Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Physical Services committee debates billing village for emergency water‑main response
Summary
Following a large water‑main break in Fultonville, county DPW presented a $3,128.05 bill for labor and equipment; legislators debated whether the county should charge municipalities for emergency shared services and whether existing shared‑service practices and reciprocity make billing appropriate.
A water main break in the Village of Fultonville (reported at the meeting as occurring Dec./Jan. 26) prompted a discussion in the Physical Services Committee about whether the county should bill municipalities for emergency DPW responses.
A county speaker presented an itemized bill for $3,128.05, outlining labor and equipment costs for crews who were on site from around 11:30 a.m. until 9 p.m. The speaker said the county has frequently provided shared services to villages (including mowing a one‑mile stretch of the bike path for decades) and argued the county should consider charging for services to help fund equipment replacement and staff safety. He noted that Fultonville residents pay county taxes and called billing the village for the emergency response a policy question for committee review.
Committee members asked whether Fultonville requested the county’s help (answer given: yes) and whether similar bills have been presented previously (responses were inconclusive). Some members recommended developing a county policy or a standard charge schedule, or pursuing on‑demand hourly billing rather than machine‑hour charges. Others cautioned about fairness to small municipalities and the perceived reciprocity provided by villages that perform other services for the county.
No final decision or formal motion to adopt a charging policy was recorded; members asked staff for further review and data.
