Video recording

>> Councilwoman Wright >> here. >> Attorney for the town Taylor >> here. >> All right. And this is why it's always first because it is my favorite time of the meeting. It is the open to the floor where each speaker will be allowed up to five minutes uh from the podium. Um we have a lot of veterans in the room tonight. So I'll go through this quick. my three rules of decorum, I'll call them. Um, one is that, uh, we only have the person at the podium speaking, people in the crowd. We don't want cat calls, things of that nature. We're a civilized, uh, society. Um, two, five minutes. Please time out what you're about to to say up there because I hate having to say you're at 4 minutes and 50 seconds because there's no nice way to say it without people getting mad at me.

So, please don't put me in that position. Um, and third is that if you go up to the podium and you ask one question of the town board or you ask 50 questions, we are not under any obligation to answer those. But I will say this, we will get you uh before the end of the night in into the right hands of department heads or subject matter experts to get those answers to you uh hopefully by tomorrow. So, uh I think those are the three rules of decorum. Did I miss anything? I don't think so. All right. So, first up is Chris Naka. A clean shaven Chris Naka. May I >> semi clean. >> I wonder how long that will last.

>> H you'll have to come back and report to us how long it lasted. >> I will give you the uh Chris review on the no-name razor that I bought. Christopher Naka 1065 Shoecraft Road. Good evening everyone. Um, I didn't have much planned, but in the last meeting I did write down a few things. Sorry, Jen. It is about the uh trendy storage containers. Um, so the Sandbar Grill, it would be really nice if we when we were looking for vendors to maybe set in how much these people were going to be getting paid that were working there. My only concern is that if one of the people across the street making $16 an hour at one of the fast food places decided they did not want to eat fast food that night and they went over to the sandbar to eat, maybe bring a date, how many days of pay is it going to cost them to eat there?

you know, is if um if we're going to be saving all of this money, having it be the storage containers, who's going to be uh kind of earning in that saving? Is it going to be just the vendors? Is it just the town and taxes? Um who's going to benefit from those being constructed there? And uh cuz if we're going off the brick and mortar, I mean, I know we're saving money, but if [snorts] we were to look at the brickandmortar restaurants that we have, I don't think too many of them, to my point, are paying that much. So, you know, a bit of job security. I understand at the location it can't be full-time necessarily.

It is more of a seasonal uh thing regardless of whatever gets put there. [snorts] Um, what about just like uh a bunch of public grills that people could use? You know, like that'd be way cheaper. You put some sand down, maybe build a little playground, put in 15 to 20 public grills. People could [snorts] gather their own resources and go down there with the family and save a little while they experience life in the town where it's worth living. [snorts] And uh yeah, that's that's about all I got on that. Thank you, >> Chris. Thanks. >> All right. Well, Chris is was the first of what looks like eight signed in speakers tonight.

I like my numbers. I like my stats. Um, five of the eight, so five of the next seven have written down they're here to talk about 799 Holt Road, which has a resolution tonight on the agenda to set a public hearing on that site for December 4th, which is 28 days from today. So, I just wanted to make sure that people as they go up to talk about this understand that the resolution tonight is to set a public hearing where I would hope that all the speakers for or against it would come back in 28 days and speak to it at the public hearing. So, with that being said, John Langino, you are next. Hi, I'm John Lagambino, 784 Maple Drive, and I'm here to speak in opposition of the board rushing through the plans that will result in the development of the whole road project.

What's going on in Webster is that a bipartisan residents the bipartisan residents share one strong belief that the town is fully o built out. Residents, let me stress the bipartisan label again. and residents don't want any more forest or farmland destroyed. How you as a board have failed to act on this, have failed to put the development moratoriums or to change priorities for the planning board. This lack of action finally played out at the voting booth. Development is our number one local issue. Those of you who are finishing board terms, you have the opportunity to take a strong stance against further unrestricted development.

vote to move the public hearing regarding the whole road property to December 18th. Those whose terms are not ending, do you know what the saying that one unhappy customer tells 10? Do you not realize that overdevelopment in every is in every neighbor's over the fence conversation in this town? Start representing residents. This is what you were elected for. Thanks. Thank you, John. [applause] >> Next up is Charlotte Kabili. Hi, I'm Charlotte and I just want to say ditto. Uh so thank you for those eloquent remarks and I wanted to be another voice to reinforce that if we can postpone the hearing.

Um that would be awesome on Holt Road. And I also wanted to put in a request again to uh make available if not already available the survey results and comprehensive plan meeting minutes from September 17th, September 18th. Make those available online. there was a lot of good content that was covered there. Um and then also a request to make sure there's some advanced time on those upcoming meetings about the comprehensive plan. It's a really um hot issue. I think we all many people care about it and I just would like to see a little bit more uh information. Um [snorts] I think those are my remarks.

Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Charlotte. Okay, we're two the first two speakers said something about moving the public hearing that to the 18th. I I want to just clarify something else before the next uh three get up on Holt Road. Uh and Diana, I conveyed this to you today. The board, if there's a public hearing on the 4th of December, would never vote on December 4th. Minimally, we would vote December 18th. And as I said, I'm mindful to the fact that there is a transition of the board into January. So that will be taken into effect as to a vote on the 18th of December. So just some more information for people who are about to take the podium for or against the Holt Road thing.

So next up is Bruce Winters. I'm Bruce Wyers, 20 Downing Avenue in the village. Um, in a previous meeting, I spoke about the uh Sandbar Park and complimented the board on what I thought was just an absolutely magnificent improvement in that area. Uh, however, I do want to add that um I'm opposed to the uh concept of a shipping container down there. Um, I did look up on Google some examples of shipping containers. There's quite a variance in what you can do, but nevertheless, they're kind of an albatross when you see it sitting down there in that beautiful park. And I just I'm opposed to it. and a friend who's in Florida and can't be here, Charlie Conrose, uh, wanted me to speak his sentiments, which are the same.

Thank you. Thank you, Bruce. Next up is Dorothy Fate. >> Dorothy Fate, 742 High Tower Way. Uh board members, thank you for the opportunity to present my concerns regarding the uh PDD for the uh lumberyard property. Um I'm opposed to establishment of a PDD for the lumberyard property. U the property already has a EPOD designation and as such it's already been designated as a property that is sensitive environmental area within the town of Webster. In order to establish a PDD, the town board must according to our code outline how the establishment of a PDD shows a plan that is in harmony with the comprehensive plan.

The development of this property per the presented site plan is in direct contradiction to our comprehensive plan. Specifically, this property was designated as a property of interest for open space preservation in every parcel review completed. I'm asking the board to honor our comprehensive plan and I will contend that there is a silent majority of Webster residents and maybe not such a silent majority um who view the preservation of mature undisturbed treed parcels as critical to the aesthetic qualities of Webster. Secondly, the town board must show how the development of this parcel meets community needs according to our town code in order to grant that PDD.

The board has not provided any hard data to substantiate that this development meets the current needs of Webster residents. This proposed development combined with the development of the 5acre wooded lot next to Bird Song Trail, the clearcut woods along Publishers Parkway for the McKelpin Industries, and the approved preliminary site plan review of Willowpoint Town Homes, which are adjacent to ecologically sensitive property on the steep slopes of Arandquite shoreline, speak to the incredible development pressure the town is now experiencing. I would once again ask the board to consider passing a moratorum on any new ground development until Webster residents have had more opportunities to participate in an updated comprehensive plan.

The balance between growth and preservation of natural undisturbed space is an obligation of our elected officials and I ask that your discernment about these issues consider the wishes of many of the residents of Webster. Thank you. >> Thank you. And next up is Diana Davis. Succulent. >> Hi guys. >> That's the flower by the way, just in case people took that the wrong way. Um, it is a succulent, right, Betty? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. >> It's okay. I grew up in the 90s. That was compliment. >> Okay. Well, fine. >> All right. Um, so well, thank you guys for reading all of your emails over the past 24 hours.

I appreciate that and you know it's good to see you all again. Um, so yeah, just to recapitulate, I think, you know, my biggest issue with this is um is the timing obviously as you guys know. Um, I I am aware that this is just a resolution to determine um a date for the public hearing. Um, as such, you know, my nervousness about this is that, you know, it's just the first step down a road, which is by no means the only way of achieving the developers aims or what is best for this property. Um, having only just seen the modified plan, um, you know, the Webster Open Space Committee, we're going to be meeting with them, um, to talk further.

I I'm concerned that um any any issuance of a public hearing date, particularly if we issue it for December 4th, does leave open the slim possibility of determining a PDD vote prior to the incoming board in January. Um, if you know, as Tom said, you know, you're mindful of the ethics surrounding that and the fact that that's not maybe necessarily, you know, the most ideal course of action, I I see no reason why not just modify the resolution to set the public hearing for December 18th. That gives us time to meet with Jerry um the public two more weeks to see these modified plans to consider a potential alternative.

Um my concern with the PDD as the only course of action is because the PDD is tied to the site plan, not the site plan, sorry, the site itself, the parcel, um there is no kind of uh recourse if the developer then subsequently decides to expand the site plan. So not accusing of any dishonesty here but just the concern that there could be a situation whereby the PDD is issued and then a plan subsequent to that is produced which is by no means as ecologically sensitive. So that's that's my concern. And the other point that I would say is, and I understand there's maybe a conflicting legal interpretation of this, is that I did um you know, just seek legal advice on whether or not the town board was actually obligated to set the public hearing at this time um or whether it would be within its remit.

And you know, and I'm sure Jerry understands the timing here is is pretty sensitive. whether it would be within its remit to either table the resolution or as I'm saying just modify it so that the public hearing is two weeks subsequent to that um ensuring that a vote would not take place before the incoming board and honestly you know by no it's by no means guaranteed or or even biased against it that the incoming board would be biased against such such a consideration I just think personally ethically speaking it's better to let that incoming board determine this But anyway, sorry that was a sidebar.

The legal uh advice that I received uh was very much of the opinion that the town board is not obligated to set the public hearing at this time. I am not a lawyer. I don't understand some of this jargon. Um but given that this is a legislative action um which the board has no obligation to take action on that was the opinion that was communicated to me which you guys should all have that letter communicating that. Um so I would say that you know if you were disposed to listen to my plea to table the resolution or otherwise modify it you would be well within your rights to do so. Um, and unfortunately the lawyer whose counsel I sought could not be here tonight because of uh conflicting plans or something.

Um, so you know that's unfortunate because um, again I'm not a lawyer so I can't explain the standpoint but you know he's fairly well respected and I and I trust his opinion. So that would be what I would ask. either table the resolution or modify it so that the public hearing is not on the 4th and I don't have to stress. Thank you guys. >> Thank you. Just to your point. >> Yeah. >> Um I I did consult our attorney and we are legally obligated according to the law and code to set a public hearing on this issue. >> Okay. >> I am not >> certain whether we are obligated to the date. >> Right. That's what I would >> I agree with you that we should allow the opportunity for the vote to take place with the new board coming in.

It's a significant vote. >> Um I'm not adverse to changing the date to December 18th. >> That would make me >> I I'm I'm not adverse to in in all fairness, right? >> It's something that I feel that we should consider. >> Right. Thank you. I appreciate that. Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks, Diana. And next up is Peter Elder, >> who's probably sleepdeprived. >> Yes. But that's okay because lots of different hats and sometimes that happens. So, I um I'm just coming before you tonight. I want to first of all, 59 Dunning Avenue, Village of Webster. I want to come before you tonight just to thank you for your service.

Um you have a very tough job to do. I I know that for certain and making these decisions is difficult. Um I am here tonight with some bias towards the open space committee because I've been involved with it for a long time and work closely with Diana and I do want to encourage you um to consider moving the date to December 18th. I think that it is a better look for the board and a better look for the process. I don't think those two weeks or so will make much difference in um any sort of uh the application or the applicant. Um, [clears throat] and I also think that it would allow more time um for the public to inter to um interact with um the open space committee and other interested residents prior to the public hearing.

The other thing I would say is this that tonight, largely due to Diana's efforts, this kind of is a public hearing. You're getting a good sense of what much of the public considers already. So, you have kind of a barometer to look at um in terms of of delaying that for two weeks. So, I would encourage you to do that. And finally, I would also like to mo mo mention that it's great that you have a comp the comprehensive plan moving along. I think it's wonderful, but I also think that in context, this is a reasonzoning within the context of considering a comprehensive plan, which is a little unusual, right?

So, if you think about it long enough, the comprehensive plan itself is the guideline for different zones that different zoning that might occur once it's implemented. So, it does bear some additional time um to look at the a project like this while the comprehensive plan is being considered. Anyways, thank you so much for listening tonight and have a good night. >> Thanks, Peter. >> And the last one who signed in is Kevin Lockhart. [clears throat] >> Hi everybody. Thank you. uh Josh for handling the American flag issue. That was very impressive. I wanted to also follow up and ask if the comprehensive plan committee meeting is committees are meeting privately or not and if so then what are the results of those meetings to be productive towards creating a comprehensive plan steering committee or comprehensive plan for 2026 or whatever 2040 or whatever you call it.

the website hasn't been updated, but this week, uh, just so that was point number one. And then point number two, I wanted to just appreciate Jenny for I don't think I've ever said her name out loud. Sorry, Jenn. Jenny. >> That's okay. >> Or Oh, thank you. >> Yes. So, um, but Jenny was amazing as a town board member. I think just modeled and exemplified the characteristics of a very good, uh, town board member for the town of Webster. So, I know it's tough being a town board member or administrator and getting everybody's grief all the time and nobody's ever happy about anything, but I just wanted to express how uh grateful I am and acknowledge that the board has historically leaned more conservative and in favor of the people because where the I also then want to move on and state how terrified I am [laughter] for the future of Webster and the what I view personally as inevitable changes coming uh changes perpetrated by in this case voting Democrats and their fixation with Trump which I find just absolutely suffocating and toxic.

I think it was a huge mistake this week for Webster to elect Democrats potentially to the town board. That's a devastating shift in representation away from the people of Webster most likely in my opinion and towards the global democrat ideology which will subvert us all. We had a critical public safety incident in Webster. The paroleles that were released from the prison came into Webster and they were a five-time convicted felon and stabbed somebody on Royal Sunset Lane in the 700 block. So, I don't have confidence that, God forbid, a Democrat town super or town supervisor, no offense, Tom, but would have a any approach to public safety measures in the Webster more so than what we ourselves self-govern and insist upon.

Um, furthermore, more of a declaration. The town of Webster is not we're not Monroe County. We're not New York State and we're not Rochester. What we are and what we have accomplished for many years is to be a unified board. Um, we've stopped we accomplished things. We stopped this alone tower development in Webster. No one from town board, as far as I'm aware, accused anybody of disinformation, Trumpism, any anything any of those extra frills that they add on. So, that was amazing to see. I don't think if even one Democrat were on the board, that that would have that the cell phone tower would have been stopped, the new American flag, as I mentioned.

We also do the pledge of allegiance. I think those are two things that are instantly going to end up out the door, uh, if, god forbid. Alex, go on, Tom. Do you want to say something? >> I I just I have more faith in in Since you want to interrupt me since we're answering questions now. Did you go on? >> Let me ask you a question from from one of the residents in Webster. >> Did you go on to the Brothers We show and say that I'm mentally ill on the radio? >> Keep going, Kevin. You got 30 extra seconds. >> Did you Let me ask you another question. >> I already told you I'm not answering questions.

Three years ago, were you the one involved in having the Webster Town police come and mental health arrest me while I was at the laundromat, inevitably becoming one of the most terrifying experiences of my life. >> You're getting down to your last couple of seconds here. >> I'm I'm I'm holding the floor. Actually, this is going to be a filibuster. >> Well, then we're, you know, that's going to be >> Look, look, look, Tom. Let's rewind. 30 seconds, okay? And let's get back to the point of orders. For 200 years, our priority as a town was always the same. Public safety, public education, safe traffic infrastructure, and a lower cost of living.

We have to govern ourselves accordingly. Thankfully, because Pete Elder handles almost everything in town. Is Pete here? Almost everything. By the way, thanks for leading us to a devastating loss, Pete. I'm very upset that you're the county GOP >> Kevin >> the county GOP chairman for the board of elections >> Kevin >> simultaneously you're the you're the county GOP >> chair for the Republicans >> Kevin Kevin this is really simple >> no you either stop right now or you guys for many many years take out have subverted democracy >> we're going to have the police come to take him out >> you've sub you've subverted democracy threatened the taxpayers I'm being perfectly peaceful and you can't talk.

Look at him. No. Shift the cameras toward his direction. He's upset and he's calling the police. What are you going to do, Tom? You're going to call the police and tell him that I'm No. Go right ahead. Call the 911 call center. >> You're going to be removed. >> Oh, I'm going to be removed in the town of Webster. Am I >> You want a court case, don't you? You want to get sued personally? >> I'll make a motion to take a break. >> Uh, yes. >> To uh Banning Drive, the Webster courthouse. We need a police officer to >> There's no second. It's not a motion. >> I just made a motion yesterday. >> Oh, thank you, John.

>> From the town courtroom. >> Take a roll, >> please. >> You guys are severely disregulated. >> Yes, it's the Webster town courthouse. >> Kevin. Kevin. >> All those in favor? >> Kevin, just go sit down, sweetie. >> What? >> Just go sit down, Jen. >> Kevin, >> please. >> Thank you. All right, I withdraw the motion. >> Actually, you know what? We're all set. The the gentleman has decided to stop. >> No, I guess then maybe maybe you know what >> we're gonna we're gonna do this. >> Please, >> Kevin. >> Um, yes. >> Have the have the police officer come. >> Uh, Ridge Road. Yes, that is correct. And what's the suspect look like?

>> Uh, suspect's name is Kevin Lockheart and he's wearing a gold sweatshirt. >> White, Hispanic, >> Caucasian. [cough] [clears throat] >> Yes. But actually right now he is subdued and behaving. So we hopefully will not need him to be physically removed. But when I was making this call, it looked like we were going to have to. That would be great. That would be great. >> No, the the former the former. >> That would be great. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'm Supervisor Tom >> Flity. >> All right. Thank you. Okay. Um we will proceed on. Is there anybody else that would like to take the podium who didn't sign in tonight for the five minutes open to the public?

Um, that is it. Uh, that is it. Uh, >> attempt to have next for speaking during a public >> because you didn't like what I have to say. You're setting yourself up for a good lawsuit. >> I can't wait. Um, so the next item up tonight is the minutes to be considered for approval from the October 16th board meeting. And I have reviewed the workshop minutes and I make a motion that we approve those. >> Second. Supervisor Flity. >> I, >> Councilman Cahill, >> I. >> Councilwoman Katali, >> I. >> Councilwoman W. >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright, >> I. >> And the regular town board meeting from October 16th.

I've reviewed those minutes and make a motion that we uh approve those. >> Second. >> Supervisor Flareity. >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataly. >> I. >> Councilwoman Cahill. >> I. >> Councilwoman Wyn. >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright. I >> Okay. Who looked at the bills today? >> Me. >> All right. Jenny rattled off. >> I have looked over the bills um with directors um financial directors and everything seem to to be in order. I would like to make a motion to pay the bills. Please second. Councilwoman W. >> I. Councilwoman Wright >> I. >> Supervisor Flity. >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataly >> I. Councilman Cahillo.

>> I >> And I went over the prepaid warrants submitted by Paul Adams, the director of finance, and I make a motion that we approve those. >> Second, >> Supervisor Flareity, >> I. >> Councilwoman W. >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataly, >> I. >> Councilman Cahill, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright, >> I. >> And I went over the purchase orders as submitted by Paul Adams, director of finance, and make a motion that we approve those. >> Second. Supervisor Flareity. >> I, >> Councilwoman Cataldi, >> I. >> Councilwoman Cahill, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wyn, >> I, >> Councilwoman Wright, >> I. >> The next two, I think, uh, where is Oh, Paul, you want to give any >> commentary?

I know you sent it out to the board. >> An overview of the next two. >> Yeah. >> The [clears throat] next two resolutions are to make some revisions to the procurement policy and the investment policy. In regard to a procurement, uh the most significant change is we uh we d we define specifically professional services in guideline three and that we're actually in the future going to require RFPs if the annual cost of professional service is $50,000 or more. Um we added a definition of public works in guideline four. Uh, in guideline five, we actually changed the purchase order threshold for public works purchases from 3,000 to 8,000 um from 3,000 to $800.

That makes it consistent with our standard purchases and it's actually going to make it easier when we go electronic for purchase orders and uh invoice approvals. uh guideline six actually um I had some additional wording and we had an explanation of what best value is and explained why best value is not allowed for public works contracts. Uh guideline 12, we we uh revised the list of public officials. And guideline 19, we actually um added in conjunction with appendix D, we added uh some wording to provide the procedures for the approval and procurement of contracts that require town board resolutions.

Uh so that revised appendix D as well. In regard to the investment policy, we just made some revisions to the depository listings. In other words, to the banks that we do business with. Uh we added community bank. It is now currently fairly active in the government market. Uh Evans Bank has become NBT Bank. So, we made that change. And uh we deleted the New York Liquid Asset Fund because that merged with New York Class. So that's pretty much the changes in summary. So we have two resolutions. >> So Paul, I just wanted to um to thank you very much for your revising and changing of the procurement policy, especially um guideline number three, professional services.

I know we've had conversations about this in the past. Um I've also encouraged our town engineer to add um additional uh architectural engineering firms. So we can have a more competitive environment which I would say today was was demonstrated in the significant swings and in bids. >> Um so the more engineering firms, reputable engineering firms that we can add to send these RFPs out, I think I feel and I know based upon what we saw today and have seen in the past um that it the taxpayers are the ones um that win in that >> and thank you. Thank you so much for doing this because professional services >> are not required by law to be sent out for RFP.

Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Thank you. >> This will definitely uh encourage them to sharpen their pencils. >> Absolutely. >> Save us some money. >> And I very much appreciate what Councilman Kale said. And uh Paul, in the six years that I've worked with you as supervisor, uh we have never gone and hired any professional service without coming to you and asking does this cover is this meeting our procurement policy. >> Correct. >> So we always go out and get a couple of different uh proposals and things of that nature. This will not be something new. >> Um I think you just we've always done that.

>> Correct. >> Um so >> but I appreciate what you're saying, John. So I make a motion to approve the town's revised procurement policy as presented by Paul Adams, director of finance. >> Second. >> Supervisor Flity. >> I. >> Councilman Cahill. >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataly >> I. >> Councilwoman W. >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright. >> I. >> And I make a motion to approve the town's revised investment policy as presented by Paul Adams, the director of finance. >> Second. >> Supervisor Flareity. >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright. >> I. Councilwoman Cataldi. I >> Councilman Cahill. >> I, >> Councilwoman Wyn.

>> I >> uh John, I know you had some questions earlier about potentially the cleaning service. Oh, cuz the resolution as it says stands here doesn't show the sewer treatment plant building. >> No, that wasn't my concern. Rick brought his concern um to me who I asked him to speak to you about. Yeah. was the ex existing contract um does not include the cleaning of the sewer department and I didn't see anything on the resolution that clarifies that. >> So Paul that's my concern. >> Any insights? >> You're saying the police department? >> No. Sewer. >> The sewer. Um >> I did they go off on their own?

I thought I thought they were using them initially. >> Yeah. You know what? I'm not sure which version is not that time sensitive. I'm gonna make a motion to table uh resolution six uh but I can table this even though it's authorizing me as town supervisor to extend the town hall court building police department parks and recreation and highway cleaning service provided by Snappy Cleaning Services DBA Alliance for one year December 31st 2025 through December 2026. We will table that. >> I'll second that motion and thank you for doing that Tom. >> You got it. Supervisor Flity. >> I, >> Councilwoman Cahill, >> I.

>> Councilwoman Cataly, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wyn, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright, >> I >> bring that back. November 20th, we'll get with Keith and the contract and make sure that that thing is tight. >> Okay. Uh, the first of what is I'll call it's like amen corner here by the way. Uh, the eighth hole, seventh hole, eighth hole. Um, so the seven number seven resolution tonight had a presentation by Josh Artuso earlier, our community uh development director uh on surveying and uh engineering designing for the West Webster Hamlet um to support the town's um intended application for a TAP grant in most likely February of 2026.

six. Uh, we did spend 26 minutes on that presentation. You presented for 17. Town board did 9 minutes of Q&A. Before I make a motion on this, do is there any further conversation questions that uh that the board members have? My my only question is the the resolution does not include who we would be signing that agreement with and to what cost >> hostage and the [clears throat] I would make it such that it's for the u the what did you call it the in your presentation the suggestion of the full 36,000 >> um >> so is there any further questions before I or somebody makes that >> I [clears throat] don't have any questions.

>> Okay. >> I >> I want to just make sure that I word it correctly, too. >> Okay. I'm I'm pulling up the presentation. >> I am going to say >> I do have a question now. >> Actually actually have two questions. >> Okay. >> I and I briefly spoke to you about this earlier, Josh. Um I don't have that right in front of me, but the the amount is what? 36,000, I believe. >> Yes. >> 36,000. >> So that's the quote they gave us. Correct. Correct. >> So, and should the motion include the amount not to exceed 36,000 and should it require additional funding? That request, regardless of cost, should come before the entire board in in a resolution for the additional costs because I I really honestly I don't know who tracks this.

I don't. And what happens all of a sudden we get to the end and all of a sudden it's 50,000. Are we obligated to pay that? >> So I I think that's probably a question for Paul, >> our attorney. >> It's also a question for Paul. Paul, what's the chances once we do this and you queue it up that the billing and invoicing would go over what the contract is without us knowing? And >> yeah, maybe we do monitor the situation. I know Josh would as well. >> Absolutely. >> But I understand that. But what if what happens if Kyle to you? >> Not a bad idea to say not to exceed. >> To answer your first question, Council Mahill, the contract should say not to exceed the $36,000.

Uh your your question as to what happens if it does exceed $36,000 that exceeds this board's authorization, which is required to enter into a contract. Y >> um obviously in the legal world, it's never a simple yes or no, black or white answer there. So, it's a little bit more complicated, but just generally speaking, anything above that $36,000 that would be authorized this board would be an unauthorized expenditure uh and and not authorized. So, um which means which which means you get into a bit of a legal back and forth with them, but the position would be that that's not authorized and the town shouldn't be paying it.

>> And I totally understand that, right? But do we put verbiage in the contract to specifically say should an amount to be seen to be going over, you must have prior authorization from the entire board to exceed said 36,000. >> Well, generally, you know, good contracting principles, you would have who's authorized to bind the organization. And so you would put in there that the town board is the only one authorized to uh approve expenditures above and beyond the $36,000 threshold. >> That's great. >> I just I mean >> I think that verbiage should be included in it. I mean it's it's double triple security a resolution a contract at 36,000.

I could make an argument that that in and of itself is good. you double down and it's good security to say not to exceed 36,000 because now you got a resolution that's in the records not to exceed to put in the contract more verbiage that says if it's going to go over 36 defcon 5 danger Will Robinson that's fine you triple uh protect and I'll let you handle that with hostage all right but for the time being we'll do the double I don't know if we'll do the triple of putting it into the contract I'll let you decide that with costes. But the double is you're going to do a resolution not to exceed $36,000.

Whoever makes that most >> I wasn't saying that it needs to be in there. I was simply asking a question that as far as you're tripling down. >> Oh, >> what happens? >> I mean I I'm fine. I mean business 101 and legal. We do the resolution. We do not to exceed. We put it in the contract. We go to the owner's house and we say, "I also want a pound of flash pine of blood that you are double secret doing this." I mean, it gets to the point exaggeration make a point where we're we're we're overkilling on this. I appreciate I really do. And you're doing the taxpayers a service to ask that type of stuff, but there becomes a practicality in business and in legal just how much.

I have no problems with the not to exceed. I don't even want to comment on whether I have a problem of building it into the contract, the verbiage that you said that we can go back and pull the minutes and the tape of what you said you'd like to see in the contract. Fine, get that in the contract, but deal with Kyle, deal with Paul, deal with hostages people to see if they're okay putting that in the contract. I have no I could care less. >> Sure. >> Because I'm going to sleep at night knowing we're about to do a resolution that says not to exceed 36,000. So any additional verbiage in the contract, you guys want to do that, go ahead.

It's great. Love it. So, whoever wants to make that resolution. >> With all of that said, I am going to make a motion to authorize the supervisor to sign an agreement for professional surveying services associated with the town's transportation alternatives program grant application for sidewalks in the West Webster Hamlet. that that agreement to be with Costich Engineering for a total of total not to exceed $36,000. >> Second. >> Councilwoman Cataly >> I. >> Councilman Cahill >> I. >> Supervisor Flity >> I. >> Councilwoman Wyn >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright >> I. >> Okay. Uh >> thank you for all your work on this.

Next resolution. Um, Jerry Goldman, I think you're representing the developer who has requested in writing and put together all the things for a public hearing. And I'm not going to sit here and litigate whether there's a certain date the public hearing has to be or if it's legal that we have to give them a public hearing. I don't want to do that. I just go ahead before we do any resolution at least explain some things to or fans >> if I can, Mr. supervisor and and members of the uh board, members of the public. Uh I think we have good news all the way around relative to our proposal. With me tonight is Evan Gthell, project engineer from Kassage Engineering.

Uh the overall site uh is 67 acres roughly that we are talking about. The development plan initially was marketkedly an ambitious plan and it was thought that there was interest on the part of the town to see the extension of Abigail Way uh between Hard Road and Holt Road. [cough] We've come to understand [clears throat] that that is less of a priority. uh in taking a look at the site and taking a look at prioritization. Um the developer has decided that they are going to limit the development and also having listened to the open space committee and the public to the area which is already disturbed by the former Webster lumber area approximately 8 acres on the northeast corner of the site.

Um that is what we are asking uh ultimately asking to have approved. It will be 104 units. We're proposing that to be a threetory >> uh a threestory and uh and four building plan essentially clustering the development in that area so that we are not disturbing any of the woods. Okay. the wood lot line, if you will, that we understand is here. We're leaving all that alone. In addition, we're leaving pretty much everything along the rest of the Hope Road frontage alone uh that is not already disturbed. And that is uh and that is a proposal. [snorts] Um Diana had made some illusion that perhaps there will be some slight of hand.

I don't operate that way. I I won't sponsor that. uh the town board and the planning board does have the ability to condition uh any PDD approvals to talk about it uh relating to the plan as it's shown with with perhaps some modifications as we go through uh the planning board process but in essence to keep the woods. We would welcome anybody who has any ideas for someone who may be interested in acquiring the remainder of that property, be it a Genese land trust. I don't know if the town has any interest in taking on uh some land. Uh but that is really um yeah that's really a question for the future and perhaps not the long-term future but it's something that we can discuss uh as part of the process as we go forward.

Um as as to the date uh of the hearing um I will have to reschedu my trip to uh to visit family in Florida but that's okay uh if you wind up doing the 18th. I will caution, however, that any undue delay beyond that point could invoke some legal issues and and I'm not going to try to go into all of them right now either, but suffice it to say, it's really up to uh up to the board. We look forward to you scheduling uh the public hearing uh in December and uh and let us go ahead and keep this process moving forward. Now that we have expended, it's not it's not new. We've been trying to deal with this for the better part of a year or more.

Uh and we think we should have something which will um have some traction with uh with the open space folks and everything else. And in speaking Diana tonight, we're committed to meet with the open space group as well uh in advance of that hearing. But we always like to start with the boards that are making decisions before we start taking it out to the public. With that, that's about all I have to offer. If there are any questions, uh, we'd be glad to answer them at this time. >> I just want to say thank you, Jerry, for your input. >> You can ask me not there. >> What are we doing? >> This is not a public hearing.

>> Yeah. Uh, uh, no, no. And I, you know, this boy, I am going to just, people are loving me. First of all, nobody can hear you that's watching this tape. We don't speak from there. Um, you had your time at the the podium. My rules of a decorum. He now has his time just to describe before any resolution votes. So, we're good. >> Um, we're all good. And so, I just would like to say, are we are you done? >> Yeah, I'm done. >> You're done. >> Just I'm not done. >> Oh, go ahead, John. You You can talk all night long because you are on the days. >> All night long. >> You can do [laughter] anything he wants.

>> I'm not nearly as verbose as Tom, believe me. Mhm. >> My intent was just to thank you and your client for putting forward a new a new uh revised plan, which is significantly less of a footprint than the previous one. So, I appreciate that. I also appreciate the fact that you're willing to move the date of the public hearing um to December 18th, which I agree with, Diana. That'll give the new board an opportunity to weigh in. It'll also give an opportunity for you and open space to get together to sit down and go over the new plan. So, I would encourage this board to consider moving the date from um November 26th to um December 18th.

So, thank you. >> December 4th, I think it was initially. I don't >> Yeah, December 4th. I'm sorry, >> John. I might want I might comment on something else and and Jerry, I'm very I'm very sensitive to your family plans for Christmas. It's all good. >> But when you said that, I realized that you're not the only one who might have family plans the week before Christmas. And I'm wondering if we wouldn't be doing a disservice to some of the people who want to come in and speak at the public hearing, whether they before, I'm not too sure how many those are, or against, um, that we would schedule it that close to the holidays.

I I will also say that I have no intention on bringing this to a vote after the public hearing before the first of the year and and we've got that on tape. I can't imagine that we would do that. So, um I'm just a little concerned with delaying that that it wouldn't give everyone the opportunity to come in and speak. And we're not looking at scheduling it until December 4th. That's a full month away for the open space committee and other people to weigh in and to meet with Jerry. So just just a counterpoint to that 18th thought. >> Well, I'll say this. I am glad to hear you say that um you would be adverse to scheduling it the vote until after the 1st of January.

Um but I believe at the time that you won't be on the board when that resolution is put forward. >> Correct. So, >> no, I understand that and I'm very aware of the fact that I'm not on this board for much longer and I don't I think it's it's only the right thing to do to leave that to the board who will be coming in to make that make that vote on whether this moves forward to the planning board. Um, who's I'm not willing to take that chance [laughter] because who who sets the resolutions for the vote on this on on these schedules. >> All right. You know what? I think we I think we got it. And this this could end up being two votes.

All right. Because I'm going to just go with what's on here. I make a motion to set a public hearing for Thursday, December 4th at 7:30 p.m. to consider the establishment of Progressive Development District PDD at 799 Holt Road, the former Lumberyard site tax ID number 079.08-1-13 to be advertised in the Wednesday, November 26, 2025 edition of the Webster Herald. >> Second. >> Supervisor Flity, >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataldi, >> I. Councilman Cahill. >> The only reason I'm voting yes is because of legal counsel that we are obligated by law to schedule this public hearing. I adamantly disagree with scheduling it for December 4th.

But I will oppose harshly any vote on this PD PDD prior to the new board being seated. That being said, my vote is yes. >> Councilwoman Wyn, >> um at this time I will be voting no for the reason is that we are in the process of updating the town comprehensive plan and we should have a moratorum on a new development into the residents have a chance to view the final comprehensive plan. I'm sorry, Jerry, but that's my vote. Councilwoman Right. >> I'm voting yes. I I agree with um Councilman Cahill and Councilwoman Cataly that the um public hearing on the 4th is important. Well, one because I think it's pretty unfair to ask Jerry to change his plans that are already in >> Please.

I I've rescheduled so many trips. That's fine. And and two, um December 18th could be a difficult time for the community to come in. I too um uh strongly agree that taking action on this um this project beyond a public hearing in 2025 is not the right thing to do. And and I believe Supervisor Ka Supervisor Cahill, Supervisor Flarity, >> is that for No. Uh I I I I trust Supervisor Flity and I trust his word because that's one thing he is is a man of his word. And he put in his email today that it's the right thing to do to have any action when the new board is in place. I believe we're all in agreement with that.

>> And I think if Diana, we're not going to have you talk. She got that email and she's had a lot of interactions with me in the last six years. And I would say that Diana, I'm a flawed person, but one thing I've never done is tell you I'm going to go left and then I went right. So, all right. That passed 4 to one. There will be a public hearing on December 4th. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next up, um, this is Chris. Chris Bo actually presented at the workshop. We had a 22minut time slot for that with Chris presented for 11 minutes and then there was 11 minutes of Q&A. Is there any other Q&A from the board before this resolution?

>> Uh, no. I have no more questions. Just for some of those who who may have come into the meeting without attending the workshop, when we go out, if if this vote moves forward to request proposals for the storage containers, modular containers at Sandbar Park, um one of the things we did discuss at the [clears throat] workshop was that we are by no means obligated to accept those bids. This is something [clears throat] we're still looking at moving forward, but we just need more information. Can I add on to that? Since there was this last resolution about we should have things pushed into January because there will be three new town board members.

We also said at that workshop that the resolutions to accept the low bid if that happens on containers and to accept an operator would happen in late January or early February. Unequivocal, irrefutable. That would be the new board. >> Correct. Okay. I have no further questions. I'm ready to vote. >> So, with that, I will make a motion to advertise a request for bids on storage containers for Sandbar Park Food and Drink in the Wednesday, November 12th, 2025 Webster Herald edition with bids due no later than Friday, December 12th, 2025. >> Second. Councilwoman Wright I. >> Councilman Cahill >> I.

>> Supervisor Flity >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataly >> I. >> Councilwoman when again at this time I will be voting no. And here's my explanation. We are the government. We should not be paying for the private business at the Sandbar Park. No government money whether borrow or from the reserve should go to the private enterprise at Sandbar Park. And this is an example, even though I know that we're just going to go for, you know, an IFP. As an example, for $500,000, 2% for 10 years bond is 4,61 a month. And that's 3% is 4,828 a month. That would be the minimum, excuse me, that would be the minimum for the business would have to pay for 12 months a year, including seven months they are not opened.

and that does not include utility, insurance, water and etc. I don't think that I can be burdened um a taxpayer with this. So my answer would be no. >> Okay, all set on that one. >> All right. And the last of the resolutions spawning off of a workshop presentation this evening, Pat Stevens presented uh at the workshop for 24 minutes. He actually presented for 11 and then there was a robust 13 minutes of Q&A and discussion. So um any further Q&A on uh this resolution on the highway salt barn bidding prior to a resolution? I did have one question that I didn't have a chance to ask Pat when he was up there and I don't know Pat if you can if I can ask ask one question.

>> Yeah, sure. Pat, you want to come up and take the podium? >> One of the alternatives for cost savings was wood versus concrete walls. And I was wondering if you can comment on the life expectancy difference from that additional $350,000. Uh it's it's not drastic. We currently have wood in the existing barn. It's been there since the 80s. Uh it's still a very durable product. Uh concrete, there's a lot of upkeep to the concrete to keep it at the same level as the wood because the salt impacts it uh a little bit more. Uh has reinforcement inside of it. Um again, I I'm going to try not to uh speculate on expertise of of other engineers that I am am not.

Uh I I don't believe there's a drastic difference in the two. Obviously, if we were to get to a point to consider that alternate, uh we could reach out to our consultant professionals and get uh some form of written documentation on that exact data. Uh but I I don't believe it's drastically different. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. Uh any other questions or comments? Well, I make a motion to put out uh to bid the highway salt bar and W station and advertise in the Wednesday, November 12th, 2025 Webster Herald with bids due no later than Friday, December 12th. >> 10th. >> I I think that um Pat had indicated he wanted that to be December 10th.

>> December 10th. And I just got to look at the the day of the de of Wednesday, December 10th, 2025. >> You did? Okay. Missed that. All right. So, let me let me say that again. I make a motion to put out to bid the highway salt barn W station uh demolition of the existing um or the old highway uh garage and advertise in the November 12th, 2025 Webster Herald with bids due no later than Wednesday, December 10th, 2025. Second. Supervisor Clarity, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright, >> I. Councilwoman Cataly, >> I. >> Counciloman Cahill, >> no. >> Councilwoman Wyn, >> no. And I would like to explain my votes as well.

The salt barn and a truck wash will cost us all almost $5 million. And that's only if we get the grants and other saving, which we are still unsure of. I I cannot justify this expense to the Webster taxpayers. So therefore, my answer is going to be no. >> Thank you, Jenny. And I strongly believe, as I stated earlier during the workshop, that uh this project should be sent out in three separate bids, which is why I voted no. Okay. Um, this is I'm going to go with you on this one, Jennifer, because you've kind of been the lead on this. >> Um, yes. Um, I'm sorry I'm not feeling really great tonight, but I'm doing my best.

>> Okay. Um, Councilman Cahill and I met with Demarco Taylor on October 20th and prior to that time, we sent out a request to the department heads for feedback on the services received from Demarco Taylor and also the um chairman of the planning board and the zoning board. The feedback was very positive. We've had um good experiences with the firm um are pleased with the services that they're providing. There was some constructive input and that was taken into consideration [clears throat] and addressed. So, with that, I would like to make a motion to approve a one-year contract renewal as of January 1st, 2026 with DeMarco Taylor Attorneys at Law at the existing rate and scope of the current 2025 contract, which is $165,000.

>> Second. >> Councilwoman Wright. I, >> Councilman Cahill, >> I, >> Supervisor Flareity, >> I, >> Councilwoman Cataly, >> I, >> Councilwoman Wen, >> I. >> Okay, Chris is no longer in the building. Chris Bo, um, but he, I think, sent us over. Um, he's been happy with, uh, the vending service over there at the rec center. and um wants to have us renew it um for 2026 one year. I'm sorry for 24 months commencing November 1st. I don't know if I'd call that nonp pro tunk. It's only six. Yeah. So, anybody have any questions on this? Nope. >> I do not. Um, I would move to authorize the supervisor to extend the CERN vending services agreement for 24 months commencing on November 1st, 2025 for parks and recreation department and sign said contract.

>> Second. >> Councilwoman Cataly, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright, >> I. >> Supervisor Flity, >> I. >> Councilman Cahill, >> I. >> Councilwoman Wyn, >> I. >> Jennifer, I appreciate you're not feeling well, so you want me to take this one? >> Yes, please. Okay. Uh, this is our last formal resolution tonight. I make a motion to approve the following items for recycling from the highway department as listed. >> Second. >> Supervisor Flity. >> I. >> Councilman Cahill. >> I. >> Councilwoman Cataly. >> Councilwoman Wyn. >> I. >> Councilwoman Wright. >> I. And I got to tell you that can that what I'm really happy about tonight is for the first time in several months we can open up the round table to everybody including the board members because the election is over.

So here we go. We're going to start with Paul. All right. All right Tom. Well um well today I took a look at the town's uh cash flow. So I do that once a month and uh we do earn uh some significant uh interest revenue on a monthly basis. Uh rates are currently between about 3.7 and 3.9%. They've been dropping a little bit over the past few months. Expect that trend to continue but um we c keep an eye on it and then invest the money uh sufficiently and try to maximize those earnings. Thanks, Paul. >> Tenifer, >> you probably just want to get home. >> Yeah, I do. But I we just went through the uh budget reviews, the third quarter budget reviews for the larger of the departments.

We did that or I sat through the meetings with highway and parks and recreation and both of those um departments budgets are very well under control doing very well. Conservative budgeting allows for higher revenues and uh staying on track with costs. So um yeah, very good job. Thank you >> Paul and the department heads for managing their departments effectively. Thank you for all you do. >> I almost said Jennifer again. Patty, >> uh I look forward to having those meetings next week. Mine are scheduled with police department and sewer next week and I'm certainly hoping for those same results. >> Uh what?

It's not tomorrow. >> Oh, tomorrow. Okay. >> Yes, >> I'll be there. >> It's my whole day tomorrow. Right, Paul? Oh, yes. >> It's tomorrow. We have two tomorrow. >> Okay. >> I'm I'm a little time warped this week. I >> All right. >> Had a problem here. >> Kyle, >> I suppose it might be a little premature. It's only November, but in light of the resolution to u uh engage Demarco Taylor for 2026, I did want to say thank you uh to all of my colleagues here in the town. Uh past year has been enjoyable uh getting to know everyone and work with everyone. I appreciate your patience as I've uh kind of grown into this role a little bit and uh certainly I know I speak on behalf of John DeMarco and Frank Chardy.

We do appreciate the opportunity to continue to work with everyone here at the town. >> It has not required a lot of patience and thank you for your hard work. It's been a pleasure. >> Yeah, you you've been great and that's fantastic Jenny. >> Thank you. Well, good evening everyone. Thanks for being here today. Sorry about my voice. I've been having um I I got sick. I got langitis and so it's just came back. Anyway, I would like to thank everyone that come in here today and I wanted to thanks everyone that come out to vote and congratulations to the winners. Um it's have been an honor and privilege to serve this community as the result that I um the result was not what I expected but that's okay and I believe that God have a plan for me.

Um, I will continue to serve Webster any way I can where life is worth living. God bless you all and I will continue to see you all around town. And also to please do not forget to thank our veterans for their sacrifice. Veterans is coming. Our veteran day is coming up which is you know I wouldn't be here without their sacrifice. So therefore I'm deeply appreciate that. And again God bless America and thank you all. Thank you, Jenny. John. So, I want to thank both Jenny and Patty um for your years of service. They don't just show up for meetings. They spend hours and hours and hours dedicated to this town and also Patty to the village of Webster where she was an elected official.

It's not just coming to these meetings. They they do the hard work behind the scenes. They spend time asking questions, looking at technical qu technical things. Patty, with respect to the sewage treatment plant, the massive undertaking [clears throat] that has been done there to upgrade that. Um, you probably can't even calculate the amount of hours you spent there. >> I can't. And I've often said I know way more about water treatment and sewer plant than any girl ought to. >> Yeah. And the same with Jenny. Um, they're they're both extremely committed to this community. Extremely committed. And I I just want to thank you and wish you both the best.

>> I I don't know how to put it any more, Frank, than that. >> Thank John. Don't make me cry. >> Appreciate it. >> Thank you, John. >> Thank you. >> Denim will end with you. >> So, um, school tax collection ended on October 31st for the town and any remaining school taxes we will be surrendering over to Monroe County for collection. And that's all I have. >> All right. Well, we um like I said, we could get back to round table with the the board members. Uh because the election is over and uh um actually I want to say as we adjourn tonight, this is in honor of Garrett Wagner. Um Kyle, would you like to get home and see the football game?

It's >> not that good tonight. >> Okay. What do you mean? It's the Broncos said [laughter] this meeting is adjourned.