[3:47] All
[3:53] right.
September.
[4:16] Okay. Roll call.
>> Mr. Sla
[4:19] » here.
>> Mr. Sonus
[4:20] » here.
>> Mr. Johnson
[4:22] » here.
>> Mr. Hbert
[4:23] » here.
>> Mr. Warden
[4:24] » here. Communications.
>> No communications.
[4:28] » Okay. We're going to go right on to open
forum. Guest shall speak in an orderly
[4:31] fashion or limited remarks of five time
minutes or less. The speaker shall
[4:34] deliver their comments, concerns in a
civil tone without the use of profanity,
[4:37] personal attacks, or other disruptive
behavior which may result in the
[4:41] offender's removal from the meeting. The
speaker shall not be interrupted and
[4:44] except in a matter of urgency. Would
anybody like to speak tonight?
[4:57] » Hello. I uh took the [clears throat]
opportunity to watch the public hearing
[5:01] on the edus from
18th meeting and one thing that stood
[5:07] out is it seemed like a lot of people
blaming this board for what was going on
[5:12] and the increase
tax
[5:17] and I would just like to emphasize and I
think one or two of you have said it
[5:22] that this is something that's mandated
from all and I think if more people paid
[5:28] attention to who we elect as officials
or representatives
[5:34] um instead of paying attention to the
people that are
[5:40] um on noon every week giving out big fat
pay checks from Albany that are your tax
[5:48] dollars that they're spending if they
paid attention to that voting for that.
[5:53] I think that that would go a long ways
and just appreciate everything you guys
[5:58] are doing as far as the edus are
concerned. Um it's an easy job for you
[6:03] guys. I mean, you were you were dealt an
awful hand, but you're making the best
[6:08] of it. You're listening to people and
you're letting them, you know, voice
[6:12] their opinion frustration. I thank you
for that. I also want to bring up um
[6:19] the condition of a lot of the buildings
in in the town of Schnangle seems to be
[6:24] dwindling significantly. I know we had a
point where code was lacking.
[6:32] Um, I hope that the new guy that's in
there, um,
[6:39] emphasizes,
you know, the existing stuff that we've,
[6:43] you know, [clears throat] that that
citizens have brought up and other board
[6:46] members have brought up um, over the
years. There's properties that have been
[6:51] just, you know, continuously violation,
violation, violation, and nothing seems
[6:57] to be getting done about it. I I would
hope that we could prioritize those
[7:01] buildings and residences that have been
problem areas and get those taken care
[7:08] of as quick as possible. Thank you for
your time. Appreciate
[7:12] » Thank you.
[7:17] Anyone else?
[7:22] » Okay, we're going to move on. We're
going to go right to old business.
[7:26] Uh 5.1 wastewater train wastewater
treatment plant updates. I we have
[7:31] nothing on here. Is there anything
correct?
[7:33] » Okay.
Uh 5.2.
[7:36] » I I just have a question though. Uh
>> we had an email about the Wisconsin pump
[7:42] station over there.
Is that a big to-do or whatever? because
[7:48] I know we talked about it at the last
meeting two weeks ago and I don't know
[7:52] if anything's been done about it or
everybody's communicating together to
[7:57] get something done or Alex and I met
there today and we had a meeting with Le
[8:02] and Gleason.
She was going to reach out and send an
[8:07] email out to everybody. I don't know if
she did it yet today.
[8:10] » I didn't get today's
>> We met there. We met at Apprentice Road.
[8:15] » Yeah.
>> I know if there was a a timeline because
[8:19] the I guess the contractor is waiting
for us to make a decision or whatever.
[8:22] So
>> I think there is kind of like a time
[8:25] limit to this.
>> We had Alex out there today. He's going
[8:28] to give his thoughts and recommendations
and then uh we'll put it in front.
[8:35] » Okay,
[8:40] » that's it.
>> Okay.
[8:41] » All right. There will be other
information I'll put on the next meeting
[8:45] for wastewater updates. There's a few
things that we want to get into the
[8:49] project, but it was too late. I got the
information to put it on this agenda.
[8:54] She'll have it for the next one.
>> All right.
[8:59] All right. Moving on. 5.2 comprehensive
plan update.
[9:03] » Um, [clears throat] we have not met
formally since our last uh board
[9:07] meeting. Um we will meet as a committee
before we have our next meeting and then
[9:14] we also will have a get together with
CIERS at the end of this month.
[9:19] Uh Chris Bodec did do a media
presentation on channel 34. I didn't see
[9:27] it but I guess he did a good job.
Uh text my gov was uh sent out and I
[9:35] guess it was successful. We had a pretty
good response for people who want to
[9:39] take advantage of the service.
>> Yeah, we have 10,000
[9:44] a little over 10,000 opted in.
>> Really?
[9:48] » Out of 11,000 that were sent out.
>> Wow.
[9:52] » Anybody here?
>> I didn't I didn't get it.
[9:56] » I didn't get I didn't get it either.
>> I
[9:58] » I Spectrum didn't go to Spectrum, right?
Yeah, I think there was a couple of
[10:03] spectrum people that came in, but for
anybody's phone number, just let us know
[10:07] if you want to be opted in. We
>> I I only I only said I didn't get it
[10:12] because the conversation was about this
going out to reach the the townwide
[10:18] people. And I'm
>> It depends on where they got the
[10:22] » the phone number database from.
So, anybody that does want to be opted
[10:27] in, I mean, you can do that, you know,
manually via the 91896 or just let me
[10:33] know.
>> But the question is, should should have
[10:37] you gotten it though? I mean
>> well no I was expecting I mean that was
[10:44] the whole point of the the data and from
my opinion from my point of view that's
[10:48] all I I specifically have not gone on
and registered and got pre-registered
[10:53] but did it before this blast email or
text went out because I wanted to see if
[10:59] I was on it if I got it. you know how
many numbers they said that they were
[11:03] going to do and how effective it was
going to be and you know of the 11,000
[11:09] some odd number that went out 10,000
>> 10,000 are in
[11:14] » and how many of them are town residences
>> uh from the database that they got
[11:21] wherever it is they get it you know
usually can buy it and sell it and all
[11:24] of that stuff it is town of Shenango
residents their their phone number
[11:29] » they're tied to a billing zip code.
>> Yes.
[11:32] » Within the town. That's where this
>> And when they sent out comes from.
[11:37] » Yeah. When they sent out the mass
notification of 11,000, I had 1300 and
[11:41] something that opted out. Everybody else
so far, last time I checked, was in and
[11:47] we were at 10,100
that are getting notifications from the
[11:52] town.
>> Okay.
[11:55] I didn't expect this to be absolutely
perfect candidly,
[12:00] but the
if we did the other service, the list
[12:05] was zero. So, we would have had to
recruit raw versus at least having some
[12:11] sort of base.
>> Seems pretty successful to me, those
[12:15] numbers.
>> Yeah, those were good numbers. I like
[12:18] » yeah the interesting thing will be the
first time we do a survey and see what
[12:21] the response rate is on those thousand
>> you know I mean if it's 20% I think that
[12:29] had 130 respond or whatever it was
>> yes and on that since we're here I added
[12:35] Darren Greg and Kevin to the list
everybody
[12:41] I just need to know who else on the
board or who else anybody wants
[12:47] the ability to be able to send out text
messages. I just need to know who that's
[12:52] going to be. If it's going to be all the
board members or
[12:55] » I do not want that.
>> I I think what you have is is fine.
[13:00] » I don't I don't think there's a need for
any more expansion.
[13:03] » I'm not removing you, Kevin. [laughter]
[13:08] » Yeah. If there's a case where one of us
needs to be added because we're chairing
[13:11] something, I think we can add ourselves
ad hoc, but I don't think we need to be
[13:15] on it.
>> Okay. for Darren and Greg. If y'all need
[13:18] to just know how or train, you know,
we'll figure that out.
[13:27] » All right. Any questions? Go ahead.
>> Uh, real briefly, uh, I guess Rene is
[13:32] going to talk about this or I going to
I'm going to ask her to talk about it.
[13:35] Uh we finally got a response from the
DEC about the climate score grant
[13:40] yesterday
and uh briefly talking to her. I think
[13:46] we're going to have to do some
investigating to see if this is going to
[13:49] be worthwhile for us because it's going
to be quite involved
[13:53] getting to
>> Yeah, sure.
[13:57] When I I got a hold of the DEC yesterday
and I asked I said what's the process
[14:02] because I was looking for whatever the
OSC procurement document thing is that I
[14:06] had never heard of and what they told me
is the process is basically DEEC
[14:11] approves once it goes from there then
the comproller office it goes to them
[14:17] they approve and then like money gets
dropped and everything else.
[14:22] So I was I was trying to figure out
going through the documents required for
[14:29] the administration of it and I was
talking to Dave and I'm going I know
[14:33] this much about grants but I'm looking
at this
[14:38] and
this is just my opinion and since I
[14:42] don't know if anybody does know please
stop me from being wrong or something.
[14:46] When I look at what is the climate smart
grant used for, it's for stuff that
[14:53] you're doing in doing stuff like nails
and boards and stuff like that. The
[14:58] comprehensive plan is basically one big
vision statement more or less
[15:04] oversimplified.
So I'm trying figure out just from
[15:08] looking at what is required and what we
have to do
[15:13] is that a thing that falls
category of stuff. And I don't know
[15:18] enough to know if that's true, false, or
indifferent. And when I was I was
[15:24] talking to Kevin, I was talking to Dave
about having somebody at the town with
[15:29] either the expertise and the time to
administer the involved stuff that is
[15:37] required.
And from talking to Dave, just wanted to
[15:42] bring that up going, where do we fall
and where should we look? I mean, I can
[15:47] talk to the comprehensive plan when we
have our meeting on the 15th,
[15:51] but I'm just trying to get a basic idea
of
[15:56] background or something that I might be
missing.
[16:04] Well, since we just got the information
yesterday, I think we need time to go
[16:09] through it and just kind of see what is
in it, you know, and so
[16:12] » yeah, I mean, I was looking at the
quarterly reports that are required, all
[16:17] of the uh the different metrics along
the way, and these look like stuff that
[16:22] you actually do like soil stuff and HVAC
stuff and minority and, you know,
[16:29] disabilities and everything else.
And quite honestly, when I'm looking at
[16:34] it, I was trying to figure out how that
fits in with a comprehensive plan
[16:42] thing.
[16:46] So,
[16:50] how do how do you want to handle it as a
board?
[16:53] » I'd say let's wait till next meeting to
find out if we can get more. maybe talk
[16:57] to other towns who have gotten these
grants to
[17:01] find out if they were how they how they
did how they did.
[17:04] » Yeah, that would be my first question is
how other towns that have received this
[17:08] who managed that or
>> Yeah.
[17:11] » So the the village of Aigo and I think
the town of Ulyses both got this grant
[17:16] um in some fashion. Ulyses used it for
their comprehensive plan. So, I'm fairly
[17:21] and I know when the grant application
was submitted, it was it should have
[17:24] been identified that it was going to be
for purposes of comprehensive planning.
[17:29] » Could you get me their
>> I don't Oh, yeah. I can get you their
[17:32] contact information. I was say I don't
have any of the actual application
[17:35] materials that we sent in, but I'm
assuming we would have identified for
[17:38] comp plan purposes.
>> Well, they were one of the towns that we
[17:41] said, well, they got it, so let's try
our shot at it. So,
[17:47] » Jean, we had a brief discussion on this
as a board prior um because I had some
[17:53] similar concerns and I thought that when
the grant application went in on our
[18:00] behalf, it was for the comprehensive
plan.
[18:03] » That
>> that that was my understanding.
[18:06] » That's the way that I remember the
conversation and the intent.
[18:09] » Right. And then I remember further
discussion on that when we talked about
[18:14] the MWBE requirements
that was part of the discussion with
[18:21] collers.
>> It it was at a higher level because they
[18:27] those those um the MBE WBE
requirements are goals.
[18:37] » Yes. And there's quite a few places
within the process of the comprehensive
[18:43] plan process to be able to
fit those those activities that meet
[18:49] those goals in
and then the due diligence if you can't
[18:54] meet them to prove the due diligence was
was done. So that was that was at the
[18:58] level that we talked about but not
specifically what activity do I I don't
[19:02] remember a conversation about that
>> but it certainly was the expectation
[19:08] that Kers knew that was part of this
program if you will or the plan
[19:14] » I do I remember that because they also
said that they had people they had
[19:18] consultants that could fulfill those
those
[19:22] » and that's where I remember the
conversation going.
[19:25] » Yeah. Collars did say that if we accept
the grant, they have to know to do stuff
[19:31] on their end.
>> But I agree with everything you guys are
[19:34] saying here.
But the first meeting or meeting after
[19:38] that when we first had the committee
meeting,
[19:40] » they were kind of surprised that we had
the grant.
[19:43] » Yes.
>> And we had to remind them, no, we got
[19:45] the grant. We thought that they were
going to be doing work work for us or
[19:51] working towards it already. They go, oh,
you got the grant. So, so David
[19:55] surprised I think I think part of the
issue with the consultant is that the
[19:59] town's never even accepted the grant and
so and Kier started the work before the
[20:03] grant had even been awarded
>> and they were never told okay go retain
[20:08] stuff like so the problem you guys are
going to run into is we keep not
[20:12] accepting the grant they're going to
finish their work and none of it's going
[20:16] to be reimburseable anyway.
>> Yeah. And that's when I talked to DEEC,
[20:21] I'm going, do I get uh okay, y'all
approved it and they said, you know,
[20:24] pretty much it's an [snorts]
if DEC approves it, then OSC is probably
[20:31] going to go, okay, that works for us. I
haven't received anything from OSC, I
[20:36] don't know if that's the normal process.
It did not was not able to get a hold of
[20:39] OSC to ask them that particular
question. So, it's still okay. DEEC said
[20:44] yes. They're pretty confident that means
OSC is going to, but they can't speak
[20:49] for OSC obviously. So, and then after
that it's set up a contract thing and
[20:55] SFS and all of that.
So,
[21:04] » I don't want to blur the the
conversation, but in past experience
[21:08] with grants, the questions that you're
asking have been presented to the town
[21:13] board by the person or the entity that
has prepared the grant and summarized
[21:18] those activities and gave us the
deadlines and the requirements for that.
[21:23] you could give me a thousand pages of
that grant and unless I've got all the
[21:26] supporting documentation that went
behind it
[21:29] » and then go through it and actually do
what I need to prepare the grant to
[21:33] understand it. I don't think that that's
what board needs. I think the town board
[21:37] needs from the from the
from the person or the group that
[21:43] actually wrote the grant and submitted
it to give us what we've got to do and
[21:48] when we've got to do it by
>> agree do we did Alex
[21:51] » so so we went through this Alex we asked
Alex to do this
[21:55] » and Alex said it was he would apply for
it but he wasn't going to do anything
[22:00] else after that. So where do we go from
here? I know what you're asking for. I'm
[22:05] not against what you're asking for, but
where you I think the last meeting we
[22:08] talked about putting it on the ordinance
office to try to figure out,
[22:13] » right? And we had this much to do with
it. So, I'm just trying to get to the
[22:16] bottom, find out what I have to do.
>> What do you want to do?
[22:20] » Wasn't Alex talking to someone at like
Cornell Cooperative Extension or
[22:23] something about this or am I making that
up?
[22:24] » No, there was another lady
southern tier or something or there were
[22:28] deals with this with other counties. And
did they get Alex something back? And I
[22:33] just don't remember seeing the email.
[22:40] » So what is the harm of accepting the
grant and presenting this to Kers to say
[22:47] that we have the grant
and we need
[22:52] to try to meet the goals or at least
provide the supporting documentation.
[22:59] So, I know one of the items that Alex
has mentioned is that there's a
[23:05] long-term committee that has to be
established and that has like annual
[23:10] maybe quarterly uh reporting.
>> There are reports so that are due
[23:14] quarterly that I saw.
>> So, so you you'd be committing to doing
[23:18] you know those types of things.
>> What's the what's the term on that
[23:23] committee?
>> That I don't know.
[23:24] » Is it three years, five years? The grant
is good until 2031.
[23:30] We have from like whenever we accept it
to 2031 to do all of the things
[23:35] necessary for that. So I would imagine
we have that far.
[23:39] » Yeah. I was just
>> the committee doesn't exist. So we'd
[23:42] have to create the committee and and
then establish those positions and
[23:45] terms.
>> I understand that. And but how long does
[23:48] that committee exist
>> post
[23:52] » for the post receiving
>> for the life of our commitment to the
[23:57] grant to the to the not to the grant but
to the program?
[24:02] » Okay. And the program you believe is
2031.
[24:05] » Yes.
>> Okay.
[24:11] So
we can talk to Kers on the 28th
[24:17] » or
tomorrow. Well,
[24:21] » yeah,
[24:29] » Kevin, I I I mean, I I think the
discussion goes, are we willing to put
[24:34] such a committee together and keep it
intact doing quarterly reports for the
[24:39] next five years or four years, whatever,
>> who who's going to be the committee?
[24:44] » Well, that's just it. I think that's how
we make that suggestion because there's
[24:48] not enough employees in the town.
There's definitely not. I agree.
[24:52] » It's just a take away from something
else.
[24:55] » So, are we agreeing that this grant is
being used just to produce a
[24:59] comprehensive plan?
>> Well, I believe that's what the intent
[25:03] was when the grant was written.
>> Okay.
[25:06] » That was my understanding.
I'm just wondering how difficult or
[25:11] complex that would be to have a a
committee
[25:17] like the way I got it. Some of the
information she was reading off there is
[25:20] like a lot of these plans are for
they're actually doing physical things.
[25:24] » No, I and I agree. I read that the same
way
[25:28] » things. I I read the program the same
way,
[25:30] » but when we applied for it, our specific
intent was the comprehensive plan.
[25:37] Now, I don't know whether or not it
needs to that that's why I wanted to
[25:40] have the discussion regarding the
committee. Is it a committee of one? Is
[25:42] it a committee of three? A committee of
five? And what do the quarterly reports
[25:46] entail?
>> Looking just very briefly looking at
[25:50] some of the metrics are talking about it
looks like it's going to take some time,
[25:55] but personnel, manpower, manh hours that
I don't know if we have that current
[26:01] existing in the town.
>> Probably not.
[26:06] Yeah,
[26:13] I mean guys, I I I think that's where
the discussion needs to go is to is
[26:17] whether or not we're committed to a a
committee of whomever.
[26:22] Do you want to talk to one of the other
towns to see what they did?
[26:25] » I will do that.
>> Bring that information back to the board
[26:28] and
>> I mean, if if you're all right with
[26:31] doing it, I don't want to.
>> No, I'm good.
[26:33] » Okay. Thank you, Renee. I appreciate
that. Thank you.
[26:36] » Thank you.
>> And you're welcome. You get me that.
[26:39] Thank you.
[26:43] » All right, we're done with that. Uh 5.3.
Are you good with
[26:48] » I'm done.
>> Okay. 5.3. Hometown Heroes.
[26:53] » Sorry for missing the last meeting.
>> Um Okay. Hometown Heroes. This is where
[26:57] we're at. Um,
ultimately
[27:02] after driving around the town, the
original plan that I thought of or or
[27:06] talked to the other municipalities about
of renting a scissor lift and putting
[27:11] them up ourselves and figuring that out
to save money is really not possible.
[27:16] Whether we were to do this on River Road
or on Front Street, ultimately
[27:21] that's just not a viable option. The
pole pole setback is too much. the
[27:27] position of the pole and the sidewalk or
the main road. Like, I think it would
[27:32] just be a nightmare. And once again,
we're talking about limited staffing and
[27:37] how many employees do we have to take
them off of one task to have them do
[27:40] another. Um,
[27:47] » what did we use to put those up, Greg?
[27:53] employees.
>> Was it a bucket list?
[27:58] » Okay.
>> So, so ultimately that's what I did was
[28:00] I called a handful of signed companies
and said very very informally without
[28:04] the specs of this ballpark, what is it
to have you come and do this? And the
[28:09] cost of a bucket truck from a signed
company is roughly 200 bucks an hour. So
[28:15] that's a driver. That's someone in the
bucket. and and that is the act of
[28:20] having them come in over a window of
time to do this kind of work. So
[28:25] ultimately this is how I did these rough
numbers for overall the program cost. So
[28:31] the cost of the banner and the bracket
to put it up is passed on to the
[28:36] individual that is sponsoring the
banner. So I'm a veteran of Afghanistan
[28:42] and Iraq. My family wants to do one for
me. they they front that cost. What we
[28:48] would be doing if we kept it at that
rate is we the town would have to put a
[28:54] budget line in essentially annually to
put the banners up and take them down.
[29:02] I'm estimating that at if we do the 50
banner increments, I'm estimating that
[29:09] at roughly $5,000 to put them up and
5,000 to put them down. take them down.
[29:15] I'm sorry. And then obviously we'd have
to figure out storing them. It could be
[29:18] significantly less than that or it could
be significantly more. I we won't know
[29:22] until we actually list what you know
this is a program we're going to do.
[29:27] We've all agreed we're going to put this
up on Front Street
[29:31] and see what the turnout looks like.
[29:38] But ultimately, we're talking about, you
know, we can of course raise these to be
[29:42] $300 a piece and then that would
subsidize the cost of the bucket truck,
[29:49] but I don't know what our turnout would
then be.
[29:53] The other thing that we're not really
certain on, and this is when I I spoke
[29:57] to one of the sign companies, was the
first one that I talked to, they gave me
[29:59] a ton of ton of information, and
ultimately I would think that we go out
[30:02] to [clears throat] like a formal bid
process and ask a handful to do a scope
[30:06] of work for us. and what the cost of
these banners would be. But the first
[30:10] one I talked to, um, the gentleman that
I spoke withly,
[30:15] he said, "I think I can get these for
cheaper, but I need to know how many you
[30:19] need." I said, "I don't know how many I
need." Um, so I don't know how we would
[30:23] get the level of interest on this
formally, unless we'd be taking people's
[30:27] money and then, hey, never mind, the
price went down. Um, but ultimately if
[30:33] they could get the banners for 100 bucks
a piece and we're actually charging them
[30:36] 200, that would cover the cost of
everything and there would be no budget
[30:41] line. But we'd have to be,
I guess, willing to potentially incur
[30:46] cost if
if we wanted to sponsor this program. Or
[30:51] maybe it's year one we sponsor the
program.
[30:56] But I guess now that I'm thinking out
loud, year two, if we're putting them up
[31:00] and down, we are going to incur that
cost.
[31:08] » You don't have any indication on
interest, do you?
[31:10] » No, I wouldn't even know where to begin.
>> We had two two people reach out
[31:16] » specifically to Adam and then one day I
was in Kevin's office when someone
[31:21] stopped in to talk about it. So, I know
of two people. I guess I make three. Um,
[31:26] three,
>> four.
[31:27] » We've got four so far, Jay, to answer
your question. I I want to say it will
[31:33] be pretty heavy.
[31:39] » Yeah, I mean, we could do a brief
survey.
[31:43] The problem is it's really easy to say
yes to something and then when you have
[31:46] to come up with a check for $200, what
is the actual turnout? But
[31:51] I I don't know the interest level for
this.
[31:56] I think it's if it's something that the
board wants to go forward with, it's
[32:00] something that we need to add into
budget for next year
[32:05] because I think you have to have a
budget line for it even if you're gonna
[32:09] » Exactly.
>> Yeah.
[32:10] » Not to exceed
>> x amount of dollars.
[32:14] » You might not use that budget line. I
mean, you know, if you can some
[32:18] » Well, and that's why I say I think
ultimately the board would have to be
[32:20] willing to incur the cost. And if we
find a creative way to subsidize this,
[32:27] whether it be we get a better rate on
the actual banners by ordering them in
[32:32] bulk from somewhere. So, for example,
like just looking at the websites, on
[32:36] average, if we order over $2,000 worth
of banners, we get free shipping. In
[32:43] reality, a sign company would have a way
to subsidize that because they wouldn't
[32:48] just be ordering banners for us. they're
ordering from a supplier or a wholesale
[32:52] house for a bunch of other companies,
too. So, some of these could be a moot
[32:56] point if we put them out to bid. We just
would need to know the interest level
[33:00] and are we willing to say, "Okay, let's
pencil in a $10,000 budget line for year
[33:04] one and see
how we can creatively do this." So, I
[33:10] guess I in reality, we don't need to
make this decision today. This could be
[33:14] one of the first things we talk about
when we're talking about the general
[33:16] fund. But here, the information is in
front of you. I'm embarrassed how long
[33:19] it took to get it all. And once again,
sorry for missing last meeting, but
[33:23] » this is what it looks like without
putting the burden on Greg or Darren's
[33:29] employees. Um,
and I think there's some creative math
[33:34] that can be done here. You know, I
talked to the um county veteran
[33:41] representative about are there grants
for this right now? He didn't know of
[33:44] any, but he said he would email me if he
does.
[33:48] So, I mean, I'll continue to look for
creative ways to to figure that out, but
[33:54] so I'm all for this at at the $10,000
amount, not to exceed if we if we put
[34:00] this in the budget here in another
couple weeks for next year and then
[34:03] advertise this through the winter to be
put up in the spring. I think it would
[34:06] be a great thing. I mean, years ago,
Darren had shared with me after the last
[34:11] meeting that or two meetings ago that we
did actually do this. I wasn't aware of
[34:15] it. I mean, I've been a town resident
for 10 years. Um, I don't know what
[34:20] happened with all those banners. I don't
know how that program died.
[34:31] » We used to do the winner.
>> So, it was a variation.
[34:39] Those
[34:50] are like flags,
>> names of businesses.
[34:57] [snorts]
[35:01] the cost.
[35:07] » Some of the um the last time that we got
pricing for
[35:12] the veteran pole banners,
we we got pricing in um
[35:20] July of 24.
So that was the last time that I
[35:24] remember. So maybe there's some
conversation and some dialogue and some
[35:27] supporting docs in our minutes.
Who did that? Do you remember, Jean?
[35:32] » Um,
well, I I know I I have it because I
[35:36] know that it was information that I
forwarded on to the board at the time
[35:40] and that was um just um from victory.com
is one of the the vendors that provided
[35:46] us pricing. Um but that I'm just I'm
just saying that historically we can
[36:01] I'm listening, Jean.
>> I'm listening.
[36:05] » No, just historically is all I'm saying
is we could go back to the documentation
[36:09] and the conversation
did instead of reinventing the wheel
[36:14] because we had gone and found out how
many from the early
[36:19] like 2012
201
[36:24] frame when we had the signs up. how many
there were and from memory it was like
[36:28] 35 to 40
signs that but they were that were on
[36:32] there so it wasn't a lot that we were
talking about so we could go back and
[36:37] look at th those minutes in that time
frame.
[36:40] » Yeah. I mean, if we do it on Front
Street, we could make it a variation of
[36:45] » that and veterans, you know, does a
does a does a business want a sign on
[36:52] Front Street as well as I mean, this
could be
[36:56] dual function to get participation.
I mean, I myself when I go through a
[37:01] town main street that has American flags
hanging, like I notice that um I think
[37:09] it's a nice thing um to have through the
summer months when I see that there are
[37:14] veterans or even businesses supporting,
you know, something along the lines of
[37:18] that. Like I just I personally like the
way it makes me feel. Um, I think that
[37:24] would be a nice nice thing for the town
to have at worst case scenario $10,000.
[37:30] Um, but I mean that's something that we
can I can dig that up or meet with
[37:34] Eugene and and get that. Um, how do you
recall off the top of your head and then
[37:40] we can kill this for now. How did were
they going to put those up or this
[37:43] victory company was going to come and do
that?
[37:44] » No, it was just that was procurement. It
was like $60 a sign or something like
[37:48] that at that time for the size and the
pole mounting brackets and everything to
[37:52] get the the actual flag, but it was
strictly a veteran. You supplied them
[37:57] with the name and the photo and I think
there was a date or date of service or
[38:02] the branch of service that was that was
associated with it. Um the issue with
[38:07] the businesses in the past that have
come up, they they helped support the
[38:12] program and that's why their names were
on it because they the businesses
[38:17] contributed to the to offset the town
costs for but it was strictly a town
[38:23] manpower issue putting them up taking
them down.
[38:26] » Yeah. And that's why the more and more I
looked into this, the more and more I
[38:30] thought it was worth looking into
private pay options.
[38:35] Well, I there just isn't as many
employees in the town as there was in
[38:40] the past. Um, and
to start up and bring different
[38:46] operations in and up. I mean, I I don't
see a reason to to put it on existing
[38:51] town, you know, services.
>> Yeah, 100%.
[38:55] » Yeah. We're not we're not carrying
liabilities.
[38:58] » Yeah. I don't even know what the
insurance cost or if the union rules
[39:00] would allow them to go up. We don't
need, you know, we don't need to buy a a
[39:04] lull bucket truck and
[39:09] but I can I can give you the as far as
that, but I I see this as a 2027 budget
[39:14] issue. So, and I have no I I have no
objection to
[39:21] to the to the veterans portion of the
flag.
[39:26] » Absolutely. I think it'd be I think it'd
be a great idea and I I like the idea of
[39:30] the the business,
you know, supporting it or paying, you
[39:34] know, sponsoring it, basically
sponsoring maybe a section where you
[39:38] have a bunch of veteran flags up just
putting money into the I mean, that's
[39:42] something we can all work out.
>> Yeah.
[39:44] » But we need to put a budget line in and
then go from there.
[39:49] » Okay. So for now I'll do nothing until
we have that discussion and then at that
[39:53] point I could reach out to a handful of
these companies and say you know
[39:57] » so one of the things that I need to
municipalities cannot solicit donations.
[40:05] » Okay so we don't do that part. So if if
there's a friends of organization that
[40:12] would like to spend the time to go drum
up to support that and people or
[40:18] businesses give money to that
organization and that organization turns
[40:22] around and donates that to the town or
somebody who's not a town board member
[40:27] or town employee goes and says, "Hey,
the town's starting this program up. You
[40:31] should donate to it." Um that would be
okay but we cannot directly solicit
[40:36] money from anybody.
[40:41] Okay, understand
[40:47] » Luke. Yeah, thanks for the research on
this. This is great.
[40:50] » And Luke, I sent you the email that had
that link to that company
[40:55] just kind of as a reminder that you and
I can connect later.
[41:00] » Perfect. Got it. Thank you.
>> Y
[41:04] » All right. Thanks for that, Luke.
Moving on. 5.4 Department head probation
[41:10] discussion.
Is this something that we had a Do you
[41:15] want to do an executive session or
I think that's warranted. We have a full
[41:21] board tonight. So, we tabled it last
meeting.
[41:27] » So, I'll do that
>> at the end.
[41:30] » At the end.
>> Okay.
[41:32] Okay, we have department head job
description discussion.
[41:38] Didn't have any backup material for
that. I saw that there were some emails
[41:41] that came out today.
>> Well, I had sent I had sent that for the
[41:45] last for last meeting for the
discussion. I didn't know why that
[41:48] wasn't on the agenda.
The only thing I sent really for
[41:52] tonight's discussion was the template.
That was just that really wasn't for
[41:56] tonight's discussion either. It was just
if the process goes forward,
[42:01] » right?
>> Um, so but I don't I don't know why that
[42:07] » Did you send it to Jody or just the
board member?
[42:10] » I only I I originally only sent it to
the board members.
[42:14] » Okay. Then that's probably on me not
forwarding it to Jody.
[42:23] » So that job description we should put on
the next agenda.
[42:26] » Yeah. I can put I
You want that updated evaluation form on
[42:32] there?
>> I I didn't know there was an updated
[42:37] evaluation form.
>> I thought that's what you sent today. I
[42:39] I didn't think it was necessarily
updated. That's the one that we had
[42:42] before.
>> Um there there were two correspondences
[42:46] that I that I sent today just for the
conversation. One was the um
[42:53] it was the template
for
[42:57] the department head job description.
I resent the um
[43:07] the job description responsibilities
that I had sent to the board for my
[43:12] comments for the last for the la for the
last meeting. That didn't change. It was
[43:17] just resent.
And then the other the other
[43:22] correspondence was what we had provided
to
[43:28] um to Greg with with his department
head.
[43:33] Uh when we had that conversation with
with Greg, it was the job job
[43:37] description that we have provided you
the that was that that's what you don't
[43:45] have to look. It wasn't about you. It
was just
[43:49] what we had given you for the department
head job description.
[43:54] 25
in 2022.
[43:58] No, you you did that was when we when we
met um with the um department management
[44:06] plan when you pro when you developed the
management plan
[44:15] » no information
>> the department head
[44:20] » responsibility
>> Greg this was dated back April 25
[44:25] » that's what I said in 25 It
was addressed to you.
[44:33] » No.
>> Um, it was your
[44:35] » No, it was it was just a plan.
>> It was the management plan that was put
[44:39] together that you had to put together.
>> Yes. Yeah.
[44:43] » Yeah. So, we Jean distributed to the
board.
[44:45] » He just redistributed that.
>> Redistributed. You You distributed to
[44:48] 2025 and then he redistributed to the
board. Specifically, what we're talking
[44:53] about tonight was the
town department heads
[45:01] um
respons the responsibility of the town
[45:06] department. What what responsibilities
go with the town department head? That's
[45:09] the conversation.
There were there's two board members
[45:13] that weren't that didn't that weren't
around in 2025 that didn't have a copy
[45:19] of the responsibilities for the public
works department head list that we
[45:26] provided to you. They didn't have that.
So I redistributed that to them and you
[45:32] got that with the um with the management
plan correspondence and that back in
[45:39] April. So
that
[45:43] » I didn't take that as new.
>> It wasn't.
[45:46] » Yeah. I And I didn't take it that way. I
just take it that it was distributed for
[45:51] Luke and I's behalf.
>> Yes.
[45:55] » So you just want to the the first email
that you sent today, you want that on
[46:01] for the next meeting for the department
head job description discussion.
[46:07] » The department head template.
>> Yes. If
[46:10] » department head template and core
responsibility of all department heads.
[46:14] » Yes.
>> So that's backup material for
[46:17] » right. But the the core responsibility
department head list that that is that
[46:23] there's nothing different than what
I had sent that to the board for just
[46:29] » Yes. But that you we were looking for
more input from the board too, right?
[46:34] » Yeah. I was
>> Anybody else have input? get it before
[46:37] the next meeting so we can get it on the
agenda.
[46:39] » Y
>> All right.
[46:42] » But I will make sure that we have at
least your stuff on there. If we get
[46:47] anything else, then we will.
[46:56] All right. Anything else on 5?
That was you.
[47:02] Anything else on 5.5?
I have none.
[47:06] » I have nothing.
>> All right. 5.6 secure vestibial.
[47:22] » All right.
[47:27] On this drawing here that's in front of
you,
[47:32] this took the approach here. And you can
see they did the elevation views
[47:38] specifically in the clerk's office.
This seemed like a far more simple
[47:43] approach
in terms of the work being done in the
[47:48] clerk's office and in the water
department.
[47:52] I really like what we're doing there in
the water department. Even eliminating
[47:55] that door because I think it provides
far better use of that space and opening
[48:00] it up and opening that up.
So it it achieves the the goal of
[48:07] getting the two windows in the
vestibule.
[48:11] And one of the the differences are is
that there's a door on each end of the
[48:16] hallway to leave space to go to the
elevator. What's not on this drawing was
[48:22] the discussion about securing the
supervisor's office.
[48:27] And the first issue that we had there
was the discussion of providing a
[48:32] restroom for the for the uh town court.
So we were looking into that but it did
[48:39] not have the drawing there. But to me,
this vestibule layout makes more sense.
[48:45] And at least if it's a step approach,
phase one, if you will, it certainly
[48:52] does secure the vestibule,
which is what a discussion we've had at
[48:57] previous meetings.
[49:03] So the control into the vestibule is
going from the bottom of the bottom of
[49:10] the drawing into the building. You have
the green existing doors.
[49:16] You go into that vessel and that's the
secure area and you don't get buzzed
[49:21] past that.
That's an interesting approach. But that
[49:26] I don't think that was the intent. The
intent was that once you came past the
[49:31] green doors that you were in the I guess
the the lobby itself to be able to
[49:37] access the elevator for anyone needing
handicap access to go to the court. Now
[49:44] again this does not secure the second
floor. What this does is it secured the
[49:49] main floor down here like again as maybe
a step one, but it allowed people into
[49:55] the lobby to access the clerk's window
and the DPW window.
[50:03] I think that's I just think that's the
biggest divergent from
[50:09] the original plan is that that vestibule
area
[50:12] doesn't secure that that that area and
and and that's a that's a that's an
[50:19] approach we could take and leave that
whole lobby area open, but anyone
[50:25] needing handicap access to the court and
I don't know what that traffic is,
[50:29] right? that they would have to be
someone would have to be either at the
[50:32] clerk's office or DPW to at least be
able to identify who's in the vestibule
[50:38] itself before they they granted access
to the lobby.
[50:48] » The other part of this too, Gan, is that
it only pulled out a cabinet section in
[50:55] the clerk's office. So, where that
existing counter and cabinets are that
[51:02] you see on the drawing remains, we're
just removing that one section there.
[51:06] And as you'll see on the elevation, I
think the north view, it'll show that um
[51:11] that's only a half door there just to
kind of keep it, if you will, private,
[51:18] right? So, if someone were to come in,
if you buzz someone in, the handicap
[51:23] access would still be accessible through
the main door of the clerk's office. And
[51:29] that's where that low desk counter is
identified there in what is currently
[51:34] the clerk's corridor.
[51:41] And obviously extending the half wall
that's at the end of the existing
[51:44] counter because he's identified some
printers there.
[51:56] So access control would be the key here
if we're securing the vestibule, right?
[52:02] You'd have some access control cameras
and obviously video that would have to
[52:08] be visible in both the clerk and the DPW
office.
[52:18] and obviously a form of communication
so anyone in the vestibule could
[52:22] identify themselves.
[52:27] I think both offices should have video
access to that front door anyway,
[52:36] whether it's part of this plan or even
>> right
[52:38] » tomorrow,
>> Jean, in doing that,
[52:44] I would recommend the elimination of the
two doors in the hallway for sure, but
[52:49] again, as the second step,
I am still of the opinion that the
[52:55] second floor needs to be secured.
>> No, I don't I don't um I the way that I
[53:00] see this
without really any any modification is
[53:05] that not not a lot of modification. The
the two doors that are on the left side
[53:10] and right side of the elevator.
>> Yeah.
[53:12] » I think that provides
a a
[53:18] belt and suspender security for the
staff.
[53:23] So I I don't have any issue with those
doors being there. They they um because
[53:27] that that's employee
um passage. So it gives another level of
[53:34] just somebody having to stop and
actually get through a door. Um, and if
[53:39] um the new set of doors that are in red
there, if that had the push button
[53:47] camera audio controls there to the clerk
in the water department, that could buzz
[53:53] somebody in once they show ID, once they
say why they're here, where they're
[53:56] going.
That that works for me. I I I see that
[54:01] how that would secure the building and
still allow passage directly to the
[54:07] elevator. That is a concern, you know,
for for the second floor.
[54:16] I don't see a cost difference between
bringing those two hallway doors, the
[54:23] the man doors, as opposed to, you know,
a curtain wall across that lobby. I'd be
[54:29] really really surprised if this were
above our budget
[54:33] all of this work.
[54:37] » So the whole no one will be able to get
into the lobby just into the
[54:43] » it brings them just to the vestibule
>> is the discussion we're having.
[54:46] » But not even into this lobby area new
windows are right. So someone's going to
[54:50] have to buzz every single person that
comes to the town into the town.
[54:55] » Yes.
>> Just hire a security guard. Don't even
[54:57] do this.
>> You'll never do it for less than this.
[55:03] » Who are you going to pay to buzz people
in? I mean, if if people are busy doing
[55:07] their jobs because that's what they do
all day long here. They going to be able
[55:11] to answer every single I mean, there's a
lot of people that come in and out of
[55:13] town all day, especially on court days.
>> Well, who's going to do that? I'm just
[55:19] I'm just going back to what the original
plan for this was was to put the
[55:25] responsibility of buzzing that person
buzzing that in for the public on on the
[55:31] clerk's office.
That's that was the primary function of
[55:36] whose responsibility it was. If you're
if you're adding in the water department
[55:42] as a person that that separates it out,
gives a backup, I don't see a huge issue
[55:47] with that,
but that it was the clerk's office that
[55:53] is responsible to have that first
engagement with the public that's coming
[55:58] in. You're going to have um keyless
entry just like we have all the other if
[56:02] it's an employee that's coming in,
they're badging in.
[56:04] » I don't think I don't want to speak for
Kevin, but I don't think his concern is
[56:07] the employees. No, I know. I'm not
saying
[56:09] » you're public, right? You're
>> I only have one part-time employee and I
[56:15] have to go to lunch when he's not there.
Who's going to take care of it then?
[56:24] » That's the le that's the least issue
from the complaints that I'm getting
[56:27] about the clerk's office. So, I'm not
worried about that.
[56:31] But potentially, but potentially to
Kevin's point, this could create a staff
[56:37] issue. I mean, it's possible.
>> Yeah, it it is. But that's also the
[56:41] whole conversation about security and
convenience,
[56:46] » right? Oh, absolutely.
>> So,
[56:48] » because even regardless once they get
into the lobby, if there's no one at DPW
[56:53] or the clerk's office, I can't do my
transaction anyway.
[56:57] » That's a separate conversation.
[57:01] the the point of this is to secure the
building.
[57:04] » There's no scenario where the doorbell
system,
[57:10] » you know, I envision a a camera with a
computer screen that there's not buttons
[57:15] for each thing. I want to go to the
clerk's office, I press push the clerk's
[57:19] office button. They're then responsible
for buzzing me in. I want to go to
[57:22] court, I push the court button. And and
I can only imagine on court days, this
[57:26] would put a huge overflow on them. But
then that way it's who are you? My
[57:29] name's Luke Sla. I'm here because I have
a court date for a speeding ticket.
[57:34] Okay. Yep. We can buzz you in because I
don't love the idea. I mean, I was there
[57:38] the day that the .edu letters went out
and I watched him answer, I'm not
[57:43] joking, 30 phone calls in the hour that
I was there. Um,
[57:49] I don't know what the flow of traffic
is, but I I see Kevin's point and agree
[57:54] with him that I don't want any one
office responsible for this.
[57:59] And it's really easy if we have multiple
officers responsible for it for them to
[58:02] be like, "Well, I'm not going to answer
that."
[58:04] » Well, it's also accountability. When you
have everybody responsible for it,
[58:08] nobody does it. And there's no there's
no accountability of who buzzed who
[58:12] when, who's getting the training. The
training for a secure vestibule is
[58:16] absolutely
the most important part of putting in a
[58:20] vest a vestibule. You can't just put in
a vestibule and then not train the
[58:24] person who's responsible to the criteria
of coming in. They check their IDs. They
[58:29] find out. They have a conversation when
they know who they're doing. They know
[58:31] why they're there. That's all part of
the training. You can't just buzz
[58:35] somebody in
and not know why you're doing it. So,
[58:41] having four or five people doing it is a
is an investment in four or five people.
[58:46] Having two departments do it is an
investment in two in two departments.
[58:51] And when somebody's on vacation,
that's just part of what we it's part of
[58:56] what the overall plan has to account for
because you have to have people to let
[59:01] people into the building.
>> So, do we hire someone for this? I I
[59:05] cannot support putting the guy here and
paying for a salary, paying for
[59:09] retirement, paying for all the other
stuff in prepare just forever in lie of
[59:15] the mechanical and electronic and
technology to do the same thing for
[59:20] one-time purchase.
>> Yeah. My problem with it is is the
[59:25] amount of time that we're taking people
away from doing their actual job.
[59:30] » There's no more time taken away from
them doing
[59:32] » 100% there is. I disagree with you
because I watched him answer 35.
[59:35] » I understand, but let me finish my
sentence first.
[59:38] » Okay.
>> They have to engage the P. Somebody has
[59:40] to engage the public at some point to
find out where they're going, who they
[59:44] are, what they're here for, and where
they need to go to.
[59:47] » Somebody has to do that. So, there is no
additional time.
[59:50] » Not necessarily, but but it is for a for
the process. If you're putting all on
[59:57] one person or just having someone walk
in and go wherever they want to go, then
[1:00:02] it's only one person. But if they go
down to the if they go to the clerk's
[1:00:05] office like they do now and the clerk
isn't there and they go to the code
[1:00:10] department and it's not a code issue,
we're interrupting and taking away from
[1:00:14] that service time and detracting from
what they have to provide for their
[1:00:18] services to cover another department. So
there there it there are a lot of
[1:00:22] tangible and intangible issues about the
efficiency of what a secure vestibial
[1:00:28] does but absolutely it will increase one
person's time but take it away from
[1:00:33] other people's time.
>> Yeah. I think my big problem is is on a
[1:00:38] court day,
the clerk's office will
[1:00:43] based on the traffic of our court from
the documentation that Jay and I saw
[1:00:48] when we did the audit. I'm assuming on
court days, the clerk's office or the
[1:00:55] water whoever it is that's going to do
that those days is going to have a very
[1:00:59] very hard time accomplishing any other
task
[1:01:03] for that window of four hours or
whatever it is that they have to verify
[1:01:07] everyone's ID and then does the court
provide them with a list to verify yes
[1:01:12] this is the day that you're supposed to
be here like the logistics of that seem
[1:01:16] overwhelming to me on another department
And I and I think that those are all
[1:01:20] reasonable concerns, but they were all
part of the secure vestibule plan and
[1:01:26] engineering controls that we are putting
on to Keystone to develop that. That's
[1:01:31] information that they need to know from
us, but they're they're getting paid to
[1:01:34] solve these questions and solve the
problems of that and to give us options
[1:01:41] on what we're going to choose.
you think that they might have more
[1:01:46] options coming up the longer we look at
this or feedback from us?
[1:01:49] » Of course. Of course. All of these
things are are, you know, coming to
[1:01:54] light. Um,
and obviously obviously on court days
[1:02:00] with the signage and probably some
additional signage, the idea is to
[1:02:05] direct any able bodies around to the
back of the building. However, those who
[1:02:09] need to use the elevator um or desire to
use the elevator are going to be buzzing
[1:02:15] in. There's no there's no question about
it. How much that traffic is, I really
[1:02:18] don't know.
>> I don't know either. But yes, whether
[1:02:21] it's coming to the code office, DPW,
um
[1:02:25] » yeah, you're right. There's the there's
the
[1:02:28] » convenience or inconvenience, if you
will, of securing the vestibial, right,
[1:02:32] as opposed to just being able to come in
and go to the department in which you're
[1:02:36] looking for. So absolutely, Keith, to
answer your question, Dave, absolutely.
[1:02:42] That understanding
how we're laying this out and how we
[1:02:48] want it to work. Yes, there's some
engineering controls, electronic
[1:02:53] controls, if you will, that have to be
part of this discussion. Um, we were
[1:02:59] really focused on the layout of this and
what we were going to do to kind of
[1:03:03] minimize some of the impact particularly
in the clerk's office without relocating
[1:03:08] walls or moving all the cabinets around.
So
[1:03:13] yes, we'll pull that piece together and
and and have that discussion of saying
[1:03:18] what we're trying to accomplish in terms
of
[1:03:22] securing just the vestibule and then
having to how does a resident
[1:03:30] get out of the vestibule, so to say,
right?
[1:03:33] » You know, what department are you
looking for? Who am I going to be
[1:03:35] talking to?
>> I I can't get away from the original
[1:03:41] foundational issue of why we have the
conversation about the secure vestibule.
[1:03:48] And that is not
for any other reason except to add a
[1:03:55] significant level of security to the
building to funnel all of the public
[1:04:02] into one location and keep the employees
safer.
[1:04:10] That's that's what I need this project
to accomplish because that's what it
[1:04:15] started from.
>> And I think there was some scope creep
[1:04:19] if you will on this as well in those
discussions. I mean I certainly the
[1:04:23] discussion started early on
>> and that's great for the first floor and
[1:04:29] anyone coming to the main building but
it accomplishes nothing for those who go
[1:04:33] up to the court they have complete
access through the second floor back
[1:04:37] down into the building. Yep.
So, I think adding that element into it
[1:04:45] and part of some of the other physical
changes to it, the scope creeped a
[1:04:49] little bit, but you're right, the the
electronic side of this is not been the
[1:04:54] options have not been presented.
[1:05:04] I'll I'll work with Alex on that and
we'll get we'll get those options
[1:05:09] forwarded.
Okay. Okay. Looks good. All right.
[1:05:14] Moving on. 5.7 edu letters and
responses.
[1:05:20] How does the board want to handle this?
These are the 29
[1:05:25] letters and responses. That's what I got
on the agenda.
[1:05:30] But all of them were responded to,
right, Craig?
[1:05:34] » I have not sent a response out. I have
answered and given you my
[1:05:38] recommendation.
>> Oh, I thought these I thought these all
[1:05:42] went out.
>> No,
[1:05:43] » no, it's a board.
>> I'm waiting for the board to decide
[1:05:45] » decision.
>> Oh. Um, yeah. I I was under the same
[1:05:49] assumption, Greg, because they were all
dated letters.
[1:05:52] » Yeah,
>> I dated them as they came in to me.
[1:05:56] » Okay. Um,
[1:06:06] » I don't think I I mean I read through
them. I didn't read I did not read
[1:06:09] through them with the lens of whether or
not they should have gone out. I read
[1:06:13] them as if they had gone out. So, um, I
didn't take notes on them or I don't
[1:06:19] have any comments.
>> So, so Jane, just to help clarify.
[1:06:22] Right. So the the eventual goal here is
to have the town board approve the EDU
[1:06:28] sewer debt assessment role. So we have a
role that was what the public hearing
[1:06:34] was on. 29 people grieved their
assessments. It's up to you folks to
[1:06:40] decide whether to grant their grievances
or not and adjust their edu assignments.
[1:06:46] So for all 29 of these, you know, you
guys need to tell me which ones, if any,
[1:06:53] you are not going to or excuse me, which
ones you are going to approve and grant
[1:06:58] their grievance so that when so that way
we can update the assessment rule and
[1:07:02] you guys can then approve the updated
role.
[1:07:06] » I didn't I didn't understand that
process.
[1:07:08] » No, I didn't either. I I was
>> if you adjust if you adjust any of these
[1:07:11] EDUs, it affects
>> I I understand but I thought to accept
[1:07:15] the the EDUs as they were presented with
the public hearing information and then
[1:07:19] address these 29 afterwards.
>> That if we had to.
[1:07:23] » Yeah. No, that that's why there was no
action to approve the .edu assessment
[1:07:27] role at the last meeting. We just held
the public hearing, took no action so
[1:07:31] that way you guys could review this
information and decide whether to grant
[1:07:34] them or not.
>> I'm sorry,
[1:07:35] » Greg. Out of these Hang on a second.
>> Yeah, that's what I was saying. I didn't
[1:07:38] mean to interrupt you.
>> No, no, but I I was under the same
[1:07:40] impression. Out of these 29, how many
did you find were in error?
[1:07:45] » Do you have the Excel spreadsheet there?
Uh, I'm thinking like 10.
[1:07:50] » The Excel spreadsheet is not part of
this.
[1:07:52] » Yeah,
>> I could go to the last meeting.
[1:07:55] » Maybe 10.
>> There were 10.
[1:07:57] » Yeah.
>> Okay.
[1:07:58] » So, I was under the impression that
because I would have accepted those
[1:08:02] recommendations from you to make those
adjustments, any of the ones that were
[1:08:06] in error. So maybe at the next meeting
if if you guys are saying that you will
[1:08:13] probably agree with Greg's
recommendations, grant 10 of the
[1:08:17] grievances, deny the other 19 of them.
We can I can put a resolution together
[1:08:22] for the next meeting. We can include
Greg's Excel spreadsheet. We can include
[1:08:26] all 29 of these things that Greg has
there right now. Just to be clear, the
[1:08:30] ones that I did read through that I know
that you made corrections to,
[1:08:35] » they were an error, not necessarily
an exemption grant. I just want to be
[1:08:40] really clear on that
>> that it was a miscalculation
[1:08:44] on the footage.
>> And they were they were granted
[1:08:47] obviously a slight um adjustment. And
then the other suggestions that we made
[1:08:53] to some of the guys that had the
homeowners that had vacant parcels that
[1:08:57] if they combined them they would pick up
like a 75. They would go to the maximum
[1:09:02] 1.25. I'm in favor of that. But there in
in regard to any exemptions that this
[1:09:08] board would make for a property owner, I
didn't I I I didn't see any of those
[1:09:14] that met the grounds of a correction.
>> There was no exemptions. There was just
[1:09:19] adjustments. corrections.
>> Correct.
[1:09:21] » Right. Okay.
>> So, for the next meeting, I'll put a
[1:09:25] resolution together. We'll have as the
backup Greg's spreadsheet that just kind
[1:09:29] of summarizes it all. the 29 attachments
that are here right now, the sewer debt
[1:09:36] assessment role, and I'll talk with
Katherine about we can't actually get
[1:09:41] the role itself updated because it's all
currently locked behind the county
[1:09:44] system. But between that role, which
we'll have and the current the changes,
[1:09:49] corrections to it, those two together
will be what we end up having as
[1:09:53] attachments for links because it's too
big uh for the next board meeting. But I
[1:09:57] just needed direction from you guys like
do you want to grant these, deny them?
[1:10:02] So I I think I've got that right now.
>> The second one on the list, do we have
[1:10:08] any exposure with that one in particular
given there's so much documentation?
[1:10:14] » Uh so that one I think there actually
isn't
[1:10:20] there's not a signed agreement and I
looked at the minutes from 1998. There
[1:10:26] was never a board approval.
>> Okay.
[1:10:30] » So,
>> and this one wasn't grieved last year.
[1:10:34] » No.
>> So, even for corrections,
[1:10:38] calculations that were made in error
requires the board vote to fix the
[1:10:44] corrections.
>> So, because these these these aren't
[1:10:47] these aren't exemptions,
>> correct? Yeah. This this is it's just
[1:10:51] like um the real property assessment
role.
[1:10:55] » Okay. So it's basically the whole role
including these 10 adjustments.
[1:10:59] » Yes. So you guys you guys are going to
approve that the whole role with these
[1:11:03] » these 10 adjustments. Okay.
>> I just wanted to be clear that we
[1:11:06] weren't making a separate resolution
just for 10 adjustments.
[1:11:09] » No.
>> Okay.
[1:11:10] » Why why can't
approve why can't that corrections be
[1:11:16] made to the role and then we approve
that role?
[1:11:19] » That's the idea.
>> That's the idea. It's just that we don't
[1:11:22] have because of the time of the year it
is. We can't make the changes to the
[1:11:26] role ourselves. We have to get the
county to do it. And we want to go to
[1:11:30] the county and say, "The board has now
approved this role with these changes to
[1:11:35] it. Please actually implement these
changes."
[1:11:42] » I I just don't want to misunderstand
what my ch my what my charge is for the
[1:11:46] next meeting. Yes.
>> So, Greg, are you going to reissue these
[1:11:51] letters all with a different date
because they haven't been sent? You're
[1:11:55] not going to send out an August 10th
letter on a response?
[1:11:59] » I could easily change the date.
>> Once once we decide this is what we're
[1:12:04] going to go with, I can change the dates
and and send them out. Yes.
[1:12:07] » I think no. For for the agenda next for
the next meeting, I would I would I
[1:12:13] would like you to change the date on the
letters.
[1:12:15] » Sure.
And then if your recommendation to the
[1:12:20] town board is to make a correction or to
not adjust the the role number, then
[1:12:27] that will be what the letter says. And I
and I will look at those 29 letters from
[1:12:33] that viewpoint. Okay.
Okay.
[1:12:39] Just I mean my letters state if there
needed to be a correction, it showed the
[1:12:44] correction.
>> Yep.
[1:12:46] I wouldn't expect anything other than a
date change.
[1:12:52] » Okay. So, my only concern is going to be
if you change the edus,
[1:12:57] your number is going to change the
amount you're going to charge per EDU
[1:13:00] unless you want to use fund balance.
So, I think Kevin, that's that's a valid
[1:13:07] question and concern to raise to the
board. That is a budget time issue. Um
[1:13:14] it and I'm not trying to I mean if you
guys want to talk about it but when you
[1:13:17] guys are doing your budget part of that
is going to be what is the actual EDU
[1:13:22] value that's going to get charged to
everybody and this this will affect that
[1:13:26] and that's the question you guys will
talk about
[1:13:28] » but but I'm understanding Kevin's
comment to be this issue the number that
[1:13:34] we associated everybody's the entire
town edus we already sent them a letter
[1:13:41] and they didn't grie they didn't grieve
it they didn't complain about it. Now we
[1:13:45] adjust these everybody's changes filed.
>> So the the edus remember are you know
[1:13:51] 1.25 or one or whatever the number
actually is.
[1:13:56] » That is the only thing that people can
grieve. People can't grieve the dollar
[1:14:00] value that you end up actually charging
to people because we have to because
[1:14:06] it's all based on the debt. The debt is
owed. We have to pay it. We were
[1:14:10] assessing the .edus and of course the
dollar value will change as edus go up
[1:14:14] and down. to Kevin's point is I and
because I think we've talked about it or
[1:14:18] it was mentioned before the number value
the dollar value that was put into the
[1:14:24] notice although I think it was clear
that this is like this is a you know
[1:14:28] potential which means it could change if
you want to I'll say honor that dollar
[1:14:35] value and we adjust EDUs so we're losing
some EDUs that number is going to tick
[1:14:42] up slightly unless the board uses is
available.
[1:14:45] » I'm I'm in support of using a couple of
thousand dollars from fund balance
[1:14:50] » and it's not it's not general fund
balance. It's it's the SS fund balance
[1:14:55] which is the sewer bond fund balance. I
I would suggest doing
[1:15:00] » and there's 163,000 in there which was
the money that was collected over six
[1:15:04] years
>> for the ban interest that was
[1:15:06] » but I'm saying in in terms of
>> money for this
[1:15:09] » yeah I understand but even if even if we
eliminated all 10 right on 1.25 25. What
[1:15:16] do we We're talking about what? $2,600.
I guess that's what I'm saying. He's got
[1:15:20] 10 that he adjusted. So instead of going
back and and getting everyone fired up
[1:15:27] again because they went from whatever it
is 26410 to 265 and a nickel.
[1:15:34] Let's just use the 2500 from fund
balance and keep it where it was
[1:15:38] presented.
[1:15:42] » It's going to be I don't have any
problem with that. As long as I as long
[1:15:45] as you you can tell us what that
>> dollar
[1:15:48] » dollar amount is that we're actually
talking about.
[1:15:50] » Yeah. And Greg, I'm just doing a quick
estimate based off of the 10 that were
[1:15:54] adjusted. That's all.
>> And and those numbers you will have very
[1:15:57] easily because once you approve the
final edu assessment role, there's the
[1:16:01] EDUs. We do the math. Here's the new
number.
[1:16:05] » Okay.
>> But but this scenario is scenario is
[1:16:09] going to happen every year though,
right?
[1:16:11] » Yes. And recommendation would be to do
it earlier in the years before the rolls
[1:16:15] close.
>> So we don't need the county.
[1:16:17] » So you don't need the county. Catherine
Katherine can change them before the
[1:16:21] roles are finalized.
[1:16:29] » All right. We good with that one?
>> Yes.
[1:16:31] » Thank you.
>> Thanks, Greg.
[1:16:34] » All right. Uh no public hearings
tonight. We're going to move on to 7.1.
[1:16:39] New business.
Joyy's replacement discussion.
[1:16:46] Who's leading this?
>> Darren
[1:16:52] put in there just
[1:17:10] what her duties are right now
and what it entails just so
[1:17:17] she can speak a little more depth of
them.
[1:17:21] The only concerns that I had, this is
for everybody,
[1:17:28] anyone actually somebody knew coming
into the position trying to do
[1:17:33] administration
might be the hardest out of all these
[1:17:39] parts
[1:17:44] or we can work on doing it in our
person.
[1:17:50] the only one that I saw.
[1:17:56] This is just
[1:18:02] talking
on top of this. The actual replacement
[1:18:06] portion I have going forward is going to
be a budget budget discussion
[1:18:14] because she's not going until April 1 of
next year. So it would be talked about
[1:18:22] how
[1:18:38] » you'll have a recommend. You'll put your
recommendation together.
[1:18:46] » Okay, I'm all set. Yeah,
>> I am too.
[1:18:49] » Thank you.
[1:19:10] I am the only
[1:19:16] » that'll be part of your recommendation.
>> The first of the year we renew all those
[1:19:21] policies in theory. No.
[1:19:32] Does it does the policy joy say your
name or your position?
[1:19:36] » No, my name.
>> Okay. Well, I think that that's just
[1:19:39] probably
the policies to the position.
[1:19:44] » So,
I mean, I don't see that as as a as a
[1:19:48] huge issue at all. I I understand if if
the person who's sitting in that chair
[1:19:54] and an appointment isn't in the in that
chair that day, but the position exists.
[1:20:00] So, I'm good.
Just have it as part of your
[1:20:04] recommendation. And even if that, you
know, if there's other things like in
[1:20:07] the policy that specifically name her,
name the position.
[1:20:16] » All right, we're going to move on. 7.2
two bch scheduled discussion had no
[1:20:21] backup for this. I I don't
>> So there's a resolution later on and I
[1:20:27] sent an email. I wasn't exactly sure
what fees we were updating. Adam did
[1:20:31] respond to me asking about the dog
license fee which the board already
[1:20:37] approved by resolution last year
sometime. So I just said
[1:20:41] forward the resolution onto e-code or
general code. They should be updating
[1:20:46] the fee schedule because you can update
that fee schedule. You can increase or
[1:20:52] decrease the fees on the fee schedule by
resolution. So that one should be
[1:20:56] resolved. And then the other one was the
blank check fee that you bounced check
[1:21:01] fee, excuse me. So there is no fee for
bounced checks in your fee schedule.
[1:21:07] So, I think that would take a local law
based on the way that I read it and that
[1:21:12] there's no other provision in your town
code that separately authorizes the
[1:21:17] board to set a fee for bounced checks
outside of that fee schedule. I'll
[1:21:22] contrast that with the roof fee
schedule, which your building code
[1:21:25] administration chapter says you can set
fees for the building code stuff by
[1:21:30] resolution from time to time without
limiting ourselves in the way that
[1:21:34] chapter 19 fees does. So, we would need
a local law, I think, to adjust that fee
[1:21:39] schedule. If we're going to do a local
law to excuse me, not adjust it, to add
[1:21:44] a new fee. If we're going to do that,
I'd recommend just revamping it a little
[1:21:50] bit more. Um the
and just really completely if we want if
[1:21:57] we can get away from needing to add fees
to this by local law unless you're
[1:22:03] comfortable with that of course you know
but the flexibility to add new fees and
[1:22:09] increase and decrease them by resolution
is just it's good because it lets you be
[1:22:14] flexible. um local laws take of course a
public hearing notice
[1:22:19] adoption filing with the state. Now
there's benefits to that as well. If you
[1:22:24] want to be a really
if you are want to have that public
[1:22:30] notice and input then that's the way to
go. Um if you value the flexibility
[1:22:36] responsiveness to changes and needs then
you would say I would say go by
[1:22:41] resolution. It's whatever you guys want
to do, of course, but if you want a
[1:22:44] bounce check fee, I think we need to do
a local.
[1:22:52] » I I went back and looked at the
historical portion of what we did with
[1:22:57] these fees and it was originally in our
code and it was originally a local law
[1:23:02] change. There were some things that that
came up in the 20145
[1:23:06] time frame where there were some fees
that were just never happened in the
[1:23:13] past that we didn't have the opportunity
in that budget year to do anything in
[1:23:16] it. So we added the language for by res
we can change then by resolution
[1:23:24] if it was an existing one. But the but
the conversation at that time was still
[1:23:31] an annual review of what our what our
fees were. So I just want to give you
[1:23:38] what has been done in the past and what
we had been what we used as a board just
[1:23:42] in the time that I've been on a board on
on what it was. Um, so
[1:23:47] adding our fee schedule to our January
1, the first meeting in January as a
[1:23:54] review, I think takes care of a lot of
stuff because we budget throughout the
[1:23:58] year for it and if something comes up,
we can take care of that. We do all of
[1:24:02] that with all the other stuff. So it's a
a public meeting. I just wanted to give
[1:24:06] you the background on it, hear how it
goes. Might might I suggest so of
[1:24:11] courseing budget now anyway
opportune time for your department heads
[1:24:16] to recommend
due fees now so that you can but then
[1:24:24] adopt them in January at your or
anything that gets increased and then of
[1:24:29] course if they say oh we should have a
new fee then we do a local law to try to
[1:24:34] time it so that the local law takes
effect as of January 1st. as well.
[1:24:41] » Okay.
>> Do do you guys want to do a local off or
[1:24:46] bounce check fee
>> or do you want to ask your department
[1:24:50] heads if there's any other fees that
they want to add into a local offer
[1:24:54] doing what anyway?
>> I I would think we would want to we're
[1:25:00] going to do it all at once. I we could
just I can send an email see if there's
[1:25:05] any other fees, but that's the only one
that's come up to me was the bounce
[1:25:08] check.
[1:25:13] » Yeah.
[1:25:17] » Kevin, do you know what we've done in
the past with a bounce check?
[1:25:20] » I don't I don't know. I'd be honest with
you. I have no idea. It's the first time
[1:25:23] I heard that we had one.
[1:25:28] » How frequent is this, Adam? That's Greg.
Does that ever happen in your
[1:25:31] department?
>> Billing.
[1:25:34] » And what do you do with it? You wave it.
>> We call the homeowner and they repay it
[1:25:40] with a good check. They get the fee
through the bank anyways. Their bank.
[1:25:44] » Do you get a do you get a fee?
>> We don't get charged a fee though.
[1:25:47] » So, what's what's the fee that we're
putting into a local law then?
[1:25:51] » Penalty.
[1:25:56] » Oh, we don't get charged the fee.
>> Right. We're not. It sounds like we
[1:26:00] don't get to charge a fee from our
banking institution. This is a penalty
[1:26:05] what we're talking about.
>> Well, the way the way I see
[1:26:08] » I I don't think I do either.
>> The way the way I could see justifying
[1:26:11] it is that the time it takes for the
staff person to enter the initial check
[1:26:17] only for it to bounce and then to
recognize that now there's a deficiency
[1:26:22] and then to follow up with the homeowner
potentially or whoever it is. Hey, your
[1:26:26] check bounced. You need to get me a new
one. And now there's a second bite at
[1:26:29] the apple. It takes time.
>> Well, it takes time to also process that
[1:26:33] $10 fee. And $10 is not is not even
coming close to cover. I I'm not saying
[1:26:38] not not do it, but penalty I don't have
an interest in dinging somebody for for
[1:26:44] that.
>> Okay.
[1:26:47] » No, I'm I'm in agreement with that. I I
thought we were getting charged a bank
[1:26:51] fee on that. So if we're not going to
try No,
[1:26:56] I'm not for
>> I would like to see something for
[1:26:59] relevy. We relevy a lot of accounts in
October.
[1:27:05] So that's something that I would like to
see
[1:27:08] » a fee for relevy because we revy and
that's $150,000 we probably relevy.
[1:27:14] » So we're we're already getting interest
and penalties on that through just the
[1:27:19] failure to pay. It's 1% every month. So
like I we're already being compensated
[1:27:24] for that.
[1:27:28] » Okay.
All right. So we're good with the fee
[1:27:31] schedule.
We're going to move on to department
[1:27:34] reports. 8.1 DPW report.
[1:27:41] Um I received the email from BNL.
The contractor on contract one is asking
[1:27:47] if we would like to leave the existing
building there. Um
[1:27:53] there's roughly $10,000 left in that
part of it for their demolition.
[1:27:58] They suggested that if we wanted to
leave the building, there could be an
[1:28:02] opportunity to um sheetrock, do
lighting, do some electrical upgrades in
[1:28:08] that building and keep that building.
>> I would say yes. It's good for storage.
[1:28:16] Greg, what's the uh what's currently on
the walls on the interior of the
[1:28:21] building?
>> There's some plywood. There's mostly
[1:28:25] block.
>> If you're using that for storage, where
[1:28:28] what would you be drywalling? Because it
seems like it would get damaged just in
[1:28:33] a storage condition.
>> Some of some of the walls that had some
[1:28:36] electrical stuff on it was drywalled.
Some of the one of the lower rooms had
[1:28:40] some drywall on it. the outside wall
between there and the MBR tank. It's
[1:28:45] just block.
>> You would leave that
[1:28:48] » the block.
>> Yeah.
[1:28:49] » Yeah. It's a block wall.
>> Yeah. And then instead of drywall, maybe
[1:28:53] infilling with plywood or something or
>> Yeah.
[1:28:55] » I'm just I just looked at the drywall
part of it and I was like, if you're
[1:28:58] using it for storage, that seems like
it's going to get damaged pretty quick.
[1:29:01] » It It doesn't have to be drywall.
>> I was just curious. I was just curious.
[1:29:04] » That was just in their email.
>> Was something the town board wanted to
[1:29:08] look into. We can dig deeper into it. If
not, we have them tear the building
[1:29:11] down.
>> So, it's a nice secure building. I mean,
[1:29:15] you store chemicals in it or
>> No, there's already storage for chemical
[1:29:19] in the back in the new building. It
would be snowblowers,
[1:29:23] pumps,
spare parts,
[1:29:31] snowblowers,
um, is a fire code issue.
[1:29:37] » So, I would, unless you're going to
put the facilities that need to be in
[1:29:43] there for for the fire hazard. Just be
very careful about what you're what
[1:29:48] you're storing in there.
[1:29:55] I think that that that would probably be
the only thing I'd want to make sure
[1:29:58] that we document like what what our
decision is going to be based on is what
[1:30:02] you're going to store in there
>> to make sure that the facility is
[1:30:06] actually capable of storing that. Okay.
>> Um
[1:30:09] And it'll also make sure that
in five years it doesn't get
[1:30:15] turned into something that it shouldn't
be stored for.
[1:30:21] » Greg, what's the size of that building?
[1:30:30] » 20 by 40. There's a wall in between the
two rooms. One was the electric room,
[1:30:37] the other one was the blower room.
[1:30:41] floor is in good shape.
>> Yes.
[1:30:46] » I think we're crazy to knock it down.
>> I do too. I I don't have any issue with
[1:30:50] keeping it. I'm uh I was just concerned
with what we're spending, you know, to
[1:30:54] kind of freshen it up what we're doing
in there. And I agree with Jean, you
[1:30:59] know, hazards. I mean, I don't know if
the brand building sprinklered. I don't
[1:31:01] know anything. I think paying attention
to the to the uh the use of the
[1:31:06] building.
>> We can also just get the credit.
[1:31:08] We don't have to do anything. That's
also an option. If there's $10,000 left
[1:31:12] over for them to demo, they should.
>> But would you need something done in
[1:31:17] there for storage then?
>> No.
[1:31:19] » Oh, you don't?
>> No, not necessarily. If they wanted to
[1:31:21] upgrade the lights, stuff like that.
Sure. But we can also take the $10,000
[1:31:26] as credit.
[1:31:30] » That needs to be removed though.
>> Like was in there has been removed.
[1:31:34] » It's already is. Okay. So, it's a blank
canvas right now. Well, there's still
[1:31:37] stuff and let me rephrase that. There
are still electrical stuff that's being
[1:31:40] used because we haven't flipped over to
the new complete system yet.
[1:31:44] » And then after that, then we'll have
that removed.
[1:31:46] » Yes.
>> Yes.
[1:31:48] » What was the original plan? Why did the
original plan call for it to be demoed
[1:31:53] if there was a potential use for it?
>> Because the electrical room got moved
[1:32:02] forward into the new addition to the
building. Okay. And reclaiming that
[1:32:07] space of the building, there's not a
benefit to that.
[1:32:11] » That building is gone. What is What is
the space?
[1:32:13] » Yeah, it's all all new electrical room
now.
[1:32:16] » No, the the building that we're talking
about that is going to be demoed.
[1:32:20] » Well, you you couldn't turn one system
on without
[1:32:26] you had to install the system in order
to get it that running before you demo
[1:32:30] the existing system that's there, which
is the electrical and the blowers. Once
[1:32:34] everything's turned on to the new stuff,
all that equipment in there is not going
[1:32:40] to be used.
>> I'm talking about the footprint of the
[1:32:42] building. The building itself,
>> it was just going to be blank space,
[1:32:45] » but it was going to be gone.
>> Yes.
[1:32:48] » Gone. Foundation, walls, roof, gone.
>> That was the original plan.
[1:32:51] » Correct.
>> So, there had to have been a want for
[1:32:54] that building to go away because you
didn't need it.
[1:32:57] » And then what was the space potential
space for that? Couldn't Was there a
[1:33:02] plan for it? No, not that I'm aware of.
I didn't design it, but all I understood
[1:33:08] was that the building was coming down.
It was going to be blank space, grass,
[1:33:12] concrete, black top. That's all it was
going to be.
[1:33:17] I I just would want to get the
engineers, you know, understanding of
[1:33:22] why they were directed to demo it so
that I knew what
[1:33:26] what we're trading up.
>> Yeah. What are we missing out on if we
[1:33:30] do leave it up?
>> Yeah. and $10,000 for,
[1:33:35] you know, if we're gonna eventually buy
a $40,000 demo and we're getting it now
[1:33:41] for $10,000,
get rid of it. I I just want to see I
[1:33:46] just want to understand the whole life
cycle of this decision.
[1:33:50] That's all,
>> right? Because there would have been
[1:33:53] removals. There would have been either
restoration of grass, pavement,
[1:33:57] something
>> a lot more than $10,000.
[1:34:00] » It smells that way. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[1:34:07] » All right. Anything else for DPW?
>> No, I assume we have time to make this
[1:34:13] decision, right, Greg? It's not like
they were like, "We need to know."
[1:34:15] » No, they're still using the building,
right?
[1:34:17] » Electric.
[1:34:20] [snorts]
>> I just I had one thing. I had the lady
[1:34:25] call. She wants to sell back two plots,
cemetery plots. I know you're aware of
[1:34:31] this,
>> correct? You
[1:34:33] » Greg had emailed me. If you'll see my
report, I mentioned
[1:34:37] » Is it on your report? Okay. Well,
>> sticky note on my desk asking
[1:34:41] » which cemetery.
>> I don't know.
[1:34:44] » Maple Grove.
>> Maple Grove.
[1:34:46] » But I'd asked um if if you don't mind, I
can I can
[1:34:48] » Yeah, you take it. Take a run with it.
>> So, in looking at it, I I don't see that
[1:34:53] the town has any obligation to buy back
burial plots that people do not need.
[1:34:58] There's nothing in the agreement that I
was sent about that. There's nothing
[1:35:02] under state law that requires it.
However, if the town board would like to
[1:35:06] buy them back, you certainly can. So,
it's really just a decision to you folks
[1:35:10] as to whether or not you would like to
buy these back or not.
[1:35:16] » How full is the cemetery?
>> I have a lot of open space there.
[1:35:21] There's a lot.
[1:35:25] I I don't have any issue with buying
cemetery.
[1:35:29] » I I don't want to pay more than what we
got paid, but I don't know, you know, if
[1:35:32] we got paid in the 40s for them. I I I
don't know what
[1:35:36] » what was the value looked like they were
pretty recent. Um 20 I'm going way off
[1:35:42] field left field here, but it looks like
four lots were purchased. It looks like
[1:35:46] they might have divorced.
>> So I I actually in my email back I'm not
[1:35:50] sure if she can sell these. Correct.
Like we need to know who the actual
[1:35:55] owners of it are. There might have been
some divorce settlement or she got to he
[1:35:58] got to. I don't know. We'd have to see
more information about like the actual
[1:36:03] state of ownership on their side of it.
But I'm sure Greg's staff can find or
[1:36:08] the clerk's office can find how much was
paid for these, when it was paid. There
[1:36:12] is paperwork indicating when it was
purchased.
[1:36:14] » Yeah, I think Jody has it all.
>> She did.
[1:36:17] » She's been contacting
our office. So, I just if if the board
[1:36:22] wants to entertain it, we can get
everything together and see how much and
[1:36:27] if it's even possible to see the legal
side of it.
[1:36:30] » Yeah, I don't see any issue with buying.
>> I support buying them back.
[1:36:33] » I I do too. I just want to see the the
documentation.
[1:36:36] » All right. I'll tell Jody get everything
to you.
[1:36:38] » Yep.
>> All right.
[1:36:41] There's just two to buy back or the
four.
[1:36:43] » Uh she she's just offering two.
>> Just two.
[1:36:49] Anything else for DPW?
[1:36:55] Moving on. 8 8.2 ordinance report. See
the
[1:37:01] » you want to answer?
>> I have no questions.
[1:37:04] » Everyone's good with that. 8.3 dog
control report.
[1:37:10] » Looks good.
[1:37:14] » 8.4 attorney's report.
>> Yep. See, pretty short. Uh, we've
[1:37:20] already talked about the cemetery burial
plot buyback question. The one item on
[1:37:25] there that you might say, "Huh, what was
that about?" So, I note that we had a
[1:37:28] video conference, we meeting Alex, uh,
the Brian, the new code officer, and
[1:37:33] myself with an attorney for the Quinn
Estates LLC, which is the parcel
[1:37:40] neighboring adjacent to town hall. It
appears based on what he'd indicated
[1:37:45] that they will he they anticipate
submitting an application for a PDD
[1:37:50] reszoning of that parcel some point in
the near future. He did not show us any
[1:37:54] plans, did not any get into any detail.
He was more asking like what the
[1:38:00] procedure might look like just so that
they could have some expectations as to
[1:38:06] what a timeline might actually be. um
try to explain what our code says and I
[1:38:14] also flagged that we are in the
comprehensive planning process. So I
[1:38:18] don't know how I was very upfront. I
have no idea how receptive the town
[1:38:22] board will be to this one way or the
other. So, if they apply, Alex knows
[1:38:28] he's going to look at it, confirm its
completeness
[1:38:32] uh before moving it on to the town board
for your review and then your decision
[1:38:38] whether to move it on to the planning
board or not from there. But we're I
[1:38:43] think all Alex and myself and
Brian's still so new at it. We're going
[1:38:50] to say we're on the same page. But, you
know, if and when this does come in,
[1:38:53] we're going to move it forward in the
appropriate process.
[1:39:01] All right.
Anything for Nate?
[1:39:06] Good. All right. 8.5 supervisor's
report. Everybody see the budget
[1:39:11] modifications
adjusting the lines that are short.
[1:39:20] Anybody have any questions on those?
We are creating one new line if you
[1:39:26] approve it for the justice grant.
[1:39:39] Questions, concerns, comments?
[1:39:47] Kevin, will these will these
modifications take us through the end of
[1:39:50] the year? Is that the is that the idea?
>> There's I'm just looking there's there's
[1:39:55] quite a few there obviously that are uh
in the negative now. Um
[1:40:02] and it looks like we've got a number of
them moved from water fund balance.
[1:40:08] » Those ones Greg would have to answer to
>> because I'm looking there's there's
[1:40:12] three, right?
>> Yes,
[1:40:14] » Greg.
Yeah, that's what I see here because
[1:40:18] obviously that one is significantly
[1:40:23] um in the negative.
So essentially even moving the
[1:40:29] modification amount,
it's basically going to leave you nine
[1:40:32] grand left for the
for five months.
[1:40:38] Am I looking at that right?
>> Yes. That's what we discussed when Kevin
[1:40:41] and I talked about yesterday.
>> Is that going to satisfy
[1:40:47] that through the end of the year, that
$9,000? Because that's that's what not
[1:40:50] unless I'm looking at this wrong, but
that's all you're going to have left in
[1:40:53] that.
>> As long as I don't have to replace
[1:40:57] $50,000 in unbudgeted pumps and drives
and everything else.
[1:41:02] » Is that what that was driven from?
>> Yes.
[1:41:06] » I replaced two pumps that are
>> Maria. I I remember
[1:41:09] » $20,000 a piece.
>> Okay. As normally normally at budget
[1:41:14] time, we don't have money for those
types of repairs.
[1:41:17] » We do budget for for one. Yes. I don't
budget for
[1:41:21] » the two that you
>> three. No,
[1:41:24] » you have you had a third. I know about
the two.
[1:41:27] » Well, I ordered pumps three times. Oh,
we had the original. That's one. Then
[1:41:30] I've ordered pumps twice.
>> Right. Because you you had the one
[1:41:34] stock, right?
>> Yeah.
[1:41:35] » Okay.
>> I had three drives that went down. Mhm.
[1:41:39] » And one has been replaced, one has been
fixed, and one I'm waiting on
[1:41:46] price on a replacement.
[1:41:51] » So those expenses will go underneath
contractual instead of repairs.
[1:41:57] contractual I purchased the pump from
the
[1:42:02] company
[1:42:05] who did the repair I should say
equipment to go under the tube
[1:42:17] where does it leave you for a um a
balance for
[1:42:24] the F99
[1:42:29] I don't remember what off top of my head
what it was. It was a couple
[1:42:34] hundred,000.
>> Okay.
[1:42:42] » $527,999.
[1:42:45] » That's what it leaves him
>> or that's what it is before we pull off
[1:42:50] this.
>> That's what it is prior to these
[1:43:05] 502
>> 50299
[1:43:07] » 5029
>> Okay,
[1:43:14] » that's that's before these
modifications.
[1:43:21] So, we're going to be pulling
[1:43:26] 71,000 off of this. Correct.
[1:43:45] I don't see another option.
>> Yeah, there's no
[1:43:47] » Yeah, there really isn't.
[1:43:54] And then at budget time, do we
budget for two of these next year?
[1:44:02] » Depends on how much you want to raise
rates,
[1:44:07] » right?
[1:44:11] » Kevin, aside from that, when I look at
this, I didn't see anything else that
[1:44:14] came out of the fund balance. Is there?
>> It looks like these just had to be
[1:44:18] reallocated.
>> Yeah. All the other ones were
[1:44:21] reallocated. The only fund balance was
for the water. We really didn't have any
[1:44:25] other money in the budget. There's no
other money in the budget to take from.
[1:44:28] » Okay.
>> The other ones we kind of
[1:44:30] » talk to each department head and figure
out where we could get away with moving
[1:44:34] some money and not
>> So those were like those were true
[1:44:38] transfers.
>> Yes.
[1:44:39] » Within the budget
>> and a lot of them were mistakes that
[1:44:41] were
>> I see that.
[1:44:43] » Yeah.
Greg, do you do you have any other um
[1:44:48] issues in the budget besides what the
ones we're talking about transferring
[1:44:51] here that you think could be a potential
issue over the next five months?
[1:44:56] » I hope not.
>> Okay.
[1:44:59] » It's been a very expensive summer.
[1:45:06] » I'm all set. Thank you, Greg.
>> Yeah.
[1:45:08] » All right. Everybody's all set?
>> Good. Yep.
[1:45:09] » Good with the budget modifications.
>> Please forward. I'll send everybody
[1:45:13] email today with the fund balances as of
July 31st if you got to see that it's
[1:45:18] and I can add it to the agenda next. I
didn't get them till this morning. So,
[1:45:22] » okay.
>> But if you want me to add it to the
[1:45:24] agenda, do you want it for discussion?
We could talk about that in future
[1:45:27] topics, but
>> I'm I'm fine with it.
[1:45:29] » I'm fine with future topic, right?
>> Yeah.
[1:45:30] » Okay.
>> Under the sewer, the one for the .edu
[1:45:34] edu payback. Will that be then credited
back to the account where we paid back
[1:45:40] the $5,000 plus dollars for the EDU out
of the sewer account we were going to
[1:45:44] transfer SS fund?
>> What are you talking about
[1:45:50] » the repayment for the .edu?
>> Yeah. So the BC laundry one, we approved
[1:45:56] that by resolution last budget
modifications which I think was April.
[1:46:01] We approved that. It was never moved.
>> Correct. So that I have to I have to get
[1:46:06] Tom to move that
>> that money that was already approved by
[1:46:10] resolution. These are things that we're
finding that are not
[1:46:12] » Okay.
>> I just saw ARPA on there for the water.
[1:46:14] I was just making sure.
>> The ARPA one was never that's why I put
[1:46:17] it on here because I went back and look
at the other resolutions that the board
[1:46:20] already approved and and that was not on
there. So,
[1:46:24] » okay.
>> That one had we had to put that on here.
[1:46:28] » But yes, you will get that. That'll put
an extra
[1:46:32] » 5,000 in there.
All right. So, we'll talk about that.
[1:46:36] And then, did you see the other thing I
had on there? I sent you an email and I
[1:46:39] put it on here about help with the
finances and the budget. Budget time
[1:46:43] coming up.
>> I didn't see that. When did you send
[1:46:48] that?
>> It's on the agenda here, too.
[1:46:50] » It's right underneath budget
modifications where it says super help.
[1:46:53] » I also sent it by email.
>> Superhel.
[1:46:57] » Superhel.
>> Oh, I thought it was a runover from the
[1:47:01] budget modifications.
Sorry. No, I could have labeled it
[1:47:05] differently.
>> Nine.
[1:47:07] » Okay,
>> we knew what it meant.
[1:47:11] » Trying to get it on there. All right.
Um,
[1:47:13] » I think it's a good idea.
>> Well, Joy Joyy's ex just a just
[1:47:18] explanation here. Every day when my
truck pulls in, the phone rings by the
[1:47:22] time I get to my office. Joyy's like,
just I don't want to ruin your day, but
[1:47:27] this is what I found in the in the
financials and this needs to be
[1:47:30] corrected. And so she has a pretty good
grasp on what's going on in our uh
[1:47:36] financials and she's shown a lot of
interest in helping out getting it
[1:47:40] straightened out. She's even I think she
sat down with Tom the one day to try to
[1:47:45] straighten a whole bunch of the highway
lines out and I don't think she could
[1:47:49] get through to them. So
[1:48:00] » and these these lines are are not these
lines are mistakes.
[1:48:05] So a lot of this is just things that
were done incorrectly
[1:48:09] even in the last just this year
just just mistakes.
[1:48:16] Um, so we're just we really I'm just
trying to get this.
[1:48:20] » I want everything clean.
>> I think it's a great idea
[1:48:23] » and just like like Greg said with his
there's a BC laundry one. I mean that
[1:48:28] that was just an overlook. I mean I
thought that was already funded into
[1:48:31] your line and I'm glad you caught it and
>> we just we got to get that fixed so you
[1:48:35] have that money. There's $5,000 that
should be in your line. Yeah.
[1:48:39] » Um and there's a lot of them that are
like that. I mean, I know that the the
[1:48:44] comprehensive plan was taken out of the
contractual line and not the actual
[1:48:47] comprehensive plan. The first payment
was should have been taken out of the
[1:48:50] comprehensive plan by I mean, they just
need to be fixed. These are just
[1:48:53] mistakes. Tom says they can be fixed if
they're if they're mistakes and not
[1:48:57] actual transfers of money. If they're
just a mistake that was made on the
[1:49:01] accounting part, he said we can fix
those because there's a trail of why
[1:49:06] those were not. I mean, if the board
wants me to put them all in here so you
[1:49:10] can approve them by resolution, I can.
[1:49:15] » That's a journal entry issue to me.
>> It is. I think that's what it is.
[1:49:19] » Exactly what he said. A journal entry.
>> There's already been a resolution to get
[1:49:22] these fixed and it just wasn't Yes.
>> entered. Okay. So, so just so you see,
[1:49:27] this is what I'm I put on there
>> about Joy. I don't know if anybody has
[1:49:32] an issue with it or concerned with it.
I'm looking for help to the end and I
[1:49:35] also need help with the budget. I I've
got to enter the budget all myself. So,
[1:49:43] so I've been taught how to do it. So,
maybe Joy will teach Joy how to do it.
[1:49:49] Um,
>> I'm comfortable with it.
[1:49:53] It's it's it's it's
hard not having
[1:49:58] somebody in that seat day in and day out
and they're coming basically per the
[1:50:05] contract how many hours we put on there
is the only hours that they're spending
[1:50:08] in the town which I don't know is enough
but we signed the contract we'll get
[1:50:12] through the end of the year we'll see
how things go.
[1:50:15] » Well in my opinion this has certainly
come a long way so I appreciate what
[1:50:18] you've done and I think this is this is
a great addition. Um, I'm in favor of
[1:50:23] moving that forward. Just do it.
>> Well, we we've got we we've done these
[1:50:28] budget modifications and everything by
resolution. So, I would I would expect
[1:50:32] that we're going to have a formal
resolution
[1:50:35] for this cost at some point to document
it.
[1:50:40] » But is this a budget modification?
[1:50:44] » Yeah. Well, I'm looking at it as a
budget modification. We got to take it
[1:50:48] from someplace. We got to adjust. We got
to allocate it from some account that's
[1:50:53] going to go over. We don't have that
$5,000 in the budget anywhere.
[1:50:58] So, I mean, not allocated for this for
this scope. Forget So,
[1:51:04] » well, there's $5,000 allocated for
bookkeeping.
[1:51:07] » Yeah, that's what I was looking at.
But not but that bookkeeping is already
[1:51:16] I'm just telling you where where where
I'm
[1:51:19] I don't care about the scope of what
this is, but we didn't have this $5,000
[1:51:24] budgeted
for this up until this conversation. We
[1:51:27] didn't have it in the budget.
So it it it to me it was
[1:51:34] a cost add to the budget because we've
still got to we've still got to at some
[1:51:38] point this $5,700, right?
>> What is that what it was?
[1:51:45] » $4,984.
>> Sorry, I got
[1:51:48] » It's under the $5,000 threshold.
>> There's money in the book. I I don't
[1:51:54] » I guess I'm Yeah, I'm
>> I'm trying to follow this too.
[1:52:00] Okay. I'm I mean e either I'm okay to do
a resolution, but I just looked at this
[1:52:04] this was in the bookkeeper's line.
There's there's $5,000 there.
[1:52:10] » I did not look at this ask is that's
what it was. It was it's a it's an add
[1:52:15] to the budget. So, we're taking it from
somewhere. We're putting it somewhere a
[1:52:18] resolution for why we're doing it, why
we're spending the money. I think that's
[1:52:22] that's really that covers us for
everything.
[1:52:25] » But I don't look at it that way. I I
look at it as I'm using the bookkeeper
[1:52:28] line which has at the end after
modifications that we made to it after
[1:52:35] you approved this resolution for
modifications.
[1:52:39] It leaves it leaves $20,589.81
in that bookkeeper line for the rest of
[1:52:45] the year.
>> Right. But what was that? What was
[1:52:47] » that was for bookkeeping.
>> That was that was for bookkeeping
[1:52:50] » bookkeeping personnel line. And that's
what I'm asking.
[1:52:53] » But we were we were going to a different
service for that. We have that in the
[1:52:57] public accounting line,
>> right?
[1:53:00] » We have a public accountant line in the
budget that pays for the public account
[1:53:06] and then we have a bookkeeping line.
>> All right.
[1:53:10] Okay. I think we
>> we do budget this year if you want to
[1:53:13] remove one of those lines.
>> Well, this is a decision that either
[1:53:17] needs a motion or a resolution because
every decision that we make, we can't
[1:53:20] just say go forward with it. We got to
we got to we got to make a decision.
[1:53:23] It's got to be recorded somehow.
We've done we've done employment there's
[1:53:28] an employment issue that absolutely
should be done by resolution that we're
[1:53:33] going to employ this person for this
amount of time for this cost through
[1:53:40] this period.
>> So we'll do it by resolution then
[1:53:44] » I just when I just looked at this right
when you say budget modification I'm
[1:53:47] assuming we're taking it from another
account line. It it looks like it's
[1:53:51] coming out of this line, but it's not
moved anywhere else.
[1:53:56] » Yes. And and I can see that. I didn't
read it this way that I didn't read it
[1:54:00] that way when I read through it. I
looked at this as a as a budget cost ad.
[1:54:06] So, we'd have to bring it from somewhere
else and there wasn't a lot of
[1:54:10] documentation in it for that. I
understand what you're doing with it,
[1:54:13] but the original resolution that we put
together for that line item for that
[1:54:18] budget was this is the services for it.
This is a different service for it.
[1:54:23] It's fine.
It's it's just different. Um this is
[1:54:28] this is an employment issue. It's not
really a budget line item issue more
[1:54:34] than than anything else. So, you know,
the the way I think I would think of it
[1:54:39] is, and this should happen with some of
your employees, right? You have an
[1:54:43] employee whose job duties are water and
sewer.
[1:54:47] » Their salary or their hourly rate should
come out of both of the personnel lines.
[1:54:51] So, I think what we are doing is we'll
do a resolution saying Joy will be
[1:54:56] assigned additional bookkeeping duties
for two and a half hours a day, you
[1:55:01] know, Monday through Friday or whatever
it is as needed until the end of budget
[1:55:04] season.
with her pay for those services to come
[1:55:10] out of the bookkeeping personnel line
and then she just gets her salary or her
[1:55:14] wages split like that. My question is do
you want to have her start doing
[1:55:20] tomorrow? So the resolution will ratify
her starting those duties, you know,
[1:55:26] retroactive to September 3rd or do you
want to wait for two more weeks?
[1:55:31] » Tomorrow.
>> Yeah, tomorrow.
[1:55:36] I I mean I don't have an issue doing
that resolution. It's up to you guys if
[1:55:38] you want to do it.
>> I'm totally comfortable with that given
[1:55:41] » the only exposure that you have and I'm
not saying there's any
[1:55:45] » it. But if we actually pay her for that
without the resolution,
[1:55:49] you've encumbered it without without the
resolution and I don't see a big deal
[1:55:53] with it, but I think it's important to
know that that we're not going to meet
[1:55:56] again before payroll goes out and her
working on it and getting paid for it
[1:56:01] before we've actually put it in place.
I'm personally comfortable with that
[1:56:06] still.
>> I hear what you're saying, but yeah, I'm
[1:56:08] good to move forward.
[1:56:15] » Move as fast as we can.
>> So, I need a resolution or not just
[1:56:21] resolution will be at the next meeting.
Okay.
[1:56:25] » All right. So, we'll have a resolution
next meeting.
[1:56:31] » Thank you.
All right, that's it for supervisors. On
[1:56:37] to resolutions
9.1.
[1:56:40] » Resolution.
>> I have a question.
[1:56:42] » Go. Sorry, we got a question
>> about the bookkeeper. We have um Tom is
[1:56:47] the one who's doing most of the hands-on
work for us.
[1:56:51] » Yes,
>> I believe. And the owner, she was having
[1:56:54] problems with having her personal
computer connected to our town computer
[1:56:59] system. Yes,
>> we were talking about maybe buying her a
[1:57:02] computer. Has that been resolved or
>> We can't communicate with her.
[1:57:08] » We don't talk to her.
>> We try.
[1:57:11] » So, she she has an employee
working with us, but she's not.
[1:57:17] » Um,
Pyramid has tried to contact her
[1:57:21] numerous times. Pyramid sends me emails
that they can't contact her. I've tried
[1:57:24] to contact her. Jod tried to contact
her. Um, so
[1:57:30] We're working on it the best we can.
I'll keep you up to date. Um,
[1:57:38] that's all I can tell you right now
because Pyramid has an open ticket for
[1:57:41] that VPN issue and we can't get it
resolved.
[1:57:46] So,
[1:57:51] » just a rumor that I heard. So, I just
wanted
[1:57:53] » It's no rumor.
All
[1:57:59] right. Resolutions
>> 9.1 approving abstract number 17.
[1:58:07] » So move
>> second.
[1:58:10] » Any discussion?
>> None.
[1:58:13] » None.
>> None.
[1:58:14] » Mr.
>> Hi.
[1:58:15] » Mr. Simonus.
>> Hi.
[1:58:16] » Mr. Johnson.
>> Hi.
[1:58:17] » Mr. Hbert.
>> No.
[1:58:18] » Mr. Warden.
>> Hi.
[1:58:20] » 9.2 and 9.3. You'll see. I I don't
believe I received the backupion for
[1:58:26] those yet. So, they're still just kind
of placeholders right now.
[1:58:31] Uh 9.4 resolution accepting and
approving justice court audit report for
[1:58:37] fiscal year ending 2024.
>> So moved.
[1:58:40] » Second.
>> Any discussion?
[1:58:42] » None.
>> None.
[1:58:43] » None.
>> Mr. Sla.
[1:58:45] » I.
>> Mr. Simonus.
[1:58:46] » Hi.
>> Mr. Johnson.
[1:58:47] » Hi.
>> Mr. Hullbert.
[1:58:49] » Hi.
>> Mr. Warden.
[1:58:50] » I.
>> 95. Resolution accepting and approving
[1:58:52] justice court audit reports for fiscal
year ending 2025.
[1:58:56] » So moved.
>> Second.
[1:58:59] » Any discussion?
>> None.
[1:59:00] » Question.
>> Um when are is there a time frame that
[1:59:04] these have to be done in
>> there was it's passed
[1:59:10] » and I'm I'm just extrapolating to 2026.
When when do we
[1:59:14] » first quarter
>> first quarter? Okay. I'd like our
[1:59:17] resolution for these should be done
before the first quarter. or in the for
[1:59:22] in the
>> right the audit should be done in the
[1:59:23] first quarter.
>> Okay.
[1:59:25] » Yep.
>> Now that we know the process, it will be
[1:59:28] » Yeah.
>> much easier. I
[1:59:30] » I just didn't know if it was an a yearly
issue.
[1:59:33] » It it is it's an annual thing, but I
think uh April 30th or something like
[1:59:37] that. Trying to remember the date, but
it's it's first quarter. It's basically
[1:59:41] you're supposed to get these in, you
know, once the year's over with, books
[1:59:45] are closed. These are supposed to be in,
I believe, by the end of April.
[1:59:49] » Okay.
[1:59:53] Mr. SL.
>> Hi,
[1:59:54] » Mr. Sonus.
>> Hi,
[1:59:55] » Mr. Johnson.
>> Hi,
[1:59:56] » Mr. Hbert.
>> Hi,
[1:59:57] » Mr. Warden.
>> Hi.
[1:59:59] » 96. We talked about that earlier. Uh 97,
resolution approving three new volunteer
[2:00:06] Shenango Bridge firefighters.
>> So moved.
[2:00:11] » Second.
>> Any discussion?
[2:00:13] » None.
>> None.
[2:00:14] » None.
>> Mr. SLA.
[2:00:16] » Hi.
>> Mr. Simonus.
[2:00:17] » Hi.
>> Mr. Johnson.
[2:00:18] » Hi.
>> Mr. Hbert.
[2:00:19] » Hi. Mr. Warden
>> I
[2:00:20] » and 9.8 resolution authoriz transfers.
>> So moved.
[2:00:25] » Second.
>> Any discussion?
[2:00:27] » None.
>> None.
[2:00:27] » None.
>> None.
[2:00:28] » Mr. Schla.
>> I.
[2:00:30] » Mr. Simon.
>> Hi.
[2:00:31] » Mr. Johnson.
>> Hi.
[2:00:32] » Mr. Hullbert.
>> Hi.
[2:00:33] » Mr. Warden.
>> I.
[2:00:36] » All right. 10.1. Future board topics.
[2:00:54] We have wastewater treatment plan on
there again. Uh comprehensive plan on
[2:00:59] there again. We're going to hold off on
the hometown heroes. We're good with
[2:01:02] that until we
>> until budget. Yeah. Yeah, we're good
[2:01:04] with that.
>> Uh we have budget discussion
[2:01:09] next uh next meeting. We said the 16th.
>> Yep.
[2:01:14] Are you doing the department head um
duties
[2:01:21] template?
Department department head job
[2:01:24] description discussion with the Is that
what you're looking for?
[2:01:27] » Yeah.
>> Yep.
[2:01:29] » Okay.
>> Yep. We'll put that back on.
[2:01:37] Uh,
you're going to have the edus back on
[2:01:41] there again or just the resolution?
>> It'll be the resolution regarding the
[2:01:45] edu assessment.
[2:01:50] » You have a reszo for Joy?
>> Yep.
[2:01:54] And then the other resolution that you
guys will need to do is uh introducing a
[2:02:00] tax cap override local law and
scheduling a public hearing on that.
[2:02:11] Yes.
[2:02:15] » When's the next uh B&L update?
>> Is that next meeting, Greg? Or
[2:02:22] » I see in Jod's hands for the next
meeting.
[2:02:24] » Yeah,
>> it is.
[2:02:25] » Yes, sir.
>> Just curious how the schedule's going
[2:02:31] » because obviously we've passed
substantial completion. Correct.
[2:02:38] When do you think you'll be able to have
the information on that building
[2:02:42] demolition information?
>> Next week. Next meeting.
[2:02:47] » As long as B&L will give it to me and
have it in a timely fashion, I should
[2:02:50] have it. Yeah.
>> Okay.
[2:02:56] Do we have do we have time on
on our next meeting for that?
[2:03:02] » Absolutely. for that for that I would
think so
[2:03:05] » I mean
>> I don't know how much you want to get
[2:03:07] into the budget on
>> well that the budget was probably
[2:03:11] » the most of it but I I I think we should
move on this this I don't think that's
[2:03:14] it
>> okay
[2:03:16] » I I have no problem with it I just don't
want to overload it
[2:03:18] » you will also see um for the tree
removal there's a need to be tree
[2:03:22] removal at the wastewater treatment
plant
[2:03:25] » and we have to decide if we want to do
it per the contract or if we can do it
[2:03:30] outside the contract because there's
overund $1,000 difference in the two
[2:03:34] quotes just for the insurance
requirements alone. So you'll see that
[2:03:39] in a report in two weeks.
>> Okay.
[2:03:46] » Cemetery resolution buyback information.
>> I think we need more information before
[2:03:52] I can put a resolution together, but
we're going to work on getting that
[2:03:56] information. And maybe
>> I was going to say if it was a recent
[2:03:58] purchase, it shouldn't be that long of a
walk, right?
[2:04:01] » It it shouldn't be. It's just I don't
because I don't have it all at on my
[2:04:03] fingertips. Can't say we're going to
have the resolution, but I think we can
[2:04:06] report back at the next meeting about
it.
[2:04:08] » Okay.
>> What about the uh town storage network?
[2:04:13] Are you going to be able to get that so
we can get that?
[2:04:16] » I'm I'm done making you guys promises.
My last four weeks have just not been
[2:04:21] what I needed them to be. So,
>> do you want me to get a hold of John?
[2:04:27] » No, I don't want to put anything on you
that is mine. And it's more of just
[2:04:31] » Oh, you haven't gotten the responses?
>> No, I I have not. John's asked me for
[2:04:35] information and I haven't gotten it. I
have not gotten him.
[2:04:39] » If Jody could send him the
procurement policy,
[2:04:45] » okay,
>> that Okay.
[2:04:50] » I just did not dig that out.
>> Okay. Well, I'll send it to
[2:04:53] [clears throat]
Okay.
[2:04:59] I don't know how much more we want to
add to if we're going to get into the
[2:05:02] budget.
>> I think the budget's important enough
[2:05:04] that we
[2:05:08] » Are we expecting something on the
Wisconsin Drive issue that Dave brought
[2:05:12] up earlier?
>> Is that the King property?
[2:05:15] » Yes.
[2:05:25] » And I was not in the meeting today.
[2:05:33] and nothing from BNL has been brought to
this table from the contractor for
[2:05:38] quotes for anything and this has been
over a month and a half now trying to
[2:05:43] deal with this
[2:05:46] they're road hazards right now
>> I guess
[2:05:55] if the stuff is submitted to
to Jody for the agenda
[2:06:02] on time. We can
>> get to it if we if we have it. I just I
[2:06:06] don't know what's got to happen on Greg
and Alex's and Nate's end and your end,
[2:06:12] Darren. You know, I don't know what
collaboration's got to happen there.
[2:06:16] » You said there was two Wisconsin and
>> road.
[2:06:20] » I don't even remember the Prenise Road
issue.
[2:06:24] » It's the same issue.
>> Same issue. same issue but
[2:06:27] » I think
>> okay
[2:06:30] » you should see a review from Alex then
it'll be from BNL as well Alex went out
[2:06:36] today and actually looked at the sites
>> okay
[2:06:39] » he gave us two cents
as far as the other ones like carmich
[2:06:44] paving
there is a price there incorporate all
[2:06:48] that into the next
report
[2:06:53] that's how I understood it today Okay.
[2:07:00] All right. Anybody have anything else? I
don't have anything.
[2:07:10] Good. Moving on. All right. We're going
to go to open form. Guest shall speak in
[2:07:15] an orderly fashion, unlimited remarks of
five time minutes or less. The speaker
[2:07:18] shall deliver their comments, concerns
in a civil tone without the use of
[2:07:21] profanity, personal attacks, or other
disruptive behavior which may result in
[2:07:24] the offender's removal from the meeting.
The speaker shall not be interrupted
[2:07:27] except in a matter of urgency. Would
anyone like to speak tonight?
[2:07:38] Okay.
See, we have no speakers.
[2:07:48] All right.
Make a motion to go in executive session
[2:07:53] to discuss the department head
probation,
[2:07:59] employee probation. Um,
do you want to
[2:08:06] invite anybody in or does board just
want to discuss? I think at this stage I
[2:08:13] would recommend board only first.
>> Okay.
[2:08:18] » And then to have the ability
to even discuss with department head or
[2:08:26] attorney
to have them come in, but I think it
[2:08:30] should be the board first.
>> Okay. But have the opportunity to invite
[2:08:35] department head or attorney in.
>> Yes. I'll make I'll make that motion.
[2:08:41] » I'll second that.
>> Any discussion?
[2:08:45] » None.
>> None.
[2:08:48] » Mr. SL.
>> Hi.
[2:08:50] » Mr. Simonus.
>> Hi.
[2:08:51] » Mr. Johnson.
>> Hi.
[2:08:53] » Mr. Hbert.
>> Hi.
[2:08:54] » Mr. Warden.
>> Hi.
[2:26:13] So
[2:26:41] like
[2:27:05] Oh yeah.
[2:29:00] Hydro power.
[2:37:13] Change right back.
[laughter]
[2:38:08] Wait,
[2:38:19] wait, wait.
[2:52:19] » [clears throat]
[3:33:28] » Tornado warning.
[3:33:52] Stay barefooted.
Stay barefooted.
[3:34:16] I know
[3:34:28] usually a big deal.
[3:41:24] » [clears throat]
[3:46:53] [clears throat]
[3:51:19] » Yeah, he's got
[3:51:29] All right, we're back in a regular
session.
[3:51:33] Any other
discussion tonight or
[3:51:38] I have
[3:51:41] » no
do you want opportunity to speak or
[3:51:48] visit
[3:51:57] cemetery where my wife is
[3:52:11] recruited very large secretary.
[3:52:24] Thank you.
>> All right, that's all the
[3:52:33] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[3:52:35] » All in favor?