Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Chlorine Storage Building topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rome council tables $75,000 chlorine storage project after concerns over estimates and committee review
Summary
The council voted to table a SEQRA determination and a proposed $75,000 bond for improvements to the Rome Water Filtration Department chlorine storage building, after Councilor Kathleen Anderson and DPW Commissioner Joe Giuliano said estimates and municipal-ops review were lacking.
Get email alerts on the Chlorine Storage Building topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Rome Common Council on April 24 voted to table Resolution 55, a declaration that proposed improvements to the Rome Water Filtration Department chlorine storage building are a Type II action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and later tabled the related bond ordinance authorizing up to $75,000 in bonds for the improvements.
Councilor Kathleen Anderson said she visited the filtration plant and that no work estimates were available to the municipal operations committee. She asked that the matter be returned to the municipal operations committee for further review and moved to table Resolution 55. The motion to table was seconded and carried.
DPW Commissioner Joe Giuliano said the chlorine-building work had not been discussed at the municipal operations meeting on March 19 and that the item appeared with his title on the agenda though it had not been run through his office. "The chlorine building at the water filtration plant was not discussed at that March meeting," Giuliano said, and asked for additional research before the council moves forward.
Later in the meeting, the council moved to table Ordinance 9 7 7 7, a bond ordinance authorizing issuance of bonds not to exceed $75,000 to finance improvements to the chlorine storage building. Councilor Anderson moved to table that ordinance as well; the motion was seconded and carried.
Councilors said they wanted firm cost estimates and the municipal operations committee's review before advancing the funding measure. No votes were taken on the substance of the improvements; the tabling leaves the proposal pending additional staff information and committee consideration.

