TOWN OF WATERTOWN
Special Town Board Meeting
Municipal Building
January 30, 2025
Members Present: Joel R. Bartlett, Supervisor
David D. Prosser, Councilman
Joanne McClusky, Councilwoman
Michael Perkins, Councilman
Robert Slye, Councilman
Members Absent:
Supervisor Bartlett opened the meeting with a roll call of members present at 7:00 pm. Attorney Harrienger was also present.
MOTION #24-2025
Councilman Slye moved to adjourn to executive session at 7:03 pm to discuss collective bargaining negations, seconded by Councilman Prosser.
Ayes all
The meeting reconvened at 7:31pm.
MOTION #25-2025
WHEREAS, the Town has held numerous executive sessions pertaining to the new proposed Collective Bargaining Agreement, and met with the Teamster Local 687 Bargaining Unit representatives to come to a negotiated renewal of the expired contract agreement ending 12/31/24, and
WHEREAS, under the terms and conditions proposed in the new agreement for the years 2025, 2026 and 2027, the wage grade increase as proposed by the Bargaining Unit is hereby deemed by this Board as unacceptable, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the proposal regarding wage increases is hereby rejected by this Board and returned to the Bargaining Unit for further consideration.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the town’s previous wage offer per hourly rate remains on the table for consideration and acceptance with no retroactive pay.
Supervisor Bartlett moved the foregoing resolution, seconded by Councilman Prosser.
Ayes All
MOTION #26-2025
WHEREAS, the Town Public Works Superintendent has selected a new Deputy Superintendent to carry out his duties in case of his absence, and
WHEREAS, Kevin Stevens, a town public works employee has been designated by the Public Works Superintendent to serve as his Deputy Superintendent with a wage increase of .50 cents per hour above his current pay rate of $25.22 for a total of $25.72 per hour under the current collective bargaining unit contractual agreement.
Supervisor Bartlett moved the foregoing resolution, seconded by Councilman Prosser.
Ayes All
MOTION #27-2025
WHEREAS, the Town has held numerous sessions pertaining to the creation of a new Water District to encompass the entire Lettiere Tract water system along with parcels on Ives St. Road and Outer Holcomb Street Rd. for the purpose of creating an expanded Water District and its formation, and the purchase of the existing Transportation Corporation that currently provides water service to Lettiere Tract properties, and
WHEREAS, a petition has been prepared to gather signatures of property owners who are in favor of a new district formation and the subsequent purchase of the existing system owners.
Wherein the closing date for collecting signatures was originally established at February 10, 2025, and
WHEREAS, during the ongoing period for collecting signatures on the petition, it is noted that many property owners are currently vacationing in the southern climate and not able to execute the petition if favoring the proposal as presented. Many are also sick and elderly and not able to commute outside of their homes to execute the petition if in favor of the proposal.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the following directions are hereby applicable to those who wish to execute the petition in favor of the proposal.:
1. The period for collecting signatures for acceptance of creating a new Water District is hereby extended until APRIL 15, 2025
2. Signatures will only need be witnessed by the petition carrier or another individual and not solely by a public notary as was originally required.
3. A majority 51% of property owners must sign in the affirmative along with a majority of the property values to accept a new Water District formation.
4. District formation does not constitute borrowing authority, wherein all bonding authority remains within the purview of the Town Council who act as the governing authority and administrators for the newly described water district if agreed to by the percentages previously stated.
Supervisor Bartlett moved the foregoing resolution, seconded by Councilman Prosser.
Discussion took place.
Councilwoman McClusky moved to ament the motion to extend the petition deadline to April 1, 2025, seconded by Councilman Slye.
Ayes All
In the case property owners are out of state, Mr. Lettiere can send them the petition and they could have their signatures notarized and mailed back by April 1, 2025.
The floor was opened for public comment.
Dave Soderquist, Holcomb Street, expressed his disappointment that he did not receive a response to a letter he sent out to the Board and the Town Attorney concerning issues he has with the district. He questioned the order of signing the petition to form the district then to agree on the financing. It seems to him that they are asked to sign a petition, that agrees on the amount of money to pay Mr. Lettiere in addition to agreeing to the expansion on Ives Street Road. The Ives Street expansion is for, maybe seven houses or more, and that will be an additional $735,000. He stated from the research that he has done, he feels this is a major issue with Article 12 which says that you cannot burden people with things that aren’t a benefit to that group of people. He lives in the original Lettiere Track that receives no benefit from the Ives Street Road expansion. He is asked to pay an EDU cost that’s commensurate an equal with everybody else in the community, and he believes that is not in the spirit or the intent of the law. He is frustrated with the way the whole process has been handled, especially the lack of response and the perceived flaws in how the petition has been crafted. He feels like the petition was poorly designed, that there wasn’t enough transparency or proper consideration of the burden-benefit analysis. He said it doesn’t seem fair to ask everyone to pay equally when certain costs are related to infrastructure that only benefits a specific group. He asked for the opportunity to negotiate with Mr. Lettiere, if they’re going to put $735,000 into the project, he would suggest to put it into replacing the old infrastructure that would benefit the residents in the existing district not Ives Street Road. He thinks that would constitute the new construction needed to secure funding. He is in favor of progress, but he just wants to make sure the process is done in a fair, reasonable, and in a transparent way that doesn’t unfairly impact certain groups of people. He would like to go back to the drawing board to negotiate a fair price for Mr. Lettiere, and also upgrade the exisiting infrastructure. He wants to go on the record that he objects to this and wants to stop the process now.
Supervisor Bartlett explained if you belong to a district you don’t have to connect to the system. They will be charged a nominal fee per year for the benefit of have access to the water at a future time. This adds to the value of their property. The town had an estimate done to run a parallel system to replace all of the existing pipes, it came to over $4 million. He expressed again the need for new construction to secure financing.
Mr. Soderquist asked if Supervisor Bartlett would ask the bond attorney in Albany if this petition is compliant with Article 12. He believes that the petition has not been done in the spirit and the intent of the law. He questions the legality of the project. Mr. Scordo from GYMO Engineering told him that he won’t hear from the Environmental Facilities Corporation in Albany until May. His objection is, why don’t they wait until May, until they find out what they’re willing to offer. He believes that if you upgrade the pipes, those upgrades would be considered new construction, and that is what the Environmental Facilities Corporation is looking for.
Supervisor Bartlett agreed to ask for a legal opinion on the issue.
Attorney Harrienger explained, assuming that a sufficient petition is submitted, that’s gives the town the ability to move forward with starting to form a paper district. There’s a process that they would have to follow for that, but it doesn’t require any additional signatures. If during the permissive referendum periods, the residents disagree with what was happening, then they could sign a petition. That is when the 5% of the last gubernatorial election come in. That’s how you determine how many signatures you would need in order to force a referendum or a vote. Then a special election would take place, in which time the residents would vote whether there would be a simple proposition as to whether or not the district would be formed, if they vote no, then that would kill the project. If there are enough votes to go forward, then at that time, they would still have to consider bonding, which would involve a secondary permissive referendum.
Jack Snyder, Orchard Drive addressed the Board concerning the Town of Watertown Fire Department and the 61.2% rise in the fire tax. He asked if the Fire Department has asked the Town for financial advice or does the department present the Town with their books for review? He asked if they have ever been subjected to a NYS audit?
Supervisor Bartlett responded no concerning the department asking for financial advice or presenting their books for review to the Town Board. He belives they have been subjected to state audits using independent auditing firms. The Town Council is a separate entity and taxing authority from the fire commissioners. The fire department works within and works for the fire commissioners. He stated it is very frustrating; this Board has worked hard over the years to produce a zero-town tax rate. That takes watching your money and investing in certain areas and keeping spending down. The fire departments have widespread taxing authority.
MOTION #28-2025
Councilman Prosser moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 pm, seconded by Supervisor Bartlett.
Ayes All
_____________________________
Pamela D. Desormo, Town Clerk