TOWN OF WATERTOWN
Reconvened Meeting from August 14, 2025
Municipal Building
August 28, 2025
Members Present: Joel R. Bartlett, Supervisor
David D. Prosser, Councilman
Joanne McClusky, Councilwoman
Michael Perkins, Councilman
Robert Slye, Councilman
Members Absent:
Supervisor Bartlett opened the meeting at 6:00 pm.
Supervisor Bartlett introduced Pat Scordo, Ryan Aubertine & Mark Tompkins GYMO Engineering to address information concerning the Northeast Water District, Water District #7.
Pat Scordo addressed the public. Following tonight’s meeting; their team will set up workstations where residents can review detailed plans. At these stations, people will be able to see their property, the location of the proposed main line, and where the lateral connection is planned. They hope this format will help answer specific questions about each property owner.
This project has been in development for over twenty years, with planning efforts dating back to 2005. The current proposal will serve approximately 135 residences and businesses. The Town has secured a very favorable funding package through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Five million dollars in grant funding and three million in zero-interest financing. While they had hoped for additional grant support, this package is considered a strong outcome and provides the necessary foundation to move forward.
The proposed district includes NYS Route 126, Hunt Street, the Hampton Gardens area, Slate Road, Rutland Hollow Road, Hadcock Road, and part of Overlook Drive. In total, the project involves the installation of approximately 20,000 feet of main water line. Due to the elevation changes in the service area, a pump station is required, which will house two 25-horsepower pumps for regular service and one 75-horsepower pump dedicated to fire flow. The system must overcome roughly 280 feet of vertical elevation, which has historically been one of the challenges preventing this district from moving forward.
In addition, there will be approximately 18,000 feet of laterals constructed. This amount is higher than usual, as many homes in the district are set back significantly from the road. The funding package restricts the use of public funds for work on private property. Therefore, the Town’s responsibility extends to the installation of main lines and laterals up to the public right-of-way. Where necessary, laterals will be extended across the roadway, and all permitting for this work will be handled by the project team.
Each active residence or business will have a meter pit installed at the termination point of the lateral, located at the edge of the right-of-way. The meter and shut-off valve will serve as the connection point between the Town’s infrastructure and the property owner’s responsibility. Property owners will be responsible for extending the service line from that point to their home or business.
This design approach ensures that every residence and business in the district has access to a connection point while maintaining compliance with funding restrictions.
They are still working through some details, but the current design shows that even vacant parcels will receive a lateral extended under the road, along with a curb stop marked at the right-of-way. This means that, in the future, a home or business is constructed on one of those parcels, the lateral will already be in place and ready for connection.
It is also important to note that while this project does not include funding for private laterals, once the main line is installed, residents and business owners may be eligible to apply for assistance through the Community Development Block Grant program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This is a relatively new source of funding, and it is income-based. The exact thresholds have not yet been defined, but the Town and the engineering team will be available to help guide the residents through the process if and when that opportunity arises.
Regardless of funding eligibility, every property owner will receive a drawing showing the location of their lateral, along with specifications for how the service connection must be completed. This ensures consistency across the district in terms of pipe material, depth, tracer wire, and construction standards. The Town will administer this process, and the engineers, will provide technical support.
Regarding easements, as they break into station groups later this evening, they have maps available for review. Everyone will be able to see their property, the proposed main line, and the associated easements.
Because much of the project follows NYS Route 126, the Department of Transportation does not allow municipal water mains to be installed within their right-of-way. This has been their policy for roughly 20 years. As a result, along Route 126 the water main must be located on private property. In those cases, there will be a permanent 20-foot easement – 10 feet on either side of the pipe to allow the Town to operate and maintain the line. During construction, an additional temporary easement, also about 20 feet wide, will be required to allow room for equipment and materials.
On county roads, the intent is to locate mains within the county right-of-way where possible. However, many of these rights-of-ways are too narrow to accommodate both the pipeline and adequate room for maintenance. In those cases, they will need to secure smaller easements from property owners, in order to establish the permanent 10-foot buffer on each side of the pipe.
For each property, a small area will be needed to install the lateral and meter pit. While the Town’s construction responsibility stops at the right-of-way, the DOT and the County both require that curb stops and meter pits be located on private property, not within their rights-of-way. This means there will be limited construction activity just inside the property line to set those components in place.
Mr. Scordo explained they are very close to receiving final approvals from both the Department of Health and the Department of Transportation. They have received their initial comments and are in the process of addressing them. Once that is complete, it gets resubmitted for review. This step is proceeding at the same time as the easement signing process. While they don’t know exactly how long easement collection will take, it is important to start that process as soon as possible, because easements must be secured before the project can go out to bid. That is a requirement of the funding agencies.
In terms of cost, the project has two components. The first is the capital portion, which repays the zero-percent loan over 30 years. Divided among 135 properties, that comes to $616 annually per residence. For vacant parcels, the Town Board has agreed to assess them at one-quarter of that value, which is $154 per year.
The second component is the cost of water, which is based entirely on usage. Using engineering averages and historic data, a typical single-family home uses about 175 gallons of water per day. At the Town’s water rate, that equates to approximately $484 per year.
So, combining the capital cost and the average usage cost, a typical residence or a business with comparable water use can expect to pay about $1,100 annually. This represents one of the best funding packages available. While they had hoped for additional grant dollars, further delays in pursuit of more funding would add inflationary costs, which rise three to four percent or more each year. After weighing those factors, the Town Board agreed that this was the right package to move forward with.
The floor was opened to the public for a general Q&A session.
The engineering team then set up workstations in the lobby, where property owners could review maps and discuss individual concerns directly with staff.
The Town Board reconvened and resumed the regular business portion of the meeting that had been recessed from July 19, 2025. The meeting opened with a roll call of members present. Attorney Harrienger was also in attendance.
The Board reviewed the Full Environmental Assessment Form for Sewer District #1.
MOTION #111-2025
Supervisor Bartlett offer a motion to accept the Full Environmental Assessment Form for Sewer District #1 prepared and submitted by the town engineers and to proceed with the SEQR review as an unlisted action, Councilman Prosser seconded.
Ayes All
MOTION #112-2025
RESOLUTION 16 of 2025
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SEQR (Long Form)
FOR SEWER DISTRICT NO. 1 IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Watertown, New York has considered the proposed Sewer District No. 1 improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board is aware that the proposed improvements are required as part of a consent order issued by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation in July 2020; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board previously reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form for the purpose of assisting the Town Board in making a determination of significance in respect to the improvements, and issued a Negative Declaration relative to the same; and
WHEREAS, since the aforementioned Negative Declaration was issued by the Town Board, the Town Engineers have determined that certain aspects of the proposed action needed to be modified in order to better serve the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board has been asked to complete a new review of this matter, given the updated information provided by the Town Engineers; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Watertown has reviewed an updated Environmental Assessment Form for the purpose of assisting the Town Board in making a determination of significance regarding the improvements; of whether the enactment of the Legislation would have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Town has reviewed the criteria for determining significance of an action that is set forth at 6 NYCRR §617.7(c); and
WHEREAS, having considered the action, consisting of improvements being made to Sewer District No. 1 and the potential environmental impacts associated with such action, the Town Board has determined to proceed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Watertown finds that the proposed action of completing improvements to Sewer District No. 1 is subject to SEQR; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the action constitutes a Type I action under SEQR 617.4; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Board is the agency with jurisdiction by law to fund, approve, or directly undertake this action, and therefore, a coordinated review of the action under SEQR is neither required nor necessary.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Watertown, New York:
1. Based upon the examination and consideration of the Long Environmental Assessment Form and comparison of the proposed action and criteria set forth at 617.7, no significant impact on the environment is known by the adoption of the proposed legislation.
2. The Supervisor for the Town of Watertown is authorized to execute the Long Environmental Assessment Form to the effect that the Town Board is issuing a “negative declaration” under SEQR.
3. A complete copy of the EAF including its negative declaration shall be maintained in the Town Clerk’s office in a file that will be readily accessible to the Public. All subsequent notices regarding the undertaking of the project as set forth in this Resolution shall state that a negative declaration has been issued.
4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Supervisor Bartlett, and seconded by Board Member, Prosser, and upon roll call vote of the Board was duly adopted as follows:
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky Yes
Councilman: Michael Perkins Yes
Councilman: Robert Slye Yes
Supervisor Bartlett introduced the designation of Deputy Supervisor David Prosser to be included as an authorized signatory on all bank accounts, checks, and important documentation relating to the conduct of Town business. Supervisor Bartlett will remain the primary signatory. However, in the event he is absent or incapacitated, Deputy Supervisor Prosser will be authorized to sign all document. This avoids the need to reissue checks or create separate accounts.
MOTION #113-2025
Supervisor Bartlett offer a motion to authorize Deputy Supervisor David Prosser as a co-signatory on all Town bank accounts, financial and legal documents in his absents, Councilman Perkins seconded.
Ayes All
Supervisor Bartlett will contact the bank and arrange the process. A certified resolution will be prepared for the bank. While Town Law doesn’t technically require such a resolution, the banks do, and this will satisfy their requirements.
Supervisor Bartlett proposed asking the town attorney to begin condemnation proceedings against Sam’s Club for a portion of their entranceway. This will allow the town to create proper access for the new proposed road.
The new road would go from NYS Rte. 3 follow the town right of way, turn to the right, and continue through the Sam’s entrance to County Rte. 202, creating the necessary connection. This alignment is consistent with the engineers’ reports. He stated this connection is also in line with the County’s request to ease congestion at the traffic light, and both the Jefferson County and the NYSDOT are in favor of this approach.
He has been successful in obtaining a commitment of funding assistance from the developer/ property owner of $25,000 to help cover some of the cost. The specifics will be worked into the project language and agreements, with funding required from the property owner prior to final approvals for planning work.
Supervisor Bartlett stated under Town Law, the Town may invest up to $50,000 of its own manpower and equipment toward a project like this. It is legal and has precedent in other municipalities. In this case, the primary beneficiary is NYSDOT since the project would ease traffic flow and allow the traffic signal to operate as a two-way light instead of the current three-way configuration.
He stated before proceeding; however, we need to begin the condemnation process to secure the necessary land to complete the road. Sam’s has granted an easement once before for sewer installation, without compensation. Once constructed, the road is expected to be transferred to the County, which will assume responsibility for snow removal and maintenance. That would relieve the Sam’s Company of the obligation to plow and maintain that section during the winter.
The project involves approximately 500 feet of roadway. The plan would be to lay the binder the first year and complete the top coat the following year after construction settles.
This step is essential. No final approvals for sewer work can be issued until the right-of-way pieces are secured. With outside funding contributions already committed, completing this land process will allow the project to move forward.
Councilwoman McClusky asked if we have the necessary easements in place?
Supervisor Bartlett responded the easements have not been signed yet. The design has changed three times, and every time it changes, it adds another six to eighteen months. He stated the cost of delay, plus what the town eventually would pay the contractor to install the sewer on the Phippen property, would be far greater than the cost of proceeding with eminent domain of the Sam’s property for the roadway. He feels this is the practical solution. Everyone has a share in it, federal money, property owner, and town money. It’s a joint opportunity.
Supervisor Bartlett stated the American Recovery Act will fund $25,000 and the land owner will contribute another $25,000. He stated this will be completing the remaining connection point that allows the town to pump sewer though is area. The town has spent $3 million putting infrastructure in the ground, and right now it’s at a dead stop at that property. He stated there is no other way to connect to County Route 202 except through the design that’s been accepted using this property. Without it, the system can’t move forward.
Attorney Harrienger offered the other possible way would be to connect through the Phippen property.
Supervisor Bartlett stated the road will not need to be built for big truck traffic. The lots created out there are small. They are not going to see a large-scale business go in on those parcels.
If the County ultimately takes over that section, they can reimburse the town and make up any difference. His concern is that the town will end up facing more lawsuits if they delay or fail to complete this. Under the contract, the developer has the right to finish the project. If we block that connection to County Route 202, and the project isn’t completed, that liability falls back on the town.
Councilwoman McClusky stated the town has other options not just that one alignment. She questioned why the town should be forced to choose one option over the other just because they are threatened with lawsuits? That shouldn’t dictate their decision.
She asked if the easements have been signed by the property owner yet.
Attorney Harrienger added there are ongoing issues regarding easements that are delaying progress. The town is still waiting on Mr. Simao to provide signed easements, specifically, three water easements and one sewer easement on NYS Rte. 12F and County Route 196. Two of these are located on a parcel that directly benefits from the sewer improvements. Despite repeated discussions, the necessary documentation has not been finalized.
She expressed concern about this delay. Without the signed easements, the town cannot proceed confidently or legally with certain parts of the project, the responsibility to provide those documents rests with Mr. Simao.
Supervisor Bartlett stated the majority of these easements are for NYS Route 12F and are scheduled to be signed this week. As part of a change in approach, instead of digging up infrastructure buried under the county highway, which would be costly and disruptive, the decision has been made to abandon that section and install two new manholes in a different location. This change is now part of the overall sewer project.
Attorney Harrienger clarified that the easements currently under review were originally prepared and approved by the engineering team. These easements account for the necessary distance and permanent access requirements. As long as the documents have not been altered by Mr. Simao, the assumption is that they still meet the engineer’s specifications. However, this again hinges on the easements being signed and officially recorded, which has not yet occurred.
Supervisor Bartlett stated the benefits of this project extend far beyond a single property owner looking to sell. While the current owner may not be developing the land, the future buyers will, and if we don’t act now, we’re effectively cutting them off from ever connecting to the Town services without a significant zoning overhaul. Current zoning regulations require specific frontage on a town, state, or county highway, which limits development opportunities. There are possibly four to six lots including two residential lots bordering NYS Route 3 that could be developed. These would be ideal for low-impact commercial uses like medical or dental offices, which do not generate heavy traffic and could take advantage of the existing traffic light and on Route 3 and entrance from Sam’s Club. This kind of development adds to the tax base. He informed the Board the Salmon Run Property is down to a $9 million valuation, and it once was $48 million. He thinks the town needs to take steps to rebuild and reinvest in areas like this and collaborate with developers, whether we personally like them or not, for the long-term benefit of the town. He feels giving up access to those lots would be a major loss. Without utilizing the access defined in the proposed easements, those lots will likely never have sewer service.
He urged strongly to move forward with this motion and begin construction of the road. The entrance road can be completed in the first year, which would provide immediate access to the other vacant lots. Over time, the town can extend the road and, if necessary, use eminent domain to complete the full project, including taking over the portion currently owned by Sam’s Club. That part of the road doesn’t have to be done immediately; they can stretch it out over time. This approach maintains momentum and aligns with the goal of growing the tax base rather than hindering it. What is most important is that they complete this project under the original design that was submitted back in August of 2021. He reminded the Board that this was voted in favor of that design in the past.
Councilwoman McClusky stated that since then, she has gained more insight. She has taken the comments of the Highway Superintendent into consideration and has changed her position on the project.
Supervisor Bartlett stated he understand the concerns. He is just pointing out that this is an opportunity to open up more area for development, and if we don’t do this now, that area could remain isolated and non-conforming indefinitely. If we start the first phase of the project this year, then in two to five years, we can move into the second phase. Once the cost is finalized to extend the main line, then they can budget accordingly to complete the rest later. The question is: would you be willing to phase it in over a few years.
Superintendent Clement said if that is what the Board directs him to do, he will.
MOTION #114-2025
Supervisor Bartlett offers a motion to authorize to adopt the road entrance project on NYS Rte 3 as originally defined in the maps, plans, and drawings submitted by Bernier& Carr, phasing the project over at least a five-year period. The entranceway will be completed utilizing funds from the American Recovery Act in the amount of $25,000.00, along with a financial commitment from the Town, and $25,000.00 from the property owner/developer. This motion was seconded by Councilman Prosser.
Supervisor Bartlett stated that the resolution under consideration would authorize construction of the connection road and make use of the funds already available. The Supervisor stated that the Town’s financial obligation is expected to be minimal, since the property owner/developer will contribute $25,000 and the Town has allocated $25,000.00 in American Recovery Act funds to the project. Supervisor Bartlett explained that this approach allows the Town to secure the sewer connection, which he emphasized as an important priority. He noted concerns that delays or failures in completing the connection could lead to issues. Supervisor Bartlett further stated that the Town “has base materials on hand”.
Councilwoman McClusky commented that it would be more cost-effective to pursue the sewer route through the Phippen property rather than invest in constructing a new road. She argued that extending utilities across the Phippen property would require far less funding than building entirely new infrastructure. She felt it was unfair to use Town monies to benefit a single developer. She questioned the “Town material on hand” Supervisor Bartlett repeatedly referred to and asked Mr. Clement about it.
Highway Superintendent Clement commented it’s not correct to say we already have suitable material on hand. What we actually have came from the Summit Medical Offices project. They originally planned to crush the material on-site, but it failed to meet state specifications for the road. That’s how the Town ended up with it. If crushing is done on-site anywhere, it must meet State specifications. If this becomes a county road, then county standards also apply. He expressed concerns that the Town should not be placed in the position of providing infrastructure work for private development. He wanted to clarify for the record: the Town does not have the road materials on hand.
The Town Board looked to the Town Highway Superintendent for his input on the situation. The Highway Superintendent stated that the Town does not have “free, available material” as repeatedly stated by the Town Supervisor. The Highway Superintendent said he could not understand why the Town would consider putting in this road when the existing Town roads are in such bad shape. He further commented that the Town Highway Department needs new equipment and materials but when he seeks that equipment, he is told that the Town “does not have the money”. He asked where all the money is going to come from for the stone and blacktop. He then stated that the Town Supervisor had told the Highway Superintendent that the entire blacktop budget for the Town this upcoming year “needed to be below $200,000.00”, so he really does not understand how the Town could consider this new road at this time. Two hundred thousand dollars doesn’t go far when paving, and the town has a lot of roads in need of resurfacing. He stated that he will put in the road when he can if that is what the Town Board votes, but there are lots of other projects that for the safety of Town residents will need to be completed first.
Supervisor Bartlett stated in his 30 years on this Board, he has never known a highway superintendent who didn’t want to blacktop every road in Town. They all want new equipment, and he secured some of that for him this year. Supervisor Bartlett stated it is most important that the Town complete this project under the original design that was submitted back in August of 2021.
Superintendent Clement stated he just wants to keep Town residents safe, and the Town cannot maintain growth without working equipment and you can’t expect to keep using the same equipment for 30 years and have it still function effectively.
When asked by the Board to estimate how much the road will cost the Town, Superintendent Clement estimated the project cost at $250,000.00 to $300,000.00; a figure supported by both the Town engineer and the county engineer. He further stated that the Board should go out and look at the Sam’s Club property. There is a water issue there and you can see in the area that has already been cleared that it drops right off. To do it properly, Superintendent Clement stated the Town would need to install two large 24-inch drainage pipes. Superintendent Clement emphasized that if the road is to be built, it must be constructed to full specification, and he would not build a substandard road. Superintendent Clement reiterated that quality and proper design would be non-negotiable.
Supervisor Bartlett’s concerns remained with those undeveloped lots owned by Mr. Simao. He stated if we do nothing, they will remain non-conforming and unusable indefinitely. However, if we run the sewer line through Mr. Simeo’s property, it provides access to those lots which could eventually support new development.
Councilwoman McClusky responded that if the Town goes through the Phippen property, the landowner will still be able to hook up, if he chooses to, at his own expense, not at the Town’s cost. It costs a great deal to put in a proper road.
Supervisor Bartlett continued that right now, those lots have no road frontage and can’t be developed under current zoning. He also stated that the project provides a direct benefit to residents by creating a new access point from the COR Plaza traffic light on NYS Route 3 to County Route 202. Supervisor Bartlett further stated that he has spoken with Jefferson County and the New York State DOT, and that both told him that they are in favor of this approach. Supervisor Bartlett further stated that there is always a chance the county would provide assistance, as he has seen support in the past from county legislators and the county highway superintendent. He stated that Mr. Bibbens, the former NYS DOT Supervisor, was also strongly in favor of this project in the past, and that if the County ultimately takes over that section, they can reimburse the Town and make up any difference.
Discussion took place regarding the caution light on NYS Rte. 3. Supervisor Bartlett added the light is owned by Cor. Supervisor Bartlett stated that the town would pay $1,000.00 a year to share the service.
Highway Superintendent Clement asked if the Supervisor had received approval from the NYSDOT to connect with that traffic light on NYS Rte. 3.
Supervisor Bartlett stated that we are still waiting on the final designs, and that NYS DOS has changed the design twice.
Highway Superintendent Clement stated that he personally spoke with NYS DOT and NYS DOT informed him it would be a long time, if ever, before they would approve the highway cut. They have been saying the same thing for years. Superintendent Clement expressed concern that the Town was going to spend that much money on a road that doesn’t benefit the Town, except for one property owner. Why wouldn’t they put that money into the roads that the Town Residents use every day? Why are we spending this money when our existing roads desperately need attention?
Councilman Slye commented he appreciates that the Supervisor is looking at the Town’s long- range plan as far as the growth of business development is concerned, but we have residents who pay taxes in the Town, and they’re looking for something tangible in return. He doesn’t know if looking at long-term plans for development outweighs the more immediate needs like paving roads, maintaining infrastructure, or other services. Councilman Slye stated that we are having trouble taking care of what we already have, and he feels the need to be able to show our taxpayers that we’re doing something for them. We need to show our individual taxpayers that we’re working on their behalf. Right now, he’s not sure we’re in a position to prioritize development over the basic needs of people in the town. We’re more tied up trying to meet current demands with limited resources.
Supervisor Bartlett commented that over the past 13 or 14 years, we’ve been successful in not having taxpayer’s “foot the bill” directly for many improvements. Roads have been paved, equipment purchased, and services implemented all without directly increasing the local tax burden. So, he feels from that perspective, it’s a wash and taxpayers are getting a benefit.
Councilwoman McClusky stated that it was not in the best interest of the Town to move forward with this option, especially when another option was readily available. She also stated that it was wrong for the Town to put a road in that will only benefit one person. She said the Board should be listening to the Town Highway Superintendent because he is the person in the best position to know the condition of the Town roads and what work needs to be done in the Town.
There was a roll call vote:
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky No
Councilman: Michael Perkins Yes
Councilman: Robert Slye No
MOTION #115-2025
A motion was introduced by Supervisor Bartlett to direct the Town Attorney to prepare all necessary paperwork to condemn the property as designed by the engineers in the previously submitted Map, Plan, and Report, which is on file in the Town Clerk’s office and the Engineer’s office. The motion was seconded by Councilman Prosser.
The action approved under Motion #114-2025 involves connecting Route 3 with County Route 202 by utilizing portions of a parcel currently owned by Sam’s Club. Sam’s Club has stated that they do not want to have their property bisected by a road, especially if the same could cause delays or issues with their delivery trucks, and they have previously refused to grant the Town an easement for the same. Supervisor Bartlett would like the Town Attorney to initiate the necessary eminent domain proceedings when appropriate for the purpose of building and extending the connector road between NYS Rte. 3 and County Rte. 202.
There was a roll call vote:
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky No
Councilman: Michael Perkins Yes
Councilman: Robert Slye No
Supervisor Bartlett stated that he will meet with Superintendent Clement to review the budget for the upcoming year and to plan for the second phase of the project, scheduled for three to five years out. He explained that this timeline allows time to set funds aside. Regarding the $200,000 figure originally mentioned for next year’s budget, he clarified that it was a starting point and that he will work to increase it to $400,000.
Councilman Prosser question if the town should conduct a reval to increase the assessed valuation rate.
Supervisor Bartlett stated it is now at 45%. He stated we have to make some adjustments and follow state guidance on how to increase the tax base. This road project is one way to increase the town tax base. That will help open up the other lots for development.
Supervisor Bartlett asked Attorney Harrienger to prepare all necessary documents for consideration of forming the Lettiere Tract Water District under Article 12-A of Town Law. He explained that the petition process did not pass, and the Article 12-A procedure, with its permissive referendum period, provided a more certain path forward. A public hearing cannot be held until the creation of the district under Article 12-A is presented to counsel.
Supervisor Bartlett asked Mr. Scordo, GYMO, to draft a plan to include tax parcel #82.20-1-16.1 to the existing Lettiere Tract District for a cost comparison. He stated by developing this parcel it could substantially reduce the debt load for the rest of the district users.
Mr. Scordo shared some preliminary calculations. He considered a look at it with and without that property included. He compared revenue bond rates between a 5 and 10-year scenario. He stated this is a rough estimate as they just pulled these numbers together today. He would like to discuss it further with the board to get some direction on this revenue bond issue.
Supervisor Bartlett stated he would contact bond counsel for clarification on what the revenue notes are going for.
Discussion took place whether future boards could be bound under a revenue bond structure and how short-term renewals might work, similar to bond anticipation notes. He emphasized that without a formally created district, there is no legal mechanism to collect funds for debt service; once the district is formed, repayment would be borne solely by those within the district benefiting from the system, ensuring no burden falls on the broader town tax base.
He emphasized that final decisions on terms and rates would be made after consulting bond counsel and completing the necessary calculations. The total to borrow is not yet determined.
A public hearing will be scheduled at a later date to allow the attorney and engineer sufficient time to prepare all documents necessary for forming the district under Article 12-A of Town Law. The next steps would include drafting the required documents, preparing two variations of the map and plan report, scheduling the public hearing, issuing notices, and ultimately preparing a resolution to formally establish the district.
Attorney Harrienger advised; the first step is to determine Board’s intent for the district. If they choose to move forward they would schedule a public hearing to gauge interest, whether people are in favor or not. Once the map, plan, and report are filed with the Town Clerk’s Office and a copy is given to her office, she would then draft an order scheduling a public hearing. After the public hearing is held, she would prepare a resolution and order that would formally create the district. That would be done under Town Law §209-e and §209-c.
Mr. Scordo informed that the report is not completed yet. The South Side portion is pretty much complete. That one was the petition district, and he has the assessments from the petition process, so he has that data to work with. That helped him crunch the numbers in time for tonight, but there’s still work to do. It shouldn’t take too long to finish. He needs to add the one 64-acre parcel into the proposed district.
MOTION #116-2025
A motion was introduced directing GYMO to prepare a map, plan, and report regarding the creation of a Water District No. 8 using the current Lettiere Tract parcels as the boundaries for the same. The Town Supervisor also asked that the map, plan, and report show an alternative boundary inclusive of Tax Parcel # 82.20-1-16.1. The motion introduced further directed the Town Attorney to draft the documents necessary to initiate the formation process under Article 12-A for the proposed Lettiere Tract Water District No. #8, with the intent that a majority of the Town Board would decide which District Boundaries to consider and use.
A motion to adopt the foregoing resolution was offered by Supervisor Bartlett and seconded by Councilmember Prosser, and upon a roll call vote was adopted as follows:
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky Yes
Councilman: Michael Perkins Yes
Councilman: Robert Slye Yes
Mr. Lettiere raised a question about a property owned by Barbara Ashe. She is not formally in the district but receives water service.
Supervisor Bartlett said to make the engineer aware and suggested the property could be included as a district user.
Clerk Desormo informed the Board that Mr. Mike Harrienger recently completed repairs to the roof and siding of the Municipal Building. He generously offered his services on a voluntary basis, without expectation of compensation. The Board expressed their sincere appreciation for his contribution and service to the community.
MOTION #117-2025
Councilman Prosser moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m., seconded by Supervisor Bartlett.
Ayes All
_____________________________
Pamela D. Desormo, Town Clerk