MINUTES
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 21, 2004 2:00 P.M.
SCOTT HEYMAN CONFERENCE ROOM
Present: M. Lane, Chair; K. Herrera; D. Winch; N. Schuler; D. Kiefer
Staff: C. Covert, Clerk of the Legislature;
J. Wood, County Attorney; J. Kippola, Administration; S. Whicher, County
Administrator; D. Squires, Finance Director; W. Skinner, Public Information;
V. Coggin, Assessment Director
Guests: T. Joseph, Chair of the Legislature; M. Robertson, Legislator;
P. Eberts, Cornell University Sociology Professor; P. Stein, Cornell University
Physics Professor;
Called to Order
Mr. Lane called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.
Changes to Agenda
There were no changes to the agenda. Ms. Kiefer
asked if there could be a report or discussion on the County's Administrator's
evaluation. Mrs. Covert noted this topic will be placed on the next
Committee agenda.
County Executive Form of Government
Presentation
Mr. Stein and Mr. Eberts provided a presentation to the
Committee concerning their analysis of whether a County Executive form of
government for Tompkins County is more efficient or democratic than a County
Administrator form of government.
Mr. Stein's analysis used data compiled for another project
from 1980, 1983, 1987, 1999, and 2000, and included for comparison purposes
the 47 counties that are not densely populated metropolitan or suburban counties.
Since county spending can be expected to be proportional to county population,
per capita spending (i.e., total expenditures divided by population) is a
more valid figure for comparison purposes than total spending. Per
capita spending by a county with an elected County Executive with spending
in a county without an elected County Executive can be misleading.
In 1994, per capita spending in counties without elected County Executives
varied from $1,557 (Lewis) to $485 (Schenectady), and from $1,102 (Broome)
to $726 (Putnam) in counties with an elected County Executive. The
difference is attributed to the different services provided by counties.
Many of the increasing expenditures are presumably related to inflation,
state and federal mandates, rise and fall of the economy, and health care
costs. Mr. Stein felt the best comparison of measurement was the rates
of rise of expenditures between counties with and without elected County
Executives.
Twelve of the 47 non-municipal non-suburban counties with
populations between 69,000 and 111,000 were analyzed. Two counties
(Putnam and Chemung) have elected County Executives and the remaining ten
(Cattaraugus, Cayuga, Clinton, Jefferson, Madison, Ontario, Steuben, Sullivan,
Tompkins, and Wayne) do not. The rise in county expenditures from 1980
to 1994 was compared averaging the figures for County Executive counties
comparing them with the average of non-county executive counties. The
results of the comparison show both Chemung County and Putnam County consistently
higher in the rise in expenditures than the average of the ten non-County
Executive counties. The analysis shows no evidence that a County Executive
system will hold down expenditures for counties with populations in the 90,000
range and in fact demonstrates that County Executives are less able to restrain
from spending than counties run by county legislatures and appointed professionals.
From 1980 to 1994, counties in the Tompkins County population range governed
with County Executives showed expenditure rises that were about 12 percent
higher than those without County Executives.
It was noted that Tompkins County had the lowest expenditure
rise from 1980 to 1994 of the 12 medium sized counties in the analysis.
During that time period, the average rate of rise of expenditures in the
nine counties not governed by County Executives was 39 percent higher than
Tompkins County, and 43 percent higher than Tompkins County in the two counties
governed by County Executives.
Mr. Eberts said the report he presented compared Tompkins
County primarily with Chemung County and Chautauqua County, both having County
Executive forms of government. The three counties are all relatively
low-commuting counties with relatively large central places and populations
in the 90,000+ range. Data received between 1980 and 2000 on county
budgets from the New York State Comptroller's Office, show that counties
with a County Executive form of government were neither more efficient in
terms of per capita expenditures on nine major county budget categories,
nor more democratic in terms of percentages of adults voting in Presidential
elections (data were not available for percentage voting in local elections).
He also noted that when there are elections for a single individual, such
as a County Executive, people tend to use more extreme statements and negative
campaigning.
It is their judgement that a County Executive form of government is more
open to demagoguery and other forms of negative campaigning and is less likely
to produce trust, respect, and cooperation among elected officials.
Based on their analysis they concluded that there is no clear reason for
Tompkins County to move toward a County Executive form of government.
Among comparable counties, the County Legislature-Administrator form of government
appears more efficient in per capita expenditures than the County Executive
form of government and to be just as democratic on percentages of adults
voting in Presidential elections.
Highlights from Broome County Trip
Mr. Lane reported on the trip some Legislators took to Broome County to meet
with the Chair of the Legislature, Minority Leader, Clerk of the Legislature,
and a former member of the Legislature. The meeting was very interesting
and informative. At this time, Mr. Lane provided some highlights from
the meeting. During the 1990's when there was controversy between the
Executive and Legislature (two different parties) a proposal was brought
forth which failed to change to a County Administrator form of government.
There was an open discussion about the lack of communication between the
Chair of the Legislature and the Executive, which was completely different
than Chemung County and Chautauqua County. Also it is difficult to
get information out of department heads and they only come to legislative
meetings with permission from the Executive.
Apprenticeship Program
At this time, Mr. Lane granted privilege of the floor to those who wished to speak.
James DeChene, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.,
(ABC), said the association represents 600 companies across New York State
called merit shop contractors. Mr. DeChene spoke in opposition to the
proposed resolutions because of the regulations of the apprenticeship requirements
being proposed. As an Association, ABC is a strong advocate of training
and practicing in the apprenticeship program. He spoke about the different
apprenticeship programs available and expressed concerns that there will
be companies in Tompkins County that will not be eligible to do the work
because of this type of regulation that puts a specification of certain kind
of apprenticeship program or training.
Jerry Stevenson, owner of McPherson Builders, said he
has done work in Tompkins County since 1972. He feels the proposed
resolutions will decrease the number of entry-level construction positions
available in Tompkins County. One reason is most of the entry level
positions are created by non-union contractors, i.e., small mom and pop operations.
On the union side, there are very few apprentice jobs open. He feels
if the resolution is approved, it is likely to eliminate his business from
consideration for any work covered under the proposal. If he were to
participate, he would have to create five or six apprenticeship programs
increasing his costs substantially. He also feels the cost to the county
would increase as it would eliminate many of the merit shop contractors from
the pool. As a taxpayer, he would prefer to have the money used for
other purposes.
Dave Braun, Pleasant Valley Electric, said he has done electrical work for
a number of people present for the meeting and feels that he can be trusted
enough and have the confidence for his company to do work for the County.
Dave Marsh, Building Trades Council, clarified that County jobs are based
on prevailing wage whether they are union employees or not. An apprentice
job is the only time you can pay less than journeyman rate. He said
the union understands there are small contracting companies and therefore
recommended a threshold in the resolution to ensure all business owners have
the opportunity to continue to work for the County. He spoke
about the importance of training the future generation of construction workers
in skilled trades.
Rebecca Meinking, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., addressed the
issue of cost. She agreed there is a prevailing wage for public works
projects whether an individual is a non-union or union member. However,
what does affect the cost is the inefficient work rules that are part of
union collective bargaining agreements. She spoke about two recent
bid projects in areas with apprenticeship programs. In both cases the
lowest bidder was the non-union contractor and questioned what the differences
in the costs were for the union contractors for those two bids. She
commented that the Association works with merit shop contractors to get their
apprenticeship programs approved. It's not a simple process especially
for the smaller companies and is also a difficult program to sustain.
Dave Richardson, IBEW Diversity Recruiter, believes it is much easier to
get diverse candidates into a union organization at the ground level than
in non-union organizations. Over the last three to four years he has
been able to get 25 women and people of color into unions in Tompkins County.
Presentation of Resolutions
Ms. Herrera spoke about the two resolutions being presented and explained
the differences. The resolution prepared by the County Attorney does
not include all subcontractors and has a threshold of 2.5 million dollars
in cost. The version she is proposing includes subcontractors, but
does not include a threshold. At this time she spoke about economic
development and the importance of having an apprenticeship program in Tompkins
County and does not believe it would necessarily cost more. She feels
the training provided through apprenticeship programs also encourages safety
with workers.
It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Ms. Schuler, to approve and submit
the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval. Discussion
followed on the differences between the two resolutions and that only facilities
and structures are impacted, not highway and bridge construction.
Ms. Herrera said she inquired as to how many major projects the County has
had in the last ten years and was told there were only a few that exceeded
$1 million. Mr. Squires reported some of the projects include the library,
Human Services Building, Airport, Public Works Department, and Solid Waste
Division.
Following further discussion, Ms. Herrera agreed to add a threshold of $1
million for total project costs to the resolution. This language was
accepted as a friendly amendment.
Mr. Joseph said he supports the resolution being proposed as he feels as
a County government, we have an interest in not only creating jobs, but creating
careers. He believes the business of subcontractors is unclear and
feels it needs to be clarified in order to accomplish the following:
(1) make it possible for a local small contractor to work as a subcontractor on big projects; and
(2) make sure the large contractors cannot avoid the rule by using a series of small contractors.
Ms. Meinking commended the Legislature for supporting
the planning and workforce development, but reminded the Committee that there
are many forms of training that can be utilized outside of the New York State
registered apprenticeship model which is a model based on union apprenticeship.
Mr. Winch said there are a number of small contractors
in the area and would like all of them to have an opportunity to bid on jobs
and feels this proposal will exclude some of them from the bidding process.
Ms. Kiefer spoke in opposition to including all subcontractors
in the resolution. She feels an apprenticeship program is valuable
but other training is also valuable.
Ms. Kiefer MOVED to substitute the resolution with the
resolution prepared by the County Attorney with a threshold of $2.5 million
in total project cost and excludes subcontractors. MOTION FAILED DUE
TO LACK OF A SECOND.
A voice vote resulted as following on the original resolution:
Ayes - 3 (Herrera, Lane, and Schuler); Noes - 2 (Kiefer and Winch).
RESOLUTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. - REQUIRING CONTRACTORS ON CERTAIN COUNTY CAPITAL PROJECTS TO HAVE APPRENTICESHIP
AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the County Government from time to time undertakes
construction contracts which involve the construction of facilities and structures,
and
WHEREAS, County government is making considerable efforts
to increase the number of jobs in the county, and is consistently advocating
for quality employment opportunities for Tompkins County residents, and
WHEREAS, maintaining a qualified and skilled labor force
is essential to a healthy and dynamic local economy, and
WHEREAS, it is desirable to establish employment principles to guide future decisions of the County, and
WHEREAS, Article 23 (Apprenticeship Training), Section
816-b of New York State Labor Law states, "in entering into any construction
contract, a government entity which is to be a direct or indirect party to
such contract may require that any contractors and subcontractors have, prior
to entering into such a contract, apprenticeship agreements appropriate for
the type and scope of work to be performed, that have been registered with,
and approved by, the commissioner pursuant to the requirements found in this
article," now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations Committee, That:
1. Any public work which requires separate specifications (the award of three
or more separate general contracts) pursuant to Section 101 of the General
Municipal Law (commonly known as the "Wicks Law"), and which exceeds $1 million
in cost, must include contractors that participate in New York State certified
apprenticeship programs.
2. All bidders and all subcontractors under the bidder must maintain or participate
in a bona fide New York State Apprentice Program approved by the Division
of Apprentice Training of the Department of Labor for each apprenticable
trade or occupation represented in their workforce and must abide by the
apprentice to journeyman ratio for each trade prescribed therein in the performance
of the contract.
3. Any bidder who fails to comply with the requirements laid out in numbers
1 and 2 above shall be subject to any or all of the following sanctions:
a. temporary suspension of work on the project until compliance is obtained; and/or;
b. withholding by the County of payment due under the contract until compliance is obtained; and/or
c. permanent removal from any further work on the project; and/or
d. recovery by the County from the bidder of 1/10 of one percent of the contract
amount or $1,000.00, whichever is greater, in the nature of liquidated damages
assessed for each week that the contractor is in non-compliance.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * *
Assessment Department
Board of Assessment Review
Ms. Coggin announced the resignation of Nancy Watts and
asked that a letter of recognition be sent to her. Mrs. Covert agreed
to prepare the letter. At this time, the list of potential replacements
was reviewed and following a brief discussion, the Committee agreed to have
a subcommittee meet and contact the candidates to ask if they are interested
in serving. Ms. Herrera and Ms. Schuler agree to serve as the subcommittee
and will report back to the Committee their findings.
Resolutions
It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Herrera, and
unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve and submit the following resolutions
to the full Legislature for approval:
RESOLUTION NO. - ADOPTION OF APPORTIONMENT OF TAXES FOR 2005
WHEREAS, the report of equalization rates and totals (footings)
of assessment rolls has been prepared and approved by the Assessment Director,
now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
Committee, That the report of the Director of Assessment be accepted and
adopted and the valuation of real property and franchise be based on the
2004 final assessed values for the purposes of general and highway tax levied
against the several tax districts of the County and that the values determined
therein be set forth as the basis for such general and highway tax levies
for the year 2005,
RESOLVED, further, That several amounts therein listed
for State tax, County tax for general County purposes for 2005 against the
several towns of the County and City of Ithaca be assessed against, levied
upon and collected from taxable property of the several towns and City liable
therefore.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * *
RESOLUTION NO. - RETURNED SCHOOL TAXES
WHEREAS Article 13 of the Real Property Tax Law authorizes
school district tax collectors to submit by November 15th a listing of unpaid
taxes to the County Treasurer for enforcement, and
WHEREAS the County guarantees the school districts payment
of the unpaid taxes by April 1 of the year following the return, now therefore
be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
Committee, That the Director of Assessment of the County be and hereby is
authorized and directed to add to the respective 2005 tax rolls the amount
of the uncollected school taxes that remain unpaid and that have not been
heretofore relevied on town tax rolls and that have been returned by the
collectors of the various districts, exclusive of the Ithaca City School
District, to the County Finance Director and that said returned school taxes
be reassessed and relevied on town tax rolls as they are returned, and that
said school taxes returned in 2004 be reassessed and relevied upon the lots
and parcels so returned with 12.0 percent annual interest in addition thereto.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * *
RESOLUTION NO. - RETURNED VILLAGE TAXES
WHEREAS Article 14 of the Real Property Tax Law authorizes
village tax collectors to return to the County Treasurer a listing of unpaid
taxes for enforcement, and
WHEREAS the Villages of Cayuga Heights, Dryden, Freeville,
Groton, Lansing, and Trumansburg are authorized to submit their unpaid taxes
to the County for enforcement, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
Committee, That the Director of Assessment of the County be and hereby is
authorized and directed to add to the respective 2004 tax rolls the amount
of the uncollected village taxes that remain unpaid and that have not been
heretofore relevied on town tax rolls and that have been returned by the
village tax collectors of the various villages to the County Finance Director,
and that said returned village taxes be reassessed and relevied on town tax
rolls as they are returned and that said returned village taxes be reassessed
and relevied upon the lots and parcels so returned with 12.0 percent annual
interest in addition thereto.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * *
Designation of Successors
It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Ms. Schuler, and
unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve and submit the following resolution
to the full Legislature for approval:
RESOLUTION NO. - APPROVAL OF DESIGNATIONS OF SUCCESSORS
WHEREAS, Section 31.07 of the County Charter specifies
that the County Administrator and specified department heads shall designate
in writing, and in order of succession, the deputies (or in the absence of
officially designated deputies, the employees of the department) who shall
possess the powers and perform the duties of the principal in the event of
the latter’s absence from the County or inability to perform or exercise
the powers of the office, and
WHEREAS, the Charter further requires those designations, except department
heads elected on a county-wide basis, to be approved by the Tompkins County
Legislature, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations Committee, That
the following designations of successors are hereby approved,
RESOLVED, further, That this list is complete and supercedes all previous designations:
Airport Manager: Assistant Airport Manager
Airport Terminal Services Coordinator
Operations Supervisor
County Administrator: Deputy County Administrator/Commissioner of Planning
County Attorney
County Attorney: Deputy County Attorney
Assistant County Attorney
Commissioner of Social Services: Director of Eligibility
Director of Services
Director of Administrative Services
Legal Unit Administrator
Director of Emergency Response: CAD Systems Coordinator
Administrative Assistant
Public Health Director:
Public Health Administrator
Director of Patient Services
Medical Examiner:
Deputy Medical Examiner, William Klepack, M.D.
Deputy Medical Examiner, David Newman, M.D.
Mental Health Commissioner: Deputy Commissioner of Mental Health
Medical Director
Director of Mental Health Clinic
Clinic Supervisor
Director of Finance:
Budget and
Finance Manager
Director of Accounting Services
Commissioner of Personnel: Deputy Commissioner of Personnel
Benefits Manager
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * *
Mr. Winch was excused at 3:58 p.m.
Next Meeting
As the Committee was unable to complete all the items
on the agenda, members agreed to have a special meeting on October 27th at
3 p.m.
Ms. Kiefer requested to review the policy Allocation of Space at the next regular meeting.
Mr. Lane referred to an email he received from David Chase
concerning the County's policy for appealing position reclassifications and
asked if there was a need to appoint an appeal's committee. Mr. Whicher
noted that this policy is in the process of being revised and will be presented
and discussed at the next Budget and Capital Committee and then submitted
to this Committee for consideration. Mr. Whicher recommended Mr. Chase
be contacted about this schedule and be asked to attend the Government Operations
Committee meeting if he wished to comment. Mr. Lane agreed to reply
to Mr. Chase's email.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m.
Tompkins
County Home Page
Tompkins
County Legislature's Page
Comments
or questions