[4:52] Good evening everyone.
[4:54] I hereby declare the
[4:57] New Windsor City Council meeting open for business
[4:58] on September 21,
[5:00] 2026. The first
[5:05] item on our
[5:07] agenda today is the
[5:08] approval of
[5:09] the minutes of the
[5:10] August 2026 working meeting
[5:12] . You should all have
[5:16] received it
[5:17] electronically
[5:18] from the City
[5:19] Secretary-Treasurer. That being the
[5:21] case, I
[5:23] await a proposal to
[5:24] adopt these
[5:25] minutes in
[5:25] writing.
[5:28] I propose to adopt
[5:30] the minutes of the working
[5:31] meeting of September 21.
[5:32] Oh, I'm sorry.
[5:34] Minutes of the working
[5:35] meeting of August 21,
[5:37] 2026 in written
[5:38] form.
[5:39] Okay, we have
[5:40] a proposal to adopt the
[5:41] minutes of the working
[5:42] meeting of August 21.
[5:44] Is there a second offer
[5:45] ?
[5:45] I support.
[5:46] We have the first and second
[5:47] proposals. Are there any
[5:48] questions about this
[5:50] protocol? Those who are "in favor",
[5:51] please say "yes".
[5:53] Yes. Are
[5:53] there any objections?
[5:55] Okay, the offer
[5:56] is accepted. The protocol
[5:57] has been entered into the
[5:58] official register. The
[6:01] next item on the
[6:02] agenda is
[6:03] approval of the
[6:05] stage rental for the event "
[6:06] Music on the Main Street".
[6:10] Er...
[6:12] Yes, we are making changes
[6:13] for those looking
[6:15] at the agenda.
[6:19] So, just a quick
[6:19] note, the
[6:20] Mid-Atlantic
[6:21] Rage organization was supposed to be here
[6:22] tonight, but
[6:24] the gentleman who
[6:25] sent the letter of
[6:26] intent has a daughter in
[6:27] the hospital, so we'll
[6:28] move it to the
[6:29] October
[6:30] council meeting. So we'll replace
[6:36] that with stage rental. Do
[6:39] you want me to read what
[6:42] Anne-Marie prepared?
[6:43] Of course, if you wish.
[6:45] So, she received a
[6:47] quote
[6:48] from All Stage and Sound Inc. onto a
[6:50] 12-by-24-foot stage, which is
[6:51] larger than what we
[6:52] used
[6:54] before. It will be
[6:58] slightly raised. The stage
[7:00] has a border, stairs,
[7:01] and a small step
[7:03] at the end. The cost
[7:04] includes delivery,
[7:05] installation and dismantling. I
[7:07] think she said
[7:09] they would be there at
[7:11] 8:00, set up the stage
[7:12] by 10:00, and take it down
[7:14] by 7:00 and clear the
[7:16] street. The cost of this
[7:19] scene is
[7:21] $3,179. We
[7:24] discussed this at the
[7:26] Music on Main meeting
[7:27] today at 6:00 PM, and the
[7:28] council members present
[7:30] seemed to be in favor,
[7:31] so we are putting it
[7:32] to a vote.
[7:35] I propose to approve.
[7:36] If it saves us
[7:37] from having to
[7:38] collect it ourselves.
[7:40] This is what Dante said
[7:42] at the press conference.
[7:46] Good. So, as you may have
[7:49] heard, All Stage &
[7:51] Sound provided a quote
[7:53] or estimate for
[7:54] $3,179 for a
[7:56] 12-foot by 24-foot stage
[7:58] for our 10-foot by
[8:00] 20-foot tent. The stage will
[8:03] have a skirt and
[8:04] steps. The estimate
[8:06] includes delivery,
[8:07] installation and dismantling.
[8:10] The stage will be set up by
[8:12] 10:00 a.m. and
[8:13] dismantled by 7:00
[8:14] p.m. to clear
[8:15] the way for
[8:17] Main Street. So I
[8:21] would like to
[8:22] propose or
[8:23] consider
[8:24] a proposal to
[8:25] accept the cost of
[8:27] $3,179 for the
[8:28] rental of this stage.
[8:34] I make a motion
[8:35] to approve the rental of the
[8:36] stage in the amount of
[8:38] $3,179 $
[8:40] 3,179
[8:42] $79, yes.
[8:44] dollars.
[8:44] Good. Okay,
[8:45] the motion has been made, is
[8:46] there anyone who would
[8:47] support it?
[8:48] I support.
[8:49] Certainly. Okay,
[8:50] we have a suggestion and
[8:51] support. Are there any
[8:52] questions before
[8:53] the vote?
[8:54] I have one quick
[8:55] question. Will this
[8:56] be funded from
[8:57] our
[8:58] Music on Maine budget that
[8:59] we have already approved? Is this
[9:00] still within that
[9:01] budget?
[9:02] This is a perfectly valid
[9:03] question, and we have just
[9:04] enough
[9:05] funds to
[9:06] cover it.
[9:07] Perfectly. I might
[9:10] just be kidding.
[9:12] I'm kidding. We have
[9:13] enough funds in
[9:14] the budget, so we will not
[9:15] go beyond it.
[9:16] Okay, we have a
[9:17] suggestion and
[9:18] support. The
[9:19] question was answered.
[9:21] Are there any more questions?
[9:22] OK. Those in favor,
[9:24] please say yes.
[9:26] Who is "against"? Okay,
[9:28] the offer is accepted.
[9:30] So, we are moving forward
[9:32] with stage rental.
[9:35] Before we
[9:35] continue, Gary,
[9:36] please ask
[9:38] Ann Marie to inform the
[9:39] fire department that we
[9:40] will not be
[9:41] using their
[9:42] stage. Fire Chief
[9:44] Kramer asked
[9:45] me
[9:46] tonight what our
[9:47] solution was.
[9:50] Yes, and by the way, I also
[9:52] got this question
[9:53] at the crab festival
[9:54] last Saturday. Will
[9:57] we need
[9:58] help from the fire
[9:59] department? They were
[10:01] very open when
[10:02] asking if
[10:03] we needed
[10:04] help. So I
[10:05] told them that we...that
[10:07] everything was under control and I
[10:08] hoped they would take
[10:09] care of it.
[10:10] Just let
[10:11] Steve know.
[10:12] Steve Crown, I don't
[10:13] know who this is.
[10:14] Steve Crown.
[10:15] Yes.
[10:15] But that was about the
[10:17] scene. The only thing
[10:18] we didn't ask about were
[10:19] chairs and tables.
[10:20] No, we rented, we
[10:21] rent tables and
[10:22] chairs.
[10:23] along with this? OK.
[10:25] Therefore.
[10:26] Need help with
[10:27] installation?
[10:28] They
[10:29] will install everything themselves.
[10:30] If I
[10:31] remember correctly, they are from the
[10:32] same company as the
[10:33] tents.
[10:34] OK.
[10:34] They will bring
[10:35] tents, set
[10:36] them up, and set up
[10:37] tables. They'll
[10:38] just leave the chairs there,
[10:40] because you understand, they
[10:41] can't be put up until the
[10:42] morning. So, do
[10:43] we need the fire
[10:45] department to
[10:45] set up 50 or 100
[10:47] chairs? I don't think so.
[10:48] I think not. OK.
[10:50] We can do it.
[10:51] Believe me, I'd
[10:52] trade the stage
[10:54] for a chair any day.
[10:55] I think Dante can.
[10:59] Okay, if everyone is
[11:00] ready, we can
[11:01] move on. Um,
[11:03] a letter terminating the
[11:04] agreement with the
[11:05] Reapers baseball club regarding the
[11:07] Lions Club field.
[11:08] Okay, give me a
[11:09] second.
[11:10] One second. So, the termination letter
[11:14] was prepared,
[11:15] reviewed, and
[11:16] approved by
[11:17] attorney
[11:17] Ostrander. The letter
[11:19] was sent to the mayor
[11:20] and council for
[11:21] review. A little
[11:24] background: The
[11:26] Reapers baseball club, under
[11:26] Stuart
[11:28] Simpson, replaced
[11:29] previous
[11:29] managers and only began
[11:31] using the
[11:32] Lions Club field in May of
[11:33] this year. Mr.
[11:39] Simpson provided
[11:39] monthly schedules
[11:40] only for May and
[11:41] June of this year,
[11:42] although he is required by the licensing
[11:44] agreement
[11:45] to provide calendars
[11:46] for the entire season. We
[11:52] didn't know exactly how
[11:53] long the Reapers
[11:53] had been using the field,
[11:55] but based on
[11:56] the inspection in late
[11:57] August, the field had
[11:58] not
[11:58] been used or
[12:00] maintained for a long time.
[12:03] Just recently,
[12:04] last week,
[12:06] Allen and I looked it over
[12:07] , and the grass in the
[12:08] outfield and around the
[12:09] benches had been, shall we say
[12:10] , roughly
[12:11] trimmed by someone
[12:12] who doesn't work for the
[12:13] utility
[12:13] company. We don't
[12:15] know who did it,
[12:16] but the condition of the field is still
[12:17] terrible. The infield
[12:19] is overgrown with grass, even though there
[12:22] wasn't any at the beginning of the year. The
[12:24] license agreement
[12:25] clearly defines
[12:26] Reapers' obligations
[12:27] regarding technical
[12:28] maintenance and
[12:30] information provision.
[12:32] Therefore, with the approval
[12:33] of the board, tomorrow I will
[12:34] send
[12:35] this letter to Mr. Simpson
[12:37] terminating the
[12:37] license agreement.
[12:42] He doesn't answer
[12:43] emails, but
[12:45] we have his address.
[12:50] OK.
[12:50] Does that
[12:52] suit you? I
[12:53] will send this. Does
[12:55] everyone agree?
[12:59] Good.
[13:00] Thank you.
[13:02] Good. Yes, item
[13:04] number three is
[13:05] exterior
[13:06] renovations at
[13:08] 211 High Street.
[13:09] Yes.
[13:11] Wood restoration
[13:12] , contract award.
[13:13] Let me
[13:17] change the subject a little. OK.
[13:22] This is actually the last
[13:24] of the first four
[13:25] requests for
[13:26] proposals, the first
[13:27] stage of tenders. So,
[13:30] the request for proposals (
[13:31] RFP) was published on
[13:33] July 7. Three
[13:34] mandatory inspections
[13:36] of the facility took place on July 20,
[13:38] 21, and 23. The
[13:40] deadline for submitting
[13:41] questions was July 30.
[13:43] We didn't receive any
[13:44] questions. The deadline for
[13:46] applications
[13:47] expired on August 7. The
[13:51] state's revitalization program grant amount for
[13:53] fiscal year 2025
[13:54] is
[13:56] $250,000. The 211 High
[13:58] Street project consists of
[13:59] four phases, and the
[14:00] exterior
[14:01] woodwork is the fourth
[14:03] phase of the four. We
[14:06] received one bid
[14:08] from JPS
[14:10] Construction for
[14:12] $7,206.50. In fact,
[14:15] it was a revised
[14:16] price offer. The
[14:21] original bid
[14:22] was $10,295, but
[14:24] they planned on
[14:25] woodwork on the
[14:26] existing facade, which is
[14:28] recessed under the
[14:29] arch. I discussed
[14:35] this with the mayor and the
[14:36] public works director. We do
[14:40] n't know what we
[14:41] will do with this during the
[14:42] internal
[14:42] renovation. I know
[14:46] that the council members want
[14:48] to make a beautiful facade.
[14:51] So we asked them
[14:53] to remove that portion,
[14:55] and the application amount
[14:56] was reduced to
[14:58] $7,206.50. So, we
[15:02] discussed this in
[15:03] our first of
[15:04] several meetings
[15:05] tonight. We
[15:08] met with
[15:09] the fire department and
[15:10] reviewed all the
[15:11] costs incurred,
[15:12] namely the payment for
[15:13] dismantling. It is
[15:16] complete.
[15:19] Including the balance,
[15:21] we will have
[15:23] $129,358.50 of the $250,000
[15:24] after completing the
[15:26] next three
[15:28] phases of the project. Em.
[15:35] So I'm asking for a vote to
[15:37] approve JPS Construction
[15:39] for the exterior
[15:40] woodwork.
[15:43] Okay, you've heard
[15:44] the information regarding
[15:45] exterior
[15:47] woodwork. Em. The
[15:51] mayor is awaiting
[15:52] approval of the contract
[15:54] with JPS Construction.
[15:59] Okay, I'm making
[16:01] a proposal to award a
[16:02] contract for exterior
[16:05] woodwork at
[16:06] 211 High Street to
[16:08] JPS Construction for
[16:10] $7,206.50.
[16:15] Okay, we have
[16:16] a proposal to accept the
[16:18] JPS application for the amount of 7,200,
[16:19] sorry.
[16:21] 6 dollars 60 cents.
[16:23] 6 dollars 50 cents. 6
[16:25] dollars 50 cents.
[16:27] I support.
[16:28] There is a second proposal.
[16:30] Are there any questions about
[16:31] this approval?
[16:34] I ask everyone who is "in favor"
[16:35] to say "
[16:36] yes."
[16:37] Who is against?
[16:39] Thank you.
[16:40] The decision has been made.
[16:41] Announcement about
[16:42] the start of work tomorrow.
[16:44] OK.
[16:45] One, one, one.
[16:48] Say it.
[16:49] OK. Item number
[16:53] five is a change
[16:54] order for the
[16:55] interior demolition of
[16:57] 211 High Street.
[16:59] Yes. As I just said
[17:03] , the internal dismantling
[17:04] was completed
[17:05] by Urbana Multi
[17:07] Services. We were hoping to
[17:10] get
[17:11] changes to our orders from them
[17:12] tonight, but
[17:13] they haven't provided them yet,
[17:14] so we're waiting on two
[17:15] adjustments. The first
[17:17] is a temporary support
[17:18] for a cross beam
[17:19] on the second floor,
[17:21] which has sagged, is
[17:22] cracked, and needs
[17:23] stabilization. This will be a
[17:24] temporary
[17:25] stabilization.
[17:27] Everything inside has
[17:28] been cleaned out, so we've
[17:29] removed
[17:31] a lot of
[17:31] structural supports, so to speak.
[17:33] Nothing serious,
[17:34] but there are
[17:35] a lot fewer supports there now.
[17:37] So, since there are other contractors working on the roof
[17:39] and exterior
[17:40] , we
[17:41] wanted to back that up.
[17:43] So, that's one change to
[17:44] the order—
[17:45] installing
[17:46] temporary support under
[17:47] that location. And the other one is on the
[17:49] first floor, I don't
[17:51] know if everyone has seen it,
[17:52] but everything there is stripped down to the
[17:53] bricks, and it's actually
[17:54] really cool. But they
[17:58] made lintels
[17:59] about every 4
[18:00] feet, but the
[18:01] lintels themselves were made of
[18:02] old wood.
[18:04] Mhm.
[18:05] And that wood has rotted,
[18:06] so they will replace those
[18:08] wooden lintels,
[18:09] which again are the
[18:10] structural
[18:11] support for the brickwork
[18:12] . So, those are the two
[18:15] changes to the order that
[18:16] we're waiting on. We
[18:19] need to get them and
[18:20] approve them at the
[18:21] next meeting.
[18:24] Our staff wants
[18:25] to share this with
[18:26] everyone. The experience
[18:29] with Urbana is simply
[18:30] fantastic. This is a
[18:32] top-notch company
[18:33] , honestly. And
[18:35] they are the general
[18:36] contractor. They have already
[18:37] confirmed that
[18:38] they will do the internal
[18:39] renovations and everything else.
[18:42] But just
[18:43] the communication, the guys
[18:44] who work—we're
[18:45] really, really
[18:46] happy with them. We would be
[18:49] more than happy to
[18:50] work with
[18:51] them again in the future. That's
[18:52] it.
[18:53] Good to know.
[18:55] Yes. More
[18:56] information will be provided at a
[18:57] future meeting.
[19:02] Good. Thanks for the
[19:04] update and
[19:05] information. OK.
[19:10] Item 6 is FAMLI.
[19:14] family, what we
[19:15] talked about.
[19:16] OK.
[19:17] Where we need the
[19:18] council to
[19:19] vote is whether
[19:20] the city will cover that
[19:22] 0.9% or whether we will split it
[19:23] 50/50 with the
[19:24] employees.
[19:25] Okay, I know we
[19:26] talked about this
[19:27] before. Uh-huh.
[19:28] Let's talk about this
[19:29] again.
[19:30] Good. So,
[19:31] based on gross
[19:32] payroll for
[19:33] fiscal year 2017,
[19:35] the cost to the city
[19:36] if it pays the
[19:37] full 0.9% would be
[19:38] about $4,935.
[19:40] At a 50/50 split, that's,
[19:42] you know, $2,467
[19:44] . This is mandatory. This is a
[19:45] federal requirement, we
[19:47] have to do it.
[19:49] We are a state, but it is
[19:50] mandatory for everyone
[19:52] , and we should start
[19:53] collecting these costs
[19:54] on January 1st.
[19:58] OK.
[19:59] Um, so now I
[20:00] need to
[20:01] register us and get
[20:02] things moving somehow
[20:03] . Um, we
[20:05] just need to
[20:06] make a decision
[20:07] about what we're
[20:08] going to do.
[20:10] So this amount was
[20:12] $4,900 plus
[20:14] salary, and that doesn't
[20:15] include any
[20:15] overtime, because I'm
[20:16] just basing it on the
[20:17] total for the
[20:18] city
[20:19] for the year.
[20:19] Per year. This is 0.9%.
[20:22] Good. For an employee
[20:24] or
[20:24] Well, that's if the city
[20:25] pays for everything in full.
[20:27] For an employee, it would be
[20:28] 0.45. And then the
[20:29] city pays 0.45
[20:31] if we split that.
[20:32] So this
[20:33] total is
[20:35] $4,900 all together.
[20:36] Not including
[20:37] overtime.
[20:38] Yes, that's right.
[20:39] No overtime
[20:40] for every
[20:41] employee for the entire
[20:42] year.
[20:42] Right. Are
[20:43] you all included?
[20:44] Yes, city employees
[20:45] . Well, am
[20:46] I included in this too?
[20:47] You should be, yes.
[20:48] We checked it, yes.
[20:49] I believe you.
[20:50] Yes. This This This is not as
[20:51] much as it seems,
[20:53] but it is
[20:53] 0.9% of our salary.
[20:56] Yes, I know. That's what
[20:57] I'm talking about. Yes. Yes, you're
[20:59] all included, so
[21:00] yes.
[21:01] We are already working for free.
[21:02] It is carried out in the same way as
[21:03] any
[21:04] other taxes
[21:05] you have to pay.
[21:06] The season is coming,
[21:07] Josh. Ask for a
[21:08] raise. Well,
[21:09] man. it?
[21:10] Therefore.
[21:11] Yes, I don't think this
[21:11] will be a very popular
[21:12] solution.
[21:13] Well, you haven't had a
[21:13] raise since
[21:14] I started
[21:15] working here. A
[21:15] lot of time has passed,
[21:16] but it's nothing. Nobody is
[21:18] here for the money.
[21:19] Okay, so
[21:22] Thoughts?
[21:24] Discussion?
[21:25] I have just one
[21:26] question. Not that I
[21:28] want to do that, I'm
[21:29] just asking:
[21:30] Could we make it
[21:31] so that elected
[21:32] officials pay a
[21:33] percentage and city
[21:34] staff get
[21:36] paid in full? Should
[21:38] this be the only solution
[21:40] for the city?
[21:41] Mhm.
[21:42] I don't know this
[21:43] for sure, I mean I'm not
[21:44] sure, but it would probably be
[21:46] easier to have some kind of
[21:47] single approach. Because I
[21:49] have to do
[21:51] quarterly
[21:51] reporting, and, let's say,
[21:53] if someone
[21:54] uses this, I
[21:55] think it would be
[21:56] easier if it
[21:57] were clear.
[21:59] Yes, I haven't studied it
[22:00] as thoroughly as they have,
[22:01] but I am somewhat familiar
[22:02] with the issue. And I didn't
[22:05] see anything that
[22:07] related to a
[22:07] multi-level
[22:08] structure of
[22:09] employees. You know,
[22:12] people who earn
[22:13] the most have to
[22:14] pay everything themselves, and those
[22:15] who earn
[22:16] the least can
[22:17] split the amount.
[22:18] I think it's
[22:18] fair to say
[22:19] that none of us are
[22:20] going to
[22:20] take parental
[22:21] leave
[22:21] .
[22:22] But it's not just parental
[22:23] leave
[22:24] . Anything
[22:26] you're right about
[22:27] .
[22:28] Therefore.
[22:29] That's pretty much everything
[22:30] you'd want to take
[22:31] six weeks
[22:32] off for.
[22:33] Excuse me, what, what did you
[22:34] say?
[22:35] I probably shouldn't have
[22:36] said that. I
[22:37] said that's probably how it
[22:39] looks now, and
[22:40] this is a new program, right?
[22:44] But there are family
[22:45] vacations,
[22:46] health issues, and other
[22:47] similar crises. This is a
[22:51] very broad
[22:52] formulation. So, um,
[22:54] maybe if you had
[22:56] Never mind. There are
[22:59] many, many reasons
[23:01] . It's not just
[23:02] Yes, it's not just
[23:03] health.
[23:04] using. Oh, yes,
[23:05] it's not just health.
[23:06] Newborns, if
[23:07] your parents are sick, or,
[23:09] yeah, it's just very
[23:10] broad. Yes.
[23:11] it's a lot, almost anything,
[23:13] So, I guess I have, I have
[23:14] two
[23:15] questions. Or we,
[23:18] since I'm out of the
[23:19] workforce, um,
[23:20] except here. Um, how, do other
[23:25] municipalities, and
[23:27] maybe even
[23:28] businesses, of those that are
[23:29] working,
[23:30] deal with this? And
[23:33] secondly, should it
[23:34] be all at once, or should it be
[23:35] split, or is it something that the
[23:37] city could
[23:38] phase in
[23:39] 25% this
[23:40] year and then
[23:41] I think it would be 50/50
[23:43] or
[23:44] Yeah, I think 50/50 or
[23:46] I mean, everything that
[23:47] I've seen, I'm not saying it can't
[23:48] be different,
[23:49] but I think from a
[23:50] logistics perspective for
[23:51] reporting and my
[23:52] tracking, and because
[23:53] we're going to
[23:54] do it in-
[23:55] house, not with a
[23:55] third
[23:56] party. Um, so I
[23:58] think so.
[23:59] Do we know what others
[24:01] They asked us.
[24:04] They sent it.
[24:05] They do it.
[24:06] They are
[24:07] trendsetters.
[24:08] Yes, everyone is waiting to
[24:09] see what
[24:10] but we are getting close
[24:11] to the point where we are
[24:11] running out of time for me to
[24:13] register.
[24:14] boat.
[24:14] Yes, therefore. And that's just something that would be
[24:18] beneficial if we
[24:19] implemented it to
[24:19] retain people, and it's
[24:20] just another
[24:21] benefit that we
[24:22] can add to
[24:23] our benefits. which
[24:24] I was thinking about too.
[24:25] Seeing that we had
[24:26] problems with this.
[24:27] I, I mean, the
[24:29] city's payroll has been
[24:30] growing pretty
[24:31] steadily above the rate of
[24:32] inflation over the
[24:33] last few
[24:34] years, but it's also not
[24:36] , it's not a $20,000 bump
[24:37] like health
[24:38] insurance and so on,
[24:39] so I'm inclined to
[24:42] say we just
[24:43] pay it, pay it in
[24:44] full, and
[24:45] hope that
[24:46] state law
[24:47] doesn't change to
[24:48] increase that 0.9%.
[24:49] If it changes, we'll
[24:50] have to
[24:50] look at it
[24:51] when it happens.
[24:52] Yes, yes.
[24:54] Okay, um I'll
[24:57] take
[24:57] suggestions to accept
[24:59] that we're going to
[25:00] provide 100%
[25:01] coverage for the city. with
[25:04] F M F
[25:05] FMLA, it's family, they
[25:07] call it family
[25:09] Yes, it's "family"
[25:10] through the "and", it's a coincidence.
[25:14] Okay, I'm open to
[25:15] a proposal that the
[25:17] city
[25:18] cover 100% of family
[25:20] leave.
[25:25] I will make a proposal to have the
[25:26] city cover
[25:28] 100% of family leave
[25:29] .
[25:30] Good.
[25:31] I support.
[25:32] Okay, we have a
[25:33] suggestion and
[25:33] support.
[25:34] OK.
[25:35] This is to ensure that the city
[25:36] covers 100%. Those who are "in favor
[25:37] ", please say "yes
[25:38] ".
[25:38] I have just one
[25:39] question.
[25:40] Okay, one
[25:40] question. Excuse me, I
[25:41] beg your pardon,
[25:42] let me
[25:42] go back.
[25:43] This question is more for
[25:44] our lawyer.
[25:45] Putting it this
[25:47] way, should we
[25:48] specify a specific
[25:49] time period? Because if
[25:50] we just say that
[25:52] , is that...
[25:52] I don't think that will
[25:53] obligate you to
[25:54] not make
[25:55] any changes forever. If
[25:56] they quadrupled it
[25:57] in 2 years, I do
[25:58] n't think you would be
[25:59] stuck with it.
[26:00] These are all the questions I have
[26:02] .
[26:02] Sorry to interrupt
[26:03] your question.
[26:04] OK. So, we have a
[26:05] proposal and
[26:06] support. I assume
[26:07] all questions have already
[26:09] been answered. OK.
[26:10] I ask everyone who is "in favor" to
[26:12] say "yes."
[26:13] Yes.
[26:13] Who is against? Good.
[26:16] The proposal is accepted.
[26:19] OK. Item number
[26:21] seven is mine. Uh,
[26:23] review of the charter and
[26:24] possible amendments.
[26:27] OK. Um, I'm not
[26:29] going to
[26:30] rewrite the entire
[26:31] city charter. But there are
[26:36] things that, in my
[26:37] opinion, do not
[26:38] reflect what
[26:39] we are doing now,
[26:41] particularly in terms of
[26:41] budget preparation.
[26:47] Um, I think the
[26:48] current statute
[26:49] says that the mayor or
[26:50] mayors prepare the budget,
[26:52] or have prepared
[26:53] the budget, or commission
[26:54] the preparation of the budget.
[26:59] Um, in my opinion,
[27:00] after years of
[27:01] budgeting, it's
[27:02] better to have
[27:04] someone who works
[27:05] with finances every day do it, rather than
[27:06] someone who doesn't
[27:07] . This is just my
[27:11] opinion, we don't
[27:12] necessarily have
[27:13] to change anything, but for the sake of
[27:15] ... I know it's still
[27:16] ahead, and I
[27:16] hope I can
[27:18] convince Gary
[27:19] to stay for another 5
[27:20] years. Um, I know that's
[27:25] not going to happen, and I
[27:26] want to make sure
[27:28] we have everything ready
[27:29] for his successor,
[27:31] even though he says that...Did you
[27:32] say 2029?
[27:36] I was just putting it off
[27:38] .
[27:40] Only for a year. So, no,
[27:42] seriously, um, I think
[27:44] this process
[27:45] will start
[27:46] next year. I
[27:47] know what will begin
[27:49] , because that's exactly how I
[27:50] imagined it. So I want
[27:55] the person who
[27:56] actually prepares
[27:57] the budget...I would like the
[27:58] documents or the code
[27:59] to reflect what we are
[28:01] actually doing
[28:02] now and have been doing
[28:03] for the last 10
[28:04] years.
[28:08] At least 10.
[28:11] So, having said that,
[28:13] the section that I was
[28:14] looking at is the
[28:15] section, it's
[28:16] in
[28:17] Mayor's Section C 4-4 E,
[28:18] regarding the preparation of the
[28:19] budget by the mayor. I don't
[28:23] want to give
[28:24] the impression that I'm abdicating
[28:26] responsibility. I
[28:28] want it
[28:29] written so that the mayor
[28:30] still has control
[28:31] and can
[28:33] come in and
[28:34] audit the budget at any time, and that
[28:38] responsibility
[28:39] should not change.
[28:43] Uh, the mayor needs to
[28:44] do some
[28:45] consistent
[28:46] budget review. But I want it to
[28:50] reflect what
[28:51] we are doing now and have
[28:52] done before. This, this,
[28:57] so, uh...
[28:59] This probably goes back to
[29:01] when we didn't
[29:02] have city
[29:03] managers, and, you know,
[29:04] I talked to the mayor.
[29:06] I remember Mayor Pierce
[29:07] bringing in a
[29:08] three-page budget. This is what the
[29:10] budget is. Mayor
[29:12] Gallo always made
[29:13] the budget himself. Uh
[29:16] , maybe there are a
[29:17] few more sections in the
[29:18] charter that we
[29:19] should look at. I'm not
[29:22] talking about a massive
[29:23] rewriting of
[29:24] the charter. But if you're
[29:26] going to
[29:26] review, it makes
[29:28] sense to do so if
[29:29] you have three or four
[29:30] sections that
[29:31] need updating
[29:32] . We can do this
[29:33] in one
[29:35] bylaw resolution because a
[29:36] bylaw resolution is
[29:37] adopted differently
[29:38] than bylaws. They
[29:39] also need to
[29:39] be sent to
[29:40] Annapolis, not for
[29:41] review or change, but
[29:42] at least to
[29:43] make sure
[29:44] they are recorded. So it
[29:45] makes sense to approach
[29:46] this a little more
[29:47] globally than
[29:48] looking at one
[29:49] section at a time, because that's quite
[29:50] cumbersome. We
[29:52] may have other things
[29:53] that state that certain
[29:54] people do them,
[29:55] even though in reality that is
[29:56] no longer the case. So it would be
[29:59] helpful if elected
[30:00] officials
[30:01] would look at this too and
[30:02] see if there is anything
[30:03] that raises questions
[30:04] or something that you have never
[30:06] seen or would like to
[30:07] change, and then we
[30:08] can discuss it
[30:09] all together.
[30:14] Yes, thank you for saying
[30:16] that, because that's what I was leading up to
[30:17] , to have you
[30:18] evaluate it with your own perspective,
[30:20] because obviously you're going to be the ones
[30:22] making the decisions,
[30:23] but I wanted to at least get
[30:25] it started. Is this
[30:32] acceptable? I thought I had a
[30:35] great idea there.
[30:38] And I think that's how
[30:39] a lot of
[30:40] government agencies
[30:41] that are bigger than
[30:42] New Windsor, say,
[30:44] twenty or more
[30:45] years ago, work—the city
[30:46] government prepares
[30:47] a budget because they
[30:48] know when to
[30:50] replace equipment,
[30:51] when to buy,
[30:52] how much salt costs.
[30:54] I can't say
[30:55] how much the salt costs,
[30:57] but I know Wayne
[30:58] could tell us,
[30:59] and then they
[31:00] present it to the
[31:01] mayor and council, and we
[31:02] approve it.
[31:04] Yeah, again, I
[31:05] just...whoever succeeds me
[31:08] in 6 years, I don't
[31:09] want them to have to
[31:10] deal with my
[31:11] problems. He doesn't
[31:21] object. He doesn't
[31:23] say "no." OK.
[31:28] So, okay. Thank you
[31:30] all. And let's take
[31:32] a look. That's all
[31:34] we have for questions...
[31:35] Want to
[31:37] go through them quickly? Future
[31:38] meetings?
[31:38] Yes.
[31:39] Future meetings.
[31:40] Wednesday, October 7—
[31:41] council meeting.
[31:42] Monday, October 19—
[31:44] working session. And on
[31:46] November 4th, the next
[31:48] council meeting.
[31:51] And I don't usually
[31:52] always come to the
[31:53] working sessions, but I
[31:54] know I won't be
[31:55] at the October session.
[32:00] OK. I had
[32:02] one thing...this
[32:02] invitation. If I
[32:06] can find him
[32:07] again. We
[32:10] actually have a new
[32:12] business, uh...
[32:14] So this is our camping and
[32:16] canoeing on Falls Lake.
[32:19] I'll have to
[32:20] do it.
[32:21] Councilman Schultz, I'm
[32:23] referring to the new business
[32:24] that's moving into the
[32:25] Brotherhood Center.
[32:28] Yes. Yes, we received an
[32:30] email about
[32:31] this.
[32:32] What will happen there? Did
[32:33] you get one?
[32:34] Yes. Did
[32:35] you receive this
[32:36] invitation?
[32:36] I didn't
[32:37] need it. It looks like they
[32:39] sent it out to everyone,
[32:40] but I'm not sure.
[32:42] Oh, yes.
[32:43] Find him.
[32:44] Yes, I got it. Thank you.
[32:51] So, on September 18th, a couple of
[32:52] days ago, I received an
[32:53] email from
[32:54] Allison Redner, she's
[32:56] writing on
[32:57] behalf of CMMB, which is the
[32:58] Catholic
[32:59] Medical Missions Board, Inc., a
[33:00] global
[33:01] health and
[33:03] development organization that has been serving
[33:04] communities around the
[33:05] world for over 100 years.
[33:15] She wanted to
[33:15] introduce herself and
[33:16] the company as a new
[33:18] neighbor in New Windsor
[33:19] , and here it says, "We
[33:20] have opened a new
[33:21] drug distribution center in New
[33:22] Windsor,
[33:23] operating out of a
[33:24] leased
[33:25] space from the Church of the
[33:26] Brethren." In short
[33:31] , she has an
[33:32] invitation for all of
[33:34] us for Thursday,
[33:35] October 22nd. I have no
[33:36] information about the time.
[33:38] Yes.
[33:38] But I plan
[33:39] to visit it, Kim.
[33:40] So,
[33:42] Councilman Schultz's position.
[33:43] Let us know when you
[33:44] 'll
[33:45] RSVP,
[33:45] ask her about the time,
[33:47] because yes.
[33:47] I'll try to go too
[33:48] if I'm in town.
[33:50] So she hoped
[33:52] to meet everyone
[33:53] who wanted to come. I
[33:56] thought it would be
[33:57] good to visit. So
[33:59] I'll contact her and
[34:00] tell her I'll definitely be
[34:01] there. And if you're interested
[34:05] , I'll find out the date
[34:06] and time, and we'll see.
[34:09] From the way
[34:10] her
[34:11] email was worded,
[34:12] it seems they are still
[34:12] being determined.
[34:13] So, that's all I have
[34:15] before going into
[34:16] closed session. Are there any
[34:18] questions about
[34:19] any upcoming events
[34:20] or...
[34:22] No.
[34:23] questions.
[34:24] OK. Uh... Oh
[34:29] , in case anyone's wondering,
[34:30] I was asked to
[34:31] mention that tomorrow
[34:32] Uncle Maddie's is sponsoring a
[34:33] talk by Sam Riley,
[34:35] who, if his name
[34:36] were anything else, would be Sam
[34:37] Shriver Riley, a very
[34:38] active member of the
[34:40] Shriver family from Union
[34:41] Mills, who will be giving
[34:42] a presentation on
[34:43] taverns in
[34:44] Carroll County.
[34:47] Oh, cool.
[34:49] Taverns along
[34:50] Tavern Road or
[34:51] something. I'm not exactly
[34:52] sure. It will be at
[34:54] Uncle Maddie's from 6:30 to 8:00. From
[34:57] 6:00 to 7:30.
[35:01] There is a
[35:02] registration page on the Carroll Library page, but
[35:03] I don't have it.
[35:06] Uncle Maddie's is well
[35:07] known in the beer
[35:08] community for its
[35:09] wide selection of very
[35:10] good beers.
[35:12] I'll share this
[35:14] on the city page now.
[35:15] Yes, put it there.
[35:17] I had my first
[35:19] glass of Orval...what's it
[35:20] called? Was it
[35:22] Trappist beer?
[35:24] Yes.
[35:28] It's a brave new world.
[35:30] Taverns and wine. This is
[35:32] interesting.
[35:33] And bourbon.
[35:34] I also drank some
[35:35] bourbon there.
[35:36] I know. I've
[35:38] liked it ever since.
[35:39] speech We are talking
[35:41] about the other property
[35:42] you wanted to
[35:43] talk about. OK.
[35:44] Right. It was
[35:45] just an intervention on
[35:46] my part.
[35:47] OK. OK. If
[35:50] there are no other questions
[35:52] or comments regarding
[35:53] upcoming events, I
[35:54] will accept the motion
[35:55] to move to a closed
[35:57] session. According to the
[35:59] general
[36:00] provisions, article
[36:02] 3-305, paragraph b, subparagraph 1
[36:03] . Namely: to discuss
[36:07] the appointment of an
[36:08] official to a
[36:09] vacant seat on the council
[36:10] .
[36:11] I am making this proposal
[36:12] .
[36:13] Good. Proposal
[36:14] regarding...
[36:14] I support it.
[36:15] The proposal
[36:16] was supported. Who is "for"?
[36:17] Is that you, Don?
[36:18] By.
[36:19] OK.
[36:20] Good. Is anyone
[36:22] against it?
[36:23] OK.
[36:24] Let's move to a
[36:25] closed session.
[37:41] Ugh.