Alright. Good evening, and welcome to our, February 25 work session. I'm mayor Brian Pugh.
• And, the first item of business will be an update from the village manager with regards to the blizzard and snow recovery. Yes.
• So it's been a
fun couple of days. Can I just drop you just one second? I'm the screen on that not the screen on that side is black.
• Thank you. So it's been a fun couple of days here in the village of Croton for our DPW and all our staff.
• The
• DPW
• put in
• thirty one hours of of time. They've got here on 4PM Sunday,
• and they were here until 11:00 Monday night.
• So,
• you know, they basically that entire time was spent plowing the roads and making them safe for
• emergency vehicles.
• For the majority of that time, 9PM Sunday to 6PM Monday, we had a travel ban that was issued by the county.
• So,
• you know, there was very limited traffic on the roads, which obviously made a a big difference in the their ability to,
• you know, keep the roads as clear as possible.
• Our fire department was on standby from 04:00 Sunday to 3PM Monday.
• You know, we there were
• more than a dozen volunteers in the different firehouses.
• And,
• you know, thankfully, there were no calls no calls for service during the storm, so they were able to
• just be on standby in case they were needed.
• According EMS, it was staffed with both their paid EMTs as well as volunteers,
• and the police department was staffed with additional staff on the overnight
• and the evening shift during the brunt of the storm.
• As I was saying, thanks to all the preparations
• and residents respecting the travel ban, there were very few incidents reported during the storm.
• For yesterday, our DPW crews,
• along with contractors that were brought in to assist us, helped remove snow from sidewalks, the pedestrian bridge, the crossing on Route 9, and the Riverwalk.
• And this morning, they began snow removal in the business districts, and the goal is to have most of those areas complete by Friday.
• Snow is being removed to an area of Croton Point Park, and we thank, Westchester County Parks for their,
• assistance in making that happen.
• We have sufficient salt supply.
• Thankfully, we got a delivery of seven
• loads yesterday morning to replenish what was used during the storm.
• And
• just as a general reminder,
• snowfall under two inches is considered a salting event for DPW, and then when snow is accumulates over two inches, that's when plows are required, and that's, what when our parking prohibition goes into effect.
• So,
• just to request
• that given the sheer amount of snow,
• if we just,
• ask that residents understand that this is going to be a multi day effort to clean up from this storm.
• For perspective, it took about three weeks after the storm in January
• to get,
• most of the piles removed from the village. Now, hopefully,
• with this storm, we'll have a little bit of a warmer,
• weather pattern. You know, we were we basically didn't go above freezing for two weeks after the storm in January.
• Today, we were above freezing, and there was a a decent amount of melting that took place.
• So, hopefully, there will be even though with this storm, we got about 10 more inches of snow than we got in the January storm, hopefully, with the melting that will assist in in having it cleaned up a little bit quicker.
• And finally, just a a reminder, which I give often, is for all residents to sign up for the Everbridge Alert system.
• It was used multiple times during the the storm.
• We sent out information before the storm, during the storm, after the storm.
• There's about 2,770
• residents that are signed up for it, so we do have a decent number that are What was the number? Sorry. 2,770.
• So there's a decent number of people, but, you know, we're a village of 8,300.
• Mhmm. So there are there's definitely some room to grow there. So if you are not getting,
• our calls or emails or texts through the alert system,
There is a button right under the citizen action center on the website,
• for emergency alerts.
• And if anybody needs assistance, they can always call or stop in, and we're happy to to help them with that. Thank you.
• Are there any questions?
• you know, just to
• so I can turn this in, so I can get Oh, yes. Okay.
• But, you know, it looked like we we adopted a $164,000
• for our snow removal budget.
So how do you have a projection of where it's gonna come in at this point?
• Before this storm Mhmm. We were
• approximately 200,000
• in snow over time. Okay. And we had budgeted 60,000 for snow over time. Yeah. So we are we're significantly over. This is we are certainly not unique. Every community in Westchester is is
• dealing with the same problem. Yeah.
• You know, we've also exhausted our salt budget.
• Mhmm.
• We had we had, enough funds encumbered to cover us through this storm, but the delivery that we got yesterday,
• put us over the the salt budget.
• So, yeah, it's we're definitely
• going to have to look at
• our revenues and our expenditures and
• make some recommendations
• to transfer some money. Okay.
• My plan is to not do that until,
• basically, the winter when the winter's over, late March, early April Okay. So that we don't have to keep
• coming back and putting more money in. I'd rather just do it all at once. Yep. And by that point, hopefully, we will have some you know, we have we have a number of revenue sources that are coming in higher than budget. Mhmm. So it's not an issue of cash flow or not. You know, we have we have the funds available. It's just it's just a budgetary movement that needs to amend the budget to reflect the higher spending and recognize the increased revenue.
K. So Thank you. Thank you. That was a good question. Is there any additional funding that becomes available if there's a state of emergency or any other declaration?
So with the state of emergency, there's not necessarily any funding that becomes available. What the state of emergency does, it allows us to
• circumvent our purchasing policy.
• And circumvent's probably not the right word. But, you know, normally, when we buy certain things, there there might be,
• three quotes that are required or if, you know, if it's a large item, it has to go out to bid or something like that. When the state of emergency is declared, you don't have to necessarily follow those rules. You can just if you need to rent a piece of equipment, you can just go and rent the piece of equipment without getting three separate prices. So that's that's what the state of emergency allows you one of the things that the state of emergency allows you to do.
• You know, Westchester County is looking into whether they would qualify to request
• a disaster declaration from the federal government.
• If they if they do qualify for that based off of the damages that were encountered in the county, then that would open up a potential,
• funding from the federal government through FEMA.
• You know, based off my initial reading of it, it doesn't seem like it would cover something like overtime.
• But, you know, we had pieces of equipment that broke down or we had,
• you know, slow blowers that stopped working with things like that. You know, it would cover the it would cover some of those expenses. So
• was excellent
• Thank you. In terms of, you know, enabling residents to prepare for this storm. And when I look out on the streets, it's just remarkable
• the work that residents and business owners have done to clear
• sidewalks and everything. It's it's pretty amazing.
• As far as DPW
• and all the hours and sleeping on cots,
• do do they get extra time off or, you know, how are I know they get overtime, but, you know, will they have,
extra vacation days to take or, you know So there's you know, their terms of employment are covered through the Teamster contract.
• So, that's not something that is
• avail you know, we don't have that in the contract with them.
• You know, they certainly are entitled to the overtime,
• and they can choose to either take the overtime and comp time, which they could then use for additional,
• time off, or they can, get paid out for the overtime.
• So, you know, that that's the options that they have available to them. K.
I was just gonna add, you know, we we did not dodge the bullet on the snow, which sometimes we have. This time, we didn't, going all the way back to January.
• But we did dodge the bullet in terms of power outages and downed trees. Yes. So it's
Yeah. That was very good. And we also, thankfully, did not have flooding. Yep. You know, for I I don't know exactly,
• the confluence of factors, either, you know, a combination of the storm moving a little bit further to the east, The wind shifted a little bit quicker than they were forecast, and so we did not have any flooding in the parking lot or the parks. So that worked out in our favor as well.
• So
• we just got two feet of snow.
Thank you. Thank you. Alright. Our next type of business is an update from valley Valerie Monastra of Nelson Pope and Voorhees on the 2026 grant opportunities.
• Good
• My name is Valerie Monastro. I'm a principal planner at Nelson, Pope, and Voorhees, and,
• I've been working with the village,
• to,
• we work on grants and grant submissions for the village.
• So tonight, I just wanted to talk a little bit. I have a little quick agenda just to kind of in a small PowerPoint presentation.
• I just wanted to touch, upon,
to talk a little bit about how grants and how to decide when to pursue a particular grant,
• talk about a little bit on the anticipated state grants,
• for this year.
• Grants
• for potential cap village capital projects that have already been identified,
• by the village manager, And then also to have a broader discussion with the village board if there's any other priorities or projects you would like me to just kinda keep an eye out for for potential grants.
• Next slide.
• So I just wanted to kinda touch base on, you know, how do we decide, when to pursue a grant. And I think this is kind of important because, I mean, even as a member of the public,
• you know, there's always projects and there's always things that, like, always try to get funding or seek funding or get grants.
• But, you know, every one of these grants have they're come from very specific pots of money, and they all have very specific criteria,
• purposes of the grants, and and they specifically
• really focus on, like, five key areas. First, if the project is eligible.
• And so, you know, depending upon the particular scope of work or the entity that's looking to, submit the grant, you know, can either make a project ineligible
• of to even pursue the grant from the get go.
• If, like so for example, sometimes there might be, a parks grant, but the parks grant might only want to seek funding for, like, new playgrounds. Right? So if you want a new field,
• that would not be eligible for to seek that type of funding.
• Also, another key is does the does the proposed, project meet the objectives of the grant? And a lot of times,
• even through the state and over the years, the state might continuously each year identify very specific,
• have specific funding,
• but that funding mechanism might shift from year to year depending upon the overall objectives that the state wants to accomplish that year. Or if for some reason it's not for profit, there might be particular objectives or goals that they want to accomplish.
• And so, again, if the if the particular project doesn't meet those or is not gonna be able to achieve those particular goals, then you wouldn't be able to submit for that particular grant funding.
• The other thing is total funding available. This is something that's really important because sometimes you might hear of a grant, but then you find out, gee, there's only, like, $5,000,000
• statewide.
• Right? And all of a sudden, it becomes something that, like, you might have 200,
• you know, applications that you're competing with. And if you don't meet, like, you know, all the criteria,
• like, a 100%,
• you're gonna find that all of a sudden that particular grant application is not going to be competitive.
• And so those are things that we also try to highlight when when discussing with, like, the village village
• manager as to, you know, whether, you know, we should pursue that particular grant. The other thing is, scoring criteria.
• A lot of times over the last especially the last few years, there has been very specific rubrics that have been,
• that are associated
• with particular grants. And those will clearly identify,
• like, policies or priorities from that particular funding agency.
• But then they also and there also might be certain things with, like, community characteristics or,
• or demographics where, like, you know, specifically, they're aiming to focus on funding for more rural areas or more urban areas or certain types of populations.
• And so that also becomes you know? And and they'll they'll provide additional scoring or points. And again, that's where it kind of, like, it's that feedback of, like, okay. Well, then if for some reason you're not gonna be able to score, like, within, like, you know, if it's a 100 points, if you're unable to score within that top 80%,
• you know, and you don't you know, and the funding is completely, you know,
• and and the funding available is a small amount and you don't particularly
• meet all the objectives, that's where, you know, grants become very competitive to achieve.
• And then the last is the information required. Because now a lot of times grants really require they wanna see actual, like, plans or engineering plans. They wanna see, like, cost estimates, but not just a rough estimate. They actually wanna see sometimes
• cost estimates from, like, a certified engineer or,
• somebody or specific cost estimates that you actually have to submit as part of the grant,
• proposal.
• And then also, a lot of times, they wanna see that there's public engagement and public outreach.
• And they when we actually have to document, like, we you should then some of the grants that we even submitted last year for the village, I mean, the attachments themselves ran, like, over 50 pages because you're they're asking for all this information
• just to be able to back up again going back to that scoring criteria to maximize
• the amount of scoring points.
• And then the other thing is the last for, like, resolutions and specifically
• so that, you know, in the past, and I've been doing this for many years, like like, twenty years ago, you could just put in a grant application with an general cost estimate
• and you could potentially have, you know, a village board say, well, we'll we'll, you know, we we support the grant application, application, but but you you don't don't necessarily necessarily have to commit to certain funding. Now a lot of the resolutions want absolutely commitment to the funding, commitment to the matches, and then also specifically identifying how that funding's gonna be achieved.
• So
• that's how we really look at whether to,
• pursue a particular grant application. So there's constantly grants being,
• sent out to communities,
• and we do look at all of them, but we also look at these other factors to see how they align with some projects that are of importance to the village.
• Next slide.
• So the anticipated state grants this year,
• a lot of this falls
• under the consolidated funding application,
• which typically,
• comes out in, like, spring and is usually due at the July.
• Empire State Development is one agency that has a lot of, funding, and that's a lot of its focus is on economic development and housing and really focuses on
• specifically dealing with there's a lot of private, grants given out for through this type of grant funding.
• Then there's homes and community renewal, which is also housing. And, again, a lot of that tends to be, private,
• or not for profit organizations that tend to get those types of,
• funds, but mostly because it's generating actually housing units themselves.
• And then there's also,
• the office of parks and
• recreation historic preservation.
• These grants tend to focus on,
• specifically what they call the environmental protection fund grants for for parks and preservation,
• and so this will be a lot of your park projects and recreation projects that get funded through that.
• And this is one in particular that tends to have different shifting,
• funding priorities from year to year.
• And then also,
• they also have, different recreational trail programs and stuff like that and grants associated with that funding.
• Then, the Department of State. The Department of State has a number of different grant programs.
• They,
• they they
• have, grant programs for the New York Forward and Downtown Revitalization
• Initiative. I know this is something that the village is is potentially interested in pursuing.
• There's the local waterfront revitalization
• plans
• that, they also fund. They fund for not only development of those,
• local waterfront revitalization
• plans,
• but also restoration,
• water quality,
• and other public,
• space
• public,
• projects for, like, more open space or public access to the waterfront. And a lot of that's your implementation projects that are identified in your LWRP,
• which the village has.
• Then there's also the brownfield opportunity area through that particular project and then, through that particular
• department of state. And, again, that tends to be a lot of private,
• developments,
• but you also can have public space that you know that, for example, that you have a property that you have now obtained and you wanna clean it up, and that would where you would go through the brownfield program.
• And then also the smart growth community planning program, which is a lot of planning and zoning, and those are where you get some of those types of grants to look at comprehensive plan updates or other particular zoning updates that you would want to, consider.
• Then,
• there's also,
• grant funding through,
• the NYSERDA, which is the Energy Research and Development Authority, and that really focuses on energy efficiency and energy reduction projects.
• And then the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
• and, those particular projects focus on climate smart communities, which again focuses on, greenhouse gas reductions or types of planning associated with that and other projects,
• water quality improvement projects, and then storm water,
• mapping programs as well.
• So, next slide. There's also other grants,
• through that are not part of the consolidated funding application, and those deal with the Greenway grants, which are more planning,
• grants. They're smaller grants, but they are good grants too if you wanna have supplemental,
• funding for a particular project.
• Environmental bond act, this one has,
• this particular act was passed by. It was a referendum that was passed, a few years ago. And a lot of the grants that have been coming out recently associated with this bond act focus on recreation and habitat and preservation and restoration.
• We have looked at a number of these, but, a number of them are really like, you have to have specific projects. A few of them were recently was, like, acquisition of open space,
• land, but it really had to have a focus on,
• climate
• protection,
• rehabilitation,
• focusing on habitat re rehabilitation,
• and not so much just for, like, open space or recreational fields.
• There's also the New York State Department of Transportation.
• They focus on a lot of projects on what I'm calling complete streets, which is really like sidewalks,
• other types of,
• you know,
• bike trails, those types of things.
• And then the New York State Division of Homeland Security, that's where a lot of your fire and police department grants,
• typically come through.
• And, New York State,
• also Department of Conservate Environmental Conservation also has waste reduction and tree restoration programs.
• So next slide. And then last, the other types of grants programs are also through Westchester County. Right now, Westchester County has stormwater and complete streets,
• grant programs that both of which, the village has submitted for. One, we've the village received for the stormwater grant, and then we're still waiting on the complete streets.
• But we anticipate that funding to continue into the next year as well so that we could potentially, submit some additional projects.
• And then last is the federal grants, which I'm not gonna go into detail, but there's a lot of different agencies. And these grants have been, as you as you know, in the last year or so, really up in the air as to what's gonna get funded, what's not gonna get funded. So those would kinda be on a case by case basis as they come in.
• So
• we already took a look at the at some of your, your capital projects,
• that you've already identified for the next year or well, this year, 2026.
• And so there are some potential
• grants that we could pursue.
• One deals with, like, fire department.
• Sometimes they'll allow for some field facility upgrades,
• equipment, usually exclusion of any sort of trucks, but personal protective equipment
• and other types of things. So I noticed, like, you had, for example, like, turnout gear that you might be looking to. So that's something that we could, consider looking at if there's some potential funding for that, or if not this year, for some future years because I saw that that's something that's you know, that you have on for your five year capital plan.
• Also, police department,
• some IT upgrades and also police equipment. I think we were talking about cameras and looking for that. And those grants haven't been announced yet, but sometimes that the those, we anticipate coming within the next, like, six months or so.
• Then also water and sewer,
• a lot of these usually, it's associated with they there is funding available, but usually, it's associated with, projects that are going to increase, like, water improve water quality
• or potentially expansions.
• So for example, if you wanted to try to if you didn't have sewer in a particular area and you wanted to bring sewer into that area, you know, those are the types of projects. Or you wanna increase, like, water filtration,
• Those are the types of projects that tend to get, funded as opposed to just maintenance.
• They tend to not fund just direct maintenance type of projects.
• And then finally,
• a couple of your park projects, Gueva,
• Park site improvements. We've tried to for the we've we've already put in a couple grants for that. We haven't received,
• haven't been successful yet. We're hoping that maybe something will come through soon.
• Those we knew were gonna be challenging because
• both the the criteria of those also took into consideration some of the overall
• population within,
• within a village or a community.
• And that, and, unfortunately,
• like, Croton, Hudson,
• you know, did not the
• did not achieve the maximum amount of points because of, like, certain demographics that's just out of your control.
• But but we do think that there is a potential for
• park improvements, and so we're gonna continue pursuing that. And, basically, the grant is ready to go, so we just have to find, like, that that particular funding stream that would be the perfect match.
• A senior bus is another one that we can look for, that has been funded in the past through some of the CDB
• community development block grants, so we are gonna continue looking for that. And then shoreline resiliency,
• we do think that that is something that tends to be very much in the forefront of a lot of grants, so we do think that there's that's a possibility that we can really look for that in the next year.
• So
• with that, I just kinda wanna open up for any questions, discussions,
• or if there's any other projects in particular that we want to kinda focus on and look for grants for in the next year.
Well, Valerie, thank you so much for the presentation, for being here. Appreciate all your hard work for us and and the the success you've
• gotten for us so far. Appreciate that. Just a couple of things. Mhmm. I think, you know, for me, at least just speaking for myself, the big one out there that that we're going to get, I just don't know when, is is New York forward. Right. And I think we had a pretty good application
• last year, but didn't get funded.
• We collectively
• opted
• not to go into the round this year mostly because we were somewhat changing the orientation
• of the project, and and those projects that we would put in there are not quite ready yet, but they but they will be
• eventually, hopefully, sometime this year.
• So New York Forward is in the governor's budget, and I think it's got a, you know, decent chance of the legislature
• including it in their budget. They always have. And so
• we would presumably
• be in a position
• to apply for the next round in October.
• Now it's February.
• But it seems like we should probably be spending the next few months, you know, really getting ready for that next round and and not wait until,
October when when the new round is announced. Absolutely. And that's correct. And I think, if the village really wants to submit this round, I do think, you know, we talked about some potential projects. We should go back and look at those projects, see where those projects you know, any forward momentum we can have on those projects. You know, I think we talked about even some of the private projects reaching out to some of the property owners. So we should probably start having some, like, you know, meetings, you know, maybe once a month just to kinda touch base, maybe next steps on that to get the,
• to get everything as ready as possible for that.
Great advice. Looking looking forward to that. I think that's exactly what we should share what New York forward projects just as examples?
Some examples. Well, you know, for Croton or in general? For Croton. Oh, okay. Yes. So we okay. Well, I I mean, what I would say there is I mean, that's the whole point of the publication
• in, like, the process that we need to be initiated. So I don't think we should telescope it. I think it might be more useful for Valerie to give us a if you have an awareness of what's been funded in other communities. Yeah. So among We had some underway. No. Oh, no. No. Because we didn't we put in an we'll get to we can get to that in a minute. We put it in application. It was not accepted. So
• I think the follow-up would be
• in kind of
• they weren't necessarily the right fit where what they had in mind, and I I guess we can get to that as well, Valerie, is my understanding,
• the feedback we got from Empire State Development Corporation was
• what they really wanted to see was, let's say, more geographic
• concentration and cohesion for and part of the reason why our original grant was like, well,
• we have the challenge of having multi Yep. Multiple quasi downtowns. Mhmm. We're trying to deal with that.
• And, you know, that was the theory of the case for that grant, and it was not something fire loop. Yeah. It is not something that ESD
• was found particularly compelling. And, therefore, what they want is something that is
• geographically contained and focused and then also has a certain amount of,
• stimulating or cat being a catalyst for additional private sector investment.
• And I think a lot of what we have proposed in our previous application were these are nice amenities for the residents,
• but they weren't necessarily specifically tied to mobilizing private dollars.
• So, anyway
• Yes. Yes. So can you give us some some examples in which we're coming from? That's all that's absolutely all correct.
• so a lot of the projects that they'd like to see are they'd like to see some sort of private development project because the way the New York Forward grant operates,
• it's for both public and private
• funds.
• So if so they do like to see, private
• projects
• also get identified.
• So housing projects,
• it could be some sort of, like,
• like, cultural facilities. So theaters
• have been funded in the past.
• Other types of museums have been funded in the past.
• And then, of course, housing projects. And then they like to see, like, streetscaping.
• They tend to fund a lot of streetscaping projects.
• They also like to fund other types of, park improvement projects.
• They also tend to fund,
• what they call small grants projects. So, basically, if you have a downtown and you wanna do some facade improvements,
• they create the small grant fund where individual
• property owners can submit for facade upgrades,
• and it's part of, like, a, an overall,
• like, pocket pocket of money that, you know, a certain percentage goes out to individual property owners for them to do some facade improvements.
• And then they also, fund marketing and branding types of, projects to to help with, specific downtown areas.
• helpful. And, just one quick, additional question. The other the other one that I think is just waiting for us to have the right combination of factors to get funded is we worked so hard over the years for our local waterfront revitalization
• plan
• with with the understanding
• that if you do a good job on the plan and then come up with good projects, there's some state funding that that helps us. What what do you think in terms of
• what what might be the best match in terms of those dollars and some of our,
• pending projects?
• I think it probably would be good for us to take a look at those types, those projects and see if there's ones that specifically float
• to the top. I know, you know, in your LWRP,
• I mean, you do have the train station parking lot, which I think we're looking at potential, like, county funding for.
• There is a grant program that potentially could be used for that. I think you wanna do some shoreline resiliency. I do think the LWRP,
• which is the environmental protection fund, you could potentially put in funding for that. But all these types of projects, a lot of them do require some sort of match, which is where I think the challenge always is with, like, communities because sometimes it could be up to 20% of the the total. Or, for example, some of these projects have up to, let's just say, $500,000
or, like, a million dollars. And if you have a $2,000,000 project that becomes something that the community has think about. I always felt that if if, if they'll come up with the 80, we can find the 20. Right. Right. But but
but, but you do think there's there's a certain viability between our LWRP and Yes. Absolutely. And so we can take a look at those, those kind of projects and work with,
• you know, Brian to see which ones have because some of them I know have been already implemented and then which ones haven't been implemented and which ones might be of priority to consider for funding. Great. Appreciate it. Thank you. Sure.
Thank you very much. This is really helpful. I just wanna share a little bit of good news. I know that some grants, you're always looking for a nonprofit partner. Yep. There's a requirement for a nonprofit partner.
• So we do have,
• coming very soon,
• a, Friends of Croton Parks Okay. Is going to be a, physically sponsored by Westchester Parks Foundation.
• So that particular organization will be able to be a partner when we go after some of our park grants. That'd be great. And I I think it's you know, Guevea is absolutely,
• you know, a park where we, you know, have a vision, and we continue to sort of invest
• in
• building the story of Guevea. We're actually having a public meeting on Monday night. Okay. Great. Talk through kind of where we're at and
• kind of what the go forward is. We're gonna be sharing with the public
• the
• architectural drawings that were done by our architect. Yes. And just, you know, just a couple weeks ago, we passed
• money so that we bring in a landscape architect to look at the property. So every everything we're doing there is just to make a better grant application
• Yes. To try to free up some money to get there. But then there are also the other parks in Croton
• that, you know, can all use some TLC.
• So Right. You know, with a with a private organization
• helping fund,
• hopefully, that will make it more enticing for the state to support us.
• And then my other question is, you know, just in thinking about walking around the village and kind of our big ticket items. So one of the things that we talked about, this is kind of a a you know, the picture tunnel in that area
• and then also the pedestrian bridge,
• you know, what the lifespan is of both of those things that are owned by the village and, you know, are those things that are on our wish list of
• the picture tunnel, we're not really
• sure as to the ownership of that. That's Okay. That's That's still in question. That is you know, if there is ever an issue with that, it's gonna have to be resolved. Mhmm.
• But, I mean, it's lasted a hundred years, so hopefully, it will last for at least another twenty five.
• But the pedestrian bridge, there is no question. That is ours. Yeah. It was gifted to us by the DOT when after they built it.
• It's about 30 years old. Mhmm. And it is gonna need an assessment at some point in the near future. Yeah. I think it makes sense, you know, right now,
• basically, after we're done with Half Moon Bay Bridge,
• that would be something that we should probably look at. And, know, there's no reason that there's no reason to think that there's anything
• wrong with it, you know, just by looking at it. But, you know, being that it's 30 years old, it's probably time to get the book says. Yeah. Right? It's it's time to get it checked out and just make sure that everything is structurally sound and,
• you know, good quality.
• if it's
• private development in combination with
• cultural projects,
• knowing that that bridge pedestrian bridge crosses over into
• North Riverside,
• which has new development
• as well as commercial.
• You know, I just wonder if there's
• a bigger opportunity
• there to
• pull together, like, the New York forward
• North Riverside
• redevelopment.
• And I would like to suggest
• that we consider including
• a youth community center
• there, you know, because that's a project that,
• you know, I know we
• we don't have that in in the village. And
• I think it would be wonderful to have a
• an inspiring space that's
• walkable,
• you know, for
• youth and seniors. So,
• you know, I don't know if that's
• how anybody feels about that. But
I think those those are all really good ideas. I think one of the challenges with New York Forward, and I'll just say this, is that the way the project or the way the program runs is when you submit an application,
• they want a prod they want projects identified that can be shovel ready within, like, about a two year time period.
• So they want to see a lot of times that projects have already been sort of developed to a certain extent.
• So that's always the challenge a lot of times working with communities trying to identify those particular projects.
• So in the past, they have, funded some work from community centers,
• but they typically have community centers that have already have, like, plans drawn up and already have, like,
• more
• cost estimates associated
• with them. That's not to say that they wouldn't potentially look at something like that. I mean but those those are the types of programs that would be fundable under New York Forward.
And I would propose that we have a New York Forward work group formed. Mhmm. Yeah. Absolutely.
Did we tap into that? We did. We did. We did submit for the round one, and we are I think there is gonna be a round two. So we're, you know, we probably gonna
• I would recommend hey. We've probably taken a look at round two and trying to resubmit again and maybe even,
• like, trying to set up a meeting with, like, the state to kinda get an exit. But we knew that one was gonna be very challenging because there were extra points provided to certain communities that had,
• certain economic,
• like, more economically depressed communities got extra points,
• as well as other communities with
• certain certain populations.
• So they tend to they tended to,
• provide extra points, which that was a little bit more of a challenge for the village of Croton On Hudson.
• But I think we you know, round two, there's gonna be less of those applications,
• and you do have a very complete package.
• And we do feel that there were a lot of other points that this particular
• application,
• this project the project for Guiava Park really did hit the mark.
• So,
• I do think that would be one that we'd wanna probably resubmit for again. Mhmm.
I'm not as fluent in a lot of these grants as my colleagues are, but I do have a couple specific questions.
• I know that I noticed this year that Briarcliff received a grant for their park, and I think it was maybe for drainage or something very specific. Right. And so I don't I I
• my thought was
• demographically,
• we would run into the same kind of challenges that Briarcliffe might, but yet we they were able to get that grant. So was that because it was for can you explain a little bit why Briarcliffe would get that grant and maybe how
• we could have asked for a grant in that way? And and sort of feeding into that question would then be breaking
• some of the projects at Govea are Yeah. There are huge projects to be done there. Right. But then if we were to break it off into smaller pieces, you know, there are particular parts and just hearing you say about sort of, like, the habitat rehabilitation.
• I think there are some smaller pieces within the park. So I don't know exactly how
• just to your orientation of working with all of us. I know you're meeting with a lot of people.
• You know, you're you're meeting you're at more meetings. But I think that
• your orientation
• with or or adjusting your orientation to how we work together, I wanna make sure that we are assessing
• how we approach these by tapping into the expertise all the expertise across the dais. Absolutely. Because I think, we all bring something very different and with some different perspectives
• from where we plug into the community.
• So I'm not I know I just asked you five questions. No. I agree. Yeah. So I apologize.
• But but I just wanted to you know, I think that all sort of goes in together because Yes. These huge grants are amazing. But if we can be whacking off little projects at a time, and then we can it's little you know, hearing about all the projects that we don't get
• is frustrating. But I think if we were going after some small not for lack of great work, but I think if there were some smaller wins that we could have,
• and then people could see progress, and then that progress becomes part of whatever the next grant application is. You know how to do your job Yeah. Way better than I do. But those are just some of my non expert
No. Absolutely. And I I think those are all those are all important points.
• So with Briarcliffe,
• the BRICS grant was specifically for new community centers.
• So what the funding that Briarcliffe
• received
• was probably through the consolidated funding application, which would have had different funding mechanisms.
• So the scoring
• and criteria are completely different for each and every single grant.
• So
• it can get very complicated. But,
• but in terms of the Gueva Park,
• we
• specifically
• submitted for the community center,
• right, for that for the rehabilitation of the house with the architectural drawings and all the cost estimates associated with that. But the other trails and the other park upgrades that you want to undertake in that, those could potentially be broken out for other types of grants.
• But when we were working on that last year,
• they at that point in time,
• that was, like, towards the fall. And at that point, the consolidated funding applications
• were no those all were closed.
• So this year, we can look for, like,
• identifying specific pieces for that per park, you know, in terms of,
• trail development or in terms of habitat restoration.
• That would be separate from the actual community center piece itself. Okay.
• I guess it was maybe last year this time I got to participate in a call where
• we debrief Len, you and I or trustee Simon, you and I were on it together, where we debriefed after we didn't get a grant. I can't remember which one it was, but it was I thought it was so interesting because it really
• you know, just in hearing them, you know,
• it's sort of course, it's, you know, easy to Monday morning quarterback, but you could have put in it. But I thought it was really helpful.
• And I don't know how I don't think I did a good job of then going back to my colleagues and conveying, like, oh, these were all the things, and I don't think we were working with you at that time. But I think that that piece of hearing the feedback, it was something about connecting
• It was it was in New York forward. It was in New York forward. Yeah. But yeah. So that part was because I thought, like, there were other perspectives about how different parts of the village are connected that there, you know, there were opportunities for reassessing how we did that. So I just think, you know, just to reiterate, I think that
• I know that you go to the planning board meetings and the zoning board meetings and some of those meetings, but I think that however we we can I don't know exactly how we can
• you know, the the more working groups on some of these grants we could have,
• the better? You know? And just as an example,
• was something we're working on some grant where we were saying and it was kind of asked
• this I don't mean this critically, but it was asked casually, like, if we know people who would be willing to write letters of support, we should do that. I I think that being able to formalize that process because, of course, then I'm thinking, who lives on the street that I know that I could ask to write a letter? But I think there's probably a better way to do that
• that
• is not you the manager doesn't you don't have time to be managing that part of the process, but those pieces are really important. Mhmm. So I just don't know how we kind of tie a bow around this because I think there are tons of opportunities,
you know, in working the more we closely we can work with you and, of course, the longer you work with us. Right. Right. So, I mean I mean, part of it could just, you know, it could be even just maybe I can give, like
• we can provide, like, maybe a monthly summary of, like, what grants we are looking at. You know what I mean? And so that because usually there's usually when a grant gets announced,
• you usually have about a month or a little bit more than that to pull pull everything together. Right? So it's not usually something like two weeks. Yeah. It's it's right. So if we just send a monthly, you know, update,
• you know, just to where things are, that way the village manager can speak to the board. And if there's particular,
• like, organizations or particular aspects that you want to raise really helpful. Then we can we can flag that and make sure that we either incorporate that or reach out or get some more additional information.
• within the last couple months with a communications firm, and part of the thought was that of that was, you know, to work on our communications, but also to sort of be building this library
• of
outreach that we've done or marketing you know, things that we've done marketing wise that then could be used as supporting documents to some of the grants that we're doing. And that is that is, I think, one of the most important things that, you know, over the last ten years, they've really been pushing more and more to make sure they have, like, community buy in and community support for different grant projects.
• You do have a lot I will say the village has a lot of documents and a lot of, like, you know, documentation on different projects and the community support for them. So so far, we haven't that has not been an issue,
• but it is very helpful, especially even though it's something like if a if a document is a few years old to have those follow-up, like, maybe a community meeting or, like, a little bit of, you know, something at a work session or, you know, a village board meeting just to get additional feedback to say, we had these initial documents, and then we, you know,
• we reconfirmed
• that this particular project is priority of the communities.
Okay. You know, I think that I mentioned this early on, but I just wanted to emphasize it again that in in the year or so that we've been working with you, we have a lot of wins. And I wanna I wanna thank you for that and as well as the manager who's who works most directly with you is my my recollection is that you took us somewhat by the hand to Westchester County, and we ended up with 700,000,
for the Brook Street drainage Well, yeah. I mean, that was right. That was a that was a you know? And we are looking at potentially
• submitting another grant under that that program. Yeah. Right. You know? And they seem to be happy with the way So I just want to point folks. The manager has a memo in in there. Right. Good good segue. Trusting side. Yeah. Yeah. And,
you know, we have we have big wins and little wins. Right. And, certainly, we have our share of disappointments as everyone does, you know, when you get engaged in the grand business. But I just wanted to point out that, you there's about a million bucks there that Just do we we can all be very pleased about. And just before you get to that manager
• input on these grants before they,
• you know, kind of hit the submit button. So
• these stakeholders could consist of all of us as well as committee chairs
• or, you know, certain experts in our community
• on key topics. I just
I don't know what the process is. Think it it that input. It differs from grant to grant. Right? Like, you know, and Valerie can speak to this a little bit more. Right? New York Forward requires robust community input.
• Other grants like the TAP grant that the board just voted on,
• a resolution for last week, right, that just required a resolution passed by the board and getting some letters of some support from members of the community.
• Other smaller grants may not even require that. It may just require, you know, showing support from the municipality itself.
• So it kinda depends on On the grant. Correct. Yeah. Usually, I would say the the more money that is available
• from the grant,
• the more More input. Yeah. Exactly. The more, input and support they want shown from the community. Yeah. No. I've always found in in business that,
• incredibly invaluable.
• But in addition, it's the people who are closest to the work and passionate,
• you know, around it that would also be adding value to the content of the Mhmm. You know, of the final document. So Yeah. And, I mean, I think,
you know, a good example of that is the TAP grant that we're getting ready to submit. Right? Because we, you know, that that for those who may not have been watching the meeting last week, that is we're seeking money to install sidewalks on Cleveland between Jacobi and 5 Corners. Mhmm. Right? And so we've,
• reached out for support the Bicycle Pedestrian Committee,
• from the library, from the Sustainability Committee,
• from the school district. That's great. You know, all all people that have a vested interest in seeing those sidewalks built. Mhmm. Right? Safe safe passage to the library, safe passage to CET,
• you know, more walkability
• for residents overall. So, you know, trying to show that there is that stakeholder support
• from,
• as you said, those who are most invested in the in the project.
Thank you. So if I can kind of provide an outline perhaps or work as a group, we can work towards an outline of how we're gonna move forward. I would it seems to me, like, in the near term, we have a
• CFA, the consolidated funding application. Correct? Mhmm. And then in the medium term, we have New York forward. Right. And then in kind of the long term,
• I would say,
• you know, probably not even necessarily for this round, though maybe as practice,
• congressionally directed spending
• for the pedestrian bridge because, you know, the manager's great memo that goes back to covers twenty twenty five successes,
• but there was a history before that. Right? And one of them is congressionally directed spending
• from former congressman Mondaire Jones route. 10 communities got CDS from Mondaire,
• and Croton got two two of those
• grants. One was for directly for the village,
• for the bridge,
• know, Half Moon Bay Bridge, and then the other was for
• Van Cortland Manor,
• which, you know, is a large and significant nonprofit and obviously an important part of the community even if it's not actually the government anyway.
• But, you know, given the CDS process and how you don't always get it and,
• you know, the fact that we have the luxury of some time on the pedestrian bridge. But on the flip side, if it needs repairs, it's not gonna be cheap. I think that's a strong CDS candidate. Yep.
• Also, the fact that it goes to, like, a regional resource, which is Croton Landing. Right?
• You know? Anyway
• but in terms of CFA, what do you kind of envision? And I'll I'll start to the group, but especially
• you, Valerie, and manager, if there are specific projects you want think we should be thinking about for CFA. Yeah. So I think with the CFA, definitely the parks projects
• and,
• also some trail projects looking at, you know, especially
• in some of your parks if they wanna develop new trails or rehabilitation
• of some trails or expansion of trails, that seems to be a very big thing. And then also the local waterfront realization program
• to see if there's any of those projects that are identified in the LWRP,
• whether we wanna move forward with those.
• And then I think just in general,
• you know, some of the water quality improvement projects, if there's a particular storm water project that we you know, the village really wants to focus on or other storm water projects, that could be a potential. And then also the you know, some of the,
• over the last year, there's been some,
• grant funding available for,
• communities that are pro housing communities.
• And so and they've been they've been coming up with different types of
• different types of projects that could qualify.
• And so that's something else that now, you know, more familiar with the community, but also for the fact that, you know, you already have moved forward with a number of different projects that maybe there might be some funding in that
• to help with the the village move forward with some of your infrastructure projects as well.
• So those are the types of things that we'll be looking for, but there usually is, as part of this the CFA, there will be a a package of
• funding available,
• and we'll probably comb through the whole the the whole package and then work with the
• with your village manager to identify any particular projects that could potentially meet. And then we can also come back again to talk about if there is another type of project that, you know, might not be on your capital,
• program, but it could be something that we, you know, talk about or just like you were talking about with the parks or trails that we could also identify as a new project and try to submit for for the CFA. Okay. And, what level of maturity does a project need typically for CFA? Well, that's the so it all it all varies.
• You know, it depends. A lot of the park projects,
• they do wanna see,
• if you can have some sort of plans associated with them.
• But some of the LWRP
• projects, which is the local waterfront revitalization program, some of it, they tend to like it in phases.
• So it could be the first phase would be for design.
• You know? And then once you complete the design, you go back again for more funding for the actual construction,
• you know, or the engineering of it, and then you come back again for the actual, like, implementation.
• So sometimes it's a couple years in a row, but they do like to see those types of phases. So a number of these programs do have start off with the design or engineering phase that you could potentially put funding funding in for as well. Yeah. I mean, I think the LWRP has a number of projects. Some are
• and,
• you know, maybe not that exciting, and then some are very exciting, but kind of more in the category of nice to haves. The latter being a prime example would be Yeah. The connection of Curtin Landing to Oswaldoana.
• Right.
• And
• that like, there's no design even, so getting that funded would be a huge
• plus for the community. Yep. Okay.
Valerie, under the CFA, is there, funding available for, drinking water improvements?
• projects,
• you know, but, again, some of it has to do with,
• it depends on what it is that you're looking to do, and and so we can talk about that. Because sometimes if it's just, like, maintenance
• potentially be if it if if it improves water quality,
• you know, as a part of that relining, then that could potentially be
• a project to submit for. So it there's, like, little nuances
for each one of those. But, yes, the water quality improvement projects would probably most likely be that. Good. Thank you. And just because I have a little knowledge of it and where you asked about it, when we were talking about the law trap the law park drainage in Briarcliff, that was the third phase of two phases that kind of had already been implemented.
• So when Valerie talks about staging and where you are and how shovel ready you are, Some of those things affect certain things. Yeah.
Alright. Thank you, Valerie. Very Thank much, Valerie. Have a good night. Thank you, Valerie.
We're just gonna see if we can make your volume a little bit louder, Kieran. Sure.
Yes. Yeah. I can hear you plainly. I don't know if folks in the audience can really hear. Can we crank that a little? I can try.
• to hear me now? No. Okay.
• I'll just
• keep talking a bit here.
• So
• you can set the volume.
• for Oh, you moved them. This far out.
• sort of forecasting.
• We're gonna be
• Here. Yeah.
• while those technical issues are being worked out, I'll just orient us on the agenda. This is a further discussion of an operation of the possible operational study for the village court.
• This would be in theory with the the Center for Government Research.
• Kieran, who we're working on tuning in, is here on behalf of CGR.
• And, especially given where we the
• we've expanded the agenda since this was originally devised,
• and, we're already an hour deep.
• And, so for that reason, I just wanna level set here and say I think that kind of what I hope to achieve in this agenda item is for us to have a good conversation with Kieran,
• really get a sense of what CGR can do,
• and then bring this back for a discussion and vote
• at an actual regular meeting of the board of trustees.
• Alright. I mean, if this is as good as it gets,
• hopefully,
• people can hear reasonably well.
Sure. Yeah. I'll I'll try to talk loudly. I don't know if that will help at all, but
• I hope it projects a little bit. I'm a senior associate at at CGR,
• as was mentioned, the Center for Governmental Research.
• I have a a little slide presentation I can do if that would be helpful just to overview the the project here and the research we're thinking about.
• Yes. Yes. Please. That'd great. Sure.
The just a quick technical note. So, yeah, we're closing that control panel. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Mayor.
• Alright. Yes. Please go ahead.
Think you may need to make, Kieran a cohost so that he can share his screen.
• Yeah.
• Are you able to share, Kieran?
• I see. Blues no If if it doesn't work, can just talk through everything.
• What's that? Has to be to come. You know what? Because Oh,
• Command Zoom. Right. Yeah. But just, like, for like, I'm just gonna be recording this. Yeah. We should record it too. But just because I think that there is a lot of potential there. Yeah. And instead of us trying We're gonna get a lot of support out of that piece. So Let's figure that out. Alright. Okay. You should be able to share with Derek.
Derek, looks like it's working. Especially given the limitations we have on the volume, can we limit outside noise? Away. Yes. Awesome. Can you see my screen here? Yes. Yes. We can. Yep. Great.
• So just a little bit of background on CTR.
• We're based out of Rochester, New York. We've been in the municipal consulting business for over a century. We were founded by George Eastman of Eastman Kodak to be a resource to local governments. So we work with a lot of municipalities
• on
• studies to address whatever questions they have.
• We've looked at port operations as part of numerous studies we've done,
• kind of general municipal assessments,
• operational assessments,
• town of Rye, South Dampin, Grand Island, etcetera.
• We've also looked at court consolidation.
• In particular,
• we did a study for Port Chester on that
• question.
• So,
• what we're looking at here, our understanding of the study is examining if efficiencies can be found in court operations,
• potentially resulting in cost savings.
• So we'd like to conduct a detailed review of the court operations looking at the staffing structures, the administrative setup,
• short and long term budgetary needs,
• the revenue generated by fines and fees,
• and identify the course of this, current strengths of the village court, some challenges it may be facing,
• what opportunities exist for improvement,
• and pros and cons about maintaining the status quo everything as it is currently
• versus some potential options for change that we hope to identify as we conduct the study.
• We have a few sources of data we'd look to gather. First of all, we'd start with interviews of key players here,
• and we post interview the village justice, justices,
• prosecutor,
• the court clerk, mayor, village manager,
• as well Portland's town justice
• and the town supervisor.
• We would also like to get some input from law enforcement that is bringing some of the cases before the court to understand how well it works for them, what could be improved,
• what their considerations are. So that would include the police departments,
• the MTA police,
• and the local state police unit,
• is doing some of the traffic tickets, etcetera.
• As well, to get a sense of how it impacts people who are bringing cases before the court, we'd like to meet with a group of defense attorneys,
• have a group meeting or a focus group with them
• to get their perspective on things.
• In terms of data from the court, we'll look for
• three years of caseload data,
• budgets,
• actual expenditures,
• revenues,
• breakdown of fine revenue by source. So we need to understand where it's coming from,
• fines and fees,
• what kind of cases are being brought, etcetera.
• Document record storage, understand how that's being done, what kind of technology is being used currently to manage information
• and staffing information, job descriptions, collective bargaining agreements, etcetera, to get a a full picture of how the court is currently operating.
• As well, we'd like to benchmark with two other municipalities
• that have recent court reorganizations,
• perhaps mergers,
• dissolution.
• We're
• looking to find some. There aren't a lot that necessarily occur,
• but
• if we can find some, we can understand
• what happened in those situations,
• the outcomes, the challenges,
• logistic issues,
• and advice they may have for others considering
• some of those same issues.
• Out of all of this, we look to develop a range of options and talk about the pros and cons of each option.
• So we don't have a, particular agenda or a particular recommended solution for anything.
• What we'd like to do is present a range of options which start with maintaining
• the status quo
• to making some kind of along the spectrum, some kind of improvements or changes,
• and perhaps at the far end of the spectrum, considering whether a dissolution or consolidation with the town court,
• might be a solution that makes some sense.
• So we'll consider
• a variety of impacts
• and outcomes
• along a range of different factors. So we'll look at budgetary factors,
• potential
• tax cost savings,
• how this will impact personnel who currently work for the court, etcetera,
• what
• various options might do for staff workloads,
• how it might affect convenience
• and so forth of those,
• using the court, utilizing the court.
• We're proposing a four month time frame for the study. This would be roughly one hundred and eighty staff hours we're looking at,
• and we propose an all inclusive fee of $37,500
• for the study
• itself. So that's just a brief overview
• of the study, and I'm happy to entertain
• any questions you might have.
Got a got a couple if I can. Yeah. Yeah. Kiernan, thank you very much for your presentation
• and also the some of the enhancements that you've made from from the the the original
• draft that we saw a few weeks ago. Just a couple of quick points and and not not trying to edit or or, you know, micro
• micro enhance, you know, with any any addition. Really just questions, but possibly suggestions as well.
• On page
• page three,
• where you talk about the attorneys
• focus groups, and you
• specifically mentioned the defense attorneys.
• I was wondering is in in work that you've done in the past or really just in in in contemplation of this, would there be any benefit to talking to the assistant district attorneys or the the county the county district attorneys that that have engagement with the court from time to time?
• they have. Yep. So,
• you know, we're open to the possibility of making some adjustments with who we speak to
• based on some of the feedback we get when we're actually on the ground or some of your suggestions right now.
• And and the thing I'll I'll just say off the bat is, you know, I think we could swing one or two changes
• without
• much impact. If we're talking about more than that,
• at some point, we might have to revisit the scope and and think a little bit about how that might change the cost profile. But, you know,
• perhaps one additional interview, two additional interviews could be added within the same scope and cost we're we're talking about currently.
• mirror image kind of thing on page five.
• You talk in in the middle of that page about
• talking
• with the justices
• in the communities
• in which another community's court has been absorbed to see how it's going.
• Is it without
• impacting, you know, your scope of work here too much, is it possible to to look at the flip side in a couple of those instances? In other words, talk to a community that
• that's no longer has a court to see how they feel about about the
consolidation. I think that's yeah. I think that's what we hope to do with those two is Right. Talk to some that have, in fact,
• dissolved or consolidated their courts and see what the impact was. Right.
• when we met here a few weeks ago, we had we had talked about
• whether or not there was some some way you could you could talk to a cross section of the public
• our public about how they feel. In other words, you're you're talking to to stakeholders,
• which is excellent, and I'm glad you're doing that. But but the public are are stakeholders as well. And so I'm just wondering if there's a way without without broadening this too much to to be able to to to to talk to people who might be impacted locally.
That that, practically speaking, gets a little bit tricky to do well without broadening it Okay. Is is the issue. So,
• you know, one of the things, for example, that we kicked around as an idea was a a a survey, but the issue with that is
• it's difficult and costly to get a representative sample of the population to answer a survey.
• It tends to be answered by those who have the strongest opinions,
• you know, on the matter one way or another perhaps, which isn't necessarily representative,
• you know, cross section
• of residents.
• There
• are some other options, for instance, reaching out to specific groups such as, you know, the the Rotary Club, the Chamber of Commerce, PTA,
• or something like that, getting some feedback through those venues.
• Yeah. Anything like that, I think, would would add to the scope and the cost because we'd have to do kind of the equivalent of a focus group is I think what we're talking about at that point. So it would involve some recruiting
• people, scheduling,
• etcetera, potentially for a meeting like that.
• If you have other ideas about how it might be easily accomplished, I'm I'm certainly open to them.
• you know, the the purpose of this
• study, right, is to review the operational efficiencies of the court. And,
• you know, I don't know how many residents of the village are well versed in that in that topic. Right? I mean, if there was a if there was an outcome that the study
• came out with that the board then wanted to gauge public
Yep. Opinion on. I think that that would be I was gonna say that that is more board work and then this is more, like, narrow and specific.
• You know, I think one of the ways of gauging,
• you know and I think we talked about this as previous work sessions as, you know, a focus group of people who were parties before the car court. But I'm going to guess that perhaps that wasn't in your presentation because
• the reaction will be, well, if the case went my way,
• that was that was good. And if the case did not go my way, that was bad. And then neither of those cases are very objective.
• And so that's the theory of perhaps going to the attorneys who are
• repeat
• know, repeat
• have a re repeating relationship and have some object,
• distant emotional distance from the individual controversies.
• But on that point, the, justice court also handles,
• you know, noncriminal cases as well,
• evictions, small claims, etcetera.
• So would you also be
• I mean, it sounds like you're willing to be flexible on this, but would you be reaching out to people that are arguing other cases in addition to criminal ones?
• again, I think, you know, we could talk to so if we're talking about attorneys, if there are other you know, we said defense attorneys, which kind of presumes those involved in in criminal matters by title perhaps. But, you know, so if there are other attorneys involved, that that would be our main
• kind of vector, if you will, again, for finding people who are involved in the court and have a stake in it and have a stake in representing people in front of the court but have some distance from it, as you said. So that would be the main way we do that.
• You know, again, if if there's a desire to really talk to people who appear before the court for civil matters or something like that,
• that's something we we could consider again for an additional scope perhaps and an additional cost.
• I perhaps
• reiterate
• Brian's point right there that,
• you know, their their view strictly on the efficiency of port operations may be limited.
• But, you know, again
• Yep. I think the sense of of whether this is something you want,
• you know, is something you can consider, but that
would probably expand the scope of it. Yep. And I'll just wrap up my my point just by saying I'm I'm comfortable with that being our role, mayor. I just wanted to
• just make sure there wasn't something typically that they did with the public that that could be applied to this. But if it's if it's if it's our role, so be it. And last point just on task three options for future.
• I presume that we would see
• almost an equal number of options
• for efficiencies and innovations in in addition to the question of of consolidation.
• Is that is that fair?
Well, sure. You know, it depends on what we identify. Presuming that there are. We speak. Yeah.
• That'd be my expectation that that we would have. We we would be able to look at a a a range of things and and then make make our mark our judgments about what made the most sense. Thank you very much. Thank you, Kieran.
So I'll jump in. I have a well, I have a lot of questions. But one question I have is about
• I I think you're probably aware of the
• timing of you know, the the timing of since we're talking about potentially merging or dissolving the court,
• as part of the outcome of what this study might provide.
• I have concerns about the timing of when this is happening. It's just about March.
• And the the timing of,
• potentially the findings and the desire,
• you know, the the the next steps that we're gonna undertake.
• We don't have a whole lot of runway here between now and when a decision would be made. Is this typically
• you know, I don't I don't know exactly how this works in every other municipality. But for us, the decision
• if we decided that the
• your study proved that the court should be dissolved
• and then
• there was it ended up on the ballot in November, so work back from there. I feel like this timeline is
So just to slip in, I'll let Kieran answer for himself in a moment, but the manager and I have had been having a discussion about that, and I don't think that the well, to the manager's credit, right, is this is his usual approach in budgeting and everything else is to have the most conservative outline first and then look into it further. Right? And so what he outlined in his earlier communications with the board is, like, if you wanna figure it that way, the the the kind of the safest or you you get what I mean. Like, if you wanna have the most margin for error for all this,
• you know, this is the timeline. But the manager is looking into it a little more, and I think we'll I I don't think we wanna provide
• exact kinda dates at the moment, but there is some more wiggle in terms of how much time the board could actually look at this
• in a constructive way, in the sense that we would have more time for deliberation than perhaps
• we originally contemplated.
So I guess I'm just asking if information this for the deck. Is the timing of this I'm just trying to understand the timing of this because I don't know a lot about this, but I feel like I would have liked to if we were gonna do this
• for the potential outcome, you know, in a year where it's of you know, it's we're we're at the we're at we're at a village justice election year. Right? So I just feel like the timeline is a little short, and I'm just wondering if this is the typical timeline or if we have created a situation where we are in a little bit of a crunch.
• Like, when you out do this for other municipalities, you usually undertake it in March for a potential
• November?
• You know, I don't I don't know if you're understanding my question. But
• I mean, I you know, I would say when it so we proposed a a four month timeline, as we said, you know,
• completion by the June.
• That that's the time we think we need to manage everything and file everything. So, you know,
• we're not picking a particular start date. It it just kind of, you know, starts when it can. Right? So
• we,
• you know, we have an amount of time it could take. We we might be able to expedite that a little bit, you know, but I I don't know that it would be by, you know, more than a few weeks at best.
• But as to the the start of it, the timing of it, you know, that that's usually something that's figured out on the client's end. Yeah. Now, again, to be clear, what I'm talking about is the kind of the statutory timelines in terms of
• the operationals.
That's their that's their business and, you know, they know how long I'm just wondering if this is, like, typically, like No. When you're undertaking this study, do is it usually undertaken by municipalities
• in March, you know, with the November election? I'm just trying to figure getting that answer. Well Hearing's not answering. I I think
• much time, like, you know, after the presentation
of one of your reports does a board spend on a topic like this? I'm just saying I I'm happy to have this conversation. Conversation. I'm I'm happy happy to to have have all the conversations, but I just feel like if we talked about this in, you know, in if we start talking about it in in, I I don't know, October, maybe I would have felt I'm just nervous about the timeline and us getting the information,
• know, the work that I'm not nervous about the work that they're it just feels like a short timeline, and I'm wondering if it's realistic to undertake this type of
• because we're not gonna have the information that we need back about about budgeting
• in time to have it impact
• our budget process. Oh, that was never the intention. No. Right. I'm but I'm just
• Mhmm. It would be great to have an intention
• that included
• evaluating the court for efficiency as part of the 2627
• budget process because I'm sure,
• manager, you're looking at how all the departments could be run more efficiently
• in times when we're seeing increased costs, right, health care, pension, etcetera.
• So,
• you know, that's I mean, it's a fair question to just say Yeah. Why can't efficiency of the court
• analysis and evaluation be folded into the 2627
• budget process so that we would have an answer on efficiency
in March in four weeks? If we want you know, if we're talking about have the board having enough time to deliberate saying that it has to be done as part of the regular village budget process, that goes in completely the opposite direction. And while it's true that it wouldn't, you know, you couldn't necessarily include, any
• changes one way or the other, in this year's budget,
• it's got you know, there would be potentially a budgetary impact and that would there there will be another budget. You know what I mean? So I mean, if I could just if I could just jump in here.
• we look at all the departments every year to make sure that they are operating as efficiently as possible under their current structure.
• And, I mean, I think our budgets in recent years have proven that with, you know, 20%
• tax rates in three years.
• But, you know, if the timeline is such a is a concern to the board, you know, once again, I just wanna reiterate that there this is a study of the efficiency in the operation of the court. There we are not at the point already where we're getting ready to get petitions circulated. Right? But understanding that that is a concern of the board members, I just want to say that there is nothing
• that is requiring
• you to make a decision
• by
• July 2 so that you have it on the ballot in November. If you don't feel like you have enough
• of,
• enough knowledge at that point to make a decision, you don't make the decision at that point. And then if you wanna vote on it in August
• and we have to have and and people circulate petitions and we have to have a special election, that's why that exists in the law. Right? I mean, it it can happen. So there's a whole procedure for that. It's it's not it is nobody
• I shouldn't say. I'm speaking for myself. I am not trying to make the board
• I'm not trying to back the board into an uncomfortable spot where they're forced to make a decision. You've that is not my intention here. If you want more time, you can have that time.
• So
• to the mayor's question? Because I think that
• that sort of can help this conversation along a little bit. So
• your report
• would kind of would make a recommendation
• for next steps. It would list a series of recommendations
• for next steps for the board to take.
• Like, how what would the final report kind of look like?
So I you know, maybe more than talking about them as recommendations, it would lay out an array of options, a a menu,
• if you will. And it could say, you know, you could choose to keep everything exactly as it is Mhmm. And these are the impacts we foresee of that. You could make perhaps some some modest minor changes.
• You know, these might have this magnitude of impact. You know? And I just I don't know what any of these might be at this point. Right. So I'm just, you know, kind of speaking theoretically.
• And then, you know, kind of the range from
• complete status quo to
• minor, moderate,
• you know, more significant change, etcetera.
• And then, you know, at one end of that spectrum, we would look over the pluses and minuses and the numbers connected with something like dissolution consolidation.
And then for your clients that you work with, you know, generally, how long does it take them once they receive a final report
• to kind of go through it?
• You know, what's your process with other clients?
• it varies tremendously.
• And, you know, I
• to to be completely frank,
• you know, a fair number of our reports
• are are not acted upon in a way that generates significant change, you know, even even when we recommend strongly for particular change.
• That's just the nature. You know, it's it's something that drives information.
• You know you know, to the previous point that was raised,
• most of the time or many of our reports aren't connected to
• matters that might appear on a ballot or a ballot initiative or anything of that matter. So the timing of them, you know, in calendar terms usually
• isn't that significant.
• But it's
• I I can't say how long people on average take because it just varies tremendously.
• Some some municipalities
• really wanna get started on making some change and act on things right away. Others, it's another report and a series of continuing reports that have said the same thing,
• and, it ends up being filed away somewhere, frankly.
• Yeah.
• have a lot of respect for your company. I did a lot of research on it, and I appreciate you,
• speaking to us tonight.
• The examples that you gave us, Southampton,
• Port Chester,
• are
• extremely
• large cities with populations
• of 70,000
• people,
• you know, 32,000
• people,
• etcetera.
• Croton is a small village, right, 8,200 people, and the court is less than 1% of our entire budget appropriations.
• So one question I have for you is I would like for you to help convince me why this is a good investment,
• why we should be spending $40,000
• to learn about efficiency ideas
• on a court that costs 1%
• less than 1% of our entire budget,
• which, in my opinion, is currently
• making money for the village. So I just would love for you to you know, I'd love to hear your thoughts on, you know, why you think this is a good investment.
• maybe I'm gonna cheat on that question a little bit, but, you know, I don't know that I can
• convince you it's a good investment. That's something for you to make up your own mind on.
• All I can say is we'll produce numbers
• that will tell you how much potential money you have to save. I don't know what those will be
• before they occur. It could be on an ongoing basis. You know, the the 1%
• you cite is a small number perhaps in one year.
• Over the course of a number of years, it could add up. But, again, until we actually study and do the math, we can't tell you what a realistic cost savings may be. And it it, you know, it may be that we look through a variety of scenarios
• and don't see a lot of opportunities for cost savings.
• And, you know, to to be realistic and frank again,
• you you could have us do this study. It costs what it costs. And we could come up with, you know,
• some dramatic things that need changing or we could not come up with a lot. We don't know until we actually go in and do the work, you know. So there there might not be a lot of cost savings to realize.
• I don't know at this point, honestly.
• engineering study, a lot of the work and it was sort of piqued my interest because Karen talked about
• data management and records management in the court.
• And I think when we looked at the engineering department, that was a big unlock.
• I mean, we all kind of knew we're a very old village, and there are a lot of records.
• And how we're keeping records
• is not the most up to date, and there was a lot of room for improvement, which we, you know, really started trying to do. Yeah. Started to do. So I guess I'm curious about the court and kind of where they are from a record keeping perspective.
• And do they need that, you know I mean, that that seems like a great benefit that they could bring in.
• Curious kind of where where we are with record keeping in the court.
With the mayor's indulgent, if we can have the court clerk come up, I think she's probably the best Sure. Person to speak to that. I'd agree.
• Lisa,
• do you wanna just come up and answer trustee Nicholson's question? Oh,
• So I'm just wondering how modern,
• our record keeping,
• I have to get approval to shred after six years, VTL and parking? So every time the shredder truck comes every September, October, I get the approval. We're up to date on shredding all that. You can shred and get rid of criminal files after twenty five years. There's a lot in the vault downstairs locked. But as I said, I don't wanna get rid of criminal because we have a lot of people coming in for certificate of dispositions,
• which mean, you know, when they come in, I just I want the file, you know, because the the computer system didn't come in until the nineties. Right. So then we go to a little card system. It was like when you're in a library with the cards, so we go back and we know the files downstairs,
• and we go back to about 1973.
• Okay. Prior to that, it could have been Town of Cortland.
• lot of email.
• Not many faxes, but a lot of emails go on.
• Great. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. No. And that and, you know, that is
• we are running out of space in this building. Right? I mean, that's part of the reason why we are looking at lots of things including, you know, relocating
• departments elsewhere.
• And,
• you know, it it could be that we're gonna need to look for a type of storage facility for some of our of our records because the which I know. Right? It's saying that in 2026 is, like, why why are we doing that? But, you know, one of the things that
• Paula, the village clerk, has identified as a task that she would like to do is go through the the records. A lot half of the records downstairs in the in the court in the sorry. In the storage room are related to the manager clerk's office. Right? Because it's it's one office. And so she would like to kinda go through there and make sure that all the records that are actually down there are
• per on a permanent retention schedule and not things that can just you know, things that could be shredded. You know,
• in the seventies, eighties, nineties, everything was a letter. Right? Everything was by mail. And so, you know, people we don't necessarily need correspondence from fifty years ago. Right? I mean, it's, you know, if it's something important, obviously, but not, you know, every single letter that was sent to the village.
• So
So, Kiran, is that something that, you know, you would look at in terms of our record keeping
• and trying to, modernize that and make recommendations?
• beyond the scope of the court,
• we probably wouldn't touch in-depth.
• But, you know, in general, we intend to
• address the question of especially the court records
• Yeah. How they're being handled and, you know,
• concerns about storage and cost and so forth related to that. Yeah. Because I I know that there are other villages that
• in various departments, not specific to the court, but, you know, other villages, various departments
• have,
• ended up scanning all of their records
• and have gotten rid of their hard copy records.
• So I think and and, obviously, this is something that CGR can look at. Mhmm.
• But I think legally, that would be something that is permissible. Right? Because there is a 400 page
• book that's put out by the New York State Archives that's called the the the LGS one, the it's the record retention schedule. And everything from, like, you know, dog license forms to contracts to payroll records, everything has a set number of years that you're supposed to keep it. So, yeah, it's
• incredible.
• So yeah. And so yeah. So that that will be looked at as part of this. Got it. You know, one of the other things that
• I would I would like them to to look at in terms of potential efficiency slash modernization,
• you know, we spend
• over $30,000
• a year on
• stenographic services and,
• interpreter services for the court. And is there a more
• techno technologically
• advanced way
• of doing that either through some sort of
• recorder system,
• you know, is there an AI service. Right? I mean, this it was on the news that, you know, the Vatican is gonna be able to broadcast now in 60 different languages immediately
• through the use of AI. You know, is there a way that we could use that to somehow translate
• in real time for people in the court? So, you know, looking at because 30,000
• a year is a significant
• amount of money. So, you know, if we could, you know Manager Yeah. Wasn't clear that was part of the scope.
• So I just wanna make sure that That's well, I mean, that's scope of work. It's not spelled out it's not spelled out specifically. That's just one of the efficiencies that we would be looking at. You know? But would it come from the would it be included in the recommendation
• by Yeah. I mean,
• their their scope of work is broad at the moment. Right? I mean, they're gonna be looking at the efficiencies
that could be found in the court. Mhmm. So I'm just giving you one, you know, one example. The another example was yeah. Right. Since we went through the effort of zooming in the horse, perhaps we can hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak. Is
• that something that would potentially be part of the review?
• I mean, obviously, we don't wanna say that you're gonna recommend software x or or service y, but the potential for information technology like that would definitely be looked at. Right?
• the the depth, yes, to some extent is the answer. And and the depth we've looked at it is,
• you know, a question. So we are looking at the staffing of the court, the resources, the budgeting. So obviously, some of that falls under that. We're looking at the technology that's being used.
• Now I don't know that we'd be taking you know, we'd be talking about it in general, talking generally
• about some possibilities and alternative.
• I can't promise we're gonna be doing a deep dive on what the best AI software is for this particular case or something like that. Again, an intensive study like that would would be another scope. But generally speaking, yes, that that will be something we'd look at.
Okay. Just inter I just have one other question about, in terms of the actual study.
• Some I know that
• the,
• expanding the court to
• have night court, which we don't currently have, and to do Zoom arraignments, which we don't currently do.
• Would there be some way but it's something that people discuss.
• Would that be would there be some way to figure out for that to be part of the study,
• you know, how adding those things might benefit or how they would increase the cost? Or is that something that it would be part of the
• typical recommendations you would make or suggestions you would obviously, you don't. You haven't done the study, you don't know. But those are two things that other courts are doing that we're not doing. And so would the would the feedback that you give us include those items, or would that be beyond the scope of what you have laid out in this price point?
• we
• could do,
• you know,
• kind of rough estimates of how that might work. You know, if we're going to do a a detailed study of how to set up a night court or something else like that, again, that that might be a new scope of work by itself.
• But, you know, to generally
• say, you know, you could switch over to this format.
• This is how you might staff it. This is what some of the costs might look like ballparking it. That could be something that's that's part of the study. Okay.
• a breakdown of
• budgets and revenues
• from three to five years.
• I I guess depending on so
• looking back to,
• you know,
• 2022
• or so in my mind, I mean, maybe there's still kind of a a hangover from
• COVID and the pandemic at that point.
• We we just wanna make sure we have
• you know, we're not just looking at one year, but we'll certainly, you know, take into account, and we have in the past when we've done,
• you know, research on municipal budgets of all kinds that the pandemic years were weird years for a lot of things in terms of their budget impacts and everything like that. So Right. Bear that in mind. Why would you include the I would think the only clean
• really.
• I mean
I think having, again, the the three years helps, but but it will be broken out, I think, by year. So, you know, we
• usually present in tables. So, you know, there's '23, '24, '25,
• and you can
• look at the last two years, look at the most recent year only, and, you know, draw conclusions from that, you know, as you think is appropriate. I guess I'm just sensitive because you said five years back. So to me,
• what they are, but revenues,
• you know, fell off a cliff because of COVID. So clearly, ROI on a court is gonna look terrible
• during COVID versus an improved ROI and efficiency score
post COVID. So to the court actually didn't remain stable. The court was closed for five months in 2020.
So Well, I I think that the trustee's point is taken there in terms of, you know, exclude but,
• you know, whether it's three or five, I think the other point is that if it's broken out by table, the board can weigh it how it wants, so to speak. And, you know, we're all aware of the pandemic. We're all aware that that wasn't a normal time. If that appears in a table, we give it appropriate weight. That's why God created footnotes
• Yeah. To
• what I'm struggling with is
• this is an this is an expensive this is a spend for us.
• And I think that we
• not related to the
• quality of this,
• consulting firm and the the
• the,
• proposal that is presented to us, especially with the,
• updates after the conversation that we previously had about this.
• I just to me,
• we have
• I wanna make sure that if we're gonna commit to spending $40,000
• to study a department, that we're studying
• a department that that may cost you know, studying other departments might cost a little bit more than this, but the ROI on what we're gonna get might enable us to make better staffing staffing decisions
• for other departments. I I don't I mean, I can be specific or I don't have to, but I'm just thinking about the fact that,
• to me, $40,000 is a lot of money to spend on this. And I before we make a decision about whether we wanna spend this kind of money to
• look at the court, especially based on the fact that you're saying we we,
• you know, we have a little bit more time than maybe we originally thought we had in terms of
• making a decision about this November.
• I would like to understand a little bit
• what benefits we could have from spending, call it, $50,000 on studying another department, which might
• be making a budgetary a a larger budgetary ask. I I don't I'm being a little, you know, I'm I'm kinda going a long way around the mountain, but, you know, the No. I I agree. The police, you know, police I think that's part of the conversation that we can have when it comes back for the regular meeting. And we should
• our friend I mean Yeah. This is not a Karen question. He has a lot of information he can share potentially, but that's a question for us to to think about. Yeah. Right. But I'm just saying like, in terms of kind of, like, wrapping up this conversation for us right now, this is why I'm this is why I'm asking the questions I'm asking. $40,000 is a lot of money. Is this the best use of it for our decision making process? Stipulate that's a rhetorical question, that's a good rhetorical question. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't. Don't answer. That that can turn into a I wanna go home eventually. Can turn into a substantive question for the regular meeting. Right. Yes. Okay.
Kiernan, one more quick question back to some of the things I was asking earlier
• just on making sure we're we're
• we're getting what what we think we might need. But on a baseline data, will you look at
• who the customers are of of the court?
• In other words, Croton residents versus non Croton residents or
• things of that nature? To
to the extent that we can get that data, yes, certainly, we'll break it out. Yeah. I I I it's it's helpful to know. Yeah. Kieran, to build on that,
• and those people are buying gas and food and beverages, and they're contributing to our economy.
• I know that's very difficult data to get if unless you're doing some kind of survey. But is that something that you might,
• you know,
• build in as,
• oh, by the way, you know, there's this additional revenue stream,
• from people coming in and out of here,
• which I think is just a consideration.
• know, I I have to say for that, we we actually have a a history of doing economic
• impact studies,
• and and they're quite complex and they're highly detailed.
• So I'm gonna say we can mention that, but the the actual estimates, we'd wanna do it properly,
• and that that would be an additional scope of work. And and there's there's a very precise methodology
• for how some of those are done, actually.
Yeah. Because the point is and we I think we know from 2020 that a large percentage of users of the quarter from out of town, but they're coming in. And I think, you know, there is a benefit
• associated with that to our town that hasn't been measured,
• and quantified.
• So it's just
• you know, I think there's value to that.
• That that makes a certain amount of sense. Yeah.
• Further questions?
• Well, thank you very much, and
• thank you all for your thoughtful con thoughtful conversation.
We'll continue this, and now we move on to another Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Have a good night. So, mayor, can you just clarify? Because I know, like, a lot of everyone who's sitting in the audience is here for mostly for this. So can we just talk about what what happens next with this conversation so that everybody understands?
I will put it on the agenda for regular meeting, and we'll have a discussion about whether or not to retain them or not.
And I I think the the plan would be to have it at the next meeting? Potentially.
yeah. I mean, our next meeting is not until March 11. March 11. So it's gotta be near our next meeting. Yeah. I don't
I'm new at this, so I I respect what the manager has put forth here and the company you've chose.
• I do have an alternative idea
• for evaluating efficiency of the court.
• You know,
• I know with Kieran on the phone, we didn't wanna get into anything outside of the, you know, of the study. But if it's something that you would consider, I'd be happy to meet with you and the manager. Oh, okay. Yeah. If you wanna talk about this offline, I'm happy to talk about it offline. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.
• Is chief Columbus still with us? I saw them. Saw I he got a call. I think he actually had a call.
• Did they have a call? I I did hear a buzzer go off. He might have had it on the line. Oh, wait. We have chief Strini with us. Chief Strini. Oh, they were here with us the whole time. Welcome back. They're coming out of the dark.
• So,
• I asked,
• chief Colombo and assistant chief Strini to join us tonight
• to, talk about the replacement for engine one nineteen.
• That engine is housed at Washington Engine,
• Firehouse on North Riverside.
• Their company has been working on
• developing
• the specs for the new engine,
• to replace their existing engine, which I believe is how old, Chris? 2006.
• 2006. So it's twenty years old at, this year, which is the standard,
• replacement time frame under the NFPA, the National Fire Protective Association.
• So they've been working on that. They have their specifications
• ready
• to move forward.
• With this particular
• contract,
• it's actually available
• through one of our, cooperative purchasing,
• agencies, the Houston Galveston
• Area Consortium.
• And so, we're able to purchase it through that consortium
• without having to go through the competitive bidding process.
• And, because it's a little bit of a different,
• way than we've done it in the past and the fact that it is a significant sum of money, which we do not have to pay until it is delivered,
• which is approximately
• does it say on there? Is it four years? Sixteen hundred. Four years, roughly. 1600. Within 1600. Yes. I did the math. So
• Joe will be chief at that time. Lord
• willing. Lord willing. Yes. So
• we don't have we we don't have to make the payment until the until it's delivered. So we don't have there's no
• money do it at the
• signing of the contract. But like I said, because this is a little bit of a different,
• approach than we've taken to these purchases in the past, I just wanted to have the chiefs come kinda talk about it and see if the board had any questions.
• Glad you're glad you're here. What
• you know, just for those that are still listening or with us, what happened in the fire engine manufacturing
• industry over time
• that makes a
• replacement of a vehicle take purchase of a new vehicle take four years? I once had to wait, like, four months for a new car, and I thought this was outrageous.
• Four years. Something happened in the in the manufacturing
world that that that caused this. Seems like COVID kind of with that national backorder and parts, I think it's slowly getting better. Yeah. But the the backlash of
• waiting is just growing. Yeah. I mean, there's still the same number of manufacturers out there. Yep. And they all seem to be as long because the latter's being purchased by somebody different than the manufacturer of Seagrave,
and it's the same same length of time. Right. I don't know if any of you were able to catch up with the congressional hearings with the major manufacturers
• Yeah. Of fire equipment. They spent quite a bit of time Yeah. Beating those guys up.
• And,
• essentially, it comes down to four or five companies that are in this business. Yeah. Major companies are in the business. One of the bigger ones
• one of the bigger ones is called Red Group.
• They bought up five
• different fire
• company manufacturers,
• and it's really like an investment group more so than it is having anything to do with public safety or that kind of thing.
• So they they ate up a big portion of the industry.
• Pierce Manufacturing,
• Rosenblatt, Sutphin, Seagrave, that's basically the remaining
• major companies. There's some smaller ones along the line,
• but those are the companies that pretty much, do the 90% of the business throughout the country.
• The other thing that has a huge impact,
• abate what the chief said based on what they did in the time frame,
• is that there's
• basically one engine, Detroit diesel. Yeah. You
• can't find a a unit, you know, you know, whether it's your dump truck or your gar whatever garbage truck, it's detroiturable.
• It's Allison transmissions.
• Two
• fire pump companies,
• either Hale or or Waters.
• They put the fire pumps on there. Anybody can put a fiberglass tank in, but they get a cab, a chassis, and they put all of this stuff,
• all of the stuff you see on a fire truck onto a cabinet chassis with those
• three major components,
• you know, the pump, the transmission,
• and and the and the engine,
• and they sell it. And
• the price
• and the time period has
• doubled in five years. Absolutely doubled
• in five years, the cost of fire apparatus. And
• I don't know that any of the congressional hearings got satisfactory
• answers or information,
• but
• it it's it's to the point where almost
• seems like collusion
• that they're, you know So there's something Something's going on. We're all doing the same thing. Yeah. You know, the the the new ladders from where?
• Pierce or Pierce. Yeah. Yeah. And and then the and we're talking about with Seagreve, but there there's no difference
Yeah. No matter where you go. You know, there's no question it needs to be replaced, and so we're we're gonna we're gonna do that, you know, as soon as as soon as they can get us one. But Yeah. I I was just wondering,
• are are there some things that that
• an engine
• twenty years younger,
• twenty years newer can do that that that we wouldn't have from from the one that's being replaced in terms of functions or abilities?
Yeah. I think they had the same safety features. There's some stuff that's a little bit Just a little newer. There's new camera systems. They Oh, yeah. Okay. Know, you put your left blinker on, lights come on on the left side. That's something they might not have had twenty years ago. Yep. So there's slight things that are that are better that we've been informed on Yep. And we've added to the to the build of this rig. But
• for the most part, it's
Yeah. Cookie cutter ish. Yeah. Yeah. A little bit here and there, though. That's Yeah. That's that's great. And we actually,
• Yep. To a very, small extent
• in that on the current apparatus,
• seats eight people. Mhmm. The one that we're proposing
• only seats, six,
• four in the back, two in the front. The current one,
• had a a little bit more, to it,
• multiple discharges.
• make a little less Right. A little more efficient
• than than what we we we sort of
• over specked and overbought
• Yeah. Twenty years ago. Yeah. But
So is the chief, is is the reduction in just the length or in the width a little bit? Because I'm wondering if the new one would would do a little better on some of our more narrow streets. Or
This one, I think, is a little bit smaller. Okay. Not a not a big, big difference. Maybe a foot. Maybe. I'm I'm I don't remember exact. But Game game of interest. It's it's tough. Chemical engine, they built it small because it has to fit in the firehouse. Yeah. So that one's remained small.
• It's it's a very small firehouse. So
• if some
• of these people build in these
• posts to get in their driveways,
• Big trucks just don't fit. Right. Exactly. Thank you both. Thank you. Thank you.
• side, can you elaborate on the benefits of going off an existing contract? Yeah. Sure. Thank you, mayor. So,
• going through the competitive bidding process,
• we have to put it out to bid. Mhmm. We have to wait a minimum of, you know, three or four weeks to allow the bids to be, received.
• And then, we have to review the bids, make sure that they're accurate and complete.
• And then
• the the board has to award the bid, and then,
• the village clerk has to get insurances and get, surety bonds and make sure that all, you know, all their paperwork is in order. And so this process, when all is said and done, it can take three months. And what this this consortium has basically done all all of that already
• for us. Right? They've already vetted the firm. They've already made sure that the the specifications,
• their vendor specifications are complete, that they're, you know, that they're,
• a legally operating business. All of that all of that stuff that we would have to do has been done already. So it it saves a significant amount of time.
• So
• or is it better to do a competitive bidding process? Because it sounds like there are very few vendors that can even Yeah. And, I mean, the thing the thing is, right, is that,
• been working on designing a specific type of engine for their needs and their wants and what will best suit the residents of our,
• village. Mhmm. And so,
• you know, usually when you do these types of
• bids or, you know, specification,
• develop these specifications,
• usually end up receiving one bid because it's you know,
• what ultimately ends up happening is that the other companies know that you've been working on designing it in such a way that it's
• you know, that that company bids on it. Yeah. So, you know, you have to make sure that you when you put your bid proposals together,
• that you don't specify
• certain you you can't specify specific brands or you can't you have to make sure that, you know, you include, you know, or the equivalent thereof, you know, stuff like that so that it is you know, other people can certainly bid on it. Mhmm. But,
• you know, just generally speaking, that's not usually what happens.
And the function of the, you know, of of what we do Mhmm. And and, you know, you get a brand new fire truck and you sit it next to the old one, the equipment comes off and one comes out to the other. So, I mean, we we have to be able to the things that we know and use and need have to fit in compartments, have to be able to you know, how much hose do we have to carry, how much things that we need, you know,
• it's almost cookie cutter to some extent
• that we have to,
• you know,
• replace one and almost almost in kind with it, you know, with the other ones. I mean,
• you know, it's not a lot of
• wiggle room as far as negotiating a deal. Yeah.
• a real world example. Right? We we did we did a bid for the ladder truck. Right? That was a that was a regular bid. And
• chief Munson at the time was the one who was
• who was the chief,
• and he had been working with the latter's apparatus committee to get the
• specifications
• ready.
• And, I mean, I think it took Paula and myself
• almost four weeks just going through the specifications
• and removing all the brand names and removing or adding in or the equivalent thereof and, you know, just making it so that it would be a legally
• compliant bid.
• And, of course, we only got one response to that bid. Mhmm. So, you know, I mean, it's just it's just a a lot of work when you're dealing with these highly
• specified
• How much was the ladder truck? Over $2,000,000.
Yeah. And we got This is a bargain. So this is a bargain. And then from that, we got $250,000
because From Assemblywoman Levenburg. It's Assemblywoman Levenburg. Right? So if we know that this is sort of gonna come in 2028,
• we can start
• soliciting. Because then the next one Gonna be more like 2030.
• Yeah. Because then the next one that needs to be replaced is another engine,
• 01/20.
• Right? And so that would that order would need to be placed in the next
• couple of years.
• Next 2020. With
• Actually, two things. One is that we had no knowledge of the
• lease purchase
• that the village allowed to do, but that has an impact on your budgeting.
• It's you don't have to bond. You
• know? So the it's a different thing. But there's some fire departments that go that way based on their cost and their money.
• The second thing is at the time of the signing,
• they offered that they
• would sign allow us to sign for a second fire truck
• at the same price with the same specification.
• That's the caveat.
• So I did my quick little homework cheat sheet Mhmm.
• This morning. Exhibit a. That's right. So in four years in four years,
• the engine the same exact engine that they're asking 1,700,000.0
• for would be 392
• thou $3,092,995.
• So what's happened in the last five years,
• the cost is doubled and the time to make an apparatus is doubled. Yeah. It's gonna happen again in the next five years. There's a and that's one of the big things that the congressional hearings,
• emphasize.
• Basically, it's a 20% each year
• cost,
• revision
• for each of these fire apparatus companies. Like compound interest. Compound.
• Yeah. So so if you take what our 1,700,000.0
• is, just next year alone, that 20%
• is $357,000.
• Wow. And you keep adding that to
• the cost of the apparatus, it actually will double in price. Now I I don't know if the board is anywhere near
• saying, you know, we we might save some money,
• but you'll save,
• like, a mill it's
• 3 it's 3 it's over $3,000,000.
• You you would save this considerable amount of money. And the crazy thing is
• it puts us right in the time slot to get it made.
• So if we waited a year or two,
• what'll
• happen,
• logistically
• is that in about two and a half years from the time you all signed the contract,
• The vendor will contact us to do final plans, specifications,
• drawings,
• and a high level of detail that they're gonna build the truck too. We won't talk to them now after you sign your contract for two and a half years.
So because that's that's where the backlog is Yeah. Where the the actual building and construction of the apparatus. Yeah. And so and, you know, I think the manager was knows a little bit about this as well. But in in 2030, when when new one nineteen arrives,
we'll be able to get a few dollars for old one nineteen somewhere. That's what I'm saying. Somewhere. Well, was just I I mean, I actually you know, since we're since we're entering into all these hypothetical conversations,
• you know, I I did have a discussion with the chiefs, and, I mean, I we actually both had the same idea is that it would especially since we have an open bay at the Harmon Firehouse right now, it would probably make sense to keep the old one nineteen as a spare So that, you know, especially
• if there's an you know, when engines go out for service or something like that, we have another apparatus that is
• available. Mhmm. And, you know, they've you know, they take very good care of their equipment. And so, you know, even though it is 20 old and the NFPA says it should be replaced, I you know, it can remain as a Yeah. As a spare engine. Mhmm. So But it does some communities will
some communities are in a position where they can't make this purchase, and so I guess they must
Yeah. They buy one like, you know, ones that are being retired from other communities. The situation is so bad. If anybody filed the stuff that happened in California with the huge fires, they had 50% of their fire apparatus out of service for one reason or another during that whole crisis.
• And right now, there's a
• multiple of companies
• that are taking old fire trucks,
• doing a bit of refurbishment,
• and selling them to other fire departments
• because it's so difficult to get fire truck. Which four and a half years to get fire truck? We we sold I I believe we sold the
old engine one eighteen. Yep. Yeah. That was that was auctioned off. That's right. Right. So I guess it would just be like a cost benefit analysis of keeping it in the bay versus We don't get I mean, you maybe you'd get ten or fifteen thousand dollars. I mean, it's you're not talking Oh my god. You're not talking a lot of money. Right? I mean, just based off the based off the age. Right? Because by the time Okay. By the time the new engine comes, it's gonna be 25 years old. Right? So If we're lucky. Right. If we're yeah. If we're lucky. Right. So you're not gonna get you're not gonna get a ton of money for it. But, you know, for a community in Kentucky that, you know Yeah. Absolutely. That's what I was wondering.
• Right. So right. I mean, that's
• yeah. They can they would very much appreciate having having
an engine that's only 25 years old. You know? Yeah. So Right. So what impact would it be on our budget? Or I know this is a capital expense if we were to buy
• two of them at the same time.
• amount. You'd be taking on a significant amount of debt right at in one year. Our our total debt is, right now, $27,000,000,
• and, you know, you're talking about almost $4,000,000
• in
• 20% in two years.
• Yeah. Right. Well well, yeah, when the bill comes, it's it'd be you know, you'd be adding almost $4,000,000.
• And so,
• you know, but I think,
• you know and this kind of goes a little bit back to the conversation that we were having a little while ago. You know, I think there are some
• operational needs that need to be reviewed Mhmm. With the fire department that, you know, making sure that we have
• the proper apparatus in the proper places, especially with the increases in population
• and,
• you know, the increases in housing and making sure that everything is properly placed and we have the right equipment for the right, companies. Right. Like and the I don't know if the tier two battery or tier three, like, how just that impacts equipment needs or,
• in the village and
Yeah. Having more. Yeah. And so, you know, before and this is what I said to the chiefs
• earlier. Before we commit to purchasing,
• you know, two engines right now that we have for the next twenty to twenty five years,
• you know, I think we get one now because we we need one now, and then
• we commit to doing this study in the next couple of years to make sure that we have,
• like I said, what we need where we need it. Mhmm. And then, you know, at that point, the board will be in a position to make a better decision. And, I mean, I I think the history has shown that the board has always supported the fire department in in what they need. And so I think, you know, they would know that
we would go wherever the data let us. Right. So And they would be involved, obviously. Absolutely. Yeah. Discussion.
• just completed twenty twenty five with 495
• yards. That's another re four four hundred ninety five alarms, that's another record breaking year.
• I mean, you know Right. Twenty years ago, we might have had 200 or 250,
• but we we've we've doubled now the
• the number of alarms over that period of time. So, like, you know, it's busy. It's busy.
Maybe there's more education we could do as well. Know? And I know with these winters and and people using electric heaters, I mean, you know, I think just as a
• I've just been seeing more fires, you know, covered at least on TV, and I don't know if we could partner and help or
• do more education initiatives to help bring that number down
• alarms.
Yeah. I mean, you know, one of the one of the things Far from it. Is
• Yeah.
• Are false alarms. Right? That's a lot of that's a lot of the calls. And, I mean, you know, on
• I mean, thankfully, they're false alarms. Right? You know? But a lot of it has to do with there are
• so many more
• alarm systems today than there were twenty five years ago. Mhmm. Right? Everybody everybody has an alarm system at their house now. And every time, you know, somebody burns their toast, it sets off the alarm system and the fire department responds. Yep. So, you know, that's a lot of it and to this is trustee to trustee Nachtala's point. Right? A lot of it is education on the proper placement of smoke detectors in the house so that they're not set off necessarily just by bad cooking or steam steam from your shower, which Mhmm. Is a lot too. Right? I mean so trying to trying to and we can certainly and the fire department can certainly work with our fire inspector Yep. To maybe come up with some sort of communication
• strategy
• to to help people with that. Mhmm.
• So but, hey, that that's a good that's a good point. So what are our next steps for this?
• Yeah. So, I mean, as long as the board has no objection,
• my plan would be to put this contract on the
• agenda for March
• 11.
• And,
• you know, if it's approved, then we can we can move forward with with placing the order. Sounds
good. Thank you. Sounds good. Yeah. And not prolong this any further, but just trustee Nicholson, you had some very good process questions here, and I think it's worth emphasizing that, like, the New York Conference of Mayors is very supportive of this kind of model of ordering off of a list because of
• you know, in theory, there are upsides to competitive bidding, but in practice, it creates as much
• the work it creates kind of undermines Undermines. Any hypothetical
• efficiencies that exist. There are benefits.
• And so this is I mean, when the manager told me we could get this off a list, it was like the
• clouds parted.
• I
• mean, seeing this come in years later Yeah. And still be less than previous purchases is is really remarkable.
• But while we're talking about previous purchases manager,
• can you tell me how the remit how how the remainder of that truck was paid for?
• the Katz property now, Maple Commons. Yep. Okay. So
and and a de minimis, what was it, like, or $10,000? There was 10,000 that, yeah, that was left over. But the point was we were able to make that purchase without bonding Yeah. Because we had found alternative resources. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, you know, depending on
the board's decision. Right? I mean, some are some of this purchase could be covered with additional funds that will be forthcoming,
• hopefully, later this year. Yep. Mhmm. Time to sell. Yep. Yeah.
Alright. There you go. Thank you so much, chief. Thank you. Alright. Take care.
• Just wanna talk to him. Okay. Yeah. Yeah.
• But even just,
• you know, on my sheet, there was a somebody thought they had a gas leak. They had just run out. So I guess that triggers
• smoke gas. But I think four fire trucks came for that. So, I mean, even things that are
• not I mean, there's there I'm not questioning. Not you know, it's just that's a lot of Alright. So if you could bring up my
• The yeah. That one. Mhmm. Thank you.
• Okay.
• Miguel's had two long work sessions so far.
• They're not they're not always this long.
Okay. So I put together this, preview of the 2026, 2027 budget as we,
• approach the start of the budget season.
• Budget gets filed on March 20,
• and then we'll jump into the
• board's
• review process with the with the various department heads. Well, manager, it
it's up to you, but would you consider pulling up the survey results first?
• Or I mean, I but I had that I actually had that at the end. Okay. Fair enough. If you have a plan, you've got a I have a plan. Yes. Have a plan. It's a
• Okay. So just to quickly recap where we were this year,
• the budget is this budget, the 2025, 2026 budget was tax cap compliant.
• It had a flat tax rate compared to the previous year even though expenditures increased by more than $1,000,000.
• This is possible because nontax revenues such as parking fees, sales tax, interest, earnings, etcetera, was also increased by almost $1,000,000.
• And then importantly, the village continued a multiyear trend of reducing its reliance on appropriated fund balance. In fiscal year twenty four, we appropriated $725,000
• to balance the budget, and that number was reduced to 650,000
• in, fiscal year twenty six.
• And that is something that we're looking to further reduce in future years.
• Next slide.
• So some highlights from the, current year's budget. We created three full time positions. Two were in the engineering department.
• The assistant building inspector, which, came out of the, study that was done of the engineering department,
• and the, fire inspector, which was budgeted
• originally as a part time position, and then we made full time during the course of this year,
• as well as,
• a full time laborer in the Department of Public Works.
• We also, added an additional EMT,
• to,
• be on duty from 6AM to 6PM on weekdays to ensure adequate responses from court and EMS.
• We engaged professional planner, Valerie was here earlier tonight,
• to assist the engineering department and planning board with their review of site plan and special permit applications.
• The assessor function was consolidated with the town of Cortland, and the budgetary savings were first realized in this year's budget.
• Additional funding was provided to some committees as well as, funding being provided to several committees for the first time to enhance their programming.
• And then finally, we purchased a new shed for the food scrap recycling program,
• to expand its capacity,
• which currently has a waiting list.
• So there were a lot of, exciting things that were done in this budget.
• For the upcoming budget,
• the tax cap,
• just a recap of the tax cap legislation, right,
• signed into law in 2012.
• Municipalities are allowed to increase their tax levy, which is different than the tax rate. The tax levy can be increased by 2% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower.
• Municipalities that do not raise their tax levies to the maximum amount each year are allowed to carry over that remaining amount into the following fiscal year. The maximum tax levy permitted under the fiscal year 2027
• tax cap is $13,904,547,
• which would be an increase of 4.3%
• over the tax levy established in the last fiscal year. And the villages remain tax cap compliant since the legislation was enacted except for one year.
So because we were flat last year, we can go to four this year. Correct. We were able to carry over all of that all of that
excess that we didn't use. Right. Mhmm. Right? So Another way to say it is if if the number is higher than two, say, like, three or four, you you still are under two because of,
the way it's calculated. Correct. Yeah. So, basically, there it you're basically calculating
• two plus two. Right? Because you didn't use any last year, and now you have the the two for this year. Mhmm. That's right. Yes. The I mean,
perhaps I'm needlessly elaborating here, but the the kind of the idea is, right, is they don't wanna create the perverse incentive of use it or lose it. Mhmm. So they let you roll over. Yeah. And I think it's again, it's just worth pointing out that these this you know, we're talking about
• maximums and theoreticals
• and,
• you know, again, some boards operate with the theory of, you know, we'll just use the entirety and that's what we have. And that is we kind of start from the opposite perspective Yeah. Historically.
Okay. So this just is a breakdown of the the budget from the current year.
• As you can see, and and we'll elaborate further,
• the largest single item in the budget are benefits and insurances
• followed behind by DPW costs and then, the police. Mhmm. So I don't think that it would necessarily be surprising to anybody, but that is
• pie chart for this year.
• We currently have 71 full time employees and 12 permanent part time employees in the general fund. The Water Fund has an additional four full time employees,
• and salaries account for approximately 42%
• of the village's adopted budget.
• Most employees are represented either by the Teamsters or the Corona Police Association.
• Those who are represented by the Teamsters are scheduled to receive a salary increase of 2.75
• percent in the upcoming year, and,
• those employees under the police association contract
• are are scheduled to get a salary increase of 3% in the current year,
• you know, and those are contractually
• bound.
And are we negotiating any contracts this year? The Teamsters contract is up 05/31/2027.
• the next fiscal year.
• The police are in contract until 2029.
• Onto benefits,
• as I said, they're approximately 202025%
• of our annual expenditures. Health insurance premiums increased by 8.8%
• for family plans and 8.9%
• for individual plans as of January
• year.
• Our state pension contributions actually decreased for police officers this year by 4% or 4.1%
• and increased by 6.5%
• for all other full time employees.
• And then property insurance went up by approximately 7%,
• while our workers' comp insurance
• is expected to decrease by approximately 10%.
• And the village clerk and I regularly review
• all our offerings to ensure the village is receiving the most competitive pricing.
• Last year, we did
• we were able to
• renegotiate,
• proposed dental,
• an increase in our dental insurance premiums. We were able to get that down to a zero to a no increase while maintaining the same benefits. Great. Yeah. And then we were actually able to,
• switch our life insurance carriers
• and as the carrier for our life insurance
• and,
• maintain the same benefits at a reduced cost. Mhmm. So,
• you know, those we're are
• we we are very cognizant of the fact that this is such a large portion of our budget and something that we largely cannot really control
• because,
• you know, the the health insurance plan is contractually set
• and
• the contributions to the pension fund are required by state law. So, you know, those two things are not things that we can really touch,
• but the other,
• you know, the other items we do have a little more control over, and so we try to be as
• aggressive with them as possible to ensure we're getting the the best value for our dollar.
• For debt service, as I was saying before,
• you know, our current I apologize. This chart is a little small,
• at least on my version. Maybe it's a little bigger on the screen here.
• In fiscal year twenty seventeen, which is when this chart starts, our total debt was 37,981,000.
• That is our our recent high watermark,
• if you if you would.
• For the start of fiscal year 2027,
• June 1
• this the start of fiscal year 2027,
• which is 06/01/2026,
• our debt
• principal is gonna be $27,368,630.
• So it's a decrease of over $10,000,000
• in the past
• ten years.
• So,
• you know, our our
• debt
• policy is working. Mhmm.
• You know, we've been able to
• do a significant amount of purchasing and infrastructure improvements
• and projects
• while
• managing our debt really well. Mhmm. And so,
• you know, this is something I'm very proud of. And,
• you know, I I would like to see that trend continue, but this is this is a little bit of a segue into the budget priority survey because, you know, we'll see what the public has to say about that.
• But,
• you know, debt is not a huge portion of our budget. As you see, it's about 3% of it, but,
• you know, the total the total outstanding amount is significant.
• Yeah.
• So
• onto the revenues.
• Nonproperty tax revenues are expected to increase in 2027 budget,
• but they're not going to increase at the rate we have seen in the past few years.
• And so there are some notable increases which I've listed here.
• You know, sales tax revenue of $75,000,
• gross receipt tax revenues, which are the that's the tax that,
• the utilities have to pay.
• That's gonna increase by 25,000.
• Interest and earnings is gonna go up by another 50,000.
• Rental of real property,
• $38,477.
• Most of that is accounting for the rent we're gonna be getting from AT and T now for this building.
• We increased the water fund transfer to,
• cover
• additional costs,
• for the
• you know, the water fund transfers money into the general fund to cover time that I spend on water projects. Frank spends on, you know, different staff members,
• spend on water fund activities.
• Fines and forfeited bail would be increased by $50,000,
• building permits by $50,000,
• $25,000
• in ambulance billing,
• $88,000
• in parking permits, and a $154,000
• in daily parking revenue.
• And specifically to those last two,
• what I will be proposing in
• the,
• budget is that our,
• hourly rate increase at the parking lot from a dollar to a dollar 50 per hour.
• So
• the cost for the calendar day to park at the lot would go from 12 to $15,
• and then on weekends, that cost would go from 7 to $9.
• The last time the hourly rate was increased
• was 2010
• when it went from 50¢ to a dollar. Wow. So it's been it's been a dollar for sixteen years, which is a significantly long time. You know,
• I I've been very hesitant about increasing that Mhmm. Because,
• you know, our machines don't give change down there.
• And so having people have to, like, have quarters to use the machines, I I always thought was kind of unreasonable.
• But
• there are so few people that pay with cash. I was just gonna ask you that. Yeah. I mean,
• Paula act you know, Paula goes and collects the money from the machines once a month. And,
• you know, we have five pay machines down there. And for the entire month, it's less than a thousand dollars in cash. Yeah. How does that daily rate compare with, like,
of the other Yeah. I mean, that was always, I think, the Yeah. The the one that I compare that I compare us to the most just because it's similar in terms of size and usage is Tarrytown. Mhmm. And
• there were those rates are similar. Tarrytown is a dollar 50 an hour. So I mean, I'd be interested in Ossining and and or and Cortland, though, because that's You where you we can't compare ourselves to Cortland because the the train usage
• the amount of trains that go into the Cortland Station is much less. Right. And,
• you know, the Cortlandt
• Station is also the parking lot is also owned by Metro North. Right. So they have a much they charge much less, and they're also free on the weekends.
• But the trade off for that is that, you know, you get a train every two hours instead of every twenty minutes. Right? I'm just making that up. I don't know. Totally. But I just think it is that, you know, it's it is this would somebody
there's there's a there's a point at which somebody would, for a less convenient train, spend less money to go to Portland. I don't there was always some,
• you know, calculation. I don't this is a bigger conversation than right now, but I was just curious.
• I don't think that the it's an unreasonable
ask. I just am interested. I I think that one relevant data point in terms of optimal
• pricing or efficient pricing here is the extent that the times that we have shortages in hourly. And that's not all the time, but it definitely does happen. Right? And, mean, there are other things besides
• changing
• pricing that can affect that.
• Manager, I think we've talked about arbitraging,
• if you will, or reorganizing
• Yeah. Because monthly just does not recover it in the same way that hourly has. And so there are, you know, it's
• I'm sure it's very frustrating
• when you're looking for an hourly spot and there are none to be found, and then you see all these vacant monthly spots and that's something that we've got. We have paying display which Yeah. Which accounts for that. And we have already converted
• of the formerly permit spaces. We've converted those to daily. Mhmm. And, you know, I think when
• when the sale of Lot A is completed and
• we'd lose those overflow spaces,
• those overflow spaces are going to end up being relocated to Section G because most of the time,
• the majority of Section G, 300 spaces is
• empty. Yeah. So
And and, of course, if we complete we achieve one goal, a certain goal in our LWRP,
• which
• is the theoretical removal of the salt shed. Yeah. Yep. Yes. There'll be more space. Yeah. More spaces.
Time will come. Echo. We're I'm looking forward to the conversation on what to do when we get rid of the salt shed. You know, and then just, you know, look at your your staffing cost increase over sixteen years. Well, That's yeah. Down there. You know? Yeah. And I mean, you know, it's just
yeah. I mean, frankly, I would have like I said, I would have put this I would have scheduled an increase in this
• a long time ago if I, you know but my concerns with the people paying cash have been pretty much allayed by the fact that so few people are actually using cash. Mhmm. And so,
• you know, for those few people that do pay in cash that are not paying
• the full day rate. Right? Because
• the other thing is the vast majority of people that park in the daily section don't pay by the hour. They just pay the $12 fee for the whole day. Yeah. And
• know, so you're really talking about a small subsection of a small subsection
• that
• pay cash and hourly.
• So I I really I don't think that that I don't think that the cash issue is is a big deal, you know, whether or not we think it's an inflection point that people are gonna say, I'm not going there. I'm gonna go to Cortland. That's another conversation. I'm
• I'm pretty sure the Ossining lot is
• much smaller than ours and it and fills up Yep. Very quickly. So I don't think that Ossining is pretty much an option. We have a lot of people that park in Cronin from Ossining. Right. Yep. So Yeah.
• You know, and there's always the option if people find that they're that it's costing them too much money, they can always buy a permit. Yep. So And by the way, if if Paula is ever busy one day, I'm very happy to make the cash collections.
• Oh, yeah. Sure. Yeah.
And trustee Simon mentioned the the expense of labor, but I think it's also worth emphasizing just
• the maintenance of this facility. We did have that study that, you know, conducted, and we are in a continuous contest with mother nature and old man river for holding back
• the coastline. And Absolutely.
• That is not costless.
this is this is the bottom line. Right? As of when I created this PowerPoint on February 20,
• the budget as it as it stands right now would increase the tax levy by 3.47%
• and then the tax rate by 3.59%.
• It would be a tax cap compliant budget if presented in its current form as we showed,
• earlier.
• And then,
• again, right now, expenditures are increasing by a little over $1,000,000 while revenues are increasing by $644,000.
• And,
• you know, the the difference between those two numbers is why you have an increase. Right? Because if you had,
• if you had if you increase the expenditures the same amount that you increase the revenues and we use the same amount of fund balance, our levy would end up being the same as the previous year.
• Yeah. And just as I've underlined here to underscore,
• these numbers are still in draft form and will fluctuate between now and March 20. So,
• you know, do not be surprised if you see a different number when you when the budget is filed.
• And then for the water and sewer funds,
• these are budgeted separately from our general fund.
• They're established as enterprise funds, meaning that the necessary revenue to operate the systems are raised by service fees charged to those specific customers.
• Most residents of the village are,
• served by our water department,
• and I would say probably,
• 75 to 80% of residents are on our sewer system. So the vast majority of people are getting, both from us, but there are there are is a minority that does not get sewer.
• In fiscal year twenty six, water and sewer rates were flat compared to the previous year. I'm currently, proposing
• that that would be the same for '27.
• We are ex getting higher than expected revenues in the water fund. That is a combination of,
• replacing,
• basically, ancient meter technology
• at some of our larger customers
• Mhmm. As well as
• the
• redesigning of the water
• tiers
• that was done as part of this current budget.
• You know, we changed the levels of,
• the tiers so that our higher,
• consumption users
• pay more.
• So,
• so, again, for the vast majority of residents,
• are in tier one, and that stayed the same.
• And then, you know, as you use more water, you move up into tier two, three, and four, and then those you know, there was an increase in those. That's like businesses?
• Or Correct. I mean, it's really for tiers three and four, it's
• Metro North, it's the schools, it's Skyview, it's, you know, the large institutional It used to be the golf course when Yeah. The I mean, the golf I think the golf course is still up there because, you know, they still use they don't use it for their irrigation, but they use it for the the clubhouse and other things.
• Yeah. So it's it's your it's your big users of of water,
• you know. 99%
• of residents are in that tier one.
• So
• yeah. And then as I put here, the we're we're reinvesting those revenues in, capital upgrades for the distribution system, which is a wonderful thing.
• But it's,
• there is a lot of work that needs to be done. So because we had the the water fund went through some turbulent times in years past where it actually had a deficit for a couple of years, and then it was just kind of breaking even, and we weren't really able to save much at all. And so
• right now, we're in a in a good spot to be able to,
• hold the rates flat as well as invest in the infrastructure.
• So
• and then so you can hold it on that slide for now, but I I just,
• in terms of the budget priority survey actually, don't we why don't we pull that up? Yeah.
• Since I wrote my notes down here.
• So because this goes in this goes into infrastructure.
• So, the budget priority survey closed on Monday,
• and, hopefully,
• everybody was stuck at home with the blizzard and got time to fill out their survey. Mhmm. But we did receive 305 responses,
• and,
• 78%
• of those,
• respondents said that they were satisfied or very satisfied with village services, infrastructure, and amenities.
• And 63%
• of the respondents rate the value for their village tax dollar as good or very good. So, I mean,
• I I think that that is
• pretty
• outstanding responses.
• You know, it's it's nice to hear that people think that we're doing a nice job and are are working as good stewards of their of their funds because that is our goal at the end of the day is to be good stewards of the the public funds.
• 63%
• also picked infrastructure as their highest priority for additional,
• funding.
• And so are we there still? Yeah. We're good there.
• You know? So,
• I think that's a pretty clear majority that Yeah. Would like that,
• would like funding to be allocated towards that.
• A plurality of the respondents, 35% said reduction should not be made in any area of the budget,
• and 40% said that existing user fees should be increased to obtain additional
• needed funding. So there were for those for, those questions, there was not a majority for any one answer, but that was the highest,
• of the of the answers.
And then You know, I just think that's very interesting information having sat through so many, of the recreation departments. Yeah.
• The recreation department is so
• conservative
• in their
• you know, and thoughtful about the increases that are made every year for those services. Yep.
• So I think that, to me, that's a very interesting data point to share with the rec department and the recreation advisory committee as they're going I don't know when that it's gotta be they didn't do it already, did they? They did. Oh, okay.
• Where they make it because that is I mean, that is having sat through those, I wouldn't have imagined that and knowing how we've approached that in the past, wanting to be so incredibly conservative. Maybe there is more tolerance
for that than there there clearly is more tolerance for that. Yeah. I mean, I think, you know, one of the overarching themes here is that I think there is more tolerance. I think people are willing
• to see us take on a little more debt for high valued goods. Exactly. Yeah. Right? You know, they don't, you know I mean, yeah, they would want as long as it's a project that
• is, you know, like,
making sure that the parking lot doesn't flood in every storm. Right? I mean, you know, something like that, I think people are willing Well, but also that they're willing to pay they're willing to pay, you know, they're willing to pay more for the things that they right. Yeah. Yeah. I I don't mean to go backwards, and I don't know if we're gonna talk about it at the end. But I'm also kind of stunned by this data,
• about the infrastructure being so much.
• Am am I reading that number right? Where are we? Sorry. The the highest priority infrastructure was that much
• more That's what yeah. That's what that's what I'm saying. It was a 100 out of the 300 respondents or so. I'm but, I mean, I just can't believe that it's that much higher than public safety. I would have never
Well, I mean, I let's think of it this way. Right? The good news is we live in a safe community.
• Right. And most of the time, people don't have to avail themselves of our public safety services.
But they're driving on the roads every day, and they're, you know, all that. So I'm not Including on some roads that we don't have. That are not ours. Yeah. Right. Right. Exactly. But I'm just saying that is that is I would not have I'm I'm stunned by that data point. Point out. Right? This is this is saying for additional funding. Right? Mean Right. Right. Right. They people who are answering this question
could believe that our public safety is adequately funded. Right? So Right. Not saying that, you know If you sat through a meeting, you might have picked up. Right? But in the in the next question, right, like, could we reduce?
• It's yeah. I mean, there there's a a decent number of people that say yes. It could be. Right? I mean,
• That's surprising.
Yeah. I mean, that was that was the one right? That was 35% of people said
• that reduction should not be made in any area of the budget. Yeah. Right. But 25% of people said arts and culture should get the axe.
• in the next
iteration? Yeah. This this is just the raw data. Raw data. Yeah. We're we'll put together with with charts and I just wanna say I'm so glad you did this. I think it's fascinating and really Yeah. As we enter the budget process to be able to have this perspective,
• I'm so grateful that we Yeah. This no. This very helpful. Survey. So I know it was a lot of work, but and I know that you're not done presenting the so I could
give you a minute, but I just really appreciate it. And we had a whole bunch of seniors on Friday filling up by hand. So yeah. That that and that was fabulous. Yeah. And that their data was entered in here as well. That was fantastic. Thank you. Great. And we can just go down to the next page.
• Alright. And then
• alright. 63% of people said that their overall budget priority was keeping any tax increase as low as possible.
• And then 43%
• stated that the village should borrow money for major infrastructure projects instead of deferring maintenance or funding expenses with cash.
• So, again, kind of a surprising
• change.
for for those it was a little bit before my time, but we'd had a you know, there was a I remember. Well, a reduction a $10,000,000 reduction in debt in ten years. Right. Right. Especially when you factor in 10,000,000 isn't what it used to be. Like, though, that's also been further eroded,
• by inflation functionally.
Right. But, I mean, that that is a major shift since you and I served together in the past mayor.
• So I mean yeah. And it's
• as the mayor was saying, I think it has to do with the fact that we've had I mean, our bond issuance
• for this current fiscal year was, you know, under a million dollars. Right. Right? And so, you know, there were bonds issued
• in, you know, the past ten or fifteen years that were for $10,000,000.
• Right? So,
• yeah, I mean, it's been a significant
• change in methodology and thinking to to get us to this point. Yeah. And I
• what one of the options that we didn't put in here because it's, like,
• would be putting the thumb on the scale in a pretty major way,
• and it's not always repeatable budgets
• budget cycle to budget cycle
• is something that we do do, right, which is to identify nontax revenue sources
• and strategically
• deploy those funds on capital projects as we covered with the fire truck that was paid for by Crest and by the proceeds of the sale of the Katz property, which, like, if you could say, you know, get money from nontax sources and deploy it without borrowing, like, everyone will just pick that one. Right. Right. But you can't do that every time. Right. Yeah. That doesn't mean though that doesn't mean though as a board, that's not what we should be doing. It's just that's something that you get to do once every four years, not every budget. If we knew in advance all the money we're gonna get for the next five years, we could make some great decisions. Yeah. Exactly. You'd never have that information.
• in a nutshell.
• There were
• approximately half of the people who responded
• wrote in the comment box. Okay. So I have not looked at those yet. Are you gonna do those, Ladd?
• Can do a word cloud. Neat. Or I can have somebody do a word cloud. I don't know if it'll be Miguel can do a word cloud.
Think qualitative would be great. But yeah. I I'm look I'm looking forward to reading those. I think that will be very informative. Yeah. And manager Or entertaining at least. Just just going back to the preview for a second. That was extremely helpful, you know, because I I think the the the idea behind that was to give us an early look at some of the stress points and some of the factors going into
• the considerations you have to make as as the person who's drafting this. And so when we get it on March 20, I think we're we have a better foundation from which to start making some some judgments. Mhmm. Thank thank you. Yeah.
And a few editorial comments, one's minor. It's a footnote, if you will. But, you know, you mentioned that declining
• appropriations
• from fund balance for the purposes of balancing the budget.
• And
• I think the members of the board are aware of this, but just for folks following along at home who may be seeing this for the first time is
• that is
• well, manager, why don't you explain why that why that's done and how it works? Okay. So,
every year, we, we appropriate some money from our fund balance to help balance the budget. Right? That is basically to help keep the tax rate down. Mhmm. So,
• it's it's kind of a double edged sword
• that,
• when we appropriate an excessive amount of fund balance in the general fund budget,
• Excuse me. The,
• rating agencies for our bonds
• does do not like that. They you know, because they feel like it's,
• it's a one shot, one time deal.
• And, you know, eventually, if you keep appropriating fund balance in your budget, you're going to run out. That as unlikely as that is, that is their line of thinking.
• On the flip side,
• the state comptroller's office
• does not like you to have an excessive amount of fund balance. Mhmm. They want you to appropriate your fund balance accordingly.
• Mhmm. You know, whether that is in,
• reserve funds,
• you know, and we've we've done a lot of this. Right? We have assigned fund balance for capital projects now. We have assigned fund balance for tax certiorari payments.
• We have assigned fund balance for,
• payouts,
• you know, retirement when employees retire to pay out their, vacation time. You know, we we've done a lot of that,
• and so our fund balance right now is within the appropriate range. Mhmm.
• But if you don't
• if you don't have a fund balance policy to adhere to it and follow it,
• you know, the state controller's office, if they come and do an audit, will
• knock you from that. So it's it is a balancing act trying to figure out what the appropriate amount of fund balance is.
• But the general consensus from our financial adviser is that we are
• at a higher than normal amount for a community of our size. We should probably be somewhere more in, like, the 200 to $300,000
• range
• of appropriating fund balance in the general fund budget. So right. And just as a reminder, we're we're at,
• six fifty right now. That's the 25%
No. The 25% number Is the unassigned fund Correct. The unassigned fund balance should be no more than 25%
• of our total appropriations
Mhmm. In the budget. And based on a tax compliant budget, which is great to hear and see,
• do you envision that unassigned
• number fund balance number being in that range of about
• allows the fund balance to be anywhere between 17 and 25 percent of our
• total appropriations,
• and we we'll absolutely be within that range. Mhmm. So I I I I don't know if we'll be at exactly 25%
• you know, we're gonna have to use some. We may have to use some depending on what happens with the winter. Hopefully, like I said, I I'm hoping as of right now, we have enough money to cover Yeah. You know, but who knows what March will bring. Right. Right? So, I mean, it's Friday.
• Yeah. Right? I mean, it's like yeah. So, you know, it's a little it's a little too early to answer that definitively.
Mhmm. Yeah. But the the other port point that I wanna emphasize here is generally,
• that
• borrowing of fund balance, which is borrowing from ourselves, of course, it's if you wanna think of it this way, at least I do, taking money from savings to checking in a way,
• it usually gets returned. Right? It's part of it is because of the
• manager's appropriately fiscally conservative approach to budgeting. Right? We have a bunch of non prop property tax revenue is basically the only money we're guaranteed, the levy. And then everything else is up in the air. And, certainly, as we saw during the pandemic,
• you know, I used to think, like, oh, it can never go to zero. Apparently,
• some of those lines definitely can go to zero,
• or very close to it. And so that's the reason why we have that is
• we have a very conservative estimates
• on
• the nonproperty tax side. And, you know, if they come in, great. If not, we we have this money. It's been set aside, and it can make sure that the budget is balanced.
• Usually,
• the
• non property tax revenue is more than enough to cover the entirety of that,
• return it to the fund balance, return it to reserves, and then some. Yeah.
And and that's exactly right. And so, you know, we've been able to do that
• for many years, you know, with the exception of of this most recent year because of the the amount that we were we put towards capital. Mhmm.
• But,
• you know, the it's
• we have to have it in there to show the balanced budget. Right? And so, you know, the rating agency sees that that is our plan, so to speak, because of the reasons outlined by the mayor. And so,
• you know, they,
• you know, they don't like that. So like I said, it's just trying to get to that to that right number, and we're we're on the right track. You know, I'm I'm hoping
• that what I come in with in this current budget is in the $600,000
• range.
• And,
• you know, if we can just keep
• Moody's will appreciate or whoever whichever rating agency we speak to, it's usually Moody's,
• will appreciate the fact that we are trending downward. Mhmm. You know, they'll see that as, a good sign and something to be
• Mhmm. Noted.
• So as long as we continue that downward trend, it doesn't necessarily have to be $50,000
• every year. If it can be, that's great. If it can only be 20 or 25,000,
• then so be it. But as long as we continue the downward trend, I think it I think it will be fine as long you know, eventually, we'll get to that to that sweet spot. Mhmm.
where it's Yeah. Yeah. As of as of right now, there's no there's no prospects,
• you know. But, yes, our financial adviser is on top of that and will let us know if if there is one that that comes up. Mhmm. Because, you know, the last the last time we did that a couple years ago, we saved a significant amount of money.
• So yeah.