TOWN OF WATERTOWN
Regular Meeting
Municipal Building
July 17, 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 with the Pledge of Allegiance followed by a roll call of members present at 7:00 pm. Attorney Harrienger was also present.
MOTION #92-2025
Supervisor Bartlett moved to adopt the minutes from the June 12, 2025 Regular Town Board Meeting, Councilman Prosser seconded.
Ayes All
MOTION #93-2025
Supervisor Bartlett, GYMO moved to adopt the minutes from the June 23, 2025 Special Town Board Meeting, Councilman Prosser seconded.
Ayes All
Supervisor Bartlett introduced Mr. Pat Scordo to give an update on the Northeast Water District and the proposed Lettiere Tract Water System.
Northeast Water District No. 7
• Received NYS DOT plan review comments; (no significant plan revisions)
• Awaiting NYS DOH plan review comments
• Soil Borings/Rock Probes are complete. Awaiting soils report.
• Williams Water Pumping Station – Waiting for landowners to sign and return Purchase Agreement. Submitted Subdivision and Site Plan to Planning Board and attended 7.7.25 Planning Board Meeting. Public Hearing for Subdivision is 8.4.25. Site Plan Approval for Pumping Station was waived by the Planning Board
• Work with Municipal Solutions to have a Public Information session regarding CDBG individual homeowner funding for water laterals.
• Planning to start the water-main easement process. Does the Town Board require a Public Hearing?
Lettiere/Southside Water
Public hearing tonight
Supervisor Bartlett introduced Mike Altieri, BCA to give updates on town projects:
PROJECTS IN CONSTRUCTION
Outer Arsenal Street Water District No. 1 and Sewer District No. 2 Extension
Current Construction Budget: $ 3,307,691.00
Current Change Orders (Included in Above): $ 525,960.00
Pending Change Orders: None Current
Estimated Completion Date: December 2025 (anticipated)
Project Status – Construction has resumed on County Route 202. Final restoration complete on areas that were previously disturbed. New PLC design is being finalized with Aqualogics.
NYS Route 12F Watermain Installation
Original Construction Budget: $ 660,816.00
Original Contract Price: $ 603,069.90
Final Projected Construction Budget: $ 611,254,90
Project Status – Closeout, Pay App. No. 4 has been approved.
PROJECTS IN DESIGN
Water District No. 4 Extension (Northland Estates/Pine Meadows)
Construction Budget: $ 7,250,000.00
Administrative and Technical Costs: $ 1,709,500.00
Contingency: $ 1,040,500.00 (around 10%)
Total Project Cost: $ 10,000,000.00
Total Grant Funding (WIIA and CDBG): $ 6,250,000.00
Anticipated Cost per EDU: $ 600/EDU (1/3 debt service, 2/3 water purchase from City)
Project Bidding Date: August 2025 Projected Bidding Date:
Projected Construction Substantial Completion Date: September 2026 Project Update – Comments have been returned to NYS DOH and the Bureau of Health, awaiting final approval for bidding. DEC and Army Corp permits have been approved. Easements are being obtained for affected property owners.
Sewer District #1
Total Project Cost: $ 2,643,000.00 (WWTF Replacement)
$ 4,491,00.00 (Stormwater Improvements)
Project Funding Awarded: NYS EFC WIIA – $ 444,500.00 (WWTF)
NYS DEC WQIP – $ 1,000,000.00 (WWTF)
Project Update – Awaiting announcements on GIGP and FEMA Funding originally applied for under stormwater improvements. Will submit to the GRG Program for additional stormwater funding.
Comments from DEC and EFC were replied to and we are currently working on an updated consent order/disinfection compliance request for the DEC. Design of the new wastewater treatment facilities has begun.
Sewer District No. 1 Revised Schedule (WWTF Project Phase):
Begin Piloting Program: September/October 2025
End Piloting Program (Tentative): December 2025
Design Start: March 2025
Design Complete: January 2025
NYS DEC Review and Approval: April 2026
Begin Construction: June 2026
Construct Disinfection Units: June 2027
Complete Construction and Begin Operation: September 2027
Sewer District 4, 5 and 6 – I&l Study
This study investigated the occurrence of inflow and infiltration (I&I) in the Town’s sewer system serving Districts 4, 5 and 6. Several structures were identified as needing repair and/ or replacement. The total maximum inflow into the system is estimated at 101 GPM. The final I&l study has been submitted to the City in accordance with the agreement. BCA submitted for an Engineering Planning Grant with EFC in April for future study of upgrades for these sewer districts.
Average Water Usage: 79,304 GPD (2024)
Maximum Metered Sewer Flow: 200,000 GPD (May to November 2024)
Total Repair Cost: $ 164,000.00
Total Estimated Savings Per Year: $ 15,000/Year
Estimated Sewer Credits to the Town (1:3 rule): 48,500 GPD
For discussion, we would propose to bid these improvements in August with a bid opening September to address the repairs required in the system.
A discussion took place regarding the sewer pump station location at the CWT Hatchery. The station was initially planned to be located at the corner of the property, but it was brought to the town’s attention that the contractor installed the pump inside the building instead. They never received formal approval for that location from the Town.
In response, Supervisor Bartlett proposed scheduling a meeting with the developer to address the matter and determine next steps. He asked if Mr. Altieri, Attorney Harrienger, and one other member of the Town Board would be available to attend the meeting early next week. Councilman Prosser stated he would be available. The meeting was tentatively set up for Tuesday July 22, 2025 at 1:30 pm.
Supervisor Bartlett opened the public hearing at 7:25 p.m. to consider a petition submitted by eligible Town residents seeking the establishment of a water district, to be known as the Lettiere Water System. The petition proposes that the boundaries of the new district include properties in the Town of Watertown currently served by the Lettiere Water System Tract, as well as eight (8) additional homes located on Ives Street Road. He asked everyone for the sake of time to keep their comments less than 3 minutes.
David Soderquist addressed the Board; he wished to raise several concerns about the project. The situation has evolved from forming a water district to include properties on Ives Street Road, and now possibly excluding them. He expressed confusion over the current status, especially after reviewing the prior meeting minutes and the current public hearing notice, both of which still reference a $1.2 million figure, an amount Mr. Soderquist believes may violate Article 12 of Town Law. He emphasized he has no personal agenda, only a desire for transparency and legal integrity. He also voiced concern that Mr. Lettiere was permitted to circulate and witness petitions; he felt that such documents should be notarized and treated with the same seriousness as deeds.
He questioned whether the board intended to form a district limited solely to the Lettiere Tract and stressed the importance of clarity moving forward. He requested written responses to two letters he sent to the board, one in June and another on July 12th.
Supervisor Bartlett responded to Mr. Soderquist concerns. He acknowledged receipt of his letters, and confirmed that copies had been distributed to board members for review. It was further stated that all concerns raised by the resident had been reviewed by the Town’s legal counsel, who confirmed that the actions taken by the Board were consistent with the requirements of the law. He affirmed that Mr. Lettiere is a legitimate party authorized to circulate and witness petitions related to the proposed water district. He stated that while it may not be the “perfect scenario,” Mr. Lettiere was familiar with the area and residents, which enabled efficient signature collection. The board allowed him to proceed in that capacity with the goal of gathering the necessary support.
Mr. Soderquist asked whether the Town intended to form a water district only for the 117 houses in the Lettiere Tract or to also include the additional homes on Ives Street Road.
Supervisor Bartlett responded that the final determination has not yet been made regarding the boundaries.
Mr. Soderquist also expressed skepticism that a water district could be formed solely by resolution and suggested that the petition process, as handled, may present issues in securing a revenue bond. He recommended the Town first pass a resolution to form the district, and then involve residents in determining a fair purchase price for the system.
Supervisor Bartlett replied that allowing individual’s resident to negotiate or weigh in on the purchase price would paralyze the process and prevent progress. He clarified that forming a district does not require immediate debt or capital expenditure. A district can be formed “on paper” to initiate the process.
Mr. Soderquist referenced a statement made by Supervisor Joel Bartlett to the Watertown Daily Times, in which Bartlett reportedly described the system as too old and beyond its period of probable usefulness. He questioned the justification for what he characterized as “paying top dollar” for the Lettiere Water System.
In response, Supervisor Bartlett clarified that the Town had received two separate appraisals, one as low as $40,000 and one exceeding $500,000. The final appraisal used by the Town was a detailed appraisal that valued the system at approximately $641,000. He further noted that Mr. Lettiere’s asking price was less than the appraised value.
Mr. Soderquist continued, raising concern about funding for future infrastructure repairs, particularly those involving asbestos pipes, referencing recent violations incurred by the City of Watertown for uncertified work. He questioned whether funds would be set aside as restricted reserves and asked for assurances that public money would not support infrastructure intended to benefit speculative commercial development along Ives Street Road. He suggested the initial plan to separate the Lettiere purchase from the Ives Street Road extension had become a “marriage of convenience,” which, in his view, may violate Article 12 of New York Town Law. He emphasized as a 32-year resident, he had no financial interest in the outcome, and requested transparency, legal compliance, and civility. He expressed frustration that residents were not sufficiently involved in the process, particularly those who had conflicts with Mr. Lettiere, and asserted that decisions appeared to shift without clear communication. He questioned if shrinking the proposed district after petitions were circulated could invalidate the process.
Supervisor Bartlett clarified that the Ives Street Road extension had been included in the district proposal to support bonding efforts and that it may be reconsidered in light of public feedback.
Mr. Soderquist noted that a revenue bond of approximately $500,000 could be pursued independently of the larger district formation.
Supervisor Bartlett responded the speaker’s time has exceeded the 3 minutes. He emphasized that the Town was working closely with legal counsel, and that all actions to date had been taken in compliance with applicable laws. The board acknowledged that the process was ongoing and that public input would continue to play a role in the final determinations.
Mr. Soderquist questioned Councilman Slye directly, asking whether he believed it was legal and appropriate (“copacetic”) for Mr. Lettiere to witness the signatures on the petition. He expressed concern over the integrity of the process.
Councilman Slye responded by stating that, due to his professional role working under a Supreme Court Judge, he is not permitted to offer legal advice or personal legal opinions in his public capacity. He emphasized that the issue was being reviewed with the guidance of the town’s attorney.
Regarding the inclusion of Ives Street Road in the proposed water district, Councilman Slye pointed out that no formal vote had been taken by the board on that matter. He noted that his personal position had not been made public, and the same applied to other members of the board. Therefore, any assumption about the board’s intent to include Ives Street Road in the district was premature. He stated the importance of waiting for a formal board vote before making assumptions about the outcome.
Mr. Soderquist asked when a vote would occur.
Supervisor Bartlett stated that resolutions were scheduled for that evening, including one to determine the sufficiency of the petition and another to set a public hearing regarding the proposed district’s formation.
Mr. Soderquist responded he felt that changing the district boundaries after promoting a $1.2 million project to petition signers would be misleading, and reiterated his belief that this approach lacks transparency. He intends to communicate updates to other neighborhood residents and urged the board to clearly define the next steps to avoid confusion or mistrust within the community.
Jack Bradley Snyder, Orchard Drive, stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 47 years and expressed full support for the formation of the proposed water district. He acknowledged that the project has evolved over time and commended the town for its research, diligence, and responsiveness throughout the process.
Mr. Snyder noted that while the initial concept included an extension to enable bonding, he would be pleased if the district were limited to the Lettiere Tract only, without the Ives Street extension. He believed this would also satisfy others who previously objected.
Regarding the petition process, he voiced no concern over Mr. Lettiere collecting or witnessing signatures, stating he trusted the integrity of the effort and saw no reason to question its validity. He also mentioned that many residents, including himself, signed the petition in person at the Town Office, while others may have had mobility issues that required alternate arrangements.
Mr. Snyder concluded by saying he trusted the Town Board to act in the best interest of the residents during future negotiations related to the water system and expressed appreciation for the work done on behalf of the community.
No one else chose to speak; the public hearing was closed at 7:43 p.m.
During the meeting, the board reviewed and discussed two key resolutions related to the potential formation of a Lettiere Tract Water District: Attorney Harrienger explained:
1. The first resolution is regarding the petition validity, this resolution only determines the sufficiency and validity of the petition. It does not involve any decisions about the specifics of the district (such as boundaries, included properties, additions, or subtractions). The sole issue is whether the petition meets legal requirements to proceed.
2. The second resolution addresses whether the Town Board intends to move forward with the formation of the water district. This includes evaluating whether the proposed district would benefit the included properties and property owners.
o If the Board decides to move forward, a public hearing must be scheduled as the next step in the formal district formation process.
o If the Board decides not to proceed, the proposed district formation does not advance and the process ends.
Matt Eves, highway employee, expressed concern that their retirement contributions were not properly submitted; noting that they were here a month ago and had still received no resolution or documentation. He asked for date to commit to resolve the issue.
Supervisor Bartlett responded that the issue is being actively investigated. A computer error occurred between his system and the New York State Retirement System. They have identified the nature of the error and the updated reports are being corrected. NYS will send out corrected statements to the employees once corrections are complete. He will communicate with the Teamster Administrator of his findings.
No one else wished to speak; Supervisor Bartlett closed the floor to the public.
Supervisor Bartlett accepted the Town Clerk’s Report.
Clerk’s Correspondence
Tee Time Tavern LLC, 21880 Towne Center Drive – Notice for providing 30-Day Municipal Notification for their upcoming liquor license application.
MOTIONS/RESOLUTIONS
MOTION #94-2025
RESOLUTION NO. #14 of 2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF WATERTOWN ADOPTING THE
2025 Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan
WHEREAS the Town Council recognizes the threat that hazards pose to people and property within the Town of Watertown; and
WHEREAS the Town of Watertown has prepared a multi-hazard mitigation plan, hereby known as 2025 Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000; and
WHEREAS 2025 Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies mitigation goals and actions to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property in the Town of Watertown from the impacts of future hazards and disasters; and
WHEREAS adoption by the Town of Watertown Town Council demonstrates their commitment to hazard mitigation and achieving the goals outlined in the 2025 Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Town of Watertown, New York, that:
Section 1. In accordance with the local rule for adopting resolutions, the Town of Watertown Town Council adopts the 2025 Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan, approved by the community, may be edited or amended after submission for review, but will not require the community to re-adopt any further iterations. This only applies to this specific plan and does not absolve the community from updating the plan in 5 years.
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky Yes
Councilman: Michael Perkins Yes
Councilman: Robert Slye Yes
MOTION #95-2025
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Fair, the oldest continuously operating fair in the Nation has submitted a request for $5,000.00 in grant money to subsidize its advertising costs to promote the 2025 Jefferson County Fair; and
WHEREAS, the Town has for years contributed to the underwriting of these expenses and funds are contained within the 2025 Town budget for said purposes.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, a grant in the amount of $5,000.00 is hereby authorized.
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
MOTION #96-2025
WHEREAS, the term of office of Roger Tibbetts, Assessor for the Town, expires on September 30, 2025, and Assessor Tibbetts has requested appointment to another term commencing October 1, 2025;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, Roger Tibbetts is hereby appointed to another term of office as sole assessor for the Town of Watertown for the term commencing October 1, 2025.
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
MOTION #97-2025
WHEREAS, the Town of Watertown has title and recorded deed and legal description for a certain parcel and property formerly owned by P. J. Simao who donated the property to the town in 2024 for the purpose of granting easements and ownership of property to construct a permanent road and turnaround that brings several building lots into compliance with the Town zoning code; and
WHEREAS, the easements that are necessary for the installation of several hundred feet of new sewer main line are detailed in the map, plan and report for the construction of new force main within sewer district No. 2 that will add several new lots for development within the town; and
WHEREAS, other construction designs and easements have been explored and add to the project cost and would create construction delays with various agency permitting and design reviews causing delay of contract claims by the contractor performing the district infrastructure construction.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Town council hereby recognizes and accepts the easement locations as agreed to by P.J. Simao as noted on the map, plan, design and legal description provided this Board, and further consents to the construction of a new road and turn around providing access to said easements and utilizing free construction material in storage and additional funds from the SLRA funds granted to the town; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Supervisor is hereby authorized to execute any and all documents to effectuate this understanding.
Discussion took place concerning the construction material.
Highway Superintendent Clement advised. The material currently on site is only suitable for the base layer. Additional stone will need to be brought in from external sources to complete the project to specifications. There will be additional costs involved in bringing the area up to grade and installing the required 18 inches of road base. This is especially important if the County plans to take over the road, as it must meet their construction standards. While there is some fill material available, the fill currently at the Ag Park is not the town’s material. There may be some usable material coming from the Northern Credit site, but upon inspection, it mostly consists of mud and large stones. This material may be acceptable for general fill to raise the lot but is not suitable for building a road.
Supervisor Bartlett advised that without this agreement it would hold up sewer project that is at priory to complete.
The board discussed other alternatives to complete the sewer project without the construction of the road on Mr. Simao’s property.
MOTION #98-2025
Supervisor Bartlett moved to adjourn to executive session at 8:10 pm to seek advice from Legal Council, Councilman Prosser seconded.
Ayes All
The meeting was reconvened at 8:36 pm.
MOTION #97-2025 Continued
The motion to adopt the foregoing resolution was offered by Supervisor Bartlett and seconded by Councilmember Prosser and upon a roll call vote as follows:
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky No
Councilman: Michael Perkins No
Councilman: Robert Slye No
The motion did not pass and was therefore denied.
MOTION #99-2025
RESOLUTION NO. #15 of 2025
Lettiere Tract Water System Petition Sufficiency
WHEREAS, on or about April 1, 2025, the Town Board for the Town of Watertown, New York was presented with a petition for the establishment of an improvement district by the owners of taxable real property located within the lands known as the “Lettiere Tract”. A copy of the subject petition is attached herewith, and the boundaries which were suggested for the proposed water district are more particularly described within said petition; and
WHEREAS, the New York Town Law requires that any such petition must be evaluated by the Town Board and that following a Public Hearing on the petition the Town Board must determine via resolution whether the petition is sufficient; and
WHEREAS, in order to be sufficient, a petition must:
1. Be signed by the owners of taxable real property situate in the proposed district, owning at least one half of the assessed valuation of all the taxable real property of the proposed district;
2. Be signed by the owners of taxable real property situate in the proposed district, representing at least one half of resident owners of the proposed district;
3. Describe the boundaries of the proposed district in a manner sufficient to identify the lands included therein as in a deed of conveyance;
4. Be acknowledged or proved in the same manner as a deed to be recorded OR authenticated in the manner provided by the New York Election Law for the authentication of nominating petitions; and
5. State the maximum amount proposed to be expended for the construction or acquisition of an improvement.
WHEREAS, as to the first element mentioned above regarding assessed values, the total assessed value of the proposed district is $17,181,500.00. Fifty one percent (51%) of the total assessed value of the proposed district would be $8,762,565.00. The signatures on the subject petition were representative of $9,583,150.00; and
WHEREAS, as to the second element mentioned above regarding the number of resident owners, the total number of possible signatures on the subject petition was 235. Fifty one percent (51%) of the total possible signatures is 120. There were 122 viable signatures on the subject petition; and
WHEREAS, as to the third element mentioned above regarding the description of the proposed district boundaries, the boundary descriptions were prepared by GYMO Engineering and specifically identify the subject lands as if being described in a deed of conveyance; and
WHEREAS, as to the fourth element mentioned above regarding authentication, the subject petition was authenticated in the same manner authorized under the New York Election Law for nominating petitions. The Election Law requires the use of subscribing witness statements. The subject petition included subscribing witness statements for all signatures; and
WHEREAS, as to the fifth and final element mentioned above regarding maximum expenditures for the construction or acquisition of an improvement, the petition specifically states that the maximum amount proposed to be extended for the petitioned improvement is $1,263,000.00; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 17, 2025 regarding the subject petition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board for the Town of Watertown, New York as follows:
1. The subject petition is attached herewith and incorporated by reference.
2. The Town Board finds the subject petition to be legally sufficient under the New York Town Law.
3. This simple finding of sufficiency does not equate to approval by the Town Board to form a water district.
4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Supervisor Bartlett and seconded by Councilman Prosser, and upon roll call vote of the Board follows:
Supervisor: Joel Bartlett Yes
Councilman: David Prosser Yes
Councilwoman: Joanne McClusky No
Councilman: Michael Perkins No
Councilman: Robert Slye No
The motion did not pass and was therefore denied.
MOTION #100-2025
Supervisor Bartlett moved to pay the following abstracts contingent upon a positive review of the bills being audited.
Utilities paid prior to the meeting
General Vouchers # 125 to 127 Total $ 8,525.09
Highway Vouchers # 113 to 113 Total $ 23,351.42
Spec. Dist. Vchrs. # 75 to 75 Total $ 4,073.35
Vouchers approved for monthly meeting
General Vouchers # 128 to 145 Total $ 86,096.52
Highway Vouchers # 114 to 128 Total $ 8,726.33
Spec. Dist. Vchrs. # 76 to 82 Total $ 188,621.83
Councilmember Prosser seconded the motion.
Ayes All
Highway Superintendent Clement gave a utility and equipment maintenance update
Fire Hydrants
• After recent system flushing, 12 of the 58 fire hydrants were found to be out of service.
• 3 of the non-working hydrants are located on Mall Road, which is scheduled for blacktop paving in August. Efforts are being made to address hydrant repairs prior to paving.
• There is a mix of hydrant types in the system; some cannot be rebuilt due to their design.
• New hydrant cost approximately $5000, while individual rebuild kits are about $500 each.
• The City of Watertown recently provided a crash course on hydrant rebuilding, which allowed the our highway department to repair many units. However, 11 remain non-functional and need replacement or further repair.
• All hydrants in the Industrial Park are currently operational, and work has begun on hydrants along Mall Road.
• Often, hydrants thought to be repairable are found to have severe corrosion or bolt failure once excavation begins.
• Only three complete hydrant units remain in inventory.
• Suggestion is to include funding for rebuild kits and new hydrants in the next budget cycle to continue replacement work.
Supervisor Bartlett asked if he could get a detailed report of what districts are involved and what needs to be done to fix this situation.
Equipment Condition – Landfill Packer
• The packer truck used at the transfer site is deteriorating significantly.
• This vehicle was originally a town dump truck, which was later modified with a new packer body after removing and stretching the dump box.
• While the packer body remains in good condition, the truck chassis is failing. It passed the last inspection, but it is not expected to pass again.
• A similar situation occurred with another tandem truck, where the box was about to fall off due to frame deterioration.
Alternative Plan
• They could consider reusing the existing packer body (still in good condition after 12 years).
• Potential plan: send the packer body to Terry Groff to be mounted on a used truck chassis from Florida in better condition.
• This would be less expensive than purchasing a new unit and should be considered for the next budget cycle.
Delayed Truck Orders
• Two dump/plow trucks were ordered 2.5 years ago.
o One is currently sitting at Viking, with the latest update indicating it might be ready by fall.
o The second truck has not yet reached Viking, with approximately 250 other trucks ahead in the production queue.
Salt Purchase Overview
• The vendor for salt has not released updated pricing for the upcoming season. New prices are expected by September.
• Based on last year’s pricing:
o Salt cost: approximately $86,000.
o Sand cost: $25,000.
o Total: $111,000, not including equipment costs.
• If switching fully to salt (no sand), projected cost would be around $128,000
Operational Impact
• No spring cleanup would be required if switching to salt-only operations.
• Would eliminate the need to haul material, and significantly reduce overtime.
• The vendor previously used for sand is no longer selling it. Sourcing good quality sand is now more difficult and may require longer haul distances, making it less viable.
Pricing Trend
• Salt prices have fluctuated:
o Two years ago: $78/ton
o Last year: $64/ton
• The hope is that pricing remains stable for the upcoming season.
Next Steps
• Superintendent Clement plans to contact the salt supplier, but wanted board consensus or confirmation before proceeding.
• A final decision may need to wait until September, when new pricing is released.
• Budget planning should consider a salt-only approach, given the current unavailability of sand and operational advantages.
Supervisor Bartlett inquired of legal what the board’s next step would be if it chose to move forward with the Lettiere Tract purchase with a smaller footprint.
Attorney Harrienger responded that typically, when a district is formed through a petition-driven process, it is entirely the responsibility of the property owners within that proposed district to cover any associated costs. While the Town did provide significant assistance during the initial attempt, it’s important to understand that moving forward, there are two options: either the Town Board initiates a board-driven district, or residents pursue another petition-driven effort.
At this point, the Town Board is under no obligation to take further action, as the matter is considered concluded based on the previous actions.
Councilman Slye discussed the possibility of purchasing a payroll package to assist the Supervisor in that task. He suggested hiring someone in-house to learn the package.
MOTION #101-2025
Councilman Prosser moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:03 p.m., seconded by Supervisor Bartlett.
Ayes All
_____________________________
Pamela D. Desormo, Town Clerk