OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Pleasantville, New York/Village Board of Trustees & Boards
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Pleasantville Village Board of Trustees Work Session - January 20, 2026

Village Board of Trustees & Boards — Tuesday, January 20, 2026
BodyPleasantville, New York
SessionVillage Board of Trustees & Boards
DateTuesday, January 20, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 53:45

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:00

Here.

Unassigned speaker

0:02

All

Speaker 2

0:03

right.

0:03

Welcome all to the work session for the Village of Pleasantville Board of Trustees.

0:06

Today is Monday, January 12th.

0:11

As of the moment, three of us here.

0:14

Nicole asked with David Vignamori.

0:17

Trustee Paul Alvarez is on board via Zoom at home because of a health issue.

0:25

Welcome, Paul.

Unassigned speaker

0:27

He

Speaker 2

0:28

waves.

Speaker 3

0:28

Oh.

Speaker 2

0:32

All right.

0:34

First item on our agenda is a discussion regarding the A1 zoning district and some redefinitions regarding daycare use.

Speaker 4

0:50

Robert, do you want to give the uh the summary here?

Speaker 5

0:54

Uh yeah.

0:55

Uh hello everyone.

0:58

Um basically, you know, daily we go through different inquiries into properties and zoning districts.

1:05

And in review recently, and um two to time was going through some issues with gas um down at their building.

1:13

Um we happen to be looking up the use as a private school in daycare.

1:18

And I was noticing in our zoning that it actually wasn't listed as a permitted use in the A1.

1:23

And

Unassigned speaker

1:24

I

Speaker 5

1:24

mentioned two to time because they're clearly a daycare use in the A1 district.

1:29

I think it was an oversight back some years ago, and I brought it to uh Eric's attention, just so we should look at this to confirm that it should be a permitted use, and uh council did a good job of uh uh writing up new uh definitions on each to clarify

Unassigned speaker

1:44

it.

Speaker 5

1:44

Um so I think it's a matter of just getting this back into the code, well, into the code as it probably should have always

Unassigned speaker

1:50

been.

Speaker 5

1:51

Um and that's why it's on the docket tonight.

Speaker 2

1:54

Okay, thank you for that.

1:56

So the the issue is we know uh in a revised definitions have uh a distinction between private schools K through 12 and private schools pre-K.

2:10

Because there are circumstances where you would permit a pre-K uh daycare use, for example, in the A1 district, where a K through 12 school might not be appropriate.

Speaker 6

2:22

That makes sense.

Speaker 2

2:23

All

Unassigned speaker

2:24

right.

Speaker 2

2:25

Judd, you want to add anything to that?

2:26

Have we misrepresented anything?

Speaker 7

2:29

No.

2:29

Um, and what the uh code revisions have have done is to draw a distinction but between um K-12 and

Speaker 8

2:38

pre-school.

Speaker 7

2:40

Um there will be no change with regard to those districts within which both private um types of schools are allowed, and the A1 uh has been changed to um allow the uh the the pre-K, uh you know, as Robert has talked

Unassigned speaker

2:59

about.

Unassigned speaker

3:00

Uh

Speaker 7

3:01

it's very straightforward.

Speaker 2

3:02

Okay.

3:03

Uh is there any issue with, for example, a school that might be proposed at K through 8.

Unassigned speaker

3:10

Um

Speaker 2

3:11

that fall into the K obviously it won't it it ought to fall into the same category as K-12, right?

Speaker 7

3:19

No, no, because you've you've drawn the distinction between um K-12 and pre-K.

Speaker 2

3:25

Right, but what about K 8, for example?

3:28

Would it be high?

Speaker 6

3:29

Sorry, it's defined as a kindergarten primary or secondary school.

3:33

So that would be

Speaker 2

3:34

anything

Speaker 6

3:34

within that range, right?

Speaker 2

3:35

Right, anything in the range.

3:37

Fair to say, as Nicole has reported.

Unassigned speaker

3:42

I

Speaker 2

3:43

just didn't want there to be any unclarity that we had captured K through 12 uh as a full spectrum school, but it would be entirely imaginable that you could have a private school that serves a narrower band that's not pre-K.

Speaker 7

4:00

In in which district, Mayor.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Parks and Recreation██████████████████████████████████████38%
Education███████████████████19%
Affordable Housing██████████10%
Youth Programs████████8%
Economic Development███████7%
Procedural██████6%
Zoning And Land Use████4%
Engineering And Infrastructure████4%
Public Engagement██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Pleasantville Village Board of Trustees Work Session - January 20, 2026

The Pleasantville Village Board of Trustees held a work session from approximately 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at Village Hall, 80 Wheeler Ave, 2nd Floor, Pleasantville, NY. This summary uses the meeting date of January 20, 2026 (2026-01-20) as supplied; the agenda and raw transcript identify the session as Monday, January 12, 2026. The agenda covered A1 zoning/daycare use, FY 2026-27 recreation fees and pay rates, and continued Master Fee Schedule discussion. No formal public comment period was held.

Discussion Items

  • A1 Zoning District and Daycare Use: Robert (staff) reported that a review of the Two to Time daycare property found that daycare/private school use was not listed as a permitted use in the A1 zoning district, likely an oversight. A proposed local law amending Chapter 185 would distinguish private schools from pre-K/daycare and add pre-K/daycare as a permitted use in A1. Judd added that the revision draws a distinction between K-12 private schools and pre-K programs; districts that already allow both types remain unchanged, while A1 would now allow pre-K use. The board confirmed that a private school serving grades K-8 would fall under the K-12 private school definition, not the pre-K category. Next step: prepare a draft local law and a resolution scheduling a public hearing.
  • FY 2026-27 Recreation Fees and Pay Rates: Mike Newman, recreation director, presented the proposed fees and pay rates.
    • Summer camp: Raise the counselor base rate from $15.00 to $15.25 per hour and expand junior camp from a half-day to a day ending at 2:30 p.m. Fees would increase for junior, senior, team-travel, and after-camp programs to cover rising trip and busing costs. Board members supported the expansion, saying it helps families needing full-day care; no after-care will be offered for junior camp this year because the after-care building can hold only 58 people, though after-care may be explored later.
    • Panther Club: Increase monthly fees by 5%, the first increase since the program began, to cover supply and staff costs and to support staff-led clubs. The board discussed moving registration earlier to the first Saturday after school lets out and a possible lottery instead of first-come online sign-up because of equity concerns about internet access and work schedules. Staff will explore options and report back.
    • Pool: No membership fee increase is proposed; the plan would add back the 10% reduction taken from proposed fees last season. Guest fees would rise from $10 to $15, compared with $20 at nearby Mount Pleasant. Resident 10-pack day passes remain $250 and school-district 10-packs remain $330. Board members supported the plan.
    • Scholarships: The board asked to continue the recreation scholarship program. Staff said that because school lunch is now free for all students, eligibility will be based on SNAP enrollment proof instead of free/reduced lunch letters. Last year the budget was $13,000, actual spending was about $11,000, and approximately $7,000 of that was covered by fundraised funds held in a trust account.
  • Continued Master Fee Schedule Discussion: The board continued reviewing recreation fees paid in lieu of land dedication for residential development. The current fee for residential units subject to park-land dedication is $5,000; the previously proposed increase was to $12,000, and a board proposal was $15,000, which would tie the village with only one other community as the highest in the county. For multifamily units, the current fees are $5,000 per unit with two or more bedrooms and $2,500 per unit with fewer than two bedrooms. Previously proposed increases were $6,000 for efficiency/one-bedroom units, $8,000 for two-bedroom units, and $10,000 for three-bedroom units. The higher board proposal was $8,000, $10,000, and $12,000 respectively, with $15,000 for single-family attached/detached units versus the previously proposed $12,000. The Mayor recommended the previously proposed lower figures to avoid having the highest fee in the county and to avoid adding to the cost of modestly priced housing. Several trustees supported the higher figures, saying the fees are a small share of development cost and the village needs recreation revenue. Trustee Paul Alvarez said he would vote for the higher $15,000 figure. A non-binding straw poll showed a majority of board members favoring the higher numbers; the Mayor indicated he would vote against that outcome. A formal resolution will be prepared.
  • Metro North Substation Update: The Mayor reported that Metro North has resumed discussions about buying a village-owned parcel near the Wells Fargo lot to build an electrical substation. Village officials are discussing height flexibility, including a possible 30-foot height, even though no known substations are that tall; the Mayor and Eric plan to visit a substation with Metro North to discuss the design. The negotiations have been intermittent for about ten years.

Key Outcomes

  • The board will move forward with a draft local law amending Chapter 185 and a resolution scheduling a public hearing on A1 zoning/daycare use.
  • The board supported the proposed FY 2026-27 recreation fee and pay plan, including counselor pay, the full-day junior camp change, the Panther Club 5% increase, and the pool guest fee increase.
  • Staff will develop Panther Club registration options, including earlier enrollment and a possible lottery.
  • Master Fee Schedule fee levels were not formally adopted; a majority straw poll favored higher amounts, and a formal resolution is planned.
  • Metro North discussions continue, with a site/substation visit planned.

Meeting Transcript

Here. All right. Welcome all to the work session for the Village of Pleasantville Board of Trustees. Today is Monday, January 12th. As of the moment, three of us here. Nicole asked with David Vignamori. Trustee Paul Alvarez is on board via Zoom at home because of a health issue. Welcome, Paul. He waves. Oh. All right. First item on our agenda is a discussion regarding the A1 zoning district and some redefinitions regarding daycare use. Robert, do you want to give the uh the summary here? Uh yeah. Uh hello everyone. Um basically, you know, daily we go through different inquiries into properties and zoning districts. And in review recently, and um two to time was going through some issues with gas um down at their building. Um we happen to be looking up the use as a private school in daycare. And I was noticing in our zoning that it actually wasn't listed as a permitted use in the A1. And I mentioned two to time because they're clearly a daycare use in the A1 district. I think it was an oversight back some years ago, and I brought it to uh Eric's attention, just so we should look at this to confirm that it should be a permitted use, and uh council did a good job of uh uh writing up new uh definitions on each to clarify it. Um so I think it's a matter of just getting this back into the code, well, into the code as it probably should have always been. Um and that's why it's on the docket tonight. Okay, thank you for that. So the the issue is we know uh in a revised definitions have uh a distinction between private schools K through 12 and private schools pre-K. Because there are circumstances where you would permit a pre-K uh daycare use, for example, in the A1 district, where a K through 12 school might not be appropriate. That makes sense. All right. Judd, you want to add anything to that? Have we misrepresented anything? No. Um, and what the uh code revisions have have done is to draw a distinction but between um K-12 and pre-school. Um there will be no change with regard to those districts within which both private um types of schools are allowed, and the A1 uh has been changed to um allow the uh the the pre-K, uh you know, as Robert has talked about. Uh it's very straightforward. Okay. Uh is there any issue with, for example, a school that might be proposed at K through 8. Um that fall into the K obviously it won't it it ought to fall into the same category as K-12, right? No, no, because you've you've drawn the distinction between um K-12 and pre-K. Right, but what about K 8, for example?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com