To the Editor:
I am writing to inform Guilderland residents about an important upcoming public hearing on May 17, at 7 p.m., at the Guilderland Town Hall that will finally amend the notice provisions of our zoning code to require that notice must be given on public hearings to all those who live within a defined area near the site of a proposed development. This, in my opinion, is long overdue.

At present, the town policy gives notices as a “courtesy.” This system is not enough, as at virtually every public hearing I have heard residents who live directly next to a proposed development complain that they did not receive notice. I invite everyone to please attend this important meeting and share your thoughts.

This new zoning amendment on notice was originally proposed by myself and councilwomen Christine Napierski and Amanda Beedle about a month ago. Keenly aware of the state’s Open Meetings Law, there were no meetings. The three of us never met in person, or even had a conference call about it. We had all agreed it was a good idea and supported it, so I drafted a new proposed notice amendment and submitted it.

A draft of an amendment to the zoning code is not final and will, by law, require a full public hearing and full participation by the public, after which it may change substantially based on resident input, but, as in all proposed amendments, a working draft has to be presented to the public first.

In the past, drafts for code amendments have been done by the supervisor, but any town board member can draft and submit a proposal for an amendment to the zoning code. The draft amendment was then discussed at a meeting of the supervisor and town staff. 

Several changes were made, most of which were very positive, including formatting adjustments, breaking out the suggested 600-foot area of notice into 500 feet for residential districts and 750 feet for commercial and other districts, etc. I very much appreciate the input from the town staff and their hard work on this amendment. Their work helped.

However, there was one very major section on tenants’ rights to receive notice that was deleted, which deeply concerns me, and which I am asking people to consider.

It is my belief that, whether or not one has the means to own land and a house or whether one lives in an apartment, each is equal in that each is the resident’s home. The residents who live in apartments generally fall into one of three categories: (1) young people just starting out, (2) low- to middle-income people who cannot afford a down payment on a house, and (3) seniors.

In addition, although no formal study that I know of has been done, some believe that there are a higher percentage of minorities who live in apartments due to a variety of factors. Right now, notices only go to landowners and so, if your home is in an apartment, the landlord gets the notice, but has absolutely no incentive or requirement to share it with the tenants.

Most landlords may not want to tell tenants, for fear that if tenants knew something large was going in next door to them, they might move. Indeed, many of our current apartment complexes are located in bucolic mature forests now (e.g., Fairwood, Heritage Village, Woodlake, etc.), and tenants choose to live there specifically for the natural beauty of the area.

Just one new project could clear-cut acres of mature trees right next door to such an apartment dwelling, changing its entire character. It seems unfair to me under the current version of the new zoning amendment that a huge development project could go in and not a single apartment tenant in the 500- to 750-foot notice area would get notice but, if there is a homeowner living in a single house next to the apartments, that homeowner would get notice.

The effect of the proposed development on light, noise, traffic, viewshed, and quality of life will be the same on both. To be very clear, I don’t believe the town is intentionally discriminating against tenants, but the principle of giving notice to one group in an area and not the other does have a disparate impact, even if unintentional.

At the town board meeting on April 5, 2022, I raised this issue to inform tenants of the omission of notice to them in the current proposed amendment so they could be heard on it at the upcoming public hearing. 

The supervisor mistakenly accused me of attacking the town staff and said I was “over the top” for raising the issue of tenants’ rights.  Just to clarify, I was not attacking the town staff at all.

The town staff is currently just doing exactly what it’s supposed to do; they follow the direction and practices the town has set up on how to send out notices by mail. They are all hard-working employees, just doing their job.

The ability to change the system of who gets notice so as to make it more fair lies completely with the town board. This is our chance to make the law of notice in town more equitable and evenhanded.

Some have raised the issue that giving notice to tenants would be too expensive. Given that the 500- or 750-foot zone might include just one of many apartment buildings in a complex with 15 tenants, or a three-floor building with up to 222 tenants, I checked with the post office to estimate the costs.

The town uses a metered mail system, so to send out, for example, 100 notices would cost 32 cents to 33 cents per mailing or about $32.50; to send 200 notices would cost about $65.00.

This is not an unduly high fee for an applicant to pay in order to provide proper notice of a proposed major project. Developers of large projects can easily afford this and we could draft exceptions in the code to exclude notices to tenants for small residential variances.

Others have raised the issue that giving notice to tenants would be too difficult because our town system doesn’t have a list of apartments. To resolve this, we could upgrade our system.

Advertisements are typically addressed to each tenant in a building in the form of, for example, “Occupant,” Building N, Apartment 1, Fairwood Apartments, Guilderland NY 12084. If advertisers can do it, certainly the town, which approves the site plans for all apartment complexes, can do it too.

There are many ways to give tenants proper notice.  Let’s work on it together to find a solution.

In the end, the decision will be in the hands of the residents who choose to speak out or not on this issue, and on the town board members’ judgment. I encourage anyone with an opinion on this issue to please either email the town board members or come to the public hearing on May 17. Your voices are important.

I also would like to add that ,although town board members may often disagree on an issue, we have a duty to always remain professional and civil to each other. A democracy is a laboratory of ideas, and for it to succeed, all ideas need to be welcomed and heard.

Laurel Bohl

Councilwoman

Guilderland

Editor’s note: See related story.