HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE DECEMBER 8, 2003 - 1:00 P.M. SCOTT HEYMAN CONFERENCE ROOM
Present: M. Robertson, Chair; N. Schuler; F. Proto; M. Koplinka-Loehr; P. Penniman (arrived at 1:06 p.m.)
Staff: S. Whicher, County Administrator; P.
Carey, Social Services Commissioner; B. Crosby, Public Health Administrator;
W. Skinner, Public Information; B. Falcao, Health Planning Council; A. Cole,
Public Health Director; A. Balander, Health Department; T. Herden, Social
Services
Guests: R. Pendall, Cornell Professor; Cornell Students from
City and Regional Planning; E. Marx, Planning Commissioner; C. Nocera, Red
Cross; T. Joseph, Legislature Chair; L. Dillon, Tompkins Community Action;
H. Filiberto, Planning Department; T. Mank, Planning Department; B. DeLuca,
Mental Health; Press
Called to Order
The meeting was called to order at 1:02 p.m.
Presentation - Housing Needs, Obstacles and Recommendations
Ms. Robertson said Rolf Pendall, Associate Professor of
City and Regional Planning at Cornell University, and his class will be giving
a presentation on the second part of their project concerning Housing Needs,
Obstacles and Recommendations.
Ms. Robertson reported she and Legislators Schuler and
McBean attended a Homeless and Housing Task Force meeting last week.
She said she learned at the meeting that nationally in 1976 there were 400,000
new Section 8 vouchers made available to people who needed them and in 2003,
only 34,000 new vouchers were made available. Tompkins Communication
Action reported that of their 802 voucher holders, all had apartments as
of last week; however, 691 people are on the waiting list. In addition,
she reported the Red Cross has opened a new residence on West Seneca Street
that is being made available on an emergency basis for a family looking for
suitable housing. The residence is available for a family for up to
six months and currently is occupying a family with three children.
Staff is available as with a shelter.
Mr. Penniman arrived at this time.
Mr. Pendall introduced Kevin Anderson and Caroline Hagerty
who presented Phase 2 of the housing report. Mr. Anderson began with
providing some background information concerning Phase 1 of the study identified
critical gaps in the housing market:
- Low rental vacancy, high overpayment
- Home values have increased dramatically in the past 10 years
- Growing gap between supply and demand for subsidized housing
Recent media coverage confirms that affordability is a countywide
issue and that there is some resistance to affordable housing development
in some of the outlying communities.
In Phase 2, the class looked at the constraints and obstacles
to affordable housing. Problems include misperceptions people have
about affordable housing, its impact on the community, and the people that
live in it; and some of the regulations and policies at the municipal level.
Mr. Anderson spoke briefly about the County's comprehensive plan and the
Vital Communities Initiative and said one of the principles is promoting
quality affordable housing among the housing options for area residents.
Another principle identified is nodal development, in other words, building
new homes where there is existing infrastructure.
The initiatives to promote affordable housing and nodal
development together were explored by the students. Mr. Anderson provided
the following constraints analysis reviewed by the students:
- Four prototype affordable housing options
- Manufactured Housing Subdivision
- Small-lot Single Family (1/4 acre or less)
- Affordable Rental Complex (20 units, 5 buildings)
- Senior Assisted Living Facility
- What are the constraints?
- Regulatory, Infrastructure, Physical, Parcel Availability
The students examined current land use and zoning in all the
nodes identified in the Vital Communities Initiative, and analyzed whether
the four prototype housing options could be built. If not, the constraints
were identified as outlined above. They illustrated the process using the
Village of Groton as an example. However, all nodes were studied by
the students.
Mr. Anderson provided the general findings for each of the
prototype affordable housing options and reviewed the constraints identified
as follows:
Manufactured Housing
Highly affordable
Constraints to Development
Modular homes treated like "stick built"
No room allotted for mobile home park expansion
Resistance on the decline, with the exception of mobile home parks
Small Lot Single Family
"Starter" homes needed (lots of ¼ acre or less)
Constraints to Development
Prohibited in 4 nodes, difficult or restricted to multifamily and commercial zones in 2 nodes
Most zones are at or near build-out
Infrastructure required, generally not a problem
Rental Complex
Large need for rental units
Constraints to Development
Permitted or conditional uses in all nodes somewhere, but the capacity is at or near build-out already
Reliance on special use permits, planned development, and rezonings
Not enough permitted by right, which adds a burden on developers of getting approvals
Permitted but vulnerable - Site Plan Review
Senior Assisted Living Facility
Strong growth forecasted in senior population in next 20 years
Constraints to Development
Similar regulatory constraints as with apartments
In many cases restricted to same zones as multifamily - creates competition
Large parcels required, sometimes with excessive parking requirements
Discussion followed to clarify the study methods and conclusions.
Mr. Marx pointed out that the Groton example is not unusual, in that all
types of housing are allowed somewhere within the village, but the details
of the zoning ordinance make it difficult to construct affordable homes.
For example, multi-family complexes are allowed, but only on land that is
either very difficult and expensive to build on, or is currently occupied
by single-family homes. As presented by the students, there are opportunities
for new housing to be built, e.g., there is presently some open space within
the village, but the zoning would have to be changed.
Ms. Hagerty continued the presentation and spoke about some
of the misperceptions identified in the study. She reviewed the myths
and facts for the following attitudinal barriers:
"Wrong People"
Myth: Affordable housing will bring the "wrong people" into my neighborhood.
Fact:
People living in affordable housing already live and work in the neighborhood:
- Eddie Bauer salesperson: $14,040
- Administrative assistant: $26,104
Mentally and physically disabled
20 percent growth in senior headed households
Crime
Myth: Affordable housing will bring crime to my neighborhood.
Fact:
People often generalize stories about the big city housing projects to small town housing developments
Practically no crime at Linderman Creek
Ms. Hagerty commented that affordable housing is going to relieve
economic stress on people which will in turn reduce crime. The goal
of the community initiative is to integrate all residents of a community
and affordable housing is the vehicle to help do this.
Property Values
Myth: Affordable and manufactured housing reduce property values.
Fact:
No link between property value loss and affordable housing
Properties around Linderman Creek show no decrease in value
Property Values are linked to…
Condition of property for sale
Broad trends in neighborhood prosperity
Urban and suburban expansion
Road/highway construction
Nearby large-scale commercial and industrial developments
…not the presence of affordable housing
In discussion of this point, quality of the schools was identified
as a very important determinant of property values as well. On the point
of whether affordable housing causes neighborhoods to decline, it was stated
that often affordable housing is placed in areas that are already starting
to decline. Therefore in fact affordable housing is the result of dropping
property values, not the cause.
Design
Myth: Affordable housing will be unattractive and clash with neighborhood character.
Fact:
Does not have to be a "cookie cutter" design
Can match the neighborhood, especially with community involvement
Design can reduce crime and increase feelings of safety
Myth: High density is unattractive.
Fact:
Wide array of designs and floor plans that complement the character of various neighborhoods
Urban high density developments are not the standard for all affordable housing
Design is the determinant of community acceptance
Two examples of attractive affordable projects were shown: a development
in California had 19 units per acre, plus a community child care center,
and a Massachusetts neighborhood had five units in each two-story building.
Mr. Anderson concluded the presentation by sharing the following recommendations from the students based on their research:
Recommendations - County
Establish vision, facilitate consensus
Convene roundtable session with municipalities, establish a new committee to deal exclusively with affordable housing
Broker intermuncipal agreements
Educator
"Busting the myths"
Technical Assistance Provider
Establish a "point person"
Be an advocate during project review
Provide expertise on regulation revision, share model ordinances and best practices
Recommendations - Local
Municipalities
Collaborate with County-wide effort
Share technical expertise and experience
Revise land use regulations
Include affordable housing in comprehensive plans (e.g., decrease minimum lot sizes)
Explore ways to make existing housing more affordable (e.g., allow rental units to be added to homes)
Recommendations - Community
Community Advocates
Participate in regional visioning
Continue to pressure local government
Mobilize and network with allies
Gather and share personal testimonies
In conclusion the students noted that a full copy of the report
will be available on the City and Regional Planning website (www.dcrp.cornell.edu)
or by contacting Professor Pendall at rjp17@cornell.edu.
Ms. Robertson announced Professor Pendall will be giving a
brief presentation at the Legislature's meeting on December 16th summarizing
the students’ work on affordable housing. Ms. Schuler suggested municipal
officials be invited to the meeting to hear the presentation.
Ms. Robertson also commented that the Town of Ithaca and Town
of Dryden are currently in the process of revising their zoning regulations
and comprehensive plan, respectively.
Mr. Penniman thanked Ms. Robertson for bringing forth the issues
of affordable housing. He feels it has become a human services issue,
economic development issue, and visibility issue and that more communication
is needed with municipalities because of the barriers. There also need
to be more incentive and motivation for affordable housing.
Mr. Joseph asked why the market does not provide affordable
housing since there seems to be such a shortage. The presentation appeared
to indicate it is partly because of zoning regulations. He feels that
if building the necessary facilities is not profitable, revising or removing
regulations will not help. Some of the students felt in their discussions
with developers that there is interest, but that the regulations in place
are preventing development. Mr. Marx added that developers usually
need some kind of subsidy in order for affordable housing to be worth building.
If the project is denied by the municipality, the subsidy usually disappears.
Ms. Filiberto spoke briefly about the County's Comprehensive
Plan and the topic of affordable housing. Some of the items identified in
the Plan were mentioned during the last presentation by the students such
as the vacancy rates, and lack of rental and homeownership opportunities.
Preliminary recommendations have been prepared and will be presented to the
Planning Advisory Board at their next meeting. One of the items that
will be looked at is the number of units needed in the longer term.
Mr. Whicher spoke about one of the myths concerning crime at
Linderman Creek and asked that the Sheriff's Department be contacted for
the number of calls made to that area, as he feels that would be a more accurate
source than The Ithaca Journal (which the students used for their report).
Mr. Marx further commented on the County's Comprehensive Plan.
He said that when addressing municipalities the greater community benefits
of affordable housing should be emphasized, relating it to other issues such
as commuter traffic because lower-income workers can’t afford to live in
Tompkins County, the costs of infrastructure, etc. He said there are
many benefits of integrating mixed levels of housing.
Mr. Joseph said some of the issues such as crime and lower
property values that have accompanied low-income housing are not myths, but
these conditions don’t have to accompany low-income housing. The approach
should be an acknowledgement that these can be real problems and there are
plans and procedures to address them.
At this time, Ms. Robertson asked Legislators to provide information
or questions they wish to have addressed or highlighted in Mr. Pendall’s
presentation on December 16th.
Mr. Penniman commented on the large number of people who cannot
afford any of the housing options and said he would be interested in knowing,
based on the solutions mentioned, how many people would be accommodated.
Currently there are approximately 14,000 people commuting into the county
to work and within the last ten years twice as many jobs have been created
than the population has increased.
Mr. Proto recommended Chair Joseph's suggestion about identifying this as a need and not a fear.
Ms. Schuler said she would also like to know at some point from the industries how many people commute in.
Chair's Report
Ms. Robertson said she did not have a report.
Approval of Minutes
It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Mr. Penniman,
and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve the minutes of the November
20th meeting as submitted.
Mr. Proto was excused at this time.
Health Department
Resolutions
It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Mr. Penniman,
and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to approve and
submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval:
RESOLUTION NO. – PERMANENT REGULATION OF MUNICIPAL CHILDREN’S CAMPS – HEALTH DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, it is the declared policy of the State of New
York to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the children attending
what are commonly called summer day and traveling summer day camps, and
WHEREAS, children attending municipally run camps should be
protected from potential health and safety hazards in the same way as children
attending camps operated by other entities, and
WHEREAS, municipally operated summer day and traveling summer
day camps have been continuously regulated by the Department of Health since
1984, and
WHEREAS, the Governor’s State Camp Safety Advisory Council
recommends that municipally operated summer day and traveling summer day
camps continue to be regulated by the Department of Health and that the authority
to do so be made permanent, and
WHEREAS, legislation currently authorizing the Department of
Health to regulate municipally operated summer day and traveling summer day
camps is set to expire on December 31, 2004, and
WHEREAS, there is no reason to exempt municipally operated
children’s day or traveling summer day camps from Department of Health regulation,
now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Tompkins County Board
of Health and the Health and Human Services Committee, That the Tompkins
County Legislature calls on the New York State Legislature to enact legislation
that permanently authorizes the Department of Health to regulate municipally
operated children’s day and traveling summer day camps.
RESOLVED, further, That the Legislature shall forward
copies of this Resolution to the New York State Association of Counties,
Governor George E. Pataki, the New York State Legislature and all others
deemed necessary and proper.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * *
EXPLANATION:
Since 1984 the State of New York has regulated municipally operated children’s
camps in the same manner as private and non-profit children’s camps, but
with rules that “sunset”. Of the 29 children's camps, 11 are municipally
operated. This will eliminate the confusion about the status of rules
and ensure continuity and timely notifications to municipalities that operate
children’s camps. In Tompkins County, the Tompkins County Health Department
enforces the rules. This resolution advocates the rules become permanent.
It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Ms. Schuler,
and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to approve and
submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval.
Ms. Cole noted that this is the second year for the grant and feels it will
be ongoing funding.
RESOLUTION NO.
– AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TO
BIOTERRORISM
FUNDING, CREATION OF POSITION – HEALTH DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH)
has received funding from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to assist
county health departments in developing a Public Health Preparedness and
Response Plan and to implement a variety of deliverables, as specified by
the CDC and New York State, for the period September 1, 2003 through August
30, 2004, and
WHEREAS, this grant funding may assist the Tompkins County
Health Department in determining infrastructure capacities for areas of strengths
and weaknesses, and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Health Department is eligible
for $111,501 plus $36,170 designated as one time funds for smallpox related
activities, and
WHEREAS, to accomplish the goals of this grant the Department
requests the creation of one full-time position of Bioterrorism Preparedness
Coordinator to provide assistance in the development and updating of the
Public Health Emergency Preparedness Plan, the development of related jurisdictional
programs, and other grant deliverables as outlined by the State and CDC,
and
WHEREAS, the funds may not be used to supplant existing public health funding, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Health and Human Services
Committee, That the Health Department is authorized to accept the grant funds,
RESOLVED, further, That one position of Bioterrorism Preparedness
Coordinator (13/780), labor grade M (13), competitive class, 35 hours per
week, be created effective January 1, 2004,
RESOLVED, further, That said position would only continue so long as grant funding is available.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
* * * * * * * * * *
Explanation: Grant funding includes 1.0 FTE Bioterrorism Coordinator
and 0.5 FTE Administrative Assistant. The Administrative Assistant
was in year one of the grant. The remaining $86,428 will be spent on
equipment, training, contract with Onondaga County Health Department for
epidemiology services, and enhancement of our vaccine storage room.
2004 Budget Summary
Ms. Cole distributed copies of the 2004 impacts of the
final budget for the Health Department and briefly provided an overview.
The department will experience one lay off, reduction in time for three employees,
and a demotion of one employee. The Community Health Services Division
was the hardest hit and will discuss options for restructuring. There
will be reduced services to the towns, no more monitoring of pools, beaches
and the south end of Cayuga Lake, and delays in responding to calls.
Ms. Cole commented briefly on the WIC program and stated
the County needs to make a decision by January 1st if it will continue providing
WIC after September 2004. The Board of Health will be discussing this
subject at their meeting tomorrow.
Health Planning Council
Report on the State's Medicaid Reform Task Force
Ms. Falcao said the New York State Senate established
a task force to look at improving the Medicaid program. There have
been approximately ten meetings held around the State. The Senate is
in the process of putting together all the documentation, testimony and comments
and is hoping to come up with recommendations in January. The Senate
hopes to use these recommendations during their budget deliberations.
She provided copies of the letter and list of questions each person was asked
to address at the meeting in Binghamton she attended and reviewed them at
length. Ms. Falcao also distributed copies of her report to the task
force, as well as information concerning Medicaid Reform prepared by Citizen
Action of New York. Her points were discussed at length by the Committee.
As the Citizen Action information used 1998 Medicaid Enrollees and Expenditures,
Mr. Whicher said the County can provide more recent information for a trend
analysis. Ms. Carey said early next year she could provide the trend
analysis from 1998 to present.
Ms. Robertson asked that an additional report be provided
in January following the receipt of year-end data by both Ms. Falcao and
Ms. Carey.
Social Services Department
Monthly Reports
Mr. Herden gave a brief overview of the department's expenditures
and encumbrances and year-end projections. He said it is anticipated
that the projected year-end net local cost will be approximately $170K under
budget, out of a $35 million budget. Mr. Herden noted that this includes
the $1.3 million release of overburden aid that the County recognized as
revenue in 2003.
2004 Budget Summary
Ms. Carey said she needs more time to see where the budget
numbers fall out, but may be able to produce a report in January. She
explained the morale of employees in the Department is good.
Dental Program
Ms. Carey provided a written report of the status of the
dental program. Ms. Schuler said she expressed her concern with the
program coordinator that many of the dentists are still centrally located.
The coordinator said there are dentists willing to participate, but it is
the office staff that is reluctant because of the necessary paperwork.
Ms. Carey commented that if the dentists and their staff allowed the coordinator
to come in and listen to how much assistance they would receive, there would
be more acceptance. She also stated that the State is difficult
to deal with concerning territorial issues.
Appointments
It was MOVED by Ms. Schuler, seconded by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr,
and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to submit the following
appointments to the full Legislature for approval:
Office for the Aging Advisory Committee
Beena Kulkowitz - term expires December 31, 2006
Frances T. Sovocool - term expires December 31, 2006
Executive Session
It was MOVED by Ms. Schuler, seconded by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr,
and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to hold an executive
session to discuss real estate negotiations. An executive session was
held at 3:02 p.m. and returned to open session at 3:06 p.m.