Service Proposal

William P Johnson PO Box 20263 Rochester, NY 14602-0263 May 15, 2026

Mr. Josh Artuso, Director of Community Development TOWN of WEBSTER 1000 Ridge Rd Webster, NY 14580-2917 RE: Proposed Wireless Base Station Facility Radio-frequency Engineering Site Review Proposal Verizon “Webster North” and “Lake Rd/County Line Rd” sites

Dear Mr. Artuso, In response to the Town of Webster RFP dated May 6, 2026, and our phone conversation of May 14, 2026, I am pleased to submit the following information regarding proposed radiofrequency (RF) engineering services for telecommunication facility site review. For your information, we worked with the Town of Webster in 1997 on three Sprint Spectrum L.P. PCS Communications Facilities BU04XC034 (Damascus Temple Site), BU04XC047 (Paul Site), and BU04XC022 (Dorschel Site). Then, in 2008, we assisted the town with a Verizon Wireless site at 570 Klem Road. Since then both the wireless services carriers and technologies have evolved. We stand ready to assist the Town of Webster once again to bring our expertise and experience to assist the planning and zoning board review process. The following pages provide an introduction, a proposed Statement of Work and Engagement Agreement (SOW) for engineering services that is responsive to the RFP except as noted, and my resume. If you are authorized to enter contractual agreements, you can accept this SOW by signing the SOW signature page and scan/email that page to Bill@WilliamPJohnson.com. I am admitted to practice law in the State of New York. In order to eliminate any possible confusion please be aware that the attached proposed Statement of Work for engineering services does not constitute an offer to provide legal services and, if accepted, does not establish any attorney-client relationship. Since there is no attorney-client relationship relative to the proposed non-legal services, the protection of an attorney-client relationship generally would not exist. If you have any questions about the limitations, please let me know and consult your own attorney for clarification. The remainder of this letter provides background information and attempts to answer certain questions that are often posed by prospective clients.

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

Since 1997 when the race was on for deployment of personal wireless services after the Telecommunications Act of 1996 became law, we have used our radio-frequency wireless engineering expertise to assist over one hundred municipal clients to work through the often unfamiliar and complex engineering issues related to site plan, variance, and special permit review. Our clients retain our services to assist them with a full understanding of the radiofrequency engineering issues that underlie justification of need. We were the technical experts who assisted the Town of Ontario, NY, during the landmark litigation Sprint v. Willoth (2nd Cir., 1999) that set the stage for municipal review of wireless facility deployment to show need, adequacy, and minimum intrusion on the community. We are RF engineers and experienced university educators. We can help you vet and understand the application materials so that when a planning board or zoning board of appeals votes they understand exactly what they are deciding and the factual findings upon which to base that decision. We are not municipal planners, environmental activists, or lease negotiators. We do not get distracted from our main goal to provide unbiased assistance for your municipal board to understand the RF issues based on a solid record of substantial evidence that will likely form the fundamental basis for your vote to deny or approve. While disagreements between wireless communications tower project sponsors and our clients sometimes arise due to competing goals, we strive to keep the discussions professional and meaningful on your behalf with the goal of a thorough review under reasonable and necessary costs. We know there are ways to collaboratively reach a reasonable solution without litigious hostility, showmanship, or generation of poor community relations. Our qualifications, experience, and demonstrated ability to build consensus can help you develop a sound post-Chevron record of substantial evidence upon which to base your decisions and, as far as possible, avoid an unfortunate community-damaging experience. We would be honored to assist you.

GENERAL BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS I am Professor Emeritus at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) where I served as director of the graduate M.S. program in telecommunications engineering technology until retirement from the university in June, 2020. I hold graduate degrees in electrical engineering and law. My teaching and research included courses in radio-frequency (RF) systems, telecommunications systems, and law. I joined RIT in 1989 after a series of engineering positions in the RF/microwave industry. Since joining the RIT faculty, I have worked as an independent consultant for several electronics manufacturing companies and, since 1997, with numerous municipalities in New York and elsewhere, and a few resident associations, to provide RF consulting services related to the review of cellular/PCS, broadcast and communication tower special use permits and zoning variance approvals. My associate RIT Professor Steven M. Ciccarelli and I serve municipal clients using our experience as educators and decades of collective experience in the RF, microwave, and communications engineering field. Our resumes are attached.

Introduction Letter, Page 2

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

SUMMARY OF RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Since 1997 I have had the opportunity to personally serve nearly one-hundred municipalities involving multiple tower applications and four citizen’s associations in their evaluation of proposed telecommunication tower facilities and alternatives. Over the years I have held positions as an RF design engineer, as engineering consultant with several electronics manufacturers, and as staff engineer with a broadcast facility. The services provided to municipal clients typically involve RF evaluation of proposed tower facility plans to include review of both informal proposals and environmental impact studies created under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) or similar during a SEQRA-like review. Other services include monitoring of RF drive-test performance used to justify tower height requirements and presentation of technical testimony at public hearings. In 1998 I provided zoning review support and subsequent expert testimony during litigation on behalf of defendant Town of Ontario in Sprint vs. Willoth litigation in US Western District Court and on appeal to US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in May, 1999. The town prevailed in both actions. In 2000 I was invited to collaborate with a multidisciplinary team to author the technology section of the New York Department of State Land Use Technical Series publication Planning and Design Manual for the Review of Applications for Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. This project was co-sponsored by NY-DOS and the Town of Pittsford. The manual covered the essential technology, legal, and zoning issues surrounding telecommunication tower permit applications at that time.

Introduction Letter, Page 3

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

• • • • • •

• • •

• • • • • • •

Evaluation and fact-based demonstration that a proposed 155’ tower adjacent to a residential and scenic hiking area was not supported by Applicant’s own RF materials. Applicant withdrew the permit application. Facilitation of RF human exposure level measurements by a sub-contractor at our client’s request to confirm compliance with federal threshold levels after deployment of a rooftop site with multiple wireless service providers’ equipment. Investigation of an alternate location on proposed property based on empirical RF drive test results that allowed relocated of a proposed 100’ artificial tree bordering residences to a location father away from residential neighbors. Municipal RF engineering support for a proposed hybrid overlay of 9 small-cell sites and a macro site to provide new capacity and stronger RF coverage using low and mid-band frequencies to assure need and minimum height for the overall project. Negotiation support for requests to a service provider to reconsider alternate locations for a new 200’ tower to avoid undue visual impact for the neighborhood. Clarification and analysis of a proposed wireless tower site where the wireless service provider neglected to explain their reluctance to use alternative sites was based upon an essentially unstated in-building RF coverage requirements in a nearby commercial area where land control was not available. Evaluation of a proposed 250’ tower in a vacation area that would have required FAA lighting that lead to a recommendation of reduction to 150’ (the municipality decided to permit 199’ to allow collocation opportunities). Site analysis and RF drive test monitoring that resulted in reduction of an originally proposed 250’ lattice tower to 135’ to remove FAA lighting requirements and reduce the visual profile of the tower. Evaluation of a new digital broadcast tower proposal to address the concerns of area residents related to interference and NIER exposure. Part of the project included the test plan development and execution to obtain base-line signal intensity measurements in the area and a follow-up set of tests three years later. Verification and interpretation of RF drive tests that led to a 20 foot reduction in a “stealth” co-location structure proposed by three service providers. Review of documentation for an initial zoning variance application that was shown insufficient to justify the site and failed to prove need. Analysis of RF propagation plots (RF signal coverage simulation) leading to the conclusions that an alternate existing site may be more viable than originally presented by a speculative tower company. Review of a proposed 185’ tower in a rural residential area that was later shown to be viable at 145’ by RF drive test evaluation. The site was subsequently placed in operation for three providers without any additional height. Negotiation of alternate antenna deployment that led to the use of “flush-mount” antenna arrays to reduce visual cross-section on a monopole tower. Review of service provider documentation that revealed an error in RF propagation analysis that allowed approval of a tower that was 50’ shorter than that originally proposed by the applicant. Review and assist a town attorney in re-writing a town tower law to protect town planning goals, preserve aesthetic requirements, and speed special permit application review. Introduction Letter, Page 4

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

•

Identification of unneeded coverage area that was driving height of an initial-proposed 145’ tower and subsequent agreement by service provider to reduce height to 110’.

While the outcome of each of these example projects ultimately turned on the specific facts and their interpretation by our clients, these examples demonstrate some of the ways that meaningful discussions can lead to the consideration and analysis of alternate sites for potential reduction of visual and environmental impacts of cellular personal communications services, broadcast and communication tower site selection. Most of these outcomes were accomplished with the cooperation of the project sponsors and without resorting to a formal SEQRA environmental impact study or any additional legal process. In practice, service providers and other wireless communication system designers configure their networks based upon proprietary marketing and business information within the technical limitations of their equipment. On behalf of our clients, we always seek to maintain an open and working dialog with the appropriate personnel to ensure that the best available options are presented to the lead agency reviewing the proposal. While it is our opinion that it is usually not appropriate for an outside party to re-engineer an applicant’s proposed communications network, alternative sites and mitigation measures to reduce tower height or modify tower location can be readily evaluated by an independent party - especially when preferred areas or site designs are identified by the municipality and residents. When more information is needed, or when such an evaluation identifies issues that need to be addressed, these can be discussed with the project sponsor’s technical personnel and brought to the municipality agency for discussion. Highlyengineered wireless systems, especially in the emerging 5G environment, rarely can be optimized to meet all technical, business, and environmental goals. However, acceptable compromises between these goals can usually be found when all the facts are in the open and meaningful discussions take place. Collaborative problem solving will become more crucial as the wireless communications industry expands “5G” digital data technology deployment and moves to fill-in weak coverage and inadequate capacity areas. Wireless mobile use has been growing at unprecedented rates. Knowledgeable sources in the last ten years hint that in the near-term there will be a need for two or three new base station sites for every one existing site. Some of the new sites will be in the form of co-location sites on existing structures and “micro” sites on utility poles or buildings. Some of the new sites will require new towers or “stealth” structures. The services we offer can substantively assist your review of proposals for these projects. The following are some other items on which some clients have requested specific information in the past and which may be of interest to you.

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

engineers and full-service civil/mechanical/environmental engineering consulting firms on a project-by-project basis to provide them with expert radio-frequency services that enhance the services provided to their municipal clients and ours. In all cases I am directly involved with and oversee the radio-frequency and regulatory aspects of client projects with which we are involved.

See MetroPCS New York, LLC v. City of Mount Vernon, 2010 WL 3700845 (SDNY 7/22/2010); Jewish Recontructionist Synagogue v. Village of Roslyn Harbor, 40 N.Y.2d 158, 386 N.Y.S.2d 548 (2 nd Dept, 1988); Twin Lakes Development Corp. v. Town of Monroe, 300 A.D.2d 573, 752 N.Y.S.2d. 546 (2 nd Dept., 2002).

Introduction Letter, Page 6

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

wireless broadband, broadcast, or other telecommunication systems. We do use other RF propagation modeling software when necessary. In the unlikely event that more extensive modeling or RF drive testing was ever deemed necessary we can assist you to obtain the needed modeling, analysis and field testing from other vendors that can provide such supplementary design and analysis services for a fee. Those costs are not included in this proposal. 2. Since we provide non-exclusive consulting services to other clients, previously scheduled client and other professional commitments must take precedence. Project meeting commitments will require coordination with other scheduled work to avoid schedule conflicts. Online collaboration may be required due to distance and availability. We strive to make every reasonable effort to accommodate a client’s request for a scheduled meeting time. Once committed, we will reserve that time for the client’s purposes. 3. Our area of engineering expertise is primarily RF and microwave engineering, and it is on such matters that we can provide service to supplement existing staff and consultants. For example, while we can investigate and evaluate the technical RF issues and implications of specific sites, the areas of public safety, structural, and environmental engineering matters must be left to the consideration of appropriately licensed professionals. If legal services are requested, a separate engagement agreement proposal for those services will be offered for your consideration. 4. Please be advised that I am licensed as an attorney and admitted to practice law in the State of New York. However, the attached proposal for professional services does not constitute an offer of legal services. The engineering services offered in the present proposal are not and are not intended to be legal services. In these circumstances the protection of an attorney-client relationship generally does not exist with respect to the non-legal engineering or other services. If you have any questions about the lack of an attorneyclient relationship, please let me know and consult your attorney for clarification. If legal services are required in New York, we can discuss the engagement of those services under a different professional services agreement. A proposed Statement of Work that addresses the town’s RFP for engineering services follows. Thank you for considering use of our services. Please let me know if you have any questions or if there is any additional information that would help you and your staff reach a decision. I can be reached by phone (585) 201-8744 or email at Bill@WilliamPJohnson.com. Sincerely,

William P. Johnson RF Engineering Consultant

Introduction Letter, Page 7

William P Johnson PO Box 20263 Rochester NY 14602-0263 May 15, 2026 Mr. Josh Artuso, Director of Community Development TOWN of WEBSTER 1000 Ridge Rd Webster, NY 14580-2917 RE: Proposed Wireless Base Station Facility Radio-frequency Engineering Site Review Proposal Verizon “Webster North” and “Lake Rd/County Line Rd” sites Dear Mr. Artuso, It is my pleasure to submit for your consideration this proposal for consulting services for review of radio-frequency (RF) and related aspects of the subject application. In the following information, "Client" refers to TOWN of WEBSTER and "Consultant" refers to William P. Johnson. "Applicant" refers to the party or parties collectively submitting the subject special permit or other zoning application materials. Schedule A (attached) provides the basis for consulting fees and other costs. Schedule A is an integral part of this proposal. Reference to “Statement of Work” or “SOW” or “Engagement Agreement” or “Agreement” together or individually mean this document and are equivalent terms. Consultant is admitted to practice law in the State of New York. For purposes of the present Agreement please be aware that the proposed Statement of Work (SOW) for engineering services does not constitute an offer to provide legal services. Acceptance of this proposed Agreement does not establish any attorney-client relationship. Since there is no attorneyclient relationship relative to the proposed non-legal services, if the proposed SOW is accepted the protection of an attorney-client relationship would not exist. If you have any questions about the limitations on attorney-client relationship with Consultant under this Agreement please immediately contact Consultant and consult your attorney for clarification. STATEMENT of NON-LEGAL WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY CONSULTANT 1. Consultant will review, on a non-exclusive basis, Applicant's project materials for wireless telecommunications base station facilities designated as Verizon’s “Webster North” and “Lake Rd/County Line Rd” facilities for ELECTRICAL RF (radio-frequency) aspects. The purpose of the review is to support Client's agents in finalizing their planning and zoning decisions regarding the applications. a. Scope of Review: Client has annunciated specific areas for inclusion into the review in their May 6, 2026, RFP (see page 12 and following below). Proposed Statement of Work, Page 1

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

In addition, Consultant may identify other relevant issues for review. Consultant and Josh Artuso discussed several bullet points in the May 6, 2026, RFP by phone on May 14, 2026: i. 3.A The last bullet point cannot be accomplished by a third-party since the proportions of voice calls and broadband services can only be assessed by access to Applicant’s network database. Applicant can provide that information if willing to do so. ii. 3.B Consultant does not have access to Applicant’s modeling software and cannot replicate their materials. There are vendors who can provide similar RF propagation modeling but it may not be considered “reasonably necessary” as a reimbursable service. Costs for such analysis would need to be covered in advance by Client. iii. 3.C Field measurements, if deemed necessary, likewise would need to be paid in advance and contracted out to a vendor who can provide such services. Alternatively, one or more monitored field RF drive tests, if necessary, can be performed where Consultant oversees such testing performed by Applicant’s personnel. Consultant cannot certify results unless such testing is monitored. iv. 4. Deliverables As a first step Consultant will provide a preliminary report with findings that the town boards can use and weigh at their discretion. Consultant will then provide supplemental reports as needed to address any field testing, RF modeling, questions, feedback, or substantive corrections, if any. Consultant will be available to attend work sessions and hearings as requested subject to availability. If independent RF propagation analysis is obtained from vendors, the deliverable may not be a GIS-compatible format since RF modeling software varies in output capability. b. Consultant and associates will evaluate the RF information provided by Applicant for completeness, consistency, and adequacy for administrative board fact finding within the scope of review for the primary sites and any alternate sites relevant to the Client’s needs. c. Where appropriate Consultant and associates will comment on the implications of the system as proposed by Applicant within the scope of review. d. Consultant and associates will highlight information within the scope of review that, in the professional opinion of Consultant, may require clarification or which might otherwise be misinterpreted by Client's decision makers. e. Consultant and associates will produce a preliminary written report that summarizes the relevant findings and explains the basis for the findings. As other issues arise, Consultant and associates will assist Client to clarify those issues and, if needed, provide additional written reports to address those issues at Client’s request. 2. As needed on a non-exclusive basis, Consultant and associates will make reasonable efforts to attend work sessions, public hearings, and other meetings at Client’s request provided that Consultant and associates have no conflicting prior Proposed Statement of Work, Page 2

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

scheduled commitments. Such meetings may need to be conducted using virtual technology due to travel time and availability considerations. It is understood and agreed that Consultant will not re-engineer2 the applicant’s system. It is understood that Consultant and associates do not have access to the same simulation software used by Applicant or Applicant’s contractors and equipment suppliers, therefore Consultant cannot perform independent system design and simulation. Application review will be based on the technical documentation provided by Client and reviewed in light of the technical principles governing system proposed by Applicant. If identified and deemed necessary by Client during the review, Consultant will advise Client of costs and lead time for procurement of RF propagation plots and/or other services from an outside vendor. Such services and costs are not included in this SOW and it is possible that they may not be deemed “reasonably necessary” by project sponsors for reimbursement. Once Consultant has provided estimates for procuring outside services, Client may decline procurement of such services. When Client declines outside services, aspects of the review to which they are related are deemed to have been eliminated from the SOW. It is further understood that Consultant does not perform photographic visual simulation of proposed structures. Visual simulation services are available from other firms with expertise in such visual assessment. When deemed necessary, Consultant is willing to assist Client to obtain such materials. Consultant and associates have the ability to produce drone video and photographic evidence that can be useful to establish RF signal obstructions and implications for minimum structure height analysis. While the costs for these services are not included in this proposal, Consultant will work with Client at their request to obtain visual assessment photographic materials when needed. CLIENT’S RESPONSIBILITIES WHEN ACCEPTING THIS AGREEMENT Client agrees to inform Applicant’s agent(s) that Consultant’s non-legal services have been retained. Client agrees to obtain all relevant information and documents required for performance of this agreement from Applicant. Client will provide said information and documents to Consultant before the start of the RF review. Client agrees to provide any materials relevant to the scope of work subsequently produced by Applicant or Client in a timely fashion. Client agrees to inform Consultant of any special invoicing and/or insurance requirements beyond monthly submission of an itemized Statement of Services. Consultant is willing to follow any reasonable guidance required for timely approval of invoices. 2

According to footnote 84 in Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Inv.,33 FCC Rcd. 9088 (2018) “local jurisdictions do not have the authority to require that providers offer certain types or levels of service, or to dictate the design of a provider’s network. See 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(3)(A); see also Bastien v. AT&T Wireless Servs., Inc., 205 F.3d 983, 989 (7th Cir. 2000).”

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 3

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

For municipal clients who anticipate reimbursement for costs under this Agreement, Client agrees to make all reasonable efforts to obtain funds from Applicant either by advance payment into Client’s municipal escrow account or by other means determined by Client. In any case, Client agrees to delay hearings until suitable funds are committed by Applicant and/or impose conditions on any Applicant permit approvals to require payment of Consultant’s reasonable fees. DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION OF WORK: In consideration of existing in-process projects, at this time Consultant anticipates delivery of preliminary reports for each site within 8 weeks after receipt of (1) a signed acceptance of this proposal and (2) all other required information needed to proceed with the application review - such as any existing tower zoning ordinance and updated application documentation. Consultant has already downloaded materials from Client’s web site as of this date. Authorization may be scanned/emailed to Bill@WilliamPJohnson.com.

TERMINATION Either Client or Consultant have the right to terminate this Agreement for any reason, provided that written notice is given of said termination. Email to Bill@WilliamPJohnson.com or written notice delivered by USPS or other delivery service with return delivery confirmation to William P. Johnson, PO Box 20263, Rochester, NY 14602 by Client or by Consultant to the party signing this agreement is deemed acceptable written notice to the other party. Termination shall be effective upon receipt of the termination notice. Client shall have the right to use information and delivered work products created by Consultant prior to the effective termination date and Consultant shall have right to full payment for all work performed and any delivered work products prepared before the effective termination date. Client’s payment for said work and delivered work products shall be due and payable to Consultant upon receipt of a final statement of services.

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

in the municipal escrow account drop below $500, Client will require Applicant to deposit additional funds to replenish the escrow account to an amount of at least $5,000. A fixed not-to-exceed cost cannot be established due to the wide factual variations even between similar projects and many variables in such cases are beyond the control of both Consultant and Client. Based upon recent application reviews it is anticipated that charges for services under this Agreement will likely not exceed $12,000 per site when in-person attendance at hearings and other meetings is not required. Client’s May 6, 2026, RFP letter indicates need for in-person attendance and presentation, so the above figure is only advisory and must not be considered a fixed not-to-exceed. Client may discontinue use of Consultant’s services at any time by proper notification and payment of service to the date of discontinuance. Attendance at hearings and on-site meetings incurs travel and hourly charges in accordance with the attached “Schedule A: Non-legal Consulting Rate and Terms and Conditions.“ Therefore we urge Client to consider the use of online/remote conferencing when possible to avoid those travel costs. Neither party will be liable to the other party for any nonperformance or breach of this Agreement caused by any event beyond its reasonable control. This Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties under this Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York without reference to conflict of laws provisions. In the event legal action is necessary to enforce the payment terms of this Agreement, the Consultant shall be entitled to collect from the Client any judgment or settlement sums due plus reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, and other expenses incurred by the Consultant in connection therewith and, in addition, the reasonable value of the Consultant’s time and expenses spent in connection with such collection action, computed according to the Consultant’s prevailing fee schedule and expense policies. If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to any party or circumstance, is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable for any reason, such provision will be modified or severed from this Agreement to the extent necessary to make such provision enforceable against such party or in such circumstance, unless such modification or severance would render the remaining provisions of this Agreement inadequate to accomplish the basic purposes and intent of the parties. Neither the unenforceability of such provision nor the modification or severance of such provision will affect the enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between Client and Consultant concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any and all other prior and contemporaneous discussions and agreements, whether oral or written, pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may not be modified or amended, and no provision of this Agreement may be waived, except in writing executed by each of the parties. Any alleged or actual failure to enforce or delay enforcement of a party's rights under this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of any such rights.

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 5

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

This Agreement may be executed in counterparts by a representative authorized to enter contractual agreements on behalf of Client by signing below. If the pre-printed Client representative shown below is NOT so authorized, please correct that information as needed and execute. When executed in counterparts, each shall be considered an original and together will constitute one and the same agreement. Any signature delivered by facsimile or other electronic means will be deemed an original signature for all purposes and will be binding on the signing party.

Proposed Statement of Work and Engagement Agreement including the attached Terms and Conditions Accepted and Authorized by:

Mr. Josh Artuso Director of Community Development TOWN of WEBSTER

William P. Johnson Consultant May 15, 2026

Schedule A (Terms and Conditions) and Resume are attached Please provide the following contact information: Billing Contact Address, Phone & Fax (if different) Email address (for correspondence & jartuso@websterny.gov reports)

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 6

Schedule A January 1, 2025 Non-legal Consulting Rate and Terms and Conditions 1. Based on the standard four-to-six-week lead time, consulting is billed at $390 per hour (“Consulting Rate”). Time in attendance at meetings, preparing reports, and telephone consultation time are considered consulting. An expedited schedule for work due with less than four-week lead time (unless agreed upon otherwise in writing) incurs a 20% premium on all billable consulting hours. 2. Travel time to and from meetings, field sites and other obligations (“Event”) related to performance of the consulting agreement is billed at the reduced rate of $195 per hour (“Travel Rate”). 3. In addition to actual travel time billed at the Travel Rate, when Consultant must travel to an Event, a minimum number of guaranteed consulting hours at the Consulting Rate applies to the Event. Distances are determined by mileage from the then-current location from which travel initiates and/or concludes (usually Brighton, NY). DISTANCE Minimum Consulting Time a. Up to 50 miles: 2 hour b. 50 to 200 miles: 4 hours c. 200 to 500 miles: 6 hours or other specific minimum if so negotiated 4. Travel, lodging, meals, fees, and incidental expenses associated with the performance of the consulting agreement will be billed at cost. Vehicle mileage will be billed at the current IRS rate. 5. Invoices for consulting and other expenses will be submitted to Client at one-month intervals unless other arrangements are agreed upon. Municipal Clients: Invoices are due NET 45 days from date of invoicing with a 5% discount on consulting and travel time for on-time payments received (not just dated). Applicable on-time discounts are applied as credits on the next project invoice or, if project is completed, as a refund check to client. Electronic/ACH payments are encouraged. When applicable said discount will be promptly returned to Client by check. Nonmunicipal clients: Invoices are due and payable upon receipt from retainer funds; Client must maintain a positive retainer fund balance at all times for continuation of work. Some methods of retainer fund deposits incur bank and transfer fees. All transfer fees, charges and costs incurred by Consultant related to retainer fund deposits are deducted from the retainer. Refund of any unused retainer funds will be promptly returned to Client by check. There will be no fees or costs incurred for this method of refund. If requested by Consultant and upon approval of Client, Client will provide advance payment or otherwise cover certain specific out-ofpocket expenses such as, but not limited to, travel expenses, test equipment rental, procurement of RF modeling and measurements by vendors, and/or air fare needed for the performance of assignments. If Client does not agree to such prepayment, Consultant’s commitment to perform specific aspects of the assignments related to such expenses are deemed waived by Client .

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 7

RESUME William P. Johnson PO Box 20263 Rochester NY 14602-0263 Consulting Office (585) 201-8744 voice/text (585) 736-4630 fax

Email & WEB Site Bill@WilliamPJohnson.com www.WilliamPJohnson.com

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

TOWN of AUSTERLITZ, NY March, 2019 – June, 2025 CITY of BEACON, NY June, 2023 – November, 2023 TOWN of BEDFORD, NY August, 2023 – January, 2025 TOWN of BETHLEHEM, NY May, 2017 – February, 2023 TOWN of BOSTON, NY August, 1997 – December, 2001 TOWN of BRIGHTON, NY December, 1999 – January, 2008 TOWN of BRUNSWICK, NY July, 1998 – September, 1999 TOWN of BRUTUS, NY February, 2001 – May, 2001 TOWN of BUSTI, NY September, 2002 – July, 2003 TOWN of CAIRO, NY May, 2014 – July, 2015 TOWN of CAMBRIA, NY September, 2004 – December, 2004 TOWN of CANANDAIGUA, NY June, 1997 - August, 2000 TOWN of CARLTON, NY October, 2005 – December, 2005 TOWN of CAZENOVIA, NY May, 2007 – April, 2022 VILLAGE of CAYUGA HEIGHTS November, 2005 – February, 2006 TOWN of CHAUTAUQUA December, 2001 – November, 2002 TOWN of CHILI, NY March, 1998 – August, 2007 TOWN of CICERO July, 2008 – December, 2008 TOWN of CLARKSON, NY May, 2007 – Present TOWN of CLIFTON PARK August, 2007 – June, 2024 TOWN of COLUMBIA, NY March, 2026 - Present TOWN of CORINTH, NY October, 2020 – August, 2022 TOWN of CORNING, NY February, 2002 – March, 2002 TOWN of CRAWFORD, NY April, 2025 – October, 2025 TOWN of DELAWARE, NY June, 2001 – September, 2001 TOWN of DeWitt, NY January, 2008 – August, 2025 TOWN of EAST BLOOMFIELD, NY May, 1998 TOWN of ELLERY February 2002 – April, 2017 TOWN of ELLINGTON February, 2007 – May, 2007 TOWN of FORT EDWARD, NY November, 2009 – February, 2016 TOWN of GARDINER, NY March, 2022 – June, 2022 TOWN of GENESEO November, 2006 – May, 2007 TOWN of GLENVILLE January, 2024 – November, 2024 TOWN of GRAND ISLAND, NY October, 2008 – December, 2008 TOWN of GREECE NY May, 2000 – December, 2023 TOWN of GREENFIELD RESIDENT’S ASSOC February, 2002 – March, 2002 TOWN of HAMBURG, NY October, 2001 – TOWN of HAMMOND, NY September, 2008 – November, 2009 TOWN of HARTLAND, NY May, 1998 TOWN of HENRIETTA, NY September, 2001 – July, 2008 VILLAGE of HILTON, NY March, 2026 - Present TOWN of HYDE PARK, NY June, 2020 – October, 2023 TOWN of ITHACA May, 2009 – October, 2025 TOWN of IRONDEQUOIT, NY March, 2002 – July, 2008 TOWN of LAFAYETTE April, 2007 – May, 2007 TOWN of LAKE LUZERNE October, 2020 – September, 2021 TOWN of LAGRANGE April, 2024 – December, 2024 TOWN of LOCKPORT, NY May, 2017 – May, 2018 TOWN of LIMA CITIZEN’S ASSOCIATION July 1997 - August, 1997 TOWN/VILLAGE of LIVONIA, NY February, 2016 – January, 2026 TOWN of MONTGOMERY, NY December, 2022 – May, 2023 TOWN of MOUNT MORRIS, NY May, 2025 – September, 2025 TOWN of MARION, NY October, 1999 VILLAGE of MACEDON, NY August, 2006 TOWN of MENDON, NY July, 2001 – May, 2017 TOWN of MILTON, NY July, 2018 – January, 2022 TOWN of NASSAU, NY January, 2017 – May, 2017 TOWN of NELSON, NY May, 2024 – December, 2024 Proposed Statement of Work, Page 9

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

TOWN of NEW HARTFORD, NY TOWN of NEWARK VALLEY, NY TOWN of NORTH HARMONY, NY TOWN of OGDEN, NY TOWN of ONTARIO, NY TOWN of ORCHARD PARK, NY PALMYRA (PA) TOWNSHIP TOWN of PENFIELD, NY TOWN of PITTSFORD, NY VILLAGE of PITTSFORD, NY TOWN of POLAND, NY CITY of ROCHESTER, NY TOWN of RODMAN TOWN of ROSE, NY VILLAGE of ROSLYN ESTATES TOWN of RUSH, NY VILLAGE of SCOTTSVILLE TOWN of SPAFFORD, NY TOWN of STOCKBRIDGE, NY TOWN of STEPHENTOWN, NY TOWN of SULLIVAN, NY TOWN of SWEDEN, NY TOWN of THOMPSON, NY TOWN of TUXEDO, NY TOWN of VICTOR, NY TOWN of WALWORTH, NY TOWN of WAPPINGER, NY TOWN of WEBSTER, NY VILLAGE of WESTFIELD TOWN of WEST BLOOMFIELD, NY TOWN of WHEATFIELD, NY TOWN of WHEATLAND, NY

May 2014 – April, 2016 September, 2005 – October, 2005 May, 2002 – February, 2007 December, 2000 – January 2005 May, 1997 - February, 1998 June, 2002 – July, 2007 June, 2001 – December, 2001 July, 1997 – September, 2022 March, 1998 – December, 2022 November, 2007 – June, 2008 September, 2002 – January, 2003 March 1, 1998 – December 31, 2010 September, 2006 August, 2024 – December, 2024 October, 2024 – January, 2025 April, 1997 – April, 2000 August, 2014 – December, 2014 July, 2007 – October, 2007 November, 2024 – April, 2025 June, 2001 – August, 2001 May, 2024 – June, 2024 April, 2001 – October, 2020 August 2023 – June, 2024 September, 2024 – April, 2025 January, 2002 – April, 2007 June, 1997 – March, 2007 July, 2023 – January, 2024 July, 1997 –October, 2009 April, 2005 – September, 2006 January, 2022 – June, 2022 September, 2016 – October, 2016 December, 2023 – December, 2023

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

engineering operation. In addition, other full and part-time employment in the electronics field since 1971. COMMUNICATIONS AND ENERGY CORP., Syracuse, NY November 1992 to April 1993 Consultant for RF/Microwave circuit simulation and test. SMITH CORONA CORPORATION, Cortland NY July 1991 to September 1992 Consultant for high-volume product EMI/EMC design and compliance. MEMBERSHIPS: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) New York State Bar Association New York State Academy of Trial Lawyers SELECTED ACTIVITIES/PRESENTATIONS/PUBLICATIONS: 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Technologies for Homeland Security (HST) “Applying Machine Learning in Managing Deployable Systems” (see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329649929_Applying_Machine_Learning_in_ Managing_Deployable_Systems) “Providing first responders with real-time status of cellular networks during a disaster” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329648918_Providing_first_responders_with_r eal-time_status_of_cellular_networks_during_a_disaster Planning and Design Manual for the Review of Applications for Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (New York Department of State Division of Local Government Services, March, 2001) Johnson, W.P. and A.T.Adams "Multiple-Post Obstacles in Rectangular Waveguide: Theory and Experiment", National Radio Science Meeting, Program and Abstracts (Boulder, CO: January, 1989), p. 60. Masters Thesis: "Measured Response of Various Waveguide Inductive Post Arrays Compared to Theoretical Results", May, 1988. Co-author of The ASTI Handbook (published by Microfilco Press), a reference text on satellite ground system interference suppression. Developed and presented a 3-hour training course on interference avoidance and suppression for the Satellite Business Communications Association's (SBCA) member certification program.

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 11

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 12

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 13

TOWN of WEBSTER 5/15/2026

Proposed Statement of Work, Page 14