Called to Order

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr called the meeting to order at 11:30 a.m.

Changes to the Agenda

 Mr. Squires distributed a Department of Social Services budget overview dated December 31, 2003.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr distributed a list of draft goals for this Committee for 2004 and asked members to review the list.

Approval of Minutes of January 27, 2004

 It was MOVED Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, seconded by Mr. Penniman, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve the minutes of January 27, 2004 with the changes submitted.  MINUTES APPROVED.

Chair's Report

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr provided the Committee with a brief synopsis of the Community Advisory Panel that he recently established and appointed membership to.  He said the Panel has ten members, of which seven were able to attend the first meeting held February 6, 2004.   The following were suggested team work processes/attitudes: have a longer, retreat-style work session; split into subgroups to examine specific areas; set up way for group members to communicate electronically between scheduled meetings; when warranted, have one-to-one meetings between panel members and appropriate staff; aim for getting the most from "best practices", including learning from others' errors; be creative; and have optimistic attitude about finding solutions and be open to whatever works.

 Information requested by the Panel included actual, rather than adopted, spending to track trends on how resources are being used; synopsis of public education/outreach efforts; more detailed definition of "mandate"; explanation of OTR process; sample document; sales tax revenue projection through 2006 (document will be sent with agenda); and information from staff and/or Legislators on what they would change about the budget, if they could.

 Ideas/statements/discussion items:  Has County done a rigorous review of its procurement practices? How can "lean manufacturing" principles be applied to County government?  Need public education on drivers of budget, use of funds. Public needs to see Legislators as good stewards of funds. Can departmental/agency "silos" be leveled out?  County has to examine programs and eliminate the least successful, use projections and models as budget planning tools.  Public is skeptical that base budgets are examined; there is rising tension in the community over higher taxes and fewer services.

 Mrs. McBean-Clairborne expressed concern about the areas the Panel is seeking more information.   Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said they are asking for this data in order to gain a basis for understanding the budget process.

Finance Director's Report

 Mr. Squires said in approximately two weeks his Office will be finished posting 2003 data.  He said he has been watching DSS closely.  He said last week he reported they were over budget by $1 million; however, their situation has improved.  The figures he received this morning shows a positive $1.2 million in the mandated accounts which will offset the amount they were over-budget.  He said the areas of the budget where the Department had trouble was in Family Assistance Program.   Mr. Penniman expressed concern with the amount of revenue that came in over-budget in the Foster Care program; Mr. Squires responded that it may be possible this was the result of a claim made in 2003 but not processed until 2004.

County Administrator's Report

 Mr. Whicher reported the Department of Administration is moving forward with changing the entire budget process from a manual to a computerized process.

 Mr. Booth commented that he received his Assessment Disclosure Notice and that he found it very confusing.  He said it is extremely important that the public understand exactly what the notice means and requested that there be efforts to make sure that happens.

 It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve the following resolution and submit to the full Board:

RESOLUTION NO.        – APPROPRIATION FROM CONTINGENT FUND – TERMINAL PAY – HEALTH DEPARTMENT
 
  Ms. Kiefer questioned why the staff person's name is not included in this resolution.  Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said he would try to obtain an answer to Ms. Kiefer's question. Ms. Kiefer asked that the Public Health Director be reminded that the names and salaries of County employees is public information and should be included in this type of resolution.
 
 WHERAS, the Health Department had an employee resign effective January 22, 2004, and
 WHEREAS, the Fiscal Policy of Tompkins County allows for terminal pay from the Contingent Fund, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Health and Human Services and Budget and Capital Committees, That the Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to make the following budget appropriation:

 FROM:  A1990.54440  Contingent Fund  $3,176
 TO:  A4016.51000580 Community Health Nurse $2,285
   A4016.58800  Fringes    $   891
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20

 It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve the following resolution and submit to the full Legislature:

RESOLUTION NO.         - APPROPRIATION FROM ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX FUND AND  APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR ARTS AND
                                             CULTURE STABILIZATION - COMMUNITY ARTS PARTNERSHIP

Mrs. McBean-Clairborne asked why these grants seem to always be awarded to large organizations.  Mr. Penniman asked what these organizations will do with these funds.  Mr. Marx said these are built on  organization-building grants that are built on internal organizational, strategic, planning, and marketing strategies. He said he will provide the Legislature with a summary of what these grants include by the Legislature meeting on February 17th.
WHEREAS, the Community Arts Partnership (CAP) recognizes that the local arts and cultural community is a valuable and unique asset, and that a need exists to harness the power of the arts to develop tourism growth, and if strategically managed, that would stabilize and develop these assets to better serve tourists through well-planned marketing efforts, and
 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 46 of 2003, authorized a contract with CAP to create a comprehensive arts marketing plan and develop and implement a plan for financial and operational stabilization of arts and cultural entities, and
WHEREAS, the arts and cultural community would better position itself in the marketplace to attract more visitors to Tompkins County, thus generating more dollars into the local economy, and
WHEREAS, funding exists within the Room Tax Occupancy budget for the Arts and Cultural Stabilization Plan program, and
WHEREAS, the Stabilization, Planning, and Development grant requests of the Arts and Cultural Stabilization Plan for $137,500 have been reviewed and recommended by the Strategic Tourism Planning Board, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Planning, Development, and Environmental Quality and the Budget and Capital Committees, That $10,000 be appropriated from the Room Occupancy Tax Fund Balance and added to the existing $127,500 budgeted in 2004 in the tourism budget for the Arts and Cultural Stabilization Grants, and CAP shall then disburse grants as follows:

Historic Ithaca (State Theatre)…..$ 30,000
Kitchen Theatre………………….$ 25,000
Dewitt Historical Society………..$ 20,000
Hangar Theatre……...….………. $ 30,000
Cayuga Chamber Orchestra……..$  20,000
     Grants Total                  $125,000
RESOLVED, further, That, of the total program amount of $137,500, $12,500 (10 percent of program expenditures) shall be paid to CAP for administrative evaluation and oversight services,
RESOLVED, further, That the County Administrator or his designee is authorized to sign any agreements with CAP pertaining to this program for $137,500 ($125,000 for grants and $12,500 for program administration),
 RESOLVED, futher, That in order to increase the 2004 room tax budget from the $125,000 budgeted for 2004 to the $137,500 needed, the Finance Director is authorized to make the following transaction:
From:  0980.0000 Room Tax Reserve Fund Balance   $10,000
To:  6475.54400 Program Expense                             $10,000
SEQR TYPE:  TYPE II-20

Personnel - Approval Process for filling Positions

 The Committee discussed the procedure for filling all vacant County positions.  Sheriff Meskill expressed concern that the policy as proposed does not contain any recourse for a department who has a request denied.  He asked that the Policy be amended to allow for a mechanism to bring the request to the full Legislature if disapproved by both committees.  He said the Legislature has rules in places that allow resolutions to be brought forward as a member-filed item in those instances, and urged the Committee to incorporate similar language in this Policy.  After the discussion, the Committee amended the Policy to include language as suggested by Mr. Meskill.  The following Policy and Procedure was agreed upon with the understanding that Mr. Whicher would communicate this information to department heads and have them express concerns to Mr. Koplinka-Loehr.  If any concern is raised by department heads that warrants discussion by the Committee, a special meeting will be scheduled.

POLICY STATEMENT

 The filling of all vacant County positions on a permanent basis must be approved by both the departments' program committee and the Budget and Capital Committee of the County Legislature.  The program committee chair may call a special meeting to expedite the procedure.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  March 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004

1.  The requesting department will submit a Position Request Form to the Clerk of the Legislature for routing to the next scheduled appropriate program committee meeting and the next scheduled Budget and Capital Committee meeting that follows program committee approval.

2.  The Clerk of the Legislature will schedule the request and notify the department head (via agenda) of the scheduled review dates.  If the department head requests a special meeting, notification will be sent of the date and time.

3.  If both committees approve, the request will be certified as approved by the Clerk and returned to the requesting department and Personnel for processing.

4.  If either committee disapproves the request, then the Clerk will forward the resolution to the full Legislature for appropriate action.  If the legislature approves, the request will be certified as approved by the Clerk and returned to the requesting department and Personnel for processing.

5.  If the request in denied by both the program committee and Budget and Capital Committees, the request may be presented to the full Legislature as a member-filed item.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said the Committee received a report from the Personnel Department at the last meeting.  Ms. Fitzpatrick asked members to submit comments prior to the next Committee meeting when she will distribute another report.

Budget Survey Responses

 At this time the Committee reviewed the responses to the budget surveys from department heads and legislators and summaries of the responses prepared by Ms. Skinner, Public Information Coordinator.
 
 Ms. Kiefer commented on the following point made by department heads:

 "Overall, I think the paperwork part of the budget works well.  However, there were instances when doing the committee reviews that staff would be referring to a page that the committee didn't have available to them.  So maybe the Legislature needs to get all/most of the forms, etc. submitted by staff".  Ms. Kiefer felt that because there are so many revisions during the process, that often legislators are not referring to the same document.  Mr. Booth said he has found that on several occasions, staff did not have the paperwork Legislators were referring to.  Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said he will be working with staff to reduce the amount of different documents Legislators refer to during the process.    The importance of streamlining and condensing information was stressed by all members of the Committee.

 Mr. Booth asked for clarification of the following point:

 "Proposed cuts to budget should be required to be detailed as OTR requests - describing anticipated impacts and identifying specific program and appropriation or revenue lines.  Department/agency comments should be a formal part of the process"

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said he believes this point comes out of frustration on the part of department heads.  Mr. Whicher said departments want to know exactly what the Legislature is looking at cutting, rather than receiving generalized comments.  Mrs. McBean-Clairborne said she has heard the opposite -- that departments want to know a figure the Legislature plans to reduce a budget by and to allow departments to plan the reduction.  Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said the message from the Legislature is that priorities needs to be better-defined.  Mr. Booth said he does not believe the public understands the OTR process very well.

Discussion of Budget Procedures

 The Committee reviewed the memorandum prepared by Jonathan Wood, County Attorney, with regard to budget procedures.  Mr. Whicher said Mr. Wood's perspective is that although Tompkins is a chartered county, there are some laws that are permissive and some that are not.   He said the points noted in the correspondence from Mr. Wood are based on the items not being part of a permissive law, but what the County is absolutely required to do.   Mr. Booth asked for clarification in the following point in Mr. Wood's memorandum:  "After the hearing the County Legislature can again make changes as it deems appropriate.  It must adopt the final budget before December 20th or the tentative budget with the changes becomes the adopted budget".   It was clarified that the tentative budget is the proposed budget with changes made by the Legislature that went to public hearing.  And, if the Legislature does not act, that tentative budget becomes the actual budget.

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said Mr. Wood has brought to the Committee's attention in his memo that the process is out of compliance with State Law because the tentative budget by departments is being filed too early.  Mr. Wood's memo stated the following:
 
 "1.  The head of County administrative (budgeting units) must submit estimates of revenues and expenses to the County Administrator on or before the first day of October.  The County is permitted to require an earlier date for submission of estimates, but, "in no event shall such estimates be required to be submitted prior to the first day of September".

 Mr. Whicher did not recommend changing the date of budget adoption, instead, to move the submission date up.  He noted his office is transitioning from a manual to an electronic process which will allow for a much quicker and smoother flow of documentation.  It was proposed and accepted by the Committee to do the following:   Instead of departments submitting budgets the beginning of July, in 2004 they will submit the beginning of August; in 2005, departments will submit mid-August; and in 2006, by September 1.  This will bring the County into compliance with State Law by 2006.

 A question was raised as to what would happen if the County did not comply.  It was not known what the consequence would be.
 
 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr said the Committee will discuss the Over Target process at a future meeting.
 
 

Mandate Classifications

 The Committee discussed Public Safety Mandated Payments (items the County has no control over) and Mandated Responsibilities (items the County has some level of discretion in how the mandated is carried out) presented by Ms. Thomas.  The list as follows was accepted as presented.

 Mandated Payments - $1,525,000 (2004)
 Defense of Indigent Attorneys
 Medical and Boarding

 Mandated Responsibilities - $6,038,987 (2004)
 Planning and Coordination (Leg. Def)
 District Attorney
 Planing and Coordination (Probation)
 Probation Intake/Investigation
 Civil
 Corrections
 Jail Transports

 All other Public Safety programs will be categorized in the "Locally Controlled Spending" list.

Sales Tax

 The Committee discussed the data relating to increasing sales tax in Tompkins County.  The data presented showed Nassau County being the only County with a rate above Tompkins County.  Ms. Thomas said she spoke to representatives of Nassau County and was informed that during 1991 and 1992 they were in fiscal crisis and were granted an additional half percent to help them with their fiscal problems.  One-half of that half percentage is split between the city and towns within that County.   The data was presented for information purposes only; no action was taken.

Mortgage Tax

 Mr. Koplinka-Loehr asked if there were any proposals to revisit the mortgage tax issue that was discussed at the last meeting.    Mr. Penniman said he is opposed to the Mortgage Tax in general.  He would like to review rates for all counties in New York State for sales tax, property tax, and mortgage tax.  Mr. Thomas said a problem when comparing tax rates is that some counties do not include the same things in their tax bills and gave capital costs and Solid Waste costs as examples.  Mr. Penniman said he would like to wait and receive more information on the State budget and how Tompkins County's 2005 budget projections look.   It was suggested that data be gathered from counties comparable to Tompkins County that are also close to Tompkins County.   Ms. Thomas will gather this information.

2004 Committee Goals

 The Committee accepted the list of goals prepared and distributed earlier in the meeting by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr.   The goals will be circulated to department heads for review and comments.

Adjournment

 The meeting adjourned at 1:35 p.m.