Water billing move estimated to save taxpayers $6K, says mayor

The village of Woodbury has changed its water billing schedule from quarterly to tri-annually. This decision, according to Mayor Andrew Giacomazza, will save the taxpayers approximately $6,000.

At the April 25 village board meeting, Giacomazza shared village treasurer Desiree Potvin’s endorsement of the schedule change. Potvin, who was not present at the meeting, noted most senior citizens and small families are charged the minimum bill of $25 per billing cycle; by going to a tri-annual system this would relieve some of the burden on these groups.

During the public hearing for the proposed water billing schedule change, Highland Mills resident Christopher Graziano implored the board to adjust the village water rates to encourage more conservation. He suggested the village move to a volumetric rate which would result in those consuming a larger amount of water getting charged a higher rate.

Graziano’s views were largely supported by the board, who agreed that it is something that should be revisited.

“I’m in agreement. I think switching to volumetric flow is something we should definitely look at as a board,” said Trustee Matthew Fabbro.

In other water-related news, the village of Woodbury approved Rushmore Estate’s request for a waiver against the village’s moratorium on new developments. The moratorium was established to help conserve the village of Woodbury’s water supply. Although concerns over the strain on the water system were raised by the public, the village board claimed that Rushmore Estate’s water usage would not have a significant impact on the village.

Trustee Susan Fries-Ciriello noted that Rushmore Estate had provided a plan for using outside water if a water restriction was imposed by the town. According to the applicant’s memorandum, which Fries-Ciriello cited, they would bring in outside water and facilities to be used for sanitary purposes.

Trustee James Freiband agreed, claiming that the amount of water used would not have a significant impact on the village.

“Seems to be worthwhile to keep this business a contributing partner to the community,” said Freiband.

Pine Hill Bridge Overpass

During the meeting, the board heard from Sean Hoffman of Hoffman Engineering who provided information on the Pine Hill Bridge Overpass. Hoffman shared that the Thruway Authority intends to replace this structure resulting in the village needing to find an alternative for the sanitary force main located on the underside of the bridge.

Hoffman outlined the possible alternative sewage management option the village could take while the overpass was being replaced. One option is for the village to wait until the throughway is completed and install a new force main on the end side of the bridge. However, Hoffman explained, this would require the village to haul sewage from one pump station to another for the duration of the project. Another option was for the village to tunnel under the thruway, which Hoffman said was unfeasible. Hoffman recommended the village consider re-routing the sanitary sewer from the Skyline Drive/Pine Hill Road intersection and install a new sewer nearby and tie into a gravity sewer by Pearce Drive. This would cost about $1.22 million, according to Hoffman.

The board discussed the various options and weighed in on the impact on the health and safety of the residents as well as the potential costs.

Other business

During the meeting, the village board approved a new local law that codifies the right of designated authorities to enter private premises. The law enables the code enforcement officer or designee to enter such premises with the permission of the occupant and authorizes the officer to obtain a warrant if such permission is denied. However, under certain circumstances, the code enforcement officer may enter the premises without a warrant if there is an immediate concern for the safety of people or property.

Although approved with the support of most of the village board, Freiband said he felt the wording needed to be clarified and voted no on the motion to enact the new law.