Last week during the board's regular monthly meeting, trustees voted down the proposed change by a margin of 5-to-1 following a public hearing on the issue.

Monday night, board members failed to take action when Mayor Carol Waller brought up the matter during a special meeting scheduled for a public hearing on a change in parking regulations.

Waller, who said earlier she favored the change, told the board she was bringing up the zoning proposal because at least four of the trustees had spoken with her about last week's vote and indicated that perhaps they should revisit the issue.

The mayor found little or no support for the measure, however, as senior board member Stuart Taugher flatly stated that he believed it was illegal to discuss the change for six months because it had just been defeated.

Waller told the trustees that the zoning board of appeals was very disappointed in the board's failure to adopt the change.

ZBA chairwoman Susan Snell did not attend the special meeting, but Waller said they had talked about it earlier and Snell told her the message the ZBA got was that the trustees don't want the zone changed.

"She said any variance will have to meet the strict letter of the law," Waller said, adding that Snell said it is not up to the ZBA to change the zoning law by issuing variances. Changing the zoning law should be done legislatively by the board of trustees. Variances, Snell said, are not the way to change zoning.

"You can't be changing laws for just one or two people just to help them out," said Glenn Hubbell.

Trustee and former ZBA member Milo Stewart, Jr. said he believes the use variances already granted for homes in the area has worked well and described them as "tasteful." He recommended that variances be granted for the two properties in question because he is certain they will be tastefully handled also.

Another newcomer to the board, Madalyn Cimino, suggested the two applicants for variances be given "special consideration." Others were able to obtain variances in the past with little difficulty and she said the village should simply "do what it did for other in the past."

"Treat it as a special circumstance," she said.

"The ZBA and planning board created this situation," Waller said. "We (the village) created the situation on the street."

"I think it is a little late in the day for the ZBA to say to us, fix it," said trustee Lee Malone. "They should fix it."

The issue centers around applications for use variances on upper Main Street from two law firms to use residences for professional office space. The area is now zoned residential, but over the years, a number of variances have been granted which have opened the door to mixed uses.

Both applications were given positive declarations during the ZBA's environmental review of the proposal and require the applicant to now complete a draft environmental impact statement to address concerns about the impact of the variance if it was to be granted.

One of the applications is from Cooperstown's municipal attorneys, Lambert and Trosset, for the home that is owned by John and Maria Vann.

The Vanns attended the meeting Monday night and spoke to trustees briefly. Maria Vann told the board it is "plain and simple." The ZBA didn't follow correct procedure for variances in the past. During the review of the application for Timothy Johnson's law office, the ZBA's Snell told Maria Vann that they would receive the same consideration if and when their house was the subject of an application for a variance. That statement was not recorded in the minutes of the meeting, but Waller was there and confirmed what Vann said.

"What she said is true. I was at the meeting. I can not lie," Waller said.

Vann went on the say that the ZBA was not concerned about the impact of previous variances they granted. "All of a sudden to give a variance will change the character of the neighborhood," she asked.

John Vann told trustees that in his opinion, they have a legal problem on their hands.

Lacking support from the trustees, Waller abandoned the discussion without setting another public hearing on the proposal.

It is now up to the two applicants to decide if they want to pursue the use variances. To do so will require that they complete a draft environmental impact statement that addresses the ZBA's concerns about the impact of the variances.