Called to Order

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr called the meeting to order at 11:30 a.m.  He welcomed the members of the 2004 committee and thanked them for their willingness to serve.

Changes to the Agenda

 No items were added or withdrawn from the agenda; however, Mr. Booth asked that the Committee have a discussion early in 2004 with regard to whether or not Tompkins County should request permission from the State to change the sales tax.  He said he believes Rockland County already has a sales tax above 8 ¼ percent.   Mr. Koplinka-Loehr requested that the County Attorney and Finance Director look into what is allowable by the State.

Approval of Minutes of December 9, 2004

 It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mr. Todd, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to approve the minutes of December 9, 2004 as submitted.  MINUTES APPROVED.

Chair’s Report

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr reported he received an invitation for legislators to join a bus trip planned for February 10 to Albany to lobby State Legislators.  He said he will be going and hopes others will join him.

Report from the Finance Director

 Mr. Squires reported on a letter sent to the Town of Newfield by former Deputy County Administrator, Kathy Smithers in regard to the sales tax agreement.   Mr. Squires said the Town owes the County $15,000 and he believes he can resolve the debt by reducing the Town’s credit applied to their warrant.   Mr. Squires was directed to work with Mr. Winch, Newfield Legislator, in resolving this issue in the manner presented.   (It was noted that there was also overpayments to the Town of Ithaca, but less clear-cut.

 Mr. Squires reported on the 2003 budget and said there is $388,000 remaining in the Contingent Fund.  However, that will be absorbed by shortages in the Fringe Pool, Assigned Counsel, Utilities, and Jail medical expenses.  He said the major overage is in the budget of DSS Family Assistance program by approximately $1 million, but Mr. Squires said the Department is fortunate to have excess revenues in other accounts that should make up for that shortfall.  He said the other area of concern is in the Department’s administrative budget, which he will be monitoring.
Mr. Squires said a major area of concern for the County is the Airport.  In the past the Airport has been able to be self-sustaining.  He predicts this is no longer going to be the case because the environment they operate within is changing.  He said in 2004 he does not think the Airport will be able to cover its expenses through income.   Mr. Penniman asked that this Committee receive a financial report on the Airport for 2004 and 2005.

 Mr. Squires provided the Committee with a report on sales tax receipts for 2003 and stated the County received $1.6 million in excess of the amount budgeted.  He also reported that Room Tax income reached $1 million for the first time.  He said it is still too early to predict how the General Fund will end up at year end because there are still many outstanding claims for the fourth quarter.

Report from the Deputy County Administrator

 Mr. Marx reported on feedback from department heads on the budget process and stated they would like to be informed of legislative priorities at the beginning of the budget process.   they will continue to provide feedback to this Committee as the year moves forward.

Mortgage Tax

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said this item was discussed in December by the Budget and Capital Committee and a request was made that legislators present proposals for the Committee to respond to.  Mr. Koplinka-Loehr propose that the County operate on parallel tracks and that some generic language be sent to the State that would express the intention of what a mortgage tax would be used for while the County works on specific language.

 The following resolution was MOVED by Mr. Booth seconded by Ms. McBean:

RESOLUTION NO.   – SETTING FORTH THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL FUNDS
                                        RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF AN INCREASE IN THE MORTGAGE TAX

 WHEREAS, the County Legislature has requested that the New York State Legislature amend the tax law to allow the County to collect additional mortgage taxes for transportation purposes, and
 WHEREAS, the Legislature desires to set forth its intention with regard to the use of such funds, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, That the funds shall be used in the following manner:  first, the funds will be used to pay the County’s share of the joint mass transportation project (currently operated as TCAT), and, thereafter, any additional funds will be used for other County transportation services which can include mass transportation services, roads, bridges, and highways.
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20.

 Ms. Blanchard explained the philosophy behind the TCAT proposal.  She said TCAT became interested in the Mortgage Recording Tax two years ago when it began to explore opportunities to plug additional funds into a system that operates on a deficit each year.

 The goals of the tax are to:  reduce the deficit and treat the Mortgage Tax as a revenue to the system and to reduce all the partners share; and to provide enough revenue into the system so that they are able to build up a reserve fund that is compatible with an $8 million operating budget.

 Mr. Penniman said he absolutely supports TCAT as an important public service priority, however, he would prefer not to support the operation  this way.  He understands that not having a Mortgage Tax puts more pressure on the property tax, but does not believe the mortgage tax is a better way to raise income.   He stated he would like to explore other alternatives, such as a gas tax, income tax, or sales tax.  He believes the Mortgage Tax is a disincentive to persons buying homes or refinancing existing homes.

 Mr. Squires suggested the Committee consider allocating revenue from a Mortgage Tax to stabilization of the Airport.

 Mr. Booth said he believes that if this money is going to be devoted to TCAT that it be shared between the County and City.

 It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Ms. McBean to amend the resolution as follows:

 “RESOLVED, That the funds shall be used in the following manner:  first, the funds will be used to pay the County and City shares of the joint mass transportation project (currently operated as TCAT), pursuant to an agreement to be reached between the County and City of Ithaca, and, thereafter, any additional funds will be used for other County transportation services which can include mass transportation services, roads, bridges, and highways.”

 Ms. McBean said she agrees with Mr. Booth’s comments about the need to share this with the City and asked why a generic resolution couldn’t be forwarded to the State now with details of how the funds will be used worked out following that.

 Ms. Herrera said she represents the Legislature on the TCAT Board.  She said the Mortgage Tax is a Countywide tax and she believes it would be a disservice to County residents to apply this, to the City rather than solely across the County.  She said TCAT’s deficit should not be dealt with through County taxpayer dollars collected through the Mortgage Tax.

A vote by show of hands on the amendment resulted as follows:  Ayes – 2 (Booth and Penniman); Noes – 3 (Koplinka-Loehr, McBean, and Todd). MOTION FAILED.

A vote by show of hands on the original resolution resulted as follows:  Ayes – 2 (Koplinka-Loehr and McBean); Noes – 3 (Booth, Penniman, and Todd).  RESOLUTION FAILED.

The following resolution (adopted by TCAT) was MOVED by Ms. McBean, seconded by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr.

RESOLUTION    - PROPOSING A .25 PERCENT MORTGAGE RECORDING TAX FOR STABILIZATION OF LOCAL SHARE
                                CONTRIBUTIONS TO TCAT

 Mr. Booth said he is strongly in favor of getting these funds but will not support a resolution until an agreement is reached as to how the funds will be used.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, without objection from the Committee MOVED to Table this resolution until the previous resolution is reconsidered.

 It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Mr. Booth, to reconsider the amendment previously proposed by Mr. Booth.   A voice vote on the motion to reconsider resulted as follows:  Ayes – 4, Noes – 1 (Todd).  MOTION CARRIED.

 A voice vote on the amendment resulted as follows:  Ayes – 3 (Booth, Koplinka-Loehr, and Penniman); Noes – 2 (McBean and Todd).  MOTION CARRIED.

 Mr. Todd said he believes using a Mortgage Recording Tax as a source of revenue is a bad idea.

 A voice vote on the resolution resulted as follows:  Ayes – 2 (Booth and Koplinka-Loehr); Noes – 3 (McBean, Penniman, and Todd).  RESOLUTION FAILED.

 A voice vote on the resolution remaining on the Table resulted as follows:  Ayes – 2 (Koplinka-Loehr and McBean); Noes – 3 (Booth, Penniman, and Todd).  RESOLUTION FAILED.

Rollover Policy

 Ms. Stein, Director of the Office for the Aging, spoke on behalf of the Human Services Cabinet.  She said the Human Services Cabinet feels the Rollover Policy has been extremely useful in allowing  flexibility and helps departments plug in gaps during difficult periods.  It allows for better planning and saves money in the long run.  The Cabinet strongly supports the policy as it was originally intended.  She said the informal taking of rollover from departments that has been done has not had a basis in program budgeting and they are asking the County Legislature to consider affirming the Rollover policy as it currently stands.

 Mr. Penniman said he supports the Rollover Policy and thinks it has been successful.  He agrees the Legislature has weakened the Policy by taking money in some instances.  He suggested refining the policy to make it more possible for the Legislature to follow it and be more earnest about it.

 Mr. Joseph said the purpose of the Policy is to motivate people to behave in an appropriate manner; but he believes it works better than no policy.  He said if the policy is eliminated the County will then see the use-it-lose-it behavior.   Ms. McBean agreed with Mr. Joseph, but said Rollover for ongoing expenses is problematic.

 Ms. Kiefer spoke on behalf of Legislator Lane and said there are some legislators opposed to the policy.  She suggested there is an alternative:  rollover could be split 50-50 between departments and the County.  She said use could also depend on the source of Rollover, e.g. fees charged for public, which can fluctuate widely.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said the legislature may want to consider whether there are some circumstances where rollover would not be appropriate to give to departments (such as funds from vacant positions).  Mr. Joseph said it would be very difficult to distinguish whether a vacancy was unintentional or intended in order to save a department money.  In any case, the funds are used in the end towards purposes the departments feel they need to operate a program.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr summarized the discussion and stated at this time the Committee is reaffirming the Rollover Policy as it stands with the caveat that the origin of Rollover may be examined.  The Legislature may ask for the origination of the rollover throughout the year or during the budget process, and that department heads would be on notice to be prepared to answer those questions.

Mandate Classifications

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said the Committee has received a memo from Mr. Whicher, County Administrator, in regard to resolving the on-going concerns of the Legislature about what should be included on the tax bill as a mandate.  In his memo, Mr. Whicher proposed the following:

 January 2004:  Establish guidelines for classifying expenditure in one of three categories; Mandated Payments; Mandated Services, and Local Option Services.
 February – May, 2004:  Classify expenditures in the three categories.  Approach the topic in committee order as follows:  February – Public Safety; March – Health and Human Services; April – Facilities and Infrastructure and Budget and Capital; and May – Government Operations, Planning, Development, and Environmental Quality, and Consumer and Community Affairs.

 The Committee reviewed the charts and graphs presented by Ms. Thomas.  Mr. Booth stressed the importance of all charts produced to have accurate and consistent labeling.   Mr. Marx noted that the State says a county shall maintain its highways, which sounds like a mandate.  Ms. Cole said a county doesn't have to have a Health Department, but if it does have one there are certain things it must do.  Mr. Booth asked if the cost performed and the building space required to process mandated payments is included and was told salaries are but not building costs.  Mr. Booth noted a community college is not required.  Ms. Kiefer suggested program committees have the same discretion in their areas of responsibility.

Budget Process

 At this time Mr. Koplinka-Loehr reported on the budget process that will take place this year.  He said he would like to have a retreat in early March for legislators to establish priorities and set parameters for the budget process.

 He announced he is creating Community Advisory Panel and distributed a copy of the draft charge to all members.  The Committee consists of community leaders who are knowledgeable in effective fiscal management practices, with members representing business, government, and the non-profit sectors.  The charge to the Committee is to:
 
1.   Become familiar with the existing budget practices, policies, revenues, and expenses of     Tompkins County.
2. Consider public-sector fiscal-management best practices and policies that are particularly  appropriate during extended periods of extreme financial constraints, and  to
3. Discuss and suggest various budget management tools, processes, policies, practices, and options that may be appropriate and effective for the county to utilize, given the fiscal environment that can reasonably be expected in the next two to three years.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said the Panel will report directly to this Committee before reporting to the full Legislature.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr distributed responses to  the 2004 budget survey by department heads as prepared by County Administration.

Personnel

 Ms. Fitzpatrick distributed the following information to the Committee:

 Department overview
 Department organization chart
 Issues facing the Personnel Department in 2004
 Personnel Changes Summary

Committee Goals

 A list of goals were presented to the Committee along with the agenda. Time did not permit for a lengthy discussion of this item.

Committee Meeting Schedule

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said he has received a request to change the time of the meetings to 10 a.m.    All members were agreeable to the change; however, it was not made at this time.

Adjournment

 The meeting adjourned at 1:40 p.m.