MONTICELLO — The Village of Monticello might have to pay an energy services vendor $30,000 if it fails to move forward with a long-term contract that was estimated to save the village nearly $1 million over 15 years in energy costs.

In early March 2017, the Village of Monticello Board voted to authorize Energy Systems Group (ESG) to perform a comprehensive analysis of how the Village could save money on lighting and other energy costs - and essentially helping the village to “go green.”

Specifically, on March 7, 2017, the Board passed a resolution authorizing ESG to perform the year-long engineering work that would form the basis for a long-term contract with the village.

Then-Mayor Doug Solomon, former deputy mayor Jill Weyer and former trustee Aleta Lymon along with trustee George Nikolados, who is now also deputy mayor, voted that night in favor of awarding the contract to ESG, the lowest and only bidder. Trustee Carmen Rue voted against awarding the contract.

Alison Seipp, an account executive with the company, said Thursday that the fee due for not moving forward was originally $60,000 but ESG reduced it to to $30,000 as “a good faith effort.”

“It's payment for a fraction of what we spent in engineering development for the project if they don't move forward,” Seipp said. “If they move forward, those development costs are rolled into the project.” Seipp added that project would have paid for itself “through energy savings with a net positive cash flow of over $900,000 at the end of 15 years.”

Yesterday, deputy mayor George Nikolados said that he was going to try to salvage the contract with ESG after the new Village Board last Tuesday deadlocked on a resolution that would have extended the time for the Board to make a final decision on whether to move forward with the company's services.

“I support the contract whole-heartedly,” Nikolados said. “Anytime you can go green and save money it's a win-win. "

At last Tuesday's meeting, Village attorney Michael Davidoff told the Board that he had negotiated a 30-day extension with the vendor - until June 5 - for the Board to decide if it wanted to move forward with ESG's services.

“Don't close the door now ... If you want to close the door (on the proposal), close the door on June 5 to give yourselves the best chance,” Davidoff said. “You are not losing anything (by taking the extension offered by the company). I wrote the resolution just to give you the extension … there's no commitment whatsoever. You may even be able to make some changes (to the proposal). “

Rue, though, continued to debate Davidoff, insisting the company was going to charge the village the $30,000 anyway. Sommers disagreed with Rue and told Rue he'd rather the Village not lose the $30,000 it would have to pay for its failure to act.

Davidoff, clearly frustrated with Rue, concluded: “I am asking for the Board to benefit the Village by extending it a month. I don't know what else to do. “

In the end, a resolution authorizing that extension was defeated with the “no” votes of Rue and trustee Rochelle Massey; new Village Mayor Gary Sommers and deputy mayor George Nikolados voted in favor of the extension. And without an existing fifth trustee on the Board -- due to the resignation last week of Solomon -- the resolution was defeated.

David Sager, who until last week was Village Manager, said last Thursday: “The problem is that the board had approved a resolution stating that if ESG came back to us with viable cost savings projects and we chose not to move forward, the village would have to pay ESG $30,000…kind of a standard clause given the amount of work that ESG did. “

According to Sager, Barton & Loguidice (the engineering firm the Village employs on large projects) had recommended the company based upon their expertise in the field and having worked with them in other municipalities.

Sager said that after the company was selected, ESG “did extensive review of our buildings and energy usage and came back with proposals. The largest component of the proposals was the repurchase from NYSEG and replacement of all of the village's street lights with more energy efficient LED lights. The second was to perform energy savings upgrades to the Ted Stroebele Center. While we would have to seek financing for the projects, the projected savings annually far exceeded the costs of financing so that the village could then use those savings to either pay down debts or fund other infrastructure improvements.”