Chair Joseph called a public hearing to order at 5:30 p.m. concerning proposed Local Law No. a of 2006 – A Local Law Authorizing a Tax on Real Estate Transfers, and asked if any member of the public wished to speak. He noted action on the resolution will be postponed pending the Governor’s signature.
The following e-mail was received by the Legislature from Richard Anderson, 1030 Hanshaw Road, regarding the public hearing: “ I will be out of town on Tuesday, August 1, so I am writing you to express my position on the proposed transfer tax increase. Owners selling their home already pay $4 per thousand of value in transfer taxes, but I am aware that the County Legislature is considering an increase of 50 to 100 percent in that burden. This proposal unfairly targets a specific population of Tompkins County residents, and considering that some families are forced to sell their home because of exceedingly high property taxes, adding on more taxes is an insult to injury. I am opposed to any increase in transfer tax or real estate property tax. The county must make adjustments in expenditures rather than continually reaching into the property owners pockets.”
Dick Patterson, President of the Ithaca Board of Realtors, presented the Legislature with a petition signed by the members of his organization and spoke against the proposed local law. Mr. Patterson said it would be a hidden tax that would be passed on to the buyers and could make homes less affordable for first-time home-buyers. In addition, he stated that buyers are concerned with property taxes, which are at times two to three times the amount they presently pay in other areas of the county. Mr. Patterson asked personally and professionally that the Legislature not adopt the Local Law Authorizing a Tax on Real Estate Transfers.
Chris Vann, President of the New York State Association of Realtors, spoke on behalf of his association and self, requesting that the Legislature not adopt the Local Law Authorizing a Tax on Real Estate Transfers. He spoke of three particular types of clients that the law would adversely affect: (1) an elderly individual having to sell their home because they could no longer afford to remain there, (2) a first-time home-buyer who would have to pay more to allow the seller the profit desired, and (3) an individual who will choose to live in another County rather than pay another form of property tax. Mr. Vann asked Legislators to have courage and vote against the law.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed at 5:37 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and Roll Call of Members
Members and guests participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Present: 14 Legislators. Excused: 1 (Legislator Sigler).
Privilege of the Floor by the Public
Lee Shurtleff, Director of Emergency Response, provided information relating to the heat warnings for the next several days issued by the National Weather Service. Steps have been taken to provide public service announcements on how to avoid heat-associated problems. In addition, various organizations have been contacted to determine what resources could be made available. Mr. Shurtleff announced the Red Cross will be manning a 24-hour “cooling center” at the Ithaca High School, and that other buildings throughout the county could be utilized if proven necessary. His department has anticipated additional calls due to the heat and various emergency/medical services have staffed accordingly. With regard to utilities, he reported there are no serious concerns at this time and usage will continue to be monitored. Mr. Shurtleff noted that with the flooding earlier in the month as well as the present situation, the Emergency Management Plan developed appears to be working well, and leveraging limited resources through partnering has been effective. Mrs. McBean-Clairborne announced that there will be an additional cooling station located at the Greater Ithaca Activities Center from 5:30 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. this evening. Ms. Robertson inquired about monitoring elderly individuals and was informed by Mr. Shurtleff that his department is requesting that agencies and individuals monitor clients, family members, and neighbors during the excessive heat.
Brigid Hubberman, Executive Director of the Family Reading Partnership, spoke of the Partnership, noting it is a grassroots, community-wide effort with a vision to weave knowledge and inspiration through the use of children’s books to provide an interest in reading. Ms. Hubberman informed the Legislature that the Partnership provides books free of charge and has an extensive campaign to bring about awareness of the importance of reading. In addition, she spoke of the Family Reading Partnership having been given national attention. The members of the Legislature were provided a copy of Jim Trelease’s book The Read-Aloud Handbook that provides information on how to read aloud to children; which includes information on the Family Reading Partnership. Ms. Hubberman asked for continued support of the Partnership’s efforts and noted that the Triad foundation has provided funding to assist in providing books to public and educational libraries.
Michael Lane, Dryden resident, former Legislator and member of the Industrial Development Agency, stated he and former Legislator Peter Penniman authored an article recommending the density policy be abolished. He spoke of the Cayuga Green project’s difficulties and noted initially there were divided votes at the IDA regarding the project; now the project is being reconfigured. Mr. Lane said the resolution appears to be the result of wanting to appease individuals not pleased with the present policy; there are many good things in it, however when put together, will not be workable. Mr. Lane said he believes that the density policy developed five years ago to invigorate downtown is not needed any more. In addition, other municipalities within the County would not require a density policy. Mr. Lane requested that members of the Legislature not support the resolution.
Privilege of the Floor by Legislators
Mr. Proto, District No. 7 Legislator, reported that former Tompkins County Civil Engineer, Jim Kazda, recently took third place in the Empire State Games long jump event as well as winning in another event during the games. In addition, as noted by Mr. Proto and Mr. Booth, Town of Ithaca Board member Herbert Engman received a first place in the 800 and 1500 meter 60-64 age group during the games.
Mr. Dennis, District No. 15 Legislator, stated he has a letter relating to the Family Reading Partnership he will distribute to Legislators. He also announced that Mr. Trelease would be coming to Ithaca on September 11th.
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, District No. 2 Legislator, announced that this evening was the National Night Out events in the City of Ithaca, and Town of Newfield celebrating communities, law enforcement, and safe communities.
Ms. Robertson, District No. 13 Legislator, shared information from an article appearing in the Mother Earth News entitled “12 Great Places You’ve Never Heard Of”, which listed Ithaca, New York first within the article.
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne announced a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) training program will take place at the Greater Ithaca Activities Center on Thursday, August 3rd starting at 7:00 p.m. This training is free of charge and funded in part by a community block grant. Mrs. McBean-Clairborne indicated preference will be given to City residents and participation is on a first-come, first-served basis. Individuals interested in the training must possess a Class “D” driver’s license.
Presentation – Update on HAVA (Help America Vote Act) and Voting Machines
Mr. Bo Lipari of New Yorkers for Verified Voting
spoke to the Legislature about his involvement in various associations
and work with the State Board of Election’s Advisory group regarding voting
equipment to become HAVA compliant. He addressed the process for
the replacement of the present lever machines by September of 2007, noting
testing and selection will be within the next four to six months.
Mr. Lipari reported that as of July 20th eleven voting systems have been
submitted to the State Board of Elections, with each machine’s application
requiring a $5,000 fee. The majority of these systems are touch screen
devices (DRE), with three or four optical scanning systems; one is a ballot
marking device. The testing process will proceed as follows:
· a procedure determining how the systems will
be tested will be developed
· testing is anticipated to take approximately
thirty days per system
· it is not yet decided if testing of several
machines will occur simultaneously
· upon completion of testing the certification
process will begin
Mr. Lipari stated he believes the machines could be certified in September if the testing phase begins in August, with the certification of some of the machines possible by early 2007. If the systems are sequentially tested it may not be completed for all the machines until next spring. He expressed concern if the testing were sequential as it may cause an unfair advantage to machines tested and certified early in the process.
Mr. Lipari spoke of the concern of how many machines would be needed to replace the present lever-machine systems. At the present time one lever machine serves approximately 800 voters. Some tests indicated that a disabled person could require 20-30 minutes to complete their voting process. It appears that more than one DRE machine would be required for each lever machine, however, a timing study would be an important part of determining the appropriate ratio of DRE’s to lever machines. At this time the State Board of Elections has not contracted for a timing study, which is anticipated to exceed the $50,000 discretionary budget limit. Because of the cost, the contract will be subject to the Office of General Services bid process.
Mr. Lipari said if there is a two-to-one ratio for DRE machines, $850,000 would be required for their purchase, with the County being responsible for any expense above the Federal HAVA funds provided. He recommends that public hearings be held to assist in making a choice of machine type. Mr. Lipari said at this time Nassau and Suffolk counties have done so and residents clearly indicated a preference for an optical scan/paper ballot machine.
In response to a question from Mr. Hattery, Mr. Lipari indicated New Yorkers for Verified Voting is a non-profit 501-3c group funded by citizen donations.
Mr. DeWitt and Ms. Cree, Election Commissioners, then provided a Powerpoint presentation that provided an update of their department’s HAVA-related work. It was noted that HAVA-related grants have been submitted to seek funds for polling site access improvements and training/outreach programs for 2007. They reviewed requirements for New York State as a result of the Federal Lawsuit: one disabled-accessible voting system per county (Avante “Vote-Trakker” Auto Ballot Marking System has been chosen), an interim Statewide database (initial upload completed June 30th) until the final database is in place in September 2007, and HAVA compliant machines by September 2007. Mr. DeWitt and Ms. Cree then reviewed information contained in the Brennan Report addressing particular criteria to be followed to assure accurate elections. In addition, they reviewed the results of hands-on voting machine testing and surveys completed recently within their department. Information regarding the optical scanners ability to use one machine for many individuals was reviewed as well as the concerns relating to costs and potential problems when using the paper ballot. It was noted an optical scanner will require annual printing costs; for a Presidential election the minimum cost for printing ballots would be $69,750. Ms. Cree stressed to the Legislature that although New York State is behind in becoming HAVA compliant a decision will be made only after a thorough evaluation, and will provide appropriate training of all staff, inspectors, and technicians, and will also provide public outreach.
In response to Ms. Herrera’s question, it was noted that individuals interested in the survey results could go to www.votetompkins.org.
Ms. Robertson inquired what audit procedures for the voting machines are required by New York State and was informed that three percent requires manual audits of papers versus machines; for Tompkins County it would be three machines.
Mr. Proto inquired if there would be the possibility of reimbursement for ballot-printing expenses and was informed there is no reimbursement, a small amount of funding received can be applied to voter and co-worker training and machines.
Mr. Dennis asked if Tompkins County would have to choose a machine prior to all machines receiving certification. Ms. Cree replied that if a particular machine is favored it would be beneficial to inform the manufacturer as soon as possible, the machines are not a stock item and would have to be built.
Ms. Robertson asked if the same ballot used for optical scanners would be used as an absentee ballot and was informed it would be the same. If a DRE machine were chosen, a separate absentee ballot would need to be printed.
Report from the Chair
Mr. Joseph announced the annual Tompkins County Blood Drive will be held on August 10th. Due to the recent emergencies the Red Cross has announced blood is in short supply. Mr. Joseph encouraged members to participate.
Report from the County Administrator
Mr. Whicher announced the final interviews of the two finalists for the Office for the Aging Director position is taking place on August 14th. He referred to the new budget scenario provided to Legislators for their review and noted it is not good news; this is not the final version and he will be providing additional updates in the near future. He reported that he and Jonathan Wood, County Attorney, met with officials of the Statewide Wireless system to go over the technical review. This review is the second step of the process and went extremely well. His office is preparing a proposal that will be submitted for consideration. It is hoped that positive feedback will be received in a short period.
Report from the County Attorney
Mr. Wood reported that a judge decided that the County’s Public Health fee for water systems is illegal. Although the sum involved is approximately $40,000, he believes it is important to appeal the matter. He said that the County would have to charge the same thing to cover the administrative costs that would require it to be included in property taxes that would have some individuals paying more than others. He feels the important principle is that the County charge the fee in the most fair manner. Mr. Booth inquired if there is a lot of case law regarding this matter. Mr. Wood indicated there is a lot of case law on the charging of fees, and this is somewhat interesting in that this is a fee for a program that is largely administrative, not tied directly to a water system. Mr. Wood believes case law supports the County.
Report from the Finance Director
Mr. Squires has no report.
Withdrawal of Resolution(s) from the agenda
Chair Joseph gave the appropriate Committee Chair permission to with draw the resolution entitled Adoption of Local Law No. a of 2006 – A Local Law Authorizing a Tax on Real Estate Transfers from the agenda.
Addition of Resolution(s) to the Agenda
It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Ms. Mackesey, to add to the agenda the resolution entitled Resolution Requesting a Call for Statewide School Aid Reform. A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes – 12; Noes – 2 (Legislators Hattery and Proto); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). RESOLUTION ADDED TO AGENDA.
Approval of Resolution(s) Under the Consent Agenda
It was MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to approve the following resolution(s) under the Consent Agenda:
RESOLUTION NO. 128 - AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE RIGHT-OF-WAY FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION – RINGWOOD ROAD BRIDGE (BIN 3314160) OVER CASCADILLA CREEK
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, a Project to replace the Ringwood Road Bridge
over Cascadilla Creek, BIN 3314160, P.I.N. 3753.20, (the Project) in the
Town of Dryden, is eligible for funding under Title 23 United States Code,
as amended, that calls for the apportionment of the costs of such program
to be borne at the ratio of eighty percent Federal funds and twenty percent
non-Federal funds, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 8 adopted on January 19, 2005,
approved the Project and authorized execution of an agreement with the
New York State Department of Transportation regarding administration and
funding of Scoping, Design (Phases I-VI), and Right-of-Way Incidentals,
and
WHEREAS, in order to expedite advancement of the Project
and realize potential total project cost reductions, the New York State
Department of Transportation requires the County to appropriate one-hundred
(100%) percent of the project costs and then file for reimbursement of
eligible costs, and
WHEREAS, the County of Tompkins desires to advance the
above project by making a commitment of one-hundred percent of the non-Federal
share of the costs of Right-of-Way (ROW) Acquisition, now therefore be
it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Facilities and Infrastructure
Committee, That the Tompkins County Legislature hereby approves the above-subject
project and authorizes the County of Tompkins to pay in the first instance
one-hundred percent (100%) of the Federal and non-Federal share of the
costs of Design, ROW Incidentals, and ROW Acquisition work for the subject
Project or portions thereof,
RESOLVED, further, That the sum of $117,766 is hereby
made available within account HZ5103.59239.53.11, Ringwood Capital Project
Account, to cover the cost of participation in the Design and ROW Acquisition
phase of the Project,
RESOLVED, further, That in the event the full Federal
and non-Federal share costs of the project exceeds the amount appropriated
above, the Tompkins County Legislature shall convene as soon as possible
to appropriate said excess amount immediately upon notification by the
New York State Department of Transportation thereof,
RESOLVED, further, That the Tompkins County Highway Manager
be and is hereby authorized to execute all necessary Agreements, certifications,
and reimbursement requests for Federal Aid and/or Marchiselli Aid on behalf
of the County of Tompkins with the New York State Department of Transportation
in connection with the advancement or approval of the Project and providing
for the administration of the Project and the municipality’s first-instance
funding of Project costs and permanent funding of the local share of Federal-aid-
and State-aid-eligible Project costs and all Project costs within appropriations
therefore that are not so eligible,
RESOLVED, further, That a certified copy of this resolution
be filed with the New York State Commissioner of Transportation by attaching
it to any necessary Agreement in connection with the Project,
RESOLVED, further, That this resolution shall take effect
immediately.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II - 2
RESOLUTION NO. 129 - AWARD OF BID – HEAVY DUTY ALL-WHEEL DRIVE SNOW BLOWER – ITHACA TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, the Finance Department
has duly advertised for bids to purchase a heavy duty all-wheel drive snow
blower for the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, and
WHEREAS, one bid was received
as follows:
Tracey Road Equipment (for Oshkosh Truck Corp.)
$ 500,525
, and
WHEREAS, the budget
for said vehicle is as follows:
FAA (95%)
$ 475,499
NYSDOT (2.5%)
$ 12,513
Airline Rates & Charges (2.5%) $ 12,513
Total
$ 500,525
, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation
of the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee, That subject to grants
being received from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the New
York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), the bid be awarded to
Tracey Road Equipment of East Syracuse, New York with a bid of $500,525,
RESOLVED, further,
That the local share be derived from the airport budget and that the Finance
Director be authorized to advance payments for this piece of equipment
until reimbursement is received from the FAA and NYSDOT.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-25
RESOLUTION NO. 130 - AUTHORIZING A LICENSE TO ENTER – CORNELL UNIVERSITY CHEMICAL DISPOSAL AND RADIATION BURIAL SITES – CONTINUED REMEDIATION, MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE WORK AT ITHACA TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, the County of
Tompkins signed consecutive Licenses to Enter for Cornell University to
install and maintain groundwater wells and to install and maintain an underground
collection system in connection with contamination emanating from their
chemical disposal and radiation burial sites, and
WHEREAS, the most recent
License to Enter expired on June 8, 2006, and there is a need for Cornell
University to continue remediation, monitoring, and maintenance work at
the groundwater wells located on airport property, and
WHEREAS, said remediation,
monitoring, and maintenance is likely to be necessary for many years to
come, 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 License to Enter for a period of
five (5) years, commencing on June 9, 2006,
RESOLVED, further, That
maps of well locations showing pollution plumes, all relevant data, and
all appropriate reports be timely filed at the locations agreed upon as
necessary among the County Airport Manager, the County Planning Department,
and the County Environmental Health staff and that Cornell University keeps
the appropriate Legislature Committee informed about their progress by
way of an annual presentation to that committee.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
RESOLUTION NO. 131 - ESTABLISHING THE RURAL SMALL BUSINESS LOAN PROGRAM AS A FORMAL ACTIVITY OF THE TOMPKINS COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND AND ADOPTING LOAN GUIDELINES
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Economic Development
Revolving Loan Fund was established in 1998 to provide low-interest loan
funds over $50,000 to existing businesses, and
WHEREAS, these loans are made using repaid United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development Small Cities Community
Development Block Grant funds which are targeted for economic development
activities to benefit low- and moderate-income persons, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 173 of 2004 authorized
the Rural Microenterprise Pilot Program as an additional activity under
the Tompkins County Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund providing
small business loans under $25,000, and
WHEREAS, the Economic Development Loan Oversight
Committee, based on its experience reviewing applications and recommending
loans, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Pilot Program and recommends
renaming it the Rural Small Business Loan Program and making it an ongoing
program of the Loan Fund, and
WHEREAS, the Rural Small Business Loan Program will build
capacity for self-employed persons and small business owners that will
enhance the incomes and quality of life of rural residents and expand the
local economy, and
WHEREAS, enhancing the viability of agricultural
businesses and supporting economic development efforts that expand rural
income opportunities are policies supported by the Tompkins County Comprehensive
Plan, and
WHEREAS, self-employment and entrepreneurship are
staples of the rural economy with over half of all self-employed workers
living in rural parts of Tompkins County, and
WHEREAS, the Economic Development Loan Oversight Committee
developed the Rural Small Business Loan Fund Guidelines as a framework
to evaluate loan applications, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Planning, Development,
and Environmental Quality Committee, That the County formalize an additional
activity under the Tompkins County Economic Development Revolving Loan
Fund to include the Rural Small Business Loan Program,
RESOLVED, further, That Tompkins County hereby adopts
the attached guidelines for use in evaluating loans and publicizing the
Rural Small Business Loan Program,
RESOLVED, further, That the Tompkins County Economic
Development Revolving Loan Fund Oversight Committee will make rural small
business loan recommendations to the Legislature based on information provided
in a loan application and review of credit worthiness.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
Tompkins County
Rural Small Business Loan Program
. . . A partnership with Alternatives Federal Credit
Union
Loan Guidelines
A. INTRODUCTION
The Tompkins County Rural Small Business Loan Program
provides low-interest, gap financing for small businesses for which other
types of financing might not be available. The program is designed to meet
the needs of small businesses: retail, service, small manufacturers, home-based
businesses, cooperatives, worker-owned businesses, non-profits and start-ups.
Self-employment and entrepreneurship are staples of the rural economy with over half of all self-employed workers living in rural parts of Tompkins County. The purpose of the Rural Small Business Loan Program is to build capacity for self-employed persons and small business owners that will enhance the incomes and quality of life of rural residents and expand the local economy.
Government funded loans to small businesses, including start up businesses, that cannot obtain traditional bank financing are riskier than traditional bank loans. It is anticipated that default rates may average 10% on funds loaned for these purposes. Among the criteria used to evaluate loan proposals and guide loan decisions are the ability of the applicant to service the debt, the variety and sources of anticipated cash flow, and the adequacy of the collateral pledged. The ability to service debt may be low in the first two years of operation, but it is anticipated that these small business loans will increase cash flow in future years to sufficiently cover debt service.
The program guidelines outlined in this document provide a framework within which the Tompkins County Rural Small Business Loan Program will operate. The guidelines have been set by the Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund Oversight Committee consisting of seasoned bankers, business people, and economic development professionals with a goal of furthering economic development in Tompkins County.
B. NATIONAL OBJECTIVES
The program is funded by the Tompkins County Economic
Development Revolving Loan Fund using repaid U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) Small Cities Community Development Block Grant
funds. As a condition of receiving that funding, the County (and therefore
the borrowers) must meet one of the following National Objectives for the
Small Cities program:
1. Benefit low and moderate income persons; or
2. Eliminate a slum or blighting condition.
C. COUNTY OBJECTIVES
In addition to meeting National Objectives, and being
consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and other municipal development
policies and objectives, the borrower must meet one of the following County
objectives:
1. Support of community-based businesses selling products
or services not offered by existing local businesses or that do not create
direct competition for another business located in the local target market
area.
2. Creation of new employment opportunities available
to low-income persons, and/or retention of existing employment opportunities
similarly available.
3. Expansion of the County’s real property tax base.
4. Not-for-profit organizations servicing Tompkins County
that offer a unique or highly desired new service to the community.
D. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
· Applicants must currently operate, or plan to
open, a business in a rural part of Tompkins County. Rural areas include
all of the places in Tompkins County outside of the most recent Census
Urbanized Area Boundary (the 2000 Urbanized Area includes the City of Ithaca,
Village of Lansing, Village of Cayuga Heights, and portions of the Towns
of Lansing, Ithaca and Dryden).
· The business must have five or fewer full time,
or full time equivalent, employees.
· Applicants must show proof of completion of
a small business training program (for example, courses offered at Alternatives
Federal Credit Union). In some cases demonstration of the ability to successfully
operate a small business may be substituted.
· Applicant incomes must fall below HUD low to
moderate income guidelines. The income guidelines for 2006 are as follows:
Household Size Income Limit
1 $35,550
2 $40,650
3 $45,700
4 $50,800
5 $54,850
6 $58,950
7 $63,000
8 or more $67,050
E. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Terms and conditions are negotiable, and based on documented
need and input from appropriate organizations and financial institutions.
Loan proceeds can be used for real estate and building improvements; equipment
and related improvements; working capital and inventory. Loan amounts are
set at a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $25,000. A maximum of $10,000
of the total loan amount can be used for working capital unless sufficient
collateral is pledged to cover any additional amount. Personal guarantee(s)
of the owner(s) of the business is required. Maximum loan lengths are as
follows:
Real estate and building improvements: 20 years
Equipment and related improvements: 10 years
Working capital and inventory:
5 years
No loans for equipment will be made for a longer period than the anticipated useful life of the equipment. Businesses that either cease operations or leave the County will be required to immediately repay the loan.
Applicant will be required to pay for the cost of a credit report.
The Oversight Committee will recommend a maximum of six rural small business loans or a maximum of $100,000 in loan funds each year.
F. UNDERWRITING GUIDELINES
To the extent a project addresses national and county
objectives, and meets the following underwriting guidelines determines
whether or not it is a project that can be loaned these funds. Many factors
will be balanced to assess the overall credit worthiness of an applicant.
At the very least the following benchmarks should be reached:
1. The business must meet National and County objectives
of the program.
2. The business must meet the eligibility requirements
of the program.
3. The business must show the ability to service the
debt (debt coverage ratio minimum of 1.2:1).
4. The management of the business must have demonstrated
history and capacity to conduct the business and show commitment to the
project (owner’s equity minimum of 10%).
5. The payment history of the business with other lenders
and creditors as well as the credit history of the borrowers and guarantors
must be satisfactory (minimum credit score of 600 for borrowers and guarantors).
6. The review of proposed collateral must be satisfactory
(minimum of 80% using standard liquidation values).
7. The business must show adequate cash flow to support
a salary for the proprietor and adequate reserves for unexpected expenses
within two years based on reasonable projections.
The following criteria will be evaluated in making a loan
determination:
1. Slum or blighting conditions eliminated (if cited
as the objective of the project).
2. Financial need of the project.
3. Likelihood of success of the project.
4. Potential for spin-off benefits in Tompkins County
(jobs and tax revenue).
5. Long-term growth potential of the business.
6. Leveraging of private funds.
7. Relationship to other projects being undertaken in
the area.
8. Potential for positive or negative environmental impacts.
9. Potential for income enhancement or economic self-sufficiency
for rural residents.
10. Compatibility of the business operation with existing
rural community character.
G. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
1. A completed loan application.
2. A brief background on the business and/or a business
plan that includes the proposed project, the market area for the products,
marketing of those products, and a list of employees working for the business
and/or the expansion (both current and future).
3. Business and personal credit references (including
bank references) for all stockholders, owners or partners with at least
20 percent equity in the business.
4. The most recent three years of financial statements
and business tax returns as well as a current (to within 90 days) financial
statement (including income statements, balance sheets, and supporting
schedules). The financial statements must follow Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles. (One year of personal tax returns for the aforementioned stockholders,
partners or owners are acceptable if the business has not been in business
for two years).
5. A minimum of two years projected month by month profit/loss
statements for the business.
6. A Personal Financial Statement from each principal
of the business.
7. Description of collateral to be pledged and its approximate
market value or price quotes for new equipment.
8. Description of the nature of the equity investment.
9. If the business is a corporation or partnership, include
a copy of the certificate of incorporation or partnership papers, and a
resolution from the Board of Directors or partners authorizing the loan
request and designating who will sign loan papers.
10. Other information as may be reasonably required by
the Loan Committee.
H. ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS OF THE PROGRAM
Alternatives Federal Credit Union will provide technical
assistance in filling out loan applications, review submitted applications,
and provide a credit analysis to the Oversight Committee. County staff
will review loans for completeness and adherence to guidelines and requirements.
The Oversight Committee will make approval recommendations to the Tompkins
County Legislature. Once the Legislature approves a loan, County staff
will be responsible for closing and servicing the loans.
I. FURTHER INFORMATION AND APPLICATIONS
For information about the Tompkins County Rural Microenterprise
Loan Pilot Program or to request an application contact:
Tompkins County Planning Department121 East Court StreetIthaca, NY 14850Phone: 607-274-5560 Alternatives Federal Credit Union125 North Fulton StreetIthaca, NY 14850Phone: 607-273-4611
RESOLUTION NO. 132 - AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE A RURAL SMALL BUSINESS LOAN FOR JEFF MARIANNI / THREE SWALLOWS FARM FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Economic Development
Revolving Loan Fund was expanded in 2004 to provide low-interest loans
to small businesses (microenterprise businesses), and
WHEREAS, these loans are made using repaid United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development Small Cities Community
Development Block Grant funds targeted for economic development activities,
and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Economic Development
Revolving Loan Fund Oversight Committee reviewed an application and proposal
for a working capital and equipment loan to Jeff Marianni to expand organic-farming
operations at Three Swallows Farm in the Town of Danby, and
WHEREAS, the Oversight Committee has fully assessed the
ability of Jeff Marianni to make timely payments on monies loaned from
the Revolving Loan Fund, and
WHEREAS, enhancing the viability of agricultural
businesses and supporting economic development efforts that expand rural
income opportunities are policies supported by the Tompkins County Comprehensive
Plan, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Planning, Development,
and Environmental Quality Committee, That the County is hereby authorized
to sign a Loan Agreement with Jeff Marianni,
RESOLVED, further, That the County Administrator be authorized
to sign all documents related to this loan, and that the County Finance
Director be authorized to adjust the budget in the following manner:
REVENUES
8693.44700 Repaid Econ. Dev. Loans $25,000
EXPENSES
8693.54400 Program Expense $25,000
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-3, II-25
RESOLUTION NO. 133 - BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS – PLANNING
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Administrative Manual Policy 05-02,
budget adjustments exceeding $5,000 require Legislative approval, now therefore
be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Planning, Development
and Environmental Quality and the Facilities and Infrastructure Committees,
That
the Director of Finance be directed to make the following budget adjustments
on his books:
Planning
Revenue Acct
Title
Amt
Approp Acct
Title
CD8688.44959 Federal Aid $600,000 CD8688.54400
Program Expense
CD8695.42411 CD Program Income $350,000 CD8695.54400
Program Expense
Explanation: HO 7 Grant Funds; HO 104 HUD Program
Income
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
RESOLUTION NO. 134 – INCREASE IN HOURS – DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLE SUPERVISOR – COUNTY CLERK
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Clerk wishes to increase
the hours for the position of Department of Motor Vehicle Supervisor from
37.5 hours per week to 40.0 hours per week to accommodate the pressure
of business, and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Clerk wishes to maintain
a level of service only possible by having this position designated as
a forty-hour work-week, and
WHEREAS, such change would be beneficial to the
organization and would result in increased efficiency, and
WHEREAS, revenue generated by the Clerk’s office
will cover these additional expenses, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
and the Budget and Capital Committees, That the standard work week for
one position of Department of Motor Vehicle Supervisor (210) Labor Grade
N84, be increased from 37.5 hours per week to 40.0 hours per week, effective
August 7, 2006,
RESOLVED, further, That no additional funding is
required.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
RESOLUTION NO. 135 – AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT A GRANT FROM THE STATE ARCHIVES
MOVED by Mr. Booth, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present under the Consent Agenda.
WHEREAS, the County Clerk’s Office has been notified
of a grant award from the State Archives in the amount of $34,814, and
WHEREAS, the State Archives grant represents a
project for the County Clerk’s Office to back file deed records into their
Electronic Document Management System, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
Committee, That the County Administrator or his designee be authorized
to execute all contracts related to this award,
RESOLVED, further, That the Director of Finance
is authorized and directed to make the following budget adjustment:
APPROPRIATION: A1410.54442 Professional Services
$38,814
REVENUE: A1410.43089 Other State Aid
$38,814
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
Approval of Appointment(s) Under the Consent Agenda
There were no appointments.
Report from the Public Safety Committee
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, Chair, reported the Committee met prior to the Legislature meeting to act on rollover requests that are on the agenda. The Committee will meet next on August 3rd.
Report from the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, Chair, reported the Committee met on July 26th and is focusing on bylaws for the Committee. She indicated the intent is to replace Affirmative Action with this Committee and is initially addressing the matter of bylaws.
Report from the Health and Human Services Committee
Mr. Proto, Chairman, said the Committee will meet tomorrow, August 2nd. He also indicated that several dates will be suggested that will allow the Committee and other Legislators the opportunity to learn about various agencies associated with the recommended budgets brought forth by the Human Services Coalition.
Report from the Facilities and Infrastructure Committee
Mr. Randall, Chair, reported the Committee met on July 25th during which annual reports were provided for review prior to discussion at the next meeting. The Committee was introduced to the new Assistant Director of Facilities; reviewed 2007 budget highlights, including the amendment of the Public Works Administration budget lines to more accurately reflect the budgeting; Solid Waste projections that would require a $2 increase in the annual fee to covering anticipated budget increases; Airport projects; over target requests in the amount of $400,000 from Facilities Division to cover maintenance costs; and information from the Highway Division regarding increased costs as well as State and Federal assistance with regard to the recent flooding. Mr. Randall said a decision was made to re-establish the twice monthly meeting schedule due to the amount of work to be accomplished; the next meeting will be Tuesday, August 8th. Ms. Mackesey spoke of having toured Old 76 Road that experienced damage from the flooding and noted how quickly the work is being completed by County staff. She indicated she was extremely impressed by their professionalism. Mr. Shinagawa spoke of single-stream recycling having been discussed at the Committee meeting, explaining it would enable all recyclables to be put in a single container. He believes it will provide an incentive to recycle. In addition, Mr. Shinagawa said it is important for Tompkins County to remain competitive in the recycling field, others will take advantage of the revenue stream if Tompkins County does not.
Report and Presentation of Resolution(s) from the Planning, Development, and Environmental Quality Committee
Ms. Robertson, Chair, reported the Committee met on July 20th and prior to the Legislature meeting. She noted two items on the Consent Agenda dealt with the rural small business loan program and provided flyers relating to the program to be given to municipalities. Ms. Robertson spoke of Mr. Marx’s report regarding the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) facility relocation to Dryden, stating they are proceeding with site acquisition, although the exact timetable is unknown for completion. Mr. Marx has received a letter in May from the NYSDOT regarding the County’s request for reimbursement as agreed upon in the Memorandum of Understanding indicating they are considering the request. She noted that work done by the County on this project was $39,000. In addition to these items, she reported the Committee heard budget summaries from departments which include a $60-70,000 over target request from Planning for a variety of projects. In addition, the Committee spoke to Gary Ferguson of the Ithaca Downtown Partnership’s interest in developing an arrangement for County support of the IDP. Mr. Ferguson will work with Mr. Marx to determine things that the IDP are able to complete that the County cannot. Ms. Robertson indicated the largest item on the Committee was the Industrial Development Agency’s density policy resolution and included some language changes as a result of the Committee’s meeting prior to the Legislature meeting.
RESOLUTION NO. 136 - SUPPORTING CONTINUATION OF DENSITY INCENTIVE PROGRAM BY THE TOMPKINS COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Shinagawa. Ms. Herrera said she is a member of the Industrial Development Agency (IDA) as well as the Planning Committee. She is interested in the future of the density policy and supports many of the intentions completely, however, she said the amendments suggested at Committee have resulted in a “watered-down” version that she cannot support. Ms. Herrera spoke of the IDA’s discussions to include language within the application form that would indicate support of items thought to be of value to the community; the amended language has the effect of suggesting steps that would have the IDA go backwards. In addition, she said the language amendment of “should’ to “encouraged” do not indicate that the Legislature as a body find particular items important. She feels that her constituent needs and goals are being discussed and asked that her lack of support is not viewed as criticism to the density policy or lack of support for economic development but rather a desire to move forward the discussion, assert, and encourage IDA discussions to be more specific than the amended resolution presently offered.
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne agreed with Ms. Herrera’s statements, noting she was ready to support the resolution prior to the revisions made at Committee. She expressed concern regarding language dealing with diversity, noting the Legislature has set policies that show the County as a model that embraces diversity. In its present form, the resolution is not as strong as the County Diversity Statement. Mrs. McBean-Clairborne stated the Diversity Statement is more than a particular workforce and diversity itself, but the way individuals do and/or see businesses working with us; she does not like “are encouraged to”.
Ms. Robertson indicated amendments are possible. She said a consideration given at Committee is this is strictly an advisory document crafted to strike a balance between ideal and possible. She indicated a desire to have a strong vote on the resolution.
Mr. Hattery said as a member of the IDA he supports smart growth, density, and economic health for the City, however he won’t support the density policy or renewal of it as he believes there are inherent conflicts of the density policy with basic projects of the IDA policies that were designed and supported to create. In addition, he believes the resolution speaks to the possibility of expanding the density policy to other municipalities of the County, which unless requested by a municipality should not be included. Mr. Hattery also believes that use of the IDA tax abatement authority is a tool that does not work with the density policy.
Mr. Shinagawa noted the recommendations are not consistent and are hierarchal. He does agree and believes it should be amended.
It was MOVED by Mr. Shinagawa, seconded by Ms. Mackesey, to amend the bulleted recommendations offered within the resolution to all read “should” rather than “encourage”. He also stated that he believes that Common Council when reviewing the density policy was looking at community benefits.
Mr. Proto noted at today’s Committee meeting he had recommend the word “encourage” as many tenant businesses may not be able to comply with a livable wage, which while is what is encouraged, may be an inaccurate assumption by the Legislature. In addition, he believed that an IDA requirement of a diversity policy may be overstepping its authority. He noted the Committee unanimously agreed with the amendments.
Ms. Robertson will support the amendment, noting there should be a higher bar for the projects rather than a general one. She stated with the assumption there will be competition for projects and noted the items would be something extra the projects could provide.
Ms. Herrera supports the amendment that recognizes community benefits that are seen. She noted what is under discussion at the IDA is more of an educational process.
Mr. Dennis supported “encouraged” at Committee, however will support the amendment, understanding these are recommendations.
A voice vote on the amendment resulted as follows: Ayes 11; Noes – 3 (Legislators Hattery, Randall, and Proto); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). AMENDMENT CARRIED.
Ms. Herrera spoke to the recommendation relating to contractors and noted an exception to the work “major”. She believes there is a shortage of good contractors and that a certified apprentice program is good.
It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, to amend the recommendation to the following language:
· “Contractors should offer a certified apprenticeship program for skilled trades in construction;”.
Mr. Booth said he believes all the bulleted items are recommendations. He noted small contractors may not be able to comply with this request and therefore he cannot support the amendment. Mr. Dennis said that he had supported the inclusion of “major”, however perhaps substituting language that specified a dollar amount such as $1 million would be adequate.
It was MOVED by Mr. Dennis, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne to amend the amendment as follows:
· “Contractors who receive contracts of $1 million or more should offer a certified apprenticeship program for skilled trades in construction;”
Ms. Herrera appreciates the intention, however a contractor can subdivide the contract to subcontractors to avoid this recommendation, she believes the broader statement was better.
Mr. Hattery believes that there are contractors who receive training outside of a certified apprentice program, which can be better than a certified program, would be discriminated against. He does not believe the recommendation should be included within the resolution.
Ms. Robertson inquired how the County dealt with this situation regarding our award of bids and was informed by Mr. Joseph that he believed it too had a $1 million clause. In response to a question of how the County deals with the potential of subcontracting work it was noted that the County does not subdivide contracts; in this situation it could be subdivided to avoid the recommendation of certified apprenticeship programs. Mr. Booth believes the $1 million more specifically covers the desire than the word “major”.
Ms. Mackesey noted small contractors would obviously not be able to have a certified apprenticeship program, she believes the intention is to have as many people as can train their workers. She believes only deletion of the word “major” is adequate.
Mr. Proto spoke of the issue being discussed previously and recalled how local contractors had spoken of their not being able to do business with the County due to the apprenticeship clauses within contracts. Other statewide organizations spoke of how local contractors could receive the training independently which would enable them to bid. He believes that the County is trying to refine the process too much and that it will be the IDA who will determine what will prevail. Mrs. McBean-Clairborne recalled that skilled trade workers also spoke out in support of the apprenticeship program requirement. She believes the amendment commits the previous resolution passed by the County and will support this.
Mr. Joseph stated the resolution is advice to the IDA and as such it is important that members of the IDA to support the recommendation. He asked Ms. Herrera if she could and was told by Ms. Herrera that it is important to have had the discussion and that the $1 million amendment is well intended; in the spirit of cooperation she will support it.
Mr. Proto noted it was an omission not to mention the skilled trade workers were also present at the previously mentioned meeting.
A voice vote to amend the amendment dropping the word “major” and inserting a $1 million threshold resulted as follows: Ayes – 9; Noes – 5 (Legislators Hattery, Kiefer, Proto, Randall, and Stevenson); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Proto requested that the $1 million figure be reviewed as construction costs are rapidly increasing.
A voice vote on the amendment as amended resulted as follows: Ayes – 9; Noes – 5 (Legislators Hattery, Kiefer, Proto, Randall, and Stevenson); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). MOTION CARRIED.
Ms. Kiefer indicated that the original resolution had contained a recommendation addressing competition. She had recommended substitute language for the original resolution and would like to see one of the options added to the revised resolution.
It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, to amend the resolution to include the following: “Such projects, whenever possible, should avoid direct competition with existing businesses in the density district;”
Mr. Proto encouraged support of the motion and noted in the past local businesses have been eliminated due to larger companies coming to the area due to incentives. He believes it is unfair to the local businesses that have been self-sustaining for years to possibly go under due to incentives provided much larger firms with no local history. Mr. Proto spoke of discussions with Ms. Herrera relating to the newly acquired Empire Zones and indicated there is still information to be obtained regarding them; it may indicate there is no longer a need for the density policy to exist. He recommended postponing action until this information has been received and reviewed.
Ms. Mackesey spoke of how free enterprise is a standard for the county, with competition being a large part of it. She noted many towns have experienced local small businesses being overtaken by larger companies. She believes there is a large inconsistency regarding support of the limiting competition. She believes a planned economic policy is the right thing for the county to do, however, it is a broader question and problem to be addressed another time.
Mr. Joseph spoke against the inclusion of this recommendation; he believes the opposite of Ms. Mackesey. He said it is not about competition being allowed but rather government should bias the competition. He thinks individuals wanting the recommendation feel it is not the government’s place to intervene and bias the competition. He said there are other public benefits that outweigh the fact that the competition is being made biased. If individuals feel the government should not bias the competition they should not support the resolution. Putting this phrase in the resolution says I want a density policy but without its inevitable impact which is to bias the competition of businesses in a particular area.
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne respected Mr. Joseph’s statements but said each item could have much the same argument. She spoke of the small businesses and noted they understand diverse communities and how to embrace it. She noted diversity does not mean hiring of a particular individual, it is only one piece of it. Mrs. McBean-Clairborne said she did not see anything in the statement that offers protection or incentive to businesses.
Ms. Robertson believes Mr. Joseph’s statements point to the crux of the whole policy. Mr. Hattery indicated the problem is the density policy for projects that subsidize competitive enterprises, which is why he believes there has been controversy. He said there would be no need for a density policy if the projects were restricted and would not be incentive to be competitive; if the clause were included there would be no need for a density policy. Ms. Robertson replied it is complicated to figure out individual projects and feels it is the work of the IDA to balance issues surrounding each project.
Mr. Booth said the competition piece is a lot of what the IDA is doing; in addition, many government decisions bias the playing field in one manner or another. He spoke of zoning ordinances classifying different commercial districts with a variety of limitations. He said the same is true with street investments, traffic controls, placement of bridges, etc. as having an impact on a competitive playing field. If the IDA were to decide the standard is that the projects invested in should not have competition with existing businesses, there would be very few investments. He urges that the clause not be included and recognize that a density policy could not exist without competition in some form.
Ms. Herrera said competition helps people to excel. She thought Ms. Kiefer’s suggestion was good. She has heard from many constituents regarding the Cayuga Green project, in particular, that it was not favorable to provide revenue from tax dollars for a competitive business.
A voice vote on the amendment to reinsert the competition clause resulted as follows: Ayes – 6 (Legislators Hattery, Herrera, Kiefer, McBean-Clairborne, Proto, and Shinagawa); Noes – 8 (Legislators Booth, Dennis, Joseph, Koplinka-Loehr, Mackesey, Randall, Robertson, and Stevenson); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). MOTION FAILED.
Mrs. McBean-Clairborne inquired if the recommendations indicated the ability to review the project and recapture funds in the event contractual obligations are not met. It was noted the clause presently in the resolution calls for a review in the event there are substantial changes to the project itself, not requirements.
It was MOVED by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, seconded by Ms. Kiefer, to add the following clause: “There should be a recapture policy in the event that a recipient does not live up to their agreements.”
The amendment was clarified to provide a clear understanding that the conditions of the contract as well as other recommendations such as ones contained within the resolution were required; if performance did not follow the requirements it could result in paying back funds provided. Mr. Booth asked if the present laws allow for recapture of funds and was informed it does, however the IDA presently utilizes this for contractual agreements relating to job creation. Mr. Shinagawa reported that Common Council also has spoken to recapture of funds as outlined in the addition to the resolution. Ms. Robertson also believed the addition was worthwhile.
A voice vote on the motion to add the recapture clause as stated above resulted as follows: Ayes – 13; Noes – 1 (Legislator Randall); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Booth stated when former Legislator Mike Lane speaks he listens closely. He agrees with Mr. Lane that the IDA may create a structure and process so difficult that very few project sponsors come forward which would be detrimental to the city and other nodules of development. He believes the policy should continue because it is difficult to build in centers due to land cost, taxation, etc. and the policy assists in encouraging development in specified centers. He hopes the City and nodules throughout the County will continue to do so.
A voice vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes – 9 (Legislators Booth; Dennis, Herrera, Joseph, Koplinka-Loehr, Mackesey, McBean-Clairborne, Robertson, and Shinagawa); Noes – 5 (Legislators Hattery, Kiefer, Proto, Randall, and Stevenson); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency
(IDA) adopted the City of Ithaca Density Incentive Program (density program)
in 2001, and
WHEREAS, the resolution of the Tompkins County
Legislature originally endorsing that program provided for that endorsement
to sunset in 2006, and
WHEREAS, the IDA is now reviewing the density program,
and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has requested that
a modified program be continued, and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan’s
principles and policies, particularly those in the Centers of Development
section of the plan, support dense mixed-use development in central business
districts throughout the county, and
WHEREAS, tax incentives are one of the few tools
that can be used at the county level to encourage a nodal pattern of development
that reduces sprawl, conserves natural resources, preserves farmland and
open space, efficiently utilizes investments in public infrastructure,
and builds sustainable communities, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Planning, Development
and Environmental Quality Committee, That the Tompkins County Legislature
endorses continuation of a density incentive program administered by the
Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency,
RESOLVED, further, That the Tompkins County Legislature
urges the IDA to incorporate the following as part of its review of density
policy projects, in order to maximize the community benefits of such development:
· Such policy should be available to any community
that develops a density incentive program in accordance with the principles
and policies of the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan;
· Any policy should require, for each project,
an independent and comprehensive financial needs analysis;
· Contractors who receive contracts of $1 million
or more should offer a certified apprenticeship program for skilled trades
in construction;
· A significant percentage of construction labor
should be local workers;
· Tenant businesses should provide livable wages
and opportunities for advancement for employees;
· Projects should have a diversity plan and track
diversity in employees, including tenant businesses within density policy
projects;
· Such projects should incorporate urban design
elements that encourage pedestrian travel and facilitate community interaction;
· Buildings should be Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (“LEED”) certified;
· Any residential development in a density policy
project should include some affordable housing;
· Substantial changes in projects following IDA
approval should result in a new IDA review; and
· There should be a recapture policy in the event
that a recipient does not live up to their agreements.
RESOLVED, further, That the Tompkins County Legislature
will receive annual updates and review this program for continuation of
support five years from the adoption of a revised density incentive program
by the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency.
SEQR ACTION: No Action Necessary
Ms. Robertson announced the Committee will meet next on August 30, 2006, at 3:00 p.m.
Report and Presentation of Resolution(s) from the Personnel Committee
Mr. Dennis, Chair, reported the Committee would meet on August 9th at 3:00 p.m. He stated an executive session has taken place regarding contractual issues and he anticipates hearing additional information within sixty to ninety days.
Report and Presentation of Resolution(s) from the Government Operations Committee
Ms. Herrera, Chair, reported the Committee met on July 19th; the work is reflected on the Consent Agenda. In addition, Mr. Potter, Director of Information Technology Services Department, spoke to the Committee about the Communications Policy and E-Mail System update requirements. In addition, Ms. Herrera reported on the resolutions regarding Advisory Board appointments as well as the Rules of Voting. She noted that the Committee will also be addressing what appears to be an additional conflict regarding voting between Legislative Policy and Roberts Rules as well as times when the full Legislature is not in attendance. Ms. Herrera said that following the meeting the Committee toured the County Clerk’s office and was shown how the archive grants have improved the office.
RESOLUTION NO. 137 - ADOPTION OF REVISED ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 01-26 - ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND BOARDS
It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Mr. Booth. Ms. Herrera stated the modifications completed by the Committee were to clarify the policy; she said it isn’t ideal but reflects the work of the Committee. Mr. Proto said the revision may be the intent of this Legislature, but may not be what previous Legislature’s intended. He does not support the resolution and expressed his concern for item number five, as he does not believe individuals not residing within the County should have the ability to have a voting seat and make decisions. Mr. Proto spoke of various advisory board’s carrying weight with particular issues and feels the amendment softens the procedure for those outside of the County desiring placement on advisory boards. Mr. Stevenson stated he voted against it in Committee and will not support the resolution now. He agreed with many of Mr. Proto’s statements and believes it does not provide a consistent policy and allows for an arbitrary statement.
It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Ms. Mackesey
to amend the first paragraph to read:
“WHEREAS, to enable the County’s Advisory Committees
and Boards to better advise the County Legislature, the policy on Advisory
Committees and Boards has been revised to include a provision for filling
certain seats with non-County residents,”.
A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes – 10; Noes – 4 (Legislators Hattery, Proto, Randall, and Stevenson); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). MOTION CARRIED.
It was MOVED by Mr. Proto, seconded by Mr. Stevenson, to delete the following language from item #5 in the policy “or where the County Legislature approves advisory board bylaws that provide that one or more seats on the advisory board will be filled by the holder of a particular office or position.”
Ms. Herrera said the purpose of the language is to make the policy consistent with what presently is occurring. The suggestion to remove the language would provide guidance and she could support the amendment. She then provided information of how some individuals are on advisory boards due to positions required by Federal or State law; other advisory boards have included non-residents holding particular positions. To say only Federal and State law would eliminate non-residents holding seats that are not required by law. Mr. Proto spoke of how specific titles are required. Ms. Robertson said the proposal is the same mechanism with the exception of the Legislature signifying a seat. She indicated the amendment makes the County policy parallel with State and Federal policy. Mr. Joseph noted the policy is clear; the proposal is to change a statement equally clear. Mr. Booth agreed with Mr. Joseph’s interpretations and urged the vote be taken.
A voice vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes – 5 (Legislators Hattery, Herrera, Mackesey, Proto, and Stevenson); Noes – 9; Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler).
A voice vote on the resolution as amended resulted as follows: Ayes – 10; Noes – 4 (Legislators Hattery, Kiefer, Proto, and Stevenson); Excused – 1 (Legislator Sigler). RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
WHEREAS, to enable the County’s Advisory Committees
and Boards to better advise the County Legislature, the policy on Advisory
Committees and Boards has been revised to include a provision for filling
certain seats with non-County residents, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
Committee, That the following Administrative Policy is hereby revised and
adopted:
01- 26 Advisory Committees and Boards
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
RESOLUTION NO. - AMENDING THE RULES OF THE LEGISLATURE – RULE VII - RULES OF VOTING
It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Mr. Stevenson.
Ms. Kiefer noted that her question regarding use of “Legislature” with Rule VII (2) was confirmed with Ms. Fuller. She suggested it may read clearer if worded as follows: “(2) Every member present when a vote is taken upon any question shall vote unless excused by unanimous consent of all members present, or unless the Legislature asks the County Attorney for his legal interpretation and the County Attorney advises that the member has a direct interest in the result of the vote.”
Ms. Herrera stated the problem with Ms. Kiefer’s
suggestion is that it would have the County Attorney making the decision;
as was previously stated asks for an opinion. Although a slim difference
she feels it is important.
It was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer to amend Rule VII (2)
as follows: “(2) Every member present when a vote is taken
upon any question shall vote unless excused by unanimous consent of all
members present, or unless the Legislature asks the County Attorney for
his legal interpretation and the County Attorney advises that the member
has a direct interest in the result of the vote.”
Further discussion followed and Chair Joseph granted Ms. Herrera permission to withdraw the resolution from the agenda.
WHEREAS, it is desirable to amend the present Rules
of Voting to more clearly specify procedure to determine a direct interest
in the result of the vote, and
WHEREAS, it is also desirable to have the advice
of the County Attorney in determining direct interest, now therefore be
it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Government Operations
Committee, That paragraph (2) of Rule VII, Rules of Voting is hereby
amended as follows:
RULE VII - RULES OF VOTING
(2) Every member present when a vote is taken upon any
question shall vote unless excused by unanimous consent of all members
present, or unless the County Attorney upon Legislature request advises
that that member has a direct interest in the result of the vote.
The Chair shall in all cases, except upon appeals from rulings of the Chair,
have a right to vote.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
Report and Presentation of Resolution(s) from the Budget and Capital Committee
Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, Chair, reported the Committee met on July 24th. He spoke of Mr. Jovan Grogan, Project Assistant’s having left to pursue his career, he spoke highly of the work done by Mr. Grogan during his tenure. He reported copies of draft number four of the expanded Budget and Capital Committee meetings his been distributed and will be the final draft if no further comments were made. Mr. Koplinka-Loehr reported the Capital Project books have been distributed to members of the Legislature and also noted he has copies of the County audit available for review.
RESOLUTION NO. 138 - BUDGET ADJUSTMENT AND APPROPRIATION OF UNSPENT GENERAL FUNDS FROM 2005 TO VARIOUS ACCOUNTS
It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Mr. Proto, and unanimously adopted by a short roll call of members present, to adopt the following resolution. RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
WHEREAS, various departments have been certified
by the Director of Finance to have unspent appropriations and excess revenues
from 2005 resulting in a surplus of $808,028 on the County’s books as of
December 31, 2005, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 116 – “Budget Adjustment and
Appropriation of Unspent General Funds from 2005 to Various Accounts” was
adopted on July 6, 2006, which transferred surplus funds in the amount
of $328,197 to various departments’ current year budgets, and
WHEREAS, the rollover request period was extended
to August 2006, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to County Fiscal Policy, additional
surplus funds have been requested for use in the amount of $89,923 in the
current year budget, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Public Safety, the
Government Operations, and the Budget and Capital Committees, That the
following transactions are approved:
BUDGET APPROPRIATION:
FROM: General Fund Balance
$89,923
TO:
Legislature – Project Assistant 1040.51000049 $3,900
$3,900
Information Technology Services – Software Licenses 1680.52230
$5,294
$5,294
Finance - Upgrade Financial System 1315.54442 $5,642
Finance - License Fee 1315.54400 $2,104
Finance - Dedicated Server to host Application
1315.52206 $4,768
$12,514
Assigned Counsel – Rent (to Facilities 1170.54432 $1,647
$1,647
Emergency Response – Equipment 3410.52220 $20,000
Emergency Response – Service Contracts 3410.54425
$20,000
$40,000
District Attorney – Confidential Investigation for Upcoming
Trials 1165.54485 $7,000
District Attorney – Expert Witness Fee for Upcoming Trials
1165.54483 $10,000
District Attorney – Extradition for Upcoming Trials 1165.54479
$5,000
District Attorney – Professional Services 1165.54442
$4,568
$26,568
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
_____________________
RESOLUTION NO. 139 – RESOLUTION REQUESTING A CALL FOR STATEWIDE SCHOOL AID REFORM
It was MOVED by Mr. Koplinka-Loehr, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne. A voice vote resulted as follows: Ayes - 11; Noes - 3 (Legislators Hattery, Proto, and Randall); Excused - 1 (Legislator Sigler). RESOLUTION ADOPTED. Ms. Robertson noted that school funding based upon property taxes is not the best method and the resolution addresses this issue.
WHEREAS, there is a dual crisis within New York
State’s school system, and
WHEREAS, New York State is 48th in graduation rates
and number one in property taxes, and
WHEREAS, as the State’s share of public education
costs drops, local school districts are forced to either make cuts in programs
or increase their local school taxes to make up the difference and the
result is struggling schools and skyrocketing property taxes, and
WHEREAS, a shifting of a larger share of school
funding away from local property taxes and into the State budget would
produce fundamental changes in the growth of property taxes, and
WHEREAS, the only way to solve both problems is
to fundamentally reform school funding so that a much larger share is funded
through the State budget, and
WHEREAS, such reform, coupled with a commitment
by the State to provide a large infusion of additional school funding resources
to school districts with the greatest unmet educational needs will have
significant positive impacts in bringing property taxes under control and
improving graduation rates and other educational outcomes, and
WHEREAS, any reforms that seek to solve only one
part of this two-pronged crisis are likely to exacerbate the other, and
WHEREAS, it is highly desirable to solve both the
problem of low graduation rates and the problem of skyrocketing local taxes
by funding a larger portion of school budgets through the State budget,
now therefore be it
RESOLVED, on recommendation of the Budget and Capital
Committee, That the Tompkins County Legislature strongly supports the enactment
of statewide legislation to resolve both the problem of low graduation
rates and skyrocketing local taxes,
RESOLVED, further, That we call upon State leaders
to adopt real school aid reform that shifts the burden of paying for our
schools away from local tax dollars and into the State budget and targets
additional money toward those districts with the highest need,
RESOLVED, further, That this resolution should
be sent to Governor Pataki, gubernatorial candidate Eliot Spitzer, gubernatorial
candidate John Faso, gubernatorial candidate Tom Suozzi, and all members
of the State legislature representing Tompkins County.
SEQR ACTION: TYPE II-20
Approval of Minutes
It was MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mrs. McBean-Clairborne, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to approve the minutes of the July 18 and 19, 2006, meeting as submitted. MINUTES APPROVED.
Adjournment
On motion and duly seconded, the meeting adjourned
at 8:22 p.m.
Respectfully submitted, Karen Fuller, Deputy Clerk