Town Board Meeting
We are live. So, welcome everybody to the Thursday, September 8th, Webster Town Board Meeting. We will start off with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Denine, can you do roll, please?
Supervisor Flity,
here.
Councilwoman Cataldi,
present. Councilman Cahill,
here.
Councilwoman Wyn,
here.
Councilwoman Wright,
here. attorney for the town Taylor here.
All right. Our first uh item tonight is my favorite, the open to the floor where each speaker will be allowed up to five minutes uh to speak on anything their heart desires. I think we have two people that have signed in tonight. So, uh Christopher Naka, are you planning on speaking?
Okay. And as Christopher walks up there, I'm going to rattle off what many people have heard me say. Here's kind of the rules of engagement. Please don't make me have to say at 4 minutes and 50 seconds, you're at four minutes and 50 seconds. It It never comes off good. Um people in the crowd, respect the person who is at the podium, even if you don't agree with what they're saying there. You know, let's have some decorum. Um on that, uh what is the one that I'm missing? Why do I always miss the third one?
Be nice.
No questions answered.
Yes, you can rattle off one question. 100 questions up there. That does not mean the town board is going to spend the time after you're done answering them. We certainly will set you up with the right people offline in the future days to answer them. Those are the rules. Christopher, you're up. Christopher Naka, 1065 Shoecraft Road. Um, basically this just the same stuff that I'm coming in talking about. Uh, this town really needs a 24-hour grocery store. Not everybody um works A or B shift. C-shift people that also make up a majority uh you know a percentage of this town need somewhere to shop and eat that isn't fast food. Um any and all businesses in the town should pay you enough to live inside the town. talking about the uh containers. Uh it makes me think, yeah, it would be very nice to have those containers down there, but if it works, are the people that are working there going to be paid enough to live in this town? And if it doesn't work, then the people that work there, I mean, they've taken the time to put in hours there, and then they could just if it doesn't work, you know, on to the
next job that, you know, some job security would be nice. Um, last time we had talked about Bay Road. Um, last winter, I know at least one person was hit walking down there. Um, I think that kind of speaks to my ongoing point that the people that live in this town need to make enough where they can drive into work just like their co-workers and bosses do. They need to be able to pay their rent and have enough to save a little bit at the end of the week and not be walking on roads that aren't meant to be walked on in the winter time. You know, I remember I've lived in this town basically my whole life and every winter you'd see the one guy riding his bike down the road and you think, "God, what a maniac riding his bike to wherever he's riding to." And over the years, you see more and more of these bikes and more and more of these people that are riding on roads not meant for, you know, that type of traffic in the winter and it's unsafe and it's unfair and I think that these people should be respected because after midnight they become quite important. talking about the fast food workers now. Um, yeah, that was basically me blending
what I normally talk about with what uh and yeah, I mean, if we're going to be saving that much money doing the container idea, I think that that money saved should go into the employees that work there, not just the people that are paying for the license to vend there. And you guys, well, Eric quotes, you know, the town. I think everybody should benefit from any business that's in Webster. Thank you.
Thank you, Christopher.
And next up tonight is Kevin Lockhart.
Hi everyone. Uh Kevin Lockheart from 100-2 Kber. Um I and wanted to oppose the resolutions that this town is considering. I don't think that uh the projects the planning department needs to have more power centralized to it or the ability to site people to go to court unless for good reason. I don't like that the town board is central is decentralizing its powers and giving it to the planning and the public works and I couldn't even tell you who the two public works department heads are. So I'm not even sure how they would come to a consensus and administrate a CFO um together. Um but I don't like the idea of that. Also, the Roxbox issue, I just didn't hear anything about why it was prompted to begin with, like how the process was necessary to begin with or where the money was coming from or um how much the
service would cost to the vendors to have to lease it month by month. So that's something that is like very primary I think to that whole question of how much is it going to cost the vendors to sign up and how long is the lease for somebody mentioned maybe like July through September or something like that. Um I wanted to recognize a couple of wins that we had. first was the we managed to pass the town uh comprehensive plan steering committee. Although um I very very strongly disagreed with how it was selected, but I definitely appreciate the town for passing that motion to at least legalize the process. Although again, I'm very meed that the town allowed that New York State to hijack the whole zoning and land use laws. Um, another big win that we had for the people was the overturning of the cell phone tower. That was very exciting and I know everyone's really excited about that. Hopefully the um it won't be turned back over on appeal. And um we I spoke with uh Tom Flareity was very helpful today with um with Captain um who was it? Captain
Mark Reed. Yeah, Captain Mark Reed. Um because the town supervisor has great communication and I'm always surprised when I hear that voicemail that I leave coming back at myself. Um so we are going to do a more frequent police splatter every week so that everyone in town can keep up with um the public safety issues which is very important of course. And um what was the other thing? I think that's about it. Wait, let's see. I still have a minute. Sorry, pause for a second. Um I haven't I heard a lot of talk about the Navatas project. I didn't look into it as much as I wanted to at this point, but when we discussed the Navatas project as being one of the more costly projects. I think that's sewer maybe. But um the I don't hear a lot of discussion about um the actual details of why we're doing it and why it's necessary, which kind of goes back to the Roxbox issue of whether it's even necessary or a good idea. I know you want to turn the you're kind of reminiscing on the days of the Bayside restaurant and people kind of want that back, but I'm just not sure if the Roxbox thing is going to be realistic. It's not just going to be
really expensive cuz this town loves to spend money. And um let's see how we had here. Um yeah, you guys really um um I think worked against the will of the people in creating the steering committee. I was I'm constantly offended by the things that I hear coming from this town and uh the town board. I don't know how to act. So that's kind of difficult. I don't know how people would contact you if they wanted to. Also, um it looks like the town I got to wonder whether the town and the village are colluding um with one another. Everyone has a different opinion, but it does sound like there's some a little bit of collusion going on that we got to watch out for between the village and the town, particularly as it relates to the town comprehensive plan and Xerox and somehow those two correlating with one another. But I was really disappointed to see that you guys very arbitrarily and capriccious capricciously denied Jenny seat on the town comprehensive plan committee. No reason, no explanation. Could have let her on it. But I don't know, maybe Melissa Keller said no or who know maybe Tom said no. Who knows? who knows how you created
the town comprehensive plan steering committee, which is the most important steering committee that our town has. And
Kevin, I don't want I don't want to be called a buffoon by you, but still 5 minutes and 10 seconds right now.
Oh, no warning at 4:30.
We're at 5 minutes and 15 seconds now.
Okay.
All right. Thank you very much, Kevin. Okay. Um and nobody else came in after the fact. So that concludes the public speaking portion which leads us to the next item which is uh the town board meeting minutes to be uh uh considered for approval. We did not have a workshop two weeks ago. Correct. So we just had the regular town board meeting uh on September 4th. I've reviewed the minutes. I make a motion that we approve them.
Second.
Supervisor Flity. I,
Councilwoman Cahill.
I,
Councilwoman Cataly,
I,
Councilwoman W.
I,
Councilwoman Wright. I
Patty.
Uh, yes. I reviewed the bills as submitted by the director of finance yesterday, and everything appears to be in order. I would move that we pay the bills.
Second.
Councilwoman Cataly,
I.
Councilwoman Wright,
I. Supervisor Flity,
I.
Counciloman Cahill,
I.
Councilwoman W. I
uh and I did review the prepaid warrants as submitted by Paul Adams, the director of finance, and make a motion that we approve those.
Second.
Supervisor Flity.
I,
Councilwoman Wyn,
I.
Councilwoman Katali,
I.
Councilman Cahill,
I.
Councilwoman Wright,
I. And I did review the purchase orders uh as submitted by Paul Adams, the director of finance, and make a motion that we approve those.
Second. Supervisor Flity
I.
Councilwoman Cataly
I.
Councilman Cahill.
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
Councilwoman Wright I. on four and five uh the amendments to the budget that were pres presented by Paul Adams, director of finance and the transfers in the budget. Did the board members have any questions on what was uh submitted to them by Paul?
I don't.
No, I do not.
Okay. I'm going to make a motion to approve the budget amendments as presented by Paul Adams, the director of finance.
Second.
Supervisor Flity.
I. Councilman Cahill.
Hi.
Councilwoman Cataly,
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
Councilwoman Wright.
I.
And I'm going to make a motion to approve the budget transfers as presented by Paul Adams, the director of finance.
Second.
Supervisor Flity.
I.
Councilman Cahill.
I.
Councilwoman Cataly.
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
Councilwoman.
Hi. Uh, next up, um, believe it or not, I think on Thursday, October 2nd is, uh, the first day that the October Webster Today magazine will hit mailboxes. Um, and it is our, uh, it's our budget issue, but legally, even though 20 all the homes in Webster get it, that is not that doesn't um that doesn't cut it for the law, municipal law. you have to publish the proposed budget in the uh legal newspaper that the town picked which is the Webster Herald. So uh with that in mind um I am going to make a motion to set a public hearing for the town of Webster's 2026 preliminary budget for Thursday, October 16th, 2025 at 7:30 p.m. in this town boardroom. and
it will be advertised in both the October 1st and October 8th Webster Herald editions.
Second. Supervisor Flity
I.
Councilwoman Wright
I.
Councilwoman Cataly.
Councilman Cahill.
I.
Councilwoman W.
I. Um I think the village uh did this same exact resolution um last week.
That's correct, supervisor. The village passed this resolution and the town board here is entertaining the same resolution. Um, and this is uh um I think going to be well certainly during my time as supervisor, this will be the first time that the village board of trustees and the town board members will have a joint public hearing. Um I don't recall it during uh the six years that I've been supervisor. Maybe it's happened. But uh I'm going to make the motion to set a joint public hearing with the village of Webster Board of Trustees and the town board of Webster members on Tuesday, October 21st, 2025 in the village uh boardroom at the village offices. Um I think this is 700 p.m. Correct. 700 p.m. This public hearing is to consider the annexation petition brought by Xerox Corporation uh of village land to uh the
town. The notice of this public hearing will be published in the Webster Herald on their Wednesday, September 25th edition. SE Wednesday, September 24th edition. Sorry about that. That's my motion.
Second.
Supervisor Flareity.
I.
Councilwoman Cataldi.
I.
Councilman Cahill.
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
Councilwoman Wright.
I.
Um, Jennifer, you want to I know you've been working with Donna on this.
I I do. So, the board of assessment review has a different term period than other citizen board positions and this term is um ending at the end of this month. David Payne has been on the board of the assessment review and has been the chair of that board for quite some time. He is an asset to the community and that board based on his uh experience with the assessment process, the assessment review process. And given that we're going through the re-evaluation that is the in really in process right now, we're in the education phase. it'll start in full swing next year and then um the the letters will come out in 2027 and he will be integral to the um
assessment review process. So for for those reasons I move to appoint David Payne to the board of assessment review for a term of five years ending September 30th, 2030. Second.
Councilwoman Wright I.
Councilman Cahill.
Hi.
Supervisor Flity.
I.
Councilwoman Cataly.
Councilwoman W.
I.
Okay. We're going to move uh on this agenda of resolution 9 and resolution 12 to the end because these are the pickup of the uh workshop presentations that we uh ran out of time on. Now, resolution 10 on the agenda. Um, this was interesting because we thought that we might have done this a couple of months ago, but we had done a resolution. It was our intent to be the lead agency on the salt barn. This is actually a resolution uh not intent, but we are designating the town board uh as the lead agent. So, any questions on that?
No. I make a motion uh for the Webster Town Board to designate itself as the lead agency for the purpose of seeker review related to the salt bar replacement and truck wash bay.
Second.
Supervisor Flity
I.
Councilwoman Wright I.
Councilwoman Cataly.
Councilman Cahill.
Hi.
Councilwoman W.
I. Now the next one as far as the determination does the board and the seeker um significance um any questions?
Nope.
There are no the question I have Kyle is do we need to read like is this one of the seekers where you want to read the entire
Yes. I I would I would read this entire motion after the record here.
Okay.
So
Jennifer, it's your department. Would you mind taking a shot reading that whole thing?
I'm I'm I am I am getting there and and I and I and I will and I will um let's see. I make a motion to issue the um this this is oh this is a type one action
correct.
Okay. So that the there is significance to this and I make a motion to help me with this.
Sure. I I would just suggest just read the whereas as as
just start with the whereas correct. Okay. Where is the town of Webster? Where is the town of Webster Town Board here and after referred to as the board has determined the above referenced action to be a type one action pursuant to part 617 of the state environmental quality review seeker regulations. And whereas the town board has reviewed and accepted the complete full environmental assessment forms part one, two, and three including the supporting information on the action prepared by the MRB group here in here and after referred to as engineer and whereas the town board has completed the coordinated review and public comment period provided under the seeker regul regulations. And whereas the town board has designated itself as lead agency under seeker regul regulations for making the ter determination of significance upon said action on a separate resolution at the August 21st,
2025 meeting. And whereas the town board has given consideration to the criteria for determining significance as set forth in section 617C1 of the seeker regulations and the information contained in the full in the full environmental assessment forms part one two and three. Now therefore, be it resolved that the action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts based on the review of the full environmental assessment form and that the town board does hereby make a determination of non significance on the said action and the town board and the town supervisor is hereby directed to sign the full environmental assessment form EAF part three. the negative declaration as evidence of the town board determination of environmental nonsignificance. Second, before the the second uh just one clarification, the town board had uh declared itself as lead agency as of uh tonight's meeting pursuant to a separate resolution August 21st, 2025.
Thank you.
So, we'll make that September 18th. Oh, I thought that was the the initial
the intent
the intent part was that. Okay, thank you.
Second with that correction.
Councilwoman Wright
I.
Councilwoman Cataldi
I.
Supervisor Flity
I.
Councilman Cahill.
I.
Councilwoman Wyn
I.
And we can go through 13 through 16. I think it's going to be Patty Jennifer Patty Tom. I move to approve the following items for auction from the police department. 2008 Chevy Tahoe, 2011 Ford Victoria, Crown Victoria, 2015 Taurus, and 2016 Taurus.
Second.
Councilwoman Cataly,
I.
Supervisor Flity,
I.
Councilman Cahill,
I.
Councilwoman Wen,
I.
Councilwoman Wright,
I. I make a motion to approve the following item for trade in from the parks department. It's a plow um tag number 07745.
Second.
Councilwoman Wright I.
Councilwoman Cataly
I.
Supervisor Flity
I.
Councilman Cahill
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
My goodness we hang on to some of our vehicles for a long time. I would approve the following item for recycling from the sewer department, a 2013 Ford van tag number 5190.
Second.
Councilwoman Cataldi,
I.
Supervisor Flity,
I.
Councilman Cahill,
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
Councilwoman Wright,
I.
And I make a motion to approve the following items for recycling from the Webster Courts. A Sony recorder tape system, a Dell Optiplex computer tower, a Dell Optiplex computer tower, and a Vizio flat screen TV with the listed tag numbers or lack thereof.
Second. Supervisor Flareity,
I.
Councilwoman Wright,
I.
Councilwoman Cataly,
I.
Councilwoman Cahill,
I.
Councilwoman W.
I.
All right. the second half of Josh's presentation to be followed by a potential vote to set a public hearing on these code changes. So Josh, thank you for being understanding on this one.
No problem. All right, moving along to uh vehicle storage. So, this the proposed changes that we're uh bringing before the board have to do with um the parking and storage of both um what we like to call junk vehicles that are not registered or uh not operable as well as uh recreational vehicles and commercial vehicles. Um and then in terms of on street parking restrictions, um we do get a good deal of of complaints about people parking in the middle of culdeacs. It presents a issue for emergency first responders, uh fire trucks, garbage trucks, etc. Um we have one instance where there's a resident who's parking a complete tractor trailer in the in the center of a culde-sac um which is hindering traffic for obviously uh the residents and visitors of those residents that live there. So the provision that we're proposing would deal uh with that. We currently
have nothing that uh allows us to enforce for that type of issue. And then again um portable storage containers and rolloff dumpsters. Uh the concern is that from time to time uh these types of items remain on a property for a very great deal of time. Um, and we do often get a lot of complaints from neighboring homeowners who uh complain of, you know, the visual impact of these either bags uh being near the curb for several months or dumpsters that have uh debris and are there for extended long periods of time. Um, so we're looking to tighten up the codes in relation to uh the amount of time and the placement on the property. So the next steps uh the request here tonight is for the town board to set a resolution to hold a public hearing on these proposed changes. Um, the proposed draft code in its entirety will be posted on the town's website so that the public has a chance to thoroughly read and review and understand um, prior to
the proposed public hearing. And then we would uh, look for any feedback or, you know, proposed concerns if there were uh, additional changes that would need to be made. and then we would um like to move forward with uh making a decision on um adopting them into town code. And ultimately what we're looking for is additional tools to help our staff in addressing common resident concerns and complaints uh that we don't currently uh have available to us. And I'll just uh leave off with um you know, we our number one goal is voluntary compliance. Again, uh we have a very good code enforcement officer that uh develops, you know, good rapport with residents. We're willing to work with people and be very reasonable, but we do need uh the these additional provisions to help us with those that just refuse to comply and negatively impact um adjoining residents. So, with that, I will be happy to answer any questions or hear any feedback that
you may have.
So, Josh, I I just want to say number one, I appreciate the fact that you're updating the code. Um some of these areas are most certainly needed. Um with respect to the temporary CFOs, you said that you mentioned that we've done one in the last 5 years approximately. So what is the impetus to update this? Is there someone or some company or some person looking for a temporary CO?
Uh no, not at this time. But as I mentioned, you know, whenever you try and tackle code updates, it tends to get quite cumbersome. Um, I did think that that particular provision was very odd when it came up for the U ofR facility. That's that's the facility that requested it a couple years ago. Um, I think there's a potential uh for future businesses to request it, but I I'd like to just get it more in line uh with other towns and eliminate any potential for political pressure that could be placed upon this board.
So, I I like the fact that you're taking the onus off the board with respect to this temporary CFOs. I think that's a great move and you're putting it in with the building inspector. Where does the fire marshal fall into this as far as a temporary CFO goes?
Sure. So, obviously the fire marshall is very intimately involved in not only inspections but plan review. Um the way our code is structured currently and the way that it's outlined in the Department of Public Works, um the fire marshall is not a department head. Um the building inspector is really the most qualified individual to make a determination. Um we did think it was important though to have an upper level the building inspector is also not a department head.
So the thought was having the building inspector be the primary um evaluator of the request and also having support from their superior. Now obviously we have no commissioner public works at this time
right?
So there is a provision that states that in the absence of that it requires unanimous approval from all of the division heads that make up the department of public works. So everyone has to be aligned. The highway superintendent has to be content with the grading. Uh the engineer has to be uh content with the site and how you know the site work. Um, and likewise the fire marshall would obviously be involved in the review of any request because in order for us to even issue that temporary CO all of the fire safety related items have to be operable, inspected and in place.
Great. So you what is says requires financial security to the town by the applicant to ensure a timely project commission uh completion. Could you just elaborate on that a little bit?
Yes. The concept it's similar to like a letter of credit. So if there was a catastrophic failure of some sort and they were unable to finish the project, the town would have some sort of security to go in and and hire someone to finish up whatever needs to be finished to, you know, basically button it up.
Okay.
And then that cost could then be placed on a tax bill for recouping. So I know the you had mentioned that the uh the temporary CFOs currently are 30 days in duration. Is that correct?
Yes. Um it requires town board approval every 30 days. So they would have to essentially submit an application every two weeks.
Okay. And you came up with a sixth month.
Yes.
By talking to other towns.
Yes. Uh the majority of other towns um offer provisions for TCOs and yes the the majority of them all set it at at a six-month period.
So we said
I'm and I I don't want to can I intervene on something here and John I these are great questions. Tonight's resolution is to set a public hearing.
That's where I was going with my question.
Go ahead then.
So we're going to set a public hearing based upon this. Correct. subsequent to the public hearing, our input and input from those speakers that choose to address any of these issues, you would be open to making one or more changes to this code. Is that correct or no?
Yeah, that the point of the public hearing is to get feedback and, you know, hear what the public has to say.
Thank you. And that's and I and I will say you know one TCO it was on a commercial project U of our facility uh to me um most of this was driven by property maintenance which we've been dealing with for three or four years. the TCO came up uh in a lot of ways um because really they're on commercial projects and we're trying to get ahead of certain things and we're about to have what I think it's going to be after I'm here Xerox campus is going to re be redeveloped there's going to be 40 50 60 acre large industrial places coming in our TCO COO pro process really is built around a house in a subdivision that's just a act.
Yep.
And so when we talked to the other towns and they said, you know, this really is more a TCO is more about a large commercial and or industrial project. Um so that just gives some flavor to that. But like I said, tonight um I certainly don't want to short anybody because there will be robust conversation. My guess is on October 2nd after the public hearing, we won't be voting on these changes. That would be my guess. There will be feedback and whatever. Any other questions or comments before we set the public hearing on this? Jennifer, Patty,
quick comment.
Sure.
And that many times we look at code changes in a reactionary way. Um, we realize a problem is taking place and we go to our code book and nothing is is addressed there and we're kind of left hanging out there in midair. So, I really appreciate the efforts that uh your department, Josh, you and your department have done to make this more of um a planned implementation of needed code changes rather than being reactionary. So, thank you.
Thank you, uh Jenny. Well, as long as it's not, you know, um voting on the actual uh resolution itself, we just, you know, going for the public's hearings, then
you got it, Jennifer.
You answered my question. I was curious if it was commercial or residential, and it's more geared towards commercial.
Thank you, Josh. Appreciate it being proactive rather than reactive.
Thank you. So, I'm going to make a motion to set a public hearing for Thursday, October 2nd at 7:30 p.m. uh in the town board meeting room Webster right here on the proposed town code changes relating to building construction, property maintenance, and other text amendments to be advertised in the Wednesday, September 24th edition of the Webster Herald.
Second.
Supervisor Flity.
I.
Councilman Cahill. I,
Councilwoman Cataly,
I,
Councilwoman Wyn,
I,
Councilwoman Wright,
I,
and resolution 12. I mean, I first should say that Paul Rick, I didn't cut you off because you haven't spoken yet, but Paul, I will I owe you an apology. I uh, you know, no problem at all. Um, but here we are back on the screen with the tenative timeline of uh how this could proceed. And I and I will just say and I'll hand it back to Rick and uh uh Paul and also to the board members for any questions before we do any resolution voting. it it if this resolution passes tonight to authorize this this with them this freed Maxic study um when they come back in four to six weeks which we're we're thinking it's November 6th here they could come back and say this thing is not eligible that it's great that Navatas and Bob Whmer came in and said you're going to get 26 million of the current project that's 85 million and you're going to get the additional 8.8 8 million, whatever. But if they come back and show various things in the IRS code or Treasury and say it's not, we're done. So this is
very much of a cascaded thing. Like if that report shows that yeah, we we did our due diligence. We hired a very professional firm. Uh a firm that was not referred by Navatas. Nothing against that, but you know, we wanted our own firm, an independent firm in all the aspects of that. They come back here on November 6 and they say, geez, it looks like clear sailing to get this. The board will then be in an in a decision-making process at that time when Navatas reports of how much it will cost to engineer and design this RNG that was presented by Bob Whmer on August 21st. So that's all I got to say.
Mhm.
Yeah. And then as we were saying earlier, at some point uh we'll need to schedule public hearing for the uh there will need to be a bond amendment. The bond amendment would increase the maximum cost of the project. It would not increase the borrowing amount which is currently at 81,500,000. Uh, as you recall, we did get a grant, so we won't be borrowing up to that maximum amount. And there will be a number of other steps along the way, uh, including approving that avatar contract amendment, which I think would be the fourth amendment. Uh, one of the stipulations of this of the law is that um, the RNG project really has to be incorporated and be part of the project that we are already doing. Uh, the project we're currently in the midst of is scheduled to be complete in July of 2026. So, we would need to get us we would need to get a start on the RNG piece prior to July of 26. Uh, so it's all incorporated. That's about all I have.
Um I just want to bring us back even prior to um before August 21st when we presented to you guys um to the board. Um and the questions that you know maybe why wasn't this brought up in the beginning of the project or why are we trying to add it on now? Um as stewards of the department we have to bring anything to the board that we feel is viable and has some merit. And when this was brought to us, um it's twofold why it was brought at that time. One was the tax code that we're looking into and having this resolution done. Um it was not available when we first started this project. The second, and if it was, we really weren't going to be producing that much bio gas to actually probably make it viable. Um, fast forward, Fair Life comes to town and with their excess waste and high strength waste that would feed our digesttor, create this bio gas, put us in a good position to actually produce enough to see this as a a very good revenue generation for us. So, that's kind of why we brought that up on August 21st. And then out of August 21st, the board asked and specifically John or uh Councilman Cahillo asked about what are the next steps if this is viable and it's something that you know looks like it should be what are the next steps and that's kind of what this presentation was tonight.
Thanks Rick.
Um so the resolution has to do with authorizing the town supervisor to sign an engagement letter with Freed Maxik which is now with him. um for an amount to not exceed $40,000. Um, I do want to have the town board members ask any questions they have, but I do want to our interaction, and I say our interaction, Paul, um, Rick, Patty, myself, Patty being the sewer liaison with Freed Max since last Friday when they submitted the 26 pages of whatever, um, has been trying to drill down on. Well, you say that this report uh is going to be somewhere between 35 and 40,000. Now, why is that? And it does seem like it's a little bit of a time and materials uh similar to campus construction management on their things that they do for the town, but those contracts with campus are over like a year period. So, we get the monthly bills and we can look at them and see, you know, are those the hours they put in and is that the the the hourly rate
of the principal who worked on it versus a more of a secretary who has a lower hourly rate. What Paul and I have to go back and still do if the board decides to go forward with this is that uh and I think Paul and I are aligned on this. We're not going to get monthly updates from Freed Maxing whatever because we want to get it done in one month. So by the time we get the bill and they say, "Oh yeah, we we did all those hours and all that." They say four to six weeks. Now I'm a simple guy. If it takes them four weeks instead of six, that probably means they had to spend less hours on it. And if it was a time and materials thing, maybe that adds up to $31,000. I'm talking your language now, aren't I, Kyle? This is very similar to billable hour attorneys. Nothing personal. So Paul and I are going to go back to Freed Maxik with him if the town board approves this tonight and basically say I don't know we need a weekly update on this. But I want to lead with honey with them is that they have made it very clear to us Paul that the more we help get them the information and point them in the right directions so they don't have to go do the research on how this contract is if they got to go do the
research it takes them four hours at 500 bucks an hour. If Rick, myself, Paul, whatever, hand him the stuff, that might cut that project down from four hours to two. Does everybody understand that?
Yeah. Makes sense.
Because there would be nothing better than to come back here on November 6 or potentially come back here on October 16th and say, "We got the report." And not only do we have the report that says whether it's viable and eligible, but it looks like the total billing for the report was $28,916
because we helped
and we also inspected what we expect.
So that's
that was going to be my question. Is this like a conservative estimate? And it sounds like it's more of a conservative or high-end ex um estimate of the cost. Well, it won't exceed 40,000. They said 35 to 40. And as soon as they put a range in a deliverable, what does somebody putting in a proposal a range mean?
It means there's latitude there.
Yep.
And as we got into more conversations with him, I think that latitude could go below 35,000.
But it's how we manage this with with them and freed Maxic. And that will be potentially daily or twice a week or things of that nature. She does anticipate quite a few hours, but uh she did say if it came if the hours came in under the bill would be less than the 35,000.
Well, that's why there's a not to exceed 40,000 in this resolution.
Not to exceed.
We go.
But what's great I mean what's great about this project, like you were saying, Rick, is it wasn't a viable option before and it is now. And what's really wild about it is that it's going to be an opportunity to increase revenue for the town and at the same time lower the overall cost of this project, which is is really an incredible thing. And doing the due diligence to spend the money to make sure that that is a a viable option is the right thing to do. it's the right thing to explore this um this option very seriously and we will have a state-of-the-art wastewater treatment plant that will enable growth um at the Xerox campus at Fairlife and beyond. This is going to be an incredible opportunity for the town of Webster in the long run. That can really, Tom, you were talking about this the other night. If we had a vibrant Webster campus and fair life, that would
be an opportunity to bring overall taxes down. It's very possible. And you know, it's funny. Uh I think Patty did a great job back on August 21st. I didn't watch it live. I was not in any five hour time difference. I'm not watching it live. Um, but I watched the tape and if if I'm sitting there as a citizen or whatever, what's not intuitive is so let me get this straight. We invest nine more million. We spend nine more million on this project and we can get 14 million back from the IRS, from the Treasury to net out. that actually we get $5 million off of what we're already spending. And if we do that, we create $750,000 of annual revenue that we don't have. That's not intuitive. That that makes the skeptic in me, the economy, say, "Come on."
Well, and that's why we want to do this, right?
Bingo.
Yep. Because the skeptic in all of us say,
"Great presentation by winner and whatever."
Yes.
But you know what? we need to go and get a third party and verify, you know, money to see if if is this a pipe dream,
right? So,
let's let's make an informed decision, right? Is essentially
what we discussed at that meeting. And Rick, thank you for bringing this to our attention. I appreciate it and I understand the fact that uh we weren't in a position or sewage treatment plant was not in the position with Navatas at the time initiation of that project. So, I appreciate the update.
This this is a this is a trust but verify
correct
situation. Favorite president
and that's what we're doing.
Mhm.
That's a Reagan statement by the way.
I shouldn't probably say that out loud. Um
Okay. Well, there are no further comments or questions. I would authorize the town supervisor to sign an engagement letter with Fremaxic PC with them not to exceed $40,000. The purpose of the engagement is to evaluate the town's proposed bio gas conversion project eligibility for the advanced energy project credit clean energy investment credit in accordance with US code section 48e.
Second.
Councilwoman Cataly
I.
Councilwoman Wright
I.
Supervisor Flity
I.
Counciloman Cahill.
I.
Councilwoman W. Um I just for the record I would vote yes but um this for the study of the project only. I'm not voting for the project itself.
That's not just for not to exceed $40,000 third party
analysis
to say whether it's viable.
Yeah. Because right now too I'm kind of you know leeries about all the grants and credits and everything that with the federal cut and everything you know it's pretty scary that we're looking something that we assuming
and you know how people say about assume assumption
that's why we are trusting but verifying with this report that's what I'm saying I want to make the rapper clear
so that is a yes with those comments from That I think concludes the formal uh meeting. Uh I am going to make a motion to go into executive session citing section 105 conduct of executive sessions. Uh subchapter one um F. F is the medical, financial, credit or employment history of a particular person or corporation or matters leading to appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person or corporation.
Second,
um, who are the attendees? I'm going to invite obviously the town board, uh the town uh uh legal Kyle Taylor, um Kelsey Feny and uh Brighton Connard from the town's human resources department and town engineer um Keith Mortimer. That is my motion.
I already seconded it.
Supervisor Flareity,
I.
Councilman Cahill,
hi.
Councilwoman Cataly,
I. Councilwoman W.
I.
Councilwoman Wright
I.