Call to Order

 Mr. Penniman, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.

Agenda Additions/Deletions

 Ms. Eckstrom stated she had a five-year solid waste program with two options prepared for review as well as responses to questions raised, and itemization of tasks from the Solid Waste Management Plan requested at an earlier expanded budget meeting.

 There were no items deleted from the agenda.

 Agenda items of Solid Waste and Highway were changed on the schedule to better accommodate staff.

Persons Wishing to Address the Committee

 This item was deferred to the Highway portion of the meeting.

Chair's Report

 Mr. Penniman did not have a report; he noted discussions had taken place regarding the Solid Waste budget that would be discussed at the appropriate time in the meeting.

 Ms. Kiefer arrived at this time (2:03 p.m.).

Minutes of September 13, 2005

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Mr. Todd, and unanimously approved by voice vote of members, to accept the minutes of September 13, 2005 as amended.

Solid Waste Division

Scale Regulations

 Ms. Eckstrom, Manager, reiterated discussions related to the weigh scales, noting due to high traffic there was a need to modify operations.  In addition, she noted the regulations stating smaller-sized vehicles (under 1,000 lbs. of waste) could not continue to use the weigh scales.  As a result of these combined factors, many individuals at the Solid Waste Management facility are reviewing options that would allow for better traffic flow while addressing the regulatory requirements and determining an appropriate method of collecting fees for utilization of the facility's solid waste operation.  Ms. Eckstrom noted there is not a need to change the recycling aspect of the operation, which does not require weighing of vehicles.

 Mr. Winch stated he hopes that whatever decision is made it would not eliminate public use of the facility.  Mr. Penniman thought modifying the operation may create an incentive to use a curbside hauler rather than dropping off solid waste at the facility.  Ms. Eckstrom stressed the need to balance the traffic and safety issues at the facility while continuing to accept public use.   Mr. Winch inquired when the regulations were made and was informed it was in February 2005 that she was made aware of this regulation.  Mr. Winch requested that a determination be made of possibly "grandfathering" of the present operation due to the timing of the regulation.  In addition it was requested to determine if a smaller scale that would accommodate loads under 1,000 lbs. was a possible solution.  Mr. Winch noted that while he realizes it would require additional staffing he feels it is important to accommodate the public.  Ms. Eckstrom will make the appropriate inquiries and will report back to the Committee with information and possible solutions.

 Ms. Schuler expressed concern that the other consideration is the possibility of increased illegal dumping.  Ms. Eckstrom said an increase in illegal dumping has already been seen due to increased gasoline prices.

 Mr. Marx said rather than a scale operation there could be other ways to handle the changes that would result in a better experience for the user if the crowding and waiting period is reduced.  It was also noted there may be other options,such as extended hours, that could also help with waiting periods.

 Ms. Eckstrom will review all potential options and return to the Committee with potential operational changes.  She would like to have something in place by November that would allow for a sixty to ninety day period to advertise and communicate the upcoming changes.  It was suggested a special meeting of the Committee could take place at the Solid Waste Facility to allow a better understanding of the present problems and recognize site limitations.  Ms. Keifer inquired what the notation of "d" means in the regulations when referring to 10d and 50d weight loads; she was informed the "d" is for divisions of twenty pounds each.

Authorization to Assess a Surcharge for Uncovered Loads at the Recycle and Solid Waste Center

RESOLUTION NO. - AUTHORIZATION TO ASSESS A SURCHARGE FOR      UNCOVERED LOADS AT THE RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE CENTER
 
 It was MOVED by Ms. Schuler, seconded by Mr. Winch, to present the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval.  A brief discussion regarding the surcharge occurred, during which it was noted that it was recommended by Mr. Whicher, County Administrator, that a resolution to the Legislature reaffirming the Committee's approval as well as the Legislature's to charge a fee for uncovered loads would be appropriate.  Mr. Winch indicated he believes it should be made clear that there would be no exceptions to the uncovered load policy and that everyone is treated equally.  He also stated that employees should be aware that the term "secure" would mean the entire tarp is secure and not just portions that would still allow refuse to blow out of vehicles.  Ms. Eckstrom said the staff has been very strict since enacting this surcharge in May 2005 and she will make certain employees know the procedures.  Mr. Penniman requested clarification of whether loads such as large appliances require a cover and was informed they do.  Members of the Committee were informed the Solid Waste Division provides a tarp with the first offense surcharge.

 A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows:  Ayes - 5; Noes - 0.  RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
 WHEREAS, New York State regulations require that all loads arriving at the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)-permitted Solid Waste Facility be covered and secured, and
 WHEREAS, since 2003 the number of citation for vehicles with uncovered loads has more than doubled with a corresponding increase in the number of uncovered vehicles entering the Recycling and Solid Waste Center (RSWC), and
WHEREAS, since implementing the uncovered load surcharge in April of 2005 the number of vehicles with uncovered loads arriving at the RSWC has decreased from 110 per month to 10, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee re-confirms it previous authorization of these fees,
RESOLVED, further, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure and Budget and Capital Committees, That the County continue to assess the uncovered load surcharges for the remainder of 2005 and 2006 as follows:
First Offense   $10.00 (with tarp provided by the County)
 Second Offense   $20.00
 Third Offense or Greater $40.00
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

Caswell Leachate Treatment Project - PAR Form - Phase II

 Members of the Committee were informed this is the next step of the project, that upon approval by the Village of Freeville, would allow construction of a 1 1/2 inch pipeline that would pump the leachate directly to the treatment facility rather than utilizing tanker trucks as is current practice.  Ms. Eckstrom indicated the payback for this project would occur in approximately five years.  Presently the cost is $30,000 - $35,000 for the approximate 8,000 gallons being transported (approximately 1,000 truckloads annually).  Mr. Winch expressed concern regarding the possibility a new Village Board may have a different opinion than the present one.  Mr. Thompson and Ms. Eckstrom stated they believe the Village would still be open to the project.  Mr. Thompson reported the headworks analysis has been completed, further work will not occur until approval of the project is received from the Village.  Mr. Winch said he is in favor of moving the project approval ahead as the intent is known and the PAR could be modified at a later date if required.  Ms. Kiefer requested a breakout of the Phase II costs be provided.

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Kiefer.  A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows:  Ayes - 5; Noes - 0.  PAR APPROVED.

Solid Waste Budget Information

 The Committee was provided with two options of a revised five-year budget projection that included projected revenue resulting from one dollar and two dollar increases in the solid waste annual fee.  The projections anticipated additional revenue increases were also derived from the projected increase tonnage figures.  Ms. Eckstrom stated a key ingredient in the growth figures is the additional revenue from additional plastic recycling that previously has been disallowed, combined with programs to work closely with businesses to include materials they may have such as higher-quality papers.  Ms. Kiefer requested back-up information related to this budget projection.

 A discussion regarding the various elements of the revised budget occurred and it was noted the law enforcement budget line was for licensing as well as illegal dumping and would not require additional staffing but a shift of duties in a current staff member.  In addition, it was noted that the revised budget included all staff costs, did not include any potential surplus from 2005 as it is unknown, and the equipment reserve and capital budget have increased in anticipation of equipment and maintenance requirements over the next ten-year period.  Committee members were informed an additional reserve account, not in this budget has been maintained by the Finance Director with approximately a $400,000 balance; the cost of the conveyors will be charged to this account.

 Miscellaneous operational expenses were discussed, including the recycling bin purchasing, Ms. Eckstrom said present cost is $4.50 each and she is purchasing larger quantities to have on hand to ensure availability.  She spoke of the new programs being developed such as a green purchasing website that will provide information and locations to make green purchases; a farm composting project to utilize food waste from businesses, and a reuse center.  Mr. Marx asked about having a summary prepared and was informed the programs follow the twenty-year 1995 Solid Waste plan that is now halfway completed.

Ms. Eckstrom said presently approximately $110,000 is transferred to other department for various services provided.  She explained that by incrementally increasing the Annual Fee it would allow the operations to function without having to draw on the fund balance; allowing the fund balance to increase in a manner that would provide funding for future capital needs.  It was explained the annual increase in the fee would occur until 2009, at which time there may be a shortfall due to capital expense, but it is difficult to determine due to changes in commodity markets.

Mr. Winch inquired what were convincing factors to increase the annual fee $1 versus $2 and what is being done for preventive maintenance.  Ms. Eckstrom explained certain aspects of the operation are the County's responsibility; the company is responsible for preventive maintenance on equipment, the County has a preventive maintenance plan as well.  She felt the $1 increase should provide the required additional revenue.  Mr. Winch said he recognizes the facility is aging and feels it is important to anticipate the future maintenance needs.

Tasks Completed

 The Committee reviewed the handout responding to questions for the expanded budget meeting.  Ms. Eckstrom noted that part of the increase in budget from 2005 to 2006 addressed such things as maintenance to the tipping-floor walls.  Mr. Marx requested members review the document and ask additional questions at the next expanded budget meeting scheduled for September 29.

 Mr. Winch said the program was funded a great deal by Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) funding.  He asked if they have done any type of audit of the program.  Ms. Eckstrom said that while program information has been submitted to the DEC no responses have been received.

Snyder Road Tower Project

 Mr. Whicher informed the Committee the County is presently entering into minor contracts on this project that has a budget of $150,000.  He said it is expected that the net costs shall come in below the budget figure.  Mr. Whicher said the contracts policy allows him to enter into agreements up to $50,000.  As a courtesy he will bring these agreements to the Committee for information.  Ms. Kiefer stated she requested timeline information on the project; Mr. Whicher said Ms. Nelson was unable to attend the meeting but would provide this information.  Mr. Whicher reported at this time the information has not come forward to the Village of Lansing; upon completion of necessary forms and detailing of information it will be provided.  Ms. Jurkowich of the Planning Department is assisting with this portion of the project.

Highway Division

 Mr. Sczesny reported the public meeting for the Hanshaw Road project would take place Thursday, September 29; the McLean Road project is awaiting calls from the State to complete work with the contractor.

 The Committee reviewed the chart indicating the amended project dates, which Mr. Sczesny noted are awaiting State approval.  Ms. Kiefer noted the least expensive projects were extended out the furthest.  Mr. Winch asked if the State would be picking up any additional cost of the projects due to their request for extension of dates.  He was informed that it is not anticipated the State would do so.  Mr. Sczesny said each week calls are made to attempt to get more firm dates for funding.  Mr. Lampman noted the McLean project is believed to have all information in order and the approval should be forthcoming.

Persons Wishing to Address the Committee

 Ms. Bauer, Coddington Road resident, addressed the Committee as a follow-up to a public meeting held regarding the Coddington Road project where the topic of variances was discussed.  At that meeting it was noted that Coddington presently has ten feet driving lanes and the Federal Department of Transportation recommends the 11-foot width but a variance could be applied for if it was deemed appropriate.  She asked if it had been applied for and was informed that this would occur as part of the preliminary design work.  Mr. Lampman said the request would indicate that a non-standard/substandard feature for design is requested, and if approved the narrower road could be completed.  Ms. Bauer asked would a variance be automatically requested or would a decision from a planning group determine whether to apply.  She was informed that while the project is delayed a year the design work should be completed by the end of the year, with another public hearing taking place and a recommendation would follow.

 Ms. Bauer asked about the Section 106 that applies to historic homes, asking if it was done.  She was informed that it is not a stand-alone report but part of the design process which takes into account cultural resources.  Mr. Lampman has received the appropriate information from the town regarding previous projects and more detailed work is anticipated in the next several months.  This work will not be completed prior to the public meeting.  He believes the information on the impact is known and during the design phase an alternative to minimize impacts for the State Historic Preservation Office will be taken into consideration.

 It was then reported the Hanshaw Road project is more complete than the Coddington Road project due to fewer historic properties located in the construction area.  A second public meeting will take place later in the week; at this time there is no recommended design.

 Ms. Wahl, of 1426 Hanshaw Road, stated her home was built in approximately 1847, and she has resided there for the past 47 years.  She is speaking as a resident representative; as a result of meetings held regarding the project there is concern with Option 3 proposal.   Ms. Wahl stated that this option proposes a sidewalk path on the north side of the road.  If this is approved and completed it appears it would have a tremendous impact, taking out approximately 50 trees as a result of the rights-of-way.  Additionally, she expressed concern relating to maintenance and snow/ice removal of the walkway.  Mr. Winch asked if additional rights-of-way would be required to construct the sidewalk and was informed the initial proposal does indicate several more feet being required to do so.  Mr. Lampman said during the initial design attempts were made to design the roadway and sidewalk utilizing the present rights-of-way but due to budget constraints requiring the recycling of pavement versus full-depth reconstruction it requires utilizing the existing roadbed.  Mr. Winch asked once built who is responsible for the sidewalks.  Mr. Lampman said the Town of Ithaca is open to maintenance if it is a walkway versus a traditional sidewalk.  He explained the difference is the general public rather than just the neighborhood residents typically utilize a walkway.  This walkway would be asphalt.  Ms. Wahl said it would be more acceptable to the residents if the walkway were on the south side of the roadway.  The other suggestion was to have a roadway similar to Warren road where the shoulders are marked for pedestrian/bicycle use.

Ms. Sprole, of 1031 Hanshaw Road, spoke of her engineering background and stated her home is an historic property.  She expressed alarm at the project, stating she only found out two days ago that ten feet of her front yard would be taken for the walkway.  Although she is not against a walkway she does not like the idea of losing her trees and yard.  Ms. Sprole indicated that while there is a speed zone in her neighborhood it is not adhered to and deer have been struck and thrown twenty to thirty feet from the point of impact.  She would like to see calming features implemented in the plan.

Mr. Winch addressed the suggestion of having the walkway on the south side of the road and was concerned about potential liability of pedestrians crossing the road to gain access to it.  Ms. Wahl suggested a reduced speed zone with stop sign installation at the Sapsucker Woods Road intersection.

 In response to Ms. Kiefer's inquiry about calling Hanshaw Road a "highway", Mr. Lampman said that it is not a technical term and its use carries no meaning.  He explained part of Hanshaw Road between Cayuga Heights and Warren Road is classified as a minor arterial; from Warren Road east it is considered an urban collector.  The project lines are from the Village line to just east of Pleasant Grove Road, and then east to the area of Sapsucker Woods Road.  Ms. Keifer was disappointed to hear the proposed project would be a rebuild of the same base.  Mr. Lampman said the final determination is not yet completed and that it may be required to proceed with the limited work to maintain the budget.  He said from Warren Road in it would be over one foot of asphalt.

 An inquiry was made regarding the $225,000 budgeted for rights-of-way acquisition.  Mr. Lampman stated it is for necessary work and purchasing related to the project.  Ms. Wahl said she would not want the total width beyond 25 feet.

 Ms. Sprole spoke of the drainage in the area.  Mr. Lampman said while he was not familiar with any drainage it was thought that existing work would have reached its useful life and reconstruction of the drainage is considered.

Appropriation from Contingent Fund - Various resolutions

RESOLUTION NO: APPROPRIATION FROM CONTINGENT FUND FOR      ADJUSTMENT PAY – HIGHWAY

 The Committee inquired why the resolution would be brought forward as a request for contingent funds as this type of adjustment is typically paid from the salary line for the vacant position.  Consensus of the Committee was this would be an administrative matter and withdrew the resolution from the agenda.

 WHEREAS, the Highway Division had one employee, in the title of Interim Highway Manager, with pay adjustment, and
 WHEREAS, the Fiscal Policy of Tompkins County allows for adjustment pay replacement from the Contingent Fund, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure and the Budget and Capital Committees, That the Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to make the following budget appropriations:

FROM: A1990.54440 Contingent Fund $  3,011.70
TO: DM5110.51000837 Salary – Associate Civil Engineer $  3,011.70
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

Explanation:  John Lampman was Interim Highway Manager, who is being compensated for personal time accrued in that title prior to his return to Associate Civil Engineer (see attached e-mail).  The pay adjustment is being paid out of the 5110 functional unit.
 
RESOLUTION NO.      - APPROPRIATION FROM CONTINGENT FUND FOR TERMINAL PAY – HIGHWAY DIVISION (Associate Civil Engineer)

 It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Ms. Schuler, and unanimously approved by voice vote of members present, to recommend the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval.  RESOLUTION ADOPTED.

 WHEREAS, the Highway Division had one employee, in the title of Associate Civil Engineer, with terminated employment effective September 7, 2005, and
 WHEREAS, the Fiscal Policy of Tompkins County allows for terminal pay replacement from the Contingent Fund, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure and the Budget and Capital Committees, That the Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to make the following budget appropriations:
FROM: A1990.54440  Contingent Fund   $  7,761.62
TO: DM5110.51000837 Salary – Associate Civil Engineer $  7,761.62
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

RESOLUTION NO. - APPROPRIATION FROM CONTINGENT FUND FOR TERMINAL PAY – HIGHWAY DIVISION (Administrative Assistant)

 It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Ms. Schuler, and unanimously approved by voice vote of members present, to recommend the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval.  RESOLUTION ADOPTED.

 WHEREAS, the Highway Division had one employee, in the title of Administrative Assistant, with terminated employment effective August 17, 2005, and
 WHEREAS, the Fiscal Policy of Tompkins County allows for terminal pay replacement from the Contingent Fund, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure and the Budget and Capital Committees, That the Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to make the following budget appropriations:

FROM: A1990.54440  Contingent Fund   $  1,795.71
TO: DM5010.51000535 Salary – Administrative Assistant $  1,795.71
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

Caswell Road Landfill Storage Garage - Use by Highway for Winter Operations

 Mr. Sczesny informed the Committee he has received information from New York State Department of Transportation that they will be eliminating snow and ice removal coverage from their routes on McLean Road, Gulf Creek Road, and Peruville Road; approximately 11 miles.  He said to travel from the Bostwick Road facility to these areas is 16 miles and he would like to base two ten-wheel trucks with plows at the Caswell Road Landfill Storage Garage.   By doing so twelve gallons of fuel for each vehicle would be saved; at the present cost of $2.24/gallon for diesel he believes it is a logical thing to do.  It was noted the garage is a thirty-year old building with two high-door bays, electric, and propane heating system.  He was not certain if the plows would fit in the garage but said they are fitted with a quick-connect system.   It is his intent to assign a crew that resides in the proximity of the site and assign a working supervisor to the crew.  Ms. Kiefer inquired if it would present any problems with union agreements.  Mr. Sczesny did not believe so but will verify this.  Consensus of the Committee was that it appears to be a logical plan.  Mr. Sczesny also indicated the State will be taking over an area on Route 96 that presently is covered by the County.

Brown Road Update

 It was reported by Mr. Marx that the State has been undertaking vehicle counts this week on State Route 13, Sapsucker Woods Road, and Thornwood Drive.  It will provide a full week's count and the information is expected to be provided within two weeks, with the hope of some data analysis as well.  Manual counts will also be undertaken at the Brown Road/Sapsucker Woods Road intersection.

Update on Biggs B

 Mr. LeMaro said as a result of indoor air quality reports he has been required to undertake work of an extensive nature.  At this time workers have abated asbestos and removed insulation covering chilled-water pipes in the basement to eliminate mildew caused by condensation.  He is now continuing abatements in occupied areas of the building (administration and WIC clinic) with extensive removal of insulation, both fiberglass and asbestos.  This process requires immediate recovering insulation to eliminate condensation from the pipes dripping on other areas of the building.  He said thus far the work is being done at a time/materials rate and is an expensive project with to-date costs totaling $60,000 with work still to be done approximately an additional $20,000 - $30,000.  In addition, the HVAC units may require replacement that is not figured into the previously mentioned figures.  Mr. LeMaro said that areas that have been addressed appear to alleviate the problems and it does not appear to be a problem with the straight-run pipes but at joint areas.

 Mr. LeMaro said presently he is not over his current budget but anticipates it as a result of the work being done.  He would be coming forth with a contingent fund request to cover these expenses.  He said it is understood by Ms. Cole and Mr. Croteau that work being completed is occurring as needed to alleviate specific problems.  Any additional work that may be required will not be on a time/material basis but will have quotes obtained.

 In response to Ms. Schuler's inquiry, Mr. LeMaro said work in the occupied areas is taking place after-hours or when staff is absent from their area.  The WIC clinic area work will be undertaken when it is empty due to outside clinic dates.  He noted Southern Tier Insulators are doing the work as well as the environmental testing.  To date their fees have been $5,000 with an anticipated $5,000 additional.

 Ms. Kiefer said previously the Space, Needs and Location Committee had learned of difficulties such as this from Ms. Cole.  But subsequently Mr. Tunney reported to the Legislature on already completed work and did not mention current concern.  Mr. LeMaro then discussed other work in the building, noting the final paperwork on the roof repair will be completed to enable work to start next week.    Mr. Penniman asked how many employees were affected by the present problems and was informed two employees directly above the area of basement with the most significant problems were affected.  Mr. Marx stated the work Mr. Tunney did was not the same problem as the present one.  He believes the work done has improved the problems and that work is continuing to resolve it.

 Ms. Schuler inquired what would be the best solution to these problems.  Mr. Marx said it is a balancing act of maintaining what is necessary and planning for future needs in a new facility.  Ms. Kiefer noted Ms. Schuler's suggestions of temporary trailers in an emergency and asked if it could be done.  Mr. Marx said it require review of appropriate action and reactions.

 Mr. Winch asked for a progress report on filling the vacancy of Assistant in the Facilities Division and was informed that advertising began this past weekend.  It is anticipated to start reviewing applications within the next several weeks.  Advertising has taken place in the Central New York areas as well as the New York Times.  Mr. LeMaro hopes to appoint an individual to the position within two months.  Ms. Kiefer inquired about the job description and was informed it was not amended, however, the salary for the position was increased one labor grade, placing the starting salary at approximately $56,000.

Information

 Ms. Kiefer stated Ms. Spole provided copies of information on Hanshaw Road presented at the public meeting for interested parties.

 Ms. Schuler was excused at this time (4:25 p.m.)

Update on Photovoltalic Panels

 Mr. LeMaro reported since the opening of the parking garage adjacent to the Public Library there has been three panels damaged due to rocks thrown from the roof of the new City garage.  Each panel was approximately $900 and the particular panels are no longer manufactured.  He said a search is underway for replacement panels that match the size and outputs.  Ithaca Police have been on the scene twice attempting to obtain information on those damaging the panels.

Continuation on Biggs B

 Mr. Winch stated his belief that the work being done at Biggs B is a legitimate contingent fund request item.  He recommended Mr. LeMaro bring a resolution requesting reimbursement to the Committee for approval within the month.  It was noted Biggs B building is expected to be occupied for at least the next five years.  Mr. LeMaro said repairs are expensive; the cooling unit is eighty percent of the cost of a new one to repair.  In addition, he said it is difficult at times to determine the best option knowing that the expected use of the building is potentially limited.  Having to do this type of unplanned work also delays other work such as bike racks at the library, fire alarm systems, public safety cooling tower, sidewalk repair, masonry repair, etc.

Adjournment

 Mr. Penniman declared the meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m., without objection.

Respectfully submitted, Karen Fuller, Deputy Clerk