Video recording

captions Language: en one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all Denine can you do rooll please supervisor flare here councilwoman cataldi present councilman Cahill here councilwoman W here councilwoman Wright here Town attorney janesse present okay well our first item up tonight is a public hearing to consider an addition to the Consolidated sanitary Sewer District specifically the Woodard Road Extension um now before I put the Mallet down and start the public hearing I think this was properly uh we did a resolution a few weeks ago to advertise it in the Webster Herald um and art I I I think art you might want to say a few words before we open the public hearing about what this is pertaining to I would so uh thanks supervisor so this is a u extension to the good folks on W Road uh six homes uh that is sorely sorely needed um I would like to honestly thank take this moment to thank the team that has got it back to this point and that team includes the residents um Charlie janesse Paul Adams and Maran lamb uh to really keep this thing going and get it back to where it should be so hopefully we have no more hurdles and we keep going well thanks art I know that we've we've talked to ad naazim about this that here are people that want to um connect to our sewer system to get out of septic and uh is this the same past situation with uh the state having a very outdated um rule on this it it it really is uh it it was uh I I will say it was Troublesome uh we've gone back and forth thankfully uh they had someone new step in on their end was helpful again a bit of a struggle but they were helpful um and you know really guided us back to uh got us back to where we need to be I think Charlie can probably talk on a little bit more he's going back and forth with a state attorney okay well uh hopefully that explains to the people in attendance um and also watching at home uh what this is about so I am going to open the public hearing and at least five minutes ago who had signed in to speak at the public hearing was was no nobody but in the last 5 minutes some people have walked into the room is there anybody that walked in late that wants to take the podium to speak about this Woodard Road sewer tie going once going twice um sold I am going to close the public hearing Charlie does that seem appropriate at this point um perfectly appropriate okay the public hearing is officially close um just done I mean I don't think we have a resolution today no I was going to ask that question I know that we don't usually um we don't make a habit of passing resolutions the same night as the public hearing but since this has gone on for so long and no one spoke against it tonight certainly is there any reason we can't make this resolution this evening I'm sure I could prepare one fairly easily this is actually about I don't know how many have we had in this already oh gosh numerous over this has been going on for about two and a half year so we U we're set I think to prepare that we may have to come back I think to to go do another resolution to go back to the controller again so agreed there would be nothing wrong with the town board passing a resolution which I will prepare I'll get it to the town clerk and just again this is something we've had before it's the same group people um the same Property Owners yeah we should definely expedite the process so would it be as simple as would make the motion to make the motion to uh consider the addition to the Consolidated sanitary sewer district specifically the Woodland Woodard Road Extension second councilman cataldi I councilman Cahill I supervisor flarity I councilman w i councilman right I I think that was a common sense move based on what as long as we're on a roll let's get this thing done yep yep does this require Seeker does that require Seeker for the tie-in um I think we did the Seeker around there the if if you want to it it would be it would be type two does I'm just asking if it's needed or not if you said it was already done then that's fine I believe I don't have that I don't have the uh the public hearing resolution but if you if you would like to add that if you'd like to amend it or make a separate motion it would not be I'll make a a motion um that the um addition to the Consolidated sanitary sewer specifically the six Homes at the wooded Road Extension is a type to action under the New York State Environmental Quality review act second councilman Wright I councilman cataldi I supervisor FL I councilman Cahill I councilman when I it's got to be something about that seat thank you because Bill Abbott was our Seeker King we might have our new Seeker Queen long lived I have experience from I like it that's right and Bill was from the planning board yeah and and everything on the planning board even a sign needs yeah Seeker no yeah figured this may yeah okay well the next agenda item up tonight I've said it many times is my favorite part of the meeting this is the open to the public uh to take the podium for up to five minutes to speak about anything your heart desires um and we have three people that signed in tonight to speak and we'll go in the order that they signed in Greg Cummings you are first good evening my name is uh Greg Cummings I live on H Granger Circle here in Webster uh the only thing I wanted to talk about tonight is proposal one which is going to be on the ballot and is really just to hopefully educate people that they ought to look into this before they walk in and just vote based upon what it comes across as um I'm just going to read a letter to the editor so I'm not add living here and it talks about proposal one will appear on the back of the ballot in November it's essential that you understand the many negative effects this could result in if prop is passed the New York State Legislature has deemed it the Equal Rights Amendment who's not for equal rights we all are just about but that's not the end of the story many voters will stop right there when they hear that tagline or when they go in and read Equal Rights Amendment they won't read it they'll just vote for it and the the dangerous part is there are a couple of things that we want to bring to people's attention it's also being sold as the abortion Bill and Albany is very good as is our federal government at naming things and driving Things based upon what's popular no matter what poll you look at more than 60 or 70% of Americans right or wrong want abortion not going to argue that fact that's a personal decision but they're selling it as the abortion bill it's very similar to what happens in Congress when you have let's say funding for uh the Ukrainian War $65 billion well what other people do then senators and assembly people is they start putting in the um the ear marks and the other things that people won't vote against because they want the big thing and so it's being sold as the abortion bill because Albany knows more than 60% want abortion that's fine what they're not telling you is that there's a lot more things to it so if you want abortion and you're willing to vote this there are other things you are going to give up and we just want people to be aware before they go in and vote examine your conscience vote what you want but we I am part of the uh coalition to protect kids New York and I ended up volunteering because there were two things in this that totally irritated me that it's trying to be slipped by without anyone knowing about it so I started to volunteer as have many people and the two two things that we're really looking at is uh we're trying to educate the public uh by having them get together and giving them information we call them a town hall we have one every Tuesday at 6 o'clock on a zoom call if anyone ever wants to join um great thing about a zoom call is you can hang up if you don't like it and no one knows um so we currently have an equal rights amendment in the New York state constitution and it protects things like race Creed religion color Etc but there are 12 new categories that are being added and interestingly even though it's being sold as the abortion Bill the word abortion does not even show up in this amendment it's kind of odd what we're really concerned about is two things one is the word word age that is going to become a protected category and age at my age I think of people not firing me because I'm getting older or not allowing me to work because I'm getting older that certainly is part of it but what is not being portrayed is age also goes down to Oney old 2y old 5y old 12y old it's from first breath to last breath and that's one of our biggest concerns because if you have a child that wants to do something whatever it is and you say no and they're 11 years old they can claim discrimination now many parents won't face that because of how you've brought up your children but there are some parents who do face that and in fact not only will they face the child claiming it they will also face people that are um arguing on behalf of that child so if this gets into the Constitution Greg and I we're at five so we're at five minutes but keep going you finish up because you got a second one so I don't want to cut you off mident yep y you got the age what's the second one second one is uh adding sex to discrimination not transgender none of that stuff however that is part of this but it says you cannot discriminate on sex so that means by law by the Constitution a boy you and me I can say I want to join the girls softball team they cannot stop me legally they cannot stop me and again we're not talking transgender issues none of that and that's that's personally as a father uh my daughter's grown but she now plays adult sports and there are men who play in the adult sport roll the Derby and I don't like it and I will leave it at that I just for clarification Greg yes not only can they can boys play in women's sports they can also go into the women's or girls locker room that's true that's true and also all girls schools or all boy schools can be abolished thanks Greg thank you Greg uh you know I think we all agree that what Greg was saying was pretty uh interesting and I would have loved to said go on for 15 minutes but I know how that's cuz then when somebody's up there who maybe it's not interesting to everybody or whatever why don't I let them go 15 minutes oh you're more than welcome to come back Greg and talk on this topic sure again believe me it's a very important topic and and thank you for speaking on that really just trying to get people understand yes thank you guys yep now speaking of going 15 minutes counselor John Demarco is next I'm busting your chops John I know you won't try to push the five minut my topic is going to be a little lighter than that one um good evening members of the board um it's it's an interesting experience because sitting uh to the left of the supervisor uh at least one night a month I didn't realize that the speaker can't see barely see uh the last board member on the far end so uh it's good to stand up here uh Hillsboro Cove is my address and uh as I I just alluded to I'm the deputy Town attorney for the town of Webster I'm also the senior partner in the DeMarco Taylor Law Group um and and for transparency I'm also my law firm uh was one of the firms that provided a response to the RFP uh from the town of Webster which is relevant to item five on the business or the regular Town business agenda this evening which is the resolution to authorize the supervisor to sign an engagement agreement for Town legal services and my my comments um are going to be addressed primarily to the three board members that were not part of the committee that uh has made a recommendation relative to the selection um of the law firm and of course um that's uh Mr Cahill Miss W and Miss right and U the reason why I'm addressing it to to the three of you primarily is also because uh the town decided frankly unbeknownst to me at the time that the RFP process was the process that they decided to to use to go about uh determining what would be best suited for the town I didn't realize at the time that there was a resolution back in October of last year 23 that certainly allows this to be exempt from that process and the town was not required to do an RFP for these services and the reason why that's relevant is because I have made attempts to speak with Miss Wright Mr Cahill and Miss win and they I think all each individually viewed at least my perception was that they were handcuffed from speaking with me regarding this process because the RFP process requires that they don't because I'm a prospective vendor but in reality the RFP process was not necessary and they could have been able to speak with me as one of the prospective Law Firm for those of you that are unfamiliar with my background very briefly I have been a municipal attorney uh for 14 years nine with the town of Arondo five with the town of Webster I've also served as town justice for an additional eight years and acting judge of the New York state supreme court for a decade uh my firm also practices uh in Municipal matters for individual clients I've been practicing law close to 40 years now um for the last 18 months I've been involved with the town board at the request of the Town supervisor and the town attorney to assist the town in a backlog of legal matters that the town that the supervisor wanted to essentially enumerate pick up speed and and close things that had been uh going on for a while that's certainly uh not a a comment against Mr janesse who's probably one of the finest Municipal lawyers in the state of New York and I know the town is sorry to see him go uh but we were asked to participate we have participated for the last 18 months at their request obviously on the basis of our performance over the last five years as attorneys for the town of Webster and I suspect because of my almost 40 years of being in around these issues um the My ask this evening is simply this um I would encourage the town board to vote to either table or Workshop this matter so that the three members that were not part of that committee have an opportunity to review what we have reviewed over the last 18 months not only with respect to the supervisors matters that he wanted to get up to speed on but a considerable amount of time in determining what uh attorney janesse has been engaged in over the last 30 years the amount of time that he spent the the expertise that was required in all those matters and trying to understand from a budgetary standpoint because again with all due respect to Mr janesse the compensation and those hourly rates were extremely Antiquated and we were asked to participate in that process and I think there's a lot of information that came from that that you may not have been privy to given uh the uh amount that was shared with you or not shared with you um my second ask is that the town takes some action to unshackle those board members that have not participated in this process well I'm having fun tonight now you're at 505 so John if you could uh 15 seconds uh Mr supervisor to unshackle those board members so they can engage directly with those individuals uh that may be part of the process in um attempting to uh become the successor to uh Mr janesse I am available for the balance of the evening when you get to this item should you wish to ask me any further questions thank you for the opportunity and the time thanks John thanks John all right and last up tonight unless anybody had come in and said they if anybody else wants to talk Beyond Don White who is a town um vill resident but for full disclosure he's also the village uh attorney Dan U good evening um again Dan White uh I live on Brook Tree Lane in Webster most all of you know me um I grew up in Webster uh I graduated from Thomas High School back when it was called ARL Thomas high school I went to flarities when it was called Flags um I've been involved in town government for almost 40 years I was uh a member of this board back in the late 80s and early 90s before that I was a Deputy Town attorney serving for the zoning board of appeals um and I'm currently for the last 10 years or so the attorney for the village of Webster when I looked at tonight's agenda and I saw a resolution to sign an engagement agreement for Town Council legal service and I clicked the button to look at that agreement frankly I was shocked and very disappointed to see that it was not not a local attorney that the town is seeking to hire um like I said I've been involved in this for years and I can tell you it's always been a local Town resident attorney that has represented the village or the town of Webster for as far back as I can remember you know with herb Stern and Chris Cod Jerry Metrano and Charlie janesse and I think it is a grave mistake to go away from that including the deputy attorneys were also by and large always Town residents um and and and there's and and and I understand you went through this RFP process but it's not just dollars and cents and this may be cheaper than what you've been paying for Legal Services but some of the benefits you can't get through an RFP if it's someone local they're accessible they live here if if they need to attend a meeting they can show up on a moment's notice uh if you hire an individual you're going to get more individualized attention and service than if you hire a firm I don't know there's like nine attorneys in this firm are you going to get the same attorney all the time who knows um in addition if the if the attorney is a resident of the town they know the town they live here they got you know they've got you know some skin in the game so to speak I was always in favor of the more police officers you could hire that live in the town the better because they know the town same with your attorneys uh and lastly there are political reasons to hire someone local I'm not going to get into those political reasons because you probably know them but like it or not town government politics are a part of town government like any government and it's it's unavoidable and those are some considerations that I ask you to please take take to heart thank you thank you Don okay our next agenda item tonight is to review the minutes from two weeks ago the September 19th uh workshop and also the regular Town board meeting I reviewed red both of them I will make a motion to approve the workshop minutes from September 19th second supervisor flarity I councilwoman WN I councilwoman cataldi I was not present therefore I will abstain although I will say I did watch it councilman kahill right councilman Wright obstain I was not here either and I think we're going to get a repeat of the stains for at the regular Town board meeting I reviewed those minutes and I uh make a motion we approve those second supervisor flare I councilman WN I councilman kahill all right do you want to councilwoman cataldi abstain Council woman right abstain all right next up I think uh Jennifer did you do the Bills uh Jenny was so kind given the given my personal situation caring for my parents um she went to the town to approve the bills for me this month and she did for me two weeks ago thank you Jenny yeah they're welcome it's a teamwork I'm glad everything worked out fine uh oh I'm sorry I have reviewed the bill and everything seemed to be in order I make a motion to pay the bills please second councilman when I councilman kahill hi supervisor flarey hi councilwoman cataldi I councilwoman r i and uh first of all welcome back Paul we missed you thank you Tom um I did review the warrants is submitted by Paul Adams our Director of Finance make a motion we approve those second supervisor flarey I councilwoman w i councilwoman cataldi I councilman kahill I councilwoman Wright I and I also uh reviewed the purchase orders submitted by Paul Adam direct Director of Finance and make a motion we approve those second supervisor flarey I councilwoman cataldi I councilman kahill I councilwoman w i councilwoman Wright I okay um Megan and Miss oh Eric why you doing um our next resolution number four on the agenda is to consider approval of a license agreement to locate a fence and a shed within both a town sanitary sewer easement and a town drainage easement at 1123 Stone Gate Drive wow did you guys luck out you you have both a sewer Eastman and a drainage eement on your property lucky uh um I know that we got letters art I think from you and also from Pat Stevens in Highway who uh is overseas drainage and uh I think they were fine with this fence and the shed um so unless anybody has some questions on the board or whatever uh no I don't okay I'm I'm going to make a motion to to for approval of a licensed agreement to locate a fence in a shed within both a town sanitary sewer eement and a town drainage easement at 1123 stonate Drive tax ID number 08017 D3 d24 I'll second supervisor flarey I councilwoman Wright I councilman cataldi hi councilman kahill hi councilman w i and you have your your new best friend you've have you already talked to them okay we're up to number five I would like to um make some um hang on one second were you going to make a motion uh I was planning on making the motion I um I want to say I want to thank those who came out to speak tonight about this um and making this motion is somewhat bittersweet because the man sitting to my right has been to my right for many years and I have worked with him for a long time um he has my absolute respect um I've also been privileged to call him a friend and I want to say we're not going to get too teary about this because you'll be here a while longer but uh it's it's been a great honor to work with Charlie and he certainly deserves his retirement so uh I would make a motion to authorize the supervisor to sign an engagement agreement for Town Council Legal Services um I would the Webster General Municipal planning board and Zoning Board of Appeals Legal Services as of January 1st 20125 with manuso Brightman plcc is that your motion that is my motion and I'm going to second that before we do any further voting on that uh Denine um I want to just uh have some dialogue so Jenny you're going to have a chance to talk on this I mean I we we obviously had coun councelor uh John Marco in and and obviously Don White um so I just want to say that um as starting off the dialogue on this before we vote uh on the motion that Patty made and I seconded um Charlie I got to tell you something I mean I've really enjoyed the last five years getting to know you he's taught me Latin this and that he is a gentleman and I've really enjoyed working with him and it was interesting because you probably remember about two years ago I said Charlie uh any functional organization has to have this conversation let's start talking succession um it's a tough conversation to start but we started it and I thought after Charlie's 20 plus years to the town and in this he deserved he'd earned the right to be part of the planning of that succession um and Charlie also was able to educate me on what I thought was true is that the the complexity of the Town legal issues in 20 24 are far more complex than when you started that 30 years ago and it has a lot to do with the fact that we are not the town that we were 30 or 40 years ago um we are a very different socioeconomic town we have a lot more complex issues and I got to say that um John DeMarco made a very good point and I can't thank him enough and also Kyle Taylor um who is uh not our Deputy Town attorney but Kyle um is our attorney to the planning board because he can't be a deputy because he as Don White said he doesn't live in town he lives in Victor so we made him the attorney to the um planning board but not a deputy because you got to live in town um and and the all hands on deck the last 18 months as John DeMarco said um Charlie I I know and a lot of this is because of of of the things going on in town there's a lot of outstanding legal issues all right where we're building a sewer plant we're building a highway garage we got all this stuff going on and there's been a lot on your plate and I had asked John DeMarco and Kyle Taylor as W2 employees of the Town um just like Charlie is can can you help us can we can you help us you know your attorneys and even though this isn't their specialty uh Municipal law um they were gracious and helping and the interesting thing was and I'm going to be very honest about this is that um because I felt a certain obligation moral whatever that they were helping us outside the bandwidth of what they were hired to do to be the zoning board and planning board attorney that when we switched in January of 2023 from two planning board meetings a month and two zoning board meetings a month to one I said you know there let's let sleeping dogs lie there's no reason to talk about reducing their W2 payroll to the tax taxpayers that we paid them prior to that even though they were doing half the meetings because they were also helping us on the general Municipal stuff as Council counselor DeMarco had said and I'll be forever grateful that they did that it was an all hands- on debt now on June 6th uh about four months ago Charlie announced he's retiring um what transpired after June 6 I'm gonna hand the Baton to where is he I'm gonna hand the Baton to Bron connard uh who is our director of Human Resources to he's going to explain what we've done in the last four months uh once Charlie had announced he's retiring as of December 31st uh thank you Mr supervisor so as you were saying um on uh June 6th uh attorney janesse publicly announced his intention to retire at the end of the year and as uh you alluded to for the prior 18 months there had been succession planning discussions that took place including um all of the uh W2 town uh attorney uh staff um so at that point there was there had to be a decision made on how do we move forward and so the town board authorized the town to issue an RFP the RFP used the RFP template and model that the town uh has been using and uh um simultaneously we also posted for an employee because the study group that had been working on this uh did not know for sure what the best path forward was was it uh you know a full-time employee a part-time employee um you know a boutique Law Firm a major uh large multi-service law firm and they wanted to explore all options and so um those were posted in the RFP um was posted on the town website Town social media as well as the job posting and proactively we sent the uh RFP to 22 Local law firms that um advertise that they um practice in Municipal law uh and so um they were uh given until June 28th to respond so at the end of June 8 we had no applicants um for the position so we were there were no attorneys um inside of Webster or outside of Webster who applied for the position of town attorney as an employee so good night just to Don White You're an attorney who lives in Webster and my right to assume you did not apply for this position I think I got my answer all right so because you took the podium and said you want want a local attorney you want a person like Charlie why are we talking to someone in the audience when we're not supposed to be doing that so we we asked for attorneys and we got none no replies is that correct rules for everyone else except you did we get any replies from attorneys people no there were zero uh attorneys who applied as to be an employee of the town as Town attorney okay there were however seven uh law firms that submitted responses to the request for proposal uh those seven were brought in front of the RFP Review Committee uh six in who was that committee the RFP Review Committee was Town attorney Charlie janesse Town supervisor Tom flare Deputy Town supervisor Patty cataldi and myself the uh RFP committee uh determined that six of the seven were responsive one of the responses did not answer the question there and uh simply submitted hourly rates the RFP had requested a fixed price bidding so that the town would know exactly what its annual uh legal expenses would be for the uh Services um and so the RFP Review Committee uh looked at the criteria that were included in the publicly uh issued RFP as to what the uh selection criteria was for public procurement and selected three to be invited to finalist interviews the uh three uh firms were uh invited and made presentations to the RFP committee and the RFB committee um met and reviewed uh those presentations and unanimously uh ranked all three firms in the ex same Order each person did on a blind ballot and uh So based on the review of all factors the RFP Review Committee rated The Firm of manuso Brightman highest and unanimously recommends them to the town board to serve as councel the other two finalists were qualified and professional but did not have the combination of expertise experience and cost to be rated as high as manuso Brightman manuso Brightman understand unique challenges faced by the town of Webster they practice almost exclusively in Municipal law in fact the firm was built for the purpose of Municipal law they uh represent several other municipalities including the towns of Brighton and rush in the village of Fairport uh their attorneys have previously represented the town of Victor they had uh references from all three of those towns plus the village of uh Fairport in their responses um they have extensive experience providing legal counsel at zba planning board and town board meetings as well as defending their Municipal clients from litigation uh and they have experienced providing 247 support to town boards because um governing is a 247 uh operation um the uh RFP committee was impressed with the depth and breadth of experience and expertise of their three attorney team um that is part of a seven Municipal attorney practice uh each of our boards will have a single constant lead attorney with a a scheduled backup available at a moment's notice so On Any Given meeting night planning zoning or uh Town board there will always be two attorneys available uh they have uh St they will have standing office hours for on-site availability at Town Hall and we conduct uh monthly pre-board preparation meetings with staff uh their proposal also included educational and compliance training for citizen board members uh manuso brightman's experience representing a large town with the police department was another differentiating Factor due to the specialized nature of law enforcement legal matters uh they'll be providing a highquality uh Services consistent with the scope of work uh at the highly competitive fixed price rate of $145,000 a year any additional legal uh services that are approved by the town outside of the scope will be build at the discounted Municipal rate of $250 per hour the town's uh 2025 preliminary budget contains sufficient funding and um that represents the reasons why the RFP committee uh supported that and I guess I would ask the town attorney as a member of that committee and as the person who's been representing the for 26 years um if there was anything you wanted to add uh or highlight uh from the assessment that I gave on behalf of the committee no it was a it was a collaborative process um each of us brought something different to the to it in terms of advising um and I think it was it was robust and as well done as you can do for something like this and and Brighton you did forward all of the information as well as the scoring rubric and and all that was sent out to all of the board members so they've all seen it correctly yes all all board members have received uh the recommendation memorandum that goes through in detail the reasons they've also received the uh ranking rating form that is a public record of the uh rankings of the three finalists and as well as a copy of the RFP which of course was uh publicly posted earlier in the the process and Bron as long as we got Paul here I think it can get confusing at times we do rfps or whatever and it's municipal building projects and we're almost we have to take the low bid on those this is more of a professional service once we didn't have an actual person put their name in the Hat to be the W2 employed Town attorney once we saw that our only candidates were law firmed it was a professional service and we have a little more latitude and you know uh not taking the lowest bit is that correct that's correct for attorneys was was was this manuso Brightman at 145,000 the lowest of the three finalists no okay and um there was a a question raised earlier about um the uh RFP process and so it's standard language in the town's RFP documents as well as this one as well as every Municipal RFP that I've seen over my 33 years of government service that um firms and organizations that are responding to rfps are only allowed to uh make contact with a single point of contact and that's specifically to prevent um confusion and um different information um basically an end round and so that is uh best practice and uh in an RFP and that's that's why you have an RFP committee um otherwise uh you know uh the town board would have to uh for instance uh evaluate all the ambulance uh proposals and every engineering proposal and such it's a standard practice to delegate these two committees thank so in this letter of Engagement um under billing Arrangement expenses and dispersements um the sentence says the firm is pleased to offer an aggregate annual retainer in the amount of 145,000 so my question is retainers are typically okay this is what we're going to give you to retain you and then bill against that 145,000 is that yes is it going does it work as a retainer or no no it's a fixed price uh it's a fixed price 145 so if we uh you know do tons of hours or if we don't do tons of hours it's 145,000 for the year so why is the word retainer in there can't they just take perhaps retainer maybe you might want to have Mr manuso I would like toite John I hate to say because before we vote if the other board members Patty and I aren't going to have questions because we were through this process but councilman kale councilwoman W and Council woman um right as they discern their votes on this um it might be the horse's mouth I hope you don't take that the wrong way John um John John kahill I asked a question Mr manuso um manuso bre thank you supervisor uh to answer your question uh councilman um the the aggregate annual retainer language was added uh simply uh as attorneys we often refer to the agreements as retainer agreements and in my experience with Municipal representation um municipalities usually follow one of two Frameworks it's usually a retainer agreement based on a fixed amount build on a 112th basis you know once a month for 12 months or of hourly rate so each one of those uh fee structures was evaluated but based on the RFP that was provided by the town of Webster um the intent of the engagement letter was to provide for a fixed fee agreement where the $145,000 is in the aggregate meaning it covers Town board planning board zoning board essentially comprehensive representation of the town of Webster um there is no intention on the part of my firm to request uh upfront payment in the amount of $145,000 we would Bill uh the 112th amount on a monthly basis consistent with the town's uh expectations for billing practices there's no verbiage in there it says it's not to exceed 145,000 it's understood I guess is what you're saying um the intention was to fix it at 145,000 a year I am more than happy to add language to that effect that it would not exceed $145,000 with respect to the scope of work that was uh responded to in the RFP the only thing that would be outside of that would be uh separate engagements or matters that the town of Webster would ask the firm to undertake on the hourly basis that would be set forth in that agreement for $250 to help with Council male's question I got my answer I'm good you're not gone yet Charlie you are our town attorney what what do we got here counsel us is that pretty standard language I mean I I think what Mr manuso said is accurate but well I I completely understand what he said I don't need you to re re respond Charlie but thank you so much for J willing to do that questions or comments I want to make a point of order here for a minute first I wanted to thanks Charlie for all his you know work and everything through the years um counseling us and I wanted to thanks the um com you know selection committee but as a member of the Town board I wanted to have an input on the decision for choosing an all toown legal service um there are some questions but I I apparently you know I see the email that sent out um that I wanted to ask before we vote and again um number one the town already have a law firm if we are doing you know if they are doing a good job what is the emphasis you know for switching then number two is this Law Firm that we are you know um going to be inquired is based out of Syracuse and number three how many lawyers do they have in Rochester office and which one will represent our town and number four I know some of them you already if you can please let me read through this um if the town is involved in the future litigation would it cost us extra money for the legal service which you already said that you know I'm not done yet wait a minute isn't it part of the the negotiation not only to get the best price but to get the best qualifications for the town of Webster I understand the selection committee interviewed numerous of law firms and I'm sure those Law Firm could be equally qualified but the DeMarco and Law Firm has a history with Webster and they are currently advising the Planning and Zoning Board they understand our code and our systems that prove valuable in the future and example I'm going to give it out to the people is a lot of people want to keep their own doctors because of the history and the relationship they don't not want to switch to a new doctor even though someone say that doctor is pretty good so therefore I would again I would make a motion to tables a couple weeks before I make you know you can't make that and let us answer the questions Jenny all right let's start with the first question so and and you're going to have to just CU you rattled off five the first question was uh we'll do them one at a time so the first question was yes this town already have a law firm if we already you know happy with the way they doing are they doing a good job so what is the emphasis of switching um so uh no this town does not already have a law firm uh representing for general counsel the reason for the switch is that Charlie janesse is retiring and the RFP committee uh is recommending that instead of having multiple uh representations so instead of picking two different law firms um to represent uh Town board planning board zoning board or a mix of W2 employees and law firms the RFP uh committee said that be best uh Services would be delivered for the taxpayers in the town to have one firm doing it so that's the reply add to that answer Charlie is W2 employee of the town of Webster he's the town attorney you also have your own firm John DeMarco and Kyle Taylor have DeMarco Taylor they have their own firm they are also W2 employees of the town of Webster for their positions the aggregate of Charlie John and Kyle I think is around $138,000 a year our budget for two n for 2025 is 165,000 for Legal Services because we knew we would no longer have W2 employees because nobody came out of the woodwork to apply for these positions so the law firm their 145 at manuso Brightman is going to be $20,000 less than what we approved in our preliminary budget now I'm going to tell you and we'll get into to to question two Jenny mhm because we do have to protect the taxpayer money understand right so I liked the 145 I said earlier was it the low bid you said no I wasn't going to sit here tonight and actually talk about the seven firms that applied the three that were in the finals and then manuso John you came this is all foilable whatever so let's just get it out there you bid $21,000 they at $45 that's $56,000 less their whole website if you go to it is minicipal law there's not one mention of Municipal law on their website this committee as far as I'm concerned did our job and we gave a recommendation that made sense fiscally to the town taxpayers and also from a standpoint of who gave us the best chance going forward with the complexities that we have who understands those as Bron said so that's question one let's go to question two can that be heard at some point because that's not the full story let's go to question two okay it this law form based out of Syracuse yes the uh they have offices in Syracuse and in Rochester um and uh as far as where they're Incorporated I will defer to joh manuso thank um The Firm was founded in Syracuse New York by my partner uh Christy Brightman um I opened the Rochester Office of the firm five years ago um we uh have the majority of our attorneys are in the Rochester New York office of all of our attorneys there are only two that are currently sitting in Syracuse our entire Municipal team save one of our attorneys who is our labor and employment uh attorney is based in the Rochester office all of the attorneys that would be representing the board of the town of Webster are based in our Rochester office thank you question three okay the how many lawyers do we have in well that you already um you know kind of how many are they going to represent Webster so three uh three attorneys from the Rochester office of manuso Brightman will represent uh Webster and it'll be only those three attorneys uh and they will each back each other up so it will not be a rotating cast of characters the zoning board will have the same attorney unless there's an illness or an absence the planning board will have the same attorney unless there's an illness or an absence and the town board will have the same attorney unless there's an illness or an absence um so the the and that was part of their proposal and that was an important factor why the RP committee was not interested in uh going with uh you know very large firms that have a rad cast of characters question four so what that that's a question that's the the town it said that if they um an IL you know the uh future litigation what you said it's going to be $200 an hour um so for us to extra money for the legal services yeah and so that is uh the case today uh and is the case with all three respondents all three respondents if there is litigation outside the scope of the general services then those are build individually uh per hour um so all respondents were equal in that way uh two of the respondant uh were going to charge $250 an hour and uh one respondent was going to charge $375 an hour or $300 an hour depending on which attorney was doing the work so wouldn't it be like you have to keep you know up to date with all our codes and everything else that happened to our town that we have because there's a lot of changing and everything everything and I know that we have you know um the DeMarco and the tailor they are familiarized with our system here and shouldn't there be a negotiation is that part of that's why we are in the government we should want to negotiate to see what's best for our constituents for our town with public procurement there should be an open and fair and equal process and so that is what the RFP was done it let every interested party know the scope of work that the town was interested in and gave them an opportunity to ask clarifying questions and then issued answers to those clarifying questions all of them uh were given an opportunity to submit their proposal uh including their price their uh their proposal on how they would deliver the services and their experience and expertise the committee looked at those selected the uh best three and then did finalists and then unanimously selected who they thought was best um you know and so even if price wasn't a factor uh manuso Brightman was rated uh the best and was the first choice of every member of the RFP Review Committee any other questions because I want Jenny to have a chance to to Jenny Jennifer Jay's well I I don't have specific questions but one of the things that I would like to do especially now given the way this conversation is going I don't have input and I would love to get input from the planning board and the Zoning Board in regards to the support they're receiving and get get an understanding of how the coverage they have today is working and how they would like to see this work so that's why when I was coming in here tonight I didn't have an opportunity to do that for this meeting and given that and we're voting tonight I I was inclined to want to table this matter to be able to go out and get more information that I wasn't able to get tonight before this meeting totally understood and to that point um and and and I I appreciate the the RFP process the hours that were put into it um those people that participated in it um I I completely respect that um but Don M mentioned something that it's an intangible okay what are some of the things that we get from the support of local attorneys a great deal um I am most certainly a proponent of the trend for the last 4 40 to 50 years of the Town being represented by local attorneys I think we gain more than we lose more than just you know the bottom line of a dollar there is significant amount of intangibles okay and that's why I am a proponent for local attorneys and not a law firm that may specialize in Municipal law because I would say that between um Mr DeMarco and the other attorneys that they have a significant amount of of experience and don't interrupt me please I won't so I also took the time to talk to him chairman and he is very satisfied um with the service he's getting from our two attorneys so you know my vote's going to be no I'm going to tell you that right now that's fine and I just want to ask are you saying that we will not if we move forward in a month or so with demaro Taylor which might happen yeah does Kyle Taylor not to get work on any of these boards because he lives in Victor no I'm not saying that okay I just want you have my answer local there it is so we are about to do the vote and I just want to say uh two things one we were hoping to get this done um when Charlie announced this back in June we were hoping to get it done in October so we could have a ramp up um with the new firm uh transitioning with Charlie CU that's what functional organizations do they don't just jump on on January 1st uh at a standstill and so we were that's why we had October 3rd but the good news is from what you just heard tonight um that if there is going to be some contention on this being a positive vote it's three months away from uh the beginning of the year ideally we would I'd like the 3 months to get Charlie and the new firm and really start transitioning some of this stuff uh but we can do it on October 17th we can do it November 7th we can do it November 21st for all the reasons that everybody El said the second thing um Charlie am I right in saying that this would not be an abstain situation certainly the town board members have been furnished a lot of information over the last uh four months um so abstaining is more for like you can't really abstain unless there's this is a yes or no vote Yes okay all right letter rep okay councilwoman cataldi uh I did make the motion and I want to say I stand by that motion I was part of the RFP committee and I am confident in our choice um so my vote naturally is yes supervisor flarity my vote is I yes councilwoman W nay councilman kahill nay councilman right and since I can't abstain I'm going to have to say no because I would like more information that's a no so this one didn't pass and we will bring it back on the 17th or November 7th or whatever uh I don't know what it'll be so I have a question related to that but you know I have a question related to that sure jump in so I I take it because we have voted no on this we're not going to bring the same letter of Engagement up again for a second vot I don't know what you might bring up Charlie you go Pine in on that is it legal to bring the same letter of Engagement up again after the board has already voted no on it with no modifications to this whatsoever as far as I know yes this is yes you can okay I I guess I could look into it I mean this isn't this isn't similar to a uh a Judicial decision it's a resolution yeah that's good point basically I got you okay okay thank you this is the beauty of a government there were five votes the majority has spoken and over the next weeks and months I'm sure people watching this or whatever everybody might be contacted of why they voted the way they did and I have one one other question to you Charlie with respect to you know I know in the verbiage in the RFP um the candidates were barred from speaking directly to the board members so I would assume that now that this has been voted down the RFP process is no longer valid with respect to um candidates contacting board members directly is that true or no well I guess looking at it the RFP process is completed okay it's long over and I don't mean to jump in let's call a speed to speed here all right let's not on the bush I don't know the three board members who voted no have had interaction with uh DeMarco and Taylor and that's fine you're you're absolutely dead wrong on that you are dead wrong and I and I'm offended you would make that insinuation could I ask that we remain civil please okay thank you don't make accusations without proof because I did not do that and I wouldn't do that and John had said well then it might get worse because whoever you did talk to that had influence on this might make it worse I don't even know where you're coming from with that one I've been knowing you a long time John I don't think this is just suddenly out of the blue that this four-month process that we've gone through with so many other parties and leaders and whatever that suddenly that it like wow don't make accusations time like that unless you have you can back it up which you absolutely cannot because it is not true okay okay this is going nowhere the next resolution moving on to the next resolution if we could and it's I think yours P it is and I would uh move that we approve the following items for recycle or auction from the sewer department a lightning mixer mixer which is going to recycle gener generator auction three-phase automatic transfer switch auction and compressor air is also going to auction second councilwoman cataldi hi councilman wi I I supervisor flarey I councilman kahill I councilman r i and then our last one tonight uh is it so John I'll have you do it so I would move that we approve the attached items for deletion from the uh it Department there's a number of uh items on this so I will not be reading it well I I just re refer to the uh to the list so that's my motion I second it councilman kahill I councilwoman right I supervisor flarity I councilwoman cataldi I councilwoman w i and that concludes the formal part of the meeting tonight um robust yes it let's do our Round Table uh geez I'm going to start over there Bron are you talked out um never is that on [Music] I yeah uh just uh we've been working on um a performance evaluation process that includes employee input and uh that's been progressing uh quite well uh and we are getting ready for open enrollment uh coming up uh at in the next month or so uh and that's uh a little bit of update from Human Resources thanks Bron all right uh thanks supervisor uh a lot going on at the uh the sewer department obviously we have our construction project going on uh that's uh a lot of guys working a lot of Staff working very hard uh from uh multiple different uh contractors um we have our conveyance pipe uh project uh underway uh they're this point uh still on schedule uh they did I want to make the board aware of uh late this afternoon uh they were Excavating a uh existing manhole on Phillips Road once they get down to it it is about 20 feet deep and it is uh cracked so I just want to make everyone aware of that uh we're going to get into that manhole tomorrow doing a full evaluation with two engineering firms and uh see what comes of that um also our internal staff is uh preparing uh for winter uh which is uh right around the corner so we will do a a lot of flushing a lot of cleaning of uh pump stations wet Wells things like that to hopefully get uh all of our infrastructure uh through the winter okay and our residents through the win okay so uh busy times but busy is good thanks ER and by the way are I just want to say thank you for taking my phone call um during the week to answer the questions related to the Fairlife uh next steps I appreciate it very much and also for um Rick had called me last week um and answer some questions too so I I really appreciate um both of your willingness to uh to answer the questions that I derive from reading the contract and other documents that were um supplied by our town supervisor to myself so absolutely anytime I mean it's it's a uh it's a lot to go through it's uh it's a lot to deal with and anything we can uh do to help clarify it and uh thank you for understanding that uh sometimes we can't answer the question has to we have to go to somebody else no I absolutely understand so thank you for that the 2025 budget public hearing is set for two weeks from tonight that's October 17th at 7:30 p.m.