Enhanced minutes — transcript-derived discussion summaries per item. Not the official record.
workshop— Board of Trustees Workshop Meeting
Agenda (18 items)
Order reflects how the Board actually took items up at the meeting (which sometimes differs from the posted agenda — e.g. items brought forward when a guest is present).
The Clerk pulled the April 13 minutes from the agenda because she had changes she wished to make before formal acceptance.
The Mayor announced two agenda changes: Hardscrabble Day event application was tabled to the next meeting, and the Pride Parade discussion was moved up immediately after agenda acceptance to accommodate young guests. The revised agenda was accepted unanimously.
Trustee Amy Smith presented the Pride Celebration event application on behalf of the events committee. A group of high school youth, mostly juniors and seniors, had approached the committee about organizing a youth-led pride celebration to fill the gap left when Red Hook Pride was no longer able to host their annual parade. Smith had met with the youth organizers multiple times and helped them explore partnerships with local nonprofits. The event is planned for Sunday, June 7, beginning at 11:30 a.m., with a foot-powered parade from the high school along the same route as the prior year's drive, proceeding along Market and Broadway into the village lot. The Police Chief had already approved the parade route as not constituting a public safety concern.
The youth organizers requested closure of Prince Street and the lot for a small festival featuring student organization booths and fundraising activities such as bake sales. They expressed interest in a stage and PA system to allow for possible musical performances, though they anticipated primarily playing a curated playlist. The core group of five organizers is being supported by the high school's Gender-Sexuality Alliance, which has also expressed interest in partnering. Smith emphasized that while adults in the youth's lives are supportive and present, the event is youth-led, and she has been impressed by their commitment and professionalism in undertaking the substantial work required to organize a public event.
The Mayor noted that the 11:30 a.m. start time avoids conflict with the nearby church's service, which concludes by that time. Smith added that the organizers are requesting that attendees bring donations for the Methodist Church Food Pantry, which operates every Sunday. The board voted unanimously to approve the Pride Celebration event application contingent on submission of a Certificate of Insurance. Hardscrabble Day was tabled to the next meeting.
The Mayor invited the water operator from H2O Innovations to provide context on the wastewater treatment plant's operational improvements before the budget discussion. Coon described the facility's transition from reactive crisis management to stable, predictable operations since H2O took over in August 2025. Key improvements included replacing the original Aramco equalization pump with a standalone feed pump to manage flow variability, adding sand to tertiary filters to meet design standards, installing an alarm system for remote monitoring, and replacing a failed pump station pump to restore redundancy. Coon emphasized that the plant had moved from emergency pump-outs and non-compliance events to a more controlled state, though he cautioned that wastewater systems always carry some variability.
Trustee Uku raised concerns about sludge removal expenses, noting that as of March 20 the village had already spent approximately $53,000 on sludge removal against a proposed budget of $20,176, with April and May still remaining in the fiscal year. She asked whether the budget should reflect the actual costs now being incurred under proper operations. Coon acknowledged the emergency pump-outs had been frequent but explained that the new alarm system and operational improvements should significantly reduce those expenses going forward. He noted that improved sludge management—thickening solids by allowing settlement and pumping off clear liquid—was reducing the volume requiring removal.
The Mayor explained that the prior operator had never wasted sludge at the plant, which masked the true operational costs. The plant had only been in full service for three years, and the first year's budget had matched actual costs; the second year revealed major problems requiring emergency repairs. The village had not increased rates until January 2026 because it was still in the discovery and optimization phase. She noted that the team had met that morning and expressed confidence that major emergency expenses had been addressed, with only routine maintenance and smaller repairs anticipated going forward.
Trustee Allen expressed confidence in the team's assessment, noting that the meeting that morning had conveyed strong confidence from both Coon and the engineer that major expenses had been handled and that the team seemed ahead of emergencies through twice-daily site visits and the alarm system. He raised a concern about constituent impact, noting that several residents had reached out expressing hardship from the recent rate increase. He made a plea for some form of rebate or assistance program, drawing a parallel to the water system's leak-forgiveness program, to help residents adjust to the new costs.
Trustee Uku proposed that the board consider converting the general fund advance to the sewer fund into a permanent transfer rather than a loan, arguing this would eliminate the repayment obligation and provide the sewer fund with an opening balance sufficient to cover the next bond payment without crisis. She presented materials from NICOM and the village attorney indicating that such a transfer was legally permissible and required no public hearing—only a board decision. She framed this as a way to demonstrate proactive fiscal management to the public and avoid the appearance of a bailout by structuring it as a permanent subsidy.
The Mayor expressed discomfort with the transfer proposal, stating that when the board passed the resolution authorizing the advance in February, the village attorney had advised that it must be repaid and that a transfer had not been discussed as an option. She said she was not aware of a legal mechanism to convert an advance into a transfer and wanted confirmation from counsel before proceeding. She noted that the treasurer was scheduled to present a repayment plan by May 11, and the board had time to explore options after receiving that plan.
Deputy Mayor Kjarval cautioned that the board should not vote on a transfer without legal protection from a licensed professional, noting that the village attorney had indicated trustees could face personal liability. She expressed concern about proceeding without formal legal confirmation of the transfer's legality.
Trustee Allen stated he would support a transfer if it were legally permissible, arguing it would protect Phase One sewer users from bearing the full cost of the system's stabilization and would be digestible to the public as a communal investment in village infrastructure.
The Mayor proposed passing the sewer budget as presented and scheduling a separate workshop to review the loan structure and explore the transfer option with legal counsel. She emphasized that passing the budget did not foreclose the possibility of converting the advance to a transfer later. Uku agreed to this approach, and the board voted 3–2 to adopt the 2026–2027 Sewer Fund budget in the amount of $451,490, with Uku and Allen voting no. Uku's dissent was based on her view that the budget should not include a line item for a loan repayment when the board had not yet decided whether to pursue a loan or a transfer. Allen's dissent reflected his continued concern about rate impacts on residents and his preference for a subsidy approach.
- Trustee Allen voted no on the sewer budget but the official minutes do not record his stated reason or dissent.Transcript: “Allen: no, I'm still feel at that point about the Fran also, no, I'm a yes, but I would like it noted that I do really appreciate very much respect how you've put this together.”
- Trustee Uku voted no on the sewer budget but the official minutes do not record her stated reason for dissent.Transcript: “Uku: having this on here is already creating the framework of a loan, which, as of today, the resolution that we approved does not reference a loan.”
No members of the public were present to offer comment.
The Mayor presented a draft intermunicipal agreement for shared services covering highway and public works personnel, equipment, supplies, and resources. She explained that the county had developed this as a blanket framework to allow municipalities to work together without negotiating individual agreements for each project. The agreement establishes liability protections and clarifies that employees of one municipality working in another remain employees of their home municipality. The Mayor noted that the agreement does not obligate the village to provide or request services; specific arrangements would be negotiated case-by-case. She cited the example of the town's equipment being used to lift the second above-ground storage tank at the wastewater treatment plant. The board reviewed the document without formal action, as it was presented for information and will be brought back for approval once finalized by the county.
The Mayor proposed revisions to the Guidelines for Village of Red Hook Board Meetings to improve efficiency and access. She recommended adding a provision for the village attorney to meet with the board for one hour on the morning of each meeting, subject to his availability, to discuss agenda items and answer questions. This would provide all trustees with equal access to legal counsel rather than having individual trustees consult separately, and would allow the attorney to review resolutions and agenda materials in advance.
The Mayor proposed establishing a target end time of 10 p.m. for board meetings, with the option for the board to vote to continue past that time if necessary. She noted that the previous meeting had run five hours, which was taxing on both the board and the public. At 9 p.m., the board would review and prioritize remaining agenda items to ensure the most important business was addressed.
The Mayor proposed that the Clerk identify the source or author of any resolution on the agenda and any prepared statements, to provide transparency about where proposals originate. She also recommended that prepared statements be submitted in advance of the meeting to allow for constructive board discussion rather than reactive responses to statements read aloud.
Trustee Uku raised a concern about the language stating that the agenda is prepared by the Clerk at the direction of the Mayor, arguing that the agenda is a board document and should not be characterized as directed by the Mayor alone. She noted that while the Mayor may submit items and the Clerk may draft the agenda, the board collectively has authority over the agenda. The Mayor responded that the initial agenda is prepared by the Clerk at her direction, but the board has the opportunity to add to and adjust the agenda before each meeting. After discussion, the Mayor agreed to remove the language about the Mayor directing the Clerk and simply state that the agenda is prepared by the Clerk.
Trustee Uku proposed adding language requiring that resolutions identify not only the drafter but also the tools and sources used in preparing them, such as NICOM handbooks, OSC guidance, or other references. She stated that she provides full disclosure of her sources when she brings resolutions and believed this transparency should be standard practice. The Mayor noted that this requirement could apply to the resolution itself rather than the agenda line item.
Trustee Uku suggested that the board establish a mechanism to request expert consultation on specific agenda items by majority vote, rather than having only the Mayor request expert attendance. She noted that consulting experts such as the village attorney or engineers can incur costs and that a collaborative approach would be more collegial. The Mayor expressed concern about how such a process would work in practice, given that experts must be available and advance notice is required. Trustee Uku suggested that board members could informally discuss potential consultants via email to gauge interest before a formal request, though the Clerk cautioned that deliberation about spending village funds should not occur via email to avoid Open Meetings Law issues.
The Mayor proposed that prior to detailed discussion of a resolution, the board discuss the intent or purpose of the resolution to determine whether the board wishes to proceed. This would avoid spending time on detailed line-by-line discussion of resolutions the board does not wish to pursue. Trustee Uku expressed concern that this requirement might discourage individual trustees from bringing resolutions for the record, even if they anticipated the board might not support them. The Mayor clarified that the intent discussion would not prevent a trustee from introducing a resolution; it would simply allow the board to understand the goal before diving into details.
Trustee Uku asked for clarification on what a 'statement of intent' means and how she should structure resolutions to meet this expectation. The Mayor explained that the statement of intent is essentially the executive summary or purpose of the resolution—what the board is trying to accomplish—and that this discussion would occur before reading the full resolution. She gave the example of a videoconferencing resolution, where the intent might be to remove barriers to public access by making Zoom links available without requiring advance requests.
The board discussed whether all resolutions must be read in full into the record. Trustee Uku noted that if resolutions are provided in advance and board members have had opportunity to review and comment, there may be no need to read the full recitals if the board has already discussed and agreed on the intent. The Mayor acknowledged this approach could save time. The board agreed to revise the guidelines to remove the requirement that the board 'agree on' the intent and instead state that the board will 'discuss' the intent prior to reviewing the resolution.
The board voted unanimously to accept the Guidelines for Village of Red Hook Board Meetings as revised, with the struck language removed and the intent-discussion language modified to say 'discuss' rather than 'agree on.'
The Mayor noted that the board had previously approved the land use study with its appendix included. At the prior meeting, Trustee Uku had proposed a resolution to deactivate the appendix—not remove it, but change its status so that the narrative text in the appendix would not carry the same legal weight as the main body of the study. The village attorney had clarified that making such a change would require going through the adoption process again. The Mayor placed the item on the agenda to determine whether the two new board members wished to revisit the study or leave it as approved.
Trustee Uku explained that her concern was not about removing the appendix but about de-operationalizing it. She noted that the appendix contains a 1,500-word narrative about one property and that if the appendix carries the same weight as the main study text, it could be used against the village in future disputes. The village attorney had confirmed this was a potential liability concern.
Trustee Maccarini expressed comfort with the study as it stands, noting that the appendix does not hold the same weight as a historical register or other formal designations that might be used to restrict development. He saw no need to reopen the process.
Trustee Allen stated that he would support keeping the study as is, noting that if historical information were used to argue against development, he would welcome that outcome. He did not see a need to reopen the document unless there were substantive gaps that required redoing the study.
The board took no action, leaving the land use study as previously approved.
The Mayor presented a resolution to authorize professional training attendance and establish procedures for village payment of training fees. She noted that the general fund budget includes $2,000 for trustee training, $2,000 for village staff training, and separate line items for planning, zoning, court, and DPW training. The resolution would authorize the use of taxpayer funds for attendance at professional conferences and training but would not mandate that any trustee attend.
Trustee Uku argued that the board should take an affirmative approach to training rather than a restrictive one. She noted that NICOM conferences, particularly fall training and winter legislative meetings, provide valuable education on municipal finance, land use, and zoning law that trustees need to perform their duties effectively. She stated that the cheapest and most effective way to serve taxpayers is to send trustees to these conferences and that the board should encourage attendance rather than nickel-and-dime the budget. She proposed increasing the trustee training line item from $2,000 to $4,000 or more to allow multiple trustees to attend fall training.
The Mayor responded that she supports training but that the board must balance training expenses against other budget priorities. She noted that the budget had been passed with $2,000 allocated for trustee training and that if the board wished to increase that amount, it must identify where the additional funds would come from. She stated that the prior policy, established in January, was to split the training budget equally among four trustees, allowing each approximately $500 per conference unless the board voted to allocate additional funds for a specific trustee.
Deputy Mayor Kjarval explained that the equal-split policy had been adopted because trustees were previously attending conferences without coordinating with the board, leading to unequal spending. The policy provided a framework to manage expenses, though it did not prevent the board from voting to allocate additional funds for specific training opportunities.
Trustee Uku suggested that the board could fund additional training by reducing the digital communications line item, which she characterized as historically underutilized. The Mayor expressed reluctance to commit funds from a line item that might be needed for upcoming website accessibility requirements and other digital communication projects.
The Mayor noted that the board had just passed the budget and that if trustees wished to adjust allocations, they should identify specific reductions. She stated that she is happy to discuss training but that the conversation should occur in the context of the full budget, not in isolation.
Trustee Uku moved to table the professional training resolution to allow more time to present the case for increased training funding. The motion was seconded and passed 3–0, with the resolution tabled for discussion at a future meeting.
Trustee Uku, along with Trustees Kjarval and Smith, proposed making Zoom access available for all village board meetings, workshops, and info sessions. The goal was to remove barriers to public participation by allowing residents to access meetings via a standing Zoom link without having to request the link in advance. The proposal included security settings to prevent Zoom bombing, such as requiring the host to admit participants from a waiting room.
The Mayor expressed support for making meetings accessible but raised practical concerns. She noted that the village has offered Zoom access for nearly five years and that attendance has been minimal—typically only a handful of people per meeting. She stated that providing full Zoom access with public comment capability requires either placing a computer in the meeting room or purchasing equipment to capture the full room, and that coordinating public comment from both in-person and remote participants can be logistically challenging. She cited the example of a sewer information session with 80 people in the room and 15 on Zoom, where coordinating remote public comment would have been difficult.
The Clerk noted that there are legal requirements around noticing Zoom links in advance, which can be tricky if a meeting is cancelled or rescheduled at the last minute. She also noted that the village attorney had expressed concern about making Zoom mandatory for all meetings, as emergency meetings might not be able to accommodate videoconferencing.
Trustee Uku clarified that the proposal was not to make Zoom mandatory for emergency meetings and that public comment would only be available during the designated public comment period, not throughout the meeting. She noted that the security settings described in the proposal make Zoom bombing virtually impossible.
Trustee Kjarval expressed concern about the accuracy of some of the technical information in the proposal document, noting that one claim about default security settings had been contradicted by the Clerk's experience.
The Mayor suggested that the board continue to explore videoconferencing options but that the details needed to be worked out. She proposed that another trustee could serve as the Zoom host to share responsibility with the Mayor, who currently runs the meeting and manages the Clerk's minutes.
Trustee Maccarini noted that the proposal seemed like a work in progress and that the board should continue discussing the objectives and logistics before adopting a formal policy. He expressed support for the goal of accessibility but wanted to ensure the implementation was practical.
The board agreed to continue discussing videoconferencing objectives and logistics at a future meeting, with the understanding that the goal is to increase public access while managing the practical and legal constraints.
The Mayor presented a draft fee schedule for the village, noting that a public hearing is scheduled for May 11. She explained that the Clerk has organized the schedule to show prior fees, proposed fees, and notes on any changes. The schedule consolidates fees from multiple departments—building, planning, zoning, sewer, water, police, and garbage—into a single document for easier reference and annual review. The Mayor encouraged the board to review the schedule and submit any questions or comments before the public hearing. She noted that most fees have remained unchanged, with the Clerk's notes indicating 'no change' for items that are staying the same.
The Mayor stated that she did not have budget adjustments to present at this meeting. She noted that in reviewing the adjustments, she discovered that the water budget as adjusted had a discrepancy of approximately $32,000 and that rather than present adjustments that would make the situation worse, she would prepare comprehensive adjustments for all three funds (general, sewer, and water) at a future meeting.
Trustee Allen reported on constituent concerns that had been raised with him. He noted that he intended to provide copies of his notes to the board in advance of future meetings but had not done so for this meeting. He presented three main areas of concern: field lighting at the high school, neighborhood traffic, and assistance for unhoused individuals.
Regarding field lighting, Allen reported that five separate constituents had reached out expressing concern about the proposed lighting project, citing concerns about village character, property values, and the height and usage of the lights. One constituent was a realtor concerned about property values, and another was a potential buyer waiting to see what the lights would look like before closing on a property. Allen noted that he had directed constituents to contact the school directly, as the lighting project is a school matter. He added that constituents had expressed a desire for a site use plan to be on the books to provide clarity.
The Mayor clarified that constituents should direct their comments to the school, as the village board does not have authority over school facilities. She noted that the board had discussed the field lighting in executive session.
Regarding neighborhood traffic, Allen reported that constituents had raised concerns about traffic and parking in the village. He noted that the land use study explicitly states that traffic and parking are outside the study's purview. He asked whether the village could pursue a traffic and parking study through the Dutchess County Transportation Council.
The Mayor responded that the Dutchess County Transportation Council has conducted parking and traffic studies for other municipalities and that she had asked Emily Dozier how to get on the list for such a study. Deputy Mayor Kjarval noted that the village had previously applied for a parking study from the county but had not received it, possibly because the study was cut from the scope when the land use study was reduced in size.
The Mayor acknowledged that traffic is a complex issue, noting that the village is located on a state truck route and US Highway truck route, which limits the village's ability to control traffic patterns. She noted that there had been historical proposals to reroute traffic, including a suggestion for a flyover, but that such solutions would significantly impact the village character.
Regarding assistance for unhoused individuals, Allen reported that constituents had expressed concern about unhoused individuals in the village and the risk of death during winter months. He noted that there had been an incident where an unhoused individual was walking down the middle of the road during the day, and constituents had reached out asking whether the village could help.
The Mayor acknowledged that this is a difficult and frustrating issue. She noted that the police officers are very familiar with the unhoused individuals in the village and that most are from Red Hook with family in the area. She explained that the police regularly offer assistance, rides to services, and other support, but that they cannot force individuals to accept help unless they meet criteria for incompetence or risk to themselves. She noted that the village had previously worked with the Catholic Church to provide overnight shelter but that the arrangement had fallen through due to insurance and location issues. She stated that the village has overlooked some rules to accommodate unhoused individuals and that the issue is complicated by the lack of regional services and the difficulty of finding appropriate locations for shelters.
Deputy Mayor Kjarval noted that the overnight shelter program had been effective in the past because it involved Hudson River Housing and allowed people to be enrolled in services. She explained that the program had ended due to insurance issues at one location and volunteer shortages at another location outside Tivoli. She noted that while many people expressed support for helping unhoused individuals, fewer actually volunteered to staff a shelter.
The Mayor noted that services for mental health, housing, and temporary shelter are funded through the county, which concentrates resources in Poughkeepsie. She stated that she regularly advocates for a regional approach to services. She also noted that there had been a shelter or mental health facility in Rhinebeck that faced community opposition, illustrating the difficulty of finding locations for such facilities.
The Mayor explained that many unhoused individuals have mental health or substance abuse issues and need services to accompany housing. She noted that there have been suggestions to open the info booth as a shelter, but that it lacks facilities and has been broken into repeatedly, with the DPW having to clean up after such incidents. She stated that this is a liability issue and that the solution is not straightforward.
Trustee Allen stated that he felt passionate about this issue and intended to do some legwork to start conversations about potential solutions.
Trustee Allen proposed several ideas for improving public communication about the sewer system. He suggested creating a sewer-specific newsletter to be sent to current sewer users and anyone who wishes to be on the list, combining a condensed version of the monthly sewer report with accessible explanations. He offered to take on the task of preparing this communication to avoid creating additional work for village staff.
Allen suggested that the board consider printing and mailing the sewer communication, noting that the communication survey results showed strong preference for hard-copy materials. He acknowledged concerns about cost but noted that email distribution could be done at minimal expense.
Allen proposed holding more public listening sessions, casual coffee meetings, or sewer office hours, acknowledging that such sessions required significant energy in the past but suggesting they could be structured differently or held less frequently. The Mayor noted that the village had held six sewer information sessions in the past year and suggested that the board could consider quarterly info sessions on various topics rather than sewer-specific sessions.
Allen proposed creating a one- or two-page digestible summary of sewer information, lessons learned, and frequently asked questions that could be handed to residents and posted on the website. He noted that he had recently been contacted by someone from the Saw Kill Coalition who had questions that had been answered a year and a half ago, suggesting that some misinformation persists and that a clear, accessible summary could help address it.
Allen proposed creating a branded social media presence for the sewer, suggesting the name 'Sewer Rats' (with a Z) styled as an 1980s band. He envisioned using social media to feature team members, announce updates, and educate the public about the sewer system. He suggested that this could be taken on by a youth intern, which would also serve his broader goal of engaging young people in civic life.
The Mayor expressed support for the communication goals but noted that social media requires careful management. She explained that any posts from a village account must be retained for record-keeping purposes, that comments must be monitored if allowed, and that there are new accessibility requirements coming for digital content. She suggested that the board should have a broader discussion about social media strategy before committing to specific platforms or approaches.
The Clerk noted that there are legal requirements around retaining social media posts and comments and that there may be software costs associated with compliance. She also noted that the village attorney had expressed concern about making Zoom mandatory, and similar legal considerations apply to social media.
Trustee Maccarini noted that while social media sounds simple on its face, there are significant details and costs involved. He expressed willingness to explore the idea but wanted to ensure the implementation was practical.
The Mayor suggested that the board could discuss a broader communication strategy at a future workshop, including social media, website updates, and other channels. She noted that the digital communications line item in the budget could potentially be used for such purposes but that the board should first determine what it wants to accomplish and what resources are needed.
The board agreed to continue discussing sewer communication ideas at a future meeting, with Trustee Allen offering to provide more detailed proposals.
Trustee Allen noted that there are changes coming to SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review) and the Keeping New Yorkers Safe Act that could affect the village. He stated that he personally has concerns about the Keeping New Yorkers Safe Act because the proposed changes would diminish certain environmental protections as a means of promoting affordable housing. While Allen supports affordable housing, he does not believe the two goals need to come at the cost of environmental protection. He noted that other municipalities are expressing similar concerns and offered to provide sample materials if the board wished to discuss urging the governor to reconsider the changes.
The Mayor acknowledged that the issues are complex. She noted that the definition of 'disturbed land' in the SEQR changes is not clear and that she was surprised to learn that the Rocco property, which appears undisturbed, might qualify as disturbed because it was farmed at one point. She stated that while making the development process faster is a good goal, the details matter and the board should understand the implications before taking a position.
The Mayor noted that the governor is pushing both SEQR changes and the Keeping New Yorkers Safe Act and that hopefully the state budget will be passed before the board's next meeting. She stated that individual trustees are welcome to submit comments to the governor expressing their personal views, but that any formal board position would require discussion and a board decision.
Trustee Allen offered to send the board materials on the issues for their review.
The Mayor noted that she did not have items for executive session at this meeting but that the board could schedule an executive session at another time if needed.
The Mayor presented audited vouchers for approval as presented in the Treasurer's report dated April 23, 2026. The general fund vouchers totaled $49,221.38, the sewer fund vouchers totaled $3,614.03, and the water fund vouchers totaled $23,698.16. The Mayor noted that the village is attempting to be more specific in its voucher documentation, though this is not legally required. Trustee Allen asked about the process for flagging discrepancies in vouchers, noting that he had seen some vouchers flagged by others but still signed. The Mayor explained that if a voucher has a discrepancy that raises a question but the underlying amount is correct, she may flag it but still approve it. She noted that if a trustee believes a voucher should not be paid or requires discussion, the time to raise that is when the vouchers are presented, and the board can pull out individual vouchers for separate discussion while approving the remainder. The board voted unanimously to approve the audited vouchers as presented.
Deputy Mayor Kjarval presented results from a communication survey distributed to village residents. As of the time of the meeting, 64 responses had been received, with the survey still open for additional responses. The survey included graphs and longer-form responses from residents about their preferred methods of receiving village information. Kjarval noted that the results showed strong preference for email newsletters and inserts mailed with water bills, with in-person communication (residents walking into village offices) also being a significant channel. She observed that many residents prefer to communicate with the village by showing up in person rather than by phone or email.
Trustee Allen noted that the survey results indicated strong preference for email newsletters and that inserts with water bills were also highly favored. He suggested that the board consider using these channels for sewer-specific communication. Deputy Mayor Kjarval noted that the water bill inserts reach only property owners who pay water bills and do not reach renters, which is a limitation of that channel. She recalled that when the board had previously tried to reach renters with the neighbors' night postcards, it required significant effort to identify apartment addresses and coordinate delivery.
The Mayor noted that the survey respondents were predominantly property owners and that the board should consider how to reach renters and other residents who do not receive water bills. She suggested that the newsletter approach might be more inclusive. The board agreed to continue reviewing the survey results and consider communication strategies based on the findings.