Present:   R. Booth, Chair; D. Kiefer, Vice Chair; N. Schuler, D. Winch, M. Lane

Staff:     P. Mesmer, J. Lampman, Highway Division; C. Nelson, Public Works Administration; E. Marx, Administration; R. Nicholas, Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport; B. Eckstrom,  Solid Waste; J. Kippola, Contract Administrator; D. Squires, Finance Director; J. Wood, County Attorney; G. Potter, Information Technology Services; K. Fuller, Recorder

Called to Order

 Mr. Booth called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.

1)  Chair's Report

 Mr. Booth, Chair, reported that Mr. Whicher, County Administrator spoke at the last Public Works cabinet meeting in general terms about the 2005 budget.

 Ms. Kiefer inquired whether any contractual agreement had been reached with Johnson Controls regarding the Energy Performance Contract.  Mr. Marx said he has met with the County's contract administrator to review the draft agreement.  There are minor changes to go over with Johnson Controls, and it is anticipated the contract will move forward shortly.  Ms. Kiefer then inquired if further information was available on the City of Ithaca's Cayuga Green project generator.  Mr. Marx said he has not had any further requests from the City regarding placement of the generator on County property; he said they would be required to notify the County if they desire to do so.
 

2)  Additions to and Deletions from the Agenda

Additions:

 Mr. Booth indicated two items were to be added to the agenda for discussion:
· Discussion regarding correspondence received from Town of Ithaca Supervisor Valentino regarding Coddington Road construction
· Discussion regarding Midline Road

Deletions:

· Cornell University Chemical and Radioactive Disposal Sites - Mr. Gustofson is unable to attend, and the matter will be placed on a future agenda.

3)  Persons Wishing to Address the Committee

 No persons wished to address the Committee.

4) Newfield Bridge Dedication

It was noted that the dedication of the Zenas Bowstring Bridge had taken place.  Some members of the Committee as well as Mr. Messmer were on hand for the ceremonies.

5)  Minutes of May 11, 2004 and May 25, 2004

 It was MOVED by Ms. Schuler, seconded by Ms. Kiefer, and unanimously approved by voice vote of members present, to approve the minutes of May 11, 2004 as amended.

 It was MOVED by Mr. Lane, seconded by Ms. Schuler, and unanimously approved by voice vote of members present, to approve the minutes of May 25, 2004 as amended.

6) Audit of Final Payment Resolutions

Ms. Nelson reported that at the recent Public Works Cabinet meeting a discussion occurred respecting time-saving options.  It was suggested that resolutions for final audits could possibly be eliminated because present fiscal policy provides a system of checks and balances during projects.  This item had been tabled to allow Mr. Winch to participate in the discussion.  It was noted that at the previous meeting Committee members had felt that while it may not be necessary to have a resolution presented to the full Legislature due to accounting procedures that verify payments, it was thought to be useful to have a resolution/report at the program committee level, followed by a vote.  Ms. Nelson said the desire was to improve efficiencies and save time within several departments.

Ms. Kippola said that staff has procedures in place to prevent a final payment from being made in the event all services/items are not received.

 Mr. Winch said that many times when resolutions have been brought forth it has been reported that not all deliverables have been received at that time.  He feels that the items delivered at the end of a contract are usually important documents and that the leverage the County has is the final payment.  He said if something is built into the system to assure receipt of deliverables he would not object.

 Consensus was reached by the Committee that there continues to be concern about ensuring all loose ends are tied up before final payment is made, so we will utilize a reporting system with a Committee vote required to approve final payment, but to not send final audit resolutions on to the full Legislature for action.

7)  Dryden Dam Maintenance Responsibilities

 Mr. Wood, County Attorney, reported the request to obtain electrical service from the lines located on the Dryden Dam property would not require any Committee action.  He stated he believes that the only party that would have to provide approval to the adjacent landowners was New York State Electric and Gas Corporation.  A map indicating the underground line will be forwarded to Mr. Wood for further review.  Ms. Nelson was asked to verify any billing for the buried electric line.

 Mr. Wood provided his legal opinion regarding inspections for the dam.  He noted that the operation and maintenance agreement is between the State, the Village of Dryden, and the Town of Dryden.  In addition, the State requested that the County Planning Department to make a plan that included inspections of the dam, which was submitted to the state in June 1996 for approval.  The plan included the following:

· Annual inspection - the County was required to assist in the inspection with an engineer for only for the first three years of the contract;
· Five-year formal inspection - the County was required to supply a registered engineer for these inspections.

Mr. Wood said that the County's current obligation is only for the five-year inspection.  A discussion took place related to the liability of the County in the event a problem occurred.  Mr. Lane believes that if the County's name is on the title document for the dam and then we need to be sure the proper inspections are conducted.  Mr. Marx said the agreement said the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) may assist with the inspection depending on availability of personnel.  Mr. Messmer indicated the Division would feel comfortable outsourcing for this expertise.  He is not sure it should be a Highway responsibility.

Following the discussion it was determined to inquire when inspections have taken place and how to proceed with future inspections.  In addition, it was requested that the extent of liability the County may have in the event of structural problems with the dam be determined.  It was also noted that the Town and Village should be consulted regarding this matter as well. The question was raised regarding if the Facilities Division or the Highway Division would be responsible (because each has engineers).  Mr. Lane suggested that the question of Division responsibility be referred to the Public Works Cabinet.

8)  Bridge Program Overview

 A discussion took place related to the bridge program, including the history of the program.  There are 109 bridges in the County system, with 2/3 of these bridges located on Town roads.  Mr. Lampman said that the portion of the bridge program involving construction of bridges for towns and villages allows for an 80/20 split of costs, with the County paying the 80%.  This began in approximately 1997-98 with the construction of bridges such as Myers Road.  The County created maintenance agreements for each structure that specified the funding shares for each project.  It was noted that the Town/Village is responsible for deck work and approaches.  The County pays for other maintenance work on the structures.  Prior to 1997-98 the County built the bridges and left the approach work to the town/village.  Mr. Lampman said the present construction process allows for the bridge to be completed and utilized.

Mr. Booth inquired whether it was possible to report what the County spends on town/village bridges and was informed that it is difficult to say on an average basis.  He indicated that with the new personnel structure it will be easier to obtain these figures for this year and in the future.  There are 109 bridges in the County with approximately 2/3 of these bridges located on town roads.

Mr. Booth asked if there would be any disadvantage to the County to amend the formula to reduce the County share.  Mr. Lampman said he did not believe there would be a disadvantage, however, he felt that if the County paid less the town/village would want more input in the matter.  Mr. Messmer said it would be a large transition as the towns/villages would not have the engineering skills available.  Mr. Booth inquired how other Counties operate their bridge program and was informed it is varied with some paying similar and others paying 100%.  Mr. Lane asked to see what could be done if the County had more funds available, stating it may provide the ability to complete more bridge projects in the future.  Mr. Messmer indicated Mr. Lampman has the ability to project what would occur.  Mr. Lane said he feels if the bridges were turned over to the towns they may deteriorate due to lack of funds in small towns; that the present program was designed to assure the maintenance of the bridges.  Mr. Lane said a review of the bridge program could be done using a 75/25 formula to see if more bridges may be completed.  It was noted that the current schedule allows for two construction projects per year.  A request was made to provide information on how much was spent in 2000 - 2003 on bridge projects.  Mr. Lampman said that the prices of bridges has increased significantly due to increased costs of materials.

Ms. Kiefer said she recalled seeing a five-year bridge program in the past, but hasn't seen a recent one, and asked if it is still in use, noting that with increased cost of construction materials it could be a useful tool.  In addition, she noted that some counties use the length of the bridge to determine ownership, and that bridges over 25 feet were maintained by the county.  She was informed that various counties use different lengths to determine ownership.

With regard to the "bridge-on-the-shelf" concept, the Committee was informed that at this time there is not one planned.  Mr. Lampman said that several have been identified to begin engineering work and will be included in the five-year plan.  Mr. Winch said the concept of "bridge-on-the-shelf" began to be ready if funding was available.  He asked if the bridges built are simply duplications or if new technologies are being implemented.  He was informed that innovative practices are being utilized when constructing bridges.  Mr. Lampman said the Federal funding and T21 funding are looking for innovative construction method utilization; unless a historic consideration is involved the latest technologies are used.  Mr. Messmer provided examples of 3 - 4 side pre-cast construction that was recently used.  It was reported the next "bridge-on-the-shelf" should be ready at the end of 2005.  Mr. Winch suggested the Public Works Cabinet meet with Mr. Marx to discuss a presentation for the full Legislature regarding new techniques being utilized.
 
9)  Inter-Municipal Cooperation Subgroup on Highways

Mr. Winch reported that to date the discussions have concerned purchasing of supplies as a way to economize.  With regard to equipment sharing, it does not appear there is a desire by the highway superintendent's to modify the process from its present form.  A discussion took place regarding Mr. Messmer's desire to work one-on-one with highway superintendents to foster a good working relationship between towns/villages and the County.  Mr. Marx said the large group agreed in principal with this suggestion.  They will meet next on June 17, 2004, and will discuss next steps.  He believed it should be one-on-one contact which may develop further partnerships.

 Mr. Booth inquired how potential savings may be made by inter-municipal cooperation. Mr. Winch said he believes the one-on-one discussions need to take place first and that total inter-municipal cooperation will be a lengthy process to develop. Mr. Marx said he believes it may occur through trade of services/materials and noted that the towns/villages have the ability to obtain products at a lower cost than the County.

 Mr. Messmer said he believes in order to work the process will start small and that he plans to see if the sign shop can be utilized in exchange for other things such as pothole repair.  Mr. Marx said the town highway supervisors concern is service.  If relationships could be built to improve service it would be a positive reinforcement with regard to inter-municipal cooperation.

 Ms. Kiefer inquired whether rapid response maintenance is the main focus at this time and was told that it may be assisted through inter-municipal cooperation if the geography allows.

 Ms. Robertson inquired whether standards of repair would be a concern and was told by Mr. Messmer that standards could be outlined to ensure proper care.  It was noted that not all towns would necessarily participate.

 Mr. Winch said it was discussed that while services may be traded to create efficiencies; the real problem is that more work needs doing and hence funds need to be spent on the highways and bridge infrastructure.  He feels the public is critical of the highway department when it is simply due to the reduced budgets passed by the Legislature.

 Mr. Marx said if highway people can find ways to cooperate, elected officials will facilitate that.

 Mr. Messmer said he will focus on the sign program's potential to enable a win-win situation.

10) Hanshaw Road Request

Members discussed a letter received from Town of Ithaca Mayor Cathy Valentino requesting involvement in the rebuilding of Hanshaw and Coddington Road.

Mr. Messmer said this began with a request to have a representative from the Town of Ithaca sit in on interviews with potential consultants for these projects.  In addition to receiving the request he had received a call from an engineering firm also requesting a Town of Ithaca presence.  He noted past practice did not have this sort of participation and he also felt a certain level of discomfort with the engineering firm request and therefore declined the request to participate.  Mr. Messmer said that he is committed to choose a firm that would be sensitive to the needs of communities, but does not feel it appropriate to include municipal officials in this process.  Ms. Schuler reported that at the inter-municipal meeting that recently took place no mention was made of the desire to participate in the selection process for these projects; the letter was received the next day.

Members discussed briefly the situation and felt the topic would require further discussion, as well as the desire to include municipalities at the appropriate time during the project.  Ms. Kiefer spoke of her participation with the North Triphammer Road project at the request of the Village of Lansing and noted it was useful to them as a result of her experience gained at the County level.

Mr. Lampman said he anticipates having consultants chosen by the end of the week.

Mr. Booth said this topic will be placed on a future agenda.

11) Airport - Cash Flow

Taxiway Repairs Between the T-Hangars

 Mr. Nicholas provided aerial maps of the t-hangar area and provided a brief report on their history.  These hangars which were built approximately ten years ago by the same contractor who completed the airport terminal.  He said that the construction was inspected by a County employee, however, he felt it was inadequate as there has consistently been difficulties with water pooling and resulting ice.  Mr. Nicholas expressed the need to repair the taxiway between these two hangars and has sought funding to do so.  A Federal grant would be available to rebuild the center portion of the taxiway; however, the remaining portion would not be eligible (12.5 feet on either side).  The total cost of the project would be between $60,000 to $80,000 and the local share would be half this amount. Mr. Nicholas said that the need to improve the cash flow situation to allow this rebuild is suggested in the following topic.

Emergency Response Center Land Transaction

Mr. Nicholas desired to recommend that the airport be reimbursed $175,000 for the real property that the Public Safety Communications Building.  He explained that by having these funds placed into the airport fund balance it would provide sufficient funding to meet expenses and provide the funding to make the repairs to the t-hangar taxiway.  Mr. Squires indicated his belief that the funds would provide financial stability for the airport through the end of the year.  He stated that payroll costs are approximately $22,000 per pay period and that after the most recent pay period the airport would only have a $66,000 fund balance.  Mr. Squires also stated that the airport debt service had been paid earlier in the year to assure funds were available.

Mr. Booth inquired whether an obligation existed for the County to provide these funds to the airport and was informed by Mr. Squires that it is not unusual and that the obligation exists to pay for the property.  Mr. Nicholas explained that the figure was derived by assessment of the property.

 A discussion occurred related to the recent decision to reimburse the airport from the General Fund for the demolition of the old airport terminal.  Ms. Kiefer asked if by this transfer of funds to the airport the obligation to repay the general fund would be satisfied.  Mr. Squires did not recommend doing so at this time and expressed his belief it is important to allow the airport to stabilize its funds prior to doing so.  More information will be provided to members of the Committee and the matter will be placed on a future agenda.
 
12) Midline Road

Ms. Schuler spoke of a recent fatal accident that occurred on Midline Road in the Town of Dryden and inquired if it were possible to set a speed limit in the area.

13)  Facilities Division Vacancy

 Ms. Nelson informed the Committee of a forthcoming position request form for cleaner at the the Tompkins County Public Library.  A present employee will be out on a long-term disability and there is a need to fill the position.

14)  Preliminary Budget Information

Solid Waste

Ms. Eckstrom reviewed the Solid Waste Division's five-year plan.  She stated that although it is difficult to predict the outcome of the next six-month period, she believed that the information was as accurate as possible.  Ms. Eckstrom believed that by year-end the division is anticipating an increase in the predicted recycling revenue of $75,000.  She indicated that she intends to bring forth proposals for additional reuse programs and will have a formal presentation at a later date.  In addition, Solid Waste has received approval for a latex paint reuse event that will be coordinated with Historic Ithaca.

Ms. Eckstrom summarized that the overall budget will basically be the same as presented, however, she stated that the administration area and fund balance should be reviewed for potential changes.  Mr. Squires said the Solid Waste Division operation pays for twenty-five percent of the County's debt service of over $1 million per year.  Ms. Kiefer noted there is only a personnel item in the Household Hazardous Waste Administration.  Ms. Eckstrom said she needs to specify this for other services too.

A discussion ensured regarding the annual fee.  Ms. Eckstrom said that the five-year plan calls for an increase in the solid waste fee in order to maintain the projections, including the fund balance.  In addition, Ms. Eckstrom stated guidance will be required regarding new programs for reuse, noting they will have additional costs associated with the start-up.

Information Technology Services

Mr. Potter, reported that the budget should come in at fiscal target if rollover request for one-time funding is approved.  This funding will support professional services, filling the micro-computer technician vacancy, or over-lapping positions due to future personnel changes.  He spoke of the need to review CISNET to determine what direction the County desires.  If there are not any equipment malfunctions or requests for additional work related to the CISNET project, the budget should not have difficulties.  In the event additional applications are requested that require ITS support there most likely will be additional costs associated with it.  At this time some municipalities have expressed a desire to migrate systems to CRIMES program.  Members of the Committee indicated concern regarding County supporting the program that benefits outside agencies as well.  Mr. Potter indicated that the budget is designed to meet the department's mission statements and that it is designed to maintain internal projects rather than outside projects.

15)  Adjournment

 The regular meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m.

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