Ogdensburg council passes resolution to lease land from OBPA for city beach

May 14—OGDENSBURG — After City Council was unable to pass a resolution Monday night allowing the city manager to enter into a lease agreement with the Ogdensburg Bridge and Port Authority for a proposed city beach on authority land, council on Thursday night was able to pass the resolution.

Mayor Jeffrey M. Skelly earlier this week called for the Thursday night special council meeting to vote on the censure of councilor Michael B. Powers, which also passed, and to authorize City Manager Stephen P. Jellie to sign a lease agreement with OBPA to reopen the city beach.

The resolution states that City Council agrees to appropriate an amount no more than $50,000 for the beach project with a final budget to be presented to councilors at their May 24 meeting. The $50,000 would be for the use of the city's Department of Public Works staff, purchasing sand, among other things.

Last week, Mr. Jellie presented, to the full OBPA Board of Directors, the city's proposal to reopen the beach behind the OBPA administrative office near the Ogdensburg-Prescott International Bridge. OBPA board members took no action at their meeting, but told city officials they would send a counter offer to them in time for their City Council meeting. OBPA followed through on its promise and delivered an amended lease agreement to Mr. Jellie prior to the Monday meeting.

On Monday night, Deputy Mayor John A. Rishe introduced a resolution to allow Mr. Jellie to enter into a lease agreement with OBPA for the beach land, contingent upon the state Department of Health's determination of the property.

Council voted by a familiar 4-3 majority Monday, with councilors Steven M. Fisher, William B. Dillabough, Mr. Rishe and Mayor Skelly voting in favor of the resolution and councilors Daniel E. Skamperle, Nichole L. Kennedy and Mr. Powers voting against it. The resolution ultimately failed Monday as five votes in favor of the resolution were needed for it to pass.

Council voted along the same 4-3 line Thursday, but the resolution was able to pass as only four votes were needed instead of five.

Mr. Jellie said that Monday's resolution needed five votes as it was introduced under new business and not an official agenda item. Since the Thursday resolution was an agenda item, only four votes were needed.

The resolution didn't pass without debate.

Mr. Skamperle said councilors would first need to vote on a resolution to rescind their Monday vote. This, he said, is because the resolutions presented on both Monday and Thursday nights were the same.

"This is effectively out of order," Mr. Powers said.

Mayor Skelly asked City Clerk Cathy A. Jock if this was true, but she said she was unable to answer the question without doing research first.

"It would be nice if we had our attorney here to answer that," Mr. Powers said.

During the Monday meeting, Mr. Skamperle said he would like to hear from the public, adding that he would like a public hearing to be held before authorizing Mr. Jellie to sign the lease. Mr. Powers and Mrs. Kennedy shared Mr. Skamperle's view.

Mrs. Kennedy added that she did not feel comfortable voting yes to the resolution until it was determined whether the beach would be Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant.

The councilors again brought up their concerns Thursday, but no answers were given and no public hearing has been scheduled.

"We don't know what we're gonna get for sales tax next year, we don't have a budget," Mr. Skamperle said. "To tell you the truth, I don't feel comfortable signing this right now until we know from the (state) Department of Health, number one, and number two, I've asked over and over again for a public hearing."

The councilor also said he doesn't think the $50,000 figure will cover the costs of maintaining a beach.

"Fifty-thousand dollars, as far as I'm concerned, is way short of what we're gonna need when I start reading the regulations regarding a beach," Mr. Skamperle said.

He estimated it would cost the city upwards of $100,000 or $200,000.

"It's gonna cost a lot of money to do this," he said. "I think a lot more than what you're thinking.

"I'd like some numbers before I actually vote to basically write a blank check," he added.

The city's lease agreement with OBPA will be for $3,000. The $3,000 figure is made up of $1,000 for the security deposit, $1,000 for utilities and $1,000 to rent the land for four months at $250 a month. The beach would be open from July through September, but the city would have to pay rent for the month of June as well.

City Council, during its March 24 meeting, passed a resolution setting a goal to open a city beach by July 1. The resolution, which was passed unanimously, stated that the least expensive and quickest way to achieve the July 1 goal is to reopen the former city beach on OBPA land.

The beach was closed in 1994 when the city opened its pool.

The beach was considered too small, the surrounding grounds were routinely littered with garbage and the water itself was "dismissed as stagnant and rife with oil from the big cargo ships which navigate the river," according to a 1993 Times article on the beach closure.

The pool would remain open this summer in addition to the beach.