Feb 01, 2024 Legislative Session

[00:00:01]

WELCOME EVERYONE.

GOOD MORNING TO OUR WORK SESSION FOR SESSION NUMBER THREE OF THE COUNTY LEGISLATURE.

WE'LL GO THROUGH OUR AGENDA FOR OUR 12 NOON SESSION LATER TODAY.

MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE ONE ARE AS INDICATED.

MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE TWO AS INDICATED.

ONTO PAGE THREE, LOCAL LAWS.

LOCAL LAW INTRO 1-1 FROM LEGISLATOR BASKIN AND JOHNSON WILL BE UP FOR AMENDMENT AND CONSIDERATION TODAY.

COMMITTEE REPORTS REPORT NUMBER TWO FROM THE FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR MEYERS.

REPORT NUMBER TWO FROM PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR JOHNSON.

ALL SET CHAIR.

REPORT NUMBER ONE FROM THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE CHAIR GILMOUR.

ALL SET. AND REPORT NUMBER ONE FROM THE COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE CHAIR GILMOUR.

ALL SET.

AND REPORT NUMBER ONE FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE CHAIR VINAL.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDA, LEGISLATOR RESOLUTIONS.

INTRO 3-1 FROM THE MINORITY CAUCUS.

CALLING TO RESCIND CHANGES TO THE MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION, AND REGULATION OF GOLF LEAGUES.

MINORITY CAUCUS MEMBERS ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

CHAIRWOMAN BASKIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS TODAY FOR APPROVAL.

I HAVE SPOKEN WITH SEVERAL OF THE GOLF LEAGUES.

THEY'RE REPRESENTED HERE TODAY.

WE HAVE THE WOMEN'S GOLF LEAGUE FROM WE HAVE THE SAINT ANDREWS GOLF LEAGUE, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE, THE GOLDEN AGERS GOLF LEAGUE.

THEY REPRESENT ROUGHLY 600 GOLFERS THAT GOLF AT COUNTY PARKS.

THEY WERE NOT MADE AWARE OF THESE.

THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING THESE CHANGES TO THE GOLF RULES THAT SO DIRECTLY AFFECT THEM.

IT'S LIMITING THEIR PLAY FROM 18 HOLES TO NINE HOLES.

IT'S I HAVE HEARD FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT THAT THEY'RE ROLLING BACK ON THE CART REQUIREMENTS, BUT THESE ARE GOLFERS THAT HAVE GOLFED AT COUNTY PARKS FOR OVER 50 YEARS.

SO TO MAKE THESE CHANGES WITHOUT EVER EVEN CONSULTING THEM IS EXTREMELY CONCERNING.

SO UNDER OUR POWERS AS THE LEGISLATURE WE WOULD LIKE TO RESCIND ON THE RULES AND GO BACK TO THE RULES OF 2023.

I MET WITH THEM AS WELL AS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PARKS.

IT WAS CONCERNING.

I THOUGHT THE LEAGUE RAISED VERY VALID POINTS AND QUESTIONS ABOUT, WHY THESE RULES WERE BEING IMPLEMENTED, WHAT INFORMATION THAT THESE RULES WERE BASED ON, AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO PROVIDE ME ANSWERS.

IT WAS CONCERNING.

AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE GOLFERS CAN STILL BE GOLFING.

SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.

THANK YOU. MAJORITY LEADER MEYERS.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M NOT SURE IF I'M FOR THIS OR AGAINST IT.

I JUST NEED A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION.

MAYBE TROY CAN SPEAK TO THIS.

I DID GET A LOT OF EMAILS FROM GOLFERS IN THE LEAGUES, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO, I WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

BUT I TALKED TO ONE LADY.

I'M SURE YOU'VE TALKED TO HER. HER NAME IS MARGARET MCLAUGHLIN OR WHATEVER.

SHE HAD SOME EMAILS AND SHE HAD POINTED OUT ABOUT THERE ARE SOME VETERANS AND SENIORS THAT ARE IN THIS GOLF LEAGUE.

AND IT JUST MADE ME START TO THINK ABOUT THINGS.

AND I'M THINKING ABOUT, WELL, WHAT ABOUT OTHER SENIORS AND VETERANS THAT ARE NOT INVOLVED? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION.

I DON'T KNOW ALL THE QUESTIONS.

I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO HER THIS WOMAN IS ACTUALLY IN FLORIDA FOR THE WINTER.

AND SHE COMES BACK TO GOLF WITH SOME, SORT OF, AVID GOLFER AND THAT.

BUT I JUST LIKE TO GET A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ON WHY THIS WAS DONE AND WHERE WE'RE GOING FORWARD AND JUST STUFF LIKE THAT.

THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENT.

THANK YOU. GOT IT.

I THINK WE HAVE.

SO I'M GOING TO ASK, TROY AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO JUST COME UP FRONT, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A SERIES OF QUESTIONS FROM LEGISLATORS, SO THAT YOU GUYS WILL BE ABLE TO CHIME IN AND ANSWER. NEXT IS LEGISLATOR VINAL AND THEN LEGISLATOR JOHNSON.

THANK YOU. I ALSO WHEN, IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY, THE PARKS, I KNOW THAT HE HAD SAID THAT NATIONALLY, THERE'S SORT OF A MOVEMENT TO MAKE GOLF MORE ACCESSIBLE TO MORE PEOPLE AND THAT BY, YOU KNOW, HAVING, LEAGUES TAKE UP, A LOT OF SPACE THAT GETS RID OF OTHER PEOPLE HAVING OPPORTUNITY TO GO.

AND I DID TALK TO SOMEONE I'VE KNOWN FOR 25 YEARS WHO WAS OUR THREE OF OUR FOUR KIDS KINDERGARTEN TEACHER.

SO OBVIOUSLY I LOVE HER AND KNOWN HER FOR SO LONG.

AND SHE IS.

THAT GOLF LEAGUE HAS BEEN GOING FOR 61 YEARS, AND SHE'S BEEN A MEMBER FOR SO MANY YEARS.

AND IT'S DURING ALL OF IT, ALL OF THE GOLF LEAGUES THAT ARE THE LONG TERM ONES ARE DURING THE WEEKDAYS.

NONE ARE ON THE WEEKENDS OR AT LATER IN THE DAY.

AND THEY ARE SAYING THAT AT THAT TIME MOST OF THE COURTS ARE EMPTY ANYWAY.

AND COLLECTIVELY WITH ALL THE LEAGUES, THEY'RE ONLY TAKING UP 16 HOURS OF DURING THE WEEKDAY.

SO I WAS, THINKING THAT THEY WERE EVEN SAYING IF WE HAD A.

[00:05:01]

SO THAT THIS WAY, BECAUSE ALSO THEY'D HAVE A CHANCE TO PLAN BECAUSE SHE SAID SHE ALL THIS IS KATHY FINALDI IS THE PERSON AND SHE UNFORTUNATELY, SHE WAS GOING TO BE HERE TODAY TO SPEAK. AND THEN THE LAST MINUTE LAST NIGHT SHE TEXTED ME SHE COULDN'T COME.

SO BUT SHE SAID THAT OTHERWISE THE LEAGUES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE THAT.

THEY'RE RETIRED PEOPLE TO HAVE AN ARRANGEMENT TO GO TO A LIKE A GOLF CLUB, YOU KNOW, A COUNTRY CLUB THAT'S SO EXPENSIVE, IT'LL TAKE AWAY THE RIGHT THE ABILITY FOR A LOT OF THE PEOPLE. LIKE SHE'S A RETIRED CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER.

SO SHE OBVIOUSLY IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO WANT TO NECESSARILY PAY FOR, YOU KNOW, CHERRY HILL OR SOMETHING.

BUT THIS IS A FACILITY WE USED.

SO I THOUGHT THAT I AM IN SUPPORT OF IT, AT LEAST FOR GRANDFATHERING IN THE CLUBS THAT ARE HERE FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS BECAUSE IT TAKES A WHILE FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS.

THANK YOU, LEGISLATOR.

ALTERNATE LEGISLATOR JOHNSON.

AND THEN WE'LL ALLOW THE ADMINISTRATION TO RESPOND.

AND, YOU KNOW, TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT, THE MAJORITY LEADER SAID, I'M WONDERING WHY WE ARE NOT REFERRING THIS ITEM TO COMMITTEE AND HAVE A BIGGER CONVERSATION WHEN WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE GROUPS AND EVERYONE IN.

SO EVERYBODY HAS ENOUGH TIME TO PREPARE TO BRING THE INFORMATION FORWARD, YOU KNOW, TO SEND IT TO COMMITTEE.

I'M WONDERING WHY WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO SEND THESE ITEMS TO COMMITTEE.

AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AS WELL AS WHY SOME OF THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SENDING EMAILS NOT USING PRIVATE GOLF CLUBS, I MEAN, THERE ARE OTHER CLUBS OUTSIDE OF THOSE TWO GOLF COURSES THERE.

AND WHY ARE THEY NOT USING THE PRIVATE COURSES THAT THEY CAN GO OUT AND PAY FOR AND THEY CAN CONTROL IT BECAUSE THEY PAY FOR THAT TIME? YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S KIND OF UNFAIR TO MONOPOLIZE THE TIME ON A GOLF COURSE FOR SOMEBODY FOR 18 HOLES.

AND YOU HAVE OTHER GOLFERS WHO CAN'T EVEN USE IT BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, THOSE TOURNAMENTS.

SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHY WE CAN'T HAVE A LARGER CONVERSATION BRINGING ALL INDIVIDUALS IN TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AND [INAUDIBLE] COMMITTEE.

THAT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION I HAVE.

THANK YOU, LEGISLATOR.

PARKS COMMISSIONER SCHINZEL.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

FIRST OF ALL, AS ALWAYS, IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE THIS MORNING.

I WILL LEAD IN WITH SOME JUST BACKGROUND INTRO INFORMATION, AND THEN I'LL HAVE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF RECREATION KATE READ THE DOCUMENT THAT WE JUST PROVIDED EVERYONE.

I THINK AFTER READING THE DOCUMENT, YOU'LL HAVE SOME BETTER CONTEXT THAT MAY SOME OF YOU MAY NOT HAVE HAD.

SO FIRST OF ALL, WE DON'T MAKE DECISIONS, IN A BUBBLE, EACH YEAR AFTER THE GOLF SEASON, WE INTERNALLY MEET UP AND WE TALK ABOUT OUR SUCCESSES, AND WHERE WE NEED TO IMPROVE.

THE SINGLE LARGEST COMPLAINT WE'VE HAD AT OUR GOLF COURSES IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, WHICH IS SIMPLY A LACK OF AVAILABLE PUBLIC TEE TIMES. SO LAST YEAR, WE MADE A CHANGE TO OUR RESERVATION SYSTEM WITH A POINT SCORING METRICS, WHICH HAS HELPED AND ALSO HIRING ADDITIONAL STAFF TO HELP MONITOR PLAY IN THE GOLF COURSE.

THAT STILL SEEMS TO BE THE BIGGEST AND THAT SEEMS TO BE IT IS THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT WE GET.

THE GOOD NEWS IS IT USED TO BE COURSE CONDITIONS.

WE'VE INVESTED IN OUR COURSES OVER THE YEARS.

OUR COURSES ARE IN GREAT CONDITIONS.

WE HAVE NOT INCREASED OUR FEES SINCE 2014.

SO I THINK THE QUALITY OF PLAY YOU GET FOR THE PRICE YOU'RE PAYING, QUITE FRANKLY, YOU WON'T FIND ANYWHERE, 18 HOLE LEAGUES IS NOT A THING WITH GOLF COURSES. THERE'S VERY FEW, IF ANY, GOLF COURSES IN WESTERN NEW YORK THAT HAVE 18 HOLE LEAGUES.

WE BENCHMARKED 15 DIFFERENT GOLF COURSES.

THERE WAS ONE SO FAR THAT WE CAN TELL OF THAT HAS A FRIDAY MORNING LEAGUE OF 18 HOLES.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, MOST OF THOSE GOLF COURSES WERE A LITTLE SHOCKED.

WE HAD 18 HOLE LEAGUES STILL BECAUSE OF THE REASON IT BLOCKS OUT SO MANY TEE TIMES FOR THE PUBLIC.

SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ONE METRIC THAT HELPED ME ANSWER THE QUESTION.

SINCE 2021, WE'VE HAD 16% INCREASE IN ROUNDS OF GOLF, 16% INCREASE.

IT'S NOT UNFATHOMABLE WITH COVID AND THE RECREATION AND GOLF GROWING, WE ANTICIPATED THAT .

SINCE 2021, WE'VE HAD A 38% INCREASE IN SEASON PASSES, 38% INCREASE IN SEASON PASSES.

WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE BUYING SEASON PASSES, A LOWER AMOUNT OF ROUNDS.

THEY CAN'T GET ROUNDS, THEY CAN'T GOLF, THEY CAN'T GET IN TO GOLF.

SO, AT THE END OF THE SEASON, WE LOOKED AT A FEW OPTIONS.

WE COULD QUITE FRANKLY SAY NO LEAGUES.

THAT'S OBTUSE.

WE COULD SAY LIMIT LEAGUES TO X AMOUNT OF PEOPLE PER LEAGUE.

A LOT OF GOLF COURSES DO THAT.

THEY SAY ONLY 36 PEOPLE PER LEAGUE.

WE DIDN'T DO THAT.

SOME OF OUR LEAGUES HAVE OVER 100 PEOPLE IN THEM.

WE COULD HAVE SAID EVENINGS ONLY.

WE COULD HAVE SAID, LIKE OLMSTED, WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE YOU $100 EXTRA EVERY HOUR YOU BLOCK OUT.

WE DIDN'T DO THAT EITHER.

THE FAIR APPROACH WE TOOK TO BE IN LINE WITH THE GOLF INDUSTRY WAS TO ALLOW LEAGUES TO HAVE 9 HOLES.

[00:10:02]

MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE IN LEAGUES ARE PASSHOLDERS.

YOU'RE ALLOWED TO GET A TEE TIME EIGHT DAYS OUT.

BOOK, ANOTHER 18, ANOTHER 36, ANOTHER NINE.

WE'RE NOT STOPPING PEOPLE FROM GOLFING AT ALL.

WE'RE LIMITING THE LEAGUES AND BLOCKED OUT TIMES TO OPEN UP PUBLIC TEE TIMES AT A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE.

THE REALITY IS, THE LEAGUES ARE QUASI PRIVATE GROUP THAT BLOCKS OUT LARGE CHUNKS OF TEE TIMES BEFORE THE START OF THE SEASON.

SO THAT'S OUR STRUGGLE AND THIS WAS OUR FAIR APPROACH TO THAT.

AGAIN, THE GENERAL PUBLIC, WITHOUT BUYING A PASS, COULD BOOK A TEE TIME THREE DAYS IN ADVANCE.

SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO OPEN UP MORE TEE TIMES FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, INCLUDING THOSE IN THE LEAGUES THAT ARE THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

WITHOUT THAT, I'LL HAVE JUST KATE DIG A LITTLE DEEPER IN THE BONES AND READ THE DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF YOU.

GOOD MORNING. ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION, GOLF HAS SEEN A TREMENDOUS GROWTH IN POPULARITY AMONG MANY DEMOGRAPHICS IN RECENT YEARS.

NATIONALLY, THIS INCLUDES INCREASES IN YOUTH, FEMALE AND SENIOR PARTICIPATION ACROSS THE BOARD.

FURTHER GENERAL INTEREST IN THE SPORT HAS INCREASED, WITH A 40% INCREASE IN SURVEYED INDIVIDUALS STATING THAT THEY WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED IN PLAYING GOLF ON A GOLF COURSE OVER PRIOR YEARS.

ERIE COUNTY'S EXPERIENCE WITH THE GROWTH OF THE SPORT MIRRORS NATIONAL TRENDS, AS EVIDENCED BY AN INCREASE IN OUR PAST SALES, AS THE COMMISSIONER REFERENCED IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. SINCE 2021, OUR PAST SALES HAVE INCREASED 30% OVERALL AMONGST ALL TYPES OF PASSES.

WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE INCREASES IN OUR SENIOR TEE TIME PASSES AT BOTH GOLF COURSES AND THE DATA IS THERE IN FRONT OF YOU.

EVIDENCE OF THIS POPULARITY IS ALSO CLEAR IN THE INCREASE OF ROUNDS OF GOLF PLAYED OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS, WHICH EXPERIENCED A 16% INCREASE OVERALL, AND YOU HAVE THE DATA THERE IN FRONT OF YOU AS WELL.

HOWEVER, WHEN ANALYZING THIS USAGE DATA, ONE CONCLUSION IS CLEAR.

SUPPLY CANNOT KEEP UP WITH DEMAND.

PAST SALES ARE INCREASING AT A HIGHER RATE THAN ROUNDS OF GOLF.

THIS INDICATES THAT WE SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH TEE TIMES AVAILABLE FOR THE NUMBER OF GOLFERS WHO PURCHASE GOLF PASSES AND WISH TO PLAY, AND THIS DATA DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT DEMAND FROM NON-PASS HOLDERS OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, MANY OF WHOM ARE CALLING OUR GOLF COURSES THROUGHOUT THE DAY ON A DAILY BASIS.

ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE TELLS US THE SAME.

WHILE DIFFICULT TO DOCUMENT FORMALLY, WE KNOW THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA, GENERAL INBOX INQUIRIES AND COMPLAINTS, AND ENDLESS DAILY PHONE CALLS TO BOTH GOLF COURSES AND OUR MAIN OFFICE, THAT PASSHOLDERS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC WANT TO PLAY AT OUR COURSES AND SIMPLY CANNOT GET A TEE TIME.

BASICALLY, OUR PUBLICLY FUNDED GOLF COURSES HAS A REPUTATION AS BEING INACCESSIBLE.

THAT IS A PROBLEM AND A PROBLEM WE SOUGHT TO ADDRESS THROUGH THE POLICY CHANGE IMPLEMENTED THIS YEAR.

THE LACK OF ACCESS IS DUE TO SEVERAL FACTORS.

ONE IS LEAGUE USAGE.

TEE TIME INTERVALS, ABUSE OF THE TEE TIME SYSTEM, AND LACK OF AN EQUITABLE SYSTEM.

AND THOSE ARE THE FOUR FACTORS THAT WE ADDRESS THROUGH THIS POLICY CHANGE.

MORE OF THE DETAILS ARE OUTLINED IN THE DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR? LEGISLATOR LORIGO.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSIONER.

YOU CALLED THESE LEAGUES QUASI PRIVATE.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR BASIS FOR THAT IS? WELL, THERE ARE GROUPS THAT SOMETIMES HAVE MEMBERSHIP FEES TO THEM THAT, IN ADVANCE OF OPEN PUBLIC TEE TIMES TO EVERYONE, GET TEE TIMES BLOCKED OUT.

SO THEY'RE ABLE TO GET BLOCKS OF TIME AT A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE, GETS TO.

THEY'RE PAYING PASS HOLDER RATES THAT ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WHEN YOU'RE CALLING THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

I THINK THEY ARE THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T MAKE THAT ARGUMENT THAT THEY AREN'T.

THEY ARE USING THE SAME PASSES THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC CAN BUY.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

AND I SAID THAT. I SAID THERE ARE ALSO THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT CAN ALSO GET TEE TIMES THROUGHOUT THE WEEK, 6 OR 7 DAYS A WEEK.

OKAY. WHAT CAN YOU NAME? I MEAN, I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE 15 GOLF COURSES THAT YOU GUYS LOOKED AT.

COULD YOU NAME ANY OF THEM? SURE. OR DO YOU HAVE THE LIST THAT YOU COULD GIVE TO US? SURE WE CAN PROVIDE. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO SIT AND READ IT.

SURE. WE'RE TALKING A LOT ABOUT TEE TIME REQUESTS.

SOMETHING ELSE THAT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION IS COVID RULES ARE STILL IN PLACE IN TERMS OF YOUR TIMES AT THE TEE BOX BEING TEN MINUTES RATHER THAN EIGHT MINUTES.

ROLLING THAT BACK WOULD MAKE MORE TEE TIMES AVAILABLE.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU CONSIDERED? YES. IT WAS SOMETHING WE CONSIDERED, POST COVID AND ANOTHER POLICY.

WE DECIDED TO KEEP THE TEN MINUTE TEE TIME INTERVALS.

[00:15:01]

THERE'S DIFFERENT KINDS OF PLAYERS AT A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE, AND SOMETIMES THAT EXTRA TIME IS NEEDED.

EARLY ON, SOME OF THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS WE RECEIVED WITH THE EIGHT MINUTE TEE TIME WAS WAITING SLOW PLAY, WAITING TOO LONG.

SO THE TEN MINUTE TEE TIMES GIVES A LITTLE BIT OF A LONGER BUFFER, A TWO MINUTE BUFFER, AND SPREADS THOSE OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, ALSO COURSES, WE'RE NOT LIKE PRIVATE GOLF COURSES WHERE WE CARE ABOUT OUR COURSE CONDITIONS.

ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT MORE WEAR AND TEAR WITH MORE TEE TIMES AND MORE FOOT TRAFFIC AND GOLF CART TRAFFIC.

MR. CAMERON, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? NOW, I DON'T THINK I HAVE A SPECIFIC COMMENT.

I WAS ASKED TO LOOK INTO THE LEGAL MECHANISM THAT'S BEING PURPORTED TO RESCIND THESE POLICIES, AND I DID THAT AND PROVIDED A MEMO.

IF THE BODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

OH OKAY. PARDON ME LEGISLATOR.

CONTINUE. OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO I'M CURIOUS IF THESE 15 GOLF COURSES THAT WE LOOKED AT, WHERE THEY HAVE NINE HOLE LEAGUES, I MEAN, I'VE NEVER.

I'M A GOLFER. THERE'S TEN MINUTE TEE TIMES IS NOT TYPICAL.

SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE TEE TIMES ARE AT THOSE GOLF COURSES? I'M SURE THEY'RE EIGHT OR LESS.

IF I HAD TO GUESS. I'M SURE THEY ARE, I HAVEN'T.

WE DIDN'T LOOK INTO TEE TIME INTERVALS AT THE 15 COURSES.

YES. WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT OPENING UP MORE TEE TIMES, I THINK WHEN THERE'S OPTIONS AVAILABLE THAT ARE OUT THERE, I MEAN, I GOLF THE COUNTY COURSES BEFORE.

I'VE NEVER BEEN STANDING AROUND WAITING.

SO I THINK WHEN THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS OUT THERE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OPENING UP MORE TEE TIMES, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THOSE OPTIONS WHEN WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC GOLFERS GOLFING, THE COURSES, THEY'RE PAYING, PUBLIC PASSES.

THERE ARE THESE OPTIONS AND WE'RE JUST SAYING NO TO THE TEE TIME CHANGE, WHICH I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND.

YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN INCREASE IN THE GAME OF GOLF AND HOW MUCH GOLF IS BEING PLAYED ON COUNTY COURSES.

SO HOW MANY TIME REQUESTS, HOW MANY TEE TIME REQUESTS WERE DENIED BECAUSE OF LEAGUE PLAY? WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THAT DATA.

AS I SAID, IT'S ANECDOTAL.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE GETTING INQUIRIES.

WE'RE GETTING REQUESTS FROM MANY DIFFERENT MECHANISMS. AND THAT IS JUST DATA THAT'S VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CAPTURE.

I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS YOUR ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE PUBLIC.

THE FACT THAT THE LEAGUE MEMBERS OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, AND THAT IS ABSOLUTELY INDISPUTABLE, THEY BUY PASSES OR THEY PAY GREENS FEES.

HOWEVER, THE MECHANISM BY WHICH THEY'RE OBTAINING TEE TIMES IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

THEY'RE NOT USING THE CHELSEA TEE TIME SYSTEM.

THEY'RE RESERVING BLOCKS OF TEE TIMES MANY, MANY MONTHS IN ADVANCE.

WE NOW HAVE A MARCH 1ST DEADLINE FOR THOSE REQUESTS, AND THEN THOSE BLOCKS OF TEE TIMES ARE RESERVED FOR THEM AND HELD FOR MANY MONTHS PRIOR TO THE GOLF COURSES EVEN OPENING. SO THAT IS PART OF THAT THE MECHANISM OF THAT IS PART OF THE ISSUE HERE.

SO BUT WE STILL DON'T HAVE ANY DATA ON HOW MANY TEE TIME REQUESTS ARE DENIED BECAUSE OF LEAGUE PLAY.

NO. OKAY.

SO AND THIS IS WHERE, YOU KNOW, MUCH LIKE WHEN WE HAVE ISSUES ON COUNTY ROADS OR OTHER THINGS THAT COUNTY PARKS AND I KNOW AND I THINK WE CAN SAY PRETTY SAFELY HERE, LEGISLATORS HEAR ABOUT THEM PRETTY OFTEN.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY LEGISLATORS HERE CAN SPEAK TO ISSUES WITH, AT LEAST GRANTED, I'VE BEEN IN OFFICE A MONTH NOW, BUT I USED TO WORK HERE.

I WAS AT THE STATE BEFORE, AND I'VE NEVER HEARD COMPLAINTS ABOUT COUNTY PARKS NOT HAVING ENOUGH TEE TIMES.

DO YOU GUYS HAVE THOSE DOCUMENTED A NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS THAT YOU GOT ABOUT THAT? I'M SURE WE HAVE COMPLAINTS IN OUR GENERAL EMAIL INBOX, THAT WE COULD FIND.

LIKE I SAID, THIS EVIDENCE IS ANECDOTAL.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PHONE CALLS DAILY THROUGHOUT THE DAY AT BOTH COURSES DURING THE SEASON, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS SOCIAL MEDIA EMAIL INQUIRIES AND COMPLAINTS AND THE LIKE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND THIS IS WHERE, YOU KNOW, AS A COUNTY LEGISLATOR THAT REPRESENTS, YOU KNOW SO MANY PEOPLE.

THIS IS AN ISSUE I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT MORE THAN COUNTY ROADS, WHICH IS UNUSUAL.

SO I THINK WHEN I CAN LOOK AND SAY, I KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE IN THE DISTRICT, WE DON'T HAVE THE DATA, LIKE YOU SAID, THAT WE KNOW THAT TEE TIMES WERE REQUESTED OR DENIED DURING LEAGUE PLAY. I THINK IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO GET BEHIND THIS DECISION, AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THE CHANGE THAT THESE LEAGUE PLAYERS THAT HAVE PLAYED THESE COUNTY COURSES FOR DECADES CAN STILL BE THERE TO PLAY, INSTEAD OF HOPING THAT MAYBE OTHER PEOPLE WILL FILL THESE TEE TIMES.

SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND I APPRECIATE YOU HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

LEGISLATOR JOHNSON? YES.

SINCE WE HAVE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HERE, I WONDER IF THEY CAN OPINE ON A PIECE OF THAT THAT RESOLVED CAUSING A RESOLUTION WHERE THEY, OUTLINED ARTICLE EIGHT, SECTION 8.5 OF THE LEGISLATURE.

CAN I JUST PIGGYBACK OFF THAT LEGISLATOR? THE TOPIC IS CONFUSING TO ME BECAUSE THE RESOLVE DOES NOT SPEAK SPECIFIC TO WHAT SEEMS TO BE THE CONFLICT OR THE DEBATE HERE TODAY, WHICH IS TEE TIMES, BUT IT'S THE OVERARCHING RESOLVE ASKING FOR PARKS AND RECREATION TO REFRAIN FROM MAKING ANY CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION, REGULATION OF GOLF

[00:20:02]

AND THEN I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? OKAY. THE BASIS OF REDUCING THESE 18, THESE 18 HOLE LEAGUES IS TO CREATE MORE TEE TIME.

SO IT IS ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF THE POLICY THAT HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT CONSULTING THE GOLFERS AND EFFECTS.

SO IT'S ROLLING BACK THE CHANGES THAT WOULD BE MADE AND IMPLEMENTED.

MR. CAMERON. SO I THINK MAYBE WHAT I'LL TRY TO DO IS GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT I BELIEVE THE RELEVANT AUTHORITY IS HERE, AND THEN WHY I FURTHER BELIEVE THAT A RESOLUTION IN ANY FORM CAN'T DO WHAT IT'S PURPORTING TO DO, FOR A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

I GO INTO FURTHER DETAIL ON A MEMO THAT I THINK WAS DISTRIBUTED HERE, BUT I'LL TRY TO BE AS BRIEF AS I CAN SO THAT THE RELEVANT AUTHORITY AS I SEE IT IS THREEFOLD.

THERE'S A CHARTER PROVISION, 802 OF THE ERIE COUNTY CHARITY THAT PROVIDES THE COMMISSIONER OF PARKS, RECREATION, AND FORESTRY WITH THE SPECIFIC AUTHORITY TO SUPERVISE AND CONTROL THE OPERATION OF GOLF COURSES, ERIE COUNTY GOLF COURSES.

AND THEN WE HAVE A LOCAL LAW WHICH WAS PASSED, LOCAL LAW SIX OF 1980, WITH WHICH FURTHER EMPOWERS AND AUTHORIZES THE COMMISSIONER TO PROMULGATE WHAT ARE CALLED SPECIAL RULES WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN ACTIVITIES THAT TAKE PLACE WITHIN COUNTY PARKS, ONE OF WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED AS GOLFING.

AND THEN WE HAVE THE PROVISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, WHICH HAS BEEN REFERRED TO BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON ON 8.05, WHICH PURPORTS TO GIVE THE LEGISLATURE THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE THE USE OF COUNTY PARKS, AND THEN SOME SPECIFICALLY DELINEATED THINGS WITHIN COUNTY PARKS, SUCH AS PLAYGROUNDS AND ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RECREATION CENTERS.

IT DOESN'T MENTION GOLF.

THERE'S NO MENTION OF GOLF.

SO IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME WHETHER OR NOT THAT 8.05 CODE EVEN CONTEMPLATES THE REGULATION OF GOLF, GOLFING ACTIVITIES, OR GOLF COURSES GENERALLY WITHIN COUNTY PARKS.

THIS RESOLUTION IN PARTICULAR.

SO. SO I GUESS I'M GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF.

SO, BECAUSE THE CHARTER PROVISION, THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE PROVISION AND THE LOCAL LAW ITSELF WERE PASSED IN THOSE WAYS AND RESOLUTION BASED ON MUNICIPAL HOME RULE LAW AND THE DOCTRINE OF LEGISLATIVE EQUIVALENCY WOULD DICTATE THAT A RESOLUTION CANNOT SUPERSEDE, AMEND, OR REPEAL ANY PROVISIONS THEREIN.

SO THAT'S, THE REASON WHY THE RESOLUTION IS NOT THE PROPER LEGAL MECHANISM TO ATTEMPT TO ACHIEVE WHAT IT PURPORTS TO DO.

THE RESOLUTION ITSELF, I THINK I CAN SPEAK A LITTLE BIT IN MORE DETAIL ON, IN THAT IT I THINK IT ERRONEOUSLY CITES 8 .05 CHARTER, WHEN IN FACT IT'S REFERRING TO THE 8.05 THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AS THE AUTHORITY TO RESCIND THE POLICIES THAT HAVE BEEN PROMULGATED BY THE COMMISSIONER. IT GOES FURTHER THAN I THINK IT SPECIFICALLY INFRINGES UPON HIS DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY THAT'S BEEN AFFORDED TO HIM UNDER 8.02 OF THE CHARTER AND OF LOCAL LAW SIX 6 OF [INAUDIBLE] JUST REFERRED TO.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO DO WHAT'S CONTEMPLATED, A RESOLUTION IS NOT SUFFICIENT.

YOU NEED A LOCAL LAW. YOU NEED A CHARTER LAW.

AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE FRAMED IN A DIFFERENT MANNER.

THANK YOU, MR. CAMERON.

I, LIKE THE, MAJORITY LEADER SAID DEFINITELY WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

I KNOW I'VE RECEIVED EMAILS AS WELL, AND WE SEE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO ARE HERE, I GUESS, WHO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT ACCESS TO AND LONGEVITY WITH TEE TIMES.

AND I THINK I COULD SEE MYSELF SUPPORTING A RESOLUTION THAT WAS MORE FOCUSED ON, EMPOWERING OR REQUESTING THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO DO AN IN-DEPTH STUDY AND REVIEW ABOUT HOW TO ADJUST THAT AND MAKE THAT AMENABLE AND MOST COMFORTABLE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONCERNS LIKE THOSE THAT MIGHT BE HERE TODAY. BUT THIS RESOLUTION SEEMS VERY BROAD AND BASED ON WHAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS SAYING, IT MAY NOT EVEN BE WITHIN OUR POWERS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF I PERSONALLY WOULD BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS VERSION OF IT TODAY.

MINORITY LEADER MILLS, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THANKS FOR COMING, TROY.

[00:25:02]

I'M JUST. IT JUST POPPED INTO MY MIND ARE WE GETTING AN INFLUX FROM WYOMING COUNTY? NIAGARA COUNTY, I DON'T KNOW.

RIGHT. IS THAT BECAUSE WE PUT.

I'VE BEEN HERE A LITTLE LONGER THAN A LOT OF THE OTHER LEGISLATORS THAT WE PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO ELMS MEADOWS, FOR EXAMPLE.

BIG TIME REALLY BROUGHT IT UP SIGNIFICANT WONDERFUL PLACE TO PLAY GOLF.

THANK YOU. AND, MY CONCERN IS, AND I'VE ALWAYS WORKED CLOSELY WITH YOU ON PARKS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A REAL IMPORTANT PART OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.

WHEN I CAME IN IN 2006 AS A LEGISLATURE WITH THE RED WING BUDGET AFTER THAT, AND THEY WERE VANDALIZING THE BATHROOMS AND IT WAS A THREE RING CIRCUS.

WE LOST MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

BUT I AM CONCERNED BECAUSE I PLAYED THAT COURSE AT ELMS MEADOWS AS A YOUNG GUY, WHEN I CAN PLAY DECENTLY.

AND, YOU KNOW, THESE LEAGUES AND THE PEOPLE AND PATRONIZE A GOLF COURSE OR A LOT OF THEM, MY PARTICULAR, AGE GROUP. AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT CONCERNS ME IS THE IMPACT ON THESE LEAGUES AND THE PEOPLE THAT USE THESE LEAGUES IN THE GENERAL, YOU KNOW, ISSUE THAT WE HAVE HERE.

AND I THINK I GOT A LITTLE BIT SUPPORT FROM THE OTHER LEGISLATORS, MAYBE BECAUSE THEY'VE RECEIVED EMAILS.

AND I THINK IT'S A LENGTHY DISCUSSION.

AND THOUGH IT'S, YOU KNOW, FEBRUARY 1ST NOW IT'S GOING TO BE A LENGTHY DISCUSSION IF WE DO IT RIGHT.

AND I WOULD JUST PROPOSE THAT WE DO, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL, YOUR APPROVAL TO, A MORATORIUM FOR ONE YEAR ON THIS ISSUE SO WE CAN CRAFT THE RIGHT.

YOU KNOW, THE RIGHT ITEM WE NEED TO CRAFT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOR THE NEXT 25 OR 30 YEARS.

SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST SEE THERE'S SOME SUPPORT HERE, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT IF WE'RE I GET THE MORATORIUM THING FROM THE COUNCILMAN WAS IN TOWN WITH ORCHARD PARK, AND WE PUT A MORATORIUM ON BUILDING FOR A YEAR.

BUT IT DOES WORK.

IT TAKES SOME OF THE STRESS LEVEL OUT OF THE ISSUE, AND IT MAKES IT MORE CLEAR BECAUSE THE GOLF LINKS HERE, THIS IS SIGNIFICANT, YOU KNOW, ITEM FOR THEM AS IT IS FOR EVERYBODY IN PARKS THAT USE OUR PARKS.

BUT TWO THINGS.

WHO'S USING THEM FROM OUTSIDE ERIE COUNTY? I DON'T KNOW. AND IT'S SOMETHING REALLY WE SHOULD KIND OF LOOK AT.

BUT THE OTHER THING IS THE IMPACT IT'S HAVING THIS YEAR.

SO I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE MAYBE MOVE IN THE AREA OF A MORATORIUM FOR ONE YEAR AND THEN ANALYZE THE SITUATION AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ALL KIND OF LIVE WITH.

I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ALL HAPPY WITH IT, BUT I THINK WE'RE JUST TOO CLOSE TO GOLF, PLAYING GOLF, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S A LOT OF SNOW ON THE GROUND.

BUT, I MEAN, I JUST WANT TO TAKE THE STRESS LEVEL OFF THE CONSTITUENTS WE REPRESENT, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE OUR BOSS.

AND, YOU KNOW, AND YOU'RE FOCUSED ON TRYING TO CRAFT SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE.

SO I WOULD JUST PROPOSE THAT MADAM CHAIR, A MORATORIUM.

THANK YOU LEADER.

LEGISLATOR GREENE AND THEN MAJORITY LEADER.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. HAVE YOU GUYS MET? I BELIEVE YOU DID HAVE A MEETING NOT TOO LONG AGO WITH, MEMBERS OF THE CLUBS.

HOW LONG AGO WAS THAT? IT WAS ABOUT A MONTH AGO.

ABOUT A MONTH AGO. DID A LOT OF THESE TOPICS COME UP THEN? AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, HOW MANY COMPLAINTS YOU HAVE YOU WERE RECEIVING? YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW FOR NON, LEAGUE MEMBERS THAT HOLD PASSES AND WHAT THEIR PROCESS IS? DID THOSE QUESTIONS COME UP? GENERALLY. YES.

AND THOSE WERE ASKED AGAIN TODAY WITHOUT REALLY AN ANSWER.

SO FROM THEN UNTIL NOW I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT THOSE WEREN'T YOU CAME HERE WITHOUT THOSE ANSWERS AS FAR AS HOW MANY COMPLAINTS AND WHAT WAS GOING ON.

BUT WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW IS WHAT IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW WITH YOUR SYSTEM.

IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE, WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS RIGHT NOW IS THAT ENFORCEMENT WILL OFTEN GO ON TO YOUR RESERVATION SITE.

AND ALL FOUR MEMBERS WERE PUT IN FOR A RESERVATION, AND THEN THEY'LL ONLY USE ONE TEE TIME AND THEN THREE GO UNUSED WITH A POINT SYSTEM THAT REALLY DOESN'T PENALIZE PEOPLE SEVERELY.

SO WHERE TO ME, THERE MIGHT BE A LARGER PROBLEM IS WITH THE RESERVATION SYSTEM BLOCKING OUT TEE TIMES THAT PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO.

WHEREAS YOU HAVE A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE JUST REALLY AN ORGANIZED GROUP, THAT DO ALLOW OTHER PEOPLE TO JOIN.

[00:30:04]

BUT, YOU KNOW, AS AS SPOTS OPEN UP IN THE LEAGUE, MORE PEOPLE JOIN, I THINK ARE OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, ANYBODY JOINING WHO WISHES TO.

BUT SHOULD WE JUST BE GETTING RID OF ALL SEASON PASSES THAT ARE CAUSING THE PROBLEM? I MEAN, IS THAT THE SOLUTION? YEAH. SO REGARDING THE INFORMATION, WE DON'T WHEN SOMEONE CAN'T GET A TEE TIME, THERE'S NOT A BUTTON THAT SAYS I CAN'T GET A TEE TIME.

TAKE MY VOTE. THOSE ARE NUMBERS WE DON'T GET.

WE JUST HEAR FROM OUR STARTERS, OUR CASHIERS, OUR STARTERS, AND OUR GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENT THAT THAT'S THE SINGLE BIGGEST COMPLAINT AT THE GOLF COURSE.

THOSE ARE THE STAFF WE HIRED TO MONITOR GOLF, THE POLICY AROUND GOLF.

SO FOR ME, NOT TAKING THOSE CONCERNS LEGITIMATE.

AND I HEAR THAT TOO, QUITE FRANKLY, I HEAR FROM PEOPLE AT GOLF SAYING IT'S EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO GET TEE TIMES AT YOUR GOLF COURSES, ESPECIALLY ON THE MEADOWS.

AND FRANKLY, IT'S A PRODUCT OF THE GREAT JOB WE'VE DONE, THE PLAY AND THE COST.

THIS IS NOT UNUSUAL.

THIS HAS HAPPENED IN OUR PARKS, TOO, WITH A LOT OF OUR SHELTERS AND BUILDINGS.

WE'VE MODIFIED THOSE, RENOVATE THOSE, AND THERE'S A WAITING LINE TO GET IN THOSE.

SO THIS DECISION WAS A POLICY DECISION THAT WE MADE AFTER CHANGING THE POINT SYSTEM, AFTER HIRING ADDITIONAL STAFF TO MONITOR, TO YOUR POINT, LEGISLATOR.

YES, THERE IS SOME OF THAT GAME PLAYING WITH ME AND MY FRIEND WE BLOCK OUT FOUR AND WE SHOW UP WE'RE PLAYING TWO.

WE'RE CUTTING DOWN ON THAT.

WE'RE MONITORING THAT. WE'RE TRYING TO ELIMINATE THOSE AND ASSIGN DIFFERENT POINTS AND MORE POINTS TO PENALIZE THOSE THAT DO THAT.

SO THIS IS A MULTI-FACETED APPROACH TO DEAL WITH THE END OF LINE ISSUE.

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PUBLIC TEAMS. THAT'S I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY IT ANY DIFFERENTLY.

AND I'M NOT TAKING IT FOR GRANTED HOW IT'S AFFECTING THOSE THAT HAVE 18 HOLE LEAGUES.

BUT THERE'S A REASON THAT WE'RE ONLY ONE OF THE FEW GOLF COURSES IN WESTERN EUROPE THAT HAVE 18 HOLE LEAGUES.

THERE'S A REASON AT SOME POINT YOU GOT TO BACK UP AND REASON WHY DO OTHER GOLF COURSES DO THAT? AND WE'VE ASKED THAT.

AND THEY SAID IT TAKES AN AMOUNT OF BURDEN AND TEE TIMES AND BLOCKS OUT LARGE CHUNKS OF TIME, WHICH OTHER GOLF COURSES ALSO ARE NOT WILLING TO DO.

AND WE'RE PUBLIC. SO WE EVEN HAVE MORE OF AN ONUS TO MAKE SURE, TRY TO HAVE MORE PUBLIC TEE TIMES OPEN.

AND EVERYONE GOLFING IN THOSE LEAGUES IS PUBLIC AS WELL.

AND THEY CAN TURN AROUND AND BOOK ANOTHER NINE, ANOTHER 18, ANOTHER 27, ANOTHER 36 THAT SAME WEEK.

IF THERE'S AVAILABILITY, IT'S NOT ABOUT LIMITING PEOPLE PLAYING GOLF.

PLEASE PLAY GOLF.

WALK, ENJOY.

AT FIRST WE HAD A CART REQUIREMENT AND WE HAD THAT.

AND THE FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE WAS THE FEE FOR THAT, WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE.

AND WE WANT TO WALK, WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE.

SO WE REMOVE THAT REQUIREMENT.

WE HEARD OUR CONSTITUENTS, WE LISTENED TO THEIR CONCERNS, AND WE MADE THAT DECISION BECAUSE WE DON'T MAKE DECISIONS IN A BUBBLE.

ALL I WILL SAY IS ACROSS THE BOARD, THE DECISION FROM, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IN TERMS OF THE POLICY OF LEAGUES IS NINE HOLE WILL PROVIDE MORE PUBLIC TEE TIMES FOR THOSE THAT CAN'T GET THOSE.

AND IF THOSE ARE TAKEN BY PEOPLE IN THE LEAGUES, SO BE IT.

AND YOU BROUGHT UP.

THE KEY IS TO HAVE THE MORE MORE TEE TIMES AVAILABLE, MORE ACCESS TO THE GOLF COURSE.

HOW MANY TEE TIMES GET UNUTILIZED DURING LEAGUE PLAY? I HAVE NO IDEA. NO IDEA.

ARE YOU ESSENTIALLY REFERENCING HOW MANY TEE TIMES ARE BEING USED BY LEAGUES? I MEAN, THAT'S A GREAT.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? BUT IF THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, TEN TEE TIMES IN THE MORNING, DO THEY USE ALL TEN? GENERALLY, YES.

YEAH. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IF WHAT WE'RE HEARING ANECDOTALLY, AND THAT SEEMS TO BE WHAT WE'RE BASING A LOT OF STUFF ON RIGHT NOW, IS THAT THE UNUSED TEE TIMES ARE LARGELY GOING NOT DURING THE TIMES WHERE THERE'S LEAGUE PLAY, BUT THE TIMES WHERE SEASON PASS HOLDERS ARE REGISTERING AND NOT SHOWING UP.

TO ME, THE GREATER TIME, IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO EXPAND AND PROVIDE GREATER ACCESS, IT WOULD BE TO CUT DOWN ON THOSE AS THE PRIMARY WAY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE UNUSED GOLF TIMES ARE BEING, YOU KNOW, SO FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, WASTED RIGHT NOW.

AND THEN THE SECOND PIECE IS YOU'VE MENTIONED 15 OTHER GOLF COURSES THAT YOU'VE REACHED OUT TO, BUT YOU SAID, AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, YOU DIDN'T ASK THEM WHETHER THEY WOULD OR WHAT THEIR, INTERVALS WERE AS FAR AS TEE TIMES.

BECAUSE AGAIN, IF WE'RE LOOKING TO EXPAND THAT OUT, TO HAVE MORE TEE TIMES THAN CUTTING FROM TEN MINUTES DOWN TO EIGHT MINUTES WOULD FREE UP A WHOLE BUNCH OF MORE TIMES FOR PEOPLE TO ACCESS THE GOLF COURSE WITHOUT BECAUSE WHAT I'M SEEING, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'M NOT MUCH OF A GOLFER.

I GET OUT THERE, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, ONCE, MAYBE ONCE A YEAR AT BEST, SOMETIMES ONCE EVERY 2 OR 3 YEARS.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT FRUSTRATION OF SOMEBODY WHO BARELY GOLFS THAT I WOULD NEVER CONSIDER GOING TO ONE OF OUR PUBLIC COURSES BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I DON'T I KNOW THAT

[00:35:03]

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AS A GOLFER.

SO I AGREE THAT THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A PROBLEM.

BUT I THINK WE SHOULD FOCUS ON WHERE THE OPEN NON USE DURING, YOU KNOW, SUNLIGHT HOURS IS WHICH IS NOT DURING LEAGUE TIME, BUT THE AFTER LEAGUE TIME SEEMS TO BE THE LARGER PROBLEM.

I JUST WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE CONTEXT TO WHAT YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S SORT OF A GAMING OF THE SYSTEM OR A NO SHOW PROBLEM WHICH WE ARE AWARE OF.

SO WHEN WE CONVERTED TO THE POINT SYSTEM LAST YEAR, ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WE CONSULTED WITH THE RESERVATION SYSTEM COMPANY, CHELSEA.

YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THE STANDARD RESERVATION SYSTEM IN THE INDUSTRY.

AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO USE A ONE POINT, CALL IT A PENALTY.

YOU ESSENTIALLY GET ONE POINT WHEN YOU END UP ON A TEE SHEET.

SO IF YOU BOOK THAT FOURSOME AND THEN YOU'RE A NO SHOW AND YOUR NAME IS ON THAT TEE SHEET, YOU GET A POINT THAT'S THEN ACCUMULATED THROUGHOUT THE MONTH.

AND THAT WAS CONSIDERED SORT OF THE PENALTY FOR BEING THE NO SHOW, WHICH WE NOW KNOW IS NOT A BIG ENOUGH PENALTY.

CLEARLY. WHAT'S THE PENALTY I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

THE PENALTY IS THAT YOU'RE EARNING THE POINTS WHETHER YOU GO OR NOT, WHETHER YOU USE THAT TEE TIME OR NOT, YOU'RE EARNING THE POINT.

THE POINT GOES ON YOUR TOTAL BALANCE.

AND WE'RE NOW REALIZING THAT THAT ONE POINT ASSIGNMENT OR PENALTY, IT'S NOT A PENALTY, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE EARNING EVERY SINGLE TIME IS NOT ENOUGH.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO CHANGE AND THAT WE'LL HAVE TO INCREASE THIS.

WHAT IS THE PENALTY THOUGH? IS THE POINT AN ENTIRE PENALTY IS JUST A POINT.

BUT THE POINT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY COMMITS A CRIME, THERE'S THE PENALTY IS THAT THEY GO TO JAIL, BUT SPECIFICALLY HOW LONG THEY GO FOR JAIL? WHAT IS THE PENALTY? THE PENALTY IS JUST A POINT THAT HAS NO INTRINSIC VALUE.

SO THE WAY THE POINT SYSTEM WORKS IS THAT OVER, YOU GET A POINT EVERY TIME YOU END UP ON A TEE SHEET.

ALTHOUGH IT IS WEIGHTED DEPENDING ON THE TIME OF DAY, THE DAY OF THE WEEK, THERE'S A WHOLE SYSTEM TO IT.

PEOPLE THAT PLAY MORE, EARN MORE POINTS, PEOPLE THAT DON'T PLAY AS OFTEN EARN LESS POINTS AND THEREFORE GET BUMPED UP IN PRIORITY WHEN THEY MAKE THEIR TEE TIME REQUEST. SO IF YOU END UP ON A TEE SHEET AND YOU DON'T SHOW UP, YOU GET A POINT ON YOUR ACCUMULATED TOTAL.

SO THAT'S WHY I SAY IT'S PENALTY.

IT'S NOT CALLED A PENALTY, BUT YOU ARE EARNING THAT POINT WHETHER YOU'RE THERE OR NOT.

WE'RE NOW LEARNING THAT THAT ONE POINT THAT THEY'RE EARNING FOR A NO SHOW IS NOT ENOUGH OF A QUOTE UNQUOTE PENALTY.

THAT'S WE KNOW THAT.

SO BUT WE LEARNED THAT WE'VE ONLY HAD THIS POINT SYSTEM FOR ONE YEAR.

SO WE'VE NOW LEARNED THAT.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S CUSTOMIZABLE THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE.

AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, IF I WAS TO KIND OF WRAP UP THE POLICY PORTION OF MY COMMENTS, IT WOULD BE THOSE ARE THE AREAS, THE REDUCTION IN INTERVALS AND THE ELIMINATION OF UNUSED TIMES THAT WOULD CREATE THE GREATER AMOUNT OF ACCESS TO THE COURSE THAT INEVITABLY, PROBABLY WOULD BE IDEAL, WHICH IS A RARE THING WE'RE ALL OF US COLLECTIVELY WOULD LOVE TO SEE A LITTLE MORE ACCESS, BUT THOSE ARE TWO THINGS THAT I THINK WE COULD DO, AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE GREATEST LEVEL OF SERVICE TO ALL THE RESIDENTS OF ERIE COUNTY, PARTICULARLY OBVIOUSLY, THE RESIDENTS THAT HOLD THE SEASON PASSES AS WELL.

AND WHILE I HAVE.

OR, RESPECTFULLY, MAYBE YOU COULD ASK ONE MORE QUESTION, AND WE LET THE MAJORITY LEADER ASK HIS QUESTION AND THEN CONTINUE ON WITH THE AGENDA.

IF I. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I WILL WRAP UP, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

I'D LIKE TO, YIELD THE FLOOR JUST FOR A DIFFERING OF LEGAL OPINION.

I KNOW WHAT IS BEING CHALLENGED HERE WITH THE OPINION OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS OUR POWER AS A LEGISLATURE, AND WHAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO AS FAR AS REGULATING POLICIES. IF I COULD, GET A DIFFERING OPINION FROM MR. BENNETT, I'D APPRECIATE IT. MR. BENNETT. YES, MADAM CHAIR.

RECEIVE THE OPINION THIS MORNING FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

TAKING ISSUE WITH A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE PUT IN THERE.

FIRST OF ALL, THE CHARTER IS BASICALLY THE STANDARD CODE, AND THE INTERPRETATION IS IN THE CODE, NOT THE CHARTER. AND OUR CODE IS VERY CLEAR, AS IT'S POINTED OUT BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, THAT YOU CAN HAVE A POWER BY ORDINANCE OR LOCAL LAW.

LOCAL LAW IS THE FORMALITY OF THE LEGISLATURE WHEN IT PUTS FORTH, AS WE ALL KNOW, LOCAL LAWS DO AMEND THE CHARTER OR A CODE.

THE QUESTION IS IN REGARD TO ORDINANCE.

ORDINANCE IS THE ACTION OF A LEGISLATIVE BODY.

AND IN THIS CASE, THE RESOLUTION THAT'S BEEN PUT FORTH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LEGISLATION IS REQUESTED.

[00:40:02]

THE SUBSTANCE OF IT IS DEFINED SEPARATELY.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CODE OF THE CHARTER, THERE'S THREE SECTIONS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, CODE, YOU'LL FIND THE THREE.

AND WE CAN'T DENY THAT THERE'S A POWER THAT'S PUT THERE.

THERE WAS WHENEVER THE LEGISLATION WAS ADOPTED, MAYBE BACK IN ANCIENT TIMES, I GUESS.

BUT IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT THE LEGISLATURE SHALL HAVE A POWER, AND THAT POWER IS EXERCISED BY ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW.

SO IT'S OUR POSITION THAT UNDER THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT THE RESOLUTION IS PROPER BEFORE THE BOARD.

THANK YOU FOR THAT OPINION, MR. BENNETT. MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR TO CLOSE US OUT.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. IRONICALLY, TWO ATTORNEYS IN TWO DIFFERENT OPINIONS.

RIGHT. GO BACK. WE HAVE A COUPLE PROBLEMS. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, THE MINORITY LEADER.

WE NEED THE DATA ON THE TWO TIME BLOCKS.

HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE FROM THE COUNTY? OUTSIDE THE COUNTY GOLFING.

IS IT EVEN LEGAL FOR US TO TAKE THIS ACTION? WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT OPINIONS, SO WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE COULD FOLLOW UP ON THE MINORITY LEADER SUGGESTION OF HAVING A MORATORIUM FOR ONE YEAR, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, HOW DOES IT HURT YOU, WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE IF WE DID SIT BACK FOR A YEAR AND DO THIS, IF IT'S DOABLE OR NOT? JUST ALL MY CONCERNS.

AGAIN, IT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD CONSIDER.

LIKE I SAID, AT THE END OF EACH YEAR, WE EVALUATE THE COURSE, THE OPERATION AND MAKE DECISIONS WHICH WE FEEL IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF EVERYONE, NOT JUST A FEW.

AND THIS WAS THE DECISION AND ONE WE FIRMLY BELIEVE IS THE CORRECT DECISION AND ONE IN LINE WITH WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE OUR POWERS TO MAKE POLICY DECISIONS.

IF THERE WAS A CERTAIN ASK IN THE LEGISLATURE, OF COURSE, LIKE ANY ASK, WE WOULD, WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT.

THANK YOU. YES. OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

ARE YOU DONE? YES, SIR. OKAY.

LEGISLATOR BARGNESI.

THANK YOU CHAIR. [INAUDIBLE] I WASN'T GOING TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS TOPIC, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S GETTING A LITTLE BIT OUT OF HAND.

COMING FROM A TOWN, SITTING ON A TOWN BOARD FOR 16 YEARS THAT HAS 218 HOLE GOLF COURSES.

I COULD TELL YOU THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT USED TO COME TO ME WERE FROM GOLFERS.

THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO THE COUNTY.

I'M NOT A GOLFER.

I CAN'T TALK TO THAT. BUT I CAN TELL YOU HOW MANY CALLS THAT WE DID FIELD.

SOMEBODY OR SOMEONE OR SOME GROUP IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE UPSET THAT THEY DON'T GET THE TIME WHAT THEY WANT.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY TO THIS LEGISLATOR, YOU'RE GOING DOWN A PATH THAT I DON'T THINK IS ADVISABLE.

YOU ARE TRYING TO MICROMANAGE THE DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS OF, OBVIOUSLY, THE JOB OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

AND IF WE'RE GOING TO MICROMANAGE EACH DEPARTMENT, THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR GOVERNING BODY IS SUPPOSED TO DO.

IT IS TROY'S, HIM AND HIS STAFF'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DO WHAT IS THE BEST INTEREST FOR OUR RESIDENTS COUNTYWIDE.

THEY SPEND THE TIME ON IT.

THEY MANAGE IT.

THEY'RE HERE TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY AND OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.

I SAY THAT WE ALLOW THEM TO DO THEIR JOBS.

HE HAS ALREADY STATED HIM AND HIS ASSISTANT HAVE STATED THAT THEY WILL MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.

THEY HAVE MADE ADJUSTMENTS.

THEY'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THINGS THAT THEY'VE DONE INCORRECTLY MOVING FORWARD WITH THE POINT SYSTEM.

LET HIM AND HIS STAFF WORK THIS PROBLEM OUT.

IT IS NOT UNIQUE TO THE COUNTY.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT YOU GUYS REPRESENT HAVE GOLF COURSES, BUT THIS IS A COMMON PLACE, WHETHER IT'S PRIVATE OR PUBLIC.

BUT I WILL SAY I WOULD LIKE TO PIGGYBACK TROY ON WHAT YOU HAD SAID EARLIER ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS TO OUR GOLF COURSES, AND THAT HAS DRIVEN UP USAGE.

SO KUDOS TO YOU AND YOUR STAFF THAT HAVE MADE THESE VAST IMPROVEMENTS.

THAT THIS IS A GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GET ON YOUR GOLF COURSES.

BUT MY ADVICE TO YOU IS LET HIM DO HIS JOB.

LET HIM WORK IT OUT TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY.

HE'S BEEN VERY ACCOMMODATING TO EVERYBODY HERE.

YOU'VE NOW GOTTEN OPINIONS FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THAT SAYS IT IS HIS JOB TO DO IT.

[00:45:03]

IF TROY WAS HERE ASKING FOR $1 MILLION, TROY WE WOULD HAVE ISSUES WITH HIM.

WE'D HAVE ISSUES. THAT'S NOT THE JOB.

THAT'S NOT OUR JOB.

LET HIM DO HIS JOB, AND HE'S DOING IT VERY WELL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU LEGISLATOR.

WE'LL STILL KEEP THIS ITEM UP FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY.

LEGISLATOR LORIGO, CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDAS.

COMMUNICATIONS DISCHARGE FROM COMMITTEE.

THERE ARE NONE.

SUSPENSIONS OF THE RULES.

COMMUNICATION 3D-7.

THIS IS FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING, AND THIS IS A LETTER, THAT, LOOPS INTO THE PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WILL BE UP FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY LOCAL LAW INTRO 1-1, WHICH SHOWCASES THE RESULTS OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN THAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE BY THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE.

AND HOW THERE IS A NUMBER OF ACCESS, DEVELOPERS WHO WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE PART IN THAT PROGRAM BECAUSE OF THE IMMENSE RESPONSE THAT WE'VE GOTTEN.

THIS ITEM WILL BE SENT TO THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

COMMUNICATION 3D-8, FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS, REGARDING THE GOLF COURSE ISSUE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, THIS ITEM WILL BE SENT TO ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR COMMUNICATION 3E-4 FROM LEGISLATOR BASKIN REGARDING LEASE FOR LEGISLATIVE OFFICE SPACE WILL BE UP FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY.

COMMUNICATION 3D-9 FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING THE COUNTY FUNDING LOW INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS.

THIS ITEM WILL BE SENT TO HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

COMMUNICATION 3E-15 FROM LEGISLATOR GILMOUR WILL BE RECEIVED, FILED AND PRINTED UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

COMMUNICATION 3E-16 WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED OUT.

IT IS A LETTER FROM MYSELF TO HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE CHAIR GILMOUR REQUESTING THAT WE DO HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION AT SOME POINT ON HOW THE COUNTY COULD, ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUES ACROSS THE COUNTY AND COMMUNICATION 3E-17 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF IS REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE HELICOPTER DEPOSIT.

OH, YES. GOOD MORNING, CHIEF DONOVAN.

GOOD MORNING, MADAM. GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS MORNING.

SO COULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN TO US, THIS ITEM AND WHAT'S BEFORE US AND WHAT HAPPENED? SO WE HAD A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR AN AIRBUS H135.

THAT WAS SIGNED BY PURCHASING.

WE REALIZED THAT, WE WERE RELYING ON A CREST GRANT FROM NEW YORK STATE.

THAT HAS NOT BEEN DEPOSITED INTO THE ERIE COUNTY FUNDS YET.

SO WE WORKED WITH THE BUDGET DIRECTOR, MARK CORNELL, AND WE CAME UP WITH A WAY TO MOVE $400,000 THAT IS BUDGETED FOR THIS, DOWN PAYMENT.

ON THE QUESTION.

LEGISLATOR VINAL AND THEN LEGISLATOR TODARO.

WHAT IS THE TOTAL COST OF THE HELICOPTER? THE TOTAL COST OF THE HELICOPTER IS 7.3 MILLION.

OKAY, BASE PRICE.

AND THEN THE 7.3 MILLION HASN'T BEEN BUDGETED YET.

THERE WAS ONLY A DEPOSIT IN THE LAST BUDGET.

MY UNDERSTANDING THAT $1 MILLION WAS FUNDED FOR THE HELICOPTER, BUT IT'S NOT COMPLETE.

AND THEN WHAT IS THE OTHER? THAT WAS WHAT I WAS AWARE OF.

BUT THEN WAS THE OTHER 6 MILLION GOING TO COME FROM OUTSIDE GRANTS? IT IS NOT. IT'S SUPPOSED TO COME FROM CAPITAL PROJECTS.

LEGISLATOR IF I CAN JUMP ON THAT.

SO AS PART OF THE 2024 CAPITAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE PROCESS, THAT COMMITTEE ALLOCATED OR APPROVED $1 MILLION IN PAYGO FUNDING FOR THE DEPOSIT ON THE HELICOPTER, WITH A SUBSEQUENT REMAINDER WOULD BE CONTEMPLATED AS PART OF THE 2025 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROCESS.

SO THAT WOULD BE FORTHCOMING.

THIS WAS TO PUT THE DEPOSIT ON THE PRODUCTION BECAUSE AIRBUS, WON'T START BUILDING THE HELICOPTER UNTIL YOU PUT A DEPOSIT DOWN.

SO THAT WAS TO COVER THIS POINT.

THE REST OF THE, FUNDING, WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE REMAINDER OF THE BASE COST, PLUS THE COSTS FOR THE VARIOUS OUTFITS THAT ARE REQUIRED, THE WINCHES, CAMERAS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

[00:50:01]

SO HE'S WHEN HE DOES, YOU'RE SAYING THIS.

THIS WAS KNOWN INFORMATION AT THE TIME THAT THE 2024 CAPITAL PROJECT THAT WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THE ADOPTED BUDGET, WAS FOR THE DEPOSIT AND THAT THE REMAINDER WOULD BE DEALT WITH SUBSEQUENTLY IN THE FUTURE YEAR .AND THEN THEY SAID THAT BECAUSE THE REBATE WAS SO LOW, THEY'D SO NOW UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD BUT I THINK WE'RE ALL AWARE OF WHAT A DEPOSIT IS.

AND THAT'S WHAT THIS WAS INTENDED FOR WAS THE DEPOSIT FOR A HELICOPTER WHERE THE REMAINDER WOULD HAVE TO COME FROM THE 2025 CAPITAL BUDGET, WHICH WILL BE BONDED FOR BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER DOLLAR FIGURE.

I WONDER IF IT'S A THIS IS A PURCHASE AGREEMENT.

SO THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE LEGISLATIVE, AUTHORIZATION.

THIS IS BASED ON, GSA RATE.

SO THERE WAS NO NEED TO, GO OUT TO, TO BID BASED ON MY UNDERSTANDING.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, A FINITE GOVERNMENT, RATE FOR THAT, HELICOPTER.

SO THIS ISN'T LIKE GOING AND DOING A CONTRACT FOR A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE.

THIS IS PROCUREMENT.

PRICE. THAT IS BEING THAT IS COMING FROM THE REMAINDER ARE RELATED TO THE WAREHOUSE BUILDOUT, APPROPRIATION, IF YOU REMEMBER, WHEN THAT LEASE WAS APPROVED, THERE WAS $950,000 THAT WAS ALLOCATED TOWARDS THE POTENTIAL FOR A BUILD OUT COST FOR THAT WAREHOUSE.

IN THE FINAL NEGOTIATIONS OF THAT LEASE CONTRACT, THE LANDLORD AGREED TO COVER $750,000 OF THAT ORIGINAL BUILD OUT, WHICH THEORETICALLY WOULD, BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER USES.

SO.

THAT IS THE, CAPITAL PROJECT THAT IS GOING TO BE SET UP BY THE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE THIS WEEK.

THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT FOR THE DEPOSIT IS $464,904.

THAT IS WHAT THE SUBSEQUENT APPROPRIATION IS FOR THAT.

AND THERE IS CURRENTLY 738,462 REMAINING.

SOME OF IT WAS, UTILIZED FOR, SOME OF THE OTHER UNBUDGETED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE WAREHOUSE LEASE.

IT'S A TRIPLE NET LEASE.

SO THERE ARE COSTS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE STRAIGHT LEASE PAYMENTS ARE.

THOSE WOULD INCLUDE THINGS LIKE, SCHOOL TAXES, TOWN COUNTY TAXES, INSURANCE PREMIUMS, VARIOUS MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS, JANITORIAL SERVICE, UTILITIES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND NOT FOR TAXES, I BELIEVE, 70,000 APPROXIMATELY, HAS BEEN SPENT.

I BELIEVE THE SCHOOL TAX WAS APPROXIMATELY 34,000 PRORATED.

AND THEN THE TOWN COUNTY TAXES APPROXIMATELY 27,000.

[00:55:02]

I JUST OUT OF RESPECT.

BOTH LEGISLATOR TODARO AND LEGISLATOR GILMOUR HAVE ASKED TO SPEAK, SO I'M.

OH, OKAY.

MY CONCERN IS THAT THE SHERIFF'S BUDGET, EVEN WITHOUT THE HELICOPTER AND EVEN WITHOUT THE LEASE, HAS GONE UP 50% JUST SINCE THE NEW SHERIFF HAS COME, GONE UP MORE THAN THE WHOLE AMHERST EXCESS TAXES THAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

AND IT HASN'T. AND THAT'S NOT JUST THE THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE IS, IT'S NOT JUST THE IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THE PAY INCREASES, IT'S LITERALLY GONE UP EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

IT'S NOW 50% MORE THAN WHEN THE SHERIFF STARTED.

AND AT SOME POINT, I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE SORT OF A BACKBONE TO SAY NO.

NOW WE'RE DOING A CAPITAL, WE'RE DOING THEY'RE PUTTING IT TO A CAPITAL BUDGET, WHICH IS USUALLY RESERVED FOR MORE THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOUSES OR BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES.

WE'RE DOING CAPITAL BUDGET ON A BONDED JOB THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING OUT TO BID.

WE'RE USING THE GSA, WHICH IS LIKE A STATE BID AND ADOPTING THAT.

BUT IT'S AND WE'RE DOING ALL THIS AND GIVING THIS EXTRA MONEY WHEN YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S ALL ON THE [INAUDIBLE] THAT A FUTURE LEGISLATURE AT SOME POINT IS GOING TO VOTE YES TO THE $7 MILLION, WHICH HASN'T BEEN AGREED TO YET.

AND THIS TO SAY, IT'S NOT A CONTRACT.

A PURCHASE AGREEMENT IS A CONTRACT.

SO I THINK THAT MAYBE THERE SHOULD BE A DISCUSSION.

WHEN IT ORIGINALLY CAME UP, IT WAS THE IDEA OF A HELICOPTER WAS A REPLACEMENT HELICOPTER.

DURING THE BUDGET, IT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT WE AREN'T GOING TO GET RID OF THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO HELICOPTERS NOW.

SO THE DOUBLE COST OF DOUBLE MAINTENANCE.

SO WE'LL STILL HAVE ALL THE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OLD HELICOPTER.

AND WE'LL HAVE THE NEW HELICOPTER WITH DOUBLE, YOU KNOW, THE STAFFING AND MAINTENANCE AND EVERYTHING.

AND THEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT THIS WOULD BE THE MILLION DOLLARS WOULD BE A PLACEHOLDER AND BE DISCUSSED LATER.

NOW IT'S TAKEN AS THAT.

IT'S A BID COMPLETE EVEN THOUGH NO ONE'S APPROVED THE $7 MILLION, IT'S A BID COMPLETE WITH NO DISCUSSION.

AND TO A DEPARTMENT THAT HAS GONE UP IN JUST THESE FEW YEARS, 50%.

SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO NOT TAKE THIS OUT OF ORDER AND PUT IT THROUGH, TO HAVE IT, GO THROUGH SO THAT PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT IT AND THINK ABOUT IS WILL THE BONDING GO THROUGH? IS THERE? WE HAVE THE PERSON FROM THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE IS HERE, FOR THE, YOU KNOW, OUR SOFT CONTROL BOARD WAS MONITORING, AS WE ALWAYS DOES, TO SAY THAT WE'RE AGREEING TO PAY $1 MILLION TO SIGN A PURCHASE ORDER WITHOUT AN APPROVAL FOR THE $7 MILLION SIGNED BY ANYBODY AT THIS LEGISLATURE, APPROVED BY IT. I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE KIND OF THING.

THANK YOU. LEGISLATOR VINAL.

LEGISLATOR TODARO.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I WAS JUST GOING TO DIRECT MY QUESTIONS TO THE BUDGET DIRECTOR, MARK CORONADO.

JUST BECAUSE THE PROCESS OF THIS PURCHASE, THERE'S A TIMELINE, THERE'S A BUDGET, THERE'S VOTING.

AND HE ANSWERED A LOT OF THAT FOR ME.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT MYSELF AND THE LEGISLATURE UNDERSTOOD THAT.

THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. WELL, SAID LEGISLATOR.

LEGISLATOR GILMOUR.

THANK YOU, CHAIR. MY QUESTION IS, ARE WE ACTUALLY PAYING ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY? THE COST OF THE HELICOPTER IS NOT GOING UP.

CORRECT. AT SOME POINT, IT THEORETICALLY WOULD GO, RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN SIGNED AND IT IS GOOD FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

RIGHT NOW IT IS IT'S GOOD FOR, I BELIEVE 15 DAYS.

SO THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY THE MIDDLE OF NEXT WEEK FROM WHEN THAT WAS SIGNED.

IF IT.

SO IT COULD GO UP, IF WE GO BEYOND THOSE 15 DAYS? IN THEORY, YES. BUT RIGHT NOW.

IT'S NOT GUARANTEED. BUT AT SOME POINT, YEAH.

PRICES AS WE SIT HERE, THE PRICE IS 7.1 MILLION.

CORRECT. THE PRICE IS SET.

WERE EVENTUALLY TO ME WHEN WE APPROVED THE MILLION DOLLARS, I ANTICIPATED THAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT A $1 MILLION DEPOSIT DOWN ONE SEVENTH OF THE COST THAT WE WERE GOING TO APPROVE THE TOTAL PURCHASE AT SOME POINT.

SO IF WE PUT DOWN EXTRA $400,000, WE'RE JUST CHIPPING AWAY AT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PAY TOTAL LATER ON.

TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THE TOTAL COST OF THE HELICOPTER NOW SOME OF IT, WHAT YOU SAW THE 7.1 THAT IS FOR THE BASE HELICOPTER, THERE WILL BE SOME AMOUNT OF UP FITS.

AND I KNOW THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IS WORKING TO COMPILE THAT INFORMATION ON EXACTLY WHAT THOSE COSTS, BUT OUR UNDERSTANDING HAS NOT CHANGED AS TO THE TOTAL COST OF THE HELICOPTER.

THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGED WAS THE ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION WAS THE DEPOSIT WAS GOING TO BE $1 MILLION.

IT'S A HALF $1 MILLION MORE THAN THAT, AND WE DON'T HAVE FUNDS OBLIGATED FOR THAT.

[INAUDIBLE] WERE WE COUNTING ON THE STATE TO COME THROUGH WITH A $464,000 FOR DEPOSIT? YEAH. SO THERE IS LIKELY TO BE A, AS CHIEF DONOVAN MENTIONED, A, CREST GRANT COMMUNITY AND RESILIENCE, ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM GRANT.

BETWEEN THE BUDGET OFFICE AND THE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, WHO HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR SETTING UP THESE PROJECTS?

[01:00:03]

WILL IT LIKELY COME TO FRUITION? I BELIEVE SO, BUT IT ISN'T FAR ENOUGH ALONG IN THAT PROCESS.

WHAT WE HAVE.

THAT BEING SAID, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT WE'LL BE REIMBURSED BY THIS GRANT FOR.

YES. AND THE MILLION DOLLAR, STATE GRANT LIKELY WOULD, YOU KNOW, EAT INTO, THE REMAINING COSTS THAT WERE THEORETICALLY BINDING.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

THANK YOU. I JUST, [INAUDIBLE] JUST.

I'M SORRY. LOOK.

BARGNESI. BARGNESI.

I'M SORRY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT, I FORGOT.

I'M SORRY, I FORGOT. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT MORE THAN LIKELY, ONCE IT'S DONE, WE'RE GOING TO BOND THIS PROJECT.

THE REMAINDER USE, THAT WOULD BE, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AS PART OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE PROCESS, THE BUDGET OFFICE MAKES A DETERMINATION OF WHERE OUR PAYGO LINE IN THE SAND IS BASED ON HOW WE BELIEVE THE BUDGET IS GOING TO BE.

THAT'S USUALLY IN THE 500,000 TO $1 MILLION RANGE.

IT'S MORE THAN LIKELY. YES.

WE WOULD BOND FOR THE REMAINDER.

THE REMAINDER OF THE ENTIRE THING, MAYBE ROLL IT INTO SOME OTHER EQUIPMENT.

CORRECT. AND THE ONE POINT I DO WANT TO MAKE IS, WHILE, YES, CAPITAL PROJECTS OFTEN ARE, BUILDINGS, THEY ALSO ARE EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES AND THE HELICOPTERS VEHICLE, AND LIKELY, THE HELICOPTER BECAUSE OF ITS USEFUL LIFESPAN.

THE PPU WOULD BE PROBABLY THE FULL 30 YEARS OR WHEREAS MANY OF THESE ROAD PROJECTS ARE FOR LESSER PEOPLE USE.

CORRECT. SO IF WE BIND IT TO THE 30 YEAR, THE LIFE EXPECTANCY, WE WERE IN THE 1.5 [INAUDIBLE] REIMBURSEMENT.

SO WE'D BE FOR THAT.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND THAT'S, NORMAL PRACTICE.

YEAH. THE ONLY CONCERN WAS AND I THINK YOU EXPLAINED YOURSELF WITH, WITH JOHN BY SAYING THE 400 TO ME CAME OUT OF LEFT FIELD, BUT UNSEEN TO SAY THAT WE'RE ACCOUNTING WITH SOME STATE FUNDS THAT WEREN'T AVAILABLE.

YEAH. THERE IS, THE EXPECTATION OF THESE STATE FUNDS THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED IS MORE OF A OR AT LEAST IN OUR OPINION, AT THIS POINT WAS MORE OF AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF A REQUEST FOR GRANT FUNDS, SAYING THAT THERE IS A PROCESS GOING FORWARD BEFORE FINAL DETERMINATION VERSUS AN ACTUAL AWARD LETTER.

NOW, TO BE FAIR, SOMETIMES WE GET AWARD LETTERS FOR STATE OR FEDERAL GRANTS.

WE APPRECIATE THOSE FUNDS INTO A GRANT OR A PROJECT.

AND THEN SOMETIMES THAT MONEY DOESN'T COME INTO FRUITION AND THE COUNTY HAS TO COVER THE COSTS.

THAT IS JUST THAT'S JUST WHAT HAPPENS BECAUSE OF TIMING ISSUES.

THIS TO US, WE DIDN'T FEEL FULLY COMFORTABLE APPRECIATING THESE FUNDS AT THIS POINT.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY WON'T COME THROUGH.

I HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT, YOU KNOW, ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED ARE, YOU KNOW, EARNEST IN SAYING THAT THIS GRANT IS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD.

IT'S JUST A LITTLE EARLY ON AT THIS STAGE.

SURE. AND I THINK PEOPLE SHOULD REALIZE THAT THAT'S PART OF THE FINAL FINANCING, WHICH WOULD BE THE BOND OF THE HELICOPTER.

BUT THE 400,000 SOMETIMES.

CORRECT. AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN DELIBERATIONS ON THE 2025 CAPITAL PROCESS, THAT THAT INFORMATION WOULD BECOME MORE KNOWN AT THE TIME AND WE COULD MAKE A BETTER DETERMINATION AS TO, YOU KNOW, EXACTLY HOW MUCH WOULD NEED TO BE BONDED GOING FORWARD. SO THEN MY ONLY OTHER CONCERN IS THE MONEY THAT WE PUT INTO RESERVE, I THINK, BY THIS LEGISLATURE FOR THE LEASE AGREEMENT.

WE HAVE NOW DWINDLED THAT ACCOUNT DOWN TO ALMOST NOTHING.

CORRECT. IF THIS RESOLUTION WERE TO BE APPROVED, MOVING THAT 464,904 THERE WOULD BE, I BELIEVE, $273,588.77 REMAINING.

YOU THINK [INAUDIBLE]? YEAH, $0.77.

SO IT PROBABLY IS.

IT'S VERY CLOSE TO THAT AMOUNT.

TO BE FAIR, THERE ARE GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE WAREHOUSE, NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE BUILD OUT IN AND OF ITSELF.

I BELIEVE THAT SUM OF MONEY IS APPROXIMATELY THE AMOUNT REQUIRED FOR THE LOCAL SHERIFF TO BUILD OUT, WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE APPROXIMATELY $200,000. SO WE MAY BE BACK HERE AGAIN.

THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. SO THE SAME ISSUE.

SHERIFF'S OFFICE WOULD HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SOMEHOW ACQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCE, WHETHER THAT BE TO UTILIZE, YOU KNOW, POSITIVE

[01:05:10]

AND ARE YOU GUYS AWARE OF THAT, THAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SHIFTING MONEY FROM A RESERVE ACCOUNT FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT TO COVER ANOTHER PROJECT? SO YOU'RE WE'RE VERY YEAH, WE'RE VERY AWARE OF THAT ACTUALLY.

THE LEASE ARE PUT UP TO $750,000 TO SAVE THEM FOR THE COUNTY ON THIS LEASE.

WE DIDN'T NEGOTIATE THE LEASE.

IT WAS NEGOTIATED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO WE'RE VERY AWARE OF ALL THAT STUFF.

YEAH, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS THAT WERE CERTAINLY NOT KNOWN, AT THE TIME.

AND THOSE ARE COSTS THAT ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO BE BUDGETED FOR GOING FORWARD WITH THIS COMMITMENT THAT HAS BEEN MADE.

THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, DEALING WITH THOSE COSTS FOR 2024 BECAUSE THERE WASN'T THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPROPRIATELY BUDGET FOR THOSE, SOME OF THOSE, ARE JUST REMAIN TO BE SEEN.

I KNOW THERE IS AN RFP OUT CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES, FOR INSTANCE.

I CAN'T ESTIMATE WHAT THAT MAY COST.

I KNOW THAT THAT WILL BE A COST, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

SO IT'S DIFFICULT FOR US TO SAY RIGHT NOW EXACTLY WHAT COSTS WILL REMAIN FOR 2024 THAT WILL HAVE TO BE APPRECIATED.

I JUST KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME.

AND I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH CHIEF DONOVAN.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN.

WE'RE GOING TO GET A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE AND COME UP WITH A PLAN ON HOW TO ADDRESS THOSE IN THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE, AND TO CERTAINLY ENSURE THAT THOSE COSTS ARE APPRECIATED IN THE 2025 BUDGET PROPOSAL.

SO SAFE TO SAY THAT THIS LEASE IS COSTING US MUCH MORE THAN WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED.

SURE.

IS A TRIPLE NET LEASE UNFORTUNATELY HAS A LOT OF COSTS THAT, FOR, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS REASONS WE'RE NOT KNOWN AT THE TIME OR FULLY APPRECIATED . IS THERE? THIS IS CONCERNING. IS THERE A BALLPARK PERCENTAGE OF HOW MUCH HIGHER YOU THINK THIS IS GOING TO GET BEFORE THIS GETS COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL? BECAUSE THE THE SIGNIFICANT THE REMAINING ITEMS GENERALLY HOVER AROUND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE FACILITY.

SO IT WOULD BE HVAC MAINTENANCE, IT WOULD BE JANITORIAL SERVICE, IT WOULD BE EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE.

THAT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON WHAT COMES BACK FROM THOSE RFPS.

IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR ME TO [INAUDIBLE] PART ON WHAT THOSE COSTS MIGHT BE.

I DO KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW.

I MEAN, WE THERE WAS APPROXIMATELY, $50,000, RELATED TO THE, TOWN COUNTY TAXES. SCHOOL TAXES AND THEN A AT LEAST 1 TO 2 MONTHS RELATED TO INSURANCE PREMIUMS. THOSE TOTAL INSURANCE PREMIUMS ARE ANNUALLY ABOUT $40,000 ISH, AT LEAST FOR THE 2024 YEAR.

SO THOSE WOULD BE COSTS THAT HAVE TO BE APPRECIATED.

THEN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IS GOING TO HAVE TO CONTEMPLATE, YOU KNOW, FURNISHINGS AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER, YOU KNOW, INCIDENTAL COSTS ASSOCIATED.

I'M SURE ONCE THE BUILD OUT IS COMPLETED, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR VARIOUS OFFICE SPACES.

THEY'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, COME UP WITH THE QUOTE UNQUOTE PUNCH LIST OF, YOU KNOW, ITEMS THEY NEED ONCE THEY UNDERSTAND THE FULL SCOPE OF THE SPACE.

THAT ALSO REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

I COULDN'T OPINE ON WHAT THOSE COSTS MIGHT BE BECAUSE IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT SORT OF FURNITURE THEY ARE LOOKING TO PURCHASE VERSUS WHAT IS ALREADY AVAILABLE AT, THEIR CURRENT FACILITIES VERSUS WHAT'S AVAILABLE AT THE COUNTY'S SURPLUS WAREHOUSE.

SO AS WE PROCEED WITH THIS VERY EXPENSIVE ENDEAVOR.

DO WE EVEN HAVE A DATE WHEN WE'RE MOVING IN? THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION, I THINK, FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

I DO NOT KNOW.

IT'S PROBABLY SEVERAL MONTHS AWAY, BUT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THE BUILDING STANDS.

THE CONSTRUCTION IS PROJECTED TO BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF FEBRUARY, AND WE ANTICIPATE TO BE IN BY APRIL OR MAY.

SO AROUND THAT TIME, SHOULD WE COME INTO PLAY? WE WOULD CERTAINLY KNOW THE FINAL COUNTY SHARE FOR THE BUILD OUT, WHICH WAS GOING TO BE WHATEVER THE SUM IS, GREATER THAN $750,000.

AGAIN, ORIGINAL PROJECTIONS WAS THAT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT $950,000.

[01:10:03]

THAT THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN, TALK WITH BUILDING THE GROUNDS, WHICH I KNOW HAS BEEN, IN CONTACT WITH, THE, COMPANY DOING THIS, HAYES CONSTRUCTION, WHO IS THE VENDOR FOR, THE LANDLORD.

I BELIEVE THOSE ARE COMING INTO FOCUS.

I JUST DON'T OFFHAND KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THOSE ARE.

SO THEN, MORE IMPORTANTLY, IN FUTURE BUDGETS FOR THE COUNTY, WE'LL HAVE FINAL PRICES, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE SHERIFF'S BUDGET.

CERTAINLY AN SOME OF THESE ARE ONE TIME COSTS.

FURNITURE IS ONE TIME. BUT ONCE THESE RFPS ARE DONE, WE WOULD KNOW WHAT THOSE BIDS ARE.

THEREFORE, THOSE COULD BE BUDGETED APPROPRIATELY IN FUTURE YEARS.

THE DIFFICULTY IS JUST 2024.

AND YOU KNOW THERE CERTAINLY I THINK IF EVERY PARTY INVOLVED WITH THIS COULD GO BACK IN HINDSIGHT, I THINK THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS THAT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED IN A BETTER TIME FRAME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

LEGISLATOR GREENE.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. JUST REAL QUICK.

KIND OF LOOKING AT THE BIG PICTURE HERE, MARK, MORE FOR YOU.

YOU SEEM TO BE THE POPULAR ONE HERE TODAY.

BUT JUST FROM A BIG PICTURE STANDPOINT.

AND AT FIRST, WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT, IT DOES SEEM ODD, TO ALLOCATE FOR A DOWN PAYMENT AND THEN KIND OF EXPECT THAT THE LEGISLATURE WOULD HAVE TO BOND IT OUT AND APPROVE IT NEXT YEAR.

IS THAT NORMAL FOR, YOU KNOW, OPERATIONS? I KNOW WE'VE DONE IT, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE BILLS STADIUM.

WE'VE ALREADY DONE SOME DOWN PAYMENTS.

BUT TELL ME WHAT THE WORST CASE SCENARIO WOULD BE IF WE DECIDED THAT WE DIDN'T WANT TO BOND IT OUT NEXT YEAR, WHAT WOULD BE THE RAMIFICATIONS? WELL, IF WE SIGNED A, INTENT TO PURCHASE AND WE PUT DOWN A $1.4 MILLION DEPOSIT, AND WE DECIDED NOT TO TAKE THE HELICOPTER, I ASSUME WE WOULD LOSE THE $1.4 MILLION.

UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS A TWO PART PROCESS, IT ISN'T, UNREASONABLE OR OUT OF THE ORDINARY FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS TO BE DONE IN PHASES, WHETHER THAT IS A ROAD PROJECT OR THAT IS A BUILDING PROJECT, OR IN THIS CASE, THE PURCHASE OF A HELICOPTER.

UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN YOU DO PHASES OF A ROAD PROJECT, IN THEORY YOU'RE COMPLETING A PHASE AND THEN MOVING ON TO THE NEXT, BUT YOU'RE GENERALLY SPEAKING, NOT AGREEING TO START PHASE ONE UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME DEGREE OF CONFIDENCE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO PHASE TWO, PHASE THREE, PHASE FOUR, AND SO ON, OR ELSE YOU JUST WOULDN'T START THE PROJECT TO BEGIN WITH.

I WILL SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR A PURCHASE LIKE THIS, IT WAS AT LEAST, MY UNDERSTANDING, IT WAS THE CAPITAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE'S UNDERSTANDING.

AND I ASSUMED IT WAS THE LEGISLATURE'S UNDERSTANDING THAT BY APPROVING THE $1 MILLION IN PAYGO FOR A DEPOSIT FOR A HELICOPTER, THAT THAT WAS THE STAMP OF APPROVAL FOR BUYING THE HELICOPTER, FOR THE TOTAL COST.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

THIS ITEM WILL BE UP FOR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU, CHIEF DONOVAN.

THANK YOU CHRIS. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDA.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS.

COMMUNICATION 3E-1 THROUGH INCLUDING COMMUNICATION 3E-13, AS INDICATED.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS.

COMMUNICATION 3D-1 THROUGH AND INCLUDING COMMUNICATION 3D-5 AS INDICATED.

COMMUNICATION 3D-6 FROM THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS MOORE AND COMMISSIONER ZELLNER HERE TO SPEAK.

GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. WE'RE ASKING [INAUDIBLE] CONSIDERATION TO ACCEPT THE POSTAL GRANT, WHICH WE RECEIVED FROM THE NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

THAT'S THE AMOUNT OF $359,000.

THE ABSENTEE BALLOTS, AS YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE TO PAY TO SEND OUT THE BALLOT, BUT NOW WE HAVE TO PROVIDE ALSO A, POSTAGE PAID RETURN ENVELOPE AS WELL.

WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PICK UP A STATE GRANT TO COVER SOME OF THE POSTAGE COSTS.

AND YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT WILL ALLOW US TO RECEIVE $359,107 OF MONEY FROM THE STATE.

THANK YOU. AND THE QUESTION? YES. LEGISLATOR LORIGO.

THANK YOU. SO OUTSTANDING THESE COSTS FROM THIS GRANT, DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS ADDITIONALLY, AND IS THAT ALREADY ALLOCATED FOR IN THE BUDGET? IT'S ALREADY ALLOCATED WITHIN THE BUDGET.

WE HAVE A LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET FOR POSTAGE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE TOTAL COST IS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS?

[01:15:03]

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. THIS ITEM WILL BE UP FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR, AGENDA COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PEOPLE IN OTHER AGENCIES, COMMUNICATION 3M-1 THROUGH AND INCLUDING COMMUNICATION 3M-4, AS INDICATED MOMENTARILY GOING BACK TO LOCAL LAWS VERY QUICKLY.

LOCAL LAW. INTRO 1-1.

IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE AMENDMENT FOR THE LOCAL LAW WAS NEVER PASSED OUT.

SO I'M GOING TO ASK JEREMY TO PASS OUT THE AMENDMENT.

AND THEN I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE MEMBERS FROM THE MINORITY CAUCUS WHO WOULD LIKE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO CONFIRM VERBALLY AND LATER IN WRITING THAT THIS IS NOT THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AS A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE, AS A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE LOCAL LAW WOULD REQUIRE.

THE LAW TO BE RECLOCKED IN AND FOR ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD.

BUT IF THERE ARE NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE LAW, THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AMENDMENT.

SO YOUR OPINION COUNTY ATTORNEYS.

THANK YOU, MR. STANTON, FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS BILL.

GOOD MORNING. HELLO, JEREMY TOTH COUNTY ATTORNEY, RICH STANTON.

SO THE AMENDMENT, WHICH WAS DISCUSSED LAST WEEK AS WE SORT OF, ANALYZED IT IN REAL TIME IN FRONT OF AT LEAST, SOME OF THE MEMBERS, IT'S OUR OPINION THAT FUNDAMENTALLY, THE AMENDMENT IS REDUNDANT.

THERE'S NO HARM IN HAVING REDUNDANT LANGUAGE, BUT AS IT IS REDUNDANT THAT BY DEFINITION IT IS NOT MATERIAL, IT IS NOT A MATERIAL CHANGE.

AND THAT IS OUR OPINION. WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT THAT IN WRITING.

I CAN SEND A COMMUNICATION LATER TODAY.

BUT JUST KEEP IN MIND IT'S JUST AN OPINION WITH LAWYERS.

LAWYERS ALWAYS HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS.

SO, YOU KNOW, MY OPINION IS NO MORE OR LESS VALID THAN, OTHER ATTORNEY'S OPINION.

BUT IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THE ADDITION IS IMMATERIAL.

THANK YOU, COUNTY ATTORNEY.

ON THE QUESTION. LEGISLATOR VINAL.

I WANTED TO THANK, THE SPONSOR FOR ALLOWING THAT AMENDMENT.

AND THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE IT WAS STATED BY THE SPONSOR, CHAIR BASKIN, THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS TO GIVE THE COUNTY AUTHORITY TO DO THINGS REGARDING LOW INCOME HOUSING, NOT IN AND OF ITSELF, TO AUTHORIZE LOW INCOME HOUSING.

AND I WANTED THAT IN THERE, SUBJECT TO ERIE COUNTY APPROVAL, LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL TO WHETHER IT'S REDUNDANT OR NOT.

WE DISAGREE ON THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A MATERIAL CHANGE.

BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S AN IMPORTANT THING.

JUST SO PEOPLE LIKE WITH THIS HELICOPTER THING, THERE WAS AN ASSUMPTION THAT BECAUSE WE APPROVED IT, WE ALREADY WERE APPROVING A CONTRACT OF X AMOUNT.

WE DON'T KNOW. IT'S NOT THAT, THAT WE'RE SAYING SPECIFICALLY THIS IS GIVING THE RIGHT TO DISCUSS IT, BUT NOT GIVING AUTHORITY TO START A LOW INCOME HOUSING OR TO FUND GRANTS.

IT'S THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME UP FOR A VOTE ON THE FUNDING SIDE AND ON THE APPROVAL SIDE LATER, SO THAT THE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED ABOUT CAN THE, YOU KNOW, CAN THE COUNTY GET INTO THIS? AND SHOULD WE GET INTO IT, THE IDEA OF CAN WE GET IT, MAY WE DO IT THIS YEAR.

AND THEN WILL WE DO IT WE'LL BE LEFT FOR A FURTHER DISCUSSION LATER.

SO THAT I WOULD THANK FOR THAT AND, AGREE WITH THAT ON THAT ASPECT.

THE ONE THING I WANTED TO ASK IS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE OPINION WAS DONE AS TO WHETHER THIS IS DOESN'T VIOLATE ANY CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE.

SO, MR. STANTON HAS PROVIDED TO THIS BODY I THINK THAT'S A SUSPENSION LEGISLATOR VINAL.

IT IS, THE COMMUNICATION 3D-9 AND MR. STANTON HAS ADDED THE FINAL PARAGRAPH THERE THAT FURTHER CLARIFIES, YOUR CONCERN.

I THINK LEGISLATOR LORIGO ASKED THE SAME QUESTION LAST WEEK.

SO I ASKED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DIVE INTO THAT.

AND. SORRY.

I'M SORRY. YEAH. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY NOT AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW UNDER NEW YORK STATE LAW.

IT'S ABSOLUTELY WITHIN OUR MUNICIPAL HOME RULE POWERS.

IT'S AN EXPANSION.

[INAUDIBLE] I SPELLED IT OUT MORE IN WRITING.

THE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, I CAN ANSWER THOSE.

YES, YOU CAN GIVE IT TO LEGISLATOR VINAL OR LORIGO.

AND IT IS COMMUNICATION 3-9 IN THE FINAL PARAGRAPH OF THE DOCUMENT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE LAW, LEGISLATOR LORIGO? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS REDUNDANT, BUT I'M LOOKING THROUGH AND I'M NOT SEEING WHAT IT'S REDUNDANT.

I DON'T SEE THIS ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE LAW.

SO WE HAD A LENGTHY DISCUSSION LAST WEEK, LEGISLATOR BUT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE DEMOCRATIC SO I MAY HAVE JUMPED AHEAD.

YEAH. NO, NO. SO, THE CONCERN THAT LEGISLATOR VINAL BROUGHT UP LAST WEEK WAS THAT THE LAW AS WRITTEN,

[01:20:07]

IT WAS, OUR OPINION, BOTH RICH STANTON, MINE, AND GREG [INAUDIBLE], THAT THAT WAS NOT AN ACCURATE READING OF THE LAW.

AND THAT THE LAW WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO ANY CONTRACT UNILATERALLY.

IT WOULD ALLOW THE COUNTY.

BUT THE COUNTY IS MADE UP OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE AND THE COUNTY LEGISLATURE.

SO BUT THERE, YOU KNOW, SO IT WAS DECIDED, PRESUMABLY, TO NOTWITHSTANDING OUR OPINION, THAT IT WAS NOT NEEDED TO MAKE LEGISLATIVE VINAL MORE COMFORTABLE.

AND THAT'S CERTAINLY ACCEPTABLE.

I MEAN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT.

ADDING A CLAUSE THAT CLARIFIES.

AND SPELLED OUT THAT THE LEGISLATURE WOULD CONTINUE TO BE INVOLVED IN ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM.

AND SO THAT LANGUAGE WAS ADDED.

LEGISLATOR VINAL AND I DISAGREE, AS ALL GOOD LAWYERS DO.

BUT THAT LANGUAGE WAS ADDED AND IT'S MY OPINION.

IT'S REDUNDANT. IT'S HER OPINION IT WAS NECESSARY.

SO BUT IT'S MY OPINION, THEREFORE, THAT IT IS NOT A MATERIAL CHANGE.

AGAIN, THAT'S JUST AN OPINION.

SO WOULD IT BE SAFE TO SAY THAT YOU'RE SAYING WORKS AT ERIE COUNTY BEFORE DID MEAN THE LEGISLATURE? YEAH. IT MEANT THAT THE BODY POLITIC, WHICH IS MADE UP OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE AND THE COUNTY LEGISLATOR.

IT WAS NOT IT WAS OUR OPINION THAT THE COUNTY IS NOT DEFINED AS THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE, BUT AGAIN, SO CLARIFYING LANGUAGE.

THAT'S PERFECTLY, YOU KNOW, NORMAL IN A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE LEGISLATOR VINAL IS COMFORTABLE NOW.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO ME.

SO I SUPPOSE NOW IN OTHER PLACES WHERE ERIE COUNTY IS USED, ARE YOU ASSUMING THAT THAT ALSO MEANS THE ENTIRE THE LEGISLATURE AND THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE? LIKE, ARE YOU APPLYING THAT OPINION ELSEWHERE? IN THIS PARTICULAR LAW OR JUST AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE? IN GENERAL. I MEAN, IT'S HARD.

YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET A LAWYER TO, OPINE GENERALLY WITHOUT SOMETHING IN FRONT OF US.

SO I'M NOT.

SORRY. YEAH. TRADITIONALLY, THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE, WANTS TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS OR NEEDS THINGS APPROVED TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, TO SPEND MONEY IN ALL OF THOSE THINGS HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE.

THAT'S JUST A PROCESS OF HOW COUNTY GOVERNMENT WORKS.

GENERALLY SPEAKING.

RIGHT. GENERALLY SPEAKING.

BUT AGAIN, WE SAW EARLIER TODAY A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WHICH IS DIFFERENT, PROCUREMENT IS DIFFERENT.

AND SO THERE ARE ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS.

THERE ARE ALWAYS CAVEATS.

AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT LAWYERS SPEND THEIR TIME TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

BUT YEAH, AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE, THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE CANNOT UNILATERALLY ACT FOR THE COUNTY AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. SO WE.

YES. LEGISLATOR GREENE.

OH, OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL RECONVENE AND.

OKAY. HELLO.

WE WILL RECONVENE IN 20 MINUTES FOR OUR FORMAL SESSION.

THANK YOU EVERYONE.

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.

I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE ERIE COUNTY LEGISLATURE TO ORDER.

THIS IS MEETING NUMBER THREE OF THE ERIE COUNTY LEGISLATURE.

FEBRUARY 1ST, 2024.

MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE? LEGISLATOR GREENE.

[ ROLL CALL]

HERE. MILLS. HERE. TODARO.

HERE. BARGNESI.

HERE. BASKIN.

HERE. GILMOUR.

HERE. JOHNSON.

PRESENT. KOOSHOIAN.

HERE. MEYERS.

HERE. VINAL.

HERE. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT.

THANK YOU. TODAY'S INVOCATION WILL BE LED BY LEGISLATOR BARGNESI.

PLEASE STAND IF YOU ARE ABLE.

WE CULTIVATE AND BOW OUR HANDS TOGETHER IN PRAYER.

MAY WE GRASP THINGS THAT YOU WANT US TO UNDERSTAND.

OUR HEARTS ALWAYS BE READY TO RESPOND IN JESUS NAME, AMEN.

THANK YOU.

PLEASE REMAIN STANDING IF YOU ARE ABLE, FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY LEGISLATOR MEYERS, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

[01:25:04]

TABLED ITEMS. THERE ARE NONE.

ITEMS FOR RECONSIDERATION FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING.

THERE ARE NONE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING.

MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

[ MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: Meeting No. 2]

SECOND. THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE MEETING MINUTES ARE APPROVED.

PUBLIC HEARINGS. THERE ARE NONE.

MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE ONE AND CONTINUED ON TO PAGE THREE.

[ MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS:]

THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR. MOVED TO CONSIDER.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION TO CONSIDER THE RESOLUTIONS MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

SECOND. THE SECOND SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO ZERO. OKAY, SO THE ITEMS ARE NOW BEFORE THE BODY.

MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MOVE TO AMEND TO INCLUDE ET AL.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION TO AMEND THE MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED 11 TO 0.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

THE MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS ARE AMENDED.

MAJORITY LEADER. SECOND.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MOVE TO APPROVE, AS AMENDED.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTIONS, AS AMENDED, MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTIONS ARE APPROVED, AS AMENDED.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDA.

LOCAL LAWS. LOCAL LAW INTRO 1-1 2024 MAJORITY LEADER.

[ LOCAL LAWS:]

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION TO TAKE THE ITEM FROM THE TABLE MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO ZERO. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

LOCAL LAW. INTRO 1-1 2024 IS NOW BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE.

MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I MOVED TO AMEND THE LOCAL LAW WITH WHAT'S BEEN PASSED OUT.

SECOND. THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION TO AMEND THE LOCAL LAW WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT HAS BEEN PASSED OUT TO US, MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 11 ZERO CARRIED.

UNANIMOUS. ONE IS NOW AMENDED.

MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MOVE TO APPROVE AS AMENDED.

OKAY. THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION TO APPROVE THE LOCAL LAW, AS AMENDED, MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? IT WAS SECONDED.

WAS LEGISLATOR GILMOUR ON THE QUESTION.

LEGISLATOR GREENE, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. CERTAINLY.

THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT ALL OF US RECOGNIZE, A HOUSING SHORTAGE THAT WE HAVE IN ERIE COUNTY AND HOW, YOU KNOW, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, IT ROLLS DOWNHILL.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE LOWEST, ECONOMIC MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY DO SUFFER.

I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THIS LAW.

THE ONE, YOU KNOW, THAT THE AMENDMENT DOES CREATE A MATERIAL CHANGE THAT WE'VE HEARD THAT FROM, YOU KNOW, DIFFERING LEGAL OPINIONS HERE.

BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY A CONCERN THAT THIS WILL NOT STAND UP IF CHALLENGED IN COURT.

AND NUMBER TWO, I STILL READ THIS LAW AS PROVIDING THE ABILITY FOR COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO CREATE AN ENTIRE DEPARTMENT AND EXPAND GOVERNMENT.

SO WHILE I AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT OF WHAT THIS LAW IS ATTEMPTING TO, YOU KNOW, PUT FORTH AND MOVE THE COUNTY FORWARD IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER, I CAN'T SUPPORT A BILL WHERE I FEEL, THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, MISSING SOME KEY POINTS OF EXPANSION IN GOVERNMENT AND MATERIAL CHANGES THAT MIGHT NOT BE [INAUDIBLE]. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. LEGISLATOR ON THE QUESTION.

LEGISLATOR LORIGO, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU CHAIR. SAME AS I HAVE VERY SIMILAR CONCERNS AS LEGISLATOR GREENE.

I WOULD ADD ON THEM AND SAY, IN THE PAST WEEK, I'VE SPENT SOME TIME TALKING TO MY TOWN SUPERVISORS.

THEY'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ABILITY.

IN THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION IT'S VERY SPECIFICALLY DEFINED TO INCLUDE CITIES, TOWNS AND VILLAGES, THE POWER TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THERE IS CONCERN THAT THE COUNTY WOULD BE COMING IN.

AND AS LEGISLATOR VINAL HAS SAID BEFORE ABOUT CONCERNS OF AMHERST COMING INTO AMHERST AND DICTATING THINGS, THERE'S SIMILAR CONCERNS ABOUT THE COUNTY GOING INTO TOWN TO DICTATING THINGS. I STILL HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS.

WE SAW WHAT THIS LAW VERBATIM DID IN ULSTER COUNTY AND HOW IT DIDN'T TURN INTO AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEPARTMENT WITHIN THAT COUNTY THAT HAD JUST A SEED OF $15 MILLION.

WHILE I BELIEVE THAT, IT HAS A NOBLE INTENT TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT I CERTAINLY WANT TO WORK ON WITH ORGANIZATIONS IN MY DISTRICT THAT WORK LOCALLY AND KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS LAW AND WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS INSTANCE TODAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LEGISLATOR.

ON THE QUESTION LEGISLATOR VINAL, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THE CONSTITUTION GAVE THE RIGHT TO THE CITIES AND THE STATE TO DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IT DIDN'T GIVE THE RIGHT TO THE COUNTY.

AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO GIVE US THE RIGHT TO DO IT.

AND THEN TO START THAT ROBUST CONVERSATION THAT WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR, THE FEDERAL, THE STATE, TO ADDRESS IT.

AND WE CAN'T THAT IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION EIGHT, THEY HAVEN'T INCREASED SECTION EIGHT FOR YEARS.

THERE'S A NINE YEAR WAITING LIST FOR SECTION EIGHT.

IF YOU LOOK AT MORTGAGE THINGS, OUR COUNTY HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY, YOU KNOW, THE MOST CREATIVE ON ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

[01:30:04]

SO THAT'S WHY I THINK IT WAS A GREAT IDEA BY LEGISLATOR BASKIN, AND I'M SUPPORTING OF IT.

THANK YOU LEGISLATOR.

ON THE QUESTION. LEGISLATOR JOHNSON, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

YES. I MEAN, I THINK THE SPIRIT OF THIS, LOCAL LAW IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE MANDATED TO DO AS A COUNTY IN REGARDS TO THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, YOU KNOW, THE RIGHT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS JUST A HUMAN RIGHT FOR EVERYONE.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE THIS IS PART OF THE MANDATE OF THE COUNTY.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WEIGH IN AND SAY THAT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL CHANGES THERE AND ALSO SAID THAT WE WEREN'T VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION.

SO I YOU KNOW, FOR THAT, I'LL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BILL.

THANK YOU.

ON THE QUESTION.

ROLL CALL. ROLL CALL.

VOTE ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE.

LEGISLATOR GREENE.

NO. LORIGO.

NO. MILLS.

YES. BASKIN.

YES. GILMOUR.

YES. JOHNSON.

YES. KOOSHOIAN.

YES. MEYERS.

YES. AND VINAL.

YES. THE VOTE IS 7 TO 4.

THE MOTION PASSES AND THE LOCAL LAW IS APPROVED.

OKAY, SO LOCAL LAW.

INTRO. 1-1 IS APPROVED, AS AMENDED.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDA COMMITTEE REPORTS, REPORT NUMBER TWO FROM THE FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.

[ COMMITTEE REPORTS:]

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

SECOND. THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER, HAS BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. THE REPORT IS APPROVED.

REPORT NUMBER TWO FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR JOHNSON.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

SECOND. THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION MADE BY COMMITTEE CHAIR.

JOHNSON HAS BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. OKAY, CARRY.

I'M SORRY. THE REPORT IS APPROVED.

REPORT NUMBER TWO FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR JOHNSON, I MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL MADE BY COMMITTEE CHAIR JOHNSON.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR ON THE QUESTION.

AYE.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. OKAY.

THE REPORT IS APPROVED. REPORT NUMBER TWO FROM THE ENERGY ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR. I'M SORRY.

COMMITTEE CHAIR MEYERS.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

SECOND. SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. THE REPORT IS APPROVED.

REPORT NUMBER ONE FROM THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR GILMOUR. THANK YOU.

MOVED FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION APPROVAL.

SECOND. A PROPER MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL MADE BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR HAS BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. OKAY. THE REPORT IS APPROVED.

REPORT NUMBER ONE FROM THE COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR GILMOUR.

MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION APPROVAL.

SECOND. A PROPER MOTION MADE BY COMMITTEE CHAIR GILMOUR HAS BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0.

THE REPORT IS APPROVED. REPORT NUMBER ONE FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE CHAIR VINAL.

MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION MADE BY LEGISLATOR VINAL.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. AND THE REPORT IS APPROVED.

LEGISLATOR. RESOLUTIONS.

INTRO 3-1.

[ LEGISLATOR RESOLUTIONS:]

I MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION OR APPROVAL.

THERE'S BEEN A PROPER MOTION MADE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION.

APPROVAL MADE BY, LEGISLATOR LORIGO.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY, LEGISLATOR GREENE ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? WE COULD DO A ROLL CALL, VOTE ON THE QUESTION.

I'M SORRY. OKAY.

I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT, WHETHER OR NOT THE COUNTY HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THIS.

ARTICLE TWO UNDER THE COUNTY CHARTER CLEARLY GIVES THE AUTHORITY TO ADDRESS ANYTHING NOT ALREADY ADDRESSED BY A RESOLUTION.

THEN THERE WAS A DEBATE BY DEFINITION, AN ORDINANCE IS A RESOLUTION.

THIS IS NOT AN EFFORT TO MICROMANAGE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR COUNTY CODE.

THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO MANAGE AND OPERATE, BUT IT IS THE LEGISLATURE'S RESPONSIBILITY TO REPRESENT CONSTITUENTS.

I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS TODAY FOR APPROVAL SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT'S TIMELY.

THESE LEAVES MAKE THEIR DECISIONS, IN WEEKS.

MARCH 1ST IS THE FINAL DEADLINE, BUT THEY'RE MAKING THEIR DECISIONS NOW.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE DECISIONS ARE MADE BASED ON EVIDENCE AND BASED ON DATA.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK THE LEAGUES ARE BEING PUNISHED FOR OTHER ISSUES THAT EXIST, WITH THE COURSES.

SO I HOPE WE CAN HAVE YOUR SUPPORT.

DID WE ALREADY CALL THE QUESTION ON ITEM B AND THE ROLL CALL?

[01:35:02]

OKAY. BUT ARE WE VOTING YET? YEAH. I'M GOING TO START NOW.

LEGISLATOR GREENE.

YES. EXPLAIN MY VOTE REAL QUICK.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

ERIE COUNTY CODE SECTION 8.05 CLEARLY DEFINES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LEGISLATURE AS HAVING THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE COUNTY PARKS AS WELL AS SPORTS, ATHLETIC FIELDS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE WAY THE COUNTY IS WEBSITE AND WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, BOTH GOLF COURSES ARE EVEN IF YOU DON'T WANT TO CALL THEM AN ATHLETIC FACILITY, THEY ARE BOTH CONSIDERED A COUNTY PARK OFFICIAL.

AND FOR THOSE REASONS, WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY.

IN FACT, THAT IS OUR DUTY.

AND IT EVEN SEPARATES ONE STEP FURTHER AS FAR AS THE FACILITIES THAT THE COUNTY OPERATES, CLEARLY SHOWING THAT THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE HAS THE ABILITY TO OPERATE.

WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PASS REGULATIONS.

THOSE ARE OUR AUTHORITIES.

SO, THE NOTION THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY IS FRANKLY, JUST PLAIN INCORRECT.

WE CLEARLY HAVE THE AUTHORITY.

AND FOR THESE SWEEPING CHANGES TO TAKE PLACE, WITH INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF, DISCUSSIONS AHEAD OF TIME, I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE SEEN AT LEAST A MORATORIUM OR CALL PUT TOGETHER OUR HEADS FOR A YEAR AND GET THIS DONE CORRECTLY.

BUT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THESE SWEEPING CHANGES ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THE PROBLEMS GOLF COURSE HAS, WHICH IN THE END, THE OPEN TIMES, THE TIMES THOSE GOLF COURSES ARE NOT BEING USED ARE NOT DURING LEAGUE PLAY.

IT'S IN THE AFTERNOONS.

AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE ADDRESSING, WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IN THE FUTURE.

SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, LEGISLATOR LORIGO.

THANK YOU. YES EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

WE WERE ON THE QUESTION BEFORE. I APOLOGIZE, BUT LIKE I SAID, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE CONSTITUENTS IN MY DISTRICT.

I'M NOT OPPOSED TO WORKING WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IN THE FUTURE TO ADDRESS THE REAL PROBLEMS THAT ARE AFFECTING GOLF COURSES TODAY.

UNFORTUNATELY, I JUST THINK THAT THIS UNNECESSARILY PUNISHES THE LEAGUES WHO ARE NOT [INAUDIBLE] OF SOME OF THE LARGER PROBLEMS THAT ARE HAPPENING AT THE COURSES.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE DATA BASED DECISIONS, NOT DECISIONS BASED ON FEELINGS.

AND IT'S THE LEGISLATURE'S JOB TO, BE THE VOICE OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS.

SO YES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, LEGISLATOR MILLS.

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. YOU KNOW, I CAME ON THIS LEGISLATURE IN 2006, AND BACK THEN THE PARKS WERE DEVASTATED BY THE BUDGET. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WERE CHANGING THE MOTOR OIL IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE PARK AND THEY WERE VANDALIZING THE COPPER OUT OF BATHROOMS. IT WAS A MESS AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL WERE STEALING EQUIPMENT.

IT WAS A TOUGH, TOUGH, TOUGH YEAR OF 2006, AND 2007.

AND STARTING TO GET A LITTLE BETTER.

I SPENT A LITTLE MORE MONEY IN THEIR BUDGETS, BRINGING BACK OUR PARKS, WHICH WE LOST MILLIONS BY NOT TAKING CARE OF OUR PARKS WITH THE REGULAR BUDGET.

SO. KEPT ADMINISTRATION ISSUES THAT CAME IN, STARTED SEED MONEY TO TAKE CARE OF THE PARKS AND THE CASINOS. AND WE STARTED SEEING THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.

SO, YOU KNOW, OUR EFFORTS AS A LEGISLATURE AND THE ADMINISTRATIONS THAT BROUGHT THE PARKS UP TO WHERE THEY'RE PRISTINE NOW, THE TOBOGGAN CHUTES AT CHESTER RIDGE PARK, THEY'RE THERE.

AND, YEAH, ADMINISTRATION WANTED TO TEAR THEM DOWN THE ONLY TWO.

THERE'S ONLY TWO OTHER TOBOGGAN CHUTES IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WE MANAGED TO PRESERVE THEM.

SO WE GOT SOME REALLY GREAT THINGS GOING ON.

NOW, WE ADDRESSED THE GOLF COURSES AND I WANT TO SAY THAT TROY SCHINZEL HAS BEEN A VERY GOOD PARKS COMMISSIONER.

I'VE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH HIM AT CHESTER RIDGE PARK AND OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE BROUGHT IT UP TO SPEND THE MONEY.

AND SO WE CREATED A DEMAND.

PEOPLE SAID, NOW LET'S GO BACK TO THOSE PARKS.

THEY USED TO BE, YOU KNOW NOW THEY'RE PRISTINE AGAIN.

SO WE CREATED A GREAT PARK SYSTEM.

BUT UNBEKNOWNST TO US, THE DEMAND INCREASED AND PEOPLE WANTED TO BE HEALTHY.

SO, YOU KNOW, MY IDEA WAS TO HAVE MORATORIUM AS THE COMMISSIONER AND THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE [INAUDIBLE] IS THIS A BIG LIFT? I MEAN, WITH ALL THESE LEAGUES AND THE PEOPLE THAT ATTENDED THE PARKS INSIST ON REAL HEAVY LIFT.

I DON'T THINK SO. THIS IS AN EASY LIFT.

WE PUT ALL THE INFORMATION BACK ON THE TABLE AND OUR COMMITTEE, AND WE GO FORWARD AND ANALYZE EVERYTHING SO THAT EVERYBODY IS IN COMMUNICATING.

[01:40:04]

AND I GUESS WHAT I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WAS LIKE THE OFFICIAL.

THE BOSS HAPPENS TO BE AT THE RESIDENCE.

REPRESENT, WE SERVE, AND WE MAINTAIN THE ASSETS OF ERIE COUNTY AT THEIR DISCRETION.

THEY'RE THE MOST PEOPLE PLAYING IN THE PARKS.

THEY'RE THE BOSS. WE JUST REPRESENT THEM.

SO IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL FOR ME TO HOLD THIS OFF FOR A YEAR AND ANALYZE IT PROPERLY.

I THINK LIKE YOU SAID, GILMOUR, BUT FOR SOME REASON, THE ADMINISTRATION JUST STUCK ON THE NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY COMPROMISE.

I THINK IT'S DEVASTATING FOR US AS BAD PUBLICITY FOR US AND CERTAINLY NOT GOOD FOR THE RESIDENTS IN GENERAL, THEIR MINDSET.

SO I'LL BE VOTING FOR THIS RESOLUTION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

LEGISLATOR TODARO.

YES. BARGNESI.

NO.

BASKIN. NO.

GILMOUR. NO.

JOHNSON. LET ME EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

I'M ALSO GOING TO BE A NO ON THIS.

WE'VE HAD THIS BEFORE.

THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS COME UP.

THIS POLICY WE VOTED FOR.

WE VOTED FOR THIS POLICY ALREADY.

SO NOW WE WANT TO GO BACK AND CHANGE THE POLICY.

AND I UNDERSTAND WHY. BECAUSE WE HAVE RESIDENTS WHO CAME AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, WE NEED TO CHANGE THIS POLICY.

WE NEED THIS CHANGE.

BUT IF IT HADN'T COME BEFORE US, WHAT WOULD WE BE AT RIGHT NOW? YOU KNOW WHICH.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW WHAT FROM WHAT THE COMMISSIONER SAID IS THAT THEY'RE NOT, PROHIBITING ANYONE FROM PLAYING 18 HOLES OF GOLF.

IT'S HOW THEY PLAYED.

YEAH, BUT THEY'RE NOT PROHIBITING NINE HOLES.

AND THEN THEY CAN GO BACK FOR AN ADDITIONAL NINE HOLES.

I MEAN, THE STANDARD IN, MOST GOLF COURSES NOW IS NINE HOLES, AND THAT'S MEANT TO MAXIMIZE THE POTENTIAL THAT EVERYBODY CAN USE IT.

THIS CONVERSATION IS A GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE BECAUSE FOLKS WANT TO USE THE PARKING AND WE LIKE THAT.

BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO KIND OF ALLOW THE COMMISSIONER TO DO WHAT HE HAD TO DO.

HE DID THE RESEARCH.

HE BROUGHT THE PAPERWORK, HE BROUGHT THE FACTS.

AND I THINK WE ARE WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE, WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE POLICY CHANGES.

HE'S BACKED IT UP WITH THE FACTS.

AND I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO KEEP GOING WHERE WE ARE AT.

SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO BE A NO.

THANK YOU. LEGISLATOR KOOSHOIAN.

NO. MEYERS.

EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

WE HAD SOME GOOD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS, GOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE TEE TIMES, PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY USING THE COURSES.

I THINK THE BIGGER QUESTION IN FRONT OF US IS, DO WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS? THE LEGISLATOR SUGGESTED THAT WE DO, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MR. BENNETT'S OPINION THAT WE DO.

WE HAD TWO ATTORNEYS SIT HERE AND SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE.

I'M SURE IF I PUT MR. DUDZAK ON THE SPOT, I'M SURE HE MAY GIVE A DIFFERENT OPINION.

SO WITH ALL THAT, I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE ANSWERED.

DO WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THIS CHANGE? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT ANSWER IS.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT I DO NOT KNOW CAN SPECULATE.

I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY. LIKE I SAID, WE'VE HAD THREE OF THEM HERE AND WE'VE GOT THREE DIFFERENT ANSWERS.

SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M VOTING NO.

THANK YOU, LEGISLATOR VINAL.

WANTED TO JUST ECHO SOME OF THE COMMENTS.

THAT ONE IS THAT OUR COMMISSIONER IS LIKE A WORLD CLASS COMMISSIONER OF PARKS.

I WAS SO HAPPY WHEN I MET HIM FIRST THAT HE'S SUCH A, YOU KNOW, HAS SO MUCH EXPERIENCE ACROSS THE COUNTRY ON IT.

AND I THINK THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT MOST OF THIS, SOME OF THIS IS ON COUNTRY TRENDS.

BUT, AND I THINK THE HEART OF IT IS SORT OF ON COUNTRY TRENDS AND USE OF IT.

BUT THE ONE THING THAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT OUR AREA, WHICH, WHEN IT FIRST CAME OVER, WHEN THE COMMISSIONER CAME WITH THAT IDEA ABOUT CHANGING IT TO NINE AND IT WAS VOTED ON, I THINK, IN COMMITTEE AND THEN APPROVED.

BUT I DID ASK ABOUT THE LEAGUES.

BUT THE THING IS, IS THAT MOST AREAS OF THE COUNTRY DON'T HAVE THE CONTINUITY OF A LEAGUE THAT LASTED 61 YEARS.

I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT PLACE IN FLORIDA, WHAT PLACE IN ARIZONA, WHAT PLACE ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY HAS LEAGUES THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR 61 YEARS.

SO FOR 61 YEARS IN THE SAME PEOPLE THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DOING THESE LEAGUES, IT PROVIDES EXERCISE, SOCIABILITY, IT PROVIDES COMMUNITY, IT PROVIDES ALL STUDIES SHOW THAT LIKE WHEN THERE'S MORE LEAGUES AND PEOPLE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING, DECREASES DEPRESSION, INCREASES CIVIC ENGAGEMENT.

THERE'S ALL POSITIVE THINGS.

SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M NOT TRYING TO UPSET ANY OF MY FELLOW, LEGISLATORS.

BUT THOSE REASONS, I DO THINK THAT, NUMBER ONE, I'M GOING TO VOTE YES TO THE RESOLUTION.

AND NUMBER TWO, EVEN KNOWING THAT IT'S GOING TO FAIL AND HOPING THAT EVEN THOUGH WE, THE COMMISSIONER SAID ON THAT, THAT HE ACTUALLY MAYBE TALKS TO IT AND THINKS THAT THERE'S SOME WAY TO WORK IT IN, AS SOMETHING THAT HE CAN DO TO ACCOMMODATE THE LEAGUES.

[01:45:04]

THEY WERE THE PERSON I TALKED TO, SAID THAT THEY WERE VERY HAPPY WITH THE DISCUSSION AND A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP, THAT THEY HADN'T CONSIDERED BEFORE.

AND THEY WERE REALLY HAPPY WITH THAT ROBUST DISCUSSION AND TALKING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE'S NEEDS AND SO FORTH.

SO EITHER WAY, IT'S NOT THE HUGEST DEAL.

AS LEGISLATOR MILLS SAID, IT'S NOT THE BIGGEST DEAL IN THE WORLD, BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO COME.

WE DON'T HAVE, PUBLIC COMMENTS EVER, EXCEPT AROUND LOCAL LAWS.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE EVERY WEEK PEOPLE COMING WHEN THEY CAN.

SO I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO BE RESPONSIVE TO PEOPLE AND WE WANT TO SUPPORT OUR COMMISSIONERS, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO BE, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH THEM.

SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M VOTING YES, EVEN THOUGH IT WON'T PASS.

YES. THANK YOU.

THE VOTE IS 5 TO 6 AND THIS MOTION FAILS.

OKAY. THE MOTION FAILS.

MOVING FORWARD, ITEMS DISCHARGED FROM COMMITTEE.

THERE ARE NONE. SUSPENSION OF THE RULES.

MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

[ SUSPENSION OF THE RULES:]

I HAVE SEVEN SUSPENSIONS.

THE FIRST FROM DEP COMMISSIONER, AFFORDABLE MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING PROJECTS REQUESTING ERIE COUNTY ARPA FUNDING.

MADAM CLERK, COMMUNICATION 3D-7.

THANK YOU. THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT TO THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR, MAJORITY LEADER.

NEXT IS FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

REGULATION OF COUNTY GOLF COURSES.

MADAM CLERK COMMUNICATION 3D-8.

THANK YOU. THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT TO THE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE UNDER MY.

THIS, ITEM WILL BE RECEIVED AND FILED UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

CONTINUING ON, MAJORITY LEADER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THE THIRD SUSPENSION IS FROM LEGISLATOR BASKIN LEASE AGREEMENT FOR LEGISLATIVE OFFICE SPACE.

MADAM CLERK, COMMUNICATION 3E-14 MAJORITY LEADER.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

THERE'S A PROPER MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GREENE ON THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO 0. THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE ITEM IS APPROVED.

CONTINUING ON, MAJORITY LEADER.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THE NEXT SUSPENSION IS FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

A MEMO ON COUNTY FUNDING OF LOW INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS.

MADAM CLERK.

COMMUNICATION 3D-9.

THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT TO THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

MAJORITY LEADER.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THE NEXT IS FROM LEGISLATOR GILMOUR.

A LETTER OF ABSENCE FOR SESSION NUMBER TWO.

MADAM CLERK, COMMUNICATION 3D-15.

THIS LETTER WILL BE RECEIVED, FILED AND PRINTED UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

MAJORITY LEADER. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THE NEXT ONE IS FROM CHAIR BASKIN PLACEHOLDER.

MADAM CLERK, COMMUNICATION 3E-16.

THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT TO THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE UNDER MY AUTHORITY AS CHAIR.

MAJORITY LEADER. SO I'M SORRY.

DID WE NEED TO DO THE SHARES FUNDING FOR THE HELICOPTER? LEGISLATOR GILMOUR.

OH, YOU WANT ME TO ACKNOWLEDGE GILMOUR DID YOU WANT TO MOVE THE ITEM? IT SAYS INTRODUCE A SUSPENSION.

MOVE IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL. SECOND.

THERE'S BEEN A MOTION MADE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL MADE BY LEGISLATOR GILMOUR.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OH, NO.

OKAY, THIS IS THE HELICOPTER FUNDING.

DO WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN AND GO BACK? NO. OKAY.

OKAY, SO WE'RE 10 TO 1.

10 TO 1. OKAY.

THE ITEM IS APPROVED, THE MOTION CARRIES, AND THE ITEM IS APPROVED.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDA.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS.

[ COMMUNICATIONS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS:]

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS.

COMMUNICATION 3D-1 THROUGH AND INCLUDING COMMUNICATION 3D-5 AS INDICATED.

[ COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS:]

MAJORITY LEADER YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MOVE FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

SECOND. THERE'S BEEN A MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL MADE BY THE MAJORITY LEADER IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO ZERO. OKAY.

THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE ITEM IS APPROVED.

CONTINUING ON WITH OUR AGENDA.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PEOPLE IN OTHER AGENCIES.

COMMUNICATION 3M-1 THROUGH AND INCLUDING COMMUNICATION 3M-4 AS INDICATED.

[ COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PEOPLE AND OTHER AGENCIES:]

[ ANNOUNCEMENTS:]

THE NEXT SCHEDULED SESSION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15TH.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR THE MEMBERS? PLEASE RISE FOR MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS IF YOU ARE ABLE.

[ MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS:]

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I'D LIKE TO ADJOURN IN THE MEMORY OF STEPHEN DIMMITT.

VERY ACTIVE IN YOUTH SPORTS AND ATHLETICS.

[01:50:01]

OKAY. HEARING NO OTHERS, WE WILL TAKE A MOMENT OF SILENCE.

FOR THOSE THAT HAVE GONE ON TO BE WITH THE LORD.

AMEN. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

MOTION TO ADJOURN BY LEGISLATOR JOHNSON.

SECONDED BY LEGISLATOR GREENE.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? 11 TO ZERO. WE STAND ADJOURNED.

THANKS, GUYS.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.