(1) Town Board - Regular Meeting

Okay, folks, thank you very much.

We're going to get started. We have two public hearings tonight. Would you be kind enough to join me in the Pledge of Allegiance, please? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you very much. I'd like to welcome you to the Red Hook Town Board meeting of Wednesday, May 27, 2026. And would you be kind enough to pan over? You're already there. Thank you very much for the folks at home watching what we'll be discussing. We start off with two public hearings. We then move into the agenda. We have some bids to award, well rehabilitation, Water storage tank we'll be discussing and hopefully awarding that contract as well. We have for discussion a resolution to approve a secret negative declaration for local law A. And there's a typo in the part three that I want to point out to you. Remind me, somebody please. A resolution to approve Local Law A of 2026. A resolution to approve the Bard Water District Agreement. A continuation, once again, most of the agenda items tonight have been on previous agendas for several months now. We are going to entertain an annual increase, as we have in the past, to the water district number one rates and charges. And I think I'm going to show you the project that we're talking about and the increase in rates and charges, maybe for the next couple of years, what those rates and charges might look like. A resolution to amend at the request of the highway superintendent, the 2026 highway 284 agreement, now that the budget bill was passed yesterday that pertains to highway monies. And a resolution to award the paving bed for this year's projects. And also hopefully finalize our resolution to approve the temporary use agreement with Camp Rising Sun. We'll then move into department board committee reports, correspondence, and then we'll take public comments. With that being said, we're at 7.35. We're a couple minutes late. We have our first public hearing. Deanna, would you be kind enough to read the notice?

Notice of public hearing, town of Red Hook. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the town board of the town of Red Hook on May 27th, 2026 at 7.35 PM local time at the town hall, 7340 South Broadway, Red Hook, New York. To hear all interested persons on a proposed local law number A, proposed of 2026, entitled local law number A, proposed of 2026, a local law adopting an amendment to the community preservation plan. The proposed amendment incorporates certain additional property parcels Currently owned on behalf of the town of bread of town water district number one the town of Red Hook community preservation plan in accordance with section 64 H of the town law and chapter 57 of the Red Hook Town Code Establishes a plan for the preservation of community character to acquire interest or rights in real property for the preservation of community character and within the town including villages in accordance with such plan and in cooperation with willing sellers and to provide management and stewardship program for such interests and rights the town board will meet to consider such amendment and hear all persons interested in the subject thereof and concerning the same. Copies of said proposed local law are available for review at the Town Hall 7340 South Broadway, Red Hook, New York. The Town Board has classified the action as an unlisted action and declared its intent to serve as lead agency for the matter. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at said hearing. All reasonable accommodations will be made for persons with disabilities. In such case, notify the Town Clerk in advance so that arrangements can be made. By order of the Town Board of the Town of Red Hook, dated May 12, 2026, Deanna Cochrane Town, Clerk, Town of Red Hook.

Thank you, Deanna. And this is a continuation of a public hearing that was opened at our last meeting. It's Local Law A, which is a law to include five parcels that are owned by the town of Red Hook on behalf of the Water District. The Water District is the 488 users, I hope I have that right, within the township. They own those five parcels. No, they do not. Well, the town owns them on their behalf. Yes, as I explained.

Not on their behalf, Robert. And I think we should close the public hearing and delete this amendment to the CP fund and eliminate this whole conversation here on in. Why? The town of Reddick is the primary on these five parcels. The Water District has no recourse with those properties at all. So this is a waste of my time, this board's time, and this committee, the people's time.

Okay. Kenny, this is a public here. Robby, you own property.

I own property. On my property, it says Kenneth A. Migliarelli Primary. You don't have any recourse with my property, and I don't have any recourse with your property. The Water District has no recourse with the town of Reddick Primary. So this is just a shuffling of money from one fund to another, I guess. I don't know what your agenda here is, but it's a waste of time. And I don't want to sit here for an hour having people hash out and worried about what's going to go, you know, what's going to happen with those properties when the water district has no recourse.

thank you kenny um we have with our with us tonight uh the attorney for the town chris shaw um chris maybe it'd be a good yeah chris can you explain that to me please so all of the records that we've ever reviewed from the water district um indicate that i mean i understand the deed says to the town

I understand that.

To me, it's black and white. Okay? There's no gray area. Okay. Well, I don't want to sit here for an hour discussing this when it's a waste of time.

Well, I think, you know, if you want to shorten this, let's let the attorney to the town. Okay. Answer the question.

Let's hear it, Chris. Well, so as I understand it from reviewing the history of these transactions, They were specifically, you know, deeded to the town for the purpose of the water district. And all of the transactional information that I've seen was that it was deeded to the water district. The water district has always treated those as property of the water district. The water district, remember, is not an entity. It cannot hold property. So the purpose of those acquisitions was for the water district itself. The same is true of the parcel that is owned by the town for the water tank, right? All of those were acquired in the same, not at the same time, but they were acquired in the same name, as I recall, anyway.

I don't have them all in front of me, Ken, but, you know. Well, the water district can, what he stated at the last meeting, that the water district could sell those properties. It cannot sell those properties. It would have to be approved by the town.

Correct. So who has the power to sell the properties is the town on behalf of the water district. Okay. And the disposition of the funds would have to go to the water district because they were owned for the benefit of the water district and you would serve as a fiduciary for the water district. Understood. Okay.

Because it's not an entity. Right. But the scare tactic here is that some other private entity would own those properties and do whatever and that's not so. Well, the Water District isn't a private entity, and it's a, it's a, it's a... No, I'm saying, you know, anybody could, the way, the scare tactic, what I heard at the last meeting, that anybody could buy those properties at some point with the control of the Water District selling them, and that's not so.

the town would have to be way in on it so it's whatever you want to sit here and listen to people there's surplus properties just like when we offer for sale on behalf of the highway department surplus vehicles i think maybe you were even interested in one of our surplus pickup trucks we do it on behalf of this entity, which is the water district. Just for a reminder for the folks, these parcels used to have operating wells on them. And we have a member from our water board here tonight. And they no longer have wells. And so the water board chairman for the last several years has indicated they would like to sell these surplus properties, use the proceeds towards the water district members and the costs associated with operating the water district. This seemed like an opportune time. to consummate a sale if that was the interest. Tonight what is the subject of the public hearing is whether or not to include these in the community preservation plan. They were not initially included even though they met all the criteria because they were thought to be owned by the town and only the town. had rights to those parcels. So I understand what you're saying, Kenny. I don't think that we've disagreed with that, that the town board would have to approve any sale, but we have a fiduciary. This is one of those times where we wear two hats. This as the fiduciary for the water district, the 488 members, the only ones who incur costs associated with the water district and the town who have to approve a sale. And so here we are tonight.

So I don't agree with amending the CP fund. Okay. Because that sets a precedence for other purchases, which I disagree with. We called the public hearing. Actually, we canceled the public hearing.

Okay. Well, thank you, Kenny. I appreciate that that's your opinion.

I mean, I think it deserves kind of a recap before we hear from the public, because there were certain things that weren't clear to me until I dug into it further, and I heard from... many residents in the area, also in the town. I think the question is, are we acquiring the parcels because they deserve preservation with the CPF funds, which is a whole town fund, or are we using the CPF funds to subsidize the 488 families? that live in that district. I don't have an answer to that, but I think that that's really the question that we're asking ourselves. And the delta between using CPF funds and not is about $40 per year per family for the roughly 500 families that are in that area.

Again, I'm sorry to interrupt you. I just want to remind you folks, new council members, two things. One, this is a public hearing where we're supposed to hear from the public. Two, I would just ask you to please, if you would, concentrate on the action that's in front of us tonight. The action in front of us is whether or not to include those parcels in the CPP plan. There is no action in front of us related to the sale or disposition or calling a public hearing on those parcels.

We've got six resolutions that are all related. Hang on a second.

The board members are just as much a member of the public as we are, Robert, and they have an absolute right to speak their mind at a public hearing. Thank you, Alfred. Thank you, Alfred.

Ask Chris whether she's going to tell the town board members to shut up. Thank you, Albert. She's there.

She's your attorney. Ask her about it.

Albert, I'm going to ask you to please not interrupt. This is a public hearing. At this time, we'd like to hear from the public. I think we have described yet again, and this has been for several months now, if the board decides to include this into the CPP plan, we can preserve As it says in chapter 64, I believe we can preserve these parcels. We cannot preserve them Okay, utilizing another funding source unless we make a decision to do that, to expend other funds to preserve them. We could just say to the water district, sorry, you can't dispose of your surplus properties. That does not seem to be consistent with our fiduciary. They've asked for them to be. disposed of they no longer need them so with that being said it is the time for the public to be able to speak would remind you that years ago prior to our time it was a three minute time limit set so everybody could speak and we can continue our work I'd like to speak before just to clarify for the public a few of the things that

that I've understood between last meeting and this meeting. And I'm not saying this because I'm not in support of this project. I genuinely want to hear from the public. And I understand the concern about for 500 families in our area that if their water rates go up, that might break some people. And I get that. But it starts with an understanding of that The land was owned by a branch of our town, and there's a nuance to it. But now we're transferring it, and there hasn't been a threat of it being developed or being turned into anything else. And the reason for the transfer is a bailout of what these families haven't been charged over the past four years. And in the rest of our meeting, we're gonna talk about Seeker, which I don't agree with. I still think that we're separating acquisition from reality, if we're gonna mow or if we're gonna put a bench, if we have any plans.

Christina, can we please hear from the public? You have your opportunity to discuss this among us.

This is not the action in front of us, Christina. The action in front of us tonight is to hear from the public and discuss whether or not those parcels should be included.

If we want to move this forward, Robert, if we want to close the public hearing tonight, then I think it's important to air the issues before the public has a chance to speak. So just to summarize, so What I hope to talk about later in the meeting, but I want the public to know, with the bidding, the most important thing is the coding of the inside of the tank, right? It's the entire point of what we're looking at doing. And we're looking at a lowest bidder that's $400,000 less than any other any of the competitors. So I think the public should weigh in on that, whether it matters or not.

Christina, I'm going to ask you to please, we have an agenda with IAS.

One last thing, one last thing.

You're talking about things that are way down on the agenda and we have a public hearing. In 1989. And we're waiting for the public to have an opportunity.

Correct. So let's summarize what the public should weigh in on. In 1989.

I'm going to tell them what they should weigh in on. They can weigh in on whatever they want to weigh in on.

Of course.

That's the purpose of a public hearing.

Of course. But let's summarize factually. Look, I've come into this in 1989. Bard came to the town and needed to double the size of the tank because of their own needs. And at that time, they paid half. And so now they're paying 12%. So I don't know where I ran on that, but that's a fact.

Okay, you're now on yet another agenda item, and we are not functioning properly.

Correct, but they're all related, Robert. One through six are all tied together. So if we're going to hear from the public, I'd like to hear with... comprehensive knowledge of what we're about to do. That's all I have to say.

Okay. At this time, I'd like to make a motion that we open the public hearing. So moved. Seconded. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Thank you. Nay. Thank you. All right. Again, would ask you if you would please observe the three-minute rule, and I think you can see now why, so we can continue with our work. But we do want to hear from you and also remind you to please, we encourage you to sign up for notifications and put any comments you have in writing if you have an opportunity. Who would like to speak on this subject?

Go ahead.

Yes. Howie, if you would be kind enough to come to the microphone.

Oh, I have to go up there?

Yeah, unfortunately. Or you can speak loudly from there. I can speak very loudly. Okay, and if you would be kind enough for the record to say your name, please.

My name is Howard Shea. I've lived in Red Hook for 30 years. My property butts up on the wetlands 150 feet of it. There's a stream that runs right along the border of the back of my property. I've walked through that property for 30 years. There used to be a path that went from one no trespassing sign to the other no trespassing sign. These signs were put up by the town to keep people from walking through the property. trail is there it makes perfect sense to match up with the trailhead that you have coming down from the uh rec park the trailhead was right there you walk across the ponds right there the berm in the middle of the property is an elevated path that runs right through the property you have wetlands on both sides you can walk that thing and come out on alby When you walk down Albee two blocks, you have another trailhead on fur that goes all the way up to Kelly. I don't know if people even know these trails exist. This would be a contiguous path from the rec park to Kelly Road. You would be in the woods except for that short time you're on Albee. It's a no-brainer. to see this held hostage because of the tank repairs and the lack of maintenance over the last 15 years. This issue was around 15 years ago, and it was discussed in a pamphlet that came from the water department in 22, saying the tank looked good, but it needs some repair. Now suddenly it's falling apart. Is there a built-in maintenance program to keep the damn thing in shape? I mean, it's a no-brainer. So anyway, these are two separate issues, and one's being held hostage by the other.

Thank you, Howard. Anybody else like to speak on this topic? Please, if you would.

Amanda Sandor, I'm Vice Chair for the Sauk Hill Watershed Community. I did provide the letter via email, but I also have a printed copy, if it's okay to give one to you at this time. We can't be... So I'm vice chair for this off-hill watershed community and we've provided a letter but our group supports the purchase of these parcels. We feel that it fits in the community preservation plan and I'm just going to read a a snippet of the letter, but the community preservation plan states protection of Red Hook's natural environment clearly stands out as a major goal for residents. Land to be purchased is predominantly wetlands which have great ecological value and provide important habitat for many forms of wildlife. We feel that purchasing these parcels and using the comprehensive plan funds for that purpose meets the goals of the comprehensive plan.

Absolutely. Thank you, Amanda. Anyone else like to speak on this topic? Lisa, and then you can be next. Thank you.

I just want to point out where a lot of this confusion is coming.

Lisa, I'm sorry to interrupt you. If you'd be kind enough to say your name. Thank you.

Where a lot of the confusion is coming from and the questions about the true goals and motives is this public hearing is focusing on local law A, which you're saying is the addition of these parcels to the CPP, yet the seeker resolution in the packet, as well as the EAF, defines Local Law A, I'm reading directly from the short EAF, adoption of local law number A to amend the CPP and use community preservation funds to acquire water board parcels, which we were told were two separate actions, but they seem to be very convoluted in the documentation that is put in the packet for people to digest. Is there going to be another public hearing regarding the acquisition of the parcels if they are in fact added to the CPP? Because the way this is reading, one could conclude from the documentation that you've put out to the public is that you're trying to do both of those things with this action. Are you or are you not?

Thank you, Lisa. Anyone else? I'm sorry, you wanted to speak.

went too high for me.

Sorry about that.

I'm Lois Thomas. I live at 8 Chestnut Street, so I'm probably directly behind Howie's property, having never met him before.

In the wintertime, I can see your lights. Yes, exactly.

I can see yours, too. Number one, I'd like to criticize the Water Board for not having had some sort of plan to put aside funds regularly for improvements and repairs. Every responsible agency does this. I was a not-for-profit accountant. In my career, I know state funding regs, not for this type of project. But it's only responsible to think in advance because everybody who's had the low water rates has benefited, and now new people will have to pay the higher water rates. You just plan in advance. It's a good thing. Number two, we're very in favor of keeping it as it is. It's a wetlands. It floods my backyard when it rains hard. It's going to be hard or easy to do something about making a path through. Those are not my areas of expertise. But it's nice the way it is for all of the houses. So we are very much in favor, as are the people at Lisa Jackson at 4 Chestnut, who was here two weeks ago. Things ran late, and others were speaking, and she was uncomfortable about speaking. And there was something else and it went out of my head. But, oh, for people who are not happy about this, I'm not sure who they are because I've now been to the two hearings and have the neighbors and hear most of the absolute people who are in direct contiguous properties be happy with it. So I think we have the feeling of those most impacted we've heard from. There may be others. There may be the unfortunate need to raise the water rates. That happens in life. Water rates get raised. So I'm a yes. I'm a please look in advance when we look at things that are going to need repair. And thank you very much. And I didn't know I was supposed to bring anything.

Thank you. Anyone else would like to speak? Albert?

Yes. Sorry, I can't quite hear everything. Who owns the property at the present time?

I think that was answered. The attorney for the town answered that the town of Red Hook owns it on behalf of the water district. It was the water district parcels. It is the water district parcels.

There were wells on it. This is the old well site. Exactly. I know exactly where it is. Okay. And to whom do you propose to sell it?

To the town. using community preservation funds so it becomes entrusted and protected by the regulations and i will read those in a moment so that people can understand what happens if and when it's acquired by community preservation funding i i don't understand why if you already own it why is it necessary to spend town money simply to send it from

what you claim to be on behalf of the water district to the community preservation fund. I don't think we should be using that money for that purpose. That property is totally worthless. I know the parcel very intimately. The water supply on it is terrible. That's the whole reason that we, myself as town attorney and the town board, decided to get involved. It was not providing sufficient water It was a poor district. Bob Gray came to the town, came to me on a Sunday afternoon and said he was going to go speak to old Cook in here. Could I write up an agreement to purchase the property, which I did by hand on a Sunday morning on a yellow piece of paper. And we went over there and we agreed to pay $6,000 for the acreage that the current wells sit on. And we entered into that agreement predicated upon receiving water. And we found out we had 600 gallons per minute. Now, old Cookenham was not happy about entering into that agreement, but when he closed, told him he was bound by it. So that property that you're talking about now is totally worthless. Okay? It has no value. And I don't think you should be spending community preservation funds to acquire it for the purpose of a park. I think you can go in here as the representatives of the town and as representatives of the water district and clean it up. I just don't see the purpose. There's no value to that property. Property has no value monetarily. That's why it's set there, okay? And that's why it was given to the town.

It's a very poor piece of property to begin with, but it's a great animal sanctuary. You'll see deer, you'll see raccoons, you'll see bobcats. That's fine.

And then it should be left just the way it is. If it's a great animal sanctuary, I agree with you. Leave it alone. We can talk about preserving it just the way it is. I don't want to see it anymore. I've said my piece. I don't be spending the town on monies foolishly. Please. Thank you, Albert.

Would anybody else like to speak on the topic? Hi.

My name is Wendy Chow. I'm a neighbor of Howie's. Half our neighborhood is here, as you can see. Yeah, you know, we take walks in that neighborhood every day almost, and that is one of our favorite parts of the neighborhood. It's like a really special thing. I know it might not be worth a lot in certain ways, but it's worth a lot to the neighborhood. That's why we're here at the town meeting. So I appreciate the opportunity to have a public hearing and to be able to discuss it. I get that this is kind of a confusing issue because it's like who owns what and there's multiple hats and fiduciaries. It sounds like what we're trying to do is just put it on the community preservation plan so that we can decide what to do with it later, if I'm understanding that correctly. If that's the case, I'm very in favor of that.

Well, I think there's some confusion there. Just to your point, one option would be that we do nothing.

And what happens if, I'm genuinely, like what happens if we do nothing?

Right, and I've heard this confusion. So one option would be that we take no action and the water board continues to own it as a subset of the town. And that would not subsidize the rates that are about to go up for you and your 487 neighbors. So that's really the question. It's not that it's not going to be a sanctuary. It's that are we going to preserve it under what it's currently at? owned by the water board, or do we put it into the community preservation plan and use the funds to buy it back from ourselves?

I presume that either way you go, there's still options, though, right? Like, just because you put it on the CPP plan doesn't mean that XYZ is going to happen, I think. And then even if you don't do that, I think it sounds like there are options too. Like, it might not get preserved if you don't put it on the plant, right? That's what I'm understanding, but tell me that's not right. That's exactly right.

Well, the water board could make a decision to put it on the open market and sell it, but it's all tied back to the water rates for district.

Yeah, I totally get that. I like with that. I I can't remember her name who was on Chestnut said, you know, I don't, I'm not excited about people's rights going up either but if this is the plan that helps maximize the possibility of preservation, then I am for that.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Appreciate that. Anyone else like to speak? Yes, Roland, if you'd be kind enough to say your name for the record, please.

Roland Page, town of Red Oak. Thank you. Been a resident for 57 years. I'd like to know if the property's been appraised and by whom. Do you have an appraisal and ready to go?

Thank you, Roland.

Do you have a... Answer the question, please.

Roland, is there more that you'd like, comments that you would like to make?

I think I need... Again, I would just remind you... Answer.

I would just remind you what we have in front of us is a public hearing on whether or not to include these five parcels. I have a question.

Has the property been appraised? Answer yes or no.

I can't answer that question. Answer yes or no. I can't answer that question.

Why are you hiding it?

Nobody is hiding anything from her. I can't answer that question. You're hiding?

You're getting expenses on the... Not to my knowledge.

Yeah. Roland, is there any other comments you'd like to make related to inclusion into the local audit?

December 31st of 2027 is right around the corner. Thank you, Roland.

I appreciate it. Would anybody else like to make a comment? Here you go.

Robin, could you clarify one thing?

I'm sorry. Let's let Amy have a chance to speak, too. Yeah.

I'm just now really confused.

Amy Adams. I live at Albee Road, also abutting the property. And I echo my neighbor's sentiments. We all are interested in preserving the property. This sounds like a plan that leaves it open to be on the open market, which is kind of scary. If we don't do this, and I don't know. I mean, the water rates are going to go up regardless, but it seems that this is a semblance of a plan that might help mitigate that issue. person in the community, just like my neighbor was saying, wherever she is, yeah, we walk among the area every day. And I'm interested in, I spoke with Howard's neighbor, so the idea of what to do with it, you know, is I understand a separate issue that would be discussed sort of later, whether there's a path or not a path, or a bench or no bench, but at this point we're just

discussing whether it should be part of the preservation plan which i am in favor of thank you and i did have a chance to meet with your neighbors as well amy and the door-to-door that i did monday and spoke with you as well um speaking on this topic i just for my own clarification the property exists now whether it's owned by the town owned by the water department somebody owns it

It's there. By this amendment. This amendment is going to allow it to slide over under a protective umbrella of the protection fund.

It will make it eligible. Make it eligible. I think somebody used the term options. So this will make it eligible for community preservation.

And the community preservation goal is to maintain the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and communities.

That's exactly right. Now, we'd use some language from a particular section of the code that I think is maybe appropriate for this section.

Yeah, absolutely. It's a no-brainer when it comes to that.

Yes, Roxanne, did you want to speak?

I have just a question. You said that the town owns this property and the water district is kind of the overseer, right?

So is that correct? So we own it kind of like, I guess an example, and the attorney for the town will maybe correct me on this, just like maybe you had a custodial account for your kid at the bank. We have a custodial relationship with the water district. I think somebody used the term subset, that's not accurate. We have a custodial fiduciary. We do have to approve, but just like we wouldn't stand in the way of the water board that says, hey, we've done inspections and it says it's time for a recoding. We would not, our fiduciary says, We're going out, we're getting bids for you, this is what you need to do. That's our role as the fiduciary for the water district. So to say that no, we don't have to, on behalf of the water district, allow them to sell those surplus lots, that would not be consistent with our responsibility as the fiduciary. for the water district so you're saying that they have the option to sell it but yet they're not on the deed they don't have the deed to own it how can they sell it we would sell it on their behalf just like we own the property that the water tank is on just like we're going out to bid for them we're in that role on their behalf and there would be there would be a public hearing for that process if it was going to be sold yes absolutely and so i haven't heard anybody comment

in this meeting room, or last meeting, on the rates. I don't think anyone disagrees that we don't want to see this land developed. It's going to be preserved, whether it's owned by the water board or the town board. It's really a question of, do we take town funds and buy this land in order to make 488 families have a slightly less water bill, or do we leave it as it is and let the water bill get a little higher because it hasn't increased since decades ago? I'm sensitive to both sides of that subject. I'm not answering the question, but that's really the question that we're asking. It's not like, should we let this land go to open market and let a developer purchase it?

Yeah, again, the beauty of living in this country is we have different opinions. And I could not disagree with you more, just like we would never stop the highway department, our highway superintendent, when she says she has a surplus truck. We wouldn't say, well, we just don't feel like authorizing you to dispose of that surplus equipment. The same is true here. Our fiduciary is if the water district has determined the water board has determined that these are surplus properties and i think having quoted from 2022 for a few years they have determined they wanted to sell these properties there was no need to i think somebody referenced why haven't they been saving for this they absolutely have which is why there's four hundred thousand dollars being drawn from one of the reserves towards this project I'm going to compare to you what's happening here in the Town Water District versus what's happening in the Villages to show you how dramatically prepared they are and how this will be paid for versus those other communities so you can get a sense. And I will also give you the rates from the 1980s. Even with the increase that's proposed today, it won't even be double water rate from 40 years ago so I appreciate your thoughts on this matter Christina but we absolutely cannot just simply say that the water that is not consistent with our fiduciary to the water district I think we have heard, I've gone door to door, I've met with neighbors who aren't even here. They very consistently have said that they want those lands protected. Those lands are not protected, will not be protected until there is a mechanism And the Community Preservation Fund, once it's acquired, has that mechanism built into it that it cannot be used for purposes outside of, and I'll read you the little portion of it. We have another speaker. Okay. Bonnie, please go.

Bonnie Day. I know enough to be dangerous. Excuse me. I want all four preserving them. land maybe not necessarily preserving it using money to do so but it's wetlands so it's going to be preserved but you can't build on it there's an old farm i think was the schism farm that the town bought and it was kind of like a joke because there's a lot of wetland on it and it couldn't be developed anyway that was a hundred years ago i have no questions i have no Anything other than that, except protect the wildlife. And I texted somebody who wasn't here. I was surprised she wasn't here because she lives in the district. And she said that, um, sorry. That's funny. The letter I got in the mail made it sound like it was already done. And I said, no public hearing right now. She says, okay, tell them the water quality is terrible. It's overly chlorinated. And after she does the dishes, it smells like she was in a public pool. And I mean no disrespect by that, but if that's true, maybe there's something that can also be done about that.

Thank you.

Was it clear that I want to preserve?

Thank you. At this time, I'd like to ask our engineer, Brandy Nelson from Ty and Vaughn. I had asked Brandy to take a look at the parcel to determine what the potential could be, and not the full engineering was done for these parcels because I think the question came up, and certainly tonight, Many of you have suggested it's not buildable, just because it was not built on. It was not built on because there were wells there, so there are separation distances required for wells. So, Brandy, if you'd be kind enough to just give us the, like, the quick...

So, I'm Brandy Nelson, engineer with High and Bond. We did do a desktop assessment of the parcels, so that's just we... looked at the aerial mapping and then the available mapping through the soil mapper to understand the soil conditions there as well as the wetland mapper. From that, there are on the five parcels what appear to be both buildable and unbuildable areas. These parcels have public water and on-site septic systems, right? So they don't have sewer. They need to have space for septic system. When you only have one or the other, the setbacks change. And so looking at the setback from the desktop review of the wetland area, there does appear to be some availability to site septic systems on those parcels closer to where the houses are currently. We've seen a lot through our review before the planning board here in the town, a lot of creative applications for septic systems with raised fill systems or long skinny systems. Just being conservative, it looks like you could probably get two septic systems on the sites. So I think you could get two buildable parcels out of those five if they were combined and then re-subdivided if the water department wanted to dispose of those properties and sell them as retail parcels.

Thank you, Brandi. Appreciate that. And I think there was a suggestion last time and maybe this time. Last time, I think the term hyperbole, this time The suggestion was scare tactic. Two individuals have called expressing interest in buying those lots for development. I can assure you if you drive around town you will see people build houses on properties that you would be surprised that it was allowed and generally speaking, correct me please, generally speaking the County Board of Health tries to accommodate when parcels have been subdivided and exist a pre-existing lot they try to accommodate now there may be a lot of conditions it may be a very expensive septic system that's required raised bed but generally speaking they like to accommodate those individual parcels so again i all i will say is that if we if the town In its next action, if that's being contemplated, we'd like to protect these parcels and we're getting the input from the neighborhood. I did door to door. Other council people reached out to the neighbors. I'm hearing something pretty consistent. And so if we want to do that, or at least have the option to do that, it needs to be included in the plan. There's some suggestion that it's a bailout. It's not. They wanted to sell it a few years ago. There was no hurry. They didn't need it, the money. But this came up, this project came up, and it's like, hey, maybe now is the right time to sell the surplus parcels. And so it made perfect sense. There's no bailout. It's really kind of offensive. You know, these people volunteer. They're very talented, and they are very experienced board. I mean, you have people working in this profession who are on the water board.

But the water board could not sell those properties. On the deed, it says town of Reddick Primary, and in the special districts, there's three special districts. There's the lighting district, there's the Reddick Water No. 1 district, and there's the Reddick Fire district. That's correct. It shows nothing that the district, the water district, has control over that property. And you don't have to purchase the property to put a conservation easement on it. We could put a conservation easement on it without purchasing it.

That would not be consistent with our duties as the fiduciary for the water district that owns something just like the tank. We wouldn't take the tank away. If there was some scrap value, for example, and we were replacing it with a new tank, we wouldn't say, oh, well.

Just be clear that they cannot put it on the open market.

That is not, I'm sorry, that is not correct as the fiduciary. We absolutely would be required, if that's what they wanted to do, unless we have a good reason not to do that, and maybe there's a good reason.

We would have a very good reason not to do that as a board. Then you would vote for it? No, you wouldn't vote for it. Most of the people on this board would not vote for that.

That's the challenge of wearing two separate hats at this moment, Luciano. So we do, we do. Sorry. Careful.

All of that is three minutes, too. Yeah, that's okay. I'm concise. A couple things. One... My understanding of fiduciary is that you have to do what's best for whoever you're representing. So if the water district needs to sell it, my legal understanding of fiduciary is that you all would have to sell it. And I think it's the same with nonprofits as it is for government. You would have to make sure that you got top dollar. one entity of your government tried to purchase it at a certain bid, at a private developer bid above that, your fiduciary responsibility would require that you sell it for the higher amount, correct? Second, you're all duly elected officials that represent a constituency. Sounds pretty universal from this group of people that regardless of whether we completely understand the situation and all the nuances in it, One of the beautiful things about this country is you can be totally uneducated and ignorant of everything and your vote still counts. And so everybody here, based on whatever it's based on, has said pretty universally that they want to preserve it and they're in favor of this. So I would encourage you all to just set aside what your own perspectives are and do what the public is asking you to do. Thank you. Thank you Luciano.

I can't speak for others. It's what I always try to do is what I think is in the best interest of the town. Which, by the way, is the state of the neighborhood.

Hi, I'm I live at 62 Albee Road, which is county corner. Yes. And I would just say that Randy put a septic system, I mean, moved a stream within 10 feet of my septic system. So I don't understand, you know, don't see how that plot could get the 100 foot setback that's required for septic tanks but the town's engineer allowed it to happen on my property so i would say let's not build it let's not build it again folks just want to remind you this is to give us options and it goes in the community preservation plan what happens if it does go into the community protection plan it is it is eligible

Funds can be then.

Can it be sold then?

Yes. Absolutely. It can be sold for development.

You can override the protection and.

Just because it's in the plan means it's eligible. It doesn't mean it's protected.

And it's a result of the vote of you five people.

There will be a second action, a public hearing associated with that to appropriate monies when we have an appraisal back. and all the title work back, then we will be in a position to understand the value and the funds. It also, at that point, so including in the plan doesn't require referral to the advisory board. But the application, should there be one, the second action, and that is mentioned because it is being contemplated in the secret documents. So it is mentioned, so therefore we have to put it in there. It will have to be referred to the Community Preservation Fund Advisory Board. They will make a recommendation, yay or nay. We don't have to take their recommendation. But we often match up, yeah.

So if this amendment passes and it becomes part of the preservation plan, that doesn't save it.

No, it does not. But it makes it possible. It makes it possible. Then the second step makes it possible to preserve it. Okay? And it also makes it not necessarily going to transpire. Okay. That is the first public hearing. I think we should, let's jump to some secret documents, please. I don't think we want to close it until we just review the secret on this. Folks, and also I would like to just update you because the discussion was should it have some passive recreational use in a contemplated second action. For purposes of CEQA to include in the plan, we are mentioning that there may be contemplated preservation of those parcels. Interestingly enough, because of what transpired up in Albany today, I think I mentioned earlier, there have been some profound changes to CEQA regulations were passed up in Albany. It is no longer a requirement. that public parks, if this were to be a passive park, I think there was a property on Feller Newmark back in the 80s that was donated as an ecological park. It would not be necessary to undergo a seeker for the acquisition. So just know that if there is a second action, There are requirements for that. It must be previously disturbed. Folks talked about the drive that exists and has been there. For example, the wells that were on the property and so on and so forth. All right. There is language that I just wanted to mention to you because It might be relevant to what we are talking about here. I apologize. I just have to get the right management of required lands. It's 57.6. It's in our code. You can search general code town of Rock Oak if you want to read about community preservation. Rights or interest in real property acquired under this article shall be administered and managed in a manner which allows public use and enjoyment in a manner compatible with the natural, scenic, historic, and open space character of such lands, preserves the native biological diversity of such lands, with regard to open spaces limits improvements to enhancing access for passive use of such lands such as nature trails boardwalks bicycle paths and peripheral parking areas no i don't think anybody's mentioned parking or is interested in that provided that such improvements do not degrade the ecological value of the land or threaten essential wildlife habitat, you all have mentioned, and preserves cultural property consistent with accepted standards for historic preservation. I don't believe there's anything historic on this property. I just wanted to quote that because it seems to reflect a lot of what you've said, and you'll understand that this fund was established to do exactly this, these parcels. We have parcels, parcels, parcels protected. Some of the people speaking tonight, both up here and out in the audience, have had parcels, their farms protected with community preservation funds. And those are agricultural properties, a little bit different than this. But this is very sensitive to the things that you all have articulated. So if there were to be a second action, that, you know, know that the funding requires that we be sensitive to these things. Okay. Let's go to Seeker, because in addition to that, and we do have to do Seeker, at least right now, to get it into the... LOCAL LAW A INTO THE PLAN IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO CONTEMPLATE. DID YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ONE, TWO, OR EVEN THREE? AND I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE WRONG BOX WAS CHECKED ON THREE, PLEASE. TED ACCIDENTALLY, OUR PLANNER, CHECKED THE WRONG BOX. HE GAVE THE RIGHT NARRATIVE ON IT, AND I DON'T WANT TO JUMP THE GUN THERE. But I think we looked at part one before, but are there any questions about it? It's all five parcels. We've talked about one of the parcels maybe having right of first refusal on a portion of the land. So, but for inclusion for now, we're looking at all five parcels. The acreage of the proposed site totals eight and a half acres. Is the proposed action allowable? Does it involve legislative adoption of a plan, local law ordinance, administrative rule or regulation?

I have the same objection to part one that I have for multiple meetings now, which is that if we're considering this to be a pocket park and that actually means anything like benches or paths or mowing, even mowing, then it's not covered by the as it's currently written. And I think that this, I will not stand in the way of moving this forward, but this will be the last time that I vote on a secret application that I don't feel is complete. I feel like we've already had our hands slapped by Judge Rosa, and I don't think it's right to open ourselves up to potential lawsuits just because we can't look ahead and say what we're actually going to do.

Thank you. And I think I've clarified in the planner, hasn't I? I don't know. Probably don't want to weigh in on this, Brandy, but... You must, if you have a plan for the property, and I gave the example previously, we had a plan for the Cookingham farm acquisition. The plan was to preserve the farmlands that were being actively farmed, to put a solar install on the former mine, to put 12 acres aside for affordable housing, to do trails where the farm paths were. Then yes, absolutely, you must include that because that is a plan. All we have said is that we would like to include it in the community preservation. We don't have a plan. We don't even know if that road exists the way it does. I haven't blocked it. I mean, there's no plan. And I said to you in previous meetings, if you have a plan, put forth a plan. And then we can include it as part of the secret. But nobody here has a plan. Okay, and so we're not going to include a non-planned aesthetic and that is consistent with what the planner has advised. So I do appreciate that, and I will again remind you if there's a second action, it will not be necessary to do seeker. If we do want to do any kind of passive recreation there, like have a couple benches, have that little path go through, that will not, will no longer be necessary, okay? Doesn't mean we won't review it properly, and especially, you know, continue to reach out to the neighborhood. Let's make it through part one because we're going to be here all night long if we don't. Any questions about part one? I appreciate, Christina, that you object to moving forward on. Any other questions? Energy code, a lot of these are not applicable. There's no development that's being proposed. Okay. Folks, do you have questions on the board? Okay, and part two, we have a location map. Part two, any questions? All of the actions are indicated one through 11 to have no or small impact. Again, it's just being included in the plan. Any objection to those being indicated as no? Okay, a determination of significance. Folks, if you're not familiar with secret reviews, if you find that the action will not have a significant impact, it's sort of a double negative. It's called a negative declaration. There is a write-up by our planner that says for each of the 11 impact assessment questions in part two, all answers were no impact. The action is the addition of five undeveloped parcels of land forming a collection of parcels that as a group are contiguous with Red Oaks Recreation Park West. And for the Winnikee Land Trust, South Hill Trails Preserve, no development is proposed on the parcels since the parcels of flood lands used for passive recreation activities like trail walking and bicycling connections with existing trails may occur in the future. The parcels contain, so there is a reference that there may be a future contemplation. The parcels contain extensive wetland and floodplain areas. I'm not sure. I don't think that's the right slide. Oh, sorry, I don't have the slide. I'm not sure there are floodplains in there. We know that there was formerly federal wetlands indicated. And we did order the jurisdictional determination. So it will be in a couple months, it will be that much closer to be ready for development.

I don't think you mean ready for development.

No, I do mean ready for development because that's who orders JDs is people who are interested in development. They'll be ordered in. The parcels contain extensive wetland areas. According to Hudsonia, which surveyed the adjoining Whitakee lands, the area's wetlands generally are important for amphibian breeding and support several bird and reptile species of greatest conservation need. No trail development activities will occur without further environmental assessment. Well, that's a good question. This was written before today's bill was passed. So I think it's a moot point, but I think we should say Well, no, I think you can say with will occur without further environmental assessment just won't be under the state if needed obtaining of Permits from appropriate state and federal agencies. Yes. We of course do that We've done that in the past when we need apartments from DEC or our conservation partners. According to New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation's CRIS database, no prehistoric or historic cultural resources are associated with the five parcels nor with any of the lands that adjoin the parcels. Web mapping databases in the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation were queried to determine if any state records exist related to the five parcels including the Hudson Valley Natural Resource Mapper and the DEC Info Lake Locator. None were identified. The parcels have significance to water quality. We've heard from the Southfield Watershed Community Group tonight. Because two tributaries of the Salt Hill flow through four or five parcels, the Salt Hill is a source of drinking water to approximately 2,800 persons downstream. Prime farmland soils exist in some areas. I think we all acknowledge it's not farm parcels. Riparian buffers follow the outlines of the two tributaries and contiguous habitats exist linking the parcels. With Town Parkland and the Winnikee Land Trust preserved parcels, finally, no adverse impacts on the water district are expected because the parcels are no longer used for district wells and may not be a suitable location for new wells under current regulations. That's what the Water Board has indicated. Here's the typo. He checked the wrong box. So please let's make that correction. It's the second box. His narrative is consistent with the second box. And let's press up the first one. Check this box if you have determined based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. And this was prepared by our planner. in advance of tonight's meeting after reviewing all of the information available to him. And so we do have some resolutions that pertain to CPERP. and this would be resolution i'm sorry 19 19. Okay, before we entertain this resolution 19, I think at this time I feel comfortable if others do entertaining the resolution, closing the public hearing on local law A. Would somebody like to second that motion?

Can I have a question about what you just said? Is that all right? Are we still in the public hearing?

We're about to close it, so Amy, if you want to go ahead.

I'm opposed to there being a trail through the area. And as part of this plan, it sounded like The description described it as continuous between the park and Winnington Land Trail. And as we discussed when I spoke with you, people can easily walk down the street and get to both trails without walking through that area. I feel that it's going to affect the wildlife and the whole area by opening it up and allowing the trails. Is having a trail through there the only way that it's going to be included in this plan?

No. Amy, again, this is just to get them included. I want to assure you now that there is no longer time to have these parcels sold to be used to the principle of the project, the well rehab project. We have a little more time, not much more time, if we want to use it towards the cost of the project, but not for the principle. For you all to weigh in on the next step, if there's a next step.

Well, to your point though, Amy, the seeker supports what you're saying and what we're saying is that there's no disturbance we're not going to do anything with this land and my only objection to that has been the board's own discussion in past meetings saying like oh we want a bench or we would be nice to have a pocket park well what is a pocket park time out you just referenced the entire board i was always vocally opposed to that and in sync with it i apologize it was robert

So this is not the action that's in front of this board. Amy, I appreciate that. I went to your neighbors who felt very differently than you feel, who felt very strongly that it should be opened up to the neighborhood. And so you've heard from some others. This is the challenge of representing a community of 11,000. There's diverse opinions. It's wonderful. And so there is a little more time maybe you all want to get together, maybe we'll do another neighborhood meeting if there's a second action. Maybe what that should look like. Maybe you all want to be involved. We had, you know, a playground group that worked, you know, for quite a while, and then we had a community build to the playground. Maybe there's time for that where you feel like you have ownership on what happens. to that property if there's a next step so i do hear you and i do want you to understand that that would be part of the next step but i think it's important based upon what we heard that we get these parcels included in the plan and it doesn't necessarily mean that there is going to be action happening on those parcels, okay? So there's a motion to close the public hearing. Thank you for saying that. I second it. I second. Any further discussion before we entertain the motion to close the public hearing? All in favor? Kenney? Aye. Aye. Jacob? Aye. Ms. Elf? Aye. Christina? Aye. Okay. Now let's take resolution number 19, adopting a secret determination of non-significance regarding an amendment to the community preservation plan in certain water district parcels. Number one, surplus property. And that is the terminology we're using because the Water Board has determined that they are surplus and they want to dispose of them. Providing for an amendment of the community preservation plan in the town of Rehob, the disposition of certain surplus parcels on behalf of the town water district number one and the acquisition of such surplus parcels using monies from the community preservation act fund. And whereas on April 14th, the town board classified this action as unlisted under secret and declared its intent to serve as lead agency of the project. as the only involved agency, whereas the town board has reviewed an environmental assessment form for the proposed action on file with the town clerk. And we've reviewed a draft notice of determination of non-significance, which we refer to as the setting forth a reason supporting the determination. Now, therefore, be it resolved, the town board, As follows, adopts the findings and conclusions relating to probable environmental effects contained within the EAF and NEC deck, which is just the inclusion in the plan. On file with the town clerk concluding that the actions described above will not have an adverse impact on the environment. that you authorize the supervisor to execute the ABF and file a name deck and reports for the applicable provisions of law. The town board authorizes and directs the town board to distribute a copy of this resolution to all involved and interested agencies, the town supervisor, and any person that has requested a copy. This is resolution number 19. I will just say before I ask for a vote on this, the Community Preservation Board many years ago went through an extensive redraft of the plan to include several hundred parcels that had water resources associated with them to protect them. They recognize that that's an important resource. and so as I explained to you earlier they thought it was not necessary to include this because they thought that they were already owned by the town and Trosten could not be disposed of so okay I'd like to move resolution number 19 is there a second second Any further discussion? If not, all in favor? Aye. Bill? Aye. Myself? Aye. Jacob? Aye. Christina? Aye. Thank you. Okay, we're on to resolution number 20, which is related to the local law A, to adopt the amendment to the community preservation plan. The form of local law is on file. This is in accordance with section 64H of the town hall and chapter 57 of the town code relates to community preservation. The town has previously approved the community preservation plan as amended June 2016, April 24, 2019, November 13, 2025 for the preservation of community character. to acquire interest or rights in real property for the preservation of that community and character within the town, including villages, in accordance with such plan in cooperation with willing sellers and to provide a management and stewardship program. For such interests and rights which plan is in the form attached as Article 3, Section 5726 of the Town Code, whereas a notice of public hearing regarding adoption of the Senate amendment to the plan was duly advertised in the Picket Seat Journal. the official newspaper on April 17th, presented to a resolution, adopted on the 14th, public hearing was held on May 12th. And the public hearing was continued May 27th, all parties in attendance were permitted an opportunity to speak on behalf or in opposition to set proposal for law. Whereas on May 27th, 2026, the town board serving as lead agency under the secret adopted a determination of non-significance, determining that no significant adverse impacts would result from the proposed action. and that a draft environmental impact statement would not be prepared. That's an extensive environmental review document, whereas the town board believes such actions are in the best interest of the town. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the town board or the town president as follows, that we hereby adopt said local law A of 2026, which would be referred to as local law number one, I'll move resolution number 20. Would somebody like to second?

I'll second. Thank you.

Is there any further discussion? If not, all in favor?

Kenneth? Why don't you come to me last? I called it out, Kenneth. Kenneth, what's your vote? I don't feel we need to amend this to deserve it. Okay. You don't have to vote. I don't feel we need to go through what we're going through. I'm going to vote no on this. Okay.

Thank you.

Aye.

Aye. Christina?

Aye.

Jacob? I think the persons belong in the plan, so I'm going to vote aye. I couldn't agree more. The parcels meet the criteria. Yeah, we could preserve them. Forget about scare taxes, not scare taxes. We've all watched lands being developed, whether it's the land on the former Steiner Farm where five houses occupy the best soils in New York State for that. We've all watched land or wetlands. This is Linda Nakers. You all know a few houses that are built. You're probably scratching your head going, how did those get allowed? Because of the flooding that occurs around them.

Or when you compare it to the highway department, that when she needs to get equipment, it gets voted by this board. If we vote no, she cannot get new equipment. Well, this is the same case. The water board cannot sell that without our approval. That's exactly right. It's true. That's exactly right. So when you tell people that, you know, there's people looking at it privately and want to build homes, that would never happen unless we of yous vote yes.

That is the challenge of representing and having a fiduciary to a water district which is separate and apart from the town is that those interests don't always align perfectly. And yet you have to wear both of those hats and do the best that you can and not favor one or the other. You have to represent both. I don't think we need to go this far, sir. Okay. Well, I appreciate that. I also appreciate that now, and I think my vote is aye, now that they're in the plan, we can have mechanisms put on those parcels so that you don't have to worry about whether they're scare tactics or whether somebody is going to purchase them for two houses, I think our engineer said may be possible on those parcels. It seems like a perfect situation to keep a green space in between these beautiful trails that we've created with lots of green space, that's exactly what should happen in our neighborhoods is to have these green spaces. So I vote aye. I thank you all so much for participating. I would like to encourage you to sign up for notifications so that if and when, and it's quite possible that there'll be a second action being contemplated, we want to hear from you on that, on the acquisition. Okay, and While you're here, we're about to have a second public hearing Yes So for that again Why don't we do that? Why don't we open up very late the public hearing? related to water district rates and I would like to GIVE YOU A SIMPLE EXPLANATION SO THAT IT MAY INFORM YOUR COMMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE AS IT RELATES TO WATER DISTRICT RATES.

ROBERT, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THE AGENDA? IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT, IS THAT ACCURATELY REFLECTED THAT IT'S VERY LAST? IT IS, UNFORTUNATELY.

And I apologize because we have to get our work done. And we had a meeting a couple of meetings ago where individuals were very disruptive in the highway super practically had to beg to get through for part of the evening. So you're going to make us sit here until 10.30 or 11? I'm sorry. I'm hoping we can restore it back to the first thing. So we're being punished then?

We don't even know who she was.

Okay. Okay. Let's get to water district rates. Deanna, would you be kind enough to read the notice for... Notice of public hearing, Town of Red Hook.

Please take notice that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Red Hook on May 27, 2026 at 7.45 p.m. local time to hear all interested persons on proposed modification of the water rates and charges for the Water District No. 1. The Red Hook Water Board has recommended modification of the water rates and charges to increase the minimum rate from $57.33 to $68 for up to 9,000 gallons, and from $6.95 to $7.56 per 1,000 gallons over 9,000. as further set forth in schedule on file with the town clerk. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard in person or by directing comments in the writing to the town board, 7340 South Broadway, Red Hook, New York. All reasonable accommodations will be made for persons with disabilities in such a case. Please notify the town clerk in advance at the above address or by phone so that arrangements can be made. By order of the town board of the town of Red Hook, dated May 12th, 2026, Deanna Cochran, town clerk, town of Red Hook.

So I have some questions, and I'm sure if anyone wants to comment on this, they also have questions. So when we're considering this rate increase, the last rate increase was in the fall of last year. And so can someone explain how we calculated how we got to the rates that we're looking at?

Sure. The recommendation came out of water board meetings. Bill, did you want to address it? I will just simply frame it for you that when they were looking at how to pay for this project, they had already saved reserve monies. They were contemplating whether or not to have an ad valorem, an assessment. Tax. Tax. There was, for example, the Village of Tivoli, the users within their district were just assessed $1,300, I believe was the amount. Chris, correct me if I'm wrong. It's an annual assessment for the huge infrastructure costs that they have. And so after several meetings the water board determined that they would like to pay for this just by increasing the water rates just to do it by rates and not have assessments and not have a a big assessment levied on them. And for background, it has been so affordable, the water rates, and they have increased it over the last years because they recognized they needed to address the tank issue, and so they've asked for several 5% increases. But even with this proposed increase, the quarterly minimum will not be double what it was in 1986, and I doubt that.

Why do we need to make this decision now? Because, so there's a few things we don't know, right? We don't, were we considering that we were going to approve the purchase of these lands when we calculated these rates, number one? And if so, we don't have a value for those lands yet.

It is not factored into the rates. I'm happy to go over for you how this is going to cover this project. What the Water Board has determined, however, is not only this year, but next year and perhaps even in the third year, they want to increase their rates so that they're getting up somewhere near what the market is so that they are at a sustainable path. They've done a great job of putting together some reserves. They have several hundred thousand in the transmission, several hundred thousand in the other reserve. So, but they recognize that there are going to be, the system is now approaching 60 years old. No, 80. 80 years old? So what I'm hearing is. No, not 80, so.

So wait, so let me just state. What I'm hearing is that we know that the rates weren't high enough. So we're making an adjustment because we know that we're way under, but we don't have all the answers yet. So why now?

I think you're reading a lot more into that. This is their recommendation, this is the increase that they would like to request that we approve. It is a very modest increase, it's about $10 and something a quarter or $40 something a year on the minimum that will help get them closer to a sustainable level of billing. I want to contrast that once again with say the Village of Red Hook, which just had to double or more than double the O&M associated with their, I think, sewer district. So these are tiny increases. We're way ahead of ourselves.

We want to open a public hearing to hear from the public who have come here on their night to have comments about the rate. And I want to hear what they have to say about it. And we have two people from the Water Board One is a financial specialist who specializes in the financials for public utilities. That's Michael. And Greg, who's of an engineering background. And I asked board members to come because I thought there might be questions from the public about this and how the rate amount was arrived at for now. So I'd like to make a motion to open public hearing.

I appreciate that, but can you answer my question, though? I don't hear an answer to why now.

Well, July 1, they operate on a fiscal year. And for one thing you should know is that during the pandemic, there was a pause. We were raising them about 5% to 6% every year. But because of the pandemic, there was a pause, and we didn't. So part of this is catching back up from that. And the other part is trying to lessen the burden for the rate payers into the immediate future. I don't think there's a magic number that's going to solve all our problems. But I will point this out, and I've said this many times. Part of the system is approaching 80 years old. And water mains cost about a million dollars a mile to replace. And we have about seven miles of water mains. Now, fortunately, the way they were put in was staggered. So we have, like, College Park is the oldest. And then, you know, but if we have a catastrophic failure, they don't have the reserves. I mean, they're taking 400,000 out of the 750 they had to cover this tank. So it would be a serious problem. And so part of it is also not just to pay for the tank, but to try to replenish our reserves that are being used for the tank so that if we have a catastrophic failure, it won't be as negatively impactful on the water users in the district. That is why.

Okay. I'm going to show you budget so you can understand how all this fits in. This is the recommendation of the Water District. I want the public to have an opportunity to speak. I just want to show you that resolution number four from 1986, 40 years ago. you'll see that the minimum was $35.90 per quarter. So even with the proposed increase, this isn't even double what it was 40 years ago. So this is very modest in nature. Okay, we have a motion to open the public hearing. I'd like to second that. All in favor? Jacob? Aye. Kenneth? Aye. Christina?

Aye.

Okay. Who would like to speak on the topic of water rates? And again, I would ask you if you could kindly keep your comments to three minutes. Michael Rumbart, would you be kind enough to come to the, oh, Luciano, sorry. Hi, Luciano. Yeah.

Valdivia, Fort Hogwarts Street. Thank you. I'm much more in favor of incremental increases than a one-time huge lifestyle. Yeah. Okay. And investment in infrastructure is an investment in our future. I think we all deserve this drinking water. Also, because of the other resolution I passed, I'd just like to say keeping the water district flush feels like the right thing to do. Good night. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Mr. Rundberg, would you be kind enough to state your name?

Sure. Is that on? Yeah. I think so. Michael Rundberg. I live at 28 North Drive. I've been a volunteer on the water board for 10 years. Prior to moving my family to Red Oak 13 years ago, I was an analyst on Wall Street covering water utilities and water utility financials. So I'm a rate payer. One of the things that you brought up earlier was the ad valorem tax. That's a regressive tax. So basically, it's paid by the same amount for everybody. But if you have less income or a lower value house, you're still paying roughly the same amount. So what we've designed is a system to charge people based on how much water they actually consume. which is more equitable, right? So that's number one. Number two is water rates in Red Hook are way below the national average. That's just a fact. Water is the cheapest utility that we pay, but water in Red Hook, I think we're paying something like 30% less than the national average, so we could raise the rates at this level for quite some time. They are large percentage increases, but they're relatively small dollar amount increases. The fact that we have lower rates is compounded by the fact that we are a subscale utility. We have 460 homes. It's not a very dense street. So if you think about like a million dollar a mile main in a densely populated neighborhood might have 50 homes or 60 homes. We might have 25. So the fact that our rates are low despite that headwind is already in and of itself, I think, a testament to the fact that it's been run very well. So now the reason for why now we have to raise rates, um, we have, I joined the board 10 years ago because actually in a conversation with Robert, it was coming to a point where we needed to either replace our water tank, which is the single biggest capital item in our budget. Uh, or we had to, we had to either replace it or repair it. So replacement is a 60 year or 50 year or 40 year. Nobody really knows exactly how long they last. But it's probably about, round numbers, about $4.5 million investment. There's 460 homeowners, so do the math on how much that would be per person. After a very careful financial analysis, we went back and forth for years on this, literally, almost a decade. We've decided to go with the path or recommend to the board the path of, painting the tank, which we think based on current technologies painting is the best return on investment for the rate payers. It's also substantially less. Ballpark numbers. I know there are some bids out there. I don't know what's finalized yet. There's been some email chains. A million and a half bucks. So we have a million and a half bucks that we have to spend this summer on the utility. So right now we have around about $500,000 in our reserves. that if we were to just write that check, we would have zero dollars left for anything else. If a pump fails, if a water main breaks, we have no money left. So, if we were to raise our rates to a level that would cover this capital investment that we have right now, it would be way more than 20%. It would be way more than 100%. Just to cover money that we need to spend this year. Now, what we have opted to do instead is some combination of a contribution from Bard, which Robert represented the board in negotiations with Bart, and we got a couple hundred thousand dollars out of that, which is more than the amount that they consume. So they're paying a higher amount for this capital investment than is reflected in the volumetric share that they use of our system. So that's number one. Number two is this real property that we have in our systems that's not a core asset of our property. It is the ownership. It's owned by the rate payers in our water district, of which I am one. again you talked about you know the availability of our ability to sell it that's not my issue but it is real property that at this juncture given the fact that we have about a million dollar shortfall what we need to spend money on this summer is something that's going to help your constituents my constituents as a member of the water board not have to spend as much money so that's number two we still have to borrow a ton of money and interest rates are pretty high right now so I The water rate increase that's been proposed is a balance, and it's always an art, not a science, between how much money we have to raise rates by and how we can minimize our impact to rate payers. We are charging way below the fully depreciated cost of maintaining service for rate payers. So when Robert alluded to we're gonna need several years of increases, we're gonna issue a bond for almost a million dollars. The interest associated with that is gonna be, I don't know, $50,000 a year. Roughly?

I can give you some answers to that maybe a little later tonight based upon the bids, but yeah.

So the point is that we're trying to find a balance and there's eight very dedicated people who have spent many nights here all trying to figure out the same issue. We're all rate payers. This has been the balance between what we can do to minimize the burden on rate payers and pay for something that we actually can't afford to pay for right now that we have to borrow money to pay for. We don't want to have debt. We want to have a well... run utility that is financially sustainable we have in addition to this paint job which will buy us 20 years and which at which point we'll have to once again you know you borrow the money or have in our back pocket to pay we're gonna have water main failures over the next couple of decades we have a system that was built 70 80 years ago the useful life of these pipes is 80 90 years and So a million dollars a mile, I don't know how many miles we have in our system total. There's a lot of money that needs to happen here. And it's just a reality of all the water systems in the United States are facing this type of inflation. It's not nefarious. It is absolutely what you need or else you can't have a town. This is the only product that any of us consume that we can't live without for seven days. So this was all very well thought out. The reason for why now is because we have a big bill this summer. And I hope that answers a lot of questions. I don't know if there's anything that we all discussed in prior meetings that I haven't mentioned.

I do have a question for you. Please. So my understanding was in 1989, there was a- 1989? 1989, yes. I think that's when that was written. When the tank was built. When the tank was built, yeah. So in 1989, my understanding is that there was, when the tank was being built, that Bard had an issue and needed to double the size of the tank so that it went from 500,000 gallons to a million gallons. In 1989, they paid half of the cost to increase the tank. How does the water board feel about the contribution, the current contribution, which is now 200,000 or about 12%?

Well, it's not 12%. Well, I was asking. I wasn't asking you, Robert.

Yeah, so we were not happy about it. We pushed back on that. We went back to them and said we want 400,000 or more. They said no. So we were faced with a situation where we could say, We're going to turn you off, which I'm pretty sure would have run afoul of Dutchess County, the state, uh, et cetera. We don't really have that leverage in the negotiation. So my understanding is that the amount of money that they have put up that 200,000 is disproportionately favorable to our rate payers relative to the amount of water they use. We went back. I actually think multiple of us drafted an email to Robert. and said, go back to the CFO of Bard College and tell them that it's on their heads if they don't put up more money, because water is not just for drinking and showering and cooking, it's for fire protection, and you've been entrusted with the lives of thousands of children from parents all over the country. If something, God forbid, were to happen, and you didn't put up enough money to have backup water supply from the town of Red Hook or our water district, would be on you that's pretty compelling negotiation point from my perspective they said no you know why they said no is because since 1986 they put a lot of money in their own system so they don't really need us like to the same extent that they did before and I think it came to us if we had like I held their feet to the fire in those meetings just so you're aware and I said I was very unhappy that we were only getting $200,000 from BART But the reality is that's what they're offering. And so we can't cut them off, we don't have that leverage. 200,000 is more than zero. So as a rate payer, it increases my money directly too. But there's no other recourse that I understood from this at all.

But in terms of magnitude, it's interesting because that 200,000 is the same value as the five properties, more or less, that we just spent all the time.

I can't comment on that. I think, honestly, it's a benefit. I mean, we have this land that sits there that does nothing.

I'm not trying to reopen that discussion. I'm just saying in terms of magnitude of what moves the needle on the discussion, that's roughly the same value.

It plugs an important hole in the equation for our rate payers. I don't know how the numbers were come to. I don't know if it's correlation is causation in this case. I have no idea. But yeah, it helps offset the amount of money that we have to borrow to pay to keep our water system safe and reliable and all those things. Thank you. We could raise the rates a lot more. And that would probably be the most fiscally prudent thing for us to do. Everybody that works at the wire utilities volunteers. Our expenses are extraordinarily low. But we can't. We need to be able to take into consideration the fact that times are tough and we want to do this slowly and deliberately and not overly pressure people. Because we can borrow money. The town has fiscally been responsible forever. And it's in great financial shape. We have, I think, a higher credit rating than the U.S. government, or pretty close to it. That's great. And so we want to continue that both at the board level and, you know, the town level and the utility level. But we don't want to borrow money that we don't have to owe.

In your experience, the rehab compared to purchasing new. Rehab with what? You know, rehabbing it as opposed to purchasing new. Painting it.

In our experience, what was the question?

Well, I mean, you're saying 20 years on a rehab in it?

Versus maybe 40 or so. Do you want to talk about it?

Yeah, sure. Thank you.

I don't have to just say your name, Greg. Thank you, Michael.

Greg Files, also a resident of the Water District. Over the years, we have looked at that. There's a long history. The tank has been inspected according to manufacturer's recommendations. We have it inspected internally every five years since its 15-year life. It showed no degradation up until the last inspection, which is well beyond what was expected. So we were very fortunate in that. We have looked at the option of replacement versus repair or renovation. Historically, those numbers are very close together. The last, I'll say, five or eight years, they've diverged. They've, replacement has become a much more expensive option. We did consider it early on and that would have given us a benefit to accrue more savings during the time and allow the condition of the tank to be maintained at a lower level. We didn't feel that's prudent because, as I said, the costs are divergent. Replacement is going up much faster than replenishment. The technology of the coatings are improving, so that's why we are hoping, based on the recommendations of the coating manufacturers, that we get 20 years. And we're going to have to be in a position every 15 to 20 years to pay this same bill we're talking about tonight if we go replenishment. Even replacement, although those tanks have a much longer service life, still have a periodic maintenance component that is a little bit less than refinishing. The overall length of the structure should be longer. Any other questions?

Is there a warranty on this paint job?

We'd have to look at the contracts. I don't have that in front of me. There are some ratings and contracts that are actually part of the process is verifying that the paint adheres properly, coupons, test samples, things like that have been discussed. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much.

Again, I want to just show you those two numbers. What's being proposed is a minimum of $68. What was the minimum 40 years ago was $36. We're still in the public hearing. At this time, I would like to just show you we've got several items that are interrelated. We did have public bids. We did open those bids. We are pleasantly surprised that we've got some good results to those bids and the project cost is going to come in under what we felt we needed to prepare for. And so you'll hear us entertain a warning of a couple of bids related to the project. It's quite possible that the rehab of the tank, including engineering costs, will come in somewhere between a million and $1,050,000. That's an estimate right now. We are not going to award the electrical portion of the bid related to the storage tank because we've got to do some qualification work.

Well, I think one thing that's important to point out here, if you're looking at the lowest bidder, is that the item number nine, which is interior near white glass to seal and painting, The lowest bidder was $500,000 less on that line item, which is kind of the entire point of the project. So I know we're not on that item now, but that's something that sticks out to me.

We have Brandy here tonight. We can get some comments on that, but we do want to make it through so we can get to that item. Understood. But what I wanted to show you was that if the project does come in at that rate and if we do have to authorize the borrowing, Here I go again, on behalf of the Water District, of half a million dollars, that would have a debt service at prevailing rates, which is a little over 4%. When we do go out to do the borrowing, that could move a little bit back and forth. And as Michael indicated, we have a very high rating percent of imports.

But I don't think your number is accurate if we're going to cross out the lowest bidder because that, the most important item on their list doesn't make any sense. Like why would you be half a million dollars less on the only thing that matters? Okay.

We can discuss that. I just want to show you budget implications and that the concept of incorporating those rate increases. So these are, these two columns here are the budget for the Warner District. the actual from 2025 financials and the adopted budget for 2026 and what could be, and these are sort of samples, what could be approximate budget amounts 27 and 28 more importantly just what what would it do to the meter water sales if there were to be a 45,000 increase because of debt service let's say was half a million if it was another hundred thousand then of course we would need to do another 9,000 in debt service if it was another 200 to be another 18,000 But just so you understand the implication on the revenue side, you'll see what, because we're raising the minimum, we can do this calculation, okay? It's not based upon usage. We can get a good sense of what the water rates are. what the water revenue will be. You'll see that there's a significant drop down on the interest earnings from the actual 25. What was budgeted in 26 because we anticipated that. I put a much lower number in the adopted 26 budget because as mentioned earlier, $400,000 has already been authorized to be used for this project. And so the interest earnings will decline as well. Thank you. If these rate increases go into effect, then the budget for 27, if there's half a million dollars worth of debt service, then this budget could be in balance. If we need to have higher debt service, then we would look at some of these other budget lines here, or if there needed to be another small increase next year to manage the budget, we would do that here. If there are sales of the disposition of those parcels that is not calculated into what I put for the debt service here so that's a half a million dollars four hundred thousand coming from the reserve that makes nine hundred thousand another two hundred thousand from our college that's made that makes 1.1 million dollars so again just to give you some sense of how these increases suffice for now but the water board has told you that they will have to have gradual increases so they get sustainable and they can continue to put money away for either distribution lines or for 20 years from now when that thing needs to be addressed again So that I hope was helpful in trying to understand the rates. These are the proposed rate changes is the existing is 57.33.

What's significant about July 1st billing you were saying?

It has to do with the fiscal year. Quarterly billing. The way they do their quarterly billing on their fiscal year.

Right. So if we were to postpone this action until our next meeting and figure out more of these answers, that wouldn't affect July 1st?

There are no answers needed. What the board knows is that they need to increase the rates. We are going to do the borrowing next month. We are going to do the project during this summer unless this board does a 180 and doesn't want to do this project this year. We've heard from our engineers.

So what you're saying is we need to estimate, we need to make a good phase estimate of getting the water rates up to a market value that makes sense And we need to do that now because... We need to get started now, yeah.

I think you've heard, at least from me, and I think from board of board folks, that there's going to be another increase for next year and perhaps for the year after. I think they want to get up to a more sustainable level, but this would be relatively painless by comparison when you hear of the other examples that I've quoted to you. Okay. That's a public hearing.

Could you just ask, please, officially?

Yes. I would like to make a motion.

No.

Just ask if there are any other comments. Oh, I'm sorry. Would anybody else like to make some comments about the water board rates that are proposed?

Dad, come on up. I'm coming back up. Is this rate increases only to cover the repair of this tank? No other infrastructure?

There is a, again, the budget includes all of the requirements that the water district needs. What they have decided is not to do one big assessment, not to do a combination of assessment, and a water rate increases, what they have decided is to raise the rates so that it will be at a sustainable level and it will pay the debt service associated with this project in addition to the normal costs that are and I think in a couple of years their hope is by increasing they will then be in a position again to do what they've done previously which is put money aside for future capital.

So the answer is we don't know. But what about fixing the current infrastructure problems that we have? For instance, my water main broke and my curb stop was damaged and they had to replace it under pressure because none of the valves in my neighborhood work. And also they don't know where a lot of the valves in my neighborhood are.

So if you look at the budget line, there are budget lines associated with the things you're talking about already. Those are a part of it. So there's both maintenance, there's operations, and so on and so forth. THE ONLY NEW ADDITION HERE IS DEBT SERVICE, OKAY? WHICH WOULD BE FOR THE PROJECT THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE COMPLETED THIS SUMMER. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ROBERT, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU. We're on water board rates.

Why doesn't the board, water board, just bite the bullet and charge what they're supposed to be charging? What's this nonsense you're going to go up a little bit each year? It's ridiculous. You know you got faced with this problem. You know you got to fix the tank. Then the water board made a mistake over the years not providing for proper water. set aside to cover these kind of repairs so the district had the benefit of all that all these years they've been paying a nominal sum they should have been paying a hell of a lot more so why not just bite the bullet and bring it up to what it's supposed to be and start doing the job properly i mean i don't i don't understand this piecemeal stuff i mean it just it just needs to be faced The district has to pay more money. Look what happened in the village of Red Oak. I'll get you rightfully pointed out. They did the same thing. The water bill and the sewer bill, they mismanaged the plant and now they have to bite the bullet. And I think the water board ought to do it and the district should start paying their fair share. We shouldn't be using the town's money. to support the district, which is supposed to pay for its own expenses. Thank you. Thank you, Albert.

As I like to say, there are 11,000 people we represent, and sometimes it feels like there's 11,000 different ways that people would like to do it. They did consider having a one-time assessment. They did consider having even larger increases to the rates if they were going to accomplish it by rates. This is what their recommendation is, is to do these gradual increases because they can afford to do it this way. And I think in recognizing that people are incurring, especially in 2026, other expenses.

In the past, an ad valorem tax had been used. And as Michael pointed out, it's a regressive tax. So it's sort of unfair in the sense that if you only use 1,000 gallons of water and somebody used 10,000 gallons, it's unfair to the person who's using only 1,000 gallons. So I think that was part of the rationale is to be more... To do it on right. Yeah, just be fairer to all the rate users rather than this having everybody have to pay a special assessment. That's the reason how.

But that's a very valid, a very valid alternate way of doing it. Okay. Any other comments? If not, I would like to make a motion that we close the public hearing as it relates to increase in water district rates. I second that motion. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor? Kenneth?

Aye.

Bill? Aye. Myself, aye. Jacob? Aye. Christina? Aye. Thank you very much. Okay, so we have a resolution to entertain as it relates to the Water District Number 1 rates and Deanna, that would be 21. Are we on 21? Yes. Okay. Whereas the operation and maintenance of water district number one is supported from the revenue, from the water rates and charges paid for by customers of the system. And whereas the Water Board has recommended modification of the water rates and charges. And the town board has had the public hearing on a proposal to increase the minimum rate from 57.33 to 68 for up to 9,000 gallons. and from 695 to 756 per 1,000 gallons over the 9,000 as set forth in the schedule on file with the town clerk in order to produce revenue sufficient to pay the necessary cost and expenses of the operation and maintenance of the district facilities for the production, storage, and distribution of water, and now therefore be resolved by the town board of the town of Red Hook That the Water District number one rates and charges set forth on the attached schedule are hereby approved effective July 1st, 2026. And again, I want to just reiterate, this is the request of the Water Board after careful consideration over many meetings.

I'm going to make the motion.

That we approve? Okay. I'll second that motion. The resolution, rather, 21. Is there any further conversation, discussion? Okay. If not, all in favor, pan it. Aye. Bill? Aye. Myself, aye. Jacob? Aye. Kristina? Aye. Thank you. Okay. We can't get away from water. on this dry vehicle, do you think? Three more things to do.

Since Brandy has a long drive.

Barred water district, Brandy. I think, what do we have left for you? Well, the tank. Oh yeah, let's do the tank. Let's do the tank, and then we'll get some barred water. And just to add some valid questions about the bids.

I do, and also for the well rehab.

Can we do the well rehab? Okay. Let's get back to well rehab. We have a recommendation letter from our engineering firm, Dan Valentine, who works with Brandy. Where at? Further up. Don't get busy. I apologize, folks. All right. This is the well rehab. I think you've heard and I might get to announce this one of these days. It's a resolution authorizing the contract award for water district number one well rehab project. So we go out to public bid folks as a reminder to get the best pricing. They're sealed bids. We open them. And we have those bids reviewed by an engineering firm and after the review we get recommendation letters. And so we did get a letter from Time Bond. Here are the four submissions and what they bid and a few of the lowest bid. And the reference check. And so has sent this letter and they recommend that they are. And just so you know, really when it comes to these projects, the lowest responsible bit. So responsible means they've done this kind of work. They are eligible to do this work. They are registered where they need to be registered. It doesn't mean, oh, we like Johnny or Janie and they're so responsible. That's not what it means. It means if they are the lowest bid, we have to have a very valid reason why we do not award to them when we do check their eligibility. So the lowest responsible bid was and so they recommend that we award the well rehab project in the amount of $34,452. Are there any questions as it relates to Yeah, I have a few questions.

So I understand that we rehabbed in 2021 and it failed in 2022. No. That's not right?

No, we rehabbed both the wells.

We rehabbed well number one.

No, we rehabbed both the wells. And we have the, Greg? Yeah, I believe it was both. And they were both running fine. It was well number one that, was it in the last year? It slowed down. It slowed down. And it's unclear why that happened, but it's very expensive to drill a new well, and so we rehabbed them last time. And well number two, by the way, was rehabbed, and it's running as well as it ever ran. It didn't seem to make a lot of sense on the water board to go, because I think it was Jerry Gilnick on the board who worked for Dutchess County Waste Water. It could be upwards of $100,000 to drill a well, that it would make sense to rehab this well and see how long it lasts.

So the rehab last time on well number one lasted about five years, is that?

Yeah, four and a half, five. Okay.

And so are we doing anything differently now in this rehab? I mean, there's five years and a good result for rehab?

It's hard to know what's under the ground.

Unfortunately, that is true, yeah. It is hard to understand what's going on in the aquifer.

But the rehab's not going to increase the water flow.

The rehab will increase the water flow. They surge water in and out of the well. They try and clear any fines. That well is in a gravel aquifer and the thought is it's just gotten clogged.

Are there different methods of rehabbing? Like fracking? This is a gravel well, so...

Meaning that the straw that goes down into the ground is in granular material. So fracking is for a rock well where you have fractures and you're trying to expand the fracture so more water can flow through them. That's not the style well here. Usually what it's done with the gravel wells, the alluvial wells that you have, is just surge water. So you just push water out and then pump it out, push it back in there, pump it out just to try and clear it of the fine material that can clog it up. The alternative is to pull the screen and reset the screen and repack it. But usually you try and redevelop it first.

And last time when they did it, they sent cameras down to take a look. And part of the, on both wells was that there's like a screen. It's like a metal, which is clogged with sediment. And so they cleaned it out. So it's hard to know why this well number one, it's not failing.

Is it like 50%? Yeah.

And consistent. So it's hard to know whether, you know, something happened underground and then it got stuck at that. We're going to try to bring it back to where it was. How much is it, Diane? Six inch well. I'm not sure.

I don't know.

And what's the delta between a new well and the rehab?

Well, I set it up over $100,000 for a new well, $110,000 maybe.

So it's twice as much. Three times as much.

Well, depending on... I want to caution, until you go off to bid, you don't know exactly what it's something called.

The other thing is, drilling a new well, you have to identify a location for a new well. So we wouldn't necessarily just drill a new well right next to the old well, right? So you have to do an investigation, an evaluation to see what properties the town has available. It can be pretty extensive to have to explore for a new well location, then drill the well, then plumb it into the system so that it can be filtered and chlorinated and then pumped to the tank. it would be a more significant capital project so I do think it's the board's reviewed it we've reviewed it the recommendation is to do the rehab see how it performs and then take a next step based on the and we're saying this rehab happened how long ago I think it was like four and a half years ago

I mean, I remember when it was, I remember when it was, I remember, you know, being a liaison for the water forward.

I could certainly follow back up with you. I don't know off the top of my head, but we could follow up.

How deep is more?

I'm a hundred feet.

Diameter, depth, and size of the pump.

Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm not the water engineer, so I don't deal with this day to day, so.

Okay, that's okay. Remember the reason, but one of the other reasons that there is, besides the cost, is that both the wells are right basically next to each other. And if one is just doing fine, and the other one, it suggests that perhaps . Yeah, yeah, yeah, I get it.

That's fine.

I'm good.

Okay. Any other questions for Brandi before we entertain a resolution to award the bid? It would be resolution number 22. Authorizing the contract award for water district number one, well number one rehabilitation project. The county issued a notice of equal 27 and we accepted bids. We received several of them which are listed here, the results of which they were publicly open and read on May 15th after due notice. whereas the bid of clabber act a well and pump service llc in the amount of 34 452 has been determined to be the lowest responsible bid for such project as specified in the specifications as specified in the specifications okay on file with the clerk now therefore be it resolved that the town board of the town of red hook does hereby authorize to accept the foregoing And it's resolution number 22. Who is the liaison to the order or?

I'd like to make a motion that we approve resolution number 22.

I'll second. Thank you, Kenneth. Thank you. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, let's start at the other end. Kristina? Aye. Jacob? Aye. Myself? Aye. William? Aye.

Aye.

Thank you, Kenneth.

And one thing to point out for the public is that, you know, Jerry Gilnick is the Vice Chair of the Water Board and he's worked for Dutchess County Westport Water Authority for many, many years. Ablin is with Delaware Engineering and does the Village. Many of these firms are known to them and so It wasn't like this came out of the blue and . Many, many communities have used and they're very familiar with them. So it wasn't just a reference check but our own people know .

Yeah, this is, we have many committees and boards in town you know lots of great ones they got a lot accomplished a lot of subject matter experts on this board I'm so impressed by how much they know and actually work in the field so it's been very helpful for us okay that's 22 Let's go to water storage tank, shall we? So the same thing happened for the well rehab. And I think you've heard about how we hope that technology and the materials being used will last for just as long as the last one. So there we have several submissions. And it's not filled in. So we'll have to fill in.

You just have one that was filled in. I don't know why. I do.

Yeah, I don't know why. It's in the addendum, so I'll just flip around to that when we get to it. But let's just look at the... Well, this one I raised earlier.

I'd like to hear from Brandy if you support the lowest bidder. how you feel about item number nine, interior near white glass to steel and painting that was, I guess, I mean, nearly half a million dollars. Maybe it's $400,000 if you compare it to, but significantly less than, I mean, that item is basically the whole project. Yep.

Where are you guys at in your process?

So I'm just going to list off that we had a submission of six bids related to the general aspect of the project. Two of the bidders seem to have some confusion because they listed the same amount for the electrical. I think they were trying to indicate that that included the electrical. That said, that neither one of those that used the bid forms that way were the lowest bidders. The lowest bid was U.S. Tank Painting. And yes, there was quite a divergence and we see this sometimes where the bids just are markedly different. I mean you can see the difference between the high bid and the low bid constitutes nearly $700,000 difference. The same thing is true in the electric where one is ten times the amount of another. So it is rather head scratching sometimes.

I do have a question for Randy though. Could you explain, I didn't realize that there was going to be separate bids for the electrical. I thought that a contractor who does this submits all those costs, and if they have to sub it out, could you explain why that's a separate component?

Yes, I can. So for this project, there are basically three components that are being undertaken to rehab the tank. One is repairing and coating the interior and exterior of the tank. And the other is adding what's called cathodic protection to the tank so that it helps the tank coating last longer. And the third element is adding a mixer to the tank. And the tank is a tall, skinny column. And so what happens quality-wise is that the water will stratify stratify by temperature and also chlorine level adding a mixer keeps that water quality uniform so hopefully that will improve the consumer experience as far as water quality the mixer and the cathodic protection are predominantly electrical MEP contractor undertakings whereas the coating is a different contractor so they don't usually work together And furthermore, there's a provision in municipal law for bidding where you have to split out by trades if you're over a certain dollar threshold. I believe it's a half million dollars for our region here. So understanding that an element of the project was going to be more than a half million dollars, we put out two bids, one for the electrical contract, which is the battery protection and the mixer, and the other for the coating. And the intention there is to get the best qualified in each category and not somebody who does everything kind of halfway.

But we are still under the mixed law so that we're required to have separate bids for electrical, general, HVAC, you know, that's the requirement. Assuming it's only $500,000.

Right. Which we do it to be, yes. There are a lot of constraints that we have to operate under with state laws as it relates to projects. and amounts, so know that we are and always do never to comply. So the recommendation, he did review the bid tabulation. He then reviewed the information submitted by the nominal low bidder as well as the performance reference information. Results of the review were summarized And the reference review. Do you verify the performance with respect to quality workmanship, work schedules on prior projects, submittal and change order processing, cooperation, overall satisfaction? The reference says contacted and worked with. This firm on projects ranging from less than $656,000 to over $2.9, based on the information provided from contacted references, it appears that U.S. Stamping has the experience to perform the work and the review for the financial standing, all of which we have to do to ensure that they are able to make it to the finish line, if you will. Again, our requirement by statute is that we award to the lowest responsible bidder. So that we reject the lowest bidder, we need to have a very good reason why we are doing that. So that is the recommendation of tie-in bond.

Do you want me to address Christina's question?

Sure, if you'd like to.

Okay, absolutely. So, yes, so when there's a big gap in bids, we do extra diligence to try and understand what's driving that gap. Did the contractor forget something? Do they really know what they're doing? In this case, we did a very extensive reference check on this contractor. And they are the coding contractor, exclusively coding contractor for several large water utilities in the New York Metro and New Jersey area. They do a lot of this kind of work on large volume on a continual basis. And based on feedback from some of their other customers who have used them, The input we got was that they do a very efficient job getting it out. They are thorough, but they're just, because they do so much of this work, they tend to be very efficient in the delivery of the work. So I think given the number of positive references we got, as well as the completeness of their bid, that we felt comfortable moving forward with them in terms of making the recommendation to have them proceed with doing the coding work.

And you feel that the specs are solid enough on that particular item that you've written that that's going to cover any issues that would arise? Yeah, it's pretty clear what they need to do. It's not a great item to be that much under on because it's the entirety of the project.

The discussion Dan and I had today is you see that their exterior coating is higher as compared to their interior coating, which isn't always the case with the other bidders. And, um, you know, the discussion he and I had today was around the fact that they said that that's a controlled environment that they can get in. They can sandblast, they can get, they have to get down to bare metal inside, and then they put in three coats and that they can do that very efficiently. Whereas the exterior coating, they sort of transferred some of their budget to extra because that's more complicated. They have to manage for paint chips, and they have weather conditions that they've got to back them around. So they just split their distribution of how costs are incurred a little differently than some of the other contractors. But generally speaking, when the bid is very complete and the references check out very positively, we have no reason to say that we would not recommend them.

Is there an inspection during the process?

Yeah, there is. Yeah, and we have to have the thickness of the coatings measured and that's part of the QAQC. And all of this is done under, also under the review of the County Health Department.

But this is just for the...

This is just for the coating. Not the electric. That's correct. The electric we'll have for you guys at your next event. Yeah, we're still working on reference checks. Okay.

I think this is all good news to the Water Board who debated this back and forth and back and forth. It looks like you may have made the right decision. It came in, you know, quite a bit less than we fear and we very much appreciate your advice on the matter. Okay, any other questions? Before we entertain resolution number, are we 23, Deanna?

Yes.

We used to be 23. Resolution authorizing contract award for water district number one, water storage tank rehabilitation project. Oh.

Can I walk you through the changes?

You can or I can get to the, you know. Oh, yeah, that would be better if you have it. I can get there.

I can get there. Okay. I think I can. Yeah. Because we just took out the electrical. I think I can. And filled in the name, so. Once we have the engineer's recognition. Did I speak too soon?

Well, I'd like to show you. Let me try that one more time. Yeah, it's not.

Here we go. It'll land.

So it should say authorizing general contract award?

Okay. Okay, resolution 23, dated May 27, 2026, authorizing general contract award for water district number one, water storage tank rehabilitation project, whereas the town issued a notice of public bids dated April 30, 2026, for the acceptance of sealed bids. Water District number one water storage tank rehabilitation project general contract and electrical contract in the town, which is referred to as the project to be opened at 2 PM on the 21st, 2020. Sinks at town hall when we did so. Specifications for the project were prepared by T and D engineering. Sealed bids for the project were publicly open and read on the 21st after due notice. As the bid of US tank painting in the amount of 871,000 for the general contract for the project has been determined to be the lowest responsible bid for such work as specified in the specifications to work on that language. Specifically on that one. Right, on file with the clerk and now therefore be resolved that the town board of the town of Renwick as follows. Supervisor is authorized and directed to accept the foregoing general contract for the project and execute a contract for insubstantially the form provided by the specification subject to the provision. of a certificate of insurance and bonds and such for the documentation as required by the bid specification. This is resolution number 23. I won't steal your thunder.

Well, as somebody who's sat through over six years of these meetings with the Water Board, I would like to make the motion that we approve resolution number 23 to award this contract.

Okay. Who would like to second this? I'll second it. Thank you, Jacob. Okay, further discussion? If not, all in favor? Christina, let's start with you. Aye. Thank you. Jacob? Aye. Myself? Aye. William? Aye. Kenneth? Aye. Thank you. Very good. Water Board folks, thank you very much. Randy? Can we let Randy go first? I think so.

It was about 50 minutes. I think we can. Thank you. I will take my hand. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you so much. We appreciate your handling the questions that we could not.

Good night.

Very good. Okay. We're on bar water district agreement. So there was some mention of that. Last one for you guys.

uh 24 uh before we get into it i'm gonna refuse myself because my employer is subject to this oh i'm in the wrong

Okay, so we've had this agreement. There's been a lot of discussion both last year, this year. I apologize, I'll get there.

There you go.

Unless you're on the board.

It's number five.

I'm almost there.

These are all the agreements. So just for a little bit of background, and we have discussed both this agreement and the amount of contribution by Barth College. It was mentioned that initially when the tank was built back in the 1980s that Barth was using the water a lot more than they are. We did an analysis of the last ten years, and by the way, one of the reasons and talks about this all the time is the agreement that was created last time and um i'm sure the next group of folks representing the community will also look back on something we did and say, why did they do that? But one of the things that was in that agreement back in the 80s is there's no end to that agreement. So there's no way other than to create a new agreement than to get an additional contribution from Bard College towards this project. So when we did the analysis of how much water bark was using relative to the entire district, turns out they were using less than 1%. And so it is now what it is to them, which is just a backup water supply. And so they considered when making a contribution, which they were happy to make a contribution as they expressed, they said, or they could build a tank for themselves on the property and just spend more money and then sort of be done with that.

At the time that it was being negotiated, though, was it just the tank or was it part of the discussion that the wells also needed to be rehabilitated?

No, it was not the wells.

Oh, is this only a contribution for the tank?

It was only for the tank, but you'll see there's language in the agreement about Things in the future that happen and that they should they should contribute which wasn't in the prior right right? So we're trying to get a better agreement Moving forward than what exists right now, which is no contribution towards anything Because they did pay for half of the tank and the tank is standing so there is you know some value that the water district paid for and our college paid for that that still exists so um what they have offered is to contribute this is a repetition of the last year's meetings is 200 000 100 000 to be paid their fiscal year starts in july and then 50 000 in the ensuing two years They were approached because there was a lot of back and forth. The water board trying to figure out which way to proceed. They were approached during the fiscal year where they had appropriated their budget. And this is what they offered, and we did go back. I did go back on behalf of the board, on behalf of the water district. And I would just remind everybody, because there's lots of discussion about the town, the water district. We have made several decisions tonight. as the town board on behalf of the water district and so the same applies to sale of surplus properties if that should take place in the future time. So this is what they've agreed to. The contract assumed that the storage tank rehab would be greater than it was. So when we reflected their contribution, I think 12% is used here, but it looks like the total project is going to come in well under, thank goodness, and they may be contributing closer to 20% of this project. And the agreement would only last for 10 years, so this has an end date. And so the assumption is after those 10 years, then we need to revisit with them, especially if there's some capital improvements or the tank is, you know, 15 years ready for something. We want to have language in the next contract that captures if they still want to be involved with the infrastructure. And they've acquired, as you know, other properties. So, you know, they may in 10 years just build their own tank. not have to worry about, you know, what the town wants to do with these arrangements. So, with that being said, it's not perfect, it's not as much as we had hoped, but also recognizing that it's a lot more than they're using and we appreciate the partnership involved in maintaining this tank on behalf of everyone, the people in the water district and BART who needs it from time to time as a factor. Any questions on it?

How do you feel about going back to them on the wells? I don't think that's necessary, Christina.

I think, you know, you could call well where you have a maintenance item. We don't go back to them on maintenance items and we don't have any... Well, how would you classify this?

Sorry? This is a service agreement for... related to just the tank.

No, it's not. The language covers other occurrences during the 10 years. It covers that. That's going forward. It's going forward. And now we recognize...

But didn't you just say that when you negotiated this, it was relative to the tank and not to the wells?

Well, it was relative to the whole agreement. I want to be clear about that.

But to be clear, though, at the time, the well issue had not come to, it hadn't ripened to the place where we knew what we were going to do about it. So, it really wasn't a part of that conversation at all. It was just the tank. Right.

But I'm glad to say... Said another way, we thought we had potentially a project that was going to cost 1.6 something million dollars if you include the well rehab now including the well rehab we're looking at 1.1 million dollars thereabouts we'll see what we what and who we award for the electrical so their contribution is more than even that had we done 12 percent of the well which would have only been $4,000.

And also, if this well rehab for some reason fails and they have to either do another one or they're going to do another, you know. Or a new well. Or a new well, I mean, they're, you know, maintenance is in this new agreement and it wasn't in the old agreement.

Right, but aren't we boxing ourselves out of that then with the agreement? No, no, no.

The agreement, look at the language. Okay. Look at the language. Improvements. Connection. improvements improvements to the facilities the rehab costs additional water storage improvements town from time to time may determine to make additional capital improvements to the water district water storage and the public interest water supply and distribution Right.

So what you're saying is you're comfortable that the language...

Captures. Captures.

Captures. Allows us to return to negotiating a contribution if there's a significant maintenance issue.

If there's an increase in capacity draw for in the case of distribution, right? The tank is clearly related to their, you know, usage and needs. they're not paying for additional, I mean they're paying regular rates just like any other customer who's, you know, contributing to future costs, right? So to that extent they are paying, but they're not paying extra. So they're paying extra for the water storage, right? So there is a provision for some future contribution, but it's really for things that are related to their draw. Their draw significantly increases causing you to have to...

So if we had to, if the rehab of the well didn't work and we had to drill a new well or construct a new well of whatever... No, it's not related to that.

So I'm trying to say it's related to if Bard has it, you know, for whatever reason, you know, has bigger emergency needs than they've had in the past and that's causing us to overdraw on our supply and that's going to cause you know, an additional need for another well, let's say, right? That would be a condition on which, you know, this opens up and you go back. It's not just because we incur additional costs for water supply.

So this is our one time to negotiate.

Well, again, it's related to what are the things that specifically benefit an emergency backup supply, right? That's, at least that's the way this was conceived. The original agreement was only a one-time contribution for the water supply and then treatment as if they were an inside user in terms of rates. So preferential rates as a result of making that contribution that they made, right?

more than 30 years now and this is yeah and this is far and beyond what 10 years of usage would be even at one and a half or two times or whatever it's going to be close to 20 times their usage if you were to do it based upon that so i mean i'm gonna be honest it seems weak it seems like they should be contributing more i mean i'm looking at i i know you negotiated so i know your opinion but i'm i'm looking at my other council members like what what do you think is it enough

Well, I don't think any of us are happy. I mean, we would have liked to have seen more money, but at the same time, as Michael indicated, they said, fine, then we'll build our own tank and do our own thing, and then we get nothing. And we're probably still on the hook for providing emergency water for fire, as well as, like last January for three weeks, there was a problem with their system, and the county forced mean they didn't want to have to take our water but the county said no you have to you have to do this thing and you know the water tested fine and so you know from that perspective I you know don't get everything you always want but it's better than a sharp stick in the eye I think it's fair to say it's one of many public-private partnerships we have and you know not everybody

thinks that those public-private partnerships are perfectly aligned. They have been very successful. I want to take the opposite approach, which is I'm amazed and very full of gratitude that they are contributing towards it. I'm sort of shocked that they want to be involved with our storage tank. If I had 192 buildings of which water we're going to, I don't think I'd be relying on the municipality for backup water. I think we should appreciate what we have and sure it would have been great but I'm sure you can imagine they too have expenses so they have to decide whether it's better to just spend more money on their own thing and then not worry about it or to partner with us because it makes sense for everybody to share in this cost.

And they did just acquire a tank that came with the Messina CAN WITH THE UTS. RIGHT.

SO... THAT'S CONNECTED TO, I MEAN, TO KIND OF RULE AND SYSTEMS.

NO, I KNOW. I KNOW.

IT WAS IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, IN 1989, BUT...

RIGHT. I HEAR YOU. THESE ARE ALL GOOD PERSPECTIVES ABOUT GETTING THAT CONSENSUS. OKAY. SHALL WE? motion to approve the bar water district agreement and this is 24 yes whereas the town board of the town of redmond is determined that entering into an out-of-district water service agreement between the town of Red Hook and Bard College. And substantially, the form on file of the town clerk is in the best interest of the town. The proposed action constitutes a type two action under SEEKER, which have been determined under SEEKER not to have a significant impact on the environment. By the way, I don't think we will have to do SEEKER on these types of projects either with the move. law that was passed today. But let's do it anyway. Well, this is type 2. Oh, it's type 2. Type 2. It's administrative. What's that? It's administrative. Administrative.

We don't have to declare it as type 2? Yeah, the resolution does declare it as type 2. Which I can determine. Don't have to, but we always do to make sure that we did it.

Not to have a significant impact on the environment, now therefore be resolved by the town board of the town of Red Hook as follows. The supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to execute the out of district water service agreement with Park College. in substantially the form of file with the town clerk with such changes as shall be approved by the supervisor which should not affect the substance thereof. The supervisor, the town clerk, and the town's other officers, employees, and agents are hereby authorized and directed for and in the name and behalf of the town to do all acts and things required and provided by the provisions of the out-of-district water service agreement. This resolution shall take back immediately its water bill SO MOVED. COUNCILPERSON HAMILTON MOVES RESOLUTION 24. WHO WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THE RESOLUTION? ALL RIGHT, I GUESS I WILL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR? CHRISTINA? AYE. MYSELF, AYE. AYE. ALL RIGHT. KENNETH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW YOU CAN LEAVE. Thank you. Thank you. You don't want to talk about paving? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. He's not brushing you out of here, is he? Thanks. Oh, thank you. Okay. We're at... amending the 284 agreement. So each year, the highway supervisor brings to us a list of projects. that the highway superintendent would like to conduct on behalf of the department. We approve them as our fiduciary in charge of the funding. And when the budget gets passed, when the bids come in, there oftentimes are proposed changes to the 284 agreement and now would be a good time to scroll towards that. So you heard me mention that budget bills were passed. The highway superintendent informed us that in fact what we predicted did happen. There was a $50 million increase to the various budget lines from the state for local road improvements. There were several programs, CHIPS, EWR, And so what's being proposed and we'll get to the warning of the bids. That's the reason why there needs to be a change to the 284 agreement. And just to let you know if you've watched maybe a couple of meetings ago where she struggled to get through the meeting. Those are the interruptions. You talked about how sometimes the pricing is such that you don't want to do too much or you want to do more. The pricing is quite a bit different with these bids than last year. It's no secret there's an inflation in these areas because these are petroleum products. petroleum-based products, but you'll see significant increase in that like you see at the gas pump. So, with that being said, she has given us a worksheet. Did that go in here? I know you all saw . It's not in the package, but it was in the packet. But you saw those calculations. There's a buffer there. of about 30 something thousand. We previously approved the 24,000. You'll see it's mentioned in the resolution. We did something you don't normally see, which is we did a storm water retrofit. project in Forest Park, one of the many developments that if you could do it all over again would have different stormwater infrastructure and maybe not be developed out the way it is. The forces here did that project. You put the base down, you let it settle for a year, and then you come back in and you put the top coats, the vaping on top of that. So we approved that last year. That was an amount just under $25,000, and that was included in our communications. That is Shady Lane, .09 miles. That's now included in the 284. The total of the major improvements is 430,000. We have a state contribution of that amount from the various programs, 90,000 from the local. town budget and so for folks at home if you're wondering what's going to be paid and this would be a good time to let you know that bids will be open tomorrow for the Aspen wall bridge that project is going to happen this year god willing this summer so we'll send out a notice on that when we have a finalized schedule so this year Star Barrack Road, Vosburgh Road, Shady Lane, which is a tiny little connecting road in Forest Park, Middle Road, Stony Brook Road, and St. Sack Lane are the roads that are going to be worked on. Any questions about what Teresa has sent to us? Any information? This would be resolution 25. Do we all have to sign a new? Two copies, two copies, yeah. Should I start on this copy? If you would, would you sign two? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Start on that, and Bill, would you give them yours first? How about resolution number 25, dated May 27th, amending the 2026 agreement for the expenditure of highway monies. proposed amendment to the 26th agreement for the expenditure of certain highway monies, including Forest Park HD capital funds. We had set aside last year $24,986 and assuming a state budget authorizing CHIPS amounts of at least equal to 2025. And we now know that the state has appropriated another $50 million. The town board hereby authorizes the amendment to the agreement. To include work to be performed on Shady Lane starting at an apple tree and ending at Birchwood, a distance of .09 miles. And to increase the amount for permanent improvement on Shady Lane, Starburg, and Glassburg from 323,000 to 430,000. This will not require any budget amendments. There's carryover from last year, as was explained. That's resolution number 25. And who's the liaison to the highway department? Jacob. Yeah, I would like to move to resolution number 25.

Second.

Further discussion? If not, all in favor, can I? Aye. William. Aye. Myself, aye. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Teresa. Thank you, Teresa, for the update. Thank you to the legislature for finally passing the budget and to passing an extra $50 million for the CHIPS program, especially with inflation being the way it is. Uno dos. Thank you. That was 25. Did we all vote on that? I think we did. Yes. Unanimous. Thank you. Okay. Now we have to award the paving bid, and so you did give your spreadsheets there on the paving bids. Two bids came in, two firms that often bid, Kalanen and CalaRusso. You see the bid results there. And there's the explanation of the various funding streams. There's the four programs. Okay, here's the resolution, the one that was recommended, which is called RUSO. Resolution number 26, authorizing the contract award for 2026 paving project, whereas, New York State OGS Contract Award 23371. Do you want to explain what that means, Christine, so I can stop talking for a second?

You bet. So there's a process that, Theresa's not here, right? There's a process that Theresa's been using in the last couple of years which is made available by OGS. They take contracts for commodities like this They create a general bid so that they have a lot of contractors who they've vetted as being qualified and available to make, to do these kinds of work. It's pretty generic for this kind of product. And then municipalities are invited to also submit what's called a quick quote to ask for a specific price on this item. The quote can be less than but can't be more than the OGS listed price. that OGS awarded. So she used this process to get the base bid for this project, which was for the asphalt, basically, for the paving project, for these, you know, for what was approved. And she included Shady Lane because it was included because it was started as part of that drainage project, and she felt it would be more beneficial and efficient to include it with this process.

And we often do that, entertain if there's leftover money. We're like, well, they're out there paving anyway. We can get a good price on adding another road or a portion of a road. Right. Okay, that was... 26 world yeah okay uh authorizing the award um the town highway superintendent has recommended that town award a contract for asphalt paving and related costs described in the quick quote for a portion of the projects included in section 284 agreement that's what we just approved amended executed for consisting of three paving portions of starr barb osborne and shady lane that's the paving project to a coloroso pen sign at a price of $366,210 pursuant to the quid quo as the lowest responsible bid. whereas the town highway superintendent has obtained quotes for tack coat and milling in connection with the Pagan project. Copies of which are on file with the town clerk and has determined that the bid of a Cala Russo and son at a price of 10,365 for tack coat and 9,500 for milling is the lowest responsible bid for such work and has recommended such award and now therefore be resolved. The town of Red Hook as follows. award to a coloroso and some for asphalt painting and related costs for the 2026 paving project It's approved in accordance with the contract terms for the OGS award and the form of town contract on file with the town clerk at the quote price of $366,210 with related tax code at a lump sum price of $10,365 and related milling lump sum price of $9,500 for an aggregate contract amount of $386,075. That's for the 2026 paving projects. supervisor or in his absence or unavailability, the deputy supervisor is authorized and directed to execute the contract and substantially form a file with the town clerk with such changes in substantial.

And I say we should take one of those changes out.

That would be, what was the other word that we used? Specifications. Specifications. Specific changes.

All right, all right. We'll just edit that.

It may be time to use AI.

It may be time to get new lessons. That's really the problem.

With such changes in substantial as may be approved by the supervisor. Okay. That was resolution 26. Thank you, Jacob. I'm wondering if the council person next to you would like to second that. Sure. Thank you very much. Okay. Further discussion? If not, all in favor, 10. Aye. William. Aye. Myself, aye. Thank you. 26 and counting. We are now at one left. which is the temporary use agreement with Camp Rising Sun for the pool. We're very excited. I want to tell you, people are very excited in town about the use. The camp came and approached us and said, would you like to rent our pool? And so the temporary use agreement which you had from previous meetings is included in your packet. We've had good response on lifeguards and some really experienced ones which is wonderful. People have worked at that pool which is very helpful. And so we're all excited about that. Let's get to the temporary use agreement. some draft rules. Christina, you want to see the rules? So we took what they had posted and we took our rules and we sort of made a mesh. And hopefully, and certainly those rules can be amended between now and when we start late next month. But I think they're a really good basis. So there's the temporary use agreement. I know you've all had this now for a couple of meetings. Were there any questions about the agreement itself that you wanted to address tonight?

Did we figure out the ADA access?

Oh, yeah, I did ask. Thank you for reminding me. I did ask. No, they do not have, and they never had a way. The way they explained it to me is that they... They don't have a way to get somebody in or out of the pool. If that's what your question is, you can get to the pool, you can get in the pool. They don't have a mechanism. And we're not familiar in the years that they've had that facility. So it'd be a good...

Is that a liability for us?

No, I don't think so. I think the pool has been, you know, the pool is what the pool is. But, yeah, we should try to find out. I'll see if I have time later this week, maybe talk to resources. They tend to be good to help us with this to understand what we can get and maybe we can borrow something if there's something to borrow too. So, yeah, that would be great. We want it to be accessible to all. But I did ask. Thank you for reminding me to bring it up. Okay. I think that's it. They're very excited. They're going to put up picnic tables for us and everything. Okay. You saw the draft pool rules, and if you think of any other things that we missed, the Rec Department went through, came up with that, so it's a combination of both our rules. There. So just so you know, looking at the 12 to 630, Seven days a week, that's the schedule. And typical rules that you would ordinarily see for the pool. Another image of the pool itself. That's the other side of the pool. All right, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the temporary use agreement with the Louis and August Jonas Foundation, that's who owns Camp Rising Sun, and want to thank them for their offer. Of course, we're paying rent, so it's not without compensation, but let's see how it goes. We'll learn along the way. All right, is there a second to approve the temporary use agreement? I'll second it. Further discussion? If not, all in favor? Kenneth? Aye. William? Aye. Myself, aye. Jacob? Aye. Kristina?

Aye.

Thank you all very much. All right, is that the last item on the list? Do you want me to? Let's quickly do the announcements. We have our committee and department reports, but I think we should do public comments before that. The folks have been patiently waiting. Let's go to just quickly announcements. I want to thank everybody who put on the Memorial Day Parade. It was a great success. There's another parade. There used to be the Beck Hook Pride event that was in Rhinebeck and then a parade also here one year. Now the youth have taken over this cultural event. Line up at 11 o'clock on June 7th, which I believe is a Sunday. Step off at 11.45. at Linden Avenue Middle School. They would like to know if we would like to sponsor, be one of the sponsors by the way. The village is providing staffing for this event. It starts at the Red Hook Village Hall. It's sponsored in part by the Red Hook Community Center and Village of Red Hook. Another announcement is the Dutchess County Office of Veterans Affairs Operation Mobile Outreach. Oh, Town Hall at Milan, yeah, okay. So, I think I mentioned at the Memorial Day festivities, we're very excited that on Flag Day, Albert Trezza, On Flag Day, June 14th, from 3 to 5 p.m., we will be opening the Red Church in Tivoli, the only church that was in existence of what is now Red Hook, back in the day, pre-revolutionary.

It's on the seal, isn't it?

What's that? It's on the seal. It's on the seal. Exactly right. Is it back here? It's back here. So we'll be opening that from 3 to 5 on Flag Day. We invite you to come in to see this beautiful, primitive church that existed back in the 1700s. And there'll be folks from the Legion. There'll be festivities. The mayor, who is also our town historian, and Jackie Zakko. And will Gloria be with us for that as well? for the event on Flag Day? I think so. I hope so. She spearheaded the renovation of it at the time. That's why I asked is because she was integral to maintaining, restoring, getting the grants, and doing a lot of the work that allowed us. They came to us and said that they could no longer maintain. the facility both the cemetery and the church but let me tell you they did a wonderful job that association for over a hundred years and so the town by state law had to take over the abandonment they did anything but abandonment they just did it as long as they possibly could give the town great credit the cemetery looks gorgeous i mean it's the nicest i've ever seen it

Thank you, Albert. It's a lot of work.

Thank you, Albert, on behalf of the staff. On behalf of the staff, who do a wonderful job. We appreciate it, and we appreciate the opportunity to partner with folks on this event as well. So that's three to five. The day before, the Elmendorf... The week before, thank you, the day before the Pride. At the Elmendorf is the open house from the walls to three. There's lots of history there. If you've not been to the Elmendorf Inn, you can literally see through the walls to see the history. And you'll hear all about revolutionary duchess. It's really fascinating, the history of Red Hook back during the revolutionary years. We were part of Ryback, as you know, Jacob. But what I didn't know is that we really weren't engaged in the battle. In fact, we had folks coming over from Connecticut, which was great. They were all ready, just in case. And obviously, looking over, watching Kingston burn and watching Claremont be burned, they needed to be ready. But the fact that they were here also presented some challenges because they needed to be housed and so on and so forth. Lots of history and I'm not the one to tell you about it. Okay, that's what we have for, did I miss one? I did not do Rogers Run, I apologize. That was the first one. The annual Rogers Run event is happening this year. on Saturday, June 6th. So that's in the morning. You can get your exercise and then come to the open door. St. Chris School, 30 Benner Road. Race day. All right, that's for announcements. Why don't we defer committee and department reports so we can hear public comments. And thank you for being patient and waiting. Who would like to make some public comments? Roxanne, would you be kind enough just to state your name for the record?

Roxanne Fisher, Barrytown, New York. And I have a perfect segue from the board agreement of the public-private partnership. I am here tonight to talk about consistency, municipal flexibility, and the fiscal reality of how this town approaches public access to our resources. Recently, we've seen a wonderful example of creative community partnership right here in Red Hook. The Red Hook Swim Pool, a nonprofit organization, has successfully offered daily community access for a very low fee during May and June. This arrangement proves that the town does not need to own a piece of property outright to ensure that residents can enjoy it safely and affordably. Cooperation works. Unfortunately, we saw the exact opposite approach taken during the three months of magistrate mediation regarding the Red Hook Boat Club. During those sessions with the magistrate, the Boat Club, which by the way is also a nonprofit organization, one that actually pays about 24,000 in taxes, the club put forward multiple viable scenarios designed to allow public community use of the waterfront. It was a clear opportunity to establish a cooperative access model, very similar to what works so beautifully with a swim pool. Instead of exploring those options, the supervisor insisted that the town must own the boat club. Because the boat club is absolutely not for sale, this rigid all or nothing demand effectively ended all negotiations. And what is that stubbornness costing us? As of early February, FOIL results revealed that this town has already blown through 300,000 in legal fees. We are currently mired in litigation spanning three separate courts. As the weeks go by, depositions and discovery for the federal case will continue to pile up, ensuring that those legal fees will easily rise to 500,000. The irony is glaring. The town is wasting half a million dollars to seize a nonprofit that already contributes 24,000 to the tax base. This is an extraordinary waste of public funds and it's entirely self-inflicted. I will close with my usual reminder to this board. Only one positive vote for eminent domain needs to be rescinded for an immediate end to this bleeding of public money. I urge the board to show fiscal responsibility, stop chasing a private property that is not for sale, and return to a model of flexible, cooperative community access.

Thank you. Thank you.

Very good.

Would anybody else like to make some comments? Lisa, if you'd be kind enough to just state your name for the record, please.

Lisa Palero. Thus far, the supervisor has refused to publicly disclose the exorbitant expenditures related to the ill-conceived eminent domain crusade. And we, the taxpayers who are covering those costs, must submit repeated FOIL requests for the information. The requests to date have uncovered almost $300,000 in legal and planning fees, but they've also raised a lot of questions about missing documents and what the real cost is. There are currently cases in three courts with two law firms representing the town, Hodgson Russ at $370 per hour, $370 per hour, and Keene and Bean at $225 per hour, so they're both doing quite well. On February 26th of 2025 at 10.31 p.m., the previous board, which Bill and Jacob were a part of, voted 5-0 to engage Keene and Bean in the matter of Red Hook Boat Club versus the town of Red Hook. Well, I foiled a copy of that retainer agreement, and the response I received was, after a diligent search, there are no records pertinent to this request. So there's no written agreement with the law firm? Bill and Jacob, do you even know what you voted for? The invoices show that Keene and Bean also billed for 2.9 hours between February 25th and 26th, which included a review of the Article 78 petition and a telephone conference with the town attorneys and the supervisor. But the Board didn't vote to engage their services until 10.31 p.m. on February 26, which was after those events that they billed for. There are no invoices from Keene and Bean after November 12, except for an approximately 18-minute telephone call, with the supervisor on December 8th and a 35-minute give or take Zoom call with the supervisor on March 6th of this year. And Hodgson-Ross has not invoiced for services after November 20th. And there were no invoices from them for last July and August. In July and August, they sent several correspondences to the court and participated in conference calls. There were multiple settlement conferences at the end of 2025 and early 26, and correspondence with the court in February, but still no invoices. It's unlikely Keene and Bean or Hodge and Russ are working for free. And if they are, where is the resolution accepting their gift of pro bono services? And likewise, if applicable, the board would also need to formally accept a gift from any private individual or entity covering legal costs. I asked for an accounting of legal fees paid by the town's insurance carrier, and the response again was, after a diligent search, there are no records pursuant to this request. So where are the invoices for legal representation in three courts since November 2025? Are the costs being buried? How much has this really cost? And with no end to litigation in sight, how much more taxpayer money are Robert, Bill, and Jacob going to waste on an action overwhelmingly opposed by the community. We don't expect answers, but rest assured there will be more questions on the horizon. Thank you.

Anybody else want to make a comment?

Teddy Blank. I'm going to read you a summary regarding public referendum and eminent domain in the state of New York. Eminent domain in New York is generally not subject to a public referendum. The government can exercise its power of eminent domain for public use without requiring a vote from the public. However, there are specific circumstances where local governments might choose to hold a referendum, particularly if they want to gauge public opinion or if local laws require it for certain projects. So with that being said, you stated earlier tonight that you, Supervisor McKeon, Always try to do the right thing by the town's people, so I challenge you right now to do the right thing by them and bring the procedure of eminent domain against the Red Hood Folk Club to a public vote, even if it's unofficial. You have the power to do so, but you're hesitant because you'll see that the results will show that your plan is wildly unpopular and wrong. Voting is used for making public decisions all the time. Why is this any different? I fully acknowledge that holding a vote on this issue will not result in an official decision, but what it will do is give you the town's members' yes or no opinions in black and white. I acknowledge that you held a public hearing at the high school last year, but it more than appears that it fell on deaf ears. Stop wasting the taxpayers' money and their time. And stop wasting members of the Red Hook Boat Club's money and time. We did not ask for any of this. This is completely on you. Also, the decision to move public comment to the end of board meetings seems like an intentional attempt to silence the comments and opinions of people who can't or don't want to sit here until 10.30 or 11 o'clock at night. It's shameful. Thank you, Ted.

Very good. Anybody else like to make some comments before we move on to committee? Bonnie?

Yes, please. Great. Nice thing to light because I've got some things that Roxanne already said, but I'm going to But I'm a terrible public speaker, and I hate the camera, so why stand here? I apologize, I just lost my notes. I might have to repeat myself. Just kidding, Sam. Please reconsider and simply drop the eminent domain. You can do a 180. Seriously, how would you like anyone to take your home, your gun club, You are a private property away from you. You say it's in the plans. I say perhaps the plans were read wrong. The plans do not say to take land from an unwilling seller. The only thing that makes sense financially and morally is for the town board to drop interest and let the club maintain ownership. That relieves the town of the burden to maintain, monitor, and pay for it. Keep it on the tax roll. We pay over 20,000 a year in school and property taxes. We work it all, all the mowing, all the ice damage. Sounds like a fiduciary responsibility to not waste town money by stealing the boat club property. Why hire people to maintain it and monitor? We do it all. I remind you, no government assistance necessary. We have seen how you negotiated a public-private partnership with the community center, the pollinator garden, People, and now the Rising Sun pool, they all maintain ownership of their own property. Why is the boat club different? It really feels like a personal retaliatory assault concocted in the back room closed meetings. There was zero discussion about the boat club in any open meeting. Did the other town board members even know how the boat club offered to open the grounds between Memorial Day and Labor Day? How we were willing to let people come in in their boats or kayaks or just picnic? I heard the new guy on the planning board sharing those details the same week we offered it. The people he was telling thought the terms we were offering were more than fair. There's only one person doing that negotiating for the town while we tried to come up with a way to share our private property. And he shot down every suggestion we offered and demanded that the town had to own the property. How was that a partnership like the others where the camp still owns their land and shares the pool? The community center owns their building and shares this space. We don't want or need kings in Red Hook. Thank you, Bonnie.

Anybody else before we move to committee and department? I have a couple.

Robert. First, I'd like Tina, that this is from, that was her comment. Thank you. In reference to Lisa's comments about the first Article 78 action when the law was struck down. Keenan Bean, rightfully, on behalf of the town, filed a notice of appeal because that preserves the town's decision as to whether or not it wants to take an appeal. And I'd like to know when the town board authorized Keenan Bean to take this appeal. We've been here since November. If I haven't been here Roxanne has been here. Roxanne hasn't been here. Lisa's been here. We've never heard a resolution to hire Keenan Bean to continue with the appeal. That's your decision, not the attorney's. And we want to know, because our attorney wants to be able to advise the appellate division, that they have no authority to be asking for an extension of the appeal. They're not representing the town. They haven't been hired by the town, to my knowledge. Can any board member here tell me when you voted to hire Keenan Bean to carry out the appeal? I'd like to know that.

Thank you, Robert. Any more comments?

What?

Do you have any more comments?

No, but I'd like to answer that, Robert, so we can advise our attorney. Give him the answer! I will file the necessary foil, or actually... I'll have our two industrious investigators file their FOIL. Because I don't want to be bothered with that. But they'll take care of it. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Okay, unless there are any more comments, we're going to get to our committees and department reports. I'd like to start off with the assessor's office. I want to thank the assessor's office. Last night was grievance night. They handled about 70 applications. The report is that the assessor's office has mailed out all the increased letters about the town-wide trend of 7%. If you have a residential property, In the town of Red Hook, you were trended up 7%. That doesn't mean your taxes are going up 7%. It just means the state has told us the value of properties, residential properties in our specific area have increased by that amount. And so you'll see that we lower the tax rate, hopefully we lower the tax rate to compensate for that. This report mentions that brief and stay will be held, but it was in fact held last evening. There were 11 sales for the town in April. The highest town sale price was $2,300,000 and the lowest was $295,000. For the villages, there's only one sale, and that's for 295,000. There was a sale that we're looking for the records of over $4 million for a single family, but it has not yet been. entered in for by the county and some acknowledgements of their ability. Building and zoning.

Building and zoning report for May, there were 36 permits, 82 inspections, 25 certificate of occupancies, 4 complaints and revenue of $7,187. Thank you, Kristen.

And there are charts and graphs. Police, police.

So in the month of April, they responded to 123 calls in town and an additional 16 in Tivoli. They wrote up 41 traffic tickets and they made four arrests. And the one item I will point out, every month by the number of welfare checks they have conducted was seen very high as 20, but that tells you that those welfare checks and save people's lives, and it's kind of an important function that people don't really know about or think about too much.

Bill, could I ask you, is this for the town including both villages? Because I noticed that there's a report of 17 for... Just Tivoli.

No, no, no. 17? Well, no.

A school resource officer, I have it up on the screen. So that obviously is not for the town. That's for the village, right? Yeah, and the school resource... Yeah. Is the SRR at Mill Road? I thought they were at Middle and High. One thing that's just weird, like it could be there.

But the way that they, the way they calculate their numbers... Yeah. They have a person at the school every day. There's always a police car. There's always somebody there, and it's sort of the way that particular dean is counted.

And like for pickup and stuff, they always have a car there. Yes, they always do.

And they do traffic, you know. Okay. So.

Recreation. So, yeah, I'll do a quick one. Just a reminder for folks, so signing up for our free summer rec program if your kid is in the Red Hook Central School District. They are eligible. Sign-ups are next weekend. I have that right? June 6th and June 13th at Town Hall from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. The deadline ultimately will be June 27th, but please do try to come in on those days to sign up. There's a lot of maintenance stuff that he lists there. I won't go over because it's not as exciting as you might hope it would be. Related to lights and snack bar and the staff and the trails and a bench for the trail on Rec Park West. portable mound, picnic tables that have been repainted, the new baseball shed. So we're gonna put some lights in there. The park is just about 100% renovated. We're going to do some repaving at the south entrance there. You probably noticed it's quite something, wavy and in need of some paving. And that's it. Folks, if you have kids who have e-bikes, we would really ask you to please speak to them and ask them to observe the rules and the signs with the e-bikes. We continue to get complaints whether it's on the trails or in the rec park itself of people using the bikes at unsafe speeds. We ask that you just bike at normal pace or dismount from the bike. And that's it. I think I mentioned Camp Rising Sun, the pool, and there's the south entrance. And so that's what I've got for rent commission.

Who will speak for the trees, Jacob? So the monthly report from the Tree Preservation Commission for May, last week's meeting, a few things highlighted here include the Arbor Day celebration follow-up, so thank you to Ben and Village Pizza for doing these pizzas for the volunteer luncheon. The winners of the Mill Road School Poster Contest were announced. The posters are posted back here in the courtroom. The winners received tree-themed books. A thank you to Deb Tuttle, book beekeeper, to the CAC for the displays at the event. So it was a good success. As you mentioned a minute ago, there's plans to put a 20-year anniversary for Bee Entry City in Rec Park West. The Rec Department is going to pour the concrete pad for the bench. It's gonna work the bench before that happens. That'll be happening soon. finally the committee discussed a tree planting on cookingham property where the solar panels are to help with the future so there's going to be a site visit for that in early june and then um plant in autumn and the trails are holding up

I was on the Sunday night after dinner at the Curry House and somebody came over the hill there, the crest, and was like, oh my God, I just discovered these trails. No matter how many times you mail, no matter how many times you signal, there's always people who discover for the first time. People love those trails. So kudos to all of you. All right.

So the ZBA, they issued one variance for a flag lot. Same project that we discussed last time. The issue with the ZBA is that they are down essentially to three members. They need members. And so if they're able to make a quorum their vote now has to be unanimous so certainly an issue so we need members bill Susan Grover is an alternate right yes you know Susan Grover right yes

I think you're supposed to take it from there. Did you reach out? Is there interest? Is there interest in becoming a full-fledged member?

I mean, that wasn't presented to me as... Would you reach out?

I know you haven't been able to go through those meetings.

I will reach out and clarify that, but I've been in contact with the chair and the... and the DBA secretary, and yeah, I mean, bottom line, they're in need of members.

Right. Well, Susan's an alternative. She's willing to step up. She's showing up when she needs to. And so Kate hasn't resigned yet. She's good through the year. She's good through the year. So she was there at the last meeting, because I was here working in my office when they had their last meeting. I know she was here, so that's one, two. So Chris Carney, George John, Kate, and Ross, and Susan. So they did have five in attendance for that meeting, but it would be good to have Susan as a full member. She's more like, she's not, she's been noncommittal enough. I'll leave it to you two to see if we can.

Yeah, I think we just need to put the word out there that they, I mean, they need members.

They need members, yeah. Okay, thank you. That's CBA. We made it just a hair before 11. That's a bad history, though. We have a very quick attorney class to go into. But first, I want to thank you all for attending tonight. It was a long meeting, and I want to wish you health and happiness. Summer is here. There's some sunshine. And I hope you get outside and get some enjoyment. Thanks again, folks. And at this time, I'd like to make a motion that we go into a very quick attorney-client session. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? Aye.