Establish EV charger fee of 12 cents per kilowatt-hour
ActiveoperationalongoingSets a user fee of 12 cents per kilowatt-hour for the Village's public electric vehicle charger effective February 15, 2026, directs the Village Clerk to post signage announcing the fee, and requires the Board to review use data in 6 months.
First seen
2026-01-26
Latest event
2026-01-26
adopted
Expires
—
Resolution text
RESOLVED
- users of the Village's public electric vehicle charger shall be charged 12 cents per kilowatt-hour as of February 15, 2026
- the Board will review use data in 6 months
- the Village Clerk is directed to place a sign on the EV charger announcing the fee
Legal analysisissues for consideration
Computer-generated analysis using NY State statutes and OSC guidance. Not legal advice. Frames concerns as questions, not pronouncements. Trustees and counsel make the call.
The most significant concern is whether this resolution satisfies VIL §13-1306, which appears to require that charges for use of self-supporting improvements be established by local law, rule, or regulation after a public hearing held on notice — neither of which is reflected in the resolution as recorded. Counsel should determine whether Article 13 applies to the EV charger, whether a public hearing was required and held, and whether a local law rather than a resolution is the proper instrument. Separately, if the Village is selling electricity at a retail per-kWh rate, counsel should confirm that the arrangement does not implicate PSC jurisdiction under the Public Service Law. Procedural and accounting documentation gaps are lower-priority but worth addressing to strengthen the record.
highStatute
VIL §13-1306 appears to require establishment or revision of charges for self-supporting improvements to be done by local law, rule, or regulation after a public hearing held on notice — consider whether this resolution, adopted without a recorded public hearing, satisfies that procedural requirement.
VIL §13-1306 states that the board of trustees 'may by local law, rule, or regulation after a public hearing held on notice, held on notice, establish or revise charges for the use or enjoyment of self-supporting improvement.' If the Village's EV charger qualifies as a 'self-supporting improvement' under Article 13, the fee-setting authority may require a public hearing before adoption, and possibly enactment by local law rather than simple resolution. The resolution as recorded reflects no public hearing. Counsel should determine (a) whether the EV charger is a self-supporting improvement within Article 13's meaning, (b) whether a public hearing was held and simply not referenced in the resolution, and (c) whether a local law rather than a board resolution is the required instrument.
VIL §13-1306 · source ↗
“The board of trustees of any village may by local law, rule, or regulation after a public hearing held on notice, held on notice, establish or revise charges for the use or enjoyment of self-supporting improvement.”
mediumStatute
Consider whether the Village's general fee-setting authority under Village Law or Municipal Home Rule Law independently authorizes a per-kWh user fee by simple resolution, or whether a local law is required.
Municipalities in New York may set user fees under various provisions, but the appropriate instrument (resolution vs. local law) depends on which grant of authority applies. If VIL §13-1306 governs, a local law may be required. If authority derives instead from Municipal Home Rule Law §10 or the Village's general police powers, a resolution may suffice, but that analysis should be made explicitly by counsel. The resolution does not cite its statutory authority, which makes it difficult to evaluate whether the correct procedure was followed. Counsel should identify the precise statutory hook and confirm the instrument used matches what that provision requires.
VIL §13-1306 · source ↗
“The board of trustees of any village may by local law, rule, or regulation after a public hearing held on notice, held on notice, establish or revise charges for the use or enjoyment of self-supporting improvement.”
Municipal Home Rule Law §10
mediumStatute
If the EV charger fee revenue is to be treated as self-supporting improvement revenue under VIL §13-1306, consider whether the resolution adequately restricts the use of proceeds to operating, maintaining, and improving the charger.
VIL §13-1306 states that charges 'shall be used only for the purpose of operating, maintaining and improving such self-supporting improvement, including reserves and the payment of principal and interest on any bonds, notes or other obligations issued for the acquisition, construction, lease, purchase, improvement or reconstruction of any such self-supporting improvement.' The resolution does not specify how fee revenues will be accounted for or restricted. If Article 13 applies, depositing proceeds into the general fund without restriction may be inconsistent with the statute. Counsel and the Village Treasurer should confirm appropriate accounting treatment.
VIL §13-1306 · source ↗
“Such charges shall be used only for the purpose of operating, maintaining and improving such self-supporting improvement, including reserves and the payment of principal and interest on any bonds, notes or other obligations issued for the acquisition, construction, lease, purchase, improvement or reconstruction of any such self-supporting improvement.”
mediumStatute
Consider whether the Village's sale of electricity at a per-kWh rate implicates Public Service Law or PSC jurisdiction over retail electric sales, and whether any exemption or authorization applies.
New York's Public Service Law generally regulates the sale of electricity to end users. Municipal EV charging programs may be exempt from PSC jurisdiction under certain provisions applicable to municipal utilities or incidental electric sales, but this is not a settled question for all configurations. The resolution sets a retail per-kWh rate (12 cents/kWh), which resembles a retail electricity tariff. Counsel should consider whether the Village needs to confirm its exemption status or whether a filing or notification to the PSC is warranted. The corpus provided does not include the relevant Public Service Law sections; counsel should consult PSL §2(13) and §66 directly.
lowOSC Guidance
Consider whether the Board has identified the appropriate revenue account and fund for EV charger fee proceeds, consistent with OSC guidance on transparent accounting of restricted or dedicated revenues.
OSC's Reserve Funds guide emphasizes that revenues associated with specific statutory purposes should be clearly accounted for and not commingled with general revenues in ways that obscure their use. While the EV charger fee is not itself a reserve fund, if revenues are restricted by VIL §13-1306, the Village should maintain accounting records that allow it to demonstrate compliance with that restriction. The resolution is silent on accounting treatment. The Village Treasurer and auditors should confirm the revenue is coded appropriately.
OSC LGMG: Reserve Funds (Local Government Management Guide) · source ↗
“Reserve funds should not be merely a 'parking lot' for excess cash or fund balance. Local governments and school districts should balance the desirability of accumulating reserves for future needs with the obligation to make sure taxpayers are not overburdened by these practices. There should be a clear purpose or intent for reserve funds that aligns with statutory authorizations.”
lowProcedure
The resolution does not cite the statutory authority under which the Board is acting — consider whether the record should be amended to identify the enabling provision.
Best practice for resolutions establishing fees is to identify the specific statutory authority relied upon (e.g., VIL §13-1306, Municipal Home Rule Law §10, or another provision). Without that recital, it is difficult for future reviewers — including OSC auditors and counsel — to assess whether the correct procedure was followed. Adding a WHEREAS clause citing the legal authority would strengthen the record and facilitate compliance review. This is a documentation gap rather than a substantive defect.
lowProcedure
The resolution records a unanimous vote and identifies a mover and seconder, but does not document any deliberation on how the 12-cent rate was determined — consider whether supporting analysis should be retained in the record.
While a bare vote is procedurally valid for a simple resolution, a fee-setting action of ongoing effect benefits from a documented basis for the rate chosen (e.g., cost recovery analysis, comparison to nearby municipal chargers, or staff memo). This is especially relevant if the rate is later challenged as unreasonably set or if VIL §13-1306 requires the fee to be tied to operating and maintenance costs. Retaining a brief staff memo or trustee statement in the minutes would strengthen the record.
Analysis provenance
- Prompt
- legal_analysis_v1
- Model
- claude-sonnet-4-6
- Generated
- 2026-04-29T10:19:26+00:00
- Prompt hash
- b7d687287dd2338e
- Corpus hash
- add22d4dd34c41d2 (950 entries)
Lifecycle (1 event)
2026-01-26adoptedvote: unanimous
Charge users of the Village's public electric vehicle charger 12 cents/kW as of February 15, 2026, with a Board review of use data in 6 months.
moved by Smythe · seconded by Uku
Show text snapshot for this event
Resolved
- users of the Village's public electric vehicle charger shall be charged 12 cents per kilowatt-hour as of February 15, 2026
- the Board will review use data in 6 months
- the Village Clerk is directed to place a sign on the EV charger announcing the fee
Subject key:
ev_charger_user_fee