[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6472164,"mediaKeyId","5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255","parentId",5776908,"title","Council set to consider multiple contracts, grants and budget actions; outcomes not recorded in meeting transcript","audioSeconds",385,"startMs",594000,"endMs",979000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255&start=594&end=979","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255/thumbnail_594000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6472164/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Council-set-to-consider-multiple-contracts-grants-and-budget-actions-outcomes-not-recorded-in-meeting-transcript","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6472164-a3953324a53a9daa60910307abce2357/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197612&Signature=NYETpjnYBDrSQxPa4WCRaSc-ykQul0g7tn3yhk~70sV1kGcpEInJBm6-KtLe2fthNTwJdA0V98-lwsVwX41rLEi0rP97pIKhMK~KZrE~Z6~CfigdW~u3zenr8j9TcdoUZiVlXUkpQCTmyaVg8FHi7luR3pQMtZO5xKw0nSMnTtBYvsl5~6UiAMRqCc4gH5bQGmO2VzY~7MTF723BlwRSXeMyS6D-292iMHK2BaWMNzuNZw7r2LkmbI5LzoiaR1u8MZricF0nJzNDPbVOmwPLV5XAlkQjK~y43U7YGEFRUtMmf43q42w7bJGGP-9OO4pQ6Y8w6D56DAiwdV-ixhTWfQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Saratoga","date","2025-09-12T00:00:00Z","article","Saratoga Springs City Council listed several discussion and vote items on its agenda ranging from grant applications to equipment purchases and budget adjustments. The meeting transcript records the items as scheduled for consideration but does not include recorded outcomes for those votes; a motion to adjourn was made, seconded and adopted.

Key items on the agenda included:

- Authorization to apply for the NYSERDA Clean Mobility Grant: the city will request $100,000 with a proposed $20,000 match from the Complete Streets budget line should the award be made; the grant allows in‑kind labor toward the match.

- Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program: the CAPER will be available for public review and comment from Sept. 15 through Oct. 1, 2025.

- Appointments and reappointments: Mayor Safford announced appointments of Ali Dockum and Christina Abel as alternates to the Design Review Board (terms expire 2027) and the appointment of Jay Rogoff as Poet Laureate, term Jan. 1, 2026–Dec. 31, 2027; Joy King was reappointed to the Board of Assessment Review.

- Contracts and purchases noted by department heads: Public Works listed an amendment to CT Veil for subsurface geophysical investigation (adding Task 5), a contract with Western Star for two trucks and chassis, approval of Barton & Lejudice for professional review of the Liberty Housing site plan, a sodium silico fluoride purchase (approx. $14,000), and an easement with National Grid to mount equipment on a pole. Public Safety listed a mayoral agreement for school resource officers (time/location list noted), authorization for 3M tape markings in the traffic garage, a contract for a traffic signal (names referenced as Still Sing and JMT in transcript), and authorization for Saratoga Auto Supply for public safety supplies and accessories.

- Finance items included an invoice approval for Waltz Schwartz for Arts Centre capital amendment ($1,850.43), an invoice for Travelers for about $83,000 covering settled deductibles and ongoing case billings, and routine budget transfers and payroll/benefits adjustments. The transcript records these items as on the agenda; it does not record final votes on them during the session.

The transcript shows the council planned to consider each item on the consent or regular agenda in upcoming action but did not record final outcomes for these items in the provided excerpt. The only recorded vote was the unanimous voice vote to adjourn.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Saratoga - City Council Pre Agenda Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","The council listed a set of action items for discussion and vote including a NYSERDA grant application, multiple contracts for public works and public safety, appointments, and several budget transfers and invoices; the transcript records the items as on the agenda but does not record final votes except for adjournment.","taxTitle","Saratoga Springs City, Saratoga County, New York","taxId",7807,"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},6472169,"Council schedules public hearing on revised defense representation ordinance; Article 4 removed for later policy work",108,38000,146000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255&start=38&end=146","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255/thumbnail_38000.jpg","/articles/6472169/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Council-schedules-public-hearing-on-revised-defense-representation-ordinance-Article-4-removed-for-later-policy-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6472169-73134c17bbc38d6dc0765ecffb6436cd/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197612&Signature=VCOQoMXVyUs0G4J1AEIJRBgcrF2fhnwSLgxVYSN2bsFuD-sBQvL8IQvST-iThGs0viTVTCpTsD5xWpJMycBwO8fkfsdEIuRvUoJdHKiLE-8KZ69BkSq9ZcOmbsf5zcT3GiEvlw~LeIgzJ7a0p~RSrJ375oysmP8blJ0L8eILKHXnvc0f1I1FjkhCTL5pMhOFvU6ifeCxwdl2sD~POQphtsrJyjaQBQrLT7mWLC0p-7pWqSXB81LE51g81NCuZP~HzzDhHZWnvml4bYm77XnpxUFLnBbsd8pelkyXROxd~~dILjhbF86T50VtBooAuD-7sR3fl7MW8E6Ipf5Z-1LZ9g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Saratoga Springs City Council announced a public hearing for an ordinance that would amend Chapter 9 of the City Code, the section governing defense representation and indemnification for city officials and employees. The draft removes Article 4 — a procedural section about how to obtain counsel — and leaves that procedure to be addressed later by separate policy or resolution.

A staff member identified only as Dave explained that the draft ordinance was modeled closely on New York State Public Officers Law Sections 18 and 19. \"Section 18 is for civil legal proceedings, and 19 is for criminal,\" he said while explaining that the city’s current chapter had been interpreted by courts in recent decisions to align with Section 18. Dave said recent case law, including a decision by Judge Walsh, showed Chapter 9 was being read as civil in scope and did not authorize reimbursement for criminal counsel or payment during an on‑call investigation.

Dave said the draft attempts to mirror the state language while replacing references to the attorney general with the city attorney and substituting the city council where the state is mentioned. The draft also expands coverage to include witnesses in certain investigations. He said the draft originally included a Section 4 protocol for how decisions about hiring counsel would be handled, but council members pulled that section so the council or the city attorney could develop the protocol later.

Council members and staff said that if parties encounter a legal roadblock, a court can resolve disputes about hiring counsel and fee questions. Dave said the city could always seek a judicial determination to authorize a hire or resolve fee disputes.

The transcript records the ordinance will be the subject of a public hearing on Tuesday evening; the council did not vote on final adoption during the recorded session. Officials said they plan to address the procedural protocol by resolution at a later date.","Council discussed an ordinance to amend Chapter 9 of the City Code on defense representation and indemnification, aligning local language with New York Public Officers Law Sections 18 and 19 and removing a procedural Article for later resolution-based policy development.",{"_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},6472174,"Council weighs narrower sidewalk, easement and safety trade-offs for Grand Avenue project",631,1010000,1641000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255&start=1010&end=1641","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5776908-7ea33e8f4a8218150294966384842255/thumbnail_1010000.jpg","/articles/6472174/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Council-weighs-narrower-sidewalk-easement-and-safety-trade-offs-for-Grand-Avenue-project","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6472174-481ccf0c1289f504d8f908ffe34601cf/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197612&Signature=eDwQHbDzvFLn~qVcZWmy4yNa-O19mrla9dCk7rLDMZO4rMQ5ajjbdGv1cUr-NpYF210h8jBZb9yI~zF18OB7hyL7ZAr2qszvknne~~~SRHDazEi-gyY7nnYkIDEnL-EO56pWSQdM0wUPtWpVDrmBikLXtfxLuvm14Bmm0f0pkcK-atCBGtPe0v~5lEoOdoXTcPJMkjX52n5EFnkZ67kD2Ilg-7ylF~R6tptvoJ1EyDRdHQxp4Bcq0mP6oY43oytMjNgGRWAfTN~Krr-j3GZ50MeYC03rqAfZ-53nKfNyYWk5~Q6kcqgITmNlO8PaLD57hGqgCYX30pHcROyyRBUUoA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Saratoga Springs City Council members and staff debated a proposed Grand Avenue pedestrian and bicycle improvement that council members said would reduce the number of required permanent property easements but would not eliminate litigation risk or community concerns.

Supporters and staff described options that would shrink an original 8-foot multi‑use path to a 5‑foot sidewalk, a change officials said would reduce the number of properties requiring grading and driveway easements from about 54 initially identified in concept down to roughly 18. Staff estimated the narrower design could reduce permanent easements and lower the scope of property impacts; they also offered a rough project cost increase in the “realm of $400,000.”

Council members and staff said the narrower design aims to limit takings risk and reduce the number of property owners affected. Officials said marking the 8‑foot and 5‑foot boundaries on site would allow residents to compare impacts; staff told the council those marks will be placed within about two weeks.

During discussion, council members and others emphasized safety concerns that prompted the project, including high vehicle speeds, mixing of modes such as bicycles, e‑bikes and scooters, and the presence of school‑age children in the corridor. Officials said stop signs already have reduced speeds and that adding crosswalks and pedestrian‑actuated crossings could further calm traffic. Staff also noted engineering choices — for example, saw‑cutting joints on new concrete — to reduce the “thump” cyclists experience when crossing sidewalks.

Several speakers stressed that reducing the width would remove many of the property impacts that trigger permanent easement acquisitions. But staff warned that, even with changes, takings litigation remained a realistic possibility and could delay the project for years. The council discussed the trade‑offs between an 8‑foot multi‑use trail preferred by some bicycle advocates and a narrower sidewalk preferred by many adjacent residents.

Council members said the city’s Complete Streets guidance currently lists Grand Avenue as an in‑lane bike route rather than part of the Greenbelt Trail, and staff noted utilities and right‑of‑way constraints that make some designs difficult. Officials said further public outreach would continue and that more granular materials would be provided when the narrower 5‑foot alignment is marked at the site.

The council did not record a final vote on the alignment during the meeting; members said they would add the issue to a future agenda item after additional outreach and site marking.","City council discussion focused on a proposed sidewalk/multi-use trail on Grand Avenue, options to reduce permanent property easements, safety concerns about e-bikes and scooters, and possible litigation exposure tied to easements and takings claims.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council set to consider multiple contracts, grants and budget actions; outcomes not recorded in meeting transcript

Council schedules public hearing on revised defense representation ordinance; Article 4 removed for later policy work

Council weighs narrower sidewalk, easement and safety trade-offs for Grand Avenue project