Jul 07, 2026 Public Works

[00:00:01]

ARE YOU READY? WE HAVE A ROLL CALL ON ALL OF THEM EXCEPT FOR DP. ALRIGHT, WE'LL CALL DPW TO ORDER SOME HOUSE CLEANING FIRST. YOU MAY HAVE SEEN COMMUNICATIONS SHEET. THAT DOCKET 3025 WAS LISTED FOR US. THAT'S ON PUBLIC WORKS. I'M SORRY, PUBLIC SAFETY AND THAT'LL BE HANDLED ON PUBLIC SAFETY. WE HAD ONE ADDITION WHICH SHOWED AT THE END OF THE

[l. 2026-3491 – COUNTY EXECUTIVE RE:   APPOINTMENT OF JEFFREY D. QUACKENBUSH AS COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS]

SO HE KNOWS RELEVANT. HE KNOWS THE PEOPLE. HE KNOWS THE TOWNS, HE KNOWS THE VILLAGES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO. SO. GRATEFUL THAT HE ACCEPTED. WALK AWAY. BEEN ABLE TO KEEP THEM WITH US FROM TWO PLACES. BEING COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS. AND WE'RE VERY HAPPY BECAUSE WE HEARD YOU WERE CONSIDERING BRINGING DENNIS DAVIS BACK. SO I DON'T YOU KNOW, THAT WAS I HAD A I HAD A RUMOR VERY QUICKLY. I TOLD JEFF, YOU GOT TO DO THIS EVEN EVEN FOR A DAY. I HAD A JOB. FROM ONE. ALL RIGHT. NO QUESTIONS. WE'LL CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE AYE. OKAY. VERY GOOD. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. ALL RIGHT.

ALONG. BACK IN ORDER NOW. 3099DPW. AND THE CENTRAL LEASE FOUND ON PAGES 54 AND 57 OF

[a. 2026-3099 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:                 APPROVAL OF A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY, THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF LAW, AND CENTRO OF ONEIDA, INC.]

[b. 2026-2959 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:                 APPROVAL OF A LEASE RENEWAL BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY AND ROME BASEBALL ASSOCIATION, INC.]

THE TERM OF THE BASEBALL FIELDS. LAND ADJACENT TO THE COUNTY AIRPORT IS JUNE 1ST THROUGH MAY 31ST OF 31. THERE'S NO RENT PAID ON THAT. IT'S JUST FOR THEIR USE. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT INSURANCE? WE. IS THAT COVERED WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT THE INSURANCE FOR THE BALL

[00:05:04]

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANGELA. IS THERE A CLAUSE IN THERE FOR US. I MEAN IT'S CLOSE ENOUGH TO GIOVANNI WHERE IF DOWN THE ROAD WE WANTED TO, YOU KNOW DO SOMETHING THERE. WE HAVE AN OUT OUT OF THAT CONTRACT IS THE REASON WHY THIS IS A LITTLE BIT LATE. BECAUSE WE DID HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WEREN'T GOING TO ENCROACH ON. SO THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED. BUT A LOT OF US, WE'RE TRYING TO COME BACK A YEAR FROM NOW. SO THEY WANT TO EXPAND EVEN FURTHER. AND WE NEEDED THAT PARCEL. WE COULD GET OUT OF IT. OKAY. VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE. YEAH, I THINK WE EAT FREE CHOCOLATE MILK WHILE YOU'RE AT IT. THAT'S HOW THEY GET THE MILK. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HAVING NONE. WE'LL CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AND TO 2973

[c. 2026-2973 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:    APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 3 TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY, THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND BARTON & LOGUIDICE, D.P.C.  ]

QUESTIONS? YES. WE SEE THIS QUITE OFTEN. AND WHY ISN'T THIS INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL BID? SO THAT WE GET A COMPETITIVE BID, INCLUDING THIS FOR THESE PROJECTS? WE DON'T EXACTLY KNOW WHEN THE CAC IS GOING TO BE NEEDED, WHAT YEAR WE TAKE THE MONEY OUT. DEPENDING. THIS IS A BRIDGE IN NEW YORK PROGRAM AND THEY TAKE SEVERAL YEARS. SO WHAT YEAR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE THE FUNDS TO TO DO ALL THOSE THINGS. SO WE KEEP IT SEPARATE FOR THAT REASON. BUT WE, WE PUT THE, WE PUT THE, THE BID OUT TO. IN THIS CASE, BARTON AND LOUNGE WON THE BID. CORRECT. BARTON AND LOGIUDICE, THEY ARE THE THE DESIGNERS. SO SO THE BID FOR THE DESIGN. CORRECT PROPOSAL.

YEAH, YEAH. YEAH. SO I MEAN MY QUESTION WAS WHEN WE WHEN WE DO THIS, WHY CAN'T THE INSPECTION SERVICES BE INCLUDED IN THAT AS PART OF THE PACKAGE. SO WE'RE PUTTING THE PACKAGE FORWARD TO PROVIDE THE DESIGN SERVICES AND THE INSPECTION SERVICES. WE GET A MORE COMPETITIVE BID THAT WAY OTHER THAN JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE AND THEN HAVING THEM PUT A CHANGE ORDER IN FOR THE INSPECTION SERVICES, IT WOULD MAKE SENSE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS TO THIS CHANGE. FOUR YEARS AGO WHEN BARTLETT JUDAS WAS, I'M GUESSING FOUR YEARS AGO, WHENEVER THEY WERE BROUGHT ON CONTRACT. SO IT'D BE HARD FOR THEM TO PUT A RATE ON THERE.

YOU GOT OUR RATES OF YOUR DESIGNERS AND ALL THAT TYPE OF STUFF, SO IT WOULDN'T BE AN ACCURATE OKAY, CHANGE ORDER. THANK YOU. YEP. GOOD. CHRIS. I'M GOOD. OTHER QUESTIONS? HAVING NONE. WE'LL CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

[d. 2026-2756 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:     APPROVAL OF AN CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY, THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND DELTA ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, LAND SURVEYORS, & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, D.P.C.]

HOW DOES THAT. HOW DOES THAT ESCALATION RATE WORK? TO BE HONEST, I DON'T HAVE A CLEAN ANSWER FOR THAT. I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU. I BELIEVE IT'S IN CASE IT GOES INTO THE NEXT YEAR, BECAUSE THE GUIDE RAILS MAY CARRY OVER INTO 2027 BY 3%. THAT'S THEIR INFLATION COST.

[00:10:04]

[e. 2026-3070 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:     APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 002 TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY, THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND MARCH ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS, P.C.]

PUBLIC WORKS SEEKS APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH MARCH ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MVCC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BUILDING. DUE TO SIGNIFICANT SCOPE CHANGES. AMONG THE CHANGES WERE THE RELOCATION OF PAYNE HALL COOLING TOWER TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEW BUILDING AND REDESIGN OF THE FAB LAB AND THE MACHINE TOOL LAB FOR NEW EQUIPMENT. THE ADDITIONAL FEE IS FOR $41,632. THE PROPOSED BASE FEES AND REIMBURSEMENTS BRINGS THAT UP TO A TOTAL OF 2,000,397 $477. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE ADDITIONAL 41000, MR. BUCK? NOW, NONE OF THIS IS THE ACTUAL PLANNING, KNOWING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE THE TOWER. SO THE TOWER THE ISSUE WITH THAT WAS THE TOWER WAS PRIOR, A COUPLE OF YEARS PRIOR TO THE DESIGN WAS IN BAD CONDITION. SO RATHER THAN THAN IT WAS IN THE WORKS FOR THE THE THIS PLAN FOR THE SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY BUILDING GO UP. IT WAS IN PLANNING. SO RATHER THAN TRY TO FIND A NEW PLACE, THEN AT THE TIME THEY DID SOME PATCHING, THEY REPLACED. THEY PUT. RUBBER SEAL OR SOMETHING ON THE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE COOLING TOWER TO PREVENT IT FROM RIDING OUT, JUST TO GIVE IT A COUPLE YEARS, SO WE COULD THEN FIGURE OUT WHERE WE WANT TO GO. THAT WAY WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THINGS TWICE, INCUR DUPLICATIVE COSTS. SO WE WE INCLUDED THAT REPLACEMENT IN THIS PROJECT. WHILE WE WERE ALREADY MOBILIZED HAVING A DESIGN FIRM ON TASK.

SO IT WAS JUST TO TRY TO REDUCE SCOPE AND COSTS INSTEAD OF TWO PROJECT, WE TOSSED IT INTO ONE.

WHERE IS THAT TOWER GOING NOW? I THINK IT'S LIKE 100FT TO THE NORTH EAST. NO, IT'S MOVED FARTHER AWAY TOWARDS THE THE QUAD, I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY IT'S ALREADY MOVED ACTUALLY.

YEAH. YEAH. IT WAS OUT IN FRONT IN FRONT OF THE SHERMAN DRIVE AND IN FRONT OF PAINT HALL. AND IT WASN'T IT'S MOVED IN FIELD CLOSER TO THE INSIDE OF THE CAMPUS. GOOD. MR. BROOKE, I'M GOOD. THANKS. OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST SO. THE THE WAS THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE 2.247 MILLION. AND NOW WE'RE AT 2.397. THAT'S THE NEW NUMBER 2397 WITH THE INCREASE OF 41000 MORE THAN 41000. BUT WHAT WAS WHAT WAS THE AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BECAUSE THAT THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE, IT MIGHT BE A SCHEDULE CHANGE, THE LENGTH OF THE CONTRACT LENGTH. AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE, ADD. I DON'T HAVE THAT ONE TO YOU KNOW, IF YOU SUBTRACT 32.37 9 MILLION FROM 2.247 MILLION, YOU GET A LOT MORE THAN 47,190 1000. WE INCLUDED REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I HAVE IT ON THE SUBMISSION REVIEW FORM. IT'S ON THE BACK. THAT'S THAT'S ALMOST A 10% OVERRIDE IN DESIGN ALREADY. THERE WAS A LOT OF SCOPE CHANGES ORIGINALLY. WE WERE GOING TO RETAIN THAT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BUILDING.

MR. VAN WAGNER YEAH, SO THAT'S AS WE DECIDED THE DECISION WAS MADE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ONE.

THERE IS A LOT OF CHANGES YOU DID THAT. YOU HAD TO MOVE THE THE FIBER CABLE AND THE SPACE WAS EXPANDED. AND THIS COMPANY FROM GERMANY IS BRINGING STUFF IN. THEY PROBABLY HAVE THE NEWEST, LATEST AND GREATEST, WHICH IS WHAT YOU WANT, THE COOLING TOWER, ALL THIS STUFF IS BASED ON THE LATEST AND GREATEST. BUT MY POINT WAS, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY WE'RE. THIS IS A $41,600. THAT'S 41,000 $632,000 CHANGE. BUT WE'RE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NEW CONTRACT AMOUNT AND THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT IS $191,602. BECAUSE WE WE SHOWED AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE HAD $115,000 OF REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES. SO YOU HAD THE 115 TO THE IF MY MATH IS RIGHT, GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL 2.205845, YOU'RE STILL SHORT. THAT BRINGS YOU THEN. THEN YOU ADD THE 41632.20. WE'RE DISCUSSING. NOW, UNLESS OUR MATH IS WRONG, IT SHOULD GET US TO THE TO THE NUMBER WE WERE ASKING FOR. ALL RIGHT, I GOT I GOT TO LOOK AT

[00:15:05]

BUT WE SUFFER A LOT BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES A LONG TIME FOR US TO GET SOMETHING ON THE DOCKET AND MOVE IT THROUGH. GET IT ON FOR YOUR GUYS'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL TO KEEP OUR SCHEDULES RELATIVELY CLOSE AND TIGHT AS WE WANT TO SEE IT. AND THEY TAKE RISKS. THAT ON RAMP THING THAT PRESIDENT VAN WAGONER WAS TALKING ABOUT, THEY'RE HELPING US OUT ALREADY WITH THAT. AND THAT HASN'T EVEN A CAPITAL PROJECT IS HELPING US OUT ON SOMETHING. THEN WE GET A BILL THE NEXT DAY FOR SOMETHING ELSE. OKAY. IT'S JUST MY EXPERIENCE. YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT YOU. IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT SITTING HERE AS A LEGISLATOR AND COMING FROM THAT, WHAT GOES ON. TO ME, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WHAT WE'RE CONSISTENTLY AN OPEN CHECKBOOK, YOU KNOW, AND MAYBE THINGS CHANGE CRITICAL ON SOME OF THIS STUFF. AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT IT'S NOT A YOU I KNOW YOU'RE FAIRLY NEW IN THE POSITION, BUT IT'S JUST CONCERNING TO ME THAT. LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS AND READING THROUGH THE LETTER, YOU KNOW, WE OCCURRED, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL 52,000 AND WE'D LIKE 41,000 FOR IT. DAVE, CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION? I WOULD SUBMIT BEFORE YOU START QUESTIONING MARCH ASSOCIATES TO FAR QUESTION RANDY VAN WAGNER, WHO KNOWS. AND HIS STAFF, THEY KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS ABOUT THIS SCIENCE CENTER, THIS INNOVATIVE CENTER THAT'S SUPPOSED TO FEED THE MICRONS AND ALL THE NEW STATE OF THE ART COMPANIES. SO SO NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT. LET'S NOT GO BACK AND FORTH.

CAN I SAY THAT THAT MARCH ASSOCIATES IS GIVING US A BILL BASED ON SOMETHING THAT THEY WEREN'T TOLD ABOUT, AND NOW THEY'RE BEING TOLD ABOUT IT. AND SO THAT TO FIND OUT HOW THIS DEVELOPED, MARCH ISN'T DECIDING WHAT TO DESIGN AND BUILD. FOR ME, THAT'S THEIR PROJECT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE STATE OF THE ART COMPANIES. WHERE'S OUR OVERSIGHT? YEAH, WHERE'S OUR OVERSIGHT? AND YOU CAN ASK THEM, WELL, WHAT ABOUT THESE COMPANIES THAT ARE ARE GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE GOING TO BE SENT TO THEM, NAMELY THE GRADUATES AT MVCC? MAYBE THEY SHOULD BE GETTING SOME MONEY FROM MICRON WHOSE STOCK IS UP HERE. OKAY. BUT TO ASK TO ATTACK MARCH ASSOCIATES, THEY'RE THEY'RE THEY'RE GIVING

[00:20:02]

MARCH ASSOCIATES DID NOT INVENT IT OUT OF THIN AIR. THEY WERE TOLD TO PRESENT THESE ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR COST. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I SENT HIM MEETINGS WITH THESE ARCHITECTS. I KNOW HOW IT IS. THEY'RE NOT ARCHITECTS. THEY'RE NOT DESIGNERS. THEY'RE SALES GUYS. NO THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE ON MY FLOOR IN THE 258 BUILDING.

ALL RIGHT. WE COULD GO BACK AND FORTH ON THIS ALL DAY, AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO SOLVE A THING. I THINK IF YOU GO BACK WHEN PETER WAS HERE, WE HAD SITUATIONS LIKE THIS BEFORE AND THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, AND I DON'T KNOW IF MARY ANGELA WOULD CONCUR WITH THIS, BUT IF WE, THE COUNTY, ASKED THE VENDOR TO PERFORM THE WORK AND THEY PERFORM THE WORK, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THEY'RE EXPECTING TO GET PAID FOR IT, WHETHER IT'S CONTRACTUAL OR NOT. I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING THEY DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT. AND I ASKED THAT QUESTION TO PETER AT THE TIME, I SAID, YOU KNOW, ARE WE OBLIGATED, LIKE YOU SAY, IF WE VOTED NO TONIGHT, WE'RE WE'RE PRETTY MUCH OBLIGATED. WE WOULD END UP PAYING THEM. I MEAN, WE ASKED THEM TO DO THE WORK. THEY DO THE WORK. NOW, MAYBE WE HAVE SOME INTERNAL THINGS WE NEED TO LOOK AT CHANGING, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S THE VENDOR. IF WE ASK THE VENDOR TO DO THE WORK, NO MATTER WHO IT IS, THEN THEY SHOULD GET PAID FOR WHAT THEY'VE BEEN ASKED TO DO. AND, AND I THINK LEGALLY THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET PAID FOR THAT. BUT CAN I ADD ONE MORE THING TO THAT MARCH ASSOCIATES? I'M ALWAYS AMAZED JUST LOOKING AT THE TRAIN STATION WAS HIT BY THAT TRAIN AND THEY MATCHED THE OLD BRICK, EVERYTHING. YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW AN ACCIDENT HAPPENED WITH THAT TRAIN THAT CAME DOWN FROM BURRSTONE ROAD AND RODE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE CITY, AND THEY MADE THAT BUILDING EXACTLY AS IT WAS. THEY BUILT THIS ROOM. THEY, THEY, THEY EARN THEIR MONEY FOR WHAT THEY DO. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT TAKE THE, THE SPECIFIC VENDOR OUT OF THE PICTURE. ANY VENDOR DOESN'T MATTER WHO IT IS. BUT, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT MY COLLEAGUE HERE IS ATTACKING THE VENDOR. AND SO I WANT TO SAY THAT IT DOESN'T START WITH THEM.

THEY MAY BE AN ISSUE, BUT I WOULD SAY YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE ROOT CAUSE. LET ME TAKE BACK MY STATEMENT. OKAY. LET ME JUST PUT IT THIS WAY. IT SEEMS LIKE ANY OF THE INDIVIDUALS WE WORK WITH CONSISTENTLY GO IN AND THEY BILL US FOR THINGS. THE ADDITIONAL WORK AND NO PROJECT HAS EVER COME UNDER BUDGET OR, YOU KNOW, CONSISTENTLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE COMING BACK AND SAYING, WELL, WE NEED THIS CHANGE OR WE NEED THAT CHANGE ORDER. RIGHT? OH, WELL, THE WORK'S DONE. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? IT'S KIND OF TO ME, IT'S, IT'S MY WORLD. I, I, I WOULD NEVER GET PAID FOR SOME OF THIS STUFF. MY WORLD SAYS I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T FORESEE WHAT WAS GOING ON IN IRAQ RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S HAPPENING AND RAISED OIL PRICES. NOW THEY'RE COMING DOWN. SO THERE'S THERE'S PRICES THAT GO ON AND MOVE ON. YEAH, YEAH. I THINK IF ANYTHING, WE NEED TO LOOK INTERNALLY. BUT BRINGING US BACK TO THE DOCKET. I'M GOOD. YEAH. I MEAN, I SEE I CAN, I CAN DO THE MATH NOW, BUT I JUST, I, THAT'S WHY MY ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS WHAT WAS AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE? BECAUSE WE HAVE, WE HAVE A 150, 000 PLUS A 35000 PLUS THE 416 BRINGS US TO WHERE WE ARE. BUT MY QUESTION WAS, WHAT WAS THE AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE, ED? WELL, WHERE DID THE 115 COME FROM? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS APPROVED PRIOR? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOOD, I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. AND AS A STATESMAN, I WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE DAVE'S QUESTION BECAUSE I QUESTION COST INCREASES AS WELL. SO I IT'S A PROPER, PROPER THING TO ASK AND I APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T MEAN BUT BUT IN THIS CASE, I THINK IT'S TOTALLY JUSTIFIED BECAUSE THIS IS THE GOLD STANDARD HERE. WHAT THEY WANT TO MAKE HAPPEN. MR. JULIAN, ONE POINT, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO CLARIFY YOUR POINT OF AS LONG AS WE REQUEST THE WORK TO BE DONE, WE NEED TO PAY FOR IT. WE, THIS BODY ARE PAYING FOR IT, BUT WE, THIS BODY ARE NOT THE ONES REQUESTING. WHO IS EXACTLY THE PEOPLE REQUESTING THIS WORK GET DONE, AND BASED ON WHO'S RECOMMENDATION, I THINK. AND I'M NOT ASKING YOU FOR AN ANSWER RIGHT NOW, BUT WHAT I'M, I GUESS I'M STATING IS THAT MAYBE THIS IS WHERE WE NEED TO LOOK RATHER THAN POINTING A FINGER AT OTHER PLACES. YES. I MEAN, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. I'VE BEEN HERE 21 YEARS AND I CONSTANTLY SEE WHERE THE COUNTY ASK, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH DPW OR WHETHER IT'S THROUGH WHATEVER DEPARTMENT. WE ASKED THE VENDOR TO DO THE WORK, AND IT APPEARS THAT WE'RE RUBBER STAMPING IT. I MEAN, I'LL PUT IT THAT WAY. IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE RUBBER STAMPING THE WORK AFTER IT'S BEEN DONE. BUT TO ME, IT'S NOT THE VENDOR THAT'S CAUSING THE ISSUE. IT'S IT'S INTERNAL CONTROLS. OKAY. WE SEE IT WITH CONTRACTS THAT COME TO US THAT STARTED A YEAR BEFORE THEY COME BEFORE US. IT'S THE SAME THING, MAKES US FEEL LIKE WE'RE RUBBER STAMPING.

I THINK THAT'S INTERNAL CONTROLS, THOUGH. I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY SPECIFIC VENDOR IS MY POINT. IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO LOOK AT INTERNALLY IF WE'RE BUILDING A GARAGE. AT MY HOUSE THE OTHER DAY, MY WIFE WENT OUT AND SAID, THE PEOPLE POURING THE CONCRETE PAD, I WANT

[00:25:03]

[f. 2026-2876 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:     APPROVAL OF AN ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY, THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND DELTA ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, LAND SURVEYORS, & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, D.P.C.]

QUESTIONS ON THIS. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY

[g. 2026-2879 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY RE:     APPROVAL OF A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONEIDA COUNTY, THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND DELTA ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, LAND SURVEYORS, & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, D.P.C.  ]

THANK YOU. CHRIS. HOPEFULLY NOBODY ELSE WILL TALK. NO. THE SO THIS IS THE DESIGN PHASE.

YES. AND WE HAD EIGHT BIDDERS. YEAH. EIGHT, EIGHT COMPANIES SHOWN THERE ON THE WELL NINE TOTAL DELTA B EIGHT OTHERS. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE LAST ONE WE JUST APPROVED. BUT IT ALWAYS SAYS AFTER A THOROUGH REVIEW PROCESS IS IN THE OPINION OF ONEIDA COUNTY DPW. THE DELTA ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS LAND SURVEYORS HAS ASSEMBLED THE MOST QUALIFIED TEAM. WHO'S WHO'S MAKING THAT CALL MYSELF MY DIRECTOR OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CHRIS HENRY, AND THEN THE PROJECT MANAGER, NECESSARILY THE LOWEST BID.

THEN WE WE SCORE BID PRICES PART OF IT. BUT IS A PAST PERFORMANCE. THEIR TEAM THE QUALITY THIS THEIR PLAN. WE LOOK AT THE WHOLE PROPOSAL. THERE'S 5 OR 6. I THINK I JUST NAMED THEM ALL WE GO THROUGH AND WE SCORE THEM INDEPENDENTLY, PUT THEM ON A SHEET WITH THE AVERAGE. WE DON'T OPEN OURSELVES UP FOR A LAWSUIT. I MEAN, FOR SOMEBODY THAT HAS A LOWER BID BECAUSE SOMEBODY DETERMINED THAT THEY'RE NOT QUALIFIED TO DO THE WORK, SO LONG AS IT'S CONSISTENT IN OUR. SO AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE WE'RE. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF.

APPROPRIATE. OKAY. THANKS, CHRIS. I'M GOOD. TONY. ONE QUICK ONE. THIS 565 IS JUST A DESIGN OF THE PROJECT DOESN'T. THERE'S GOING TO BE A SEPARATE CONTRACT FOR WHOEVER DOES THE WORK OR IS OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEE IS GOING TO BE DOING THE WORK. NO. THE CULVERTS WILL GET BID OUT IN SEPARATE PROJECTS. SOMETIMES IF THE CULVERTS ARE ON THE SAME ROAD, THEY'LL BE ONE PROJECT. YOU GET TWO ON THE SAME ROAD. BUT NO, THERE'S I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER OF THE CULVERTS, BUT YEAH, THEY'LL BE SEPARATE BID PACKAGES ONCE THEY'RE DONE FOR THE INSPECTION

[00:30:03]

ANOTHER MARCH 79TH PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. MOVING ON TO 31. 24. YEAH. DON'T SAY THAT TOO

[h. 2026-3124 – PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEAD: BAISLEY/VANWAGONER RE:     APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH MARCH ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS, P.C. FOR PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE CAMPUS MASTER PLAN AT MOHAWK VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE – UTICA & ROME CAMPUSES]

YEAH. PHASE ONE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN UPDATED CAMPUS PLAN FOR MOHAWK VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE, BOTH CAMPUSES, UTICA AND ROME LOCATIONS. MARCH WILL BE PAID AT AN HOURLY RATE, NOT TO EXCEED A TOTAL OF 139,600, WITH THE WORK SCHEDULED TO BE FINISHED BY DECEMBER 1ST OF THIS YEAR. MARCH'S PROPOSAL WAS ONE OF THREE SUBMISSIONS EVALUATED DURING ON CAMPUS INTERVIEWS. THE FIRM WORKED ON THE PRIOR 2010 MVC MASTER PLAN, SO THEY'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT'S EXISTING AND THE PROPOSAL FOR PHASE TWO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WILL BE PROVIDED AT THE COMPLETION OF THE MASTER PLANS FIRST COMPONENT. WITH THAT SAID, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

MR. I JUST HAVE WHAT EXACTLY WHAT EXACTLY ARE THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON CAMPUS INTERVIEWS? WHAT DOES THAT ENTAIL? YEAH. SO THEY'LL HAVE INTERVIEWS, OBVIOUSLY ON CAMPUS WITH THE THE FACULTY, STUDENTS, NEIGHBORS JUST CANVAS, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE CERTAIN QUESTIONS THAT THEY KNOW TO ASK AND TRY TO HELP THEM, YOU KNOW, BUILD THEIR PLAN AND TAKE ALL OPINIONS INTO ACCOUNT. OKAY. THANK YOU. GETTING EDUCATED HERE. OTHER QUESTIONS. AT THE END DATE OF DECEMBER 31ST. WAS THAT OUR REQUEST OR IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING THEY WOULD MEET. WE BACKTRACKED OFF OF THEIR THEIR PROPOSAL THAT PHASE ONE FROM THE NOW MAY CHANGE A LITTLE BIT DEPENDING ON WHEN IT'S APPROVED AND SIGNED OFF TODAY, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT IS THAT'S APPROXIMATELY WHEN WE BELIEVE THE FATE. YEAH. AND I THINK IT'S A CONSERVATIVE NUMBER FOR PHASE ONE. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS? FINAL QUESTIONS HAVING NONE. WE'LL CALL THE VOTE ON 3124. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT DOES IT FOR DPW. THANK YOU GENTLEMEN. THANK YOU, THANK YOU THANK YOU. YEAH. YEAH. BOY. YEAH. HERE FOR NEXT MONTH. YEAH THAT'S IS THAT IT FOR DPW FOR ME. WE'RE GOING TO BEAT UP ON CARL NOW. CARL. CARL

[i. 2026-3003 – WATER POLLUTION DEPARTMENT HEAD: SCHRANTZ RE:     AUTHORIZATION FOR ONEIDA COUNTY TO APPLY FOR A STRENGTHENING ESSENTIAL CYBERSECURITY FOR UTILITIES AND RESILIENCY ENHANCEMENT (SECURE) GRANT PROGRAM  ]

IT NEVER. NOT IN MY DEPARTMENT. NO. 800,000,340 MILLION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THAT'S GOOD.

WE'RE GOOD. CARL. WHO WOULD WHO WOULD ACTUALLY CONDUCT THE ASSESSMENT? NOW THIS IS I WORKED WITH CHRIS THIESSEN ON THIS. SO WE MIGHT HAVE HE THOUGHT WE MIGHT HAVE TO BRING IN A CONSULTANT. BUT THIS IS IN HIS NECK OF THE WOODS. BUT THE APPLICATIONS WERE SUPPOSED TO COME FROM THE UTILITIES. SO THAT'S WHY WE WE PREPARED THE APPLICATION. THE REGS GIVE US A

[00:35:02]

OKAY, GOOD. ALL RIGHT. NO OTHER QUESTIONS. CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THE NEXT TWO WILL DISCUSS TOGETHER 32, 58, 32, 57. AGAIN,

[j. 2026-3258 – WATER POLLUTION DEPARTMENT HEAD: SCHRANTZ RE:     AUTHORIZATION FOR ONEIDA COUNTY TO APPLY FOR A WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT ACT (WIIA) GRANT AND SUBMIT THE CORRESPONDING CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND APPLICATION,  FOR A PROPOSED ULTRAVIOLET DISINFECTION PROJECT AT THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT]

[k. 2026-3257 – WATER POLLUTION DEPARTMENT HEAD: SCHRANTZ RE:                 AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT FUNDING APPLICATIONS TO THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION THROUGH THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (WQIP) GRANT PROGRAM]

IF THEY WENT EXPONENTIALLY. TREMENDOUS SAVINGS. YES. LONG RUN. YES, MR. BUCK. CARL, WE'VE APPLIED FOR SEVERAL OF THESE GRANTS FOR THE ULTRAVIOLET. WE ALWAYS DO, YES. OKAY. IT'S HIGHLY COMPETITIVE. SO WE KEEP WE KEEP TRYING. IT DOESN'T. WE'VE BEEN DOING THE APPLICATIONS OURSELVES IN HOUSE. SO THERE'S REALLY LITTLE COST OTHER THAN OUR OWN TIME. GOOD.

I'M GOOD. THANK YOU, MR. LEONE. SO WE ARE USING ULTRAVIOLET NOW, AREN'T WE. NO, THAT'S THAT IS NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION. WE'RE USING CHEMICAL BUT I. BUT I THOUGHT IT SEEMS LIKE MY PREVIOUS TERM WE TALKED ABOUT ULTRAVIOLET AT LEAST TWO YEARS AGO OR MORE. WE DID. AND WE'VE PUT OUT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, SELECTED AN ENGINEERING FIRM. AND NOW WE'VE WORKED ON THE DESIGN. THE DESIGN WENT OUT TO BID. WE NOW HAVE A CONTRACTOR THAT'S THAT'S STARTING. OKAY.

SO THIS IS WE'RE NOT HOVERING A BLACK LIGHT OVER THE SEWAGE PIPE A LITTLE MORE INVOLVED. I KNOW THAT, I KNOW THAT. TONY DAVIS, FOR THE RECORD, I THINK YOU'VE MENTIONED IN THE PAST THAT THE UV DISINFECTION SYSTEM WILL MAKE THE THE RESIDUAL BACTERIA THAT SURVIVES CHLORINE, SUCH AS VIRUSES. PATHOGENS STILL ARE THERE. THE UV GETS RID OF VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING.

AND THEN WHEN IT GOES INTO THE MOHAWK RIVER AT THE END STAGE, IT'S THERE'S NO CHLORINE. YOU DON'T HAVE A CHLORINE RESIDUAL. AND THAT WAS THE OTHER ISSUE THAT CDC LOWERED OUR LEVEL LIMITS TO SERIOUS REASONS. YEAH, YEAH. YOU CAN DRINK THE WATER AFTER THE UV ON ANY TIME YOU DRINK THAT WATER. THAT ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HAVING NONE. MR. BLAIR SAYS WE CAN VOTE ON THESE TOGETHER. SO 3258 AND 3257. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED. NO.

OPPOSED OR NOT? OPPOSED. NOT OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. BOTH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL TAKE A MOT

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.