Town Board - Regular Meeting

would need to comply with 40 decibels, which is exponentially lower because decibels scale logarithmically. So we would recommend that change as well. The last thing is just a clarification. So all mechanical equipment for a battery facility needs to be within a fence. I think that's appropriate. However, mechanical equipment could be construed to mean pad-mounted interconnection equipment. which cannot be within a fence line, but the town would certainly want to see that from battery applications, I imagine. A lot of towns prefer pad-mounted interconnection equipment instead of the clumped utility poles. Developers like us, we can limit the amount of new utility poles for a project by making them pad-mount, but it can't be within a fence line because National Grid needs to access that equipment. So I think the law would benefit from a clarification on that end. None of these changes make the law weaker. In fact, we think they make it stronger. You guys could have less utility poles for your battery project. Everyone likes that. You could protect all residentially zoned properties and avoid externalities on industrial and commercial lots. And noise, it would just be consistent with your zoning law, making it a 55 decibel limit instead of a 40, which doesn't appear anywhere else. So thank you so much. I really do appreciate it and hope you consider those comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else with comments?

Good evening. My name is Mike Young. I'm one of the property owners where this project would go. And again, I'd like to reiterate Eric's comments. Thank you for taking the time and consideration. And as an investor in this community, I hope you can make these changes and get some more of these projects under your belt and make it better for the community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else in the room with comments on the solar panel? That's not it.

Hi, my name's Kristin Cascio. I'm a resident. I am a member of some advisory boards, conservation board, economic development, but I am here just speaking on my own thoughts and opinions tonight on the law. I do appreciate the work that has gone into mending this law. There does appear to be some pressure or urgency to pass this law today um and i would urge the board to pause on that and not pass it today because i believe it does require some more work and some additional clarification um in addition in terms of the notice um the draft that's being approved was dated july 15th which is less than a week ago so in terms of the public being able to review the draft it's been less than a week and in addition the date on the town's negative declaration is actually today so um again it just seems that there is an urgency to pass this law. And I would urge some caution and pause and request that the board do not pass it today without some further review. In term, there's a lot of things I would say, but in my limited time, I would say, in comparing this law to other laws, Karen Hollweg, On that I have looked at town of ton of Wanda Hamburg wheat field West Seneca cambria and then I started a model off this version of the law seems to deviate significantly from these other laws in certain areas and. one i'll bring up well the purpose also on this law compared to other towns it's twice as long and it appears to include some things that i wonder why they're there and not include some things that do appear in most other of the best laws um the other best laws on the towns i just mentioned have pretty much all very similar purposes and they're Pretty concise and to the point, ours does not include a point that says to mitigate the impacts of battery energy storage systems on environmental resources, such as important agricultural lands, forests, wildlife, and other protective resources. It says something that's a bit of a watered down and more vague version of that. And in terms of the purpose, other towns include things like to regulate the development of battery storage systems in accordance with the town's comprehensive plan. We don't mention that in ours. And as well as West Seneca's talks about protecting the public health and safety of the residents. of the town of West Seneca and provide for the training and supplying of first responders in the event of any emergency. So those are areas where I think our purpose can be tightened up and also include some of these other points. I don't understand the point that we do have in terms of our purpose that talks about integrating battery energy storage systems seamlessly into the town's neighborhoods and landscapes without diminishing the quality of life in these areas. I just wonder why the town's neighborhoods appear to be a focus of this law, whereas I would think and hope that most of these battery storage systems are not located in people's neighborhoods. um in addition uh and i would like if anybody wishes to speak to this previous versions of the law and again in all those towns that i have mentioned uh they all include three tiers of best definitions, tier one, tier two, tier three. This version of the law appears to only include tier one and two. It does not mention or define a tier three. So in general, the way that these tiers are defined, I think, could use some more definition and further explanation about the purpose. For example, in most of the other towns, they talk about Tier 1 being in an enclosed room, being a single energy storage system technology. West Seneca does a nice job of describing its intent, which is... These are accessory uses to a principal use in a residential and small commercial setting for onsite and vehicular use and are intended for energy use by the principal use and do not exceed storage of 110% of two days energy for the user as determined by the town's building and engineering department. So our law currently does not have any of that detail in it. In terms of what we expect to see in terms of the best in each of these tiers. Same thing for tier two. These other towns include some more detail that explains what they expect to see. Tier two, the other laws, and I believe the NYSERDA model law talks about tier two being comprised of more than one battery technology. It also includes energy storage limits. Our tier two mentions it could be an accessory use to a wind energy conversion system, which I believe we don't currently have any laws relating to those systems. And then tier three solar, but it doesn't include tier four solar. which we also have. So, I mean, there's a bunch of things I could go on. I just feel like this law is too important to pass it as is. In addition, when this local law was introduced back in October, it was introduced at the same time as an amendment to the solar law. The solar law currently has definitions of batteries that differ substantially from the definitions of batteries that are in this battery energy storage system law. So I had been under the assumption that since they were introduced at the same time, that at the time that the battery law would be adopted.

Once, twice, anybody online that doesn't see the chats and would wish to speak? Okay, it's that I would declare public hearing to close. I guess I would make a motion to the table. I think a couple of those issues were actually things that we would need to take a look at in a second.

To be tabled with our emergency service on the agenda for two weeks to be referred back to the board. The table looks fine. Yeah.

I'll make that motion. Second. Discussion? Karen, the roll call, please. Bigotti?

Aye. Garcia? Aye. Kilmer? Aye. Beall?

Aye. All right, sorry. All of the stuff on that is fine. All right. So next is six minutes. The motion is in order to approve the minutes from regular meeting number 12 of July 6th, 2026. So moved. Second. Any discussion? Karen, the roll, please. Garcia.

Aye. Diehl. Aye. Bigotti. Aye. Filmer. Aye.

All right. Next is the consent agenda. The motion is in order to approve the building permits issued for june 2026 18 minutes from the economic development advisory board from 11 to 2026 and that's it so second any discussion dr marston a special event permit board crossroad ministries to use the gazebo for sunday evening outreach between august 2nd in september 6th 2026. so a copy of the application is in here absolutely special use special event i'll make a second discussion All right, Karen.

Degatti. All right. Diehl. Aye. Kilmer. Aye. Garcia. Aye.

All right. Next is item nine from Councilman Garcia.

Make a motion to set a public hearing for August 3rd, 2006. Local law. On six of that new chapter. 386 of town code vehicles are driven to include e-bikes and scooters.

You made a motion. I'll second it.

Discussion.

Right. And please, Garcia, I feel I got it. All right, Kilmer.

All right. Right. Next item 10 from Councilwoman deal. Resignation.

We have an EDAB resignation and appointment. The resignation please accept with regret and a certificate of appreciation. The resignation of John Faso from the Economic Development Advisory Board. John must step away from serving at this time to demands of a growing business. He looks forward to serving our community through committee work in the future. Do I need to do these individually or can we do one? It's better for individual, right?

Yeah. Okay. So I'll second that. Any discussion?

Deal. Aye. Degouti? Aye. Kilmer? Aye. Garcia? Aye.

The next would be an appointment to EDAB. I would like to make a motion to appoint Jason Bartz to the vacant alternate position expiring December 31st, 2026. I had the pleasure of sitting in on an interview with Jason alongside the co-chairs of EDAB. He has a depth of experience that will be a great asset in addition to the board. I also have forwarded a resume to the clerk's office so they have all his contact information for the pledge cards. So I made the motion.

Second.

Discussion?

Karen?

Gilles? Aye. Garcia? Aye. Bugatti? Aye. Kilmer? Aye.

I'm really sad about the next one. It's a Crossing Guard resignation. Please accept with regret and a certificate of appreciation the resignation of Catherine Peterson from the position of Crossing Guard effective July 12, 2026. Catherine has been a great asset for our community, primarily serving Huth Road Elementary School. We wish Catherine the best in her new venture.

Second.

Any discussion? We're going to miss her. She's our newest crossing guard, but just excellent. Did an excellent job for us, but demands are calling her in a different direction. Who knows? Maybe she'll return one day.

Roll call, please.

Steele. Aye. Dugatti. Aye. Kilmer.

Aye.

Garcia.

Aye.

Next one. A letter of intent. So please find the attached letter of intent as discussed at the July 6th town board workshop. The letter is awaiting the signature of the town supervisor pending legal review. If there's no record of the vote or resolution concluding the discussion to enter into the agreement, which I researched, we did not have a resolution from that workshop. I would like to make a motion to authorize the town supervisor to sign the agreement at the conclusion of the attorney review.

Second.

Discussion?

That was last week. One of the projects already in the pipeline. So if we are able to complete that one project, that seems like a worthwhile venture.

Yeah. So Dan and I met Tim Burns Thursday. And I think one thing we just need, the one that's already in progress already has 90% design done. So I guess I'm okay with proceeding anger. So I think we need to, we're gonna approve this, we'll make sure that we intend to see . Sorry.

One discussion, yeah, too, is, and we'll have that talked around about later, is instead of them having all those projects that's at 30%, I'd rather see one or two at 90%, because that's 10 to 12 years of work, and according to Tim, 30% won't fit you in them. in the door for the grant thing. So maybe we need to rethink about pick two and get it at 90% instead of 10%.

And we will not pay for work that's already done, just to clarify that. Well, I know, but they've all... No, I understand what you're saying.

But the work is already done, and all that did was reduce what it would cost us if we ended up not proceeding. Right. I guess the point is, we don't have anything to do with knowledge. It's simply wrong if we do not proceed with something.

I think the tying down or reducing the number of projects we look at would not be an issue if we can come to an agreement and have some idea of how we're going to finance those.

I'm just saying that Tim identified that most grants that come to the wastewater treatment water would be at 99%.

it does some kind of plans i don't believe it does so what this did is give us a head start on it and if we had a grant we would be we knew we were going to be able to do the match and had a grant available then they could finish that particular one's engineering but i don't see a problem in reducing it the part i'm looking at outside of grants is the fact of the project management And we can manage the budget, the total budget. There's going to be no add-ons and no changes unless we decide to change the project. But it also would be managed. It wouldn't get put on a back shelf because something popped up and our team had to focus on that and couldn't finish the engineering of it. So I think that's going to be a great asset to have it totally managed outside of what appears to be overloaded departments.

right now and to your point tom last week i believe that question was asked they said they would just take a look at that 90 that was done make sure it concurs with their thoughts and then that would be included well i guess that's the point because it is included but they've already got the 92 000 and they come and save them for the cost of doing that design but That cost includes giving 30% design in something that we already have, 90% in something.

No, they wouldn't charge us additional on that if it's already completed, but they just review it to make sure they agree with that.

Nevertheless, my bigger concern is we have stuff we don't need to do, and if we're going to sign World War X, we as a board, we are going to see one of these and not put ourselves in a position where we're spending six figures of time Exactly.

Especially. I think there's two on those lists, too.

I think there's already two on those lists that are happening.

I don't know that they're happening. Let's just read and use Verity to do it. Absolutely. That's my point.

I want to make sure we're making the same point just different ways. Okay.

When you say that, you say that it won't happen until we sit down and have a discussion about how we're going to be able to bring the tax down to me at our commission. Sewer rates are going to go up to $3 for $10,000 because we got to pay them. So it's easy to say that now. It's going to be a little more difficult to say when we have to explain to the taxpayers that we have to pay them by now.

so if they're under this isn't a this isn't a they can do whatever they want they all didn't know give it we're giving direction yes and then that then they'll charge us correct so what this does is give them the ability to go completely vet those projects that they identified and then they would sit with us and say this is this is what we find this is what the cost would be to do that where do you want to move forward where do you want to prioritize So it's not here just go and surprise us with what you picked. We're involved in that process. So one of the lines that I added in under the break free, should the town elect not to proceed with at least one of the proposed projects listed in the above recommendations after Vergy has completed the investment grade energy audit. and presented its final engineering report, guaranteed maximum price proposal, savings analysis, and financing recommendations, the town agrees to reimburse Fergie the sum of $92,000. So it is one project within that list, which clears that obligation. I don't think it matters whether we If we took some projects off, it would lower our break free. But these are projects that were identified to basically pay for themselves if we do them. That's the point. What we save in energy and operation in turn pays for the project. And all of these that they've identified have been discussed and needed. I would like us to be proactive, whether this is the path we take or not. I would like us to be proactive in identifying those areas and being prepared for it and not being reactive to emergencies where we many times do not have any control over the cost of product or service, labor cost, whatever you want to call it. And we're exposed. I just feel exposed. And it seems that we have so much between seekers and whatever else is going on. seems that it's been very difficult to have a capital plan that's really established with priorities over the next 10 years and this gives us another way to do that so we can start planning and lay it out if the water meter project i hate to go back to this but if the water creek meter project was done five years ago the cost would have been much less and we it wouldn't We wouldn't be in that situation today of where we are now, we must do this right now. So I'm just looking for opportunities to plan better for the town and save us financially in how we do business as well as what it's costing us to do that business today. But I can go back and say, can we take some projects off? And if we take projects off, can you lower the number of obligation?

defer to you guys i know i don't really care what about when they had the lesson that this this 10 to 15 years of working evidence why would why would you want to why would you want a 30 plan on something that's popping i mean get that funding for 10 years well is it is it 15 years because we don't need it till then or is

Right, but so if we have at least a base, my thought was we have the beginning, like the thing that we have in here tonight for the water plant. So that shows $10 million. It might be more like $15 million, but we had that material to go forward to apply for a grant. It's on our list, and maybe we get the grant, and that gets bumped up.

That would be my number. This is my number. I understand that.

So I'm not positive about this, but I think there were opportunities for this next grant cycle that we might not have hit because we did not have materials needed to submit. I asked a direct question. I didn't really get a totally direct answer, but I want to avoid that. We've said we're going to be aggressive with grants, and this also gives us a tool to do that. This is an outsider coming in and looking at what they think needs correction and where savings could be with the technology they know about as opposed to, and I'm not discounting our team at all. I'm really not, but they are so focused on their one plant. Do they have fresh eyes on it? And in addition to that, when they made recommendations, they met with Tim Water, Wastewater, to say, how have you been doing it? Why do you do it this way? To really understand how that's working. But Dan, this isn't a commitment that we, that they're going to do all these projects in their time. We still have control over every step of that. That would be crazy to let that go.

My only thing is I'd rather... really focus on the top three or four okay get more design work to about three or four of the 30 percent of 10 zero eight um and i would like to support i think that's that's fair anyway and i think that some of the workshops they've asked for that but this was all

is a lot at one time and so it's okay let's just pick these and propose what these could be and we cannot step back and take some off yeah it's uh but you're uh brought amazing improvements to it since the rough draft that was voted at the workshop a couple of weeks ago um so it's it moves significantly right direction it was economic terms of it that the board could evaluate no but i mean just from a legal statement yes article nine uh contracts it's it's it's not uncommon for the person i don't know why along these lines it's not possible what they're doing something that's negotiable i don't have an opinion on the value of the work doing i'm a guy but the general framework uh That would be more definitive for the town. Yeah, the risk at this point is we decide not to do something positive or comprehensive energy audit that would undertake. That's really all that's at risk at this point. There's an example of projects that are listed. We did any one of those or another project with them. It would cover the cost of the comprehensive energy.

I'm open to Dan's suggestion. Okay. Okay. We know the two lift stations. Okay. The firework slide gates have been designed. Now we need a lot of treatment plants. Those four. With the mine output.

Well, I'm sorry. Can you repeat that?

The two pumps, the two lift stations.

Number one and two.

I think five is also currently in some application. Big need, and then seven, water treatment. I think we're pretty close.

Seven is done by implementation. I think they're in.

So we, but this includes, but this would include 60% plus the guaranteed prices. So a lot of that stuff, some of what they'll do, even when we have some design, there's parts of it. Yeah.

There's more than design work that has to be done.

But the design work is what gets us to grant that and the cost analysis for it.

Like what is our guaranteed savings on this project?

I think we would need to fine tune it some. Not really.

We can add stuff to it later. This letter of intent is to say that they're going to do this, as all the deliverables listed, that they're going to do an intent study on each of these projects, and that's what they justify with the 92, that each one of these projects will have its own detailed contract and its own guaranteed cost savings, and it So it's a big, intense contract, whereas this is tell us you're serious and let's get started. But before we employ all of our trained professionals, we need some guarantee that we can pay them at the end of the day if you take this information and walk away with it. But that's pretty much what this is. But adjusting the projects should adjust the number if it makes you feel more comfortable with that.

how much would it feel dancing if you would just give them more projects yeah i don't really care about the number because what i would be looking for is a commitment from the rest of the board to say We're not going to risk having to go up with $100,000. Some plants that are going to sell and shut. We're going to do it.

We're actually going to do a project.

I will be the one to leave the motion to say, pick one of these. One of them is getting dumped. The total list station has to be dumped. So that's the low-hanging fruit.

And after that 30% is done, that gives some idea to the cost analysis is already done, right? So you sit down as a board with department heads or whoever, we as a board decide needs to be in that conversation. I would think Corinne would need to be there from a financial standpoint. But then we say, these are our options. This is where we're sitting. Where do we want to start? Because there's more than just the design, Dan. There's also the actual guaranteed cost savings on each of these projects. So even though it's 90% done, they still have more work to do on that particular project.

So. I'll follow on these. I would want to focus on projects.

so do you say well we have to make sure peter's go with the legal anyway so we can make those changes and run it through him yeah and if the modification of those projects could result in a modification of the that the breakup fees let's call them the brain so it sounds like there's a couple of tweets okay

so are the projects let me make sure i'm clear if we're in agreement to number one two five and seven on the backs we're going to prioritize them seven something yeah and i just i would want an opportunity just to confirm with tim yeah it's pretty sure

three might be something that's pretty high on this list too, but.

So can we do this? Can we do an email thread tomorrow and restate this and list the projects and then we'll talk to whoever, Tim and Cody, fine tune it. I can send it then to Peter after I talk to Barry.

Yeah, talk to Barry too.

Are you good with making a motion with those modifications tonight or do you prefer an updated

letter of intent and do it at the next meeting well there's i think you probably need to update the letter of intent because you don't know how that's going to in fact break up fees which is a material economic item so i think you're going to go back with a shorter list um that way it's clean right that's that's the economic term that the board doesn't have right now so i think we should update the agreement and uh

so so I know this is being done very differently it's a new way of for us to do things but I feel we need just to look at some options and start being a little more aggressive with our capital planning and working it doesn't appear that it's worked very well so far

So we don't keep kicking the can down. Is it possible for us to make the motion that just simply says that the board reserves the right to prioritize and pick the projects, and that be the fee not to exceed the $92,000?

Well, the fee will not exceed $92,000.

It's not going to exceed it, but I'd probably just table people on the agenda, Dan, just because that's a material item. I know you.

I appreciate it.

There's ground for some negotiation on that item.

Okay. So I will talk with them tomorrow. I will send updates and include you, Peter, in that.

I think the board table, that will be on the agenda.

I'll make a motion to table the LOI. Okay.

I'll second that.

We'll go.

Garcia?

Aye. Diehl?

Aye. Dugatti? Aye. Kilner?

Aye.

I know you got one last one.

I got another one. Oh, so much paper, so much paper. I'm out of order when we were in the workshop today and I didn't get it back together. Bear with me. I'm sorry, guys. OK, so I'm just going to highlight I included in our agenda packet a lot of information just so that everyone would know. I want everybody to know what's going on. I'm not trying to ram anything over anyone. So I kind of overshare sometimes. That's me. But just to give you an overview without reading this entire memo that was written to the town board, we have been working on existing procedure for distribution to advisory boards for review and input on refining triggers to implement this process. And this is a bigger process. It's been discussed at several meetings. It's been since January. So I decided to pull it back and resend everything, but break it down into very step by step review process. So the intent to do this is we're going to pull what we have out of the commercial design standards and keep its original purpose. We are preserving the existing existing project review. process but improve its organizational and readability as well as just create more clarity this whole thing is about having clarity of roles and responsibilities of both advisory boards departments planning board and town board we want to extend expand the discussion of what the potential trigger criteria that's what we're calling this if it's a subdivision this large if it's a project this large if it's legislation that automatically sets it into this process And we will introduce a proposed procedure for distribution and review, like I said, of new legislation, amendments, policy changes, and other matters affecting development and municipal operations. This will give us a framework that can be updated administratively as experiences gain without requiring all these changes to an entire commercial design standards. It just pulls it out and puts a light on it. I have a motion here. I am making a motion to authorize the circulation of the attached municipal review and coordination procedure working draft, together with the accompanying memorandum and advisory board department comment form to all advisory boards and pertinent town departments for review and written comment. After review, it is requested that comments be returned to Councilwoman Rhonda Deal no later than Friday, August 21st. to allow for the preparation of a revised draft incorporating recommendations recommendations received for future consideration by the town board in a discussion clarity that we can put our team we can put it together

All right. All right.

On to number 11, which is from the Department of Engineering and Waste Water Resources, Westfall. Number one, water treatment plan upgrades for WEA grant authorizing resolution 2026, job number one. uh 205 of 2021 bob writes honorable town board we hereby request the town board authorized the attached resolution as part of the application submittal for the 2026 new york state clean water infrastructure improvement grant program and authorized the supervisor to sign the signature and certification form for the submittal of the grant application so motion is in order to authorize the supervisor to execute that document so both second discussion

this is this is your type priority too It is my priority, but I want 100%, not 49%. We can't afford to take what we can get.

Maybe we can stack it, Dan. Maybe there's another one coming.

All right. Karen, the roll, please.

Garcia? Aye. Bigatti? Aye. Kilmer? Aye. Thiel? Aye.

John Potter, Right number 12 from recreation supervisor Joseph mentor status changing rate changes. John Potter, So motion is imported to approve the status and rate changes as written in the packet.

So. John Potter, Second, any discussion.

All right. Karen, the role, please.

Filmer. Aye. Garcia. Aye. Beale. Aye. Bigatti.

Aye. Number 13. When the code enforcement officer first is a special use permit application for Jennifer Klima, 2101 Bix Road to occupy or to run a home occupation of bakery. So referring it for our review and future referral planning board and a public hearing. So motion is in order to throw this to the planning board and set a public hearing for August 24th. Yeah, it is. You skipped the one. So August 24th at 8 p.m. Yep. So I'll second it.

my question let's say it's already open it's all about that funny that works i'm just let's get some permission so it's already going on but hello she will be at national night out so you can try it out oh i know you know what i took one on

Yeah, I think we're becoming an artisan.

Any discussion? Need more discussion? Karen, the roll, please. Garcia? Aye. Dugatti? Aye. Filmer? Aye. Beale? Aye.

And next, we have a special use permit renewal for Sandy Beach Yacht Club 1851 Winter Road parking lot. Property's been inspected. New changes. So motion is in order to approve the renewal of the special use permit.

So moved.

Any discussion?

All right. Karen, the roll, please. Deal. Aye. Kilmer.

Aye.

Bugatti.

Aye. Garcia.

Aye.

I think we need that spaced.

All right. 14 from our town assessor, Jill Murphy, John, did your Bedell request to split and merge property on Cox road SBL is 64 dot 15 dash 2 dash 46 and 64 dot 15 dash 2 dash 45. So, jill writes that she received the request and after review by the town engineer supervising code enforcement officer and zoning inspector split meets bulk zoning requirements the town code with no existing code violations and no objection split will be effectuated upon approval by the town board and finally deed with erie county all right so motion is is in order to uh google uh the split so we'll assume second Discussion? All right. Karen, the roll, please. Garcia.

Aye. Diehl.

Aye. Bugatti.

Aye. Kilmer.

Aye. All right. So from our Parks Maintenance Crew Chief, Tom Ciceri, he's got a new hire. So he seeks a request to hire Michael Specht as a laborer and the seasonal rate. 1950 on a start date to be determined upon the completion of this pre-employment paperwork process where to make the hire so all righty then any discussion i i just have one comment i i thought that jill had created a new form that was going to be used

i noticed the last one didn't either we used that form on i think we used it for the assessor's office maybe i'll follow what with her it was a really great form so it was uniform and all the information was there in the same spot do you remember that it was for um no i'm talking about for for new employees it was like the full checklist i'm going to ask her about that because we said we liked it when we saw it exactly just a minor thing but just wonder why all right any further discussion

Karen, the roll call, please. Garcia. Aye.

Diehl. Aye. Degatti. Aye. Kilmer. Aye.

All right. Item 16 from the planning board. We had a motion of the planning board to ask the town to follow the proper agenda timeline, supply the packet paperwork material, and set up a presenter at the planning board meeting prior to the agenda posting for that upcoming meeting. I don't think we need to do any of this other than have it received and filed. Obviously, there's been some growing pains with respect to the departure of our longtime recording secretary and this search for a replacement, but we do have a solution to avoid that certain day that hopefully should resolve some of those issues. You know, with respect to the presenter, they stand by the request that if one of us is making a referral of a law or some kind of a policy change that we'd be there to talk about it. So I think that's something we can coordinate amongst ourselves, whether I'm a liaison, we can make a meet with one of you guys if we have something like that so that I'm in a position to discuss it with them and somebody else there. But those are their requests. All right, audit committee.

All right, I make a motion to pay the bills from the following funds. From the general fund, $57,521.99. From the highway fund, $12,281.99. and 23 cents. From the sewer fund, $46,246.98. From the water fund, $10,124.69. From the trust and agency fund, $450. And the capital fund, $365,704.71 for a total of $492,329.60. So moved. Any discussion?

All right. Karen, the roll, please.

Garcia.

Aye.

Deal. Aye. Bigotti.

Aye. Kilmer.

Aye.

All right. Item number 18 is public comments. So this is the time where you can make a comment on anything at all. If you'd like to make a comment, please take the mic, state your name, and you'll have three minutes.

Hello, Daniels. I've come here many times trying to request a resolution for a highway design study, which was recommended by the regional director of New York State Department of Transportation. Still waiting your decision on it. There's another approach to under complete streets. Complete streets, when... States receive federal money. They're required to work with local government for the improvement of pedestrian crossings and roads in general on the street. Last week I met with a representative from U.S. Representative Tim Candy's office. He's looking into things about the responsibility for the town to work with the state to improve traffic, pedestrian crossings on the town of Grand Island. A few meetings ago, I gave you what North Town of Wanda had already had in place. I also gave you the Sheriff Department's report, which showed there's a secondary cause for when my granddaughter was killed, the design of the road. Okay. So I'd like to, I made each one a copy because that's the only time we're trying with the copy machine from the federal point of view as responsibilities for the states and the town. While he's not gotten back to me, I just emailed him today. Okay. So things can be made better before something happens again.

Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else with public comments? All right. We have the public comments section closed. And from the board, Houseman Kilmer.

All right. I don't know if you guys saw this, but we're meeting the attorney for the best loss, honestly. So we need to maybe get together and change it so we don't we can't speak i mean i was going to have a chance to talk to this about it so i'm just saying maybe we could get together and take his second recommendations if you like them don't like them don't agree with them give us this camera to them yes no and then they get to see that's the finish line next week then someone was supposed to be there i don't think

that we need to maybe get together, but we can't.

Well, if you think we have it, you can kind of talk to us. I'll just get it done. And the other thing was, this is definitely not a chicken little sky is falling, but I've had a couple of residents call about these things you're seeing on Facebook. I think Jose has a little more information than I do, but, you know, that's true. I had an issue with the, So what I want to do is just inform the residents, not scare the residents, because as long as you're not clicking the pavement or doing something stupid. We're gonna find, we're gonna figure it out. Supervisor will bring us back some information. But I had a resident really asked me to do my best to get the word out there. And again, not scare the public, tell the public that we are a park. We're gonna have to look at some parts of Brandon. Yes, sir.

Thank you. So to Dan's point, I was on a webinar this morning with the regional director of the EPA, the commissioner of DTC, I forget her title, but of the top dog at the DEC and a bunch of their deputies in the health department. And they did a good presentation. They're taking it very, very seriously. They didn't provide any specific details as to the grant. I specifically talked in general about all of the spaces that I've been looking at, processes, if you get a letter in the mail, It's up to the resident if they want to allow. The EPA to come in with the DC and test the property. So you'd have to sign the agreement, allow them in there. They will start the testing with simple testing in the beginning. Then they would bring a mini excavator and they would dig a hole and test the soil. And then if they feel they need to go deeper, then they will need a separate agreement for drilling. With deeper point to determine if there was anything there. That's the process that they're using. I don't know of anyone in particular that's gotten a letter.

I'd imagine it's happened, but I don't know that.

They were very responsive. They seemed to be taking it as seriously as I would hope they would. I did leave the meeting thinking, it's horrible that we're in this position, but they're taking steps to rectify as best as they can.

All right, thank you.

National Night Out is coming up. It will be Tuesday, August 4th. We're going to have live music, our normal Tuesday concert, but it's an opportunity for community members to come together. You get to meet first responders, doing some really cool stuff last year. Jose's working really hard to get a helicopter here, but even we have the snowplow. The kids love that. I knew it would be the selfie spot for them because it's They actually get to touch the plow. You know, that's cool for our little kids and me. And we've invited our local businesses to come and an opportunity for them to meet their neighbors. It's just going to be a great community event. So spread the word. There will be the return of the costume contest. A little hint, we had a couple of families that participated as first responders, and that was really cool to see, not just the kids. So we hope to see you on Tuesday, August 4th.

All right. I believe it's nearly August. Here we are. Summer to see it nationally out because it's fun. That a motion is is in order to adjourn tonight's meeting at 911 send them second. And motion second. favor. I am the opposed. I carry if you please rise. Tonight we'll observe moment of silence. Memory of Marianne Rowe, James Dotson, Joseph Segarra, Taryn Cholsty, Terry Messon. I adjourn.