Staff:     P. Messmer, Highway Division; E. Marx, Administration; R. Nicholas, Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport; B. Eckstrom, Solid Waste, J. Wood, County Attorney

Guests: J. Morrissey, R. Mastroapolo, C&S Engineers, N. Schuler, Legislature

Called to Order

 Mr. Booth called the meeting to order at 2:03 p.m.

1)Additions/Deletions to Agenda

There were no additions to or deletions from the agenda.
 

2)  Chair's Report

 Mr. Booth thanked members of the Committee for their work throughout the year and asked that members review the Committee Goals and make any suggestions for 2004 Goals to either Ms. Nelson or himself.

3)  Persons Wishing to Address the Committee

 No persons wished to address the Committee.

4)  Minutes of November 25, 2003 and December 9, 2003

 It was MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Winch, to approve the minutes of November 25, 2003.  A voice vote resulted as follows:  Ayes - 4; Noes - 0; Abstained - 1 (Legislator Kiefer).

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Robertson, to approve the minutes of December 9, 2003.  A voice vote resulted as follows:  Ayes - 4; Noes - 0; Abstained - 1 (Legislator Kiefer).

5)  RESOLUTION NO.    INCREASE OF HOURS WEIGH SCALE OPERATOR-SOLID WASTE
 

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Robertson.  Ms. Eckstrom explained that the purpose of the resolution was to improve coverage of the scale house during its 64 hours of operation throughout the week as well as provide more flexibility in overall staffing needs.  She said expenses would be covered within the 2004 budget and would reduce the possibility of overtime pay.  A voice vote resulted in a unanimous decision to submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval:

WHEREAS, the Weigh Scale Operator hours should be increased to 40 hours per week for the Solid Waste Management Division for effective operations, and
WHEREAS, This position has been funded within the present budget of the Solid
Waste Management Division and does not require any additional local funding, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, That one (1) position of Weigh Scale Operator (726), labor grade G (7), competitive class be increased from 30 hours per week to 40.0 hours per week effective January 1, 2004 to provide adequate scale coverage and effective operations.
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II –15

 This work is required to provide adequate staffing at the scale house sixty hours per week.  By providing two forty-hour employees at the scale house, the usage of office staff and overtime will be minimized.

6)  County Road Network/Functional Classification Report - Update

 Mr. Messmer provided a timeline and brief update on the progress of the County Road Network/Functional Classification Report.  Mr. Messmer said it was initially thought the entire project could be compiled in one report; however, the various deadlines and steps necessary to complete the entire project made it clear that it would be a two-step process.  He stated that the first part of this project, the Tompkins County Highway Functional Classification System Update, is almost complete and the draft will be sent to Committee members on January 20, 2004.  This portion will provide a comprehensive review of the County Road System using Federal Highway Administration functional classification criteria to determine reclassification recommendations, as appropriate.  The second portion of the project, which will be ready for review by the Committee on February 24, 2004, will provide a draft report that includes:  (1) information on consideration of road networks maintained by the County and the Towns and possible jurisdictional realignments where appropriate, (2) suggested criteria for comparing County and Town road networks and sharing highway services, and (3) information respecting the direction of snow and ice control practices for the future.  Committee members requested that the Tompkins County Highway Functional Classification System Update report include the specific criteria relative to the reclassification recommendation.

 Ms. Kiefer inquired how to respond to municipal officials who offer to do such things as repairing pot holes on County roads.  Mr. Marx indicated that due to the County's responsibility for the condition of the roads coupled with the potential for future legal actions it was best to maintain control over the infrastructure.  Mr. Wood noted there may be significant legal problems if the County allows non-County employees to repair County roads.

7)  RESOLUTION NO.  - ACKNOWLEDGING TOWN OF NEWFIELD OWNERSHIP OF
     BEACH ROAD BRIDGE

 It was MOVED by Ms. Blanchard, seconded by Ms. Robertson.   Mr. Messmer indicated the work of the County has been completed and the engineering firm of LaBella Engineers has signed-off on the project.  Mr. Wood stated the resolution was completed at the request of the Town of Newfield Highway Supervisor who requested documentation regarding the change of ownership.  Mr. Wood drafted the resolution to indicate that the work as stated in the agreement was complete and per the agreement the ownership of Beach Road bridge should now change to the Town of Newfield.  Members of the Committee expressed the desire to notify the Town of Newfield Attorney and Town Supervisor of the completion of the County's obligation on the project and the forthcoming resolution.  A voice vote resulted in a unanimous decision to submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval, provided the Town of Newfield is contacted by the County Attorney/Administration and informed of the County's intent to bring the following resolution to the full Legislature:

 WHEREAS, on May 14, 2003, the County and the Town of Newfield entered into an agreement for the replacement of a pedestrian bridge in the Town of Newfield, and
 WHEREAS, the agreement provides that once the replacement bridge was erected and accepted by the Town it would be owned solely by the Town, which shall be exclusively responsible for all maintenance, repair, risk, insurance, and liabilities with respect to the bridge, and
 WHEREAS, the agreement provides that the Town shall be deemed to have accepted the replacement bridge once the County has, in good faith, completed its responsibilities with respect to the erection of the bridge, and
 WHEREAS, the County has, in good faith, completed all of its responsibilities with respect to the bridge, final inspection and stamped drawing have been issued by the independent engineering firm of LaBella Engineers, and the Town Highway Superintendent has indicated his satisfaction with the work to the County Associate Civil Engineer, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, as of December 1, 2003, the County has completed its obligation and in accord with the contract of May 14, 2003, the Town of Newfield is now sole owner of Beach Road Bridge.

8) Budget Adjustment - Highway Division

It was MOVED by Ms. Blanchard, seconded by Ms. Robertson, and unanimously approved to submit the following budget adjustment to the full Legislature for its approval:

Tompkins County Highway Division
Revenue Acct           Title              Amt  App. Acct.         Title(s) _____
3310.42770      Other Miscellaneous Revenue          $2,437       3310.54312 Highway Materials

Explanation:  Received extra unanticipated money in revenue that can be used to purchase additional sign material for 2003.

9) Budget Transfer and Contracted Professional Information Technology Services
 
It was MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Booth for discussion.  Mr. Potter, Information Technology Services Supervisor, provided written information regarding the budget transfer, noting that the Microcomputer Specialist position, which would be assigned to dealing with the Criminal Justice information project, was approved by the Legislature with funding only through 2004.  He said that due to the limitation of one-year funding he prefers not to try to hire someone for that limited period, and it would be more cost effective to contract for these services during 2004.  Mr. Potter noted that the contracted services may cost $65 to $125 per hour for these services.  He said further that until the County decides how it will deal with this project, no decision should be made regarding the County hiring an individual for this position.  The Committee agreed there was a need to fully evaluate the project to determine if it was worthwhile for the County to continue its level of participation in future years.  A voice vote on the budget transfer resulted as follows - Ayes - 5; Noes 0.  MOTION CARRIED.

10)  RESOLUTION NO.       - AUTHORIZING EXTENSION TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
       US AIRWAYS INC. –  ITHACA TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT

 It was MOVED by Ms. Blanchard, seconded by Ms. Kiefer, and unanimously approved to submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval:

WHEREAS, US Airways, Inc., signed a contract for the period January 1, 1994 through December 31, 2003, for use and lease of space in the passenger terminal building of the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, and
WHEREAS, US Airways, Inc., is desirous to extend that contract by one year until December 31, 2004, pending negotiation of a new long-term contract, and
WHEREAS, Ricondo & Associates of Cincinnati, Ohio, have been retained to continue those negotiations during 2004, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, That the County Administrator be and hereby is authorized to sign a one-year extension to the US Airways, Inc., use and lease agreement at the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport for the period January 1, 2004 until December 31, 2004.
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

Note:  Our consultants, Ricondo & Associates and properties people from US Airways thought it would be beneficial to postpone negotiations of a new contract in the hopes that the turmoil caused by 9/11 will dissipate within the next year or two. Having a stable situation would make it easier to decide on the appropriate terms and conditions of a five or ten-year contract. Ricondo will pick up discussions with US Airways in the second half of 2004.

11)  RESOLUTION NO.     - AUTHORIZING SUPPLEMENTAL CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
       NO. 9 WITH C&S ENGINEERS, INC., FOR TRANSIENT APRON REHABILITATION
       DESIGN SERVICES AND OBSTRUCTION STUDY PLANNING SERVICES - ITHACA
       TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Blanchard.  Mr. Nicholas indicated that this resolution provides the next step in the projects listed in the title.  Members of the Committee asked why the cost of design work for the transient apron was $110,000 and was informed by Mr. Morrissey of C&S Engineers, that the project requires assessing the present surface and designing modifications to correct problems such as ponding of water and structural damage.  He explained that this may require more work than the original design work for the apron.  Ms. Kiefer then inquired about the obstruction study, indicating her desire to have input from the County regarding environmental impact as was agreed to after the previous experience.  Mr. Morrissey explained that at this time the initial work involves determining exactly what the potential obstructions might be.  This work is done by an aerial survey.  He said further that going beyond this top-down survey and determining precisely which trees may not have the potential of becoming obstructions due to species type would require the involvement of a forester making observations at ground level.  This type of determination would be expensive and time-consuming and is not part of this proposed step in the obstruction analysis.  Ms. Kiefer noted that that type of field work is needed to identify which trees may grow to become obstructions since trees differ from the Federal Aviation Authority's simple rule of thumb which assumes all trees grow at the same rate to the same height.  Mr. Marx agreed with that description.  Ms. Kiefer requested that a member of County staff or a designee be kept involved in the process.  Ms. Blanchard requested the Committee be updated on the project to avoid potential delays that could create funding concerns.  A voice vote resulted as follows:  Ayes - 5; Noes - 0.  MOTION CARRIED.

WHEREAS, the Airport Master Plan and Five-Year Airport Capital Improvement Program include rehabilitation of the transient apron and obstruction removal, and

WHEREAS, there is a need for design and planning services in relation to these projects, now therefore be it

RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, That Supplemental Consultant Agreement No. 9 to our contract for General Airport Consultant Services with C&S Engineers, Inc., for design and planning services be approved as follows, subject to an Independent Fee Estimate (IFE) on the Transient Apron Rehabilitation - Design Services contract being performed and finding the fee is reasonable:

      Transient Apron Rehabilitation – Design Services    $ 110,000
    Obstruction Study – Planning Services                      $   49,975

RESOLVED, further, That the budget for said services is as follows:

     Federal Aviation Authority Share      (90%)             $ 143,977
        State Share (NYSDOT)                        (5%)             $     7,999
     Local Share (Airline Rates & Charges)(5%)             $     7,999

          Total                                                                          $ 159,975

RESOLVED, further, That the Finance Director is authorized to advance payments for this work until reimbursement is received from the Federal Aviation Administration and NYSDOT.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-21

Note: The Transient Ramp (the pavement between the CFR building and Taughannock Aviation) is in a deteriorating state with sections beginning to show signs of breaking up.  In addition, as a result of obstruction removal work done a couple of years ago (tree topping in the runway approach zone) it was decided that all future obstruction clearance should be identified and completed at the same time rather than “piece-meal.”  This study will identify where obstructions exist. The FAA requires an IFE to be completed for engineering contracts in excess of $50,000.

 Mr. Nicholas stated that there is the possibility of the Federal Aviation Administration's increasing its funding level to ninety-five percent and eliminating the local share for projects.  He will inform the Committee further as more information is available.

12) RESOLUTION NO. -AUTHORIZING GROUND TRANSPORTATION FEE STRUCTURE – ITHACA TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT

 It was MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Booth.  The Committee reviewed information provided by Mr. Nicholas on the history of ground transportation at the airport, including a survey conducted in November 2003 indicating average daily figures for ground transportation services provided by transportation providers.  Mr. Nicholas explained that as a result of the survey and inquiries to other airport facilities he developed a proposed fee schedule that would fairly charge all businesses conducting ground transportation business at the airport.   A discussion occurred regarding the development of the fee schedule, particularly for hospitality businesses when compared to the local taxicab approach businesses and Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit.  Mr. Nicholas explained that the proposed fee schedule was derived using the same approach as other airports, noting that the hospitality businesses include ground transportation as part of their service rather than the means of income.  The Committee came to consensus to table this resolution until all parties have been contacted regarding the fee schedule.
      WHEREAS, Local Law No. 4 of 2002 – Rules and Regulations and Minimum Standards Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport – authorizes the airport manager to assess and collect fees from ground transportation providers who operate on airport property, and
      WHEREAS, federal case law has overwhelmingly upheld airports’ rights to charge a fee to commercial ground transportation providers for use and upkeep of airport facilities and the privilege of deriving business from said airport facilities, and
      WHEREAS, the airport wishes to construct a fee system that more equitably apportions the costs of providing and maintaining said facilities to those that derive a financial benefit, and
      WHEREAS, the airport conducted a 6-week survey of ground transportation usage in October and November 2003 to determine how a fee structure should be constructed to distribute fees more equitably, now therefore be it
      RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, That the Ground Transportation Fees shown on “Attachment A” be approved for a one year period from 1 January 2004 until 31 December 2004,
      RESOLVED, further, that another 6-week survey be undertaken in 2004 to ascertain the fairness and accuracy of this fee structure and if changes are deemed necessary, that a proposal be brought to the program committee for consideration and approval.
SEQR ACTION: Type II-20 (No Further Action)

Note: The reasons and justification for this proposal are contained in a memo to the Facilities & Infrastructure Committee (together with appendices) dated 22 December 2003. Clearly the airport needs to respond to concerns expressed by Ithaca Airline Limousine (IAL) and Ithaca Dispatch about the unfairness of the present system of charging one single entity. IAL and Ithaca Dispatch are willing to team up to provide a joint ground transportation service at the airport as long as TCAT is treated in the same manner as they are. If we cannot resolve this problem with IAL and Ithaca Dispatch we may have no ground transportation from the airport terminal and the airport will have a revenue shortfall of approximately $ 12,000.

The following information was provided to the Committee by Mr. Nicholas:

To: Facilities & Infrastructure Committee
From: Bob Nicholas, Airport Manager

22 December 2003

Re: Proposed Ground Transportation Fee Structure

Background

The practice of airports charging reasonable fees to various ground transportation companies is well established. It has been tested in several landmark cases and in each case has been upheld as a valid means for an airport to collect revenue. The right to charge is based on the premise that the airport is providing the infrastructure to help bring business to the various ground transportation providers and it is reasonable for the airport to recover some of the costs associated with building and maintaining the facilities. In short, the airport has a legally established right to charge taxis, limousines, various types of courtesy vehicles and buses that use the airport to conduct business.

In the past our airport has typically requested bids for the provision of taxi/limousine service. In return for a fee the successful bidder was granted the exclusive right to transport arriving passengers to their final destinations. Though the contract did not prohibit other companies from providing ground transportation, they were prohibited from soliciting business at the airport. Apart from a period of two or three years, this contract has been held by Ithaca Airline Limousine (IAL).

When the last contract was bid in 1998 IAL expressed concern with the (then) recent introduction of the Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) scheduled bus service to the door of the terminal building. The President of IAL, Neil Wintermute, anticipated the potential for a subsidized bus service undercutting the limousine service and eroding the business that had traditionally fallen to IAL. More to the point the basis of the fee he was paying to the airport did not make allowances for such an eventuality.

At the time both IAL and the airport were assured by TCAT that their operating policy did not allow for luggage to be accepted on the bus and therefore the number of actual passengers using the bus to get to and from the airport would be negligible. To ensure that was the case, the airport and IAL wrote a clause into the ground transportation contract that provided for the airport to reduce IAL’s fees in direct proportion to the business lost to TCAT.

Within a year of TCAT’s assurance, their luggage policy was abandoned and regular passengers, particularly students, began taking the bus to and from the airport. More recently TCAT has intensified service to the Cornell and Ithaca campuses and significant numbers of students are now using the airport bus, resulting in a loss of gross revenue to IAL estimated at between $ 15,000 and $ 20,000.

With the fall off in passenger numbers caused by 9/11 and a poor economic climate, Mr. Wintermute has made it known that the diversion of IAL revenues to TCAT is no longer sustainable. Both he and Ithaca Dispatch (parent company of all the Ithaca-based taxi companies) made it known that they are unwilling to bid on a ground transportation contract unless some of the existing inequities are addressed. Since the airport needs the revenues from ground transportation, I set about designing a Ground Transportation Fee Structure that addresses the concerns expressed by IAL and Ithaca Dispatch. What follows is an attempt to be even-handed with the distribution of the fees so that all users pay an appropriate amount for the business they derive from the airport.

Survey (Attachment A)

Beginning on October 21st. the airport conducted a 6-week comprehensive study of ground transportation, documenting the number of passengers transported by courtesy vehicles, TCAT, IAL, and the local cab company. Documentation consisted of a daily tally broken down into hourly segments. From this survey we were able to determine, among other things, the number of trips each company made to the airport and the percentage of passengers carried by the various ground transportation providers.

Proposed Fee Structure (Attachment B)

Research of other airports showed that fees charged to courtesy vehicles were almost entirely flat fees rather than fees based on passenger numbers. The fact that these vehicles operate almost entirely on behalf of rental car companies and hotels and therefore do not charge a transportation fee per se, supports the notion that the fee should be based more on the number of journeys made and the resulting “wear and tear” of the infrastructure. The proposed fee structure will reflect this approach.

Leaving aside the courtesy vehicles and concentrating on passengers who actually pay a fee for travel, the survey reveals that TCAT carries between 10% and 12% of such people. The remaining passengers are split almost 50/50 between IAL and the cab companies (Ithaca Dispatch).

The proposed fee structure in terms of courtesy vehicles is based on trips to the airport but is also supported by the number of passengers carried. The survey indicates that courtesy vehicles fall into three basic categories. The Ramada, Clarion, Best Western, Courtyard and Red Runner carry less than 1,000 passengers each per year and their trips to the airport total approximately 500 per year or less. The Statler and Holiday Inn by comparison carry six to eight times as many passengers as any other hotel and travel to the airport four or five times more frequently.

The proposed fee structure for TCAT, IAL and Ithaca Dispatch is based on percentage of passengers carried relative to each other. The airport would like to recover the same revenues it gained from the counter/office rental and concession fee contained in the previous ground transportation contract. This time, however, instead of the fee being derived entirely from IAL, it is now derived from the three companies based on ridership.

Conclusion

This plan has come about as a result of some basic inequities in the old system. It is apparent that neither IAL or Ithaca Dispatch is willing to pay a concession fee to the airport without these inequities being addressed. In looking at ways to resolve the
problem of a subsidized quasi-governmental transportation service competing against an unsubsidized private entity it became apparent that a new fee structure should look at other ground transportation providers using the airport. A fee structure based, in part, on use of facilities and wear and tear of those facilities, ought to levy a fee on the other companies as well.

These fees are comparable with those of other airports and should cause no undue hardship to any company. In the case of TCAT, with the estimated number of passengers carried during a year, a fare surcharge of 50 cents to and from the airport should cover the fee paid to the airport.

IAL and Ithaca Dispatch are willing to develop a working partnership to provide ground transportation at the airport, using this fee structure as a basis for agreement. It would initially be a one-year agreement. During that year regular meetings would take place with the airport to check for problems. Another 6-week survey would be conducted next year to validate this year’s findings and adjustments will be made if necessary.

Robert A. Nicholas
Airport Manager

Appendix A

Passenger Survey
October 21, 2003 - November 30, 2003

Courtesy Vehicles
Company Number of Trips Passengers Carried (To/From) Estimated Passengers for Year
Statler 244 607 5261
Holiday Inn 252 864 7488
Ramada/Clarion 111 220 1906
Best Western 64 97 841
Courtyard 56 89 771
Red Runner 19 29 251

Other Passengers Carried % Estimated Total For Year
TCAT 213 11.7 1827
Ithaca Dispatch 850 46.5 7367
Ithaca Airline Limousine 764 41.8 6621
 
Appendix B

Proposed Fees
January 1, 2004 - December 31, 2004

Statler $ 400 Per Year
Holiday Inn $ 400 Per Year
Ramada $ 100 Per Year
Clarion $ 100 Per Year
Best Western $ 100 Per Year
Courtyard $ 100 Per Year
Red Runner $ 100 Per Year

*  TCAT $ 875 Per Year
**  Ithaca Airline Limousine $ 4,600 Per Year
**  Ithaca Dispatch $ 4,600 Per Year
 

* Estimated 2003 Enplaned Passengers
(67,844) x $0.11 = $ 7,462.84 x 11.7% = $ 873.15 (rounded up)

** Estimated 2003 Enplaned Passengers
 (67,844) x $0.11 = $ 7,462.84 x 88.3% = $ 6,589.69 + $ 2,610.31
Office/Counter Rent = $ 9,200.00

13)  RESOLUTION NO.     - APPROVAL OF CONTRACT- GROUND TRANSPORTATION
       SERVICES - ITHACA TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT

 This item was tabled pending the reintroduction of the resolution related to ground transportation fees.
 
14)  2003 Facilities and Infrastructure Committee Goals

The Committee reviewed the draft of the end-of-year report on the 2003 Committee Goals and noted minor changes.  It was the consensus of the Committee to approve the report following a final review by the Chair.  This report will be presented to the full Legislature.

15)  Adjournment

 The regular meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted by Karen Fuller, Deputy Clerk, Tompkins County Legislature