Video recording

>> All right. It is 6:30. Uh on March 5th, 2026, I am calling to order the town board workshop. Up first, we have a presentation by Josh Artuso explaining the FEMA flood mapping changes along Empire Boulevard. So Josh, take it away. >> Thank you. Um, so for some of the existing board members, I've been here before to talk about the town's flood plane program. Um, for those that may not be familiar with it, uh, the town of Webster is responsible for administering the federal FEMA flood plane regulations at the local level. And [snorts] what has transpired, if if some of you recall, we recently updated our flood prevention uh damage ordinance back in uh as FEMA had updated some of the flood mapping uh within the town of Webster.

Um, now there's an individual land owner that uh questioned the designation on their particular property and they went through a very extensive technical effort uh with a consultant and several uh flood engineers and basically they um applied to FEMA for what's called a letter of map revision. So they are applying to actually officially change the federal FEMA flood plane maps. Um they went through that process. It took about a a year and a half and ultimately um New York State DEEC and FEMA have accepted all of their technical um records and data that proves that their original FEMA flood plane elevation mapping was incorrect.

So now the town has to update its uh local ordinance to reflect this letter of map revision that has been approved. U the reason we have to do this is to maintain our good standing uh with the national flood insurance program. So I'll just um go through quickly a couple of the documents. Uh this is the official letter of map revision that explains uh the technical analyses that essentially lowers the flood plane elevation for this particular property by about 5 ft which is pretty substantial. uh [clears throat] the property in question. Actually, there's several properties in question. Um even some that border our town and go into the town of Penfield.

Um so, most of you are familiar with our bowling alley uh and the movie theater on Empire Boulevard and [cough and clears throat] the former Creeks Edge Farm Market that is just west of Country Max. Uh that is the area in question. So, what you're looking at right here is the uh revised uh FEMA flood map panel for this particular area. The blue area indicates the 100red-year flood plane. The red striped area is the floodway. That's where active uh water would be moving in the event of a 100red-year storm event. And actually, as I mentioned earlier, it actually lowers the flood plane elevation by approximately 5 ft, which will eventually um pave the way for development to occur on that site where it normally wouldn't have been.

Um, so basically this is the one section of our existing town code that needs to be updated with the uh to reflect this recently approved letter of map revision. So, we are just uh bringing this before the board because it does require um holding a public hearing and we are required to have this in place by May so that we don't lose the ability uh for our residents who do currently live in flood planes to obtain flood insurance on their properties. So, that's that's um this in a nutshell. I'd be happy to try and answer any questions that anyone might have. >> All right, I'll go down the line. Nick, >> no.

Thank you so much, Josh. >> John, I'm >> good. Thanks, Josh. >> Jen, >> can you put that map back up? >> Sure. >> Can you point out where the Creek Side Farm is in this map? >> Yes, it's right here. >> Okay. And that's the area that is now being moved out. >> No, unfortunately I don't have the >> previous map, but basically the floodway, the red and blue striped area used to be a lot narrower [cough and clears throat] um which then affected the blue areas in having an inaccurate flood plane elevation. So what they did was they sent um surveyors out there. They collected a lot of data analysis of where the storm water's coming from Penfield.

They also evaluated the culvert that goes under Empire Boulevard uh because I believe that was [snorts] replaced or enlarged at one point which certainly impacts areas south. So, um, all of this area, actually, even the entire movie theater was within the FEMA 100-year flood plane, and now that property has essentially been removed along with several others in that general vicinity. Uh, but there is obviously still quite a bit of flood plane to the south. I see where where's the five foot diff can you point out where that five foot difference is that you described? >> So basically the previous mapping said that um the flood would go up to 425 ft above sea level and now the new flood elevation for this area is roughly 419 or 420.

>> Okay. Thank you. H interesting >> Josh. Yeah. How many home owners are in homes are impacted by this if any? >> Um actually there's no single family residences impacted. Um they are all commercial properties within the town of Webster. >> Okay. So this is really going to impact more future commercial development than individual homeowners then. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> No problem. All right. Nothing else. Thank you, Josh. Um, our next is the presentation by Monte Solar, a proposed solar garden at the Xerox campus. I know this is a hot topic, so I do want to make uh ground rules here that this is a presentation by Monte, Xerox, Haley, and Aldridge to the town board.

Uh, this is not a time for public comment. You will have your five minutes once this is over, but for right now, we need to be respectful of their time and as they are respectful of yours. So I know I believe they would like Tony Kashani, head of the planning board to speak first because he is going to walk us through uh the steps that the planning board took uh to in their due diligence of site approval. >> Sure enough. Thank you. Um, this project started out with us oh a year ago now, but November, I believe it was November 18th, they were in for a preliminary approval for this project and this is was you know again for the uh Webster Solar Garden by Monte.

Um the board looked at it. There were concerns. Many of the people that were here that evening were concerned about noise, the health, safety, welfare, and they addressed the applicants addressed all the all the the you know concerns and everything that people had. One of the big things though that was of the board's uh concern was putting this putting these panels on top of this contaminated soil section and they they were going to be using these uh gabians. They were not going to be drilling in. There was no contact under the ground or making any holes. So with that then the concern was well okay then what do these big stone containers weigh you know will they will they sink?

So that became another big issue with it is the weight of these things and in time and in the summer would that be settling. They they did they actually came back in with a study on that and the study showed that um the weight would be 2,000 lbs per square foot it would hold on these on the finished product and really they only weighed like 450 lbs if I believe the number was right but way less than what so it would be okay. The other thing was uh the noise issues and that was kind of dispelled. I mean the we've heard stories of you know war stories of it all but in reality was there is no real loud noises as a result of these things.

Um the disturbance of the area was I believe 17 1/2 acres of land and then it was you know you be cutting down trees and so on. Well in 1990s there were no trees there. It was just field area. So whatever is there obviously are smaller trees and the clearing I think well I could be off of it but I think it's only like 15 and a half acres was going to be cleared something like that on it and uh there would be no destruction of of main trees and so on and so forth. Uh they do have test pits in there. The test pits are monitored monthly for any contaminated water. So that's thoroughly checked all the while also.

So, not to hold you up with too much of this stuff. I'll just give you a couple of things that we did with the uh with the approval we made. Let's see. We did I'll give you the final approval checklist that this is what we did. We made it subject to the PRC comments which there were several uh made it subject to preliminary approval conditions. All governmental fees, department of public works approvals and then we put significant construction was to commence and uh the conditions be on the cover sheet of the final drawings and the engineer for the proposed project was to certify that everything was done properly.

A letter of credit would be issued to the town for the project. And this was subject to all final approval, the final approved minutes of the uh of the meeting. And we also put in there then uh was vegetation and tree cutting limits shall be added to the plans. Removal shall be limited to surface level only. No soil no soil disturbance. In other words, they were planning on doing was taking the trees that had to come out, just cutting them, but not disturbing the soil, not digging it up. And let's see, the drawing notes called a note to protect the bedrock trench system and the fencing in the ballast area installation.

The application shall enter into a host agreement. This became a big issue with what's in it for the town. What do we get out of this thing? I mean, we're putting this in. Xerox is doing it. there's tax dollars going into it. So we felt that we don't know what that would be a town board's function obviously is to work something out financial a financial agreement with the town to be compensated in lie of taxes. So that that definitely is in here and that's going to be up to you folks to wherever if you move forward with this that you'll be dealing with that. Uh let's see we had also um the site plan should clearly show both the landfill cover and include the associated u landfills hazardous waste site and site numbers on the final drawing.

Uh decommissioning bond that is if one day this is goes out of business they close down or it has to be removed then there's a a bond placed to cover that expense at that time. Um, and the biggest thing we had in there, and I think you've got the letter, um, was a letter from the DEC. We would not give them permission to move forward any further until they received a letter from the New York State Department of Envir Environmental Conservation to say they were okay with doing this project, that it did not cause any hazardous situations. And I believe you now have that letter, correct? >> Yes. you the supervisors received that letter?

>> Yes, we received a letter from the DEEC this earlier this week that states that the entire plan will not adjust will not change any mitigation efforts. >> So that's basically a little rundown of what we did and what we looked at and and actually the vote was a full vote seven member board and everybody voted for that. That was that was that was passed well and uh there was a lot of discussion on it. didn't go light by any stretch, but ultimately it was separated from the hazardous thinking to the site and impact on the neighborhood and so on and so forth. And ultimately, we gave it a final approval.

>> All right. Thank you, Tony. Um, >> I got a quick question. >> In the interest of time, John, we're going to let Mont we're going to let Montante speak first. You can ask Tony questions for Tony. >> Yes, Tony will answer questions at the end. No, we're going to >> He's up here right now. >> He is up here. He's going to stay for this entire presentation. We need [clears throat] I'll ask him later. >> We need to be conscious of everybody's time. So would Montante please >> would Monte please approach and give their presentation? >> Got caught up again. [clears throat] >> Hi, good evening. Um, and thank you for having our team here today.

My name is Katie Sa. I'm the director of project development representing Monte Solar. We also have Kim Nason from Phillips Lidle. Uh Marcus Leyrop from uh Xerox and Janice Suz from Haley and Aldrich. Together we are presenting uh to the town board the proposed 6.6 megawatt solar project to be constructed on Xerox's campus in the town of Webster. We are here today in pursuit of an industrial use permit and our team believes that this project fits all the criteria and for the issuance of the IUP. I'd like to start by reviewing the project timeline with the board to date. The project development on this uh project began over three years ago.

During that time, we've completed environmental reviews and studies with several agencies, including a detailed review with uh New York State DEEC, which I'll get into that in a little bit. Um our team uh in 20 uh July of 2025 officially kicked off the review process with New York State DEEC. And from there uh later in July uh the the town uh board referred to the planning board this project um uh for a full uh site plan review. Um in September uh we went before the sketch plan meeting. Um and then at that meeting there was some concern from the community voiced. Um we did arrange to uh with the help of the the heads of the HOA um a meeting with the Meadows HOA um in late September.

We then took some time we implemented some of that feedback that we got during that time which again I'll go to in a little bit go through in a little bit. Um and we went before the town planning board again in November of 2025 for preliminary site plan approval. After that we went again for uh after implementing more feedback from from that uh meeting. We went for final site plan approval in early January. In January, we also had another out community outreach effort um where we launched a uh project web page which had all the project information in one consorted place. Um we held a community uh and we did advertise that meeting as well.

Um we did uh hold a community meeting um in which uh Montante, Xerox, Haley and Aldrich and DEEC were all present and available for questions and answers. And then we completed our New York State uh DEEC review um just at the end of of February and I forwarded that email over to your team um I believe last week. Um and that brings us to to today. Um our team has been working through um the appro approvals on this process since uh since July. Um and our team has made a concerted effort to make the project information available to the public. Um, I'd like to kind of start out by walking through um kind of what we're going to go through here today.

Um, but please stop me at any time or any of uh my me uh fellow team members if there are any questions. Um, we're going to go through um the Xerx site history and DEC oversight, how this project coexists with existing safeguards, the general project background, community benefits, and then community concerns and feedback that we received. Um, I'm going to hand it over um to my colleague to, uh, talk through the Xerox site history and DEC oversight. >> Hi. Uh, for those I have met, uh, Marcus Leup. I'm the manager for assessments and environmental operations at Xerox Corporation. Um, and then Janice is with me.

She's with Halen Aldrich and they're our primary thirdparty contractor. They help out with all help out with all the remediation activities and they've been at the site for oh for 20 30 years now. So, uh helping us through everything. So, that's why they're here with me as well. Um the first slide here is um the the site. So, you can see um it's kind of tough to see from from there, but because the site's so big, but we have the overall property boundaries for campus [clears throat] here in Webster. Um the yellow line there is uh the area here for the project um at that part of the property. Oh, just south of that.

So, the property is is broken up. Um, Tessy Plastics purchased a large portion of the property back in 2021. So, that's the um kind of shoelooking um white border there. That's their property. And then the rest um in the in the checkered lines inside is is all of our Xerox campus. Um the the over to the right there, that red shows you exactly where this proposed project is, the uh landfill location. So the CND landfill and our industrial waste landfill and then um from the upper portions there there's some estimates of um distance to um different um property lines and residential lines closest.

So that's a little more information there. The next slide. Um, as far as site protective u measures, control measures. Um, so we have uh we operate under a permit with New York State DEEC. Um, and that specifies what remeal measures, what monitoring, notification, inspection requirements we have on the property and that includes um the landfill, the the broader campus, but includes the landfill as well. Um, NISDC, they review and approve all of our activities. uh we do annual reports um and are in in contact with them on a reg routine basis with activities that are happening on Xerox campus. Um as you can see from the last slide, the industrial waste and CND landfills are just a small portion of the whole uh property um there or the the site development area there.

Um so just a small portion of that. Um a note here landfills they were all closed and approved of under DEC guidelines. um in in consulting with DEEC with the corrective actions and the institutional control measures. Those are all put in place um per DC requirements. Um we have a groundwater recovery trench is is there. You'll see that in some of the future the future um slides here. Um we made sure we're working with Mante that um we kept those we kept areas open so that all of our remediation current remediation operations would not be disturbed. We're not moving wells. we're not um affecting the the current activities that are going on there.

So, that was a big a big thing from from my perspective. Um you know, as a the manager for environmental environmental operations, last thing I want to do is to create an issue that endangers human health and uh dangers the environment. So, um that's huge to me and that was part of the reason part of the discussions with Monte was to make sure we that those systems were not impacted by this potential opportunity. Um so we have the groundwater recovery trench that um collects groundwater um that is is in the area leaving um the site and we that's tied into the the local POTW. We have an industrial sewer use permit that governs um the groundwater that's collected and and sent to them.

Um and so through that we do monthly um testing of the water from the landfill and we provide those reports to the town of Webster. Um, the groundwater monitoring has been going on for over 30 years. Um, and the everything that we do there is is conducted to make sure that our controls are in place and we're still are still protective of the the local community. Um, and DEEC receives all that monitoring and reporting. Uh, we they receive that information, that data, they review it, they come back to us with questions and and give us approvals on on the data we sent them. >> Next slide. Were you going to talk to this?

>> Yeah. Hi, my name is Janice Suks. I'm um from Haley Aldrich. I'm a consult environmental consultant that um supports Xerox with their remedial efforts on the site and coordination with DEEC. Um this slide just goes into a little bit more detail on some of the technical elements of the environmental remediation um features on the site. So again on the right hand side the yellow outline is the general project area. Um the two landfills um the the the the square area at the bottom that's the an active hazardous waste landfill that's been capped with asphalt. Above that is what is called the CND landfill that is also capped with a soil cover.

Um the CND landfill waste is a vegetative waste. So it's not hazardous. Um the the the landfill that's probably most in question or discussed is the is the landfill further to the south. That's the square area where that's capped with asphalt. So I just wanted to get into some of the protective engineering controls that are in place. Again, we do have the asphalt cap over it. Um the thick black line that you see north of that trench, that's the blasted bedrock trench. So it kind of acts like think of like a French drain. water is preferentially directed to that that trench. It spans beyond the full width of the landfill itself.

Um it's meant to capture any contamination that may be coming from the landfill. Um that was all uh there was a full assessment that was done. It was designed and implemented under DEEC's purview uh decades ago. Um so that's what that is. Um uh the next bullet there talks about monitoring wells. Um you'll see some bunch of black dots kind of scattered throughout um throughout both within the yellow area and then also outside. Um so those are all monitoring wells. They're all established to monitor groundwater conditions on a routine basis. Again that whole monitoring plan was um approved by DEEC.

Um they serve um a multi-purpose. um one just to understand if our our operations are going as planned. Um they're also to serve as an early warning if there's any potential issue um and any modifications need to be made to the remedial efforts. Um for um for the last 10 years the the the wells that are furthest out have have been non-detect. Um there are detections right where the landfill is. That's anticipated. That's where they're right next to the trench. So that is anticipated. Um but the ones that are further further north those have all been non-detected for over 10 years. Um again Marcus had mentioned about the groundwater.

It is captured in that trench and treated at the town of Webster PW. Um we also have contingencies in place to to handle that water differently if there are any issues that and we cannot discharge to the town. Um so that those are in place, those contingencies. And then another protective measure is just how the solar project was designed. Um New York State DEEC has guidance in place to establish what studies need to happen. Um things that need to be uh put in place or considered as part of designing a solar development on a landfill. Um so those were all um followed in um for this project. Um, and it also aligns with the New York State incentives for for solar redevelopment on landfills.

Um, supporting that that land reuse. Yeah. So, I'll talk through um how our solar project coexists with the safeguards on the site. Um, so we did complete our review um with DEEC. Um DEC completed an extensive review again that began in uh July of 2025. Um and the review was compi comprised of um full uh review of civil designs, geob ballasted foundation material spec sheets, storm water runoff calc, CND landfill closure plan drawing, CND landfill cover investigation reports, project specific and O andM plan, CND landfill geotechnical report, um an asphalt landfill geotechnical report and asfelt landfelt asbuill drawings.

um a landfill cap monitoring, maintenance and contingency plan and um our lease agreement review with Xerox. So it was a a very comprehensive review. DEEC confirmed that the project as currently designed will not conflict with any corrective action mag uh activities occurring on the site and they have also confirmed that the project uh is in compliance with DMM4 guidance uh for solar developments on closed landfills. If you go to the next slide, um I'll talk just real quick about um means and methods of of construction. Um we are using a geob ballasted foundation here. Uh gabian baskets filled uh with uh rock to weight the system down.

Um there are no ground penetrations in the landfill areas. Um this is a triedand-true method. Um Monte has installed about 40 megawatts of solar in New York State. This is one of the um applications that we use all the time. So, we are very comfortable and very familiar with it. Um there's no trenching or excavation within the landfill areas at all. It's an above ground conduit system and the areas of disturbance um are situated uh in the um southern corner of the project and they're really limited to the access road, the utility poles, um the uh concrete pad and all the equipment coming together and going into underneath that concrete pad.

Um soil sampling will be completed um during that process just in compliance with Xerox's uh comprehensive plan. um with DEC as well. Um if you go to yeah the next slide I'll talk about um general project background. Um so in addition to our review with DEEC um Bureau of Hazardous Waste Division um which is what I just previously uh reviewed with you um there's been significant um environmental due diligence uh with other agencies. Again I had mentioned that this re review process started with us about three years ago. Um during that time we've confirmed um with the US Army Corps of Engineers um that there are uh limited l uh wetlands on site and the impacts of the wetlands actually won't even trigger the nationwide 51 permit.

Um it's uh under uh.1 acres. Um we reached out to uh the New York State uh historic preservation office, US Fish and Wildlife Service, um the New York State DEEC Wetlands Division, which is the um new uh newer requirements for wetlands as of 2025. Um and then this project again um went through the the town planning board um and town engineer review as well. Um the planning board did issue a type two action. Um and in addition, I believe it was just earlier today, uh the town engineer completed, um the SWIP review for the project as well. Um so just want to talk about um the site plan. So this is a a 6.6 megawatt project.

Um it includes um almost 11,000 solar panels up top of that geob ballasted racking um and 18 inverters that have been strategically cited in the southeast corner of the project. that is uh over 1300 feet away from uh the Meadows HOA uh property line and about 1,000 feet away um from the other uh property line to the uh northeast. Um it's 1,650 ft away from the closest point on the Meadows HOA walking trail and about 1,700 ft um from the closest res residential property line thereafter. Um and then about uh 18 1860 feet um from the actual closest doicile. Um the project will be connected directly into RG&'s distribution lines along Caracus Drive there.

Um and the project has been designed so that um all environmental uh monitoring and obligations will obviously stay intact with DEEC. Um if you go to the the next slide, we do have a landscape screening plan that was part of our uh review PLA pro process with the planning board. Um we got some feedback during um an HOA meeting very concerned about sight lines into the property. Um as a result of that meeting, there was a suggestion by one of the homeowners like can you tape off with high viz tape or caution tape the bordering areas and see what we can see. Um we did do that. We also flew flew a drone and took pictures documenting if we could see that um both along the tree line and then also along the HOA walking trail that was submitted to the planning board as part of their review.

Um we couldn't see anything um from those areas. However, we understand um that that is a major concern and so we um are also going to implement about 200 feet of trees on either side to the northeast and northwest of the project to further ensure that those viewsheds are kept. Um they would be uh double row coniferous trees. Um the the trees that were selected um were feedback again from another HOA member. Um we're doing the Norway spruce and red cedar so that it stays um fully year uh coverage um to mitigate viewsheds and trees will be between a minimum of 10 ft upon planting um to ensure that these trees are are of height um that that matter which are uh in alignment with these uh edge of the backing or racking of the panels.

Um and in addition, Xerox has also agreed um that they will implement these plantings even prior um to major construction starting. So if we do get approval um from the board um in the next, you know, month or so, um Xerox would implement the planting of those trees this spring season. Um if you go to the uh next slide, I can go into community benefits. Um as um uh the chairman of the planning board mentioned um host community agreement was um one of the uh conditions of our uh site plan approval. Um the numbers that are up here are the equivalent to full taxes of the project as reviewed by the town assessor.

um the project pays um the equivalent of full taxes but notably pays 50% of that value within the first three years of the project's lifespan. So that's um pretty significant. And the anticipated land tax without solar, just the land value itself would be uh just over $17,000 over that 15-year period. And again, those numbers came from the town assessor's office. um decommissioning plan and bond. Um the project um does have a decommissioning plan uh as part of uh incorporated as part of the project. It ensures that the project is considered temporary and that there is a plan to fully remove it after the end of its useful life um post operation.

Um it also makes sure that there is a trigger mechanism to um commence the decommissioning process. Um so the trigger mechanism is either the project not producing electricity or being abandoned for longer than 12 months um or the operating term expires of the project. It would then trigger the the um the removal of the system. A decommissioning bond is also incorporated as part of this. Um it's posted with the town of Webster to ensure the removal after the end of its useful life. Um this means that the town isn't left financially responsible and taxpayer funds aren't used to remove it. Um and one of the conditions again of the planning board is that this bond rating must be of A or higher.

Some other community benefits um this is an inclusive community solar project. So 40% of the energy is reserved for low to moderate income households following NAERTA program rules. So approximately like 2.6 six megawws of the project will be the portion going back to the community um through that LMI community solar program. Um and it's a guaranteed 10% discount on the electric bill for those programs and it's monitored by NAERTA and um DPS. Um another indirect uh benefit is that this project does defay overall power costs. Solar projects help to offset the need for peaker plants which aren't often talked about.

um because they coincide with high energy use times of the year which are generally between June and September when we have those really warm spurts of weather. Peaker plants are electricity generators that are turned on when demand is especially high. They are backup power run on fossil fuels. They emit high levels of air pollution. They're the most expensive type of power on the grid because they only run 20 to 30 times a year. So the startup and shutdown costs of those plants are very high. And because it's a lot older infrastructure, there's a lot of technological inefficiencies and power loss to the grids from those plants.

So they're not as efficient as, you know, technology we have today. In addition, something that I haven't really talked about very much, but we are incorporating monarch plantings. Um it's been part of our project um the entire time since the the first time we submitted our civil drawings. Um, but there are about 4,000 square feet of dedicated plantings, mainly milkweed. There's one area that's um a little wetter that we have to have a mix seed in that area, but that'll be dedicated for monarch plantings um throughout the life of the project as well. And I'm going to pass this off to my colleague.

So, we wanted to uh Xerox um we wanted to put this slide in here um just because some of the conversations around this project that are in the community um you know there's a sense that maybe Xerox you know is doesn't support the community. So we wanted to to put this up there to to kind of emphasize the fact that uh Xerox is dedicated to the community and want to do the best thing for Webster. Um, so on the left side is kind of the donations and the community outreach getting around the the volunteer hour hours that and volunteerism that Xerox employees do between United Way support um the Rochester Museum Science Center um for the Xerox consultant program where some of our engineers went into schools to teach kids.

Uh Operation Food Basket where every year we we uh collect food for um the needy. um the monthly bag lunch outreach um a bunch of other uh volunteer opportunities that Xerox does. Um and then in addition to that, just use of our campus for community benefits, different events, e-waste collection, um the Wilmont Cancer Center Institute Warrior Weekend, they're using our parking lots for that and tour to cure. Um so, you know, I'm not going to read through every every single thing there, but I just wanted to throw this in there just to to reiterate that Xerox, we're we're here for the community.

Uh the project we're doing we think is going to benefit the community. Uh we've looked at it. We it we don't we we have the necessary precautions in there to protect the community from any danger. So um yeah, that's it. Next slide. >> So um some some community outreach and responses. Um Oh, I'm sorry, Janice. This is your slide. >> Yeah, go for it. Sorry. General Health and Sydney. Uh we hi we put this slide together just because uh of some of the questions that we had been receiving from community members um and or others. Um just about the general health and safety of the project. Um all along the health and safety have been the highest priorities through the various phases design, construction, operation.

Um there is a commitment to protect nearby residents and the community. Um the continued compliance with all safety and environmental regulations will continue. Um third bullet down DEEC is this this is under their purview. Um and it and it won't change. Um as and as uh I think Katie had mentioned they provided a statement indicating that they don't see a concern with this project on this area of the site. Um, fourth bullet down, routine inspections, monitoring, and ongoing regulatory review that will continue. Um, it's required by Xerox per their permit to maintain all those um all those pieces.

Um, there are emergency response and contingency plans that are in place even before without the solar. Um, those will remain and there's additional that have been in placed um as part of the solar project. Um we've we've had various meetings um with the town board, HOA, there have been public public engagement sessions to try to make sure we we have heard feedback and are able to respond. Um and uh second section there just talks about just the design. It's been designed to prevent risk. Um minimal ground disturbance as we've talked about. We're not going to be penetrating the cap. Um we have storm water and erosion controls that are um of standard uh to make sure that there aren't any issues um with runoff or anything like that.

Um and and the site boundaries of this project are are well defined. Um there'll be fencing around the entire thing um with controlled access. Next slide. Um and just more along these lines of general health health and safety um the landfill cap um and the integrity of that um Xerox is already required to do annual inspections of that um any maintenance that's required um that will continue um the ballasted racking system the way um the way these panels are being supported um they can be moved if needed for any maintenance. Um, so there's no permanent fixed features that prevent future cap maintenance.

Um, I think we mentioned some ge geotechnical testing that had already been done um indicating that uh the the project should not um that the the project um was in with respectable tolerances um uh or acceptable tolerances for the cap. Um it's a multi-layered engineering cap. The cap is not just the asphelt on top. There's subbase beneath it. There's two feet of soil clay. So, and there's a geoteexile membrane. So, there is more than just that cap that's protecting exposure to the waste. Um, and again, if settlement or anything or any issues were to arise, the array can be removed and things and repairs can be made.

Um, in the last section there, groundwater remedial system protection. Um, we mentioned this before, but just wanted to reiterate it because there have been so many questions. Um, the project will not interfere with monitoring wells, recovery wells, the underground trench that we talked about. Those areas have been um cleared um from design elements of this from from the solar project. Um, we made sure there's adequate spacing for large pieces of equipment to come in and and maintain [clears throat] those wells um or any other features. Um so that will continue. Uh let's see the groundwater systems um they're not going to change that the the design from 30 years ago it's still it still stands and we will continue to monitor um as need um and make any changes as needed.

Um and again we we're going to continue to report these these things to the DEEC. Um they can provide comment as needed. That's under their purview. the the health and safety um protection of the environment and the public. Um yeah, thank you. [clears throat] Um I know another um hot topic issue is the um concern about um noise uh potential noise from the inverters. Um so I just want to take a moment to to talk about that. Um so the inverters again um like I mentioned were strategically located um in that southern corner of the project. Um and it's over a thousand feet away um from that uh property line to the uh to the northeast there and then about 1300 feet away from that property line to the northwest.

Um, you know, I've heard uh concerns that the project is in uh would not be in compliance um with the town um town code um regarding sound pressure levels. Um and I did look into this myself and I saw that um you know the town code is um evaluated at the receiving property line and not the equipment itself. So I just did want to point that out as well. And when assessed using the town's criteria, the projected noise levels um from this facility remain within all applicable levels. Um and there is also within the town code um a five decel um differential that can be added. And so we actually took the more conservative number um when we kind of looked at this to make sure it was within town code compliance.

Um so I just wanted to point that out as well. Um these these are ster sterile numbers too. So they don't account for ground absorption, um vegetation, trees, real world noise that also absorbs this. So um you know uh a 40 uh decibel um is is really not loud. It's like the um can't would uh fade into the regular background noise. So I just wanted to to be clear about that as well. Um and then another uh concern um if you go to the next slide um were just like environmental considerations. Um you know I've heard uh obviously the the project we've reviewed all of the um different environmental agencies that this project has been reviewed by.

Um but uh you know I know there was also concern about um clearing the area and like the um CO2 um emissions that would actually be saved by this project. And so Xerox did complete um a study. And just for the sake of the the project, we I know that I I heard a comment about um the trees maybe not not being mature. Um Xerox did assume that 14 of the 15 acres were mature trees in their study and one acre was not. Um so I just want to be clear about that as well about these numbers. Um but they found that um you know the project basically would um recover uh from CO2 or break even on that CO2 loss within three years and then exponentially um be a CO2 saver as well.

So um I believe this was provided to to the town board and I just wanted to point that out as well. Um and in addition um again envir this project was vetted heavily um by environmental agencies and we haven't received any negative environmental feedback there. Um and then again uh our team uh did create a website um about uh the project um just to um help uh the community have transparency about what's going on. Um so uh information can be found there. DEEC has also been really helpful. Um and I have uh this was actually all available at the community meeting um on uh the 27th of January, but there is an email specifically that you can reach out to from the DEEC for this project as well.

Um so I have that up there as well. Um and then I just want to pass it off to my colleague Kim. >> Hi, I'm Kim Nason with Philips Lidle. here to kind of close out the presentation and bring us back to the ask and the request that's before this board. Um so as Katie mentioned, we are here I know this is a work session this evening but on the industrial use permit application and the host community agreement um we've we've run through kind of the comprehensive process that this project has been to date even before getting to the town board um through the planning board through the DEEC through multiple rounds of public input.

Um in addition to the planning board site plan approval, the planning board did also recommend approval um of the industrial use permit that is a part of the code as well. Um this is a under the town solar code. This is a permitted use in at this site in this district um with the issuance of the industrial use permit which is required for any use that's being proposed in the industrial district. And there are very clear standards obviously in the code um laying out what the requirements are for an IUP. Um, and we respectfully submit that based on everything we've gone through the tonight, everything that's been um, submitted over the past several months in the record and in the town board filing that issuance of the IUP is appropriate.

Um, the project meets all the standards. It is well screened. It's appropriately buffered. It's fully monitored by DEEC uh, for potential impacts to landfill integrity. And it's a productive reuse of an industrial parcel that is otherwise not developable that will be a source of revenue for the town. And getting back to the IUP standards, the nature of its solar use doesn't um create additional demand for sewage, water, transportation resources, and it doesn't result in the types of off-site impacts that you're typically looking at within an IUP. Um whether that's, you know, dust, odor, light, um air emissions, noise.

So, it it's uh again, we respectfully submit that everything in the record shows we clearly meet those standards. But, you know, we're here tonight. We've given our our presentation. We thank everybody for bearing with us and we're here to answer any questions. To the extent that there are any questions raised this evening that we don't have answers to, we'll make sure to uh submit responses in writing in advance of the next meeting as well. >> Thank you. Um and John, you get first correct for questions because we cut you off, but uh please um you know it is 7:15 7:18 now. We will continue to answer all questions from the board.

We can start the work the town board meeting late. >> Um but Tony is available for questions as is. So my first question is going to go to the uh chairman of our planning board. Um Mr. Kashani, you had mentioned um that a weight impact study was done. >> Do you have a copy of that someplace? >> Do I have it? >> Did they provide you with the study of that? Yes. >> Okay. we can provide >> because what concerns me with respect to the weight comp the weight weight study is um did that study take into account the two 2014 tons of asphalt did it take that into consideration also or no >> yeah the what was what was existing or what is existing is there but they're putting the additional inch and a half was >> on top of that >> right that's going to be another 2015 >> area and they they did all the calculations on that and there is a record of it and they do have >> Yeah, cuz I'd like to have a copy of that study.

>> I think you could probably get that right. >> We have it on file. Yeah, I could get you a copy. >> Okay. I'd like to take a look at that. Um, with respect to the cap also, um, I have some concerns or questions. I have a lot of concerns. I'm not going to ask all my questions tonight because we'd be here till probably 8:30, 9 o'clock. So, I know that you will be coming back in again. So I I'll have additional questions at that time. Um but you had mentioned you know we're going to put the array on the cap using the ballast right? >> Am I correct or not? >> Okay. So I looked at the cap the existing cap and there is a significant amount of cracks on that cap.

So, I'm assuming that those will be addressed, I don't know, before you're just going to put the the inch and a half of asphalt on top of those cracks. >> So, the cracks have been addressed as part of our annual maintenance plan. We go in there, we look at that, and then we we reseal those cracks. So, that's done on an annual basis. Um, per the planning board's requirements where they want another inch and a half of asphalt on top of what's existing, right? Okay. Um, so we're going in and we're doing that before anything any any uh solar installation occur. >> So you're going to seal the cracks before you put cuz there ex there's existing cracks right now.

So you're going to seal them before you put the inch and a half on or after? >> It's we seal it up and then we put it on put it on on top of that. Yeah. Okay. >> We we our maintenance goes through and we reseal. So >> great. >> Yes. >> So asphalt is porous. A lot of us have asphalt drive driveways and this project is supposed to last for 20 years. Well, clearly that asphalt is not going to last for 20 years. So to your point with respect to maintenance, how are you going to maintain? If you got cracks running into the edge of the bast, it'll clearly be running underneath it without having to take all the panels out.

How do you maintain the maintenance? >> So firstly, if you know putting any additional asphalt or doing any changes to the cap, you know, we'll work with a with an asphalt contractor to make sure that Well, we would Xerox would work with an asphalt contractor to make sure the repairs are going to be done properly. Yeah. >> I'm just concerned about the main. >> Yeah. And then um as I indicated, the panels can be moved. I know you want to speak to that more, but they can be moved if needed. um if there's any more subst like if that's required otherwise you know we'd work around the we'd work around the um the panels there's enough clearance between panels to be able to do that >> and I'll just again speak I know we've we've touched a little bit on Xerox's permit and the obligations that they have under their site management plan but as part of that there's an environmental easement that runs with the site that provides DEEC access to the site um provides DEEC's procedures for ongoing maintenance uh making sure that the site management plan [snorts] is still in effect.

So DEEC can will also be monitoring that as well. >> Well, I and I totally agree and that's a great plan. I'm just looking at it from a logistics standpoint when you've got to get equipment in there because you're going to have cracks in that cap. It's eventually it's going to happen just due to the nature of asphalt. How do you get in there with a limited amount of room between these panels? remove the panels, remove any infrastructure that you need to remove with respect to the ballast that weighs 2,000 lbs each to address the faults in the asphalt. I mean, have you have you ever done this on any other site um that has a landfill that has a cap on it?

And what was the process with respect to, you know, addressing the cracks? Yeah, John, I think that last one was is a good point of like I think you've said you've done these projects before. Have you had instances before where you've removed equipment to receal? What does that look like? What's the threshold? >> Right. >> Etc. >> Yeah, sure. So, um to answer the first part of your question um about clearances and things like that, the edge of the panels will be a minimum of 24 in off the ground, which I get is not like high off the ground, but it is enough to be able to seal cracks and things like that.

Um, in addition, the ballasts themselves um are filled with rock. It's not a single ballast block, and it would be annoying to lift all the rocks out and to go in and do it, but it is but it is possible. Um, so so that that would be our plan. Um, in addition though, something that we've been kind of talking about um behind the scenes are um potential other um that uh issues. So like cracks might not even become an issue. Um and one of the things um that we have been um throwing around is uh an additional asphalt pad underneath the ballast. Uh it like the 1.5 in and then an additional 1.5 in under the ballast itself.

It's something that we would need to go back to the DEC for approval for. But if it is that uh concern of this board, we're happy to do that and to make that additional request to the DEC. >> I I honestly I sincerely don't mean to contradict what you just said. Okay. >> But I have to. I used to work in the asphalt business and driveways. That asphalt will crack eventually. You're talking about a project duration of 20 years. You will have cracks. It will run underneath the the ballast because asphalt is porous and it does rain and we get a lot of snow up here. So, it's going to it's going to have an impact.

It really is. And >> John, I'm going to interrupt you. I think might be a good idea for you to do is to get a copy of all that information just for the sake of time. >> Yeah, I'm I'm done. >> He's got it. No. No. But on underneath that there's a 15 inch certified clay, whatever that means. >> And then there's a membrane besides that can't penetrate. But Got it. >> That is all stuff that's in in your documentation. >> I get a copy of that from Josh probably. And >> no, I totally understand. And I'm just trying to address the maintenance of the asphalt itself. >> And just to reiterate, even though I think everyone understands this, as Katie mentioned, while it would be very annoying to take all the rocks out and have to move them, if there's a crack in the cap, that's an issue from DEC's perspective.

We're going to have to do that. >> So, it it will it has to be feasible and DEC oversees that. And that's part of the DMM4 guidance and the the process that's done. Again, solar on landfills is not a new concept. It's promoted by EPA and DEEC and there are guidance documents out there because issues like this have come up. So, it's something DEEC will be aware of. And again, we we have to we have to address a concern if it comes up as part of Xerox's obligations at the site. And >> and you said that you have done this on other sites that have asphalt over the landfill. Correct. We have done um a bunch of uh landfills um and brownfields uh throughout New York State.

Um we've never had to remove um any type of uh project from the landfill um that that I know of and I'll certainly double check with our head of construction just to make sure that that's the case. >> Yeah. I just want to make sure I I'm being specific. >> You've put solar panels on asphalt that covers a landfill. your company has >> uh we've done uh DEEC covered landfills not with an asphalt cap. Okay. We've done other DEC landfills throughout New York State, all different kinds. Yep. >> My question more specifically on that was >> were the landfills industrial waste landfills or the construction and debris landfills that these solar p panels are on in other locations across the state?

Um, I can get you a list if you of you if you'd like of all the different landfills that we're currently working on out and then like what the uh what type of landfill they are. >> That would be very helpful. Thank you. >> Absolutely. Be happy to. >> On the cap question, like so is there is there a written plan with with thresholds when you'd move it or is it just, you know, arbitrary? You're kind of seeing when it happens and the DC is going to tell you, you know, what's your process to handle this risk that the cap cracks? What's going to happen? Is it formally written or more informal? >> It's formally written into the plan that cap the cap is inspected on an annual basis.

If there are cracks that are observed, they need to be sealed on an annual basis. >> And that goes and that's that's a plan that is with the DEC and that's like that they they've they actually required Xerox and Mante to provide like what is that inspection frequency like what is that going to look like? that is actually part of the submittals that went to the to the DEC as part of the solar project. >> Okay. So, if I understand that as a as a non-engineer, so bear with me, the D says it's monitored. If the dcc sees a crack, they're going to tell you to seal it. You would then need to then take the ballast off and seal it and put it back on.

>> Not necessarily. It depends on the crack. Okay. >> Um so, it's going to have to depend. If if there's a if there's a concern where the DEEC says, you know, we don't like this crack, you need to move the panel, then that panel would have to be moved. >> And is there is there once again I don't know the answer to this. So is there a time frame on that? Would they say like you got to address this in 30 60 90 days or how does that work? >> I'm not they haven't established what the you know what the response time would be. Okay, >> correct me if I'm wrong, but we're also talking about safety protocols that have largely been in place since we covered the the landfill, you know, years and years ago.

So, what we're talking about for sake of the solar project is bringing it to the idea of what extra precautions we're taking in the installation and the maintenance of this for for sake of this meeting. I I just want to kind of clarify because it seems like we're getting into some of the semantics which is really important in terms of residents to make sure that everybody's safe, but also that's kind of a regular concern for Xerox with this property given the the history. So I I would bring it back a little bit to, you know, when it comes to the maintenance, the the safety aspect, we're doing a lot of the testing through the the wells throughout the property.

Um, so for sake of the resident, I I imagine that's going to be where your red flags would come up and the regular monitoring of these wells to make sure that there's no particles in the ground flow. Um, so I guess I would say, you know, what is there any additional precautions with the construction of the project to kind of do some extra testing through those wells just to make sure for sake of the residents in the area that there isn't any contamination. um just to kind of give a little extra kind of credence and environmental value as the construction starts if that if that makes sense. >> So we're currently doing monthly um sampling from the the ground wad the trenches.

So we're sampling on a monthly basis those um the concentrations for any sort of VOCC's and we're monitoring that and looking for trends. Um as far as the cap goes, I just want to re reiterate the asphalt's not the only um layered there. there's multiple layers of impermanmeable material. Um so it's not like that's the only layer there. And then we have so it's a whole there's a slew of different engineering controls to prevent migration of any sort of those contaminants um with you know the we do the regular testing of the land the uh wells that are collecting the groundwater that um themselves and then the ones that are going to the POTW are is on a monthly basis for our permits.

So yeah, there's a a whole list of different controls to prevent any sort of human health. >> I just want to point out and I appreciate you sharing that it it isn't the concern that there isn't controls. We know there's monthly controls in place. The questions are more aligned to the complications of maintaining the monthly controls with all of the, you know, solar panels on there and the ballast and complications that that >> then creates on that site. I have I have a bunch of questions >> just to that statement. I'd say that this project has been designed that it's not going to impact those controls.

I mean, we we took out solar panels so we could have access to our wells. We made sure that, you know, there's nothing interfering with our current operations. So, it's the the area around our remedial activities um is where these solar panels are being put. >> So, when this when this comes back for approval, what would be good to see? I'm sure it's going to be on there, but where the panels are laid out where the access is going to be um when and also the trees because there was mention of the trees that there's a lot of small trees. There's also mature trees cuz I walked back there to kind of check out the lay of the land and it isn't like there's one acre in one spot of mature trees.

The mature trees are throughout. And I will agree most of the trees back there are very small or smaller in size. My big question when you talk about not disturbing the land is it's not flat over there. It's very it's a it's on a hill. There's and I'm not sure because I don't know what I was looking at but there's the I'm guessing it's the CN D landfill. There's a big mound. Is that all going to be taken out and leveled? >> Nope. Nope. Not at all. So, the panels will be set over like mounded areas and nonflat areas. >> What I can do, because I know that we're kind of tight on time here, um what I can do is actually have um in our civil design pulled out for you like the specs on how um specifically we're handling the area um with the topography.

>> How are you going to address the cutings of the trees? Because when I look at your plan and you know, the outline of the plan, you know, I I did a >> [clears throat] >> little field trip and there's a lot of mature trees there and I don't without clear cutting I don't understand how you're going to get those solar panels so there's got to be what I would presume a significant amount of clear cutting and there's a lot of mature trees there a lot >> I I do want to be clear we are clear cutting that area is about 15 acres of trees that are going to be removed um what we aren't doing is soil disturbance so the larger tree will we get in with a bush hog of what we can but then they have to be handfelled um because we can't disturb the soil so the roots can't be taken out um so I think that was the uh distinction that was trying to be made >> all right in the interest of time any further questions can be submitted um to you guys I believe you have they've reached I know they've reached out to each and every one of you >> um >> so when will we have time so we're going to email them questions >> yep that's why we're not doing a vote tonight >> and then what's going to happen after that >> after that after you email the questions you get the questions back from them they answer them.

>> Okay. And then what? Then we get to discuss this as a board. We ask them that's how the system works. >> What also works we get to ask our questions in the public that are here. Correct. >> If it takes a little bit longer, it takes a little bit longer. Right >> Garrett, we have to maintain our time frame here. It is >> truthfully, but this is important to residents though. Like >> this is a big decision that will forever change Webster. And should we rush it or Yeah. I mean, would I like to get home before 10 o'clock tonight for my daughter? Absolutely. >> But I wasn't elected to get my daughter to bed on time.

I was elected to represent everyone in Webster and sometimes it takes time. >> We've done it before in past meetings over and over. >> We have done past times, but the fact is is we're asking the same questions over and over again. So, please answer. >> We are. >> Yeah. >> I respectfully got to disagree with that one. >> Disagree. >> I wrote these I wrote these questions down and I haven't I have not asked any of these questions in previous meetings. >> Yeah. Well, there are also meeting minutes from the previous ones about questions asked. Again, ask your questions and we are going to be discussing this as a board which is why we are not following the vote tonight.

We also want to give the residents time to reach out to them with any additional questions. >> Yeah, it just takes time. >> Can we ask a few more questions? We got another 15 20 minutes here. >> In the interest of democracy and representing the people of Webster or is the time that important that we can't [clears throat] >> We do have a very long agenda tonight is the other issue that we have and this is not the last time they're back. >> [snorts] >> They have also reached out to you multiple times and you have ignored them. So I want to bring that to light. >> Is that really the best approach to take here?

>> Wow. >> So I should not rely on the advice of council when it comes to when to ask questions. >> No, is that what you're saying here, Alex? >> I'm saying that what you need to do is have a time. >> What are you saying here? >> But that's the problem right now is this is a workshop for for the town board. We have had multiple opportunities. We have set the time that we needed to be respectful of everybody's time here because they did come out from Buffalo as well. >> When they come back, if we need to extend the time, we we will extend the time at that. >> Well, when they come back, there's no time frame.

There's no time set at the next one. So, we have >> There's technically no time set tonight either. >> Well, there is when our town board meeting is supposed to be taking place at 7:30, but >> there's no time for the workshop, so it goes when it goes. I mean, Alex, if your stance here is this isn't important enough to spend the time here and it should be done via emails in private and come later and we should rush this and you should question the advice of council publicly, then that's your stance. >> It is not my stance a fair position, Garrett. I I think it said though that's exactly what he's saying.

>> I I don't necessarily think that that's the case. I I think Alex for for where we are right now it's worthy to take a few more questions since we have people here but we are wanting to be responsible to those residents that are here. We have a meeting set at 7:30. So the idea is that that's a reasonable thing to do. But for sake of now I I'm I'm on board with saying let's answer a few more questions while we have everybody here. Um and it sounds like there's some agreement to that. So I I move >> can we lift to 750? How's that? That gives you 12 minutes to answer ask add additional questions.

>> I'll do my best to be efficient with the time in the interest of all those people that live in Webster. >> Why don't we give the residents a chance to ask >> because the residents this is a town board workshop. The residents have had um can had the community event previously. They can ask questions afterwards. Um I know they've reached out to us that we have sent their concerns that have gone to them. So this is for the town board. Unfortunately, it's the system. So please Councilman Wagner. >> Next up, so just some clarification. Um during the planning board's final approval meeting, there was the discussion about adding approximately 1.5 inches of the axle cap.

And at time the response was the engineering team from Monte could look into it and the response was that wasn't needed. So was the engineering team from Monte redone the engineering with that extra one and a half inch of cap on there after the planning board approval. So, um, we discussed it with DEEC and, um, I mean, Janice is speaks the language better than I do, but essentially DEEC said that the 1.5 spread over the I think 2 and a half acres was minimal, that they didn't require us to redo the geotech. They weren't concerned about it. >> Okay, thank you. You're with me while I look for to narrow down my questions in the interest of time.

That's Oh, here's a question. You're trying to understand the risk and how it changes the landscape from what it was before to this. You know, we've got rain water coming in right now. The cap's designed to to flow the rainwater off. The solar arrays obviously form along drip lines. How does that change in the drip lines and the flow of water off the panels impact the cap? >> It shouldn't imp it. I don't I guess I don't fully understand the question. The drainage features will remain. >> Yeah. So, you're saying that the solar panels over this cap are not going to impact the drainage features without it.

Zero change or wouldn't it be any change? I mean, I'm not an engineer. I'm just trying to understand. >> Yeah. So, based on the evaluation that was done with the geotechnical testing and there were safety factors that were involved, um any settlement that was observed was within acceptable tolerances. >> Okay. We've talked about the cap, talked about the monitoring, the visual impact. Oh, another one. I know this is a big concern about residents is property values. So, right now your stance is once this goes in, it would not impact property values negatively. Yeah, there was an article that um I think residents were pointing to that had property values across a whole bunch of different situations and that article actually showed that for brownfields where development happens, property values, nearby property values go up.

Um it's a benefit to the community >> and and can I just jump in real quick? >> Yeah, go ahead. I think um along the lines of property values, I'll just speak to some of the additional analysis that was done. Some of it based on public feedback, some of it just as part of the regular application process, but I think we've demonstrated that there um won't be aesthetic impacts because of the screening and significant setbacks. Same on the noise side of things. So things that you may think um of, you know, from a more intensive industrial use that would impact nearby properties, we've demonstrated are not um occurring with this project as well.

It would >> go ahead. Sorry. >> Sorry. I thought you were >> Am I good? >> Yep. >> When you come back, it would be helpful when you share all of the areas where there are solar arrays on capped landfills to also provide information about property values or sales around those arrays to show or to demonstrate that there is in fact no impact of property values around those sites. of other projects. >> Yes. >> Referencing >> of other projects to demonstrate that it does not have a negative impact on property values >> just to have that data point because if >> and and heaven forbid it does change them.

Is there any mechanism that we available to the residents to account for that? >> Can you say that again? Sorry, M. >> If it does decrease the values of the properties, is there any mechanism to adjust for that with the residents? So, our position would be that it's not causing decreases in property values and that solar projects generally do not. Um, but again, we've got a situation here. We have where we have a very large parcel, very significant setbacks um from the project here. But again, I'll point to a couple things. One, this is an industrial zone site. We're not talking about a large-scale industrial development.

um but also the host community agreement and what we talked about in terms of of dollars to the town, revenue to the town on a site that is is otherwise undevelopable. So that's not, you know, a a direct uh tie to property values, but it is revenue to the town from this project that otherwise wouldn't be coming from this this nature of this site and everything we're talking about today. >> Yeah. With respect to your host agreement, I have yet to see a draft, so I I don't know what where we are as far as that goes. Um you are correct from east to west there is there is screening but it does back up when it hits the point there's it's a residential area behind that.

So there is there is some impact and from a lot of the research that I've done and and not so much this type of of of a solar project which is smaller than some of the the other larger ones downstate but they most certainly have seen property values on average decrease by 7% from the information that I've read. So I I just find it hard to accept a blanket statement that it solar panels don't have impacts on property values because the information I've read it does. >> We're we're happy to prepare prepare a response and be prepared to talk about it a little bit more next time with more data. >> Thank you so much.

>> And then you know as we think about this from the long-term impact for residents, you know, I'm trying to understand the flow. DC sets the rules. Xerox is responsible for monitoring remediation, right? What happens if unfortunately Xerox is no longer in the picture or involved? You know, if something happens with Xerox and ownership changes or stuff like that happens, what happens then? Who then goes responsible if it's not Xerox? Who's the next person in line? >> As part of their record permit for the facility, they're required to establish a it's like a financial reserve mechanism. It's called financial assurance uh for 30 years continued operation if they're no longer >> Xerox is >> existent.

>> Yes. >> Yep. >> Has that been established or now? >> Yes. >> Oh. Oh, that's been established for decades. Yep. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> And and then just going back to the environmental easement that lays out the um you know obligations for the site for operation, maintenance, monitoring requirements that runs with the land. So if someone else were to come in and acquire it, those obligations apply to them. >> So can we get a copy of that reserve that's been in place with Xerox to understand. >> Yeah, we can we can provide that's we go to the state on an annual basis DEEC reviews it of all our financial documentation so I can get you a copy of our our last submitt.

>> Okay, >> fantastic. >> Thank you. So in the interest of time, Alex, Alex, do you have any questions for them? >> Yeah, my only question is do you have an agreement with RG& on hookup time yet? >> Uh we do have an interconnection agreement executed with RG&. We have had our on-site meeting. We won't have a time of when it's going to be interconnected until we give them a start of construction date. So, we're going through the approval process now. We're not able to give them one at this time. We do expect though the project to be interconnected um before um October of 27 though. >> Okay. Just because our takes forever.

And then uh environmental incidental insurance. Do you have environmental incidental insurance where you basically get a payout if if there is a breach? Um, our building inspector had looked into this that there if there is a breach, it's insurance to basically recover any damages that may have occurred to the town. >> Um, let me look into that for you. I just don't know the answer off the top of my head for you right now. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> that's a great question, by the way, because who would who would be responsible if there was a breach? Would it be Xerox or would it be Monte? I think it would depend on like the nature of the breach.

Yeah. >> Yeah. But that's why we have the that's why there's the environmental insurance which I wanted to make sure they had. >> Thank you so much for your patience this evening. I really appreciate >> one more one more quick question I promise. Going back to the DC letter, you know, noted there'll be additional submissions and final plans to the agency and the DC reserves the right to revisit the determination yada yada. um what additional information still needs to be provided to the DEEC before construction can be proceeded if this moves forward? >> Sure. So, um the panels for our project haven't been secured yet because they're millions of dollars.

Um and obviously we're not going to secure them until we have approvals for our project. Um so, we gave them uh the panels that we think we're going to get and we have to submit them final snow and wind load pal calculations. Um panel sizes um do differentiate a little bit but not significantly. DEEC is comfortable with this. They don't think that any of the differentials are going to have a significance on the geotech report. Um, and then also just like our our final drawings once we get through this approval and make sure there are no changes in in anything. >> Does anybody know how many times the de a representative of the DEEC actually did a site visit for this project?

>> They were here. They were here last year. >> We walked them through the site. They came down. >> So they've been they've been here. We showed them where the landfill the landfill and the solar installation. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And then I just want to add one quick point. I because I know we're we're out of time and I I thank you guys for taking all the time with us this evening. But um to the extent there are any questions and you want to send them to me via email, what I'll do is compile them all with our responses and not only file them with you guys, but we can put them on the website too.

So if there's any questions that the public can see our responses to those as well. >> Yeah. Thank you to all four of you for the time and answering these questions. This is a big decision. We just want to do our best and we have the residents to understand it because it's really, you know, the solar is part of this, but there's so many other parts of the town that don't involve solar. So, I really appreciate your time here. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> All right. With that, uh, we will conclude the town board workshop for March 5th, 2026. Uh, and it is before the 750 deadline. So come.