Ballston Spa trustees name engineer for Conifer Realty 125 Bath St. application amid conflict disclosures

The Village of Ballston Spa Board of Trustees voted to authorize the use of C.T. Veil Associates as the village-designated engineer to review Conifer Realty LLC’s application for 125 Bath Street and to permit the mayor to execute an agreement after village attorney approval. The board said the applicant will bear engineering costs through the standard escrow process.

Village counsel Carla told trustees the village’s designated attorney, La Bella, had a conflict because La Bella previously represented the applicant on environmental engineering matters related to the tannery project and had prepared a conflict letter; La Bella later advised the village it would withdraw from performing village engineering work on this application. The village then approached the Laberge Group, which declined because of scheduling and workload, and C.T. Veil Associates agreed to serve as the village’s engineer on the project. “It was necessary to go out and obtain another engineer,” Carla said.

Mayor (unnamed) and staff said the board wanted an engineer on board before a joint Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on June 11 so the engineer could review documents before that meeting. The mayor said the village follows an escrow procedure so engineering fees are ultimately paid by the applicant, not the village. Trustees also noted the project has a voluminous application package and that timing matters because statutory review time frames can lead to automatic approvals if a municipality does not respond within required periods.

Public commenters criticized the short notice for the emergency meeting and said the agenda was not posted. Liz said she agreed with Marilyn that the agenda had not been posted and that attendees “have no idea what the motions are” prior to the meeting. The mayor and trustees acknowledged receipt of morning emails from absent trustees Raymond and Baskin, who the mayor said objected to the emergency nature of the meeting and did not provide proxies in advance.

The motion carried by voice vote recorded as 3-0. Trustees did not provide a detailed cost estimate for C.T. Veil’s services during the meeting; the packet included a rate sheet that some trustees said they did not receive in full, and staff said they would re-send the materials. The June 11 joint meeting between the Planning Board and ZBA will be the first substantive public hearing on the application; trustees said preliminary engineering review was the purpose of today’s emergency action.