Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Votes At A Glance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resource Management Committee approves public hearing for Ag District No. 4 and a $312,090 Cornell Cooperative Extension contract
Summary
At its Feb. 5 meeting, the Allegany County Resource Management Committee set a May 14, 2025 public hearing for the eight‑year review of Agricultural District No. 4 under the Agriculture and Markets Law and approved a 2025 contract with Cornell Cooperative Extension not to exceed $312,090.
The Allegany County Resource Management Committee on Feb. 5, 2025 approved a resolution setting a public hearing on the eight‑year review of Agricultural District Number 4 and approved the county’s annual contract with Cornell Cooperative Extension for 2025.
Allison, speaking to the committee, requested the public‑hearing resolution, saying she was “here today to request a resolution to set the date for a public hearing on the 8 year review of Agricultural District Number 4. This would the public hearing date would be 05/14/2025 at 2PM.” The resolution also asked the clerk of the board of legislators to prepare, with assistance from the requesting office, a notice to be published “in accordance with the applicable provisions of the AG and Markets law.” A motion to set the hearing was moved by Angela and seconded (second speaker phrasing in the record). The committee voted in favor and the motion carried.
Kristen Knapp, Allegany County administrator, asked for a motion to approve the county’s annual contract with Cornell Cooperative Extension. She said the contract “runs for the entire year of 2025 in the amount not to exceed $312,090” and that, if approved by the committee, the item would be referred for further board resolution. Hanchette moved the contract approval and was seconded by Bridal Swails; the committee voted in favor and carried the motion.
The committee also approved the Jan. 2, 2025 minutes earlier in the meeting: Ricky Swails moved approval, Hanchett seconded, and the motion carried. At the close of the meeting a procedural motion (recorded as a motion for enclosure) was moved and seconded and carried.
No roll‑call vote tallies with individual yes/no names were recorded in the public transcript; the meeting record shows the committee voiced “Aye” for the motions noted above.
