[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6070655,"mediaKeyId","3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9","parentId",3050233,"title","Votes at a glance: Washington County committee approves multiple resolutions, contracts and budget amendments","audioSeconds",1190,"startMs",40000,"endMs",1230000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9&start=40&end=1230","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9/thumbnail_40000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6070655/Washington-County/New-York/Votes-at-a-glance-Washington-County-committee-approves-multiple-resolutions-contracts-and-budget-amendments","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6070655-751d088182d2c424c3295d8530d12513/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161047&Signature=ffUgitBjRVKJsIaUXp1e5EWnmNQ6kifRMjv5gqyLV0HvULX9zH~lANyQ-sZuQLfOn1PIrxgYJJ3g160Kjg1DiROucmryr0o4sKpun2E1-l0t1bp8maIDlFFJ9gan5fgfsETrZJljIJRFE9ejgIM8hc~AKAXQCwwavU9s9ZqUeIYEEY1yzMCb~pD1pvxc-wM6BBKw6uaMjiQ3hPWBhcNtUCveQdhOVsboJpF6kPv2dkvsFWogSuSjWlo8coZ74Pfgg665xbX2qXrgBgM1lvkBWKIeg46yaAtEQYDC6EB8bYGnkg4atoxD1Naw6vl3Een7YKEugibo67oA-VvWB0SZnA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Washington County New York","date","2025-04-10T00:00:00Z","article","The Washington County committee recorded unanimous or carried voice votes on a package of resolutions, contracts, equipment purchases and budget amendments during the meeting.

Key outcomes recorded by the committee:

- ACC contract: Motion to send the ACC contract to the board (mover: Daryl; second: Dave). Voice vote recorded as carried.
- Resolution A (mental health state aid percentage): Moved by Dave; second by Charlie. Approved by voice vote.
- Resolution B (original abatement funds): Seconded by Dave/Charlie; approved by voice vote.
- Resolution C (Youth Bureau employment program): Moved by Dave; seconded by Sue; approved by voice vote.
- Salt bid acceptance and resolution amendment: Committee amended the resolution to insert zone rates and accepted the county bid so towns may piggyback (see separate article for full discussion).
- Chipper purchase (best value procurement): Committee approved replacing a chipper (amount cited $50,114) and noted three quotes were obtained as required for purchases over $50,000; the item passed on voice vote.
- County road fund carryovers and budget amendments: Committee approved multiple carryovers for county road funds and a county road fund agreement; one vote was recorded as carried 8–2 on a County Road Fund agreement with ShipPoint Beach.
- Social Services adoption and legal guardianship incentive payments program (reimbursement): Moved and seconded; approved by voice vote.
- Homeland Security/Domestic Terrorism Prevention and other grant carryovers (public safety, emergency management performance grants, hazard mitigation): Several grant carryover resolutions were moved and approved by voice vote.
- Creation of capital projects (USJUAN project and others) and creation of an EMS support grant accounting treatment: Committee created or directed project accounting as described in related agenda items; the EMS grant was directed to be recorded in the general fund rather than as a capital project (detailed in its article).
- Board of Elections electronic check‑in devices (replacement tablets/iPads): Approved purchase to replace end‑of‑life tablets used as electronic check‑in devices; staff said obsolete devices would be destroyed through DPW processes.
- Out‑of‑state travel request (AI workshop): Approved an out‑of‑state travel resolution for one staff member; estimated total cost around $600.
- Budget amendments: Committee approved routine budget amendments including a VAN renewal portion to be covered by contingency (presenter cited $3,221 for the department share) and a larger assigned counsel shortfall; the latter was described as a net fund balance impact around $570,006.51 after offsets.

Most votes were voice votes recorded as “aye” and carried; where a numeric tally was given, the County Road Fund agreement with ShipPoint Beach was recorded as carried 8–2. Several items were amended on the floor (for example, the salt resolution to add zone pricing).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Washington County Personnel & Finance Committee Mtgs. - April 10, 2025 (2)","oneSentenceSummary","The committee recorded voice votes approving a series of resolutions, contracts and budget amendments, including acceptance of an ACC contract, multiple grant carryovers, budget amendments and equipment purchases; some items were amended on the floor.","taxTitle","Washington County, New York","taxId",56999,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6070660,"Committee favors funding EMS support grant from general fund; flags small consumables gap and possible foundation support",151,1693000,1844000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9&start=1693&end=1844","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9/thumbnail_1693000.jpg","/articles/6070660/Washington-County/New-York/Committee-favors-funding-EMS-support-grant-from-general-fund-flags-small-consumables-gap-and-possible-foundation-support","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6070660-42871e0f0c7807d96223c239a189d338/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161047&Signature=QTkOfOHzPApcZqf51ZGcRoTliVtXlwmbcCsGuooRpcJv3tG2GthCrPmWsHsSSsWyBBsYSaLbOojdAfftXm3tlpyBE7L2CTbzy6Sbs96BQzqGpOeS6QqoQzxyvObVKeAlAUbc09Kt8aa34h103bxtP4Z2DBNTBKwIbOoiMjeuzX0cE2~-xAfWHzcrtC2zVNVMGtg6ZDWemSnbAVkWUKq4I3o6w9cmepqXi6IT652LncJV3nGO6lj3ylLkT~7ksZ7jYEmKnV~X-Ck3bFfDrPoX~zlLO6bdvFUTVYocwFUqQxFbZeLTZTAlhL~Rabi-fCAcO-Uq0W328ffCi0Z5cMuh0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County staff asked the committee to consider placing a newly awarded emergency medical services (EMS) support grant into the general fund rather than creating a capital project. The presenter said the grant covered personal services and that putting the award in the general fund would avoid adding unnecessary capital‑project accounting steps for personnel costs.

Committee members discussed staffing implications and the grant’s intent to shore up local advanced life support (ALS) capacity in areas where coverage has been reducing. The presenter said certain consumable medical supplies—bandages, pharmacy supplies and similar items—were not covered by the grant; the presenter cited a supplies shortfall figure during the discussion at about $5,000 for items not covered by the grant. Another speaker suggested seeking philanthropic support, naming the Mary McFallon Foundation and noting an amount of $25,000 as a possible supplemental request to cover additional or related costs.

Members debated funding the non‑grant consumables from contingency versus fund balance. One committee member recommended using contingency so the expenditure would receive oversight. The committee recorded a motion and second to fund the staffing from the general fund and to use contingency to cover consumables if necessary; the motion was seconded and the committee recorded the voice vote as carried.

Staff were directed to pursue contingency funding as the immediate source for uncovered consumables and to explore foundation or other grant sources for supplemental funding.","Staff recommended treating an EMS support grant as general‑fund staffing rather than creating a capital project; committee agreed and discussed a supplies gap not covered by the grant and potential foundation funding options.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6070664,"Washington County committee asks staff to gather fleet mileage data and consider centralizing vehicle management",342,2212000,2554000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9&start=2212&end=2554","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9/thumbnail_2212000.jpg","/articles/6070664/Washington-County/New-York/Washington-County-committee-asks-staff-to-gather-fleet-mileage-data-and-consider-centralizing-vehicle-management","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6070664-2bf8e1012564e260629b14cd63ab25b5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161047&Signature=hK~z8FszInE58axja2gKld46wLRHCsRU8k~8E9uTjpKz3hPsqaY3pG3AADQRWSqwIars6XDlcdwPH6Breel-S6RHJ5v9eSF4ZBVQH~pMDQ7Q23-cJ0D8RXzGPd80sC3FNeI8hQUDAh8iyomvi2gpdP7ENl6j-8EUIYfRZkj3jkCfM3BF4-8jDZTqBlIlwnmBgKuGWTiqf9OlAEiQ-QEKNU4F9bsIBo0HI8hqN9qTl6quRAtiZKyBq1Na1lZDb-z4v1uAMwDANy-zkX8sKXZ3R8D0rKpZhEwLfztHbfkd0lwO~tCAfHy9079bpaV2qRAi6mxW04cAYXERqhKBMJVOfw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee members discussed the county fleet’s usage patterns, replacement policy and whether to centralize vehicle management to reduce costs.

Members proposed setting a mileage threshold (for example, a candidate threshold mentioned was 10,000 miles per year) to flag cars for closer review. They discussed using pump and telematics data to calculate actual miles, utilization rates and amortization schedules. One member noted operating and fuel costs and argued that, for some roles, it might be more cost‑effective to reimburse mileage rather than provide county vehicles.

The committee agreed to ask two members—Daryl and Charlie—to request fleet and mileage reports from carpool/DPW and finance, and to return with proposed metrics and a study plan to an upcoming EPW or committee meeting. Members noted that centralizing management could allow vehicles to be rotated so older cars are retired sooner and replacements are more uniformly new.

No formal policy changes were adopted at the meeting; the committee directed staff and the designated members to collect data and report back.","Members debated mileage thresholds, possible central fleet management, replacing older vehicles and paying mileage instead of providing vehicles for some roles; two members were assigned to collect data for a fuller analysis.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6070669,"Committee raises safety and ownership questions for county bike bridges; asks staff to seek DOT and IDA clarity",217,2781000,2998000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9&start=2781&end=2998","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9/thumbnail_2781000.jpg","/articles/6070669/Washington-County/New-York/Committee-raises-safety-and-ownership-questions-for-county-bike-bridges-asks-staff-to-seek-DOT-and-IDA-clarity","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6070669-5fe0034c77b62a0591943862a4aa2f7a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161047&Signature=jnz0bnyR-IochxQna~WbdRPKSJRZCc72UVior3KTVDhr-TCZJ6VphMOCjzkFEdFxu0~Et~jhCd5em6kQA5Tqeuuy3Ef9UnOpw6lFYtt4eNfOL5MjOBAqFdF-rcnkSAOQn7wQCFtEeNvDNGWqFfQWpaWizCDUpmpnBVtYILgGQDcN209y212Rl339VcPH1VfcyUo5jFZIZtzLussuYEeB1sPlcq7rliFLfHfXQ04dLoei4JjOcASifNKPH1u0tEadCjF8N8TM8~gNDZkK67t-viTM-aLd3lbRdILX4QIOqGVHMcsyM96qWRDAvCNLjIawkrTWzWCUr7PgKjPw9X5SRQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Washington County committee members discussed multiple bike bridges and small road bridges where ownership, inspection responsibility and liability were unclear.

Members reported wood decking beginning to pop up on some county‑area bike bridges (one cited near Towpath/Route 196 and another in Kingsbury) and said the condition could cause injury if not repaired. A committee member said, “It is going to be a matter of time before somebody hits it and gets hurt,” and asked staff to contact the New York State Department of Transportation (DOT) and the canal/bridge owner to determine who is responsible for maintenance and repairs.

Committee members reviewed earlier arrangements in which some bridges were installed with state or IDA involvement. They questioned which structures had been transferred to county ownership (for example, bridges longer than 20 feet frequently become the county’s responsibility) and whether any memorandum of understanding allocated long‑term maintenance or inspection costs. The committee noted a specific bridge near Lockgate Way and a separate Fort Edward culvert bridge and asked staff to confirm ownership and any outstanding inspection or repair obligations.

Staff agreed to follow up with DOT, the IDA and relevant town officials and report back with inventory numbers, inspection records and liability/maintenance responsibilities.

The committee did not authorize large repairs during the meeting but directed staff to seek an immediate DOT inspection for any bridge where decking posed an imminent safety hazard.","Committee members flagged deck deterioration on several state‑installed bike bridges and expressed uncertainty about whether maintenance and liability fall to the state, IDA or county; staff were asked to clarify ownership and inspection responsibility.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6070674,"Washington County committee reviews salt bid as towns consider piggybacking amid quality and price concerns",1087,142000,1229000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9&start=142&end=1229","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3050233-ac70a91fb06972325a543a6cb8887bf9/thumbnail_142000.jpg","/articles/6070674/Washington-County/New-York/Washington-County-committee-reviews-salt-bid-as-towns-consider-piggybacking-amid-quality-and-price-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6070674-1bb3da29b978084561acb2a6b341b2ae/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161047&Signature=hxYRRR21WPrDCn7M5dpYBqZFscy7aEXJG95YAlh-v27VT6SEjp23ViDshTMvsPBLthoMy~-71iA1cKxtv-BwCgXEQV21KCgzO~I94iiiN8RfRPb9Jg9vtrY1oGyivfasUXKAGecOuIs00rFbLGThnR0ZByDJK5rgXWtU0s-G9ipaVhKTJdYD1L00tZno2s5Ula02s0aQARRboas1i1u93~Xn6IFNTlrf-rCw2V63BRsJtvKzVDOp8vdaG98Zi-F326YMnSx6MUTPCjT0lZXQ93jAo4fD1uwrWcL02Z26VodJ5tLrsnWcWk0HjGOv3qtEJoPhnFW2yvkHQ2sN3CqZ5w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A county staff member told the Washington County committee that nine towns expressed interest in piggybacking on a county salt bid after the county solicited quotes organized into four delivery zones.

The staff member said the low bidder for the county contract was Atlantic (an overseas supplier) and that regional Office of General Services (OGS) procurement rules and new Buy American guidance created uncertainty about whether the state contract would include American suppliers or allow Canadian imports. “We wanted good quality salt,” the staff member said, describing towns’ preference for higher‑purity material after recent supply and contamination problems.

The committee heard the bid included four delivery zones with different per‑ton prices: zone A (Cambridge, Easton, Jackson, White Creek) at $89.00 per ton; zone B (Argyle, Fort Edward, Greenwich, Hebron, Salem) at $89.90 per ton; zone C (Fort Ann, Granville, Hartford, Kingsbury) at $94.00 per ton; and zone D (Dresden, Hampton, Putnam, Whitehall) at $92.90 per ton. The presenter said last year’s price had been about $70.15 per ton with no delivery differentials.

The staff member reviewed exceptions attached to the bid—such as a 30‑day pricing validity clause and a pass‑through for government‑imposed tariffs and shipping fees—and said the county had told bidders it would not accept exceptions. They also said Atlantic had not withdrawn its bid despite those terms.

Committee members asked whether towns that did not want to join the county bid would be locked into quantities. The staff member said towns would not be forced to buy; the county bid would be available to any town that elected to “piggyback” and ordering towns would only pay for what they ordered. She reminded members that submitting to a state OGS bid typically requires a commitment to purchase 50% of the quantity a municipality lists by May 1 and that OGS pricing can be fixed for up to 120 days.

Members also discussed prior problems with contaminated or wet material under the state contract that reduced actual salt content (the presenter said an informal test showed roughly 85% salt content in one sample). That history and the current market uncertainty were cited as reasons some towns preferred a separate county bid focused on material quality.

The committee voted to amend the resolution to include the proposed zone rates and moved to accept the county bid so towns that wish to use it can do so. The amendment and acceptance were approved by the committee.

The staff member said they would provide final bid documentation to towns and follow up on whether OGS will permit certain suppliers under new Buy American guidance. Committee members requested that staff notify towns of deadlines and clarify OGS outcomes when available.","County staff presented a newly opened salt bid showing higher prices and zone-based delivery rates; committee discussed Buy American uncertainty at the state level, previous contamination complaints, and options for towns to opt into the county bid.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Washington County committee approves multiple resolutions, contracts and budget amendments

Committee favors funding EMS support grant from general fund; flags small consumables gap and possible foundation support

Washington County committee asks staff to gather fleet mileage data and consider centralizing vehicle management

Committee raises safety and ownership questions for county bike bridges; asks staff to seek DOT and IDA clarity

Washington County committee reviews salt bid as towns consider piggybacking amid quality and price concerns