The cleanup at 10 Church Road, the site of illegal dumping in the Woodstock hamlet of Shady, has begun. Neighbors and two members of the Woodstock Environmental Commission say the effort is inadequate and violates town law.
WEC members Alex Bolotow and Bob Wolff called on building inspector Francis “Butch” Hoffman to rescind the permit because it was a misrepresentation of fact and was against the fill-and-grading law.
Bolotow argues that the permit for “dirt removal and redistribution” is invalid because the material is actually construction-and-demolition (C&D) debris. Additionally, the new law passed because of the Shady dumping prohibits “onsite processing, sorting or crushing,” which is what property owner Vincent Conigliaro’s contractor is doing.
The remediation plan is to sift through the material, remove prohibited contents for disposed at a licensed facility, and spread the remaining material on the side of the property opposite the neighbors.
Frank and Pam Eighmey, whose back yard is filled with the debris from a June 2020 landslide due to lack of proper retaining walls, want all the fill removed. So do other neighbors.
Vincent Conigliaro’s wife, Gina ordered fill from contractor Joseph Karolys for a landscaping project. The town later discovered Karolys had delivered more than 200 truckloads of contaminated fill to the property. Karolys, who faces manslaughter charges for the death of David “Mickey” Myer, has also come under scrutiny by state officials for hauling and accepting C&D debris.
Hoffman did not agree to revoke the permit. But he did not refuse to, according to Bolotow.
Bolotow provided Hoffman with text messages between supervisor Bill McKenna and a neighbor acknowledging the material was construction debris. A She stated her argument:
A McKenna email acknowledged the material came from Karolys’ facility. A witness statement from Gina Conigliaro’s daughter Francesca described the material as debris being hidden by Karolys. An email from DEC Region 3 director Kelly Turturro acknowledged the agency understands the owner was removing C&D debris. Newspaper articles said that McKenna acknowledged the material was construction debris. In court documents from a civil suit between Conigliaro and Karolys, Conigliaro describes the material as “not clean fill, rather the fill was contaminated with solid waste including concrete and bricks and other C&D debris.” And in sworn testimony from the Town of Woodstock case, Conigliaro said “it wasn’t dirt.”
Bolotow plans on following up with Hoffman. If she doesn’t get a response or if he still declines to revoke the permit, she said, she will file a complaint with the state Department of State’s Oversight Unit.
“A number of required elements that the building inspector must obtain were not provided prior to the approval, including engineering drawings, a survey showing all contour lines of the area being excavated, as well as the features there within, the estimated quantity of material to be removed, the details of any drainage systems being installed during the performance of the work and after, and documentation regarding permit status with the DEC,” Bolotow said in an email.
While acknowledging the material was construction debris, Turturro in her email said state regulations were that “up to 5000 cubic yards of recognizable, uncontaminated concrete or concrete products, asphalt pavement, brick, glass, rock, and general fill from C&D activities may be accepted for disposal without a permit.”
The town permit was issued to remedy a violation of town law because C&D debris is prohibited in Woodstock.
Join the family! 
