feel really bad about it. The neighbors are going to be in here carrying on when they find out where that cell tower's going to be," Willsey said.

Armstrong said "a moratorium doesn't help anybody," and that being able to use a cell phone outweighs the problem of aesthetics.

"You're looking at the negatives and I think it would be nice if you looked at the positives," Armstrong said.

Willsey pointed out that he's not opposed to cell phones or towers, "but the minute we put it in the paper that we're having a public meeting this place is going to be filled with people and they aren't just going to be mad at us, they're going to be mad at you folks too. You appointed us."

Willsey said that he's concerned that the cell tower companies might not take the towers down once they've outlived their usefulness. Armstrong said that he heard Scott Olsen of Crown Atlantic say at the planning board meeting that a bond would be included for just that purpose.

The cell tower situation wasn't Willsey's only area of concern. Second up was his displeasure regarding the manner in which applications are currently handled. He said he understands that a codes inspector in town to the tune of $8,000 to $10,000 is too expensive, but there's no reason why, in his estimation, the funds can't be taken from escrow at the cost of the applicant so that consultant Nan Stolzenburg can review every application.

"We can't have (Otsego County Codes Enforcement officer) Dave West issuing a certificate of occupancy before we've even seen an application," Willsey said. He pointed out that West doesn't have the authority to enforce the site plan review. Armstrong said he'd rather wait and see how it goes for a year before they make any changes to the current system of West handling residential applications.

Willsey was concerned because a recent project, a pottery studio that is commercial and residential, was in Willsey's opinion, handled incorrectly by West, who deemed the project residential. Due to a substantial commencement loophole in the site plan review law, the project wound up being exempt anyway as sixty-eight percent of funds had been expended prior to last December 18, the day the law was passed.

But even this was little consolation to Willsey, because now the developer at that site wants to put up a sign larger than the four feet by four feet permitted under the law for a sign.

"I'm not for controls either," said Willsey. "As long as we're doing this, though, let's do it right. Every last person in this town who wants to build anything should come before the board. West should not approve any applications until we say so. We're not trying to hold anybody up or be mean."

But planning board member Anne Murphy disagreed, "You're overstepping the site plan review law now. Residential projects are exempt."

"You're wrong," Willsey said. "They should come and talk to us. We've got to review them."

"It goes completely against what the site plan review says," Murphy said.

An argument then commenced between Armstrong and Willsey as they debated whether or not West had made a mistake when he determined that the pottery studio was residential.

"All I know," said Murphy, "is what the site plan review says. You can't start re-writing it or re-interpreting it."

Willsey stuck to his guns, saying that he wanted all applicants to discuss their plans with the board. He cited instances where people blocked others' views by building their houses in an inconsiderate spot. Still, Murphy stuck to her guns, saying that while it might be inconsiderate, there's nothing the planning board can do about it given the way the law is written.

At this time, residential permits will still be approved by West and commercial site plan review applications will still be processed by the Springfield planning board.