Town Board Workshop

A these are pretty u interesting ones tonight. So, we're giving a buffer of half an hour for each one. I I don't know if they'll each need a half an hour, but uh without further ado, I'm going to uh hand the baton over to Keith Mortimer, the town engineer, to do the presentation on uh I just lost my screen. Uh future animal control and dog kennel holding area options. So, Keith, you're on. What you doing? my screen. Thank you. Good evening everyone. Uh tonight we have a presentation that's going to give us uh an update of our kennel project um which initiated back in 2022 if you can believe that. Um and we hope that um at the end of this presentation it'll give some insight and guidance on some decision making that u will need to occur. Um first and foremost are we want to talk about some of the statutes that provide governance to our animal control um officer. Um these are a couple that are uh um important and they are very explicit about um how um the animal control officer is to operate. Um and

you'll notice that it leaves very little room for uh interpretation. um a lot of shells and a lot of directing of the officer to do certain things. So bit of kenneling history. Um so this is from 2022 through uh the end of June of 2025. So very recent information. Uh and we notice that there's a probably a small uptick in uh kenneling between 2022 and 2024. Um we're waiting to find out how 2025 plays out. Um and if we continue with that uptick or still stays relatively flat. Um but I think what's also important and probably needed to be should have been highlighted a little bit more here is our footnotes. Um we have when you get when you get down into the information you'll find that um generally um when we are uh sheltering dogs there's about two one or two at any one point in time but um there have been occasions uh where we exceed that um those two dogs and that's happened about four times over the course of of the

time frame that you see there. Additionally, we tend to average about 6 days per dog um for sheltering here at the town. Some history um about three and a half years ago, um our partner uh with the Pittsford Animal Hospital changed their business model um and chose to get out of the sheltering um operations. We understanding that um in April of 2024 uh we had well prior to that we had gone out for a grant um with New York State eggs and market and in April 2024 uh we had received notice that we had won but interesting enough we did not receive any um contract to review for approximately 10 months. Um and at that point in time we once we did receive that contract we started in April of 2025 really um assessing what our alternatives were. If just to reiterate our grant uh we went in with a 1100 square foot uh kennel um and it was

uh going to cost anywhere uh cost around 1 million 1.0 million as a standalone building. So we certainly were going to look at ways that we could uh reduce that down and bring it more in line with a uh a reasonable cost that we could uh manage. So that effort was going on since uh since then um and over that time period I kind of I'd like to really highlight and this is to the credit of of our um our folks in the in the animal kennel kennel is that we have received satisfactory compliance from a market both in 2023 and 2024. Unfortunately, uh when we are reassessed here this year, we probably will not receive that same satisfactory mark um because of changes that have been made um and requirements that are necessary to keep us compliant. So from this year on, if we were to stay status quo, we would fall out of compliance. So as I mentioned, we had talked about some options. We were looking at ways we we we started off with a uh standalone

building. This is kind of how we entered into our grant. This was the work plan um that helped win us this grant. So these are all kind of these options I'm going to go through. I'll call them option A and they're going to be a variation of one through four. Um and they're all got an upfront capital investment. Um so for the first I'll just quickly was the 1100 square foot standalone building. It has been proposed in two different locations where we have some space. Uh one was here on the back side of the courthouse. Uh the other was up at town hall. Both come with their challenges. Uh at the courthouse here we were going to impact parkland um and and likely wetlands. at the town hall, we'd be more adjacent to that building and we'd be likely impacting uh police department parking. Again, both options um estimated cost in 2024 were around a million dollars. Um with a grant award of 400,000, the town match was going to be about 600,000. So, we took on um a the marching orders

to figure out how we could um maybe slim down and and reduce what this new facility was going to cost. So, we looked at a standalone building. Again, um this one would be uh directly located at town hall. And for certain reasons, this was a smaller building about 900 square ft. It eliminated uh bathrooms, it eliminated offices and it eliminated um much of the storage. So hence it would need to be near uh the town hall where those those types of facilities are located. Uh similar impacts to uh the parking for the police. Um and that estimated cost in 2024 was around 700,000. Again, with a grant of 400,000, um the town match would have been around 300. And then finally, underneath these uh option A's, we have a we had considered um or we're considering the retrofit of the old highway garage administration offices. As most of you know or as everyone knows, we have moved into brand new um spaces uh for the highway garage and they were no longer in need of the

spaces that they were in and actually were targeted for demolition uh to make room for the salt barn, but they weren't going to need that entire area. And we thought there was an opportunity to salvage at least the administrative offices. So this would this would if we proceed in this would probably require an amendment to our work plan. Um we this is a very new option that we got assessed. So our costs came in uh were a little more relevant um here in 2025 of between 1 million and 1.2 million. It would provide us a a much larger space. It was 1300 square feet. um some dedicated exercise areas and other amenities that um you know the our animal control officers would uh like to take advantage of. It also has a chance to be have this we only there the total square footage of the the old highway garage offices is about 3,200 square feet. So there was certainly much a lot more room for expansion which maybe leads to an opportunity in the future for an IMA um with another municipality.

So option B we'll call them are non- capital. These are the these will be the options that wouldn't have the same I'll call them upfront um capital investment. Uh the first is entering into a intermissal agreement an IMA with another town. Um there's are a lot of details that would need to be worked out associated with this. Certainly um associated with kenneling operations um as well as we'd want to recognize that it would be a different process for our residents um when they go to reclaim animals. Uh we've had some early conversations both with the town of Arandcoy as well as the town of Penfield and they have shown um both have shown interest in an IMA with Webster. And then another uh I guess a potential option um that would need to be further vetted but um has some merit um is contracting with a local kenneling facility such as a a a daycare dog daycare facility um uh local local business. Now, there's a lot of restrictions with that in that we still

are kenneling or monitoring a dog for five days. Um, they will not take a dog until after the 5-day holding period and they would not take any dangerous dogs. So, there are some limitations to that option. What I'd like to do now is turn this over to our police department and animal control officer and have them kind of give us some insight. Uh they've got the boots on the ground and some perspectives. Uh thank you. So uh a little bit of I guess a historical perspective to add to the the presentation is that in 2021 the animal control unit came back under the uh purview of the police department and it was right around the same time as the we lost the contract uh with the sheltering of the animals. So since that time, uh, I want to make sure that we give credit to our animal control officers for the the juggling that they've done trying to maintain compliance and service the public with the um working conditions we have, the the number of dogs and uh trying to make do with the space we have. Um, as part of the presentation, we just wanted to make sure that we covered some of the operational impact of the options that are available uh and the perspective

that we were looking at it from. So, uh, the first one is from an operational perspective with the employees. Um, having a, uh, shelter facility that's under our control and locally, uh, situated makes it a, uh, more efficient operation. It allows us to guarantee the space that we have and make arrangements for the long-term, um, housing of animals that are beyond that 5-day period. uh anything to do with an IMA uh we're at the mercy of the other organization for space um and we know that space is a premium in all the organizations we're talking about and then using another municipality uh or uh out of town uh location adds more operational impact to the employees. So um that's one perspective to look at it from. The other one is from a community perspective. Um our ideal goal when we looked at this was to have the kennel centrally located to the town hall uh on the campus if possible so that through the reclamation process getting uh the dogs back to the owners um it is a more efficient process. U so uh we see that if we have to go outside of the town for fiscal reasons that that's understood. Uh but it is going to have a a heavier impact on our operation and our operational staff uh to make sure that

that is done uh effectively. Um it potentially involves uh the reimbursement of uh cost for the dogs or getting additional staff to care for the dogs at uh those other locations. So um that's kind of the perspective we just wanted to make sure that we put out there that from an operational perspective uh each has their uh pros and cons. Ideally, we would want to be much more intentional with a capital project, not reactionary like we are in this situation. Um, but that's the hand we were dealt where we have a situation that we have to overcome and um it's uh no no good path forward in my opinion. We have we just have to pick one of the options. Thank you. So, with that, we can certainly open this up to comments and questions. I I have one question. Um, Chief, you talked about making it easier for our residents to reclaim their dogs. Do we have any idea of the number of dogs or percentage of dogs that are housed that are that people actually come to reclaim their dogs or are many of them abandoned? Uh, I don't have specific numbers. I in my head I would ballpark it 50/50 from my my recollection of the the list. Um

animal control staff shaking their heads. Yes, I see that. Good. Thank you, Barbara. Thanks. So, it's my understanding that as of right now, the grant that was applied for was for a single standalone behind the core house that is we subsequently found out that was going to be built proposed to be built on wetlands. Is that true? So, uh yes. No. So, so the initial when we looked at the space uh the campus of the town hall uh like I said in the the early part, our idea was to try to keep it essentially located as possible for just efficiency. Yeah, I was just talking about the grant application itself. The location was behind the courthouse. So, that was our first location we looked at, but our grant application was actually at the town hall. So, okay. Uh the only spot on town property anywhere in town that was physically available to build a structure was the small space just uh north of the building next to the cell tower in the police department parking lot. Okay. Um the timing at the uh when the grant uh application was due uh

didn't allow us to project out for a year and say that this space would be available in a year. um the grant instructions uh had a requirement to break grounds with within three months of contract. So we uh didn't know what the time frame of the contract was. Turns out it was more than a year before we got the contract. So that's one of the reasons why we pivoted as an option is because the space at the highway facility was occupied by the highway department when we did the grant application. I I I understand that. For some reason, my understanding was as part of the grant application, the location was supposed to be behind the core house. Is that incorrect or am I misunderstanding something? To my to my recollection, uh we weren't able to submit that to the state as the grant option because of the time frame restriction on the applications. Okay. In order to get um permission to build in the wetland, I was told it takes a legislative process that is well beyond that three-month requirement to break ground. Okay. Sorry, just to correct it's parkland. The wetland has just come to our awareness. One of the things you had mentioned with the inner municipal agreement was space is not guaranteed. Are there any other

municipalities that have these agreements? And is there a way to negotiate making sure there's at least a spot for two dogs for Webster at all times? So, uh, I may defer to our animal control officers to answer that more thoroughly. Uh, to my understanding, all of the current facilities are reaching capacity and there's already a shuffle game of we're full, we're moving dogs to another location. uh one of the municipalities locally that recently built a facility is already at capacity and they have an IMA for their overflow to go to another facility. Um so it is right now um a very much a first come first serve. I don't believe there would be any guarantee of space at another municipality based on the current size of their facilities. Well, I know that we did tour um Rando's facility and they currently have five with the capacity to add five more and they are willing to work with us with respect to taking our dogs over there and working with us jointly on um filing for a grant to improve and expand their facility. So

from my perspective um you know obviously there's operational issues that would be needed to be worked out in an IMA. Obviously if you have to take dogs from here to Rhinoquite or Penfield it's not going to be as efficient as it would be housing them here but from a capital expenditure we're going to save the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. So I think it would be um at least worth looking into these M IMAS further um to save the taxpayers money. Yeah. As I mean as far as the savings of money, uh I I guess I wouldn't say I've done a cost analysis over the life of the building to know whether the personnel costs of uh an IMA agreement outweigh the capital. That's not really my role. So I didn't uh bring that to the table. So, right, I can't speak for that because if you look at different municipalities that have built um standalone kennels in the last three three years, I know Chilai just built one that's just about a,000 square feet and they paid including soft costs $525,000.

But then you look at Greece, which obviously is much larger than than Chili, and they paid well over a million dollars. And by by the end of the day, what we're looking at based upon 2024 numbers, we're we're going to be looking over a million dollars. I I can guarantee you that. So, um Well, this is good. This is this is I'm glad we booked a half an hour for this. Um, John, you bring up some great points and um I just want to make sure everybody understands that uh my uh what I plan on doing is bringing a resolution or a couple resolutions potentially to the meeting in two weeks. So on July 17th, um I think that the the board needs to um I'll call it poop or get off the pot. Uh we need to um we need to pass a resolution that says we are authorizing whoever to go and pursue IMA. go and find out what we can get for IMA terms and or the board needs to say

we want to do a resolution that says we are pursuing option A3 the 1300 square foot uh capital thing or whatever or the 900 square foot standalone or whatever. Now, I want to make it very clear that once the board does that, I've said to me that's we are we are either making a move as of July 17th to pursue going left or pursue going right, but we have to pursue something because right now where we stand is untenable. The police department is holding dogs down in their area and they have been for how long now, Chief? I would say it's probably about two years now. About two years. and to and I couldn't agree with you more. I think that that Barbara and her staff have done yman work to try to operate under what is less than ideal. So we know that where we're at right now is not tenable. So we need to move off of that. And I want to just make sure the board understands that even when a decision is made two weeks from now, whoever, let's say it's the IMA, and let's say that John gets together with Paul and uh uh what is this going to be

the Beatles for a second there, right? Um and Keith and she and Barbara and they go and talk to Penfield and Ronda Qu. really start to work out this IMA and it really after two months it's like it just hits a dead end and so it's just it's not going to do what what we think it was going to do John because I agree I think it will be a variable cost instead of a humongous capital cost right but if you run into problems and it doesn't work and we find some things out they would be back in front of this board in September or October saying well we went that route but we've run into some snags that you know either they're objections or they're barriers. Now, conversely, and I want to make sure everybody understands this one. If we go for the capital one and we got the marching orders that we're going for the 900 square foot, which based on last year's numbers was 700,000 gross, and we we think that the eggs and market will let us use the 400,000. So, it'll net to 300,000 from the the town taxpayers. Now we start to put together the bids. First of all, we'd have to submit that back to AS and market and and we hope that they'll okay that because like you said, John, well, if it if it was in

this position when we applied for it, if we're moving it over to here, that could make them say, "No, that's different. We're not going to do it." When we talked to eggs and market back in April of 2024 and said that we were looking at some differences, they said, "Oh, that that shouldn't be a problem, you know, but you'll have to just show us the redesign and whatever." But then their attorney said to Barber or to Maria or to Keith that if you you can't use it for a retrofit. So, there's some ambiguity on there. And I know Kyle tried to reach out to the eggs and market attorney. This is not Kyle. This is John. But John's partner Kyle reached out and don't take this the wrong way. John is an attorney. But the eggs and market attorney came back and it was clear as mud. Said a lot, but didn't say anything really that would give you any unequivocal irrefutable of of whether they're going to do it or not. So if we go the capital route, we might find one that we're right back in front of the board in September saying, "Geez, you know, we can't go that route the way we thought because eggs and market won't give us the $400,000 or andor we put out the bid packages because we do have to do municipal law on this one and put out bid packages and like you said, John, it

could come back at a million, too." and this board might sit there at that point and say, "Wait a minute." You know, when we sat back on July 17th and we said, "We'll go the capital route." We we did that because we thought it was going to be a net $300,000. And now 2 months later, because of what eggs and market clarified andor what the bid process clarified, the dollar amount is significantly higher. What is the common denominator of what I just said from from uh going IMA and going capital? It is possible, very possible, that we're right back in front of the board in a couple of months with the problems that our team has run into going the route of IMA and going the route of capital. I will say this, um, I don't mean to be a buzzkill, but I think that's just the reality of where we're at. All right? We can't say, "Well, let's let's put this off for a couple more months. Let's think more and more." They've already been holding those dogs for two years. This has got to stop. We need forward motion on doing something different. Um, a market rules are getting tighter. These are unfunded mandates. You can call them what you want. That's what they are, right? From New York State. I

mean, only New York State in their infinite wisdom could take a crisis where everybody's getting out of the dog holding business and decide, well, that's when we're going to make the regulations on what you do as a town holding the dogs worse. That doesn't make any sense in the world. But that's what New York State did, right? So, we just got to play by those rules. Tom, can I just add quickly? Please do save them. We all well we also have um it it's um imperative that we make a decision soon because the grant funding that we received we've been holding them and haven't signed the contract for five months and I don't know that they're going to keep waiting while we make a decision. It's a very good point, Maria, because once did we wait for them to two wrongs don't make it right. As I was going to say, John, I I don't feel comfortable with Kyle or John or myself or John Kale going back to them and saying, "Hey, we waited a year for you. So, what are you complaining to us about 5 months?" Well, guys and gals, guess what? Here's the rules of the world. The golden rule. They have the gold. They make the rules. I think we have to follow that. And it's it's it's irrelevant that they dragged this out for 9 to 12 months on us. To be honest

with you, that worked to our advantage because we did a lot of work. That time frame that Keith I like is red, white, and blue. Very nice. You know what you did there. That is is summed up one-page time frame because the activity that went on during that time was immense. And we were always like, we got to figure this out because they're going to get that template contract in front of us any day now. They didn't get it in front of us for a year. We needed that whole year cuz we were looking at every option under the sun. And as far as I'm concerned, we are now at that point where here they are. Now the board in two weeks needs to, you know, make a decision which way to go. And I I will say this, one thing I don't think that you can't, hey, let's go both ways. Let's go parallel. and see what happens. That's a non-starter. You You can't do that. Why Why is that? Just out of curiosity. I would say that Well, so we've looked at Legally, Could you go both ways? Yes. Is it a Is it a good practice to have uh Well, John, which team are you going to be on because you're gonna you're going to lead the I'm gonna say this right now. Okay. So, we've been looking at building. We've

had we've spent tens of thousands of dollars on engineering costs since we started looking in the building of this standalone building and then retrofitting. Right? Every time the engineering group comes up with different plans or different drawings, we're spending more money. We've only been looking at the IMA aspect of this for approximately 3 weeks. We have not put the due diligence into that as we have looking into standalone buildings. So, in all fairness, I think we need to go down the road of doing some more due diligence in the IMA aspect of this before we just say, "Okay, we're not doing the IMA. We're just going to go we're going to spend $600,000 of taxpayer money." That's my opinion. And now we're coming up against 7. I'll tell you why you can't do both. You look, I've been thinking to myself, man, this will be unprecedented that we're going to throw the $400,000 fish back into the water. We've never done that to the best of my knowledge as a town. And I don't know what that means to the town overall when you take a $400,000 grant that Barbara worked very hard on and then we say after we sign the contract because if we go both then we sign the contract on July 18th and we go to the bid process and we're in good faith moving

down that road with with eggs in market only do two months later have you come back and say hey I think we got something good this IMA why doesn't the town board vote on that IMA now we go back to eggs and market a state agency and say, "Hey, you know, the last two months when we in good faith signed all these contracts and did all this stuff." Forget that. We're not taking that. I do not want to oversee an organization that does that because I think it would leave this next board uh which will be at least two different people in January with a real problem as far as how the state is going to look at this town going forward on other grants. And don't kid yourself to think that they won't. The only thing I just want to clarify, we did look at IMAS from the beginning, sir. Uh that was part of the discussion right off the bat. Uh we put out interest in IMAS. We had discussions about them and none of the other municipalities at the time were in a position to to take on a joint venture like that. Well, obviously things have changed since you had those initial conversations as to conversations that myself and Keith had with um Iran Koi 3 weeks ago. Yeah. No doubt. Yeah, and I'm just, you know, to your point, Tom, if we have an opportunity to save the taxpayers of Webster over a

half a million dollars by spending time doing some due diligence and IMAS with Pittsver or Rhonda, that's the direction I feel we should go. So, now that we're at 7:00 and this this is great. Um, I've already told you that, you know, at 20 thou in two weeks from tonight, I'm bringing a resolution or resolutions and we're going to vote on something. So, part of that due diligence, I mean, and John, I've never you should have been an investigative reporter. I've said this guy, if I ever had hire a private detective or whatever, he I'd hire you. What kind of due diligence can be done between now and 7:30 in two weeks where you can come back and help the board with what you found out about Penfield and around? So, let me let me ask you this question cuz you're you are the one saying, "I'm bringing a resolution in two weeks." Why why two weeks? What did someone call you or send you a letter or an email saying you need to put a resolution together in two weeks for your board? It's a great question. We when we just started looking into the IMAS we I'm going to chief thank you you already have answered Councilman Kale that we looked at IMAS you just looked at I randate the other day you looked at

Randquate a couple of years ago when this started so John with all clearly things have changed you have just started with IMA you have just started looking at IMAG more than accepting to do an IMA with us I don't I don't we're going to move on to the next one but I will tell you This one of the executive privileges you have as a supervisor and you don't have many is you get to set the board agenda. I'm telling everybody public and the board I'm bringing these resolutions either pursue the IMA which doesn't mean the IMA is you're authorizing it to be signed. Some team has to go and start negotiating that with the places. And I'm being redundant. you might be back here in two months and say, "We ran into some snags and that's not going to be the route." Conversely, if you vote to go the route of the capital and the grant and all that, it is possible in 2 months you're back here saying, "Geez, eggs and market wouldn't allow that place over there and or retrofit." Or we put the bids out and we found out that it's a $2 million project. And when we voted on July 17th, this board voted because they thought it was going to cost the taxpayers a net 300,000. They did not vote to do this at a net 1

million. Now, John asked, "Why would I bring it here on the 17th?" One, and probably the least of which is my executive privilege. I can bring it here. You can make motions to say we don't want to vote on either of those. and tanamount to kicking it down the road more. We got to stop kicking this issue down the road. This issue and I if you want to pull up your red, white and blue timeline there, Keith. All right. this issue has been going on and I don't want anybody to be confused by the fact that John I appreciate just because you went to Iran quite for the first time you say that is the start of IMA there's been a lot of discussions if if the IMA is something in two weeks that has the best chance of being voted on by this board there's nobody better at it John go out grab your team go to Penfield field with Barbara, go to a randquite, go to any place you want and start to put together the pieces of an IMA and maybe you find out some hurdles that are uncsurmountable or insurmountable in the next two weeks which might influence this board's

decision to move toward the capital one. But I have no appetite for us sitting here and saying why in two weeks why don't we why don't we look at this more and why don't we come back in August or September. I think that time's done. My point being, and I don't need mean to be redundant also, um the whole aspect of IMA, I didn't hear anything from you during any discussions, any tours, anything with respect to any conversations that you have had with either Oronquite or Penfield as far as is this would you be willing to work with us on that? Okay. I didn't hear any of that from anyone. So quite frankly, I took it upon myself to call the chief of police of Aranquite, set up a meeting. I invited Keith, they brought their deputy supervisor in 3 weeks ago. So my timeline didn't start in 2022 or 2023. It started three weeks ago. So it's not like I'm like put putting this thing off. We just started these discussions. they are willing to work with us on an IMA. I can't help that people started on this in 2022 and we're we're we're at where we are right now. John, I agree with

you. Really simple. Okay. You you there's five board members. There's five votes. Yeah. I'm telling you as a supervisor, I'm bringing this to the table in two weeks. the other board members can sit there and say, "I make a motion to not pursue that. I make a motion to not pursue the other one, too." That is tanamount counselor to you just kick the can down the road because the two resolutions I brought to the table, one being IMA route to start that process, one capital. That's vote with your feet. If you're if you're so passionate that you think this has to be kicked down the road, that's what you need. I'm not saying it has to be what I'm saying. Jennifer and me follow that years. Tom looked in the for three weeks. I understand your opinion. If you want to bring it up, go ahead. You can bring it up. I'm going to motivate everybody to to kick it down the road, then then that's great. It's not kicking. Well, this this has worked out great. I'm going to disagree with you on that. All right. Well, we can agree to disagree. We each have one vote. Yep. We each have one vote. Absolutely. You and I are the only ones talking when really we could be outvoted by the three ladies who probably are more common sense and measured in this and they're like, "Yeah, let those two guys just talk and

talk and talk. We'll ultimately do the vote that's going to uh move this thing along." Now, with that being said, and we're just airing our dirty laundry in front of a nice crowd that's come in. We are 8 minutes late, but we are going to start the second presentation. Maria, that's a tough act to follow, huh? But this one should be easier. Uh, our second item tonight is a presentation by Maria Dur on the tenative CFA grant application strategy. And that tenative well it's the strategy that we've been employing in for the last several months on this that will basically um come to fruition with action uh tonight because we have 28 days to formally apply for CFA grants. So once again, we can't kick this down the road on resolutions that are queued up tonight for this board to decide whether they're authorizing um and acknowledging um uh matching funds of these grants. So with that, Maria, take over. Okay. Good evening. Uh my name is Maria Der and I'm here tonight to present the proposed CFA grant applications for 2025.

But first, a quick history recap. In October 2023, the town secured the services of Gene O' Connell and Associates to write the town grants and also assigned me, Maria Der, the task of town grant liaison. Since then, I have presented to the town board a few times. My first presentation was on November 7th, 2024, regarding the relationship, delegation of tasks, and the grant writing process. My second presentation was on May 15, 2025, just recently, where we reviewed the town grant efforts and awards from 2010 to 2025. And tonight, I'm presenting the proposed 2025 NYS CFA grant applications to submit for town projects. What is CFA? Um, the NYS CFA is a New York State Consolidated Funding Application. This application allows the grant seeker to create one application per project to be considered for multiple selected sources of grant funding. Of the 32 grant funding sources, our proposed projects align with four of the grant funding sources. Project one is the Sandbar Park phase 2 and three design and permitting. This project aligns with the LWRP or local

waterfront revitalization program. Project history. December 2021, CFAL LWRP was awarded for design and construction of Sandbar Park phase 1. July 2024, CFAL LWRP was applied for design and construction of Sandbar Park phase 2. In December of 2024, we were notified that we were not awarded the grant. We attended a debriefing with the grant panel and were given suggestions on how to improve future applications. Our strategy for the application is based on the review of our unsuccessful application. As s as suggested, the grant is being written for design and permitting of Sandbar Park phases two and three. The maximum award per project available is $2 million. The required match is 25% of the grant award. The amount we're asking for is to be determined as we're waiting for estimates to come in. The grant team for this project is Chris Bo, Keith Mortimer, Josh Artuso, and me. The grant writer will be Gene O'Connell and Associates. Our next project is GIS mapping and database expansion. This project aligns

with the NPG or non-aggricultural non-point source planning and MS4 mapping grant. There is no town application history for this project or this stream of funding. The town is interested in pursuing this grant funding for GIS activities due to mapping requirements associated with being an MS4 community as dictated by the DEEC. This opportunity was mentioned during a presentation given during an MS4 operator forum attended by Keith Mortimer, the town engineer. The purpose of applying for this grant is to offset consultant fees for the GIS mapping and database expansion project. The maximum award is $75,000 and we will be applying for the maximum. The match on this grant is 10% of the award. The team for this grant will be Keith Warmmore and Mark Stein in engineering, Josh Artuso and Erica Corsy in community development planning and zoning and me. The town recreation center improvement project aligns with BOA or Brownfield's opportunity area grant. This project is part of the reimagine Webster project spearheaded by the village of Webster and WEDA. In 2024,

WEDA, the town, and the village applied for this funding. Unfortunately, at the time, they were made aware their application wasn't eligible as they were not formally designated a BOA. Recently, the BOA designation was received and we are now eligible to apply. The project scope is for preliminary design improvements to the town recreation complex, including an amphitheater, realigned driveway, new parking, and a shelter structure with restrooms. The maximum award amount is 40 uh sorry $400,000 and the town is asking for $84,000. The required match is 10% of the award. The village is the lead applicant and the town is the co-licant. We will be writing this grant on behalf of both parties. The salt barn project aligns with WQIP water quality improvement project grant. There is no town application history for this project. During a review of grant possibilities for the project, the WQIP seemed the best. There are two reasons for this. First, the grant awards period for this award is May 19th, 2025 to May 18th, 2030. Expenses during this period can be applied to this grant. Secondly,

our grant consultant, Gene Oonnell, and Associates wrote the winning grant that was awarded to Orchard Park. While this doesn't guarantee that we will be selected, it gives us a clear understanding of what information and type of narrative is is needed for the application to be a top contender. The maximum award for this type of project is $600,000. The town will be asking for the maximum award. The match is 25%. The team for this grant application will be Pat Stevens, Alli Zapoli, and Deb Castellani of the highway department, Keith Mortimer, and me. The grant writer for this project will be Gene O' Connell and Associates. Next, we have the Vosberg pump station, which is another project that aligns with the WQIP grant. For this project, the town previously applied for the WEIA or Water Infrastructure Improvement Act grant and congressionally directed spending that was recently applied for. Unfortunately, neither application was successful. This project is an important project as the equipment is well past its lifespan and it receives a large amount of flow. The maximum award for this project is 75% of eligible construction costs. The town is asking for an estimated dollar amount of 2,671,875

on their application. This is based on the 5.7 million bonded for this project in 2024. The match for this grant is 25% of the award. The team for this application will be Art Patron, Rick Connealy, and Marian Lamb of the sewer department. And the grant writer will be the engineering firm MRB Group. The final project to be discussed tonight is Ship Builders Creek Restoration Project. This project also aligns with WQIP as does the Salt Barn and the Vossburg pump station. For this project, the town previously applied for the WQIP grant funding. Barton Legjudas wrote this application and were unfortunately not selected. This project and grant application are presented for your consideration as ship builders creek is an identified impaired water source and sewer infrastructure needs to be replaced due to erosion. The maximum award for WQIP is $15 million and the town is asking for $872,000. There is a 25% match per grant award. The grant team for this application will be Art Patron, Rick Connealy, and Marian Lamb of the Sewer Department. And the grant writer will be the engineering firm Barton and Legudas.

In summary, we're asking for the following from the following grant funding opportunities. Brownfield Opportunity Area or BOA, we're asking for 84,000 of the 200 of the 2 million available. Local waterfront revitalization program LWRP the MAC the minimum the maximum ask is $2 million of $13,975,000 available non-aggricultural non-point source planning and MS4 mapping grant or NPG we're asking for $75,000 of a $3 million available funding line wastewater quality improvement project WQIP we have three possible projects totaling $4,143,875 of an avail a available $75 million. The next steps, we need you, the town board, to vote on and approve all, none, or some of the resolutions. Without the approved resolutions, we cannot apply for the grant as it's a requirement of each grant application. I'd like to thank all the town staff, engineering firms, WEDA, and Gino Connell associates who will be working

to pull the applications together that the town board approves. Are there any questions? Maria, I just wanted to say thank you very much for all the work that you put into this. It's uh greatly appreciated. You've done Yman's work on this. So, thank you so much. Thank you, Maria. Thank you. And and to echo Councilman Cahill, it's a tremendous presentation. I had some questions as we went along and we got to the summary page and all my questions were answered. So, that was great. Um, the one thing I do want to point out that we might want to correct for those who might be watching at home or who will be looking at this on the website, um, in the ship builder creek restoration project, the grant team is actually the Barton and Legudas firm, not MRB. Oh, thank you. Yep. I did a small detail. I made some last minute edits, but I'm not sure that I gave uh the right copy. No problem at all. None. But thank you. A great presentation. Jenny or Jennifer? No. Very thorough. Very thorough. Well, this works out great because uh it is 7:19 right now. So, this is what I propose we do. We're always flexible here, right, John? As far as you know, um

we're going to shut down this workshop. Uh, and we're going to come back at 7:30 to start the regular town board meeting. Um, we already have uh changed the agenda that was originally sent to the Webster Herald. Two days ago, an agenda was put up on the um town website, social media platforms that shows after our pledge of allegiance and roll call, we're going to just go right into um the voting on these six projects that Maria just went over. So, it's very possible that there will be more discussion that kind of spawns off of the uh workshop that you just presented as we approach each one of these votes. Um, and then once we get through that uh we will go to um well, I'll I'll describe what we're going to do once we uh open up the uh 7:30 meeting with what we're going to do. I'm sorry. I have one more question. Shoot away. Has the village passed a resolution for that for the grant application where we're co-licants? Uh Leanne Kimber just sent over because she's it's a WEDA generated thing and BOA is 95% of the coverages village. Uh their next board meeting

they're doing their resolution because they're applying for a lot more grants than we are. Okay. Uh through the BOA. Okay. Through this program. I think their next board meeting is the 8th. Probably next week. Is it Tuesday the 8th? Yeah. Okay. Thanks. So with that in mind, thank you everybody. Uh that concludes the workshop.