[iframe src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/THO-fQT89zg?ecver=2″ width=”800″ height=”450″ scrolling=”auto” ]
Local Law No. 3, otherwise known as the Waste Disposal Law could be off the books in mere weeks — if the Seneca Falls Town Board continues on the path it has created.
On Thursday, in a special session — the Town Board voted 3-2 introducing a new local law, which would nullify the previously adopted Local Law No. 3 of 2016, which would force the closure of Seneca Meadows by December 31st, 2025.
The introduction of this new local law comes just weeks after Seneca Meadows introduced an Article 78 Petition challenging the process, bias, and unwillingness of the previous board to work with the company to come up with an amicable closure process.
“The law was forced onto the community and it was unfair to a particular business,” Supervisor Lazzaro said after the meeting concluded. The proposed local law was drawn up by Seneca Falls Town Attorney Pat Morrell.
The public hearing on proposed Local Law No. 2 of 2017 would rescind the previously adopted Local Law No. 3 of 2016, which was passed by a 4-1 vote in December.
In that vote, Lazzaro was the only vote opposed to the legislation.
However, two new board members took over in January — and those two votes proved to be important ones on Thursday. While the 3-2 vote doesn’t introduce the legislation, it gets the ball rolling.
Board members Vic Porretta and Dave DeLelys voted against the introduction of Local Law No. 2 on Thursday.
Supervisor Lazzaro, as well as newly seated board members Tom Ruzicka and Lou Ferrara all voted for the introduction of the resolution — scheduling the public hearing.
Lazzaro said in November at the previous public hearing for Local Law No. 3 that it would not be wise for the Town to adopt such legislation, as it would not allow for either party to continue negotiating in good faith for new terms.
The public hearing is scheduled for March 13th at 4 pm at the newly opened Seneca Falls Municipal Building at 130 Ovid Street.
The new meeting room on Ovid Street is significantly smaller than the previous meeting location, which has some concerned about the feasibility of having the hearing there.