Present:   R. Booth, Chair, N. Schuler, D. Winch, M. Lane (2:10 p.m.)

Excused: D. Kiefer, Vice Chair
 
Staff:     E. Marx, Administration; L. Jehu, Purchasing; J. Lampman; Highway; A. LeMaro, Facilities Director; R. Nicholas, Airport Manager; K. Fuller, Recorder
 
Legislators: K. Herrera

Guests: M. Talarksi, IBEW Local 241; J. Garcia, WHCU

Called to Order

 Mr. Booth called the meeting to order at 2:04 p.m.

Additions to and Deletions from the Agenda

 There were no additions to or deletions from the agenda.

Persons to Address the Committee

 There was no one wishing to speak to the Committee.

1) Chair's Report

Mr. Booth noted that at the Budget and Capital Committee meeting earlier in the day the subject of pay equity was briefly discussed as a potential subject of review in the future.  In addition, the items sent to Budget and Capital from the Committee relative to the Highway Division were approved.

2)  Minutes of October 26, 2004

 Mr. Booth postponed action until the November 23rd meeting.

3)  Authorization to Bid Third Party Administrator - Drug and Alcohol

 Ms. Jehu from the Purchasing Department stated this request is being made because the present contractfor the consortium is expiring.  It was noted that this item was discussed at the October 26, 2004 meeting and concerns were expressed related to the fulfillment of the contract.  Ms. Jehu explained the bid specifications are such that the previous difficulties should be appropriately addressed.  Mr. Winch spoke of the need for providing training to employees about the potential false positive for drugs that can be caused by everyday food items.  Ms. Jehu said the vendor is requested to provide annual training each April.  The consensus of the Committee was to proceed with the bid and to notify the Committee upon receipt and review.

 Mr. Lane arrived at this time.

4)  RESOLUTION NO:   - AUDIT OF FINAL PAYMENT - LOUNSBERY ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT

 MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Schuler to recommend the following resolution to the full Legislature for approval.  Mr. Lampman indicated all outstanding work has been completed on this project, and this represents the final closeout.  A voice vote resulted as follows:  Ayes - 4; Noes - 0; Excused - 1 (Legislator Kiefer).  MOTION CARRIED.
 WHEREAS,  the work performed by Economy Paving Co. has been completed as authorized by Resolution #212 of 2002, to re-place Lounsbery Road Bridge over Six Mile Creek, in the Town of Caroline, now therefore be it
 RESOLVED, that the final claim against the County of Tompkins, be and hereby is audited by the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee.

Vendor  Payment Request  Account No.  Amount

Economy Paving Co.  Final   HZ5103.53.07  $68,490.68
SEQR ACTION:  TYPE II-20

Explanatory Note:  The total contract amount for the above mentioned work was $822,339.95.

5) Highway and Bridge Status Report

Mr. Lampman provided information requested at the previous meeting as follows:

· Ellis Hollow Road - Because this project will resume in 2006, the condition of the road will be reviewed periodically to determine what repairs are necessary to maintain it in the interim.  It was noted there will be additional public meetings prior to initiation of actual work on this project.
· The six resolutions passed at a recent meeting of the Legislature respecting federal aid projects have been received by the State.  At this time additional information is being requested related to the scope of the projects; the County will proceed upon notification that Federal funds are still available for these projects.
· Warren Road and Forest Home - A discussion took place related to citizen recommendations respecting these two projects.  It was felt the Highway Division should consult with Town officials about appropriate treatments for these roads and the potential for the Town to share some of the expenses for elements of these projects (e.g., sidewalks).
· Closeout reimbursement figures will be provided at the November 23rd meeting.
· The McFarland-Johnson Report for Red Mill Bridge previously requested was provided.  The meeting with SHPO has not taken place, and it was again noted the County's preference is to relocate the bridge.  The Committee was informed that experience with SHPO has proven less restrictive if bridge projects do not include Federal funding.

6) Meeting with Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee

Mr. Lampman met in September with the Town of Ithaca's Transportation Council and discussed options such as pedestrian and bicycle walkways and the importance of keeping Town officials informed about projects proceeding in that municipality.  A mailing from the Town of Ithaca to affected residents located on Hanshaw and Coddington Roads had Mr. Lampman listed as a contact person, and several responses have been received by the Highway Division as a result of that notice.  It was noted that the Ellis Hollow Road project would not substantially affect Town of Ithaca residents because the scheduled work is primarily within the Town of Dryden.  Mr. Lampman stated that several years ago the Ellis Hollow Road project was submitted as a project for Federal funding, but the State did not act upon that proposal.  Now, the State is in the process of reviewing projects once more, and this proposal will be updated and resubmitted.

It was also noted that animal culverts are not considered as part of the normal repairs and upgrades to the County infrastructure,  and that an update on the Brown Road/New York State Route 13 intersection should be forthcoming in the near future.  Mr. Lane will work with Mr. Lampman to develop a letter with related questions/concerns about that intersection to the Department of Transportation.

7) Proposed changes in responsibilities/title of Deputy County Administrator

As a result of a memo written by Mr. Marx, a discussion occurred regarding the current combined position of Commissioner of Planning/Deputy County Commissioner (the memo is part of the official file of this meeting).  The memo assessed the pros and cons of the current situation and examined whether there are other possibilities that may be more beneficial.

The memo presented Mr. Marx's conclusion that his time would be better utilized if he were to serve as a combined Commissioner of Public Works/Planning instead of attempting to fulfill duties both as Planning Commissioner and Deputy County Administrator as he has done over this past year.  Mr. Marx indicated that Mr. Whicher, County Administrator had reviewed the memo and proposal with Mr. Marx and was supportive of the recommendation; in addition, Mr. Marx stated that Planning Department members are aware and supportive as well.  Mr. Marx said that Administration is in the planning process for next year and will address areas deemed to require coverage if he becomes Commissioner of Public Works/Planning.

Mr. Lane believes there is a need for more administrative personnel in order to properly perform duties within the County.  He does not feel it is good to have individuals possibly seeking employment elsewhere due to being overburdened.

Mr. Winch noted that overburdening an employee takes an emotional toll, particularly when the individuals take pride in fully completing their duties.  He agrees that a Commissioner of Planning is needed as well as a Commissioner of Public Works.

Committee members discussed with varying opinions the necessity of the Public Works Commissioner having an engineering degree.  Mr. Winch felt it was a very critical part of the position combined with administrative skills.  He believed that with a P.E. in the position of Commissioner there is a professional understanding of what is needed when dealing with other counties and the State.  Mr. Winch said he had heard a lot of criticism regarding the discontinuance of the County's Public Works Commissioner position.  Mr. Lane stated that he had not heard criticism about discontinuing the position of Commissioner of Public Works.

Mr. Booth said these are two important questions about the combined Commissioner Public Works/Planning position:  1) whether Public Works needs to be headed by an engineer; and 2) whether Mr. Marx will actually be Commissioner or the Deputy Administrator who is trying to head both Departments.  Mr. Booth said he had been concerned about both issues.  Mr. Marx said he did not believe Public Works needs to be headed by an engineer; he noted he has worked successfully as a member of Public Works issues without being an engineer.  He also said that he perceives this new position as being Commissioner of Public Works and Planning and as not involving his service as Deputy County Administrator.

Mr. Marx indicated that direction would be needed from the appropriate Committees, Administration, and the Public Works Cabinet.  Mr. Lane noted the review is a result of the Planning Committee's request.  It was also noted that the Planning Committee has requested a memo from Steve Whicher addressing the impacts of not having Mr. Marx serve as Deputy Administrator in future years.

Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Lampman indicated that the idea of a joint Commissioner of Public Works/Planning had been discussed previously and was a favorable option at this time.  Both thought the ability to discuss matters with a Commissioner was an important aspect of the position.  In addition, it was noted that the relationship between the Public Works and Planning has improved as a result of Mr. Marx's efforts.  Mr. Lampman said he did not believe it is critical for the Commissioner of Public works to have an engineering degree.  Mr. LeMaro shared the points of view expressed by Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Lampman and said he feels it will provide an opportunity for synergy.

8) Capital Payment Summary

Mr. LeMaro noted there are 2-3 items on the punch list for the Emergency Response Center, and project closeout payments will be forthcoming.  Several items will have contingent payments held until completion, such as landscaping and electrical/mechanical diagrams.

In an unrelated item it was noted that the recent problems with the public library security system was resolved.

9) Cost Implications Of Apprenticeship Requirements On Capital Projects

 Mr. LeMaro spoke of the apprenticeship program resolution adopted by the Legislature at its November 3, 2004, meeting.  He stated that he had heard both sides of the issue and noted he sees benefits can flow from the apprenticeship requirement.  He said that the requirements of Wicke's Law do not always provide the County with the best contractor for the least amount on the bid.  He believes the Legislature's recent action may provide the County an opportunity to obtain a better quality of work due to the apprenticeship program.  Although he believes some projects costs may increase, he believed that overall there may be price reductions on larger projects.  He did not report on specific costs that should be anticipated.  He has reviewed certified payroll documents submitted and noted that the County has on occasion paid higher rates due to the lack of apprentice programs because merit shops pay journeyman rates for all employees.  He said other contractors with apprentice programs have reduced costs.  Mr. LeMaro said forms are in place to certify payroll and that he does not feel it will be difficult to review information as the newly passed legislation goes into effect.

10) Adjournment

On motion the meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
 

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