Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Brownfields topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Herkimer County IDA backs MOU for Charleston parcel, cites EPA support for cleanup
Summary
The Herkimer County Industrial Development Agency voted to support a memorandum of understanding for a Charleston (Charles Town) parcel after staff described EPA sampling, potential brownfield grants and possible industrial or battery storage reuse. The board approved the measure by roll call.
The Herkimer County Industrial Development Agency voted to support a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for a Charleston (Charles Town) parcel after staff described recent federal engagement and environmental sampling. Agency staff said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is engaged on the site and that sampling to date suggests no off‑site migration of contamination.
Agency presenters told the board the site could support a range of uses, including small‑scale battery storage, warehousing and other industrial uses. Staff said EPA attorneys agreed to charge the agency $10,000 for site handling and that, under an IDA project, another $10,000 would be owed; staff characterized the total EPA‑related resources for the effort as substantial and asked for board support for the MOU.
In presenting the item, an agency speaker said, “We received an email about that yesterday” and described progress on sampling and interagency coordination. Board members then conducted a roll‑call vote to record support for the MOU; the vote was recorded as affirmative by the members who answered present at the roll call.
Why it matters: The MOU would position the IDA to take a more active role in advancing remediation and redevelopment on a federal brownfield parcel. Staff emphasized that any future project would require additional agreements, developer commitments and federal/state approvals.
What happened next: After discussion, the board voted in favor of supporting the MOU. Staff said they will bring finalized agreements and any purchase/sale documents back to the board for further approval.
The board did not vote on any specific redevelopment contract or developer agreement at the meeting; staff noted sampling, additional testing and legal steps remain before any land transfer or project commitment.
