MINUTES
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
AUGUST 17, 2005          2:30 P.M.
SCOTT HEYMAN CONFERENCE ROOM
Present:  M. Lane, Chair; G. Totman; D. Booth; D. Kiefer; K. Herrera
Staff:      C. Covert, Clerk of the Legislature; S. Whicher, County Administrator; P. Meskill, Sheriff; D. Squires, Finance Director; J. Franklin, Assessment; W. Skinner, Public Information; A. Valenti, County Clerk; J. Wood, County Attorney; V. Coggin, Assessment Director; K. Borgella, Planning Department; A. Fitzpatrick, Personnel Commissioner

Called to Order

    The meeting was called to order at 2:30 p.m.

Changes to Agenda

    The following items were added to the agenda:
        - Resolution concerning Board of Elections expenses pursuant to new Election Law
        - Resolution - Authorization for Membership - International City/County Management Association - County Administration
        - Discussion regarding Conservation Leaders Network
        - Review of Report and Recommendations from Record-Keeping Task Force

Chair's Report

    Mr. Lane reported that he received a letter from the Board of Realtors concerning the release of assessment information; however, he has misplaced it at this time and will report on it in more detail at the next meeting. 

Report from the County Administrator

    Mr. Whicher said he continues to work on the budget.

Report from the Finance Director

    Mr. Squires said he anticipates an increase in filing of bankruptcies to occur prior to October 1st, the deadline for the old bankruptcy procedures.  Currently, there are 18 bankruptcies relating to taxes being unpaid. 

    He also reported on an issue relating to the collection of taxes.  Following collection of taxes, towns return a list of unpaid taxes to the County as well as submit a tax roll listing taxes paid.  The Town of Enfield's roll was missing over 500 transactions (taxes paid).  County staff had to go through the rolls and match receipts to determine how much the County owed in unpaid taxes as that is the County's only obligation to municipalities.  He said he met with the Legislators representing that town asking for their assistance in approaching the Town Supervisor.  Mr. Lane asked Mr. Squires to draft a memorandum about this outlining the issues and facts to show what is happening.

    A brief discussion followed about whether or not to charge the Town for the work provided by the County.  Mr. Squires noted staff time included about 7 hours at a cost of approximately $200.  The Committee felt that was not enough to pursue reimbursement, but it is important this is documented. 

    Mr. Squires also reported that his office has been very busy with preparing Certificates of Residencies. 
    In response to Mr. Squires report about bankruptcy cases, Mr. Lane feels the new laws are aimed at the people that generate credit card debt and not homeowners.

Report from the Public Information Officer

    Ms. Skinner said she did not have a report.

Review of  Report and Recommendations from Record-Keeping Task Force

    Ms. Herrera referenced the draft minutes attached to the agenda with the hand-written changes and reminded the Committee of the Report and Recommendations by the Record-Keeping Task Force and the guidelines for submitting changes to minutes in a timely fashion and printed in a legible form.  She stated for the record that the busy work season is coming up and that Legislators should be cognizant of the recommendations and guidelines the group made to the entire Legislature. 

    Ms. Kiefer said it was not her intention to have her hand written changes sent out with the committee agenda.  She had been told that the process for the special meeting of three committees was going to allow for other Legislators to submit changes and have all changes for the joint meeting minutes prepared in a legible format. 

    Mr. Lane commented that he has heard too from many other sources, including the Chair of the Legislature, asking that the policy be adhered to. 

    A brief discussion followed, and Ms. Herrera asked that the report be distributed with the next agenda packet for discussion. 

Approval of Minutes

    June 21, 2005
    It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Mr. Lane, to approve the minutes of the June 21, 2005, meeting as originally submitted.  Ms. Kiefer expressed concern and feels procedures for approving joint committee minutes needs to be addressed.  A voice vote resulted as follows:  Ayes - 4; Noes - 1 (Kiefer).  MINUTES APPROVED.

    July 20, 2005
    It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mr. Totman, to approve the minutes of the July 20, 2005 meeting.  Following a brief discussion concerning policy and procedures, a voice vote resulted as follows:  Ayes - 5, Noes - 0.  MINUTES APPROVED AS CORRECTED.

County Clerk

    Resolution
    It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Ms. Herrera, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve and submit the following resolution to the Budget and Capital Committee for approval.  Ms. Valenti said this position will be responsible for back filing such as indexing of map images.  This year the Department received a grant of $48,800 for records storage. 

RESOLUTION NO.     - INCREASE IN HOURS  - PRINCIPAL RECORDING CLERK POSITION - COUNTY CLERK

     WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Clerk wishes to increase the Principal Recording Clerk from 35.0 hours per week to 40.0 hours per week to accommodate the pressure of business, and
    WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Clerk wishes to maintain a level of service only possible by having this position designated as a forty-hour work-week, and
    WHEREAS, such change would be beneficial to the organization and would result in increased efficiency, now therefore be it
    RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations and Budget and Capital Committees, That the standard work week for one position of Principal Recording Clerk (685), Labor Grade J-10, be increased from 35.0 hours per week to 40.0 hours per week, effective June 10, 2005,
    RESOLVED, further, That no additional funding is required.
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * *

Report from the County Attorney

    Mr. Wood updated the Committee on the agreement with the Benderson Development firm regarding the temporary license for six months.  The agreement was renewed once and is now in the second month of that agreement.  He asked that the Committee consider this topic at a future Committee meeting.  Mr. Lane requested Mr. Wood prepare a resolution for a permanent license for the Committee to consider at the next month's meeting.

Assessment Department

    Resolution - Equalization Rates
    It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Mr. Booth, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve and submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval:

RESOLUTION NO.           -  ESTABLISHING COUNTY EQUALIZATION RATES

    WHEREAS, pursuant to Article III, Section 4.05, Subdivision (d) of the Tompkins County Charter and Code, the Director of Assessment has submitted and recommended the adoption of equalization rates for all towns in Tompkins County and the City of Ithaca for the assessment rolls filed in 2005, and for the apportionment of County taxes levied in 2006, now therefore be it
    RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations Committee, That the following equalization rates be and hereby are adopted:

                                                                           AGGREGATE ASSESSED                                                                           AGGREGATE FULL
                                                                        VALUATION OF TAXABLE                  COUNTY                              VALUATION OF TAXABLE                                                                                      REAL PROPERTY FOR                 EQUALIZATION                     REAL PROPERTY FOR TOWN                                                                                       COUNTY PURPOSES                           RATE                                        COUNTY PURPOSES
Town of Caroline                                                          138,019,159                                      100                                                   138,019,159    
Town of Danby                                                             178,799,192                                      100                                                   178,799,192    
Town of Dryden                                                            664,655,993                                      100                                                   664,655,993   
Town of Enfield                                                             129,756,726                                      100                                                   129,756,726   
Town of Groton                                                             196,374,756                                      100                                                   196,374,756   
Town of Ithaca                                                           1,021,826,414                                      100                                                 1,021,826,414   
Town of Lansing                                                        1,035,766,102                                      100                                                 1,035,766,102   
Town of Newfield                                                          187,954,495                                      100                                                    187,954,495   
Town of Ulysses                                                            329,662,392                                     100                                                    329,662,392   
City of Ithaca                                                               1,141,258,683                                      100                                                 1,141,258,683   
   TOTALS                                                                  $5,024,073,912                                                                                           $5,024,073,912   
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * *
    Veterans Exemption
    It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mr. Totman, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to set the Basic War Veterans Exemption limit at $15,000 as originally proposed and submit to the full Legislature for approval. 

    Tax Bill Printing
    Mr. Franklin said the Department is interested in contracting out the actual printing of tax bills for the Towns and County tax bills.   The Department has been considering this idea for a couple of years and feels now is the time to pursue contracting it out.  Ms. Coggin feels this service will be more efficient, cost-effective, and save staff time.  Mr. Franklin said there are 54,000 tax bills printed in December and it is the only large printing task the Department is responsible for.  Request for proposals were sent out and it appears the Department can subcontract out the printing of the tax bills for the same cost currently charged to the Towns.  Two responses were received: one company had a 12-14 day turn around which is not acceptable, the other company has a turn around time of 3-4 days and has experience in printing tax bills. 

    The Committee had no objection with the proposal and Mr. Franklin said he will come back to the Committee with more information and a tax bill in a reformatted version for review and approval.

Board of Elections

    Resolution
    Mr. Lane said he drafted a resolution for the Committee to consider with regard to election expenses.  He asked if villages needed to be included in the resolution; Mr. Dewitt said the villages were not included in the law. 

    Discussion followed and Ms. Herrera feels it is appropriate to hold the towns and City harmless for their original costs, but does not believe the County should commit itself to absorb all the costs.  Mr. Lane spoke about the current method of payment and said the towns decide that amount because they set the rates of pay for their election workers.  Beginning in 2006, the County will set the County-wide rate of pay and the decision needs to be made about the method of payment.  Mr. Lane's recommendation as outlined in the resolution holds the towns and city harmless and beginning in 2007, the amount charged back will be reduced by 20 percent per year until the County has assumed all costs for administering elections.  It is his intention to cap their costs.  Mr. Totman feels the County should be responsible for all election costs.  The Committee felt following discussion that it would be appropriate to base the amount to be charged back on the 2004 figure the last full year containing Presidential primary elections.   

    Following further discussion and clarifying language being offered, Mr. Lane agreed to revise the resolution and bring it back to the next Committee meeting for consideration.  

Next Meeting

    The Committee agreed to meet August 24th at 1:00 p.m.

Planning Department

    Resolution
    Following a brief review by Ms. Borgella, it was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Ms. Herrera, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve and submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval.  Ms. Borgella noted that the Planning, Development and Environmental Quality Committee directed Ms. Herrera, Chair of the Committee, to write a letter to both Supervisors in the Town of Danby and Town of Ithaca giving them a second opportunity to provide any input about concerns they may have. 

RESOLUTION NO.    AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE A DEED WITH THE NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR THE SALE OF TAX PARCEL NO. 31.-2-14, LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF ITHACA, AND TAX PARCEL NOS. 1.-1-12.21 and 1.-1-12.25, LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF DANBY

    WHEREAS, the County acquired the 7.64 acre tax parcel no. 31.-2-14 (Parcel A) in the Town of Ithaca in 1942 and used the parcel to store materials for the Highway Division, and
   WHEREAS, Parcel A was identified in the 1998 County Land Inventory and each subsequent update to the Inventory as surplus land that should be sold only under conditions that would protect the site’s important natural features, and
   WHEREAS, Parcel A contains many significant features, including the 100-year floodplain for Cayuga Inlet, NYS Freshwater Wetlands, National Wetlands Inventory Wetlands, Unique Natural Area “Fleming Meadow,” County Comprehensive Plan’s Natural Features Focus Area “The Gorges,” Black Diamond Trail Corridor – Priority project in NYS Open Space Conservation Plan, and possible location of Native American artifacts associated with Coreorgonel settlement, and
    WHEREAS, the County approached the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (State Parks) about the State acquiring Parcel A to preserve its unique functions and values as an addition to Buttermilk Falls State Park, and
    WHEREAS, State Parks has made a purchase offer for Parcel A of $19,000.00, and
    WHEREAS, the County acquired the 1.33 acre tax parcel no. 1.-1-12.21 (Parcel B) and the adjacent 3.01 acre tax parcel no. 1.-1-12.25 (Parcel C) in the Town of Danby in 2003 through the foreclosure process, and
    WHEREAS, Parcels B and C were identified in the 2004 Inventory of Tompkins County-Owned Land as surplus lands that should be sold under conditions that would strive to preserve trail connection potential and natural features, and
    WHEREAS, Parcels B and C contain many significant features, including Unique Natural Area “Lick Brook and Inlet Valley Slopes,” and a segment of the Finger Lakes Trail that could provide a permanent connection between Buttermilk Falls State Park trails and the Finger Lakes Trail, and
    WHEREAS, the County approached the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (State Parks) about the State acquiring Parcels B and C to preserve unique functions and values as an addition to Buttermilk Falls State Park, and
    WHEREAS, State Parks has made a purchase offer for Parcel B and C of $9,100.00, and
    WHEREAS, County Administrative Policy No. 01-07 (Land Transactions) requires that whenever the Legislature decides to negotiate a sale for less than the fair market value for real property, the resolution conveying the property shall clearly state the public purpose served by conveying for this price and it shall include the estimate of the fair market value of the property at its highest and best use as prepared by the Assessment Department, and
    WHEREAS, the Assessment Department has determined that the fair market value of Parcel A is $22,000, Parcel B is $2,400, and Parcel C is $9,600 (Parcel B and C combined total of $12,000), and
    WHEREAS, the reason that this property is being conveyed for less than fair market value is to enhance Buttermilk Falls State Park, one of the County’s premier tourist attractions, increase recreational opportunities for residents of the County, and protect significant unique natural areas in the County, now therefore be it
    RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Planning, Development and Environmental Quality Committee, and the Governmental Operations Committee that the purchase offer submitted by State Parks on June 8, 2005 is confirmed and that the County Administrator is authorized to execute the deed and closing paperwork. 
SEQR ACTION:  UNLISTED
_______________

    Morell Road Property - Discussion
    Ms. Borgella updated the Committee on the status of the Morell Road property located in the Town of Newfield that the County foreclosed on this year.  She said that the former owner of the property was identified as still occupying the property.  The property lies in a unique natural area and for that reason the Committee chose not to auction the property.  The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) was contacted and was very interested in acquiring the land and making a purchase offer.  The funding source for purchasing this property requires the local municipality being offered the opportunity to oppose the project.  A letter was sent by DEC to the Town of Newfield before the County had any opportunity to provide information and the Town chose to oppose the project.  In the letter it stated that if the land were made as an addition to the State forestland it would be removed from the Town's tax roll.  Ms. Borgella explained to the Town that the property would indeed be taken off the County's roll but the State forestland continues to pay Town and school taxes.  The DEC was going to follow-up with another letter explaining their policy, but Ms. Borgella does not expect the Town to change their opinion. 

    Ms. Borgella asked for direction from the County and outlined the following options:
- Sell the property in the 2006 auction;
- Retain the land for the purposes of conserving and managing that forest resource value;
- Explore putting a conservation easement on the property; or
- Gift it to the State.

She said she would be willing to explore options if the Committee were interested in the forest resource value, but did not want to take the time if there was no interest.  The Planning Department feels that the conservation of this land in some form fits nicely with the Comprehensive Plan. 

    Mr. Squires noted the County continues to pay the Town of Newfield its taxes for this property, which is approximately $178 per year. 

    Following discussion, the Committee requested Ms. Borgella to look at other options other than auctioning.  In regard to the former owner living on the premises, there was agreement that adult protective services should visit the land and speak with the individual.

    Eminent Domain - Supreme Court Decision
    Ms. Kiefer said she asked this Committee to discuss this issue as it was raised at a Legislature meeting recently by Legislator Proto.  The question she raised is whether the County could pass a law within its boundaries.  Mr. Lane recalls the County Attorney saying the County has the authority to pass a policy that it would never use eminent domain to take private property.  He provided an example in the Town of Dryden and feels eminent domain is a negotiating tool for many municipalities.  He also feels that if such a policy were adopted urban renewal would never happen if a municipality did not have the right for enforce eminent domain. 

    Ms. Kiefer commented that some of the concerns raised were municipalities straying from blighted land and going for primary property.  Ms. Herrera agreed with the comment made that eminent domain is needed as a negotiating tool. 

Communications Policy

    Mr. Potter updated the Committee on the status of the proposed Communications policy since the last Committee meeting and explained the projects the Department has been working on.  This policy has been discussed and reviewed by Department Heads.  There have also been additional conversations and comments and he is now asking the Committee to begin its discussion and review of the proposed policy. 

    Mr. Meskill said he opposes the changes and direction of the policy.  He feels it isolates and highlights certain groups of employees.  As a law enforcement agency, he does not want additional interference or access to the Department's electronics, files, or communications systems.  He said this raises safety concerns with his employees and requested there be exceptions. 

    Mr. Lane spoke about the need for the policy for liability and storage issues with the County's communications systems. 

    Ms. Herrera feels that in the area of public safety there may need to be some compromise with the policy. 

    Mr. Potter explained that when the issue of monitoring Internet activity was first raised with Department Heads, he proposed that one option was to install a program on Department Heads computers that allowed them to be responsible for the monitoring.  However, Department Heads preferred the monitoring be centralized.  Ms. Fitzpatrick clarified and Mr. Potter agreed that the option for Department Heads to monitor Internet activity for their own employees is still available.  However, Mr. Potter said he would continue to monitor for technical reasons. 

    Discussion continued and questions were raised concerning the monitoring of files and the statement that authorizes ITS to establish and enforce additional standards and guidelines. At this time, Mr. Potter explained the difference between monitoring Internet activities and examining the content of files.

    Ms. Fitzpatrick said a communications policy currently exists and a mechanism is in place with the capability of monitoring employees.  The importance of revising the policy is it is a visual component for employees.  There have been numerous occasions where employees used communications systems for such things as gambling or buying items on ebay.  The existing policy states that the County may monitor the activity of an employee and will notify the employee upon completion of the review or investigation.  In the proposed policy it informs employees that their activities are being monitored continuously.  This is also an important element for the Personnel Commissioner in performance-related and disciplined-related issues. 
 
Following further discussion, Mr. Booth said he feels this policy in general is going in the right direction.  However, based on the questions and concerns raised, he suggested the monitoring piece be handled separately. 

Ms. Kiefer spoke about standard format for Administrative Policies and, for the policy statement, recommended the following language:  "The County's telecommunications  and computing systems represent a major infrastructure for conducting county business and are intended to be used for County purposes.  Procedures for usage of the system, ways to check on usage, protect county from liability, and bandwidth must be established."

Ms. Kiefer also spoke about the deletion of the following paragraph in the proposed policy and would like to recommend it remain in the policy: "Employees may use County communications systems to communicate informally with others so long as the communication is not for illegal, disruptive, unethical, or unprofessional activities, personal financial gain, or any purpose that would jeopardize the interests of the County.  It is the responsibility of Department Heads and/or Supervisor to provide additional minimum standards for the use of communication systems for informal and personal uses."  Mr. Lane said he strongly disagrees with Ms. Kiefer's recommendation above.  He does not feel the public would approve that their taxpayer money is being used for the benefit of an employee for their private purposes.  However, he understands that occasionally there will be times when an employee needs to make a doctor's appointment or send a brief email. 

Mr. Potter said that is difficult to define and equitably enforce that across the various departments.  Ms. Fitzpatrick supported removing the paragraph and said that exceptions can be viewed differently by individuals about what is inappropriate or appropriate usage of county equipment.  She also commented that the union also wants buy-in on the policy as well. 

Ms. Herrera noted that she will do some research and look at articles in human resource journals to see how they are handling this issue.  Mr. Totman and Mr. Booth agreed that having examples would be helpful. 

County Administration

    Resolution
    It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Mr. Totman, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve and submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval:

RESOLUTION NO.    - AUTHORIZATION FOR MEMBERSHIP – INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION – COUNTY  ADMINISTRATION

              WHEREAS, Tompkins County Administration is seeking membership in the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) at a cost of $823 per year, and
               WHEREAS, membership in ICMA will serve as a valuable resource for the County Administrator by providing technical and management assistance, training, and information resources, and
               WHEREAS, membership will provide helpful information exchanges and creative solutions for chief appointed managers, administrators, and assistants in cities, towns, counties, and regional entities throughout the world, now therefore be it
               RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Governmental Operations Committee, That Tompkins County Administration is authorized to join ICMA,
               RESOLVED, further, That no additional funding is required.
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * * *

Adjournment

    The meeting adjourned at 4:55 p.m.


Tompkins County Home Page
 Tompkins County Legislature's Page
Comments or questions