TOWN OF WATERTOWN
Special Meeting
Municipal Building
August 22, 2024
Members Present: Joel R. Bartlett, Supervisor
David D. Prosser, Councilman
Joanne McClusky, Councilwoman
Michael Perkins, Councilman
Robert Slye, Councilman
Members Absent:
Attorney Harrienger was also present.
Supervisor Bartlett opened the meeting. He explained that at tonight’s session, they would answer questions concerning the possible purchase of the Lettiere Tract water system and the extension to the Ives Street and Holcomb Street areas. They will also address any other business that might come before the Board. Mr. Lettiere would like to divest himself of ownership of the Lettiere Tract water system. There are other areas in that neighborhood that are also requesting water service. The plan is to include four residents on Woodside Drive, part of Ives Street Road and the Lettiere Tract area into one district. The town engineers have put together a map, plan and report for the project and a spreadsheet of yearly debt cost to each parcel. The engineers will redo the spreadsheet to adjust for the four parcels on Holcomb Street Ext. that were left out. The lines on Holcomb Street Ext. will need to be upgraded from a 2 inch to a 6 inch water line to fit into the overall project. Those figures should be completed within the next three weeks to a month. Then a new spreadsheet will be created detailing the cost for each parcel for debt service. The residents can then choose if they would like to sign the petition to form a district. The City sells water to the town under contract. They can only sell to a Transportation Corporation, which Mr. Lettiere now operates, or to a municipal water or sewer district. The Town has a good working relationship with the City. There are a number of vacant lots inside the Lettiere Tract that will be assessed a charge even though they are undeveloped, this will increase as they are developed. The town will establish bylaws/ordinances, under which the Town Council governs the district. The Town will act as the administrator not owner of the district. The people in the district will own and encumber the cost of the district. If 51% of the property owners and 51% of the assessed valuation choose to sign in favor of the district the project will move forward. The Board will determine if the cost will be split using the assessed value or a flat rate formula.
Supervisor Bartlett introduced Pat Scordo and Ryan Aubertine from GYMO Engineering. They are here to answer any questions people might have concerning the project.
Pat Scordo, Civil Engineer with GYMO Architecture, Engineering and Land Surveying. He is here tonight with his colleague Ryan Aubertine. They have been working on this project since early spring. Their firm was retained by the Town to study the proposed Southside Water District. This will consist of two separate areas. The first being the existing water district known as the Lettiere Tract with approximately 120 users. The second being Ives Street Road to service seven existing homes and four vacant parcels. The Town is considering the purchase of the Southside Water District and addition of new users in the area. Tonight, they want to solicit the input and answer questions to determine the future of the plan. The study revealed that if you look at each area independently, financially it wouldn’t work. As Supervisor Bartlett alluded to, bonding for the purchase of infrastructure that’s approaching 60 years old was not a possibility on its own. That is where the scenario came forth to include the Ives Street Road area. By combining the two areas it makes it more feasible for bonding. This would be a town operated and maintained water system but owned by the people in the district. The spreadsheet showed the annual amount resulted from a 30-year market rate bond anticipation note that the Town would take with a speculated 3 ½% interest rate. The way that spreadsheet was set up was based on assessment showing everybody’s name, address, tax parcel number. That assessment of all the parcels within both areas, were tabulated to a total, and then the assessed value was divided by that total to come up with a fraction amount. That was, in turn, multiplied by the annual amount of debt that had to be paid over 30 years. The other possibility is based on an equivalent dwelling unit basis; this is like a flat rate. This would come out to approximately $520 for each dwelling unit for 30 years. This would not cover the use of the water that would come as a separate bill. He compared the cost being paid now to the Lettiere Water System to the possible cost per units if purchased from the town to include O&M charges. The town is identifying $6 per unit, a unit being 748 gallons. This converts to roughly $8 per 1000 gallons. An average household uses 175 gallons of water a day, multiply that by 365 days, you get about 65,000 gallons of water a year. This works out to around $513 a year for an average household. The important thing that must be accomplished is to keep it under the New York State Office of the State Comptroller threshold of $1,082 annually which includes capital cost and water usage. If it’s over that the town would have to seek their approval and explain the case of why that cost can’t be driven down. If it goes over this threshold, it could be a yearlong wait for review and you may not even get a green light from the comptroller. If they say no, we will have to find a way to lower the cost of the water district. In the letter sent out, it mentioned the annual amount of payback to be around $65,000. It identified the total project cost, which includes the cost for outer Ives Street Road and the purchase of the existing system from Mr. Lettiere. Part of what they are trying to accomplish tonight is to solicit the resident’s feedback. The number is broken into two segments; the outer Ives Street Road portion is estimated at $693,000 project cost. That is design, engineering, legal, administration, and construction. The balance is $500,000 to purchase the Lettiere Tract system from Mr. Lettiere, for total project cost is $1,193,000. The town is looking to finance that over a 30-year period.
The existing Southside Water already has water, hydrants, an operator and a regulatory unit. The Public Service Commission overlooks everything Mr. Lettiere does. However, in this case, the town would operate and maintain the lines. For the residents on outer Ives Street Road there is little or no water or poor-quality water. This would allow residents to basically abandon their wells, chlorinator, storage tanks, and pumps. The other benefit would be there would be new fire hydrants located every 500 feet which could allow for savings in their homeowner’s insurance policy. In both areas it would increase marketability of the parcels and properties. Although there aren’t a lot of vacant parcels, additional residential development could happen that would lower the individual cost. Typically, what happens is, if municipal water gets installed, some type of development follows. This would spread out the capital cost and lower it for existing users.
The timeline for the project is about four months’ worth of paper work to establish the district. This would entail environmental studies, water district formation, and a bond resolution. This will probably take to the end of the year. If the project is a go, GYMO would start design plans about January 2025; and move to get NYSDOH and Jefferson County approval, as well as any other agency that needs to approve it. Then they would get easements to secure construction to the outer Ives Street Road area and Holcomb Street Extension if needed. If everything is ready by July, the project can be bid out in August, and hopefully start construction in September 2025. It would not take long to get the pipes in the ground before winter sets in. Restoration of lawn and surfaces or anything disturbed would be finished the spring of 2026.
Supervisor Bartlett would like to offer one other component of value to this area. As everyone in this area knows there is flooding periodically. The Town has applied for a grant to take care of the storm water system in affected areas. That work will be going on as part of the overall sewer project in this area. The town is under a consent order by the NYSDEC to upgrade and modernizing sewer treatment plant. The town has been extremely successful in obtaining grant funds. The town was originally awarded a WEA grant for 5 million dollars. We will need to reapply for that. The sewer project will be much cheaper than the water project, there is funding available for that. The town engineers are working under a pilot program on a new design that the NYSDEC has signed off on. The goal is to upgrade the sewer treatment plant and make it large enough to except discharge waste from Sewer Districts 4, 5 and 6. Then the town would no longer have any flows contributing to the Western outflow to the City.
Supervisor Bartlett opened the floor to anybody who chose to speak. He asked to include their name and address for the record and address all questions to the engineer or council.
Susan Brogan, Co. Rte 65 asked how far the system would go.
Answer: To just before the swamp on Ives Street Road?
David Soderquist, Holcomb Street, addressed the Board. He stated Mr. Lettiere sent out a letter in January 2023. 20 months later, August of 2024 he receives another letter that basically solidifies the deal as to how much they are going to pay and the indebtedness for 30 years and he gets a second letter, basically saying, show up for this meeting. The residents thought that there would be a document to sign at this meeting. He pointed out that he was a retired financial advisor for 27 years. He said he couldn’t get away with something like this without handing a prospectus to a client. He feels that a lot of these deals have been done behind closed doors. He thinks the residents have been left out of the equation in the negotiations. He offered to be an advocate for the residents and suggested they have 1-3 advocates to form a committee. They would not have to meet with Mr. Lettiere or Supervisor Bartlett but could come up with some questions that are cogent and significant, and then bring those into the equation. Nobody has supplied him with an appraisal and he asked if he and his neighbors are going to own the district why can’t they look at that document?
Answer: Supervisor Bartlett responded there are still some negotiations going on. The appraisal, that was agreed on was to be financed and paid for, half by the town and half by Mr. Lettiere, it is proprietary. Once a final agreement is made with an acceptable price that Mr. Lettiere is willing to sell for, a new cost spreadsheet will be comprised.
Mr. Soderquist commented the town has one appraisal form Pomeroy Appraisals, and one from BCA which is much lower. He asked why they are not available to the community and why he can’t be part of a group to offer some feedback on the appraisal.
Supervisor Bartlett stated the procedure to include a committee did not work in the past. Everybody has their own idea of what this system is worth. The question is, what is Mr. Lettiere willing to sell it for?
Mr. Soderquist feels the community is being asked to buy something they know nothing about. He asked Councilwoman McCluskey and Councilman Slye for their input of the situation.
Councilman Slye responded that the Town Council has put a lot of work into this project. He commented that the Board is elected by the people and they are acting in the best interests of the people they represent. From what he has heard tonight, the Board is doing the best they know how to do. They hire competent people to guide them and they trust the report from their engineers and consultants. They negotiated in good faith for the purchase of the facilities. He doesn’t know what more an independent body of volunteer members of the community will add to that. At some point, a decision has to be made, and those decisions will be made by those who are elected to do so. If a homeowners committee has ideas, he would be receptive to them, but sooner or later, the Board is going to make the decision of what they feel is in the best interest of the community.
Mr. Soderquist stated he called the Environmental Facilities Corporation in Albany, and he talked with them about what was stated at the last meeting about this area making too much money for grant funding. The gentleman he talked to on the phone stated that this procedure doesn’t operate that way. There are a number of different matrixes involved. In fact, the Environmental Resource Management Corporation already gave out $400,000 to the Sewer District just last year. So, by having people who have some business background, he feels they can offer valuable input to project.
Supervisor Bartlett added they can stop the entire project by not forming the district. He has used the town experts and advisors to come up with the cost involved with the project. The spreadsheet will be updated to reflect the addition of the parcels that were not included in the original workup. He added he feels whoever Mr. Soderquist talked with at the Environmental Facilities was wrong, if there were grants to be had the town engineers would have found them. The median household income in that area is too high to be eligible for grants. The sewer situation is different, it allows for different criteria which allows for funding.
Councilwoman McClusky asked if the town has the legal authority to show the appraisal to the public.
Attorney Harrienger responded, at this point the town is in active negotiations with Mr. Lettiere, but the argument can be made that the contact is between Mr. Lettiere and the property owners in that area. Mr. Altieri was very thorough when he reviewed the results of the BCA appraisal. During that meeting, she recalled he gave a lot valuable information. When he did his appraisal, he essentially took a depreciation approach. The other appraisal used a different approach which is part of why it resulted in such different figures. The decision is ultimately of the people as to whether they want to sign the petition and move forward, because this is a petition driven project.
Supervisor Bartlett responded there are a number of scenarios which these appraisers used. The most expensive one that Mr. Lettiere and the Council agreed to finance is proprietary at this point. This was done using three or four different factions and sections. The BCA appraisal was done on a depreciation basis. It came in at $43,000 for the entire system, not including any apparatus that goes with that such as meters. It was determined that it would cost almost 6 million to put all new piping in and replace everything that is there now. Depreciate that by the number of years of that system, and you end up with a $43,000 value. Supervisor Bartlett feels that’s not acceptable and he finds fault with that approach. They then turned to the other appraisal. It contains 60-70 pages; he is only in possession of one copy.
Steve Wise, Woodside Drive asked how many votes each household would get. If there are two names on the deed, does that count as two signatures? Has the consideration of expenses to run the district been included in this estimate? Such as the cost of salaries of people who read meters, cut the grass, or snowplow. Have those costs been calculated?
Answer: One signature per parcel.
Pat Scordo, GYMO responded that when they looked at the appraisal Mr. Lettiere included those expenses of labor, equipment, and meter reading.
Mr. Wise asked bags of hypochlorite.
Mr. Scordo, yes.
Mr. Wise said they would like a complete list of what they are getting before he would vote on anything.
Supervisor Bartlett said that would be included in any deed restriction that was turned over when the district is formed, that would include any deed covenants or restrictions on the deed.
Mr. Wise asked how much the appraisal cost?
Supervisor Bartlett thought it was approximately $15,000 that was split equally with Mr. Lettiere.
Mr. Wise asked as to the escrow of $20,000 that Mr. Lettiere mentioned, will that go back to the town?
Supervisor Bartlett said that details still need to be negotiated.
Mr. Wise commented that this is supposed to be a question-and-answer session, correct? He feels the questions and answers should be done by GYMO, the Town and the residents. He feels Mr. Lettiere is not a resident and should not be part of the question answer session.
Supervisor Bartlett said Mr. Lettiere is here as a courtesy, he can help by answering some of the questions the public might have that could work to lower the cost. He might be able to add something or to gain information himself.
Mr. Wise questioned, is there possibly asbestos in the in the pipe? If there is a cross section of the pipe, can a camera be run down that?
Attorney Harrienger responded if there is asbestos, it is her understanding that they tend to hold up pretty well. The main issue is, if there comes a time that you have to do work on them, they have to be more careful, because that is when it becomes airborne.
Mr. Scordo responded that is correct. In addition to that, Mr. Lettiere does asbestos testing.
Mr. Lettiere said it is done every 7-9 years? Mr. Curly from NYSDOH dictates that. One was done recently, and the results are posted on his website. It was conducted by an independent source.
Mr. Wise, asked about the Mormon church. Will they be paying anything for this water system? Whereas, they are a nonprofit.
Answer: Yes, it makes no difference if they are a nonprofit for debt service and usage.
Mr. Wise, Mr. Scordo mentioned there are fire hydrants every 500 feet. Is that included in the price of this 1.3 million.
Answer: Yes
Mr. Wise stated currently, the fire hydrants are not every 500 feet in the Lettiere Tract. If the district is not formed would Mr. Lettiere put in fire hydrants every 500 feet and then charge them accordingly?
Mr. Scordo said the hydrants he was referring to every 500 feet, was for the new water lines on Ives Street Road.
Kristen Dean, Holcomb Street, asked to explain again, why they need to combine Ives Street Road to the Southside purchase. They are paying $500,000 for Southside, as well as paying $700,000 for the seven homes on Ives Steet Road.
Answer: The reason for that is because the useful length of time has expired on the Lettiere Tract water system and could not be bonded for. You need new construction to facilitate any bonding associated with the purchase and the new construction. One half of the equation needs the other for this whole scenario to work. It’s a complex scenario, but it’s the only way that they could come up with to facilitate forming a district and the ultimate purchase of the district.
Ms. Dean asked if adding the four homes on Holcomb Street Ext. would be enough to constitute new construction for bonding, without adding the cost to extend to the seven homes on Ives Street Road.
Answer: It is a minimal amount to convert to a six-inch line from a two-inch line on Holcomb St. Ext. this is not enough to constitute new construction cost for funding.
Discussion took place concerning the church and the vacant property on Ives Street Road behind the IHC School.
Mr. Soderquist asked if the Board would vote on forming an advocacy group.
Attorney Harrienger said it is not something that is decided by the Board. If the residents wanted to form a group, that would be up to them.
Andrew Mitchell, Orchard Drive, if they form a group and have questions how they would approach the Board for answers. He would like to base his opinion on the appraisal if they could see it.
Supervisor Bartlett asked Mr. Lettiere if he would be willing to share the appraisal publicly.
Mr. Lettiere agreed and will post it to his website.
Attorney Harrienger explained for the Board to proceed forward with the process to form the district. The property owners would have to submit a petition to the Board. If enough of the residents do not agree to this it would end the possible district.
Mr. Mitchell inquired of the O & M costs, essentially associated with cost to cut the grass and salaries. How was that figured in.
Mr. Scordo said that was accounted for and figured into the cost of the water use rates.
Mr. Mitchell, hypothetical, there was to be a development of some sort, would that cost become a burden to the Lettiere Tract district.
Answer: The developer would bear the cost to connect to the system. If a developer does come into the district the debt service would be shared with them and lower the overall debt charge for everyone else in the district.
Discussion took place on the size of the lines being put in and whether it was planning for future development.
Ms. Dean, asked if they went with the EDU verses assessment-based scenario and a development came in, would they have the same flat fee as everybody else? If it was assessment based, would it change based on their assessment?
Supervisor Bartlett, I don’t think we can legally do it both ways. For bonding purposes, they have to be one way or the other and it would stay that way through the 30 years. When the Board established the ordinances, it would set up on assessed on EDU value.
Mr. Kidder, the paperwork that they got was based on assessment. Why the change to EDU?
Supervisor Bartlett responded that he asked the assessor to do it on assessed value, not understanding at the time what the EDU value was.
Mr. Kidder stated his cost went from $400 to $525 by going with the EDU method.
Supervisor Bartlett, by the next session they will have a better cost projection for each parcel. At that time the residents can decide if they want to sign a petition. He accepted responsibility for having the original scenario done on the assessed value. That was on the recommendation of the assessor.
Mr. Soderquist, if they get to a negotiated price with Mr. Lettiere, and you have 51% of the votes, he thinks it would be incumbent upon the town to ask Mr. Lettiere why he is going forward with 148% increase. Mr. Lettiere is looking to have electronic equipment rather than going up to the meter to read. He feels he wants trucks with tools on it and a bunch of other things that will be redundant and unnecessary. He does not like the idea of 148% increase still hanging out there and he has crafted a letter to the Public Service Commission regarding that. He doesn’t like the fact that is still out there while we’re trying to negotiate prices.
Supervisor Bartlett answered he is vaguely familiar with the letter concerning the raise. It is Mr. Lettiere’s responsibility to answer and negotiate with Public Service Commission. The Town is not in any position as a body to negotiate with the Public Service Commission on this particular project or to tell Mr. Lettiere what he should or should not do.
Mr. Soderquiest, this is why the people that live in the Lettiere Tract are concerned.
Supervisor Bartlett stated he understood why the customers were concerned with the rate hike but stated if the district does pass and is formed this will all go away.
It was asked if they did not sign the petition does that constitute a no vote. If someone is out of town and can’t sign, is that a no vote?
Attorney Harrienger, if you sign the petition, you’re saying yes. By not signing the petition, you’re saying no. The petition would require 51% of assessed value and 51% of the property owners to pass.
Tamara Robinson, Woodside Drive, asked if it has it been determined yet if they are going to go by the assessed value, or if it’s going to be a flat rate.
Supervisor Bartlett, stated he in his opinion he would like to move forward with the EDU approach.
Ms. Dean asked if they would have an input in that, before it goes to petition?
Mr. Kidder, according to the assessed valuation chart received before this meeting his assessed value is $105,000 and he would pay $398 opposed to the flat fee of $525. There were 81 people under the flat rate of $525. The people that were here on Tuesday do not realize that the Board is going to change that to the flat rate.
Supervisor Bartlett, stated they have not made that determination yet.
Mr. Soderquiest, added he likes the assessed value. He stated it would double his cost by going to the EDU method.
Attorney Harrienger, they could have a group of citizens get together and debate amongst themselves and figure out how much they want to pay for the district. Ultimately the infrastructure cost stays the same the only figure that changes is how much you paid for the system. So, the property owners decide how much they are willing to pay. Then put the petition together as far as what they want the terms to be and bring it to the Board. This will eliminate going back and forth. It is incumbent upon all of the residents to get together and make those determinations.
Mr. Mitchell, he agrees not everyone approves of the way it was done but he believes it was put forth in the best interest of the people. He thanked the Board for their work on proposal and asked them not to get frustrated with the discussions.
Mr. Soderquist stated he looks at this like a 30-year indebtedness, in some way as taxation. He is asking for some input, by Mr. Lettiere making the assessment report public this is a good step in the right direction. It’s a piece of relevant data that they would like to see.
Ms. Robinson, wanted to clarify in order for this to move forward, that they need 51% of the property owners vote yes, and 51% of the assessed value vote yes. Does that mean that people whose assessment is higher, vote carries more weight and could be constituted as a weighted vote?
Supervisor Bartlett answered yes, that is why he suggested the EDU method, everybody pays the same flat rate.
Ms. Robinson asked about the drainage system, is Birch Lane going to be the only place that is going to get better drainage? Will they get some relief on Woodside Drive?
Supervisor Bartlett, there will be a survey, map, plan and report done by a license engineering firm to determine where the bad spots are. They will focus on the bad areas; it will not be the entire development.
Mr. Mitchell commented on the rate increase Mr. Lettiere is asking for, he said he has the right to do this and it is the roll of Public Service Commission to protect the customers. He asked if the town looked at costs being paid now, or what they would be paying with this rate increase. If they looked at any escalation, and if a private entity continued to run it what rate increases they would be entitled to.
Mr. Scordo answered the only cost he reported was what the town would be assessing or charging if the town owned the system. The town is proposing $8 per 1000 gallons of water whereas the customers are currently paying approximately $12.27 per 1000 gallons. When we worked the math he used 175 gallons per day average. He did not get into it all the potential rate increase, or what that math looks like.
Mr. Mitchell, if a decision is made to move forward what would be the timeframe?
Attorney Harrienger, if there was an appropriate petition, they would have to do a resolution, go through the permissive referendum period after a public hearing. They would form a map, plan and report. They would have to have the order that gives all of the monetary figures, all of the expenses, the boundaries exedra. Then the Board would have another public hearing period, and then they would adopt the order, and then it would go to the Comptroller. Assuming it would stay under the limit. It would take months. The hope is around 1 year.
Supervisor Bartlett, asked the residents to form a committee. He gave them two weeks to get back to the town with a report. He reminded them Mr. Lettiere knows what he wants to get for the system and he will determine what he sells it for. If they can negotiate him down, that’s fine if not this is where we’re at. This is to your benefit that the Board is committing these funds and these meetings, and they appreciate the contributions and the questions that help guide them. The Board is here to help the community come to some conclusion as to whether to form the district. If they don’t form the district, the project is dead. They will need both components of the plan that GYMO has drawn up, to include Ives Street Road, Holcomb Street Ext., and the Lettiere Tract for it all to work. He asked that they negotiate with Mr. Lettiere and come to an agreement. The Town Council will not be involved in those negotiations.
Mr. Soderquist asked how would that work, are they going to take an unofficial group of people and actually put them in a responsible role for possibly making the wrong decision.
Attorney Harrienger, typically that is why, they use Article 12 to form districts, not the petition process. Those projects start and end with the Town Board. It’s uncommon for a petition process to go forward, meaning it’s difficult to get everybody together.
Supervisor Bartlett suggested a gathering of two or three people. If they are agreeable on a sale price, then the Board will take action to proceed.
Mr. Soderquist, we know where we stand for 30 years, $500,000 to purchase the district and the interest rate. If the committee for the Southside water district happened to lower that cost that would probably be looked at from everyone’s perspective, as they’re doing their due diligence on their best behalf.
Attorney Harrienger suggested that maybe they could try to meet with as many people as possible and select a couple of people that probably were not like minded, for the sake of representing different views. Those people would talk to the group and determine whether they were willing to pay that $500,000 figure, or if they thought they ought to try to pay something lower. Ultimately, they will decide what they want the purchase price to be and Mr. Lettiere will decide what he will accept as the sale price. At that point, you would then let the Town Board know what the actual figure is that you agreed upon.
Councilman Prosser, the Town was asked to help out on the project, which they are trying to do. They came up with the best figures. The municipality has to purchase the facilities, and if the people are able to lower the purchase price, let the Board know. When they get the petitions done it will bare evidence if the residents still want it.
Mr. Mitchell would be interested in meeting with anybody and to be part of this group. He thinks it is a terrible idea for the people in this district to go speak to directly with Mr. Lettiere. People are emotionally involved, and he doesn’t feel like that’s a good idea. He asked if the group could come to the Town instead with the suggestions and let the Town deal with Mr. Lettiere to come up with a fair price for the system. At that point, he thinks the people should be done with it, and rely on the elected officials to act on their behalf in best interest of the residents.
Attorney Harrienger commented that is not the way that this process works. What typically happens is a town would not put this much time or resource into what they have this far. The Board should not be involved with negotiating or discussing the purchase.
Supervisor Bartlett added the Council has always taken the position not to get involved in direct negotiations. The Board did go into executive session at a Town Board Meeting to review the appraisal. They met with Mr. Lettiere to come up with the dollar figure he would be willing to sell it for. Mr. Lettiere is selling the product and the people are buyers.
Councilman Prosser added they could in the private sector, be able to come up with a better solution and financing. But this Board as Municipality dealing with a private corporation is governed by different rules that apply to Municipalities then what private citizens can.
Supervisor Bartlett suggested Mr. Soderquist to contact a couple other folks; Mr. Lettiere will have the appraisal up on website. Hopefully they can come to some kind of conclusion by the October Town Board meeting.
Supervisor Bartlett mentioned he would be doing a resolution to modify the resolution to purchase a bucket truck for the town highway department at the September 19th meeting.
Robert and Julie Gayne, Swan Road approached the Board. They wanted to recognize two of the highway employees. They noticed a robbery taking place at the closed prison on Swan Road and called the police. They wanted to thank them for seeing something and getting involved. Arrests were made. There have been a lot of break-ins there, but law enforcement has not been able to catch them as they usually occur at night. He just wanted to recognize Jacob O’Brien and Nick Hancock for their outstanding role in this ongoing problem.
___________________________
Pamela D. Desormo, Town Clerk