TOWN OF WATERTOWN
Special Meeting
Municipal Building
October 22, 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 special workshop meeting at 7:00 pm, Attorney Harrienger was also present.
MOTION #134-2025
TOWN OF WATERTOWN, NEW YORK
RESOLUTION NO. 17 of 2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF WATERTOWN ADOPTING THE 2025
JEFFERSON COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
WHEREAS the Town of Watertown Council recognizes the threat that hazards pose to people and property within 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 Town of Watertown from the impacts of future hazards and disasters; and
WHEREAS adoption by the Town of Watertown 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 (local rule for adopting resolutions), the Town of Watertown 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 iteration. This only applies to this specific plan and does not absolve the community from updating the plan in 5 years.
A motion to adopt the foregoing resolution was made by Supervisor Bartlett and seconded by Councilmember Prosser and upon a roll call vote of the Board was duly adopted as follows:
Supervisor Bartlett yes
Councilman Prosser yes
Councilwoman McClusky yes
Councilman Perkins yes
Councilman Slye yes
Supervisor Bartlett stated that tonight’s meeting is for discussion and to consider any modifications or suggestions the council members may have regarding the 2026 budget, as presented and filed in the Town Clerk’s Office September 30, 2025.
He commented that this year’s budget was especially challenging. With the rising costs of everything from workforce expenses, employee benefits, supplies and general operational costs. As a result, they will be forced to include a property tax in this year’s budget. As currently presented (and subject to change by the Board), the proposed property tax would need to raise $227,321.00, which equates to $0.73 per $1,000 of assessed value.
He explained the process that the Board will review and make adjustment to the budget at hand. Then move to adopt a resolution establishing the tentative budget. That tentative budget will then go to public hearing. No further changes can be made until after that hearing, at which point they have one final opportunity to revise it before certifying the final document to be presented to Jefferson County.
The Board went through the budget and discussed the changes and adjustments to be made to the Preliminary 2026 Budget.
General Fund
Mr. & Mrs. Matthew Eves and Mr. Stevens, highway employees addressed the Board to discuss the town budget. They stated they had been personally affected by the payroll and health insurance issues as described by the letter submitted to the board at tonight’s meeting. They explained that their family’s health insurance had been terminated twice due to payroll errors and requested that a new payroll or accounting program be considered in the budget to prevent future problems and ensure timely pay and coverage. They suggested reallocating part of the Supervisor’s proposed 32% salary increase toward hiring a part-time bookkeeper to assist with financial duties.
The Supervisor responded the payroll and retirement issues were the fault of the New York State Retirement System, not the town, and said those matters had already been resolved.
Mrs. Eves asked whether money was included in the budget for new electronic accounting software recommended by the state. She suggested including funding in this year’s budget to transition to the system, which would help reduce payroll and payment delays.
The Supervisor expressed concern that many of these state-endorsed systems require direct access to the town’s bank accounts, which he does not want. He stated he put extra funding in the Town Clerk’s budget for additional software to help with water district billing, fee processing, and check preparation. He noted he currently handwrites about 250 checks per month and appreciated that the new software could ease that burden if the board chooses to keep it in the budget.
Mr. Eves reiterated that his primary concern was ensuring stable payroll and uninterrupted health insurance coverage for staff. He explained that coverage lapsed because the Supervisor did not send the payment on time, causing it to miss the grace period and resulting in a temporary loss of benefits. Mrs. Eves added that the health fund requires payment by the 25th of each month; if it is not received on time, coverage lapses, creating the “glitch period” where employees temporarily lose access to benefits. She emphasized the importance of timely payments and questioned whether the issue stemmed from payroll processing or administrative check-cutting. They framed the problem in budget terms, asking what allocations or measures could be implemented to ensure reliable handling of these payments going forward.
The Supervisor disagreed, explaining that the health insurance termination issue was the result of an administrative error by the insurance system that affected only Mr. Eves, not other town employees, and that the insurer had admitted responsibility for the mistake.
Mr. Stevens brought up the discrepancy in the employee’s overtime pay, stating that the correction took three months and only occurred after repeated contact with board members. He stated that payroll errors continue regularly, including incorrect or inconsistent union dues deductions making it difficult for employees to manage their finances or know what their paychecks will contain.
Supervisor Bartlett added that the employee’s overtime pay issue had been corrected in a later paycheck. He had to consult with legal before he could move on that issue.
Supervisor Bartlett addressed the employee’s concerns about implementing the state-recommended program. He stated that the board would review the programs and determine if it should be adopted. He would welcome a program that would simplify his workload.
Councilman Slye shared information about a payroll program used by another municipality, which costs approximately $20,000. The program reportedly runs smoothly, is relatively easy to use, and automatically sends payroll payments to the appropriate agencies each period. The key question raised was whether the town wants to invest in this program to improve payroll reliability and reduce administrative errors.
Supervisor Bartlett explained that he is satisfied with the current payroll company, which processes checks biweekly and handles all necessary deductions, including municipal taxes and 1099s. He noted that processing can be affected by weekends, holidays, and the timing required for banks to clear payments, which is why there is typically a five-day window from the end of the pay period to check issuance. The payroll service charges roughly $375 per pay period ($750 per month), which he emphasized is much less expensive than the $20,000 upfront cost of the proposed program. He added that the company can quickly implement changes such as loan deductions, provided they receive the necessary information on time.
Supervisor Bartlett proposed removing the line item for his salary increase from the budget, stating he would not accept it, in response to concerns raised during the meeting.
Susan Burdick, Court Clerk spoke at the meeting to request salary adjustments for herself and her co-clerk, Darcy Graves, for the upcoming 2026 budget. She noted that her current salary ($46,640) and Mrs. Graves ($39,954) lag behind comparable positions in Jefferson County, where clerks with fewer years of service earn significantly more. She emphasized her 23 years of service, minimal sick time, extensive training of other clerks, and experience working with multiple judges.
She requested a raise to $50,000 for herself and that Mrs. Graves salary be adjusted to the level of a recently hired Deputy Town Clerk. She highlighted the expanded scope of their work due to new legislation, mandatory training, and courtroom system requirements. Additionally, she noted her contributions to improving court efficiency, including using email to reduce office expenses and bringing in over $8,000 through J-Cap monies in the past three years.
Highway Fund
The discussion centered on this year’s budget allocations for equipment and operational costs, with particular attention given to salt and sand expenses. The Town projects using approximately 2,000 tons of material, estimated to cost around $148,000.
It was noted that using salt instead of sand could lead to long-term savings by reducing overtime and spring cleanup efforts. Salt typically requires little to no cleanup after winter, whereas sand often remains on roads and ditches, requiring extensive labor to remove. Currently, the cleanup process lasts two and a half to three months and includes ditch work, the use of broom attachments on sweepers, and rental of additional equipment costing approximately $2,500.
Heavy rainfall compounds the issue by washing sand and salt back onto roadways, further increasing cleanup time and expenses.
Superintendent Clement highlighted that neighboring townships have transitioned to using clear salt for all roads, citing improved efficiency and cost-effectiveness. This approach reduces the need for repeated cleanup and allows highway crews to focus on other productive work throughout the year.
Fuel, tools, and other expenses were discussed in the budget.
The discussion covered planned purchases and trade-ins for town equipment. The budgeted $150,000 in the machinery and equipment account is intended to cover a new GradeAll of $73,000 with a $6,000 trade in. The garbage truck compactor, a 2001 International with low mileage and minimal prior use upgrade, is $54,121 after trade-in of $2,500. This totals $127,121 and leaving some flexibility in the account. The garbage truck will take 3 weeks to a month to complete.
Additionally, updates were provided on the new plow trucks, with one truck requiring axle adjustments at the dealer’s expense, potentially delaying availability until January or February 2026, depending on scheduling.
Regarding roadwork, Mr. Clement has $535,000 budgeted for CHIPS, with $418,785 estimated for Sandy Creek Valley and East Gotham Roads. The town expects to be reimbursed for most of the costs through the CHIPS program, Cold mix from Suit-Kote is being considered as a cost-effective option for chip sealing, as it is cheaper and more durable than hot mix. The County has not yet decided whether they will perform outside paving work next year.
The town will submit expenses for blacktop work on Mall Road for CHIPS reimbursement. However, full reimbursement is not expected because the State’s CHIPS inventory records show only partial ownership of that road.
If the town submits CHIPS reimbursement claims promptly, typically within a month to a month and a half after all documentation is submitted, they can expect to receive the reimbursement checks.
Joe Meyer, Co. Rte. 60 asked the Board about highway road budget. He inquired how much money was in the budget for the proposed connecter road from NYS Rte. 3 to County Rte. 202 that he feels will benefit one property owner.
Supervisor Bartlett stated the money in the highway road budget was to fund East Gotham and Sandy Creek Valley Road. The proposed road is not currently included in the budget under review. Any funding for this road would be considered after the public hearing. It will include Recovery Act Funds as well as developer contributions, potentially allowing the road to largely pay for itself. No money for this project are included in the current budget draft.
Julie Gayne, Swan Road raised concerns about using American Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds to construct a new road rather than addressing larger or more pressing expenses within the budget. She questioned the fiscal responsibility of using American Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds to construct a new road, especially while the town is considering a tax increase that could significantly impact all taxpayers. She stated that allocating funds to one small area, such as Arsenal Street, does not equally serve the entire Town of Watertown. Instead, she urged that ARPA funds be used in a way that benefits the broader community.
She inquired if the town had a 5-year plan. Stating that while the town may not have levied a tax in 17 years, it is not fiscally responsible to move forward without a long-term plan for managing future increases. She emphasized that establishing a tax this year would likely set a precedent for ongoing taxation and urged the board to outline how they intend to maintain and control tax growth at a reasonable pace in future budgets. She cautioned against sharp fluctuations that could “out-tax” residents from their homes and called for a consistent, sustainable financial strategy beyond the current fiscal year. Things are changing, and you can’t just rely that there’s going to be that continued growth. There is an end in sight to how much more growth can happen in the Arsenal Street area.
Supervisor Bartlett responded that he strongly disliked imposing a town tax and viewed it as a one-year measure to stabilize finances. His goal is for the 2026–2027 budget to eliminate the town tax. He explained that with union costs now established for the next three years, and with interest and bonding rates expected to decline, the town should be positioned to recover and rebalance revenues by 2027. He emphasized his fiscal responsibility is to present a balanced annual budget for the board’s consideration.
Mrs. Gayne replied that once a tax is built into the revenue side, it is difficult to remove without either increasing revenues further or cutting expenditures. She questioned how the Supervisor planned to achieve that and urged for clear evidence of a strategy.
Mr. Meyer stated that shifting ARPA funds to cover current expenses could create a deficit next year, and argued that the board should “trim the fat now” rather than delay spending cuts.
The Board reviewed the water and sewer budget line items.
Jack Bradley Snyder, Orchard Street addressed the Board. He commended the Supervisor for his diligent oversight of payroll and town finances, noting that signing checks manually provides better control than automatic withdrawals and reduces errors. He praised his past cost-saving measures, including work equivalent to a CPA, and expressed support for reasonable pay increases given his responsibilities. Regarding equipment and highway maintenance, he emphasized the importance of maintaining adequate funding for the highway department, particularly for payroll, snow removal staffing, and road repairs, including areas like the Lettiere subdivision and Holcomb Street. He concluded by thanking the Supervisor for his service and oversight.
Water Department / Meter System: The Master Meter reader is broken, affecting approximately 300 meters. The system will cost $2,500 to repair, but the department is phasing out this system in favor of the Neptune system, which has already installed 150 meters. The proposal is to purchase approximately 300 additional Neptune meters (estimated cost $100,000), with business pit meters reimbursed by the customers. Using the Neptune system will allow the department to operate with a single reader and software system, eliminating the need to maintain two separate systems and reducing labor required to manually read meters.
Supervisor Bartlett suggested ordering 20 meters at this time. The remaining meters will need to be purchased later, possibly using Capital Funds or by increasing the O&M portion of the water billing.
Discussion on Equipment Needs and Costs
Superintendent Clement discussed issues with working around high-pressure gas lines, mains, and electrical lines while repairing water lines. Because of these hazards, the Town has had to hire outside contractors at a cost of approximately $700 per visit.
He noted that a vacuum trailer (or “vac trailer”) would greatly reduce these expenses and improve safety. Grant programs are available that could reimburse up to 70% of the cost of $130.000 for the equipment. The trailer also includes a valve exerciser, which automates valve turning and reduces manual labor and wear.
Additionally, Mr. Clement mentioned the need for a new gate and fencing at the transfer station. Alpine Fence was the only local company available for this work. He specified that a swing gate is preferred over a sliding gate, as sliding gates tend to freeze and break during winter conditions. He noted that the new gate for the transfer station will be similar to the existing one, but extended slightly longer to prevent people from driving around it.
Defibrillator Discussion
The Board discussed the need for defibrillators (AED units) for safety purposes. It was noted that several nearby towns have AEDs in their highway trucks, offices, and courtrooms.
Questions were raised about the usefulness of having only one AED at the Municipal Office if crews are spread across various work sites. It was suggested that two AED units would be appropriate one for the office/court area and one for the Highway Department.
The estimated price of $3,942.00 included the purchase of two units. Training would be an additional cost. It was recommended contacting the local ambulance service to see if they could provide CPR and AED training at no cost, as they have done in the past.
MOTION #135-2025
Notice of Public Hearing – Tentative Fiscal Year 2026 Budget
WHEREAS, following a budget work session held on Thursday, October 22, 2025, at the Town Municipal Offices, a copy of the preliminary budget—henceforth to be known as the Tentative Fiscal Year 2026 Town of Watertown Budget was placed on file in the Town Clerk’s Office for public inspection; and
WHEREAS, Supervisor Bartlett moved to hold a public hearing on the proposed 2026 Tentative Budget, including details of all funds: the General Fund, Highway Fund, Water Districts Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6, and Sewer Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said public hearing shall be held on Thursday, November 6, 2025, at 7:00 p.m., at the Municipal Building, 22867 Brookside Drive, Watertown, New York.
All members of the public wishing to speak for or against the proposed budget will be heard at that time.
Motion made by Supervisor Bartlett, Seconded by Councilman Prosser
Ayes All
MOTION #136-2025
Councilman Prosser moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:56 pm, seconded by Supervisor Bartlett.
Ayes All
_____________________________
Pamela D. Desormo, Town Clerk