Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Snow And Ice Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State asks county to amend snow-and-ice contract language; supervisors warn reimbursement is being withheld
Summary
Livingston County highway staff told the Board of Supervisors the state is withholding reimbursement for snow-and-ice work until a revised contract language clears state review, prompting discussion of a firm 10‑day payment demand and possible operational responses if funds are not released.
Livingston County supervisors were told state officials have delayed reimbursement for plowing and snow‑and‑ice work and are requiring amended contract language before the county will be paid.
The matter drew an extended discussion during the board’s meeting after a county staff member identified as Jason said the state requested changes to a contract with the New York State Department of Transportation and that the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) is holding reimbursement until the amended resolution clears multiple state reviews.
Jason said the state asked the county to submit a new resolution because “there was a few things that they wanted removed, a few things they wanted added.” He told the board the county has completed the work and that reimbursements that normally offset the county highway budget were being withheld: “Right now, the money that you’re receiving comes out of my highway budget and then the state is to reimburse me, which obviously I’m not seeing that.”
Jason said the state reviewer told him the matter would pass through three departments and that the OSC was the last review step. He and others said the reviewer estimated a couple of days per department, but board members expressed skepticism and said the delay could stretch into weeks or months.
Shannon (role not specified) drafted a revised resolution and was asked to prepare a follow‑up letter asking the state to pay within 10 days of receiving the county’s resolution. Supervisors discussed wording and whether to include a firm deadline in the transmittal letter. One supervisor urged a clear demand: “Look. You want money in 10 days. … Just pay us.”
Several supervisors said they were concerned about the state withholding funds and discussed possible operational responses if payment did not arrive. Jason suggested that, if reimbursements were not made, the county could stop plowing state roads: “If they’re not paying, your roads don’t get plowed.” Others cautioned about contractual termination terms and the potential need to give towns and contractors notice. One supervisor noted a possible 30‑day termination requirement in local agreements and said the county should verify contractual notice periods before halting services.
Board members also discussed salt supply and delivery shortages tied to the wider winter logistics picture. Jason said he had talked with suppliers and that, while full orders might not be met, deliveries could be prioritized for counties reporting imminent shortages.
Despite the concern and discussion, the board proceeded with the item on its agenda related to contracts for snow‑and‑ice control. Supervisors later voted to adopt the contract resolutions; the roll calls recorded unanimous support from those present.
Why this matters: For the county highway fund, state reimbursements for plowing are expected revenue that offsets local costs. Delays or withholding of those reimbursements can shift costs into the county budget and into municipal partners that rely on county administration of state contracts.
What’s next: Supervisors directed staff to transmit the amended resolution and to send a transmittal letter requesting payment within 10 days of the state’s receipt of the resolution. They also asked staff to verify contractual notice periods before taking any operational steps that would interrupt plowing or related services.
