The battery ban did NOT pass. It was tabled. The permanent ban (Ordinance 9884) was tabled and referred to the planning board for review and a public hearing. So was Resolution 76. Nothing was banned Tuesday night. Councilor Sparace made this explicit. They legally cannot enact the ban without it going through the planning board first.

The battery discussion was the real story of the night, and it was substantive. Two industry-side speakers showed up:

Chris, who works with state utilities and the NY independent system operator, argued against a ban,. He warned it would push electricity rates up 30-50%, said storage is critical for grid reliability with data centers and manufacturing growth coming, and urged the moratorium-not-ban approach.

Scott Harrenson, owner of the property at 600 Canal Street, is the person who actually wants to build a distribution-level battery system. He said he called the city before buying, was told it was a permitted use and a good spot next to a substation, spent tens of thousands on engineering and studies, and is now facing a ban that would kill the project. He asked only for the chance to go through site review.

Multiple councilors came out against the ban. Councilor Smith explicitly said she would not support a ban and favors the moratorium. She cited New York City, the Bronx, and Long Island as places with regulations to study. Councilor Riley asked Scott to come back with a presentation covering the cons like fire suppression costs, toxic runoff, and the fact that residences on Lawrence Street are closer than "industrial area" suggests. Councilor Dursi said he hasn't made a decision and is thinking carefully. So the council is visibly split and deliberating, not rubber-stamping.

The Boyd Dam question got answered directly. Councilor Riley asked Commissioner Guiliano whether there's grant money or if it's all on the city. Guiliano confirmed there's a $1 million ESD grant for the Boyd Dam rehabilitation, and they're sorting whether it goes toward engineering or construction. Treasurer Adams and Guiliano committed to getting a definitive answer. Councilman Dursi also confirmed both the dam bond and the sewer equipment bond are in the 2026 capital improvement plan.

The property sale transparency question got partially answered. On the two West Thomas Street parcels, Councilman Dursi disclosed on the record that even though the lots sold for $8,001 each, the contractor (Rome Building Contractors) has proposed building new housing valued at $400,000 on each lot. So the intended use was stated verbally at the meeting even though the due diligence summary wasn't in the packet. It’s worth noting that the information exists, it just wasn't in the written record this time. The other sales got no such disclosure.

Nascentia passed. The Beeches planned development (Ordinance 9867) was taken off the table and approved, with an amendment noting the June 2nd planning board public hearing date. It's now through.

The Youth Council showed up and spoke at the June 2nd planning board hearing on the battery moratorium. Multiple speakers praised their engagement. That's the program starting to show up in practice.

The finance committee note: Councilor Dursi said they met with Treasurer Adams, are reviewing "BANs and bonds and police leases," and more items will be coming to bond at a future meeting. This means there is more borrowing ahead.