east hampton indoor tennis, lessons, club, training
27east.com

Story - News

Dec 22, 2008 8:48 PMPublication: The Southampton Press

Nuzzi proposes cutting the size of regulatory boards

Dec 22, 2008 8:48 PM

The seven-member Southampton Town Planning Board could be reduced to five members if a resolution introduced by Town Councilman Chris Nuzzi is adopted.

A public hearing to discuss the measure has been set for January 13. Mr. Nuzzi’s plan would also cut the Zoning Board of Appeals to five members and reduce the individual term of service for both boards from seven to five years.

Mr. Nuzzi said his plan was aimed at cutting costs and increasing efficiency. “If you add up the salaries and benefits of all the boards, then over a seven-year period you’re talking about saving some half million dollars,” he said. Mr. Nuzzi said he is working on a resolution to cut the seven-member Conservation Board to five members as well.

But current Planning Board member Jacqui Lofaro, whose term expires at the end of this year and would be removed from the board if Mr. Nuzzi’s plan goes through, charges that the councilman’s resolution is more about politics than belt tightening. Ms. Lofaro is one of two Democrats on the board; Alma Hyman, whose term expires at the end of 2009, is the other Democrat and also opposes the measure. Mr. Lofaro said she thinks that she and Ms. Hyman are the targets of the Nuzzi plan.

“Both Alma and I are very vocal,” Ms. Lofaro said. “We both opposed the approval of the Woodfield Gables application, which was highly contentious. We both called for a reversal of that decision.”

Mr. Nuzzi, however, dismissed any assertion that his motives were driven by politics. “I didn’t look at who it impacts on a personal basis,” he said. “This cuts across the entire political spectrum. In no way am I casting aspersions on any particular board member.”

Mr. Nuzzi added that former Town Councilman Steve Kenny, a Democrat, took the initiative to limit the terms board members could serve to two. “We’ve also increased the cost-share formula for health benefits for those serving on these boards, and this is just another means of cutting costs.”

Planning Board Chairman Dennis Finnerty said he hadn’t had time to study Mr. Nuzzi’s resolution, but he didn’t believe the councilman’s actions were political. “I really think this is about numbers in this economy,” Mr. Finnerty said. “I don’t think Mr. Nuzzi’s plan is directed at anyone in particular.”

Mr. Finnerty also noted that the Planning Board consisted of five members from 1957 until former Town Supervisor Fred W. Thiele Jr. added two additional members in 1991, a point made by Mr. Nuzzi as well. “This board used to be only five members. I haven’t heard a compelling argument why it can’t operate with five again,” he said.

That argument may come from Town Councilwoman Nancy Graboski, who served on the Planning Board when it had five members as well as after Mr. Thiele expanded it to seven. “I think the board worked quite well with seven members, and I’m against reducing it back to five,” Ms. Graboski said.

In her view, seven members are needed to provide a better geographical representation. “On the Planning Board, you have to act within certain time frames. You’re making major decisions and you have to be able to provide adequate representation,” she said.

Ms. Graboski said the Planning Board deals with land use issues, which she said are some of the most controversial. “We need to continue to search diligently for additional cost-cutting measures,” she said. “But not at the expense of weakening these boards and potentially compromising their ability to function optimally and in the best interest of the town.”

Town Councilwoman Anna Throne-Holst agreed that cutting costs in the weak economic climate was a top priority for the town, but said the amount of dollars that would be saved by Mr. Nuzzi’s resolution was not worth it.

“Planning and zoning is such a huge part of what affects and shapes this town,” Ms. Throne-Holst said. “We need as much balance and representation as possible for both denials and approvals. I voted in favor of holding a public hearing because I want to hear more. But these decisions coming out of these boards have great consequence for the town, and I’m not sure that the money saved on a yearly basis relative to an $80 million budget is a good trade-off. We need the variety of perspectives that these members bring. By shrinking the size of the boards, we shrink that balance.”

Mr. Nuzzi, however, said he thinks that in government an argument can be made that less is more. “When people sign on for the Planning Board, they are making a commitment, just like any other board,” he said, adding the Town Board consists of only five members and requires a simple majority of three for making crucial decisions.

When the public hearing is held on January 13, new Town Board member Sally Pope, a Democrat, may well cast the deciding vote. Co-sponsors of Mr. Nuzzi’s resolution are Town Supervisor Linda Kabot and outgoing Town Councilman Dan Russo.

1  |  2  >>  

You have read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Yes! I'll try a one-month
Premium Membership
for just 99¢!
CLICK HERE

Already a subscriber? LOG IN HERE

Why not reduce the additional staff added in 2008 instead? This paper should compare the number of paychecks going to the Comptroller's office this year as opposed to 2007. Kagel did the work herself, she was not just an administrator, she is a CPA who did the work not just oversaw the work. Now they have four extra people doing her job. The Supervisors office has new part time people who were not there before. Richard's many departments have more staff. Cut back on the perks to the elected officials ...more
By Hampton (50), Westhampton on Dec 24, 08 8:19 AM
Reducing Staff is a good idea, but it seems to me that Mr. Nuzzi's proposal is a sound one,

Seven ZBA and Planning Board members are two too many... the positions are paid ones, and the Boards are essentially patronage repositories... who serving on them is not "connected," almost exclusively to the Southampton Town GOP!

The Boards serve an important function within the Town, but are bloated. Look at how many serve on the corresponding boards within the various municipalities ...more
By Frank Wheeler (1796), Northampton on Dec 25, 08 10:15 AM
During these economic downturns, the town board's primary focus is on cuting costs. With CPF funds and revenues dwindling any sensible cut in the budget no matter how small must be acted upon.

Five people make decisions on the town board, why can't five people make decisions on these other boards.

Nuzzi appears to understand the economic environment and the hardship many residents are suffering.

Chis is doing the job he was elected to Do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



By kpjc (159), east quogue on Dec 28, 08 11:18 AM
Nice idea but the result is something that affects the Democrats rather poorly in a time of rising expectations for them in general. The alleged costs savings are truly peanuts in comparison to the net effect of leaving those boards in the hands of the once omnipotent Republican party in Southampton. Money is only the red herring that Mr. Nuzzi is throwing about to appear concerned about town finances. This does not even sound like a proposal that came from him directly - it has the ring of being ...more
By foodie (74), Remsenburg on Jan 2, 09 12:53 PM
Sounds to me like an attempt to hurt the Democrats. Why not instead cut each members salary.
By dagdavid (646), southampton on Jan 5, 09 3:37 PM
The problem with the town's boards especailly the Planning Board is the cumbersome and time consuming procedural processes it follows. Who has filed an application with the PB and not asked the question, "Why does it take so long?" What is needed here is a thorough procedural review of how the PB processes applications. Improved processes will result in cost savings and increased effficiency. Simply reducing the number of members on the board equates to firing the coach because the team is not ...more
By Viewpoint (26), Southampton on Jan 7, 09 10:42 AM
Why not make the 5 spots paid and two spots voluntary? The opposition to removing 2 is that MORE review is nessecary not paid review. Volunteers are found everywhere on boards committees ets why not ask those whose terms are up to commit for free.
By Bob Schepps (77), Southampton on Jan 7, 09 7:12 PM
PS those who comment and don't sign there names got no guts and must be hiding something.
By Bob Schepps (77), Southampton on Jan 7, 09 7:14 PM
to dagdavid and foodie, do your research. if these cuts happen the democrats lose 3 members, republicans lose 2, and conservatives lose 1.
mr. schepps, there's a lot more to concealing my identity than having "no guts." i have a family and a life, and i don't want it interfered with because of my comments and the people who react to them. people like you are EXACTLY why i conceal my identity. don't worry about who is making the comments, it's irrelevant.
By WHB Resident (9), WHB on Jan 20, 09 12:08 PM
Hampton Bays Rotary, Autumn Evening by the Sea, Joyce Oakland, Oaklands Restaurant