Call to Order

 Mr. Penniman called the meeting to order at 1:36 p.m.

Agenda Additions/Deletions

 There were no additions to or deletions from the agenda.

Persons Wishing to Address the Committee

 There were no persons wishing to address the Committee.

Air Service Committee (ASC) Report

 Ms. Blanchard thanked the Committee for the opportunity to present information regarding work undertaken by the Air Service Committee.

 Mr. Nicholas then reviewed written material provided to members of the Committee noted below:

Summary of Air Service Committee Activities

With assistance from a Cornell-sponsored facilitator, Yvette Rubio, the Air Service Committee (ASC) has had a number of Strategic Planning meetings to determine where we are now, where we want to be, and what we need to do to get there.

This process has defined some Strategic Goals:

Goal #1 - Contract Negotiations - Define how best to approach contract negotiations with partner airlines.
Goal #2 - Strategic Marketing and Air Service Development - Make an intelligent and committed push to improve passenger numbers through strategic marketing and well-planned air service changes - a clearly defined market and service that responds to that market.
Goal #3 - Governance - The airport's governance structure will be designed to give maximum authority to the ASC or its successor body consistent with municipal law.
Goal #4 - Operations Review and Strategic Staffing - Internal operations and staffing capabilities will align with the vision for the airport over time.

Goal 1 (Contract Negotiations) includes the following draft objectives:
- Commission a Negotiating Sub-Committee of the ASC
- Preparations for Negotiation, including investigating recent America West/US Airways contract negotiations, discussing negotiating strategy with industry experts, conducting contingency analysis and budget implications, defining revenue-sharing models, and agreeing on negotiating strategy.

Goal 2 (Strategic Marketing and Air Service Development) includes the following draft objectives:
- Define Enplanement Goals (Number of Enplaned Passengers for each of next 4 years)
- Define Plan to Reach these Goals

Goal 3 (Governance) includes the following draft objectives:
- Define Proposed Structure (charge, authority, terms of officers)
- Reach Consensus with County Government (review with County Attorney, recommend ideal to County Legislature, modify as needed to gain Legislature's approval).

Goal 4 (Operations Review and Strategic Staffing) includes the following draft objectives:
- Collect and update airport job descriptions
- Review daily actions/responsibilities compared to job descriptions
- Create a system to track internal operations to airport's financial objectives
- Recommend best practices to optimize internal operations
- Identify all prior ideas for potential improvements
- Commission an external revue by qualified agent
- Complete needs assessment
- Assess costs
- Define and approve a plan

The ASC has placed a priority on the first two goals - Contract Negotiations and Strategic Marketing & Air Service Development and will be devoting the next few meetings fully defining the goals and objectives and working towards satisfactory end products.

 With regard to Goal #1, Contract Negotiations, it was recommended to hold a brief executive session later in the meeting to discuss the matter.

 With regard to Goal #2, Marketing and Air Service Development, Ms. McPheeters said the $500,000 grant received requires having a strategic plan in place within six months of receipt of the funding; as the funds were just received there is time to develop a working plan.  She said the Federal government appears to be flexible with marketing and how to spend down the funds but a more detailed plan than outlined in the original grant submission needs to take place.  Ms. McPheeters explained that information would be obtained to develop a plan that takes into account the numerous surrounding airports that Ithaca must compete with.  She believes the approach taken will be designed to target various groups of people based on their specific travel requirements.

 Mr. Penniman inquired whether it is possible to subsidize passenger costs with the grant funds.  Ms. McPheeters stated Syracuse is providing a passenger subsidy, however, she is not aware of how they have set it up.  She noted our airport is subsidizing costs by covering some carrier costs as in incentive to bring in Northwest Airlines that will assist in the airline recovering their first-year costs.

 Ms. Kiefer arrived at this time.

 Ms. Blanchard noted a goal of the Air Service Committee is to spend in a manner that would provide more than a one-time benefit; writing down costs is good for the present but not for the future.  She said Mr. Nicholas has developed suggestions that would provide special features to passengers.  Ms. McPheeters said the Air Service Committee is spending the funds as though it is the only funds it will receive, thus they are being very frugal.  Ms. Schuler said it might be good to state the benefit of a local airport for winter travelers.  Ms. McPheeters said it is a good idea for local travelers.  She said the marketing will also include how to bring visitors from other areas to Ithaca and are looking to spend some grant funds in a joint venture with the Convention and Visitors Bureau next year to bring in people from areas such as Detroit, Ann Arbor, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia.

 With regard to Goal #3, Governance structure, Mr. Nicholas said what is being proposed by the Air Service Committee is a Committee/board that would consist of a Legislature member as Chair and Vice Chair, with other members having an interest in aviation.  This new committee/board would perform much the same duties as the Air Service Committee presently does and would report directly to the Legislature rather than a standing committee.  He said this proposal requires research by the County Attorney to determine if it is allowable under Municipal Law.  Ms. Blanchard said it would be much like the library and other groups; the budgeting would be approved by the Legislature with the day-to-day decisions resting with the committee/board.  She said the Air Service Committee is working on developing an appropriate structure.

 Mr. Penniman stated it should be made clear what the goal of the new committee/board is when it is developed.  Mr. Winch did not feel comfortable with the proposed committee/board reporting directly to the full Legislature, he felt the need to continue present practice of reporting to a program committee.  Ms. Blanchard recommended the subcommittee working on the new governance structure attend a future meeting to be able to fully discuss the matter.

Mr. Marx said the present group meets twice a month for two hours and discusses the ever-changing aviation industry.  He noted many decisions above the managerial level require extensive discussions.  He said it is important to understand that the airport is a community institution much the same way as the public library and public transportation; it requires its own board or oversight body.  Mr. Marx believes it is what is required to respond to the industry.

Ms. Kiefer recalled that in previous meetings it was noted that due to the aviation industry requirements it was thought the Legislature was too slow to act when necessary.  She said giving maximum authority to the Air Service Committee gave reason to pause; the Legislature can respond quickly when necessary and has done so.  She said that while the needs of the airport committee presently require a large time commitment she hopes it will not always be such.  Ms. Kiefer agreed with Mr. Winch that the proposed committee should follow County structure.  A request was made for the subcommittee to attend a future meeting of Facilities and Infrastructure.  Ms. Blanchard felt it would be worthwhile to allow the subcommittee to explain its reasoning for the recommendations that will be coming forward.

Ms. Schuler suggested models be reviewed in the process.  She also noted that although she will not be present in future years she strongly feels it is important to keep the Legislators informed and that they continue to be part of the loop.

Mr. Todd said he recalled a similar situation during the early years of the Solid Waste Facility.  A committee was formed until the facility was fully functioning at which time it was disbanded.  He hopes that in the future the airline industry will stabilize.

The Committee then discussed Goal #4 - Operations Review and Strategic Staffing.  Mr. Nicholas explained this would be done by an individual/group familiar with airport operations and the ability to anticipate changes in the future.  Mr. Todd requested information on enplanement levels.

Ms. Kiefer asked how personnel would be involved in this area; she was informed by Mr. Nicholas the staff would be included in this endeavor.

At this time, Mr. Penniman scheduled a meeting on November 22, 2005, at 1:30 p.m. to include the Governance subcommittee.   This meeting will be held at the airport, the exact location to be provided at a later time.

Executive Session

 On motion, an executive session was requested to discuss contract negotiations.  Executive session began at 2:08 p.m.

 On motion, the Committee went into open session at 2:15 p.m.

Airport Continued

Taughannock Aviation

 Mr. Nicholas spoke of his goal to not only have a modern terminal but to have an updated Fixed-Base-Operation (FBO) as well.  He said although over 80,000 individuals come through the terminal and have a good first impression of the facility, very important corporate aircraft utilize Taughannock Aviation's FBO.  At this time, Taughannock Aviation is able to begin its third and final phase of renovations that will provide a second hanger, after which the old T-hangers may be removed.  He noted the three-phase renovation project had been approved by the Legislature several years ago with the first hanger built in 1996.

 Mr. Thomas of Taughannock Aviation reported at this time Phase 3 is in the planning stages.  Phase 2, the first hanger, is complete including the paving and landscaping.  He reported that Phase 1 and 2 was totally funded by his company; at this time they are seeking funding (not from the County) for Phase 3 that will provide a 180 x 150 hanger.  He stated his business is successful and noted a portion of the funding for Phase 2 was from fees charged to corporate jets, which would be charged according size and/or services provided).  Upon completion of Phase 3 the Phase 2 hanger will be used as a maintenance building, with the Phase 3 building used for storage.  In addition, once Phase 3 is completed the old hangers will be demolished.

 Mr. Thomas stated his purpose in reporting to the Committee is twofold; to keep them informed of the progress, and to request that an extension on the lease to allow for twenty-years upon completion of the final phase.  He noted that due to the weather conditions it is unlikely that work will begin until spring of 2006.  Mr. Nicholas said a resolution would be brought forth to the Committee at the appropriate time to formally request approval of the lease extension.

 Mr. Thomas noted the Cornell University Quonset huts have been demolished.  He also noted that he is very happy with his facility and the tax abatements provided to him.  He said his total payroll has increased twenty-five percent and staff has increased from 42 to 52 employees during the period of September 2004 to September 2005.

Minutes of October 11, 2005

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Kiefer, to approve the minutes of October 11, 2005, as amended.

Highway Division

Snow and Ice Plans for 2005-2006 Winter

 Mr. Sczesny reviewed the snow and ice program for the upcoming winter season as reported the following:
· The State will be plowing 12.73 miles of New York State Route 96B previously plowed by the County; and approximately 11 miles on McLean-Peruville Road and Gulf Road plowed by the State will now be plowed by the County.  Although the contract received still indicates the County will plow 96B the NYSDOT has confirmed they will be responsible.  An amendment to the contract will follow.
· Approximately two miles in the Town of Caroline will be taken back by the County to plow.  This was done in order to provide more efficient service to the residents in the area.
· Two small sections on Burns Road and Updike Road in the Town of Ithaca will be plowed by the County, again to provide efficiencies of service.  By taking on the two small portions, the Town will not have to expend time and money to travel to this area.
· In answer to Ms. Kiefer's question regarding salt/sand/cinder mixes, Mr. Sczesny said each town/village has a different philosophy regarding snow and ice.  Although attempts have been made to have consistency throughout the County, particularly on roads plowed for the County, he did not believe it was adhered to.  As an example, he said the Town of Dryden offered to take over the roads not plowed by the State this year noted above, however, they use only 8% salt and the rest is sand.  Mr. Sczesny does not believe that would be adequate for this high-use highway.
· The Town of Newfield was not amenable to the suggestions made by the County regarding the County taking back some roads.  They stated the County had to agree to a contract the same as previous years for them to be interested.  A review by the County determined not to renew the contract.
· A request was made for information regarding the salt policy as well as the treatments used by the municipalities in the County.
· At this time all trucks are set up for snow/ice treatments if needed.  Mr. Sczesny stated the weather advisory gives him more concern for the possibility of trees falling due to ice.  He has all tree cutting and removal equipment inspected and ready if needed.
· Caswell Road Landfill Staging Site - Mr. Sczesny reported the necessary work at the landfill site has been taking place.  By staging vehicles at this location it will save approximately $3,500 in travel time as well as approximately $5,400 for diesel fuel.  He has spent $3,000 to make the existing structure useable.  He reminded members of his intent to staff this staging point with employees who live locally.    Mr. Sczesny said although Legislator Lane suggested using Dryden's highway barn as a staging point the Caswell Road location was closer.  Mr. Marx said this also assists Solid Waste by plowing the entrance to the leachate facility as well as mowing it in the summer months.

Wind Energy Purchase

Mr. Marx addressed questions previously raised by the Committee.  He said Mr. Gordon Boyd, consultant to Municipal  Electric and Gas Alliance (MEGA) said the State is aware of the increased cost for wind generation (two to three cents over the market rate due to the cost of development) and therefore permits the subsidy to offset this cost, which is normally a customer cost.  With regard to the question of knowing the County would receive what it is paying for, he stated the energy is from the Fenner Farm in Madison County.  At this time not all of their energy is subscribed for.  In the event it is oversubscribed, the appropriate kwh's would be transferred to the grid from Pennsylvania where another wind turbine farm is located.  He also said that the State verifies that what is purchased is being supplied to the grid.   Mr. Penniman raised the question of supply and demand; if the supply increases will the cost increase as well?  Mr. Marx did not know what would happen, but stated at the present time other wind-generating projects are being undertaken and there appears to be support for the development of projects such as this.  The market is such that it is anticipated that with time the cost for wind-generated electricity will become less expensive.

Mr. Stein said at present wind energy is not produced enough to create a large market; purchases such as the one proposed to the County is to encourage market growth to warrant the construction of additional wind turbines and reduce costs.  He said at present MEGA has eight counties, five cities, and eighty other municipalities interested in purchasing wind energy.  Of these groups, MEGA is offering a subsidy to only counties and cities that would like to purchase this form of energy.  Mr. Stein said since the cost of the wind-generated electricity is anticipated to decrease over time, MEGA's subsidy is in the amount of $2,000 per year for three of the five years contracted.  He said that Ithaca and Oneonta are considering this option; Otsego County has joined and is purchasing this energy, Tioga County is believed to purchase as well.

Ms. Kiefer said that while both Mr. Marx and Mr. Stein indicated that increased purchasing is expected to improve the market, and that any required power not supplied within New York will be provided from Pennsylvania, no information was provided whether Community Energy intends to construct additional wind turbines in New York.  Mr. Marx said it is unknown but would depend on the size of demand for those over-subscribed.  If the market demand is not large enough it may not occur.  He emphasized that this purchase would assist in reaching the County's Greenhouse Goals; when combined with energy savings from the Johnson Control projects it would almost meet the desired amount.

It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Schuler, to contract with Community Energy for a five-year purchase of wind generated electricity, and to accept $2,000 per year for a three-year period from Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance to offset costs.

Mr. Winch said the purchase of wind could help with energy credits for individuals looking to reside in the County.  In addition, it showed the County's desire to follow through on its commitment to green buildings and greenhouse gas reduction.

Ms. Blanchard informed members of MEGA's annual meeting this coming April 2006.  She said it will be a larger event than normal with many participants including Community Energy and other consultants regarding the field of energy.  She invited members to attend to speak directly to individuals to answer questions.

Ms. Kiefer said she feels it necessary to reflect the Environmental Management Council Energy Committee's discomfort in utilizing a provider that is not inclined to share information on their company.  Although she supports alternative energy sources such as wind she will not support the motion.

A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows:  Ayes - 4; Noes - 1 (Legislator Kiefer).  RESOLUTION APPROVED.

RESOLUTION NO.    - AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF WIND ENERGY EQUAL TO FIVE PERCENT OF TOMPKINS COUNTY ELECTRIC USAGE FROM COMMUNITY ENERGY INC., AND ACCEPTANCE OF      SUBSIDY FROM MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AND GAS ALLIANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,000 TO PARTIALLY OFFSET PURCHASE

 MOVED by Mr. Penniman, seconded by Mr. Booth.

 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 175 of 2004 stated Tompkins County's desire to continue its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by adopting a renewable energy standard that sets the following goal:
Tompkins County will increase its proportion of non-polluting, renewable energy so that 5 percent of its annual electricity use will be from renewable sources by 2008, and

 WHEREAS, Community Energy, Inc., of Wayne, Pennsylvania, has sufficient wind energy available to supply five percent (5%) of Tompkins County electric power usage, 390,000 kwh, allowing the County to meet the renewable energy standard outlined in Resolution No. 175 of 2004, and

 WHEREAS, the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance (“MEGA”) has offered to assist Tompkins County in this endeavor by providing a $2,000 subsidy each year for a three-year period to offset the initial increase in kilowatt hour costs by the County to make the renewable energy purchase more affordable, now therefore be it

 RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, That the County hereby authorizes the County Administrator, or his designee, to enter into a contract with Community Energy Inc., of Wayne, Pennsylvania, to purchase five percent (5%) of the County's electric power, 390,000 kwh, for a five-year term of January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010, at a rate of  $0.021 per kwh, for a total annual cost of $8,190,

RESOLVED, further, That the County hereby accepts the $2,000 from MEGA to be applied to the first year cost of the program.
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

Solar Panels

 Mr. Penniman asked Ms. Blanchard and Mr. Stein if they had any information regarding the ability of commercial property owners utilizing solar energy to sell back excess energy to utility companies (net metering).  Mr. Stein and Mr. Penniman said that New York State requires that residential customers have the ability to net meter and sell surplus but commercial customers do not have this at this time.  He said it is allowed if the utility company agrees, but at this time the only one he is aware of is Central Hudson.  Mr. Marx said the same applies for wind-generated electric as well.  Mr. Stein expressed an interest in assisting to find a way to assist commercial individuals.

Dryden Dam

 Mr. Marx reported he has spoken to NRCS regarding the required dam inspection.  They have indicated a desire to have a walk-through inspection that would provide the ability to certify a County employee for future inspections; this will be done in mid-November.  Ms. Kiefer recalled that in previous discussions regarding the dam inspection a liability question arose with regard to the County performing the inspection.  Mr. Marx said the County had the desire to see the required inspection was completed but it had been vague who is responsible for the actual inspection.  He said the NRCS suggested the previously mentioned training/certification as a way to see this is done properly.  Mr. Marx said Dryden will be contacted to participate in the walk through as well as Mr. Lampman and the newly hired civil engineer.

Mr. Winch spoke of work on Mt. Pleasant that indicated required grasses be planted to reduce soil erosion; however they have a short life and need to be replanted.  He asked if this were to be a similar situation at the dam who would be responsible for the reseeding.  Mr. Sczesny spoke of occasionally seeing areas where there is erosion sufficient to cause concern; he will continue to monitor these areas.

Brown Road

 Mr. Sczesny reported the State has completed the manual turn-count for the Brown Road - New York State Route 13 intersection.  This information will be compiled with the traffic count and then forwarded to the County.  Ms. Schuler inquired about a sign on Sapsucker Woods Road that indicated "No Outlet".  It was noted this has been on the road for some time; Mr. Sczesny will look into the ownership of the sign.

Federal Aid Project Revisions

 McLean Road:  Mr. Sczesny said Suit Kote has been given all necessary information regarding this project.  It appears that one parcel may have to be obtained through eminent domain; Mr. Wood, County Attorney, is reviewing the matter.

 The State has not yet provided additional information on the resubmission of proposed projects that reflect the State's request for extended dates delaying projects.  Within the next week Mr. Sczesny will be meeting with the New York State Department of Transportation regarding the planning of Phase 3 of the McLean Road project (bridge).

 Ellis Hollow bridge - a pubic meeting will be held on Thursday, October 27th at 7:00 p.m. at the Ellis Hollow Community Center.  The Coddington road pubic meeting will be on November 3rd.  It was noted that the Coddington Road project is still in the preliminary planning stage.

Pubic Safety Communications Projects

 Ms. Nelson reported that the consultant being utilized for the Snyder Road tower project resides in Fort Myers, Florida and has been evacuated due to Hurricane Wilma.  She said at this time there are not any companies expressing an interest in placing equipment on the new tower site.  Verizon has indicated an interest in refurbishing/upgrading the present tower location in a manner to not only hold their equipment but also be able to share the location with others.  The proposed Snyder Road project is being reviewed to determine what option would be most beneficial.

Facilities - Audit of Final Payment - Emergency Response Center

 It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Schuler, to approve the audit of final payment of the Emergency Response Center as presented.  Mr. Winch asked if all deliverables had been received on this job and was informed that the County did not accept the landscaping work as suitable.  Following discussions it was decided to reduce the contract by $10,000 and the County would then complete the landscaping to their satisfaction.  A discussion ensued during which it was requested that the dissatisfaction regarding the subcontractor used for the landscaping be recorded in an appropriate manner for future reference.

 A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows:  Ayes - 5; Noes - 0.  MOTION APPROVED.

Adjournment

 Mr. Penniman declared the meeting adjourned at 3:34 p.m., without objection.

Respectfully submitted by Karen Fuller, Deputy Clerk