Town Board - Regular Meeting

Okay, welcome to tonight's town board meeting, Wednesday, January 28th, 2026 at 6 p.m. Um, and could everybody stand for pledge of

allegiance? You lead us one indivisible and justice for all. Everybody please remain standing for those that have served in hard way. Okay. Um going to open up tonight's meeting to any of the public that would like to speak on behalf of any of the agenda items. And if you could please state your name and address.

Hey, I'm Jay Rear in Pony Lane Cicero. This will be um hopefully my last comment here before the board for a while. Um, you have item number five here on the list and I would like to draw your attention to the planning board hearing about this um, zoning change. The zoning change is fine. The zoning change is not the issue. Zoning change is sensible and logical. But at the planning board hearing on January 21st, if you watch it on the video, if you weren't there in person, um, start from 6 minutes 20 seconds in, you will see a ton of confusion about a whole bunch of documents that were approved by this board last year. Those documents include um, last two years actually uh, 2024 and 2025. Those documents include an overlay district. Those documents include design standards. Those documents include a comprehensive plan. Those documents include the current zoning regulations. This is utterly confusing. And you can see this in the way the planning board discussed this at their January 21st meeting. um as you proceed to schedule the public hearing for February 11th, which makes a lot of sense. I'm very glad you're doing a public hearing. That's great. Um the zoning is not the issue. I mean, this is fine. Nobody's going to object to this. You will have uh one person uh come forth to support it and nobody in opposition. But the fact that there are a bunch of documents out there that are in some

ways contradictory to one another and that don't exactly tie together in a comprehensive sensible way is a communications problem and it's a communications problem for anybody who might want to do building or development in Cicero going forward. And so I urge you take the time between now and February 11th when the public hearing is going to be scheduled and make that communication more clear. Specific ways you can do that is to mention that there is a comprehensive plan, there are overlay districts, there are current zoning regulations, there are design standards. How do these all fit together? This is a town board issue and better communication I think by the town supervisor who is not here uh in order to do this uh would be really really beneficial so that everybody understands what the rules are going forward without having to pester folks like Kate or Steve with excessive phone calls. Thank you. Uh, anyone else like to speak? Okay, seeing there's no further speakers, public inputs closed. Move for the adoption of a resolution approving abstract number three of 2026 dated 12120 6. That's incorrect. 2026. Abstract number four dated 128 2026.

Second. Okay. Moved in second uh to adopt the resolution. Do we have any discussion? Okay. No discussion. Call for a voice vote. All in favor? I. Any nays? Abstains. Motion passes.

Move for the adoption of a resolution to revise the public hearing on February 11th, 2026, commencing at 6 pm local time to consider the application known as Roland J. and Luanne Burke, requesting a change in zoning district from agricultural AG to general commercial plus GCP for the properties located at 6668 and 6674 State Route 31. Tax map numbers 061-01-15.1 and 061-01-15.2.

Second. Okay, it's moved and seconded. Do we have any discussions? Okay, seeing there's no discussion, we'll go to a voice vote. All in favor say I.

I. Motion has passed. Supervisor Sanucci appoints Sue Ellen Burgess Thompson at part-time regular secretary to the town supervisor. Move for the adoption of the resolution to approve an hourly rate of $1850 to Sue Ellen Burgess Thompson's as part-time regularly salary or secretary to the town supervisor with a start date on or about January 30th 2026 budget code 001-1220- 0100-00

second do we have any discussion We have no discussion. We'll go to a voice vote. All in favor say I. I. I motion passes. Reappoint Michael Harwood as member of the board of assessment review. move the adoption res of a resolution that the Cisero Town Board reappoint Michael Harwood as a member of the board of assessment review for a 5-year term to expire on 9:30 2030 at a rate of $95 per session.

We have a second. Second. Okay. Any discussion? Yeah. How many people applied to this position?

I am not aware of any that I'm know of. Do we want to wait to try to get new people on these on this board? I am in favor of, as you have said before, trying to get new people on the boards and he I believe he serves on which he does serves on on two different boards. That's correct. So, I'm uh open to that. Yeah, I I'm in agreement. He he already he started a 5-year term for the board of ethics January of 2025. So, um, I'd like to see a variety of people rather than one person taking up seats on two different boards.

What are we currently doing to try and reach more people for these positions? That is something that I know there's been discussions on that is being worked on um to try to attract people. Um, I can't speak for the supervisor himself, but I know that he's looked into some stuff, but I don't know the full details. When he's back at the next meeting, we can definitely have that conversation. So, are we removing this? We're coming back to it. Just table it if you want. Yeah, just table it the whole thing. Yeah, I'll I'll make a motion to to table this resolution.

I don't think you I don't think we have to do that, right, Robert? Shouldn't do it. If we're just skipping this and taking basically taking it off the agenda, well, we've already taken up the motion. You can you can withdraw the motion. Okay. The other thing if you make a motion to lay it on the table, then you have to make a motion to take it off the table. Yeah. Whatever. So, let's just take it off. Let's take it off the table and Okay. Okay. A motion to take off the table. Second. And then we have to vote. Yes. We'll do a voice vote. All in favor say I. I. Any nos or abstains? Okay.

Move to adopt a resolution approving the bids specifications for the property maintenance code violations contract and establishing February 13th, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. as the deadline for bid submission. All bids shall be submitted to the Cicero town clerk, 8236 Burton Road, Cicero, New York 13039. Second. Okay. Again, for this as well, what are we doing to make sure that people know about it? We're under discussion and Well, we're in discussion now, right? Yeah. I seconded it.

Yeah. I mean, aren't there procurement standards that govern what we would have to because of the size of this contract, I don't know what the value is, but if it's over what 20,000 or something, it requires it gets advertised in in the paper. That's really what what happens. And I think Tracy may post it internally. This is a contract, although the fees don't come from paid by the property owner. They they get build for these things and then if they don't pay them it gets put on their taxes and the county reimbures us. So it doesn't end up costing us anything at the end? No. Okay.

Any more discussion? Okay. Discussion disclosed. Go to a voice vote. All in favor say I. I. I. I. Any nays or abstains? Motion passes. Move for the adoption of a resolution to approve four chain web subasssembly for stock from Tracy Road Equipment in the amount of 6522 budget code 003-5130-4358-000000. Second.

Any discussions? Okay, no discussions. All in favor say I. I. I any abstains or nos? Nays. Motion passes. Move for the adoption of a resolution to approve tires for various trucks from Syracuse retreaders in the amount of $15,000 budget code 003-5130-4350--0000. Second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. Any nays or abstains? Motion passes.

Move for the adoption of a resolution to approve two Western 8x 8 foot6 in plow assemblies for two new pickups from Tony Rotella's Body Shop, Inc. in the amount of $16,36516. Budget code 003-5130-4358-0000 00 second. Any discussions? All in favor say I. I. I. Any or abstains? Motion passes.

Move for the adoption of a resolution to approve Bush electronics to purchase and install radios and GPS budgeted item in the amount of $21,500. budget code 003-3310- 0220- 000000 second. Any discussions? Uh what vehicles do these get installed in? Is this for police? All highway vehicles. Okay, thanks. Anyone else? All in favor say I. I. I.

Any nays or abstains? Motion passes. Resolution authorizing the items listed below pursuant to requirements of the New York State pollutant discharge elimination system municipality separate from storm sewer system general permits. Whereas the town of Cicero herein called the municipality after through consideration of the various aspects of the problem and consideration of available information has hereby determined that the certain work as described in attachment A. The CNY stormwater coalition final staff services proposal for for the 2026 program year herein called the project as desirable is in the public interest and is required to implement the project and whereas the central New York Regional Planning and Development Board here board has approved program planning and implementation assistance pertaining to the requirements of the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. system, SPDES, storm water phase 2 general permit for municipal separate storm sewer system MS4 operators since 2002. And whereas the board has proposed staff and education assistance services in support of sustaining the CNY storm water coalition and to provide a regional public education outreach and training compliance program to reduce municipal staff burdens. Ensure consistency provide widespread priority audience targeting the most efficient use of limited municipal funds by distributing total program cost over a number of entities within a 12-month time frame. Now therefore be it resolved by the town of Cicero board that Robert Sanushi town supervisor or such person successor in the office is representative authorized to act on behalf of the municipal government body and all matters related

to the project. Two that the municipally agree that it will fund its portion of the program cost the amount of $3,600 and that those funds will be made available to the board upon receipt of invoice. Three, that one certified copy of this resolution will be prepared and sent to the board upon adoption. Four, that this resolution take effect immediately. Second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. Any nos or abstains?

Motion passes. Sky Road pumping station pump replacement. Move for the adoption of the resolution approving the purchase of two pumps for the Skyler Road pumping station from Sher Martin process equipment in the amount of 14,136 from county contract 10912. The pumping station is down to one working pump from 1977. The funds will be considered by OCDWP budget code 092-8012-4000000-0000

second. Any discussion? All in favor? I I

Any or abstains? Motion passes. Award of drainage maintenance and improvement contract. the adoption resolution to award the town's drainage maintenance and improvement contract to the flair constructors and and approve the supervisor to sign all related documents. Bids will re were received on January 22nd, 2026 with the Flair contractors being the only bidder. The bid of $265,600 established to labor and equipment unit prices for the town's 2026 drainage work up to $500,000 approved in the budget. Budget code 060-854-400000000-0000

second any discussion yeah um uh it's a shame only one organization applied but I have to say the floor has been excellent with what they have done for us the last couple years especially on the backyard drainage specifically. Any other discussion comments? All in favor say I. I. Motion or any nos or abstains? Motion passes.

New York State DCJS law enforcement equipment grant contract. Move the adoption resolution to approve a 32,000 New York State DCJS law enforcement equipment grant contract number T63371 for the Cisero Police Department. Second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. I. Any nos or abstains? Motion passes.

Move for the adoption resolution approving the transfer of the following equipment funded through the fiscal year 2024 state of New York traffic enforcement technology grant to Cicero Police Department. Four Patrol PC Rhino Tab RHM1 laptop computers. Four Patrol PC Rhino Doc RDV2 docking stations. Four Brother Pocket Jack PJ-822 printers. Four TG3- KBA-BLTX-U- US keyboards. Second. Any discussion?

All in favor say I. I. I any nos or abstains? Motion passes. Okay. Any discussion? I I did if that's okay. Yep.

So I would like to address the issue that arose regarding members explaining votes at our last meeting. Uh this will be procedurally procedurally based. So I apologize it is quite long. Uh for more than 12 years, this board has consistently allowed members to explain their votes during both roll call and non-roll call voting openly and without objection, including at meetings held in front of council and across multiple boards and chairs. It is therefore not an isolated exe exception or informal courtesy. It is a long-standing established procedural custom of this board. Under Robert's Rules of Order, newly revised edition 12, which is the current and most recent edition that matters. Robert's rules expressly recognizes a wellestablished custom, has the force of a rule unless it conflicts with applicable law, a charter provision, or formally adopted rules. This is set out by Robert's rules section 225 custom a and reinforced by Robert's rules of order section 214 through 216 rules of assembly which make clear that Robert's rules applies only in the absence of controlling law adopted rules or established custom. There is no provision in New York state law, our town code, or our adopted rules that prohibits members from explaining their votes under the hierarchy recognized by Robert's rules. This board's long-standing custom therefore controls. There has also been reference to section 45 of Robert's rules, including 457, which states that a member has no right to explain their vote during voting

because that would amount to debate after debate has closed. That language reflects the default rule under Robert's rules, namely that renewed argument or persuasion is not permitted once voting begins. However, section 45 must be read together with section two, which clearly makes which makes clear the established custom govern where it exists. Section 45 addresses voting mechanics. It does not override a long-standing procedural practice adopted by a body and consistently applied over time. Importantly, the concern addressed in section 457 is preventing renewed debate or interruption during voting. This board's long-standing practice of allowing brief explanations as part of voting response has not reopened debate, delayed votes, or impaired order. It has functioned smoothly consistently for over a decade and has therefore become the governing procedure of this body. It is also important to understand Robert's rules functions in practice. Robert's rules prescribes a formal meeting structure including a specific order of business, motions driven debate, and tightly sequenced procedures. This board does not follow the structure rigidly. We operate by agenda, allow discussion outside of formal debate, and routinely modify procedure by longstanding practice. Those procedures are not violations. They are explicitly recognized and permitted under Robert's rules through custom. Given that reality, it is inconsistent to selectively enforce one sentence from Robert's rules while the broader meeting

structure itself operates by custom. Custom governs meeting procedure here and it governs voting practice in the same way. This practice is also not unique to this board. Many people in this room, including members of this board, have personally witnessed this practice here in these meetings also where members have routinely explained their votes during both roll call and non-roll call voting. In addition, many town boards, village boards, and other public bodies across anger county follow the same practice as part of open deliberation. This makes this makes it fair to ask factually and respectfully why a practice that has been widely accepted here and elsewhere is suddenly being treated as a problem. Now, from a statutory standpoint, New York State Open Meetings Law provides important context. Public officers law 100 states that it is essential that the public business be conducted openly so the public may observe the performance of public officials. While the law does not require members to explain their votes, it clearly favors openness and public understanding of governmental decisionmaking, allowing elected officials to briefly explain their votes, particularly when dissenting, and then it advances that purpose. Finally, I want to address the constitutional context carefully and accurately. I recognize that this board may regulate procedure, time, and manner in order to conduct business. This is not a claim of unlimited speech. However, the United States Supreme Court has made it clear that speech, debate, and voting are core legislative acts protected to ensure the independence of elected officials and the ability to express dissenting views. Explaining one's vote is legislative

speech, core political expression, explaining official action to constituents. While procedural rules may govern when debate occurs, those rules must be neutral, consistent, and evenly applied. When a long-standing practice is interrupted selectively, particularly at the moment a dissenting view is being expressed, it raises serious concerns about viewpoint neutrality and treatment of minority voices. Procedure cannot be used intentionally or unintentionally as a mechanism to silence dissenting legislative speech. Any limits on such speech must be clear, formally adopted, and applied equally to all members. What concerns me is not parliamentary theory. It's selective enforcement. Thank you.

Anyone got any input on that? I I guess my thought and is I I've always thought Robert's rules is probably overkill for governing rules for a small board like this. It's really designed for larger parliamentary procedures. So it's, you know, it's thick. If there is concern amongst the board that our rule system should be adjusted, readressed, thought about, I would suggest that we do that then because I agree that custom does supersede. So if we really want to change things, if that's the whole board's will or not the whole majority of the board's will, um, then we should do that. And while doing that, I think we should simplify it down to, you know, some very basic rules that it this board would follow. Again, I don't know that we need to do that exercise other than to establish consistency if that's how we want to spend our time. Um, I guess those are my my thoughts on it.

So, I wasn't here last meeting, so I don't know what the contention was in terms of um communicating why you're voting. Um, but I kind of got one from it afterwards. I appreciate all of your diligence and researching all the facts, Mike, because I'm sure that took some time. So, I appreciate that.

Um, I think anytime a public like a an elected official is trying to be silenced is a red flag for the opposite of transparency. And that has been a theme for me since I've been on this board is that I am promoting transparency for the people. So if we are going to um stifle any one of us uh from being able to explain why we are voting a certain way, I think that is the opposite of transparency for the people. So I am very much for being able to briefly be able to say why you're voting a certain way. The people deserve that.

Absolutely. I don't think there's I don't think the issue is whether or not a vote can be explained. It's really a matter of timing. Should it be display, you know, done in the discussion before the vote or as the votes happening? It's either way. I mean, it's six and one half dozen the other. Um,

so I don't think anyone is being silenced because there's three parts to the Robert's rule and uh I think it's page 486 or something like that. section 452 somewhere around there. Um, Robert and I had an email about it. You bring it to motion, then it gets seconded. Then it goes to discussion or comments, which is where you would make all your comments. We have discussions. You explain your your point. You're not being silenced by any means. Then we go into vote. And one of the things that I really see out of that being new and you you know councelor Hogan and councelor Balo have been up here before and sometimes you guys have some very good information that you may share during your vote and we all say that we're here in the best interest of the taxpayers and the residents of the town of Cicero. So therefore, if we share that information as we should during our discussion time, it will help everyone on this board make the best interest or decision in the best interest for our taxpayers. And holding it for a vote when everyone else has already voted, to me, that's not in the best interest of our taxpayers. And Robert, as I think about it, if either way somebody's going to vote, I would like to hear the reasoning before the vote because it may persuade me differently on that point. Oh, I hadn't thought of it that way. May maybe I should reconsider my stance. So, I I do think it's a good idea. I mean, I don't care. could be at both points, but any to share the information on somebody's thought processes, something they've researched, some reason why they're going to vote one way or another. It would be helpful to me to hear that before we actually cast the vote because

it may influence my vote. I 100% agree with that. And that's why we have the discussions like we're having now to do things better for Cicero and the residents of the town of Cicero, our taxpayers, which is why we were elected and what we're here to do. But I do agree with councelor Balo that the standing practice has been this. So if if it is again something that the majority of the board wants to change, then the majority of the board has to formally act to make that change. Otherwise, it can keep going as it is. So I he I believe he's correct in that. And I'm going to refer to Robert on this because I know he might probably want to have a comment on it.

I like this discussion. It's it's a good it's a good discussion. Really 100%.

Chris uh uh Chris, you're right that the board is free to uh enact your own rules uh in terms of what you know overriding Robert's rules if you wanted to do that. Um, I think the Roberts rules are are clear that once the votes called, it's called and it's a yes or no or, you know, approve or not. So, it's up it's really a board decision. If you want to make that change, we can do that. I can write a resolution if you know, however you want to do it. Um, if you want to clarify it, I at this point I'd call it a clarifying resolution because, you know, councelor Bau is right. That's how it's been done in the past. So, that's the, you know, that's a default. So, you know, I will what whatever the board's preference is, I'll help you write out.

I like the idea of having the open discussion and comments because it could it could help make decisions on votes, a last minute conversation before you walked in the door. You may have, you know, some information and I don't understand why you wouldn't want to share the information and save it for when you're doing the vote because that's that's that's not demonstrating the best interest of the taxpayers in my opinion. I mean, I don't you're you're specifying that every time someone says it during their vote, they haven't said it in discussion, which I think is not accurate. That is 100% accurate. The last the not accurate. The last meeting, no one had comments and then they had discussions during the vote. That's why it was brought up.

Okay. In my opinion, I think elected officials should be free to speak why they are voting a certain way when they want to say that. So then you would like us to reopen the vote on the Robert's rules and get a have that's my opinion. Have the attorney write something up different. Well, I don't think we need to reopen anything if we're going to just continue that practice. That's been our standing practice. If that's been the standard practice, then then you don't have to reopen anything. If you want to if if the board wants to clarify this is how we're going to do it going forward, that's fine, too.

However you want. Yeah, I'm I'm 100%. You know, if we're going to have it during the discussion, you can you can speak it during the vote. I would go with that, but it should be just talked about during the comments and discussions as well. Why don't we do this? Why don't I ask the board to um submit whatever your position is to me and send me an email or whatever and I'll take a look and start working on something. Sounds good. Try to make some kind of consensus here. Just just re hammering home my point. was by custom supersedes section 45. Understood. That's it. That's all. That's all. No, absolutely. I just look at it as we voted to follow Robert's rules. That's why I brought it up because

your point some other people had talked to me about it. Both correct to your point, right? That's the that's the that's the you're both correct. That's the beauty of this, I guess, is Yeah. You're both right. So, yeah. And then I got something else. the meeting the meetings itself like our meeting structure that doesn't follow Robert's rules of order either. No. Right. So when I talk about selective selective um I read it so sorry selective enforcement like that's you're walking the edge there. Right. So that that was it. Just my biggest thing is let's do our open discussion communicate with each other in the best interest of the taxpayers. That's what you guys are doing. I like it. Yeah. Okay. I do.

I I like your suggestion, Robert. I don't know if everybody else feels the same or if we just want to let sleeping dogs lie and just keep going as we are. I mean, obviously, this is not casting a vote. So, yeah. All right. Communication.

Okay. I've got one thing to read. It's a notice. Attention taxpayers. It's come to our attention that you may have not received a copy of your property tax for 2026 uh via mail. You do not need to be mailed a bill to make your payment. If you need a copy, you can go to ongov.net, click on property tax information, view bills, enter your address, and there you can view, print, or make a payment. There is a 3% fee for all credit card and debit payments and a $20 fee for electronic check. You may also call 3157521180 extension503 or stop by the town of Cyro Town Hall and have a copy of your bill printed off. We're open Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 400 p.m. with the exception of our extended hours for the last 3 days of the collection before penalty, which are 129, 2026, 1:30, 2026, and 2:2, 2026, 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Payments are due by February 2nd, 2026 with no penalty. Thank you. Yeah.

Um, I just want to report out uh last week uh Supervisor Sanuchi and I had the opportunity to attend the New York Association of Towns newly elected official training. Um, which I found extremely interesting. Most of you probably would think I'm crazy for saying that because there's a lot of finances and rules and regulations and stuff, but I learned a lot and I'm hoping to bring some of that um back to the board. And again, it would be something that we would discuss and agree upon in terms of what kind of data we will have to review and be able to potentially share at these meetings beyond just the abstracts. Um so Trey and I will have lots of conversation. Um, I'm sure don't want to overwork, but I know we do have software that should make some of this reporting rather easy. Um, so I just um I'm excited about some of the things I learned and uh how we might be even more transparent with with you all.

Any more discussion? I did have one more uh just to update everybody on the accessory dwelling units. I wrote code, emailed it to Robert yesterday. Robert's going to expertly look it over. So, appreciate it. Oh, and thank you to Chris and his team for keeping our roads clear. It's really appreciate all the work you guys put in. Thank you. Yes. Your whole department did an excellent job. My road was even plowed. Um Ashley, you got anything? Uh any public input? If you like to speak before we close the meeting.

Hello. My name is Michael Golden. I'm a local resident. Uh full transparency. I'm on uh Tormaline Drive, which is uh technically clay. I'm right on the border. U my kids attend uh CNS schools. Uh I live most of my life here in Cisero. Um, I wanted to speak to you guys to see about how we might be able to reconsider legal cannabis or uh legal retail dispensaries in the town of Cicero. I am a legal been a legal operator at the higher company in the city of Syracuse for the last two years. I've also been a advocate for about four years working on the legislation to alleviate some uh uh stigma around cannabis as well. Um, I spoke with uh, Supervisor Ericano a few months back uh, regarding this. Just stopped by as well to see if it may be brought back into consideration for the board. Um, I've emailed um, all of you as well as new uh, supervisor Sanuchi as well. Not sure if it

that definitely could be in your spam folders. Not sure if you guys have seen it. Um, just making you aware of some of the towns like Bordertown that have changed courses and opted in. towns like Henrietta that have uh brought in $750,000 worth of new tax revenue from just two dispensaries and were able to lower their residents uh property tax from that as well as 3% of every dollar goes directly to the township um that the um dispensary is headquartered in. So at my dispensary in Syracuse, I uh definitely uh service Cicero residents either in person or via delivery as well, which they're able to do. But unfortunately the town of Cicero or my kids sports teams or any of that don't receive any of that income as the uh the retail space is not headquartered in there. Um again I am a parent with three children uh one just graduated two children in CNS high school and uh am um uh uh very prevalently concerned with um you know keeping it uh safe from children and things like that. uh which is also something that having uh legal uh uh licensed dismissaries uh does to help as far as uh uh quell the illegal smoke shops. As you guys are probably aware, the ones in Cisero have all been uh cited and had to brandish the sticker for selling illicit cannabis um as well, which you know um doesn't get IDed. There's all sorts of safety hazards with that as well. So, I didn't know uh in particular how to perhaps have that added to the agenda or added to the discussion as uh I was here for the original opt out meeting uh back in 2021 and in December um December 11th I believe and I believe it was about 3 to two and you guys were waiting on some more information from the state at the time on um you know how these things would be regulated. you remember better than me.

And Robert, correct me if I'm wrong. It has to go through the regular process that everything goes through, right? Well, in this case, I believe this board opted out. Yeah. Back. There's two types of there's two types of licensing. There's there's uh cannabis sales uh operations and there's consumption uh places where for they can have uh where there's consumption. So, there's two types of licensing. I think the board uh opted out of both of those in the past. So, it would be a question of opting back in if the board wanted to do that. That's what it's about. I mean, that's that's what it would take. I know how to do it if we if the board wanted to go that route.

At at the time, there wasn't all the retail regulations weren't out, you know, when the state put the deadline for towns to opt in. So, uh, I believe their stance at the time was to wait and see exactly what which some towns took to see exactly what we're opting into because once you're opted in, you can't opt out, but if you're opted out, you can later opt in. Um, I operate just a solely retail space. Um, there's no consumption on site uh what whatsoever in front of or around the store. uh consumption on site is a a separate license type that hasn't came out yet. But some retailers uh do have special use permits that they can allow that. But that would of course be upon the uh township's uh you know zoning procedures and things like that. So you can have direct control over that as well.

Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you. I would like um if you could send more information regarding this so I could kind of do my own research to see how the positives and negatives would play out for the town of Cicero. Um you know my right off the bat my concerns are regarding safety of the kids and not having as much access to it. I think it's getting a little out of control frankly. Um I also would want to know what other towns are doing this not just Syracuse. um and what kind of experience there is in other surrounding towns that are similar to ours. Uh positives, negatives.

Yeah. Uh in this issue and any other issues that uh the that people want to bring forth. I I'm always open to learning. So, um I did not receive an email. I know there's been some issues with the email address, whether New York is spelled out or just NY, but please resend it and I'll take a look. And again, any other issues too, please send them along. It's go. It's NY, not New York. Was some confusion with that, too. Yeah, because I I didn't receive any emails. So,

so if you could resend them out, you know, to us, it would be we can look into it. Thank you. Any more public input? Okay. Can we make a motion to adjurnn? Some moved. Okay.