Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-2020-02-05 COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. February 5, 2020 PRESENT: Mayor Myrick Alderpersons (10) Brock, McGonigal, Murtagh, Nguyen, Gearhart, Fleming, Smith, Kerslick, Lewis, Mohlenhoff OTHERS PRESENT: City Clerk – Conley Holcomb City Attorney – Lavine City Controller – Thayer Planning & Development Director – Cornish Deputy Economic Development Director - Knipe Community Development Director – Bohn Director of Engineering – Logue Sidewalk Program Manager - Licitra Human Resources Director – Michell-Nunn Senior Planner – Kusznir City Planner - Phillips PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Myrick led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Mayor’s Appointments: Alderperson Gearhart requested the addition of Item 14.2 to the agenda - Appointments to the Cable Access Oversight Committee. No Council Member objected. PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS: Presentation of the J. Diann Sams Annual African American History Month Recognition By Alderperson Nguyen: Seconded by Alderperson Brock WHEREAS, since 2004 the City of Ithaca Common Council has recognized an individual in our community of great esteem and stellar leadership during African- American History Month and, in so doing, established a tradition of honoring outstanding leadership, courage against unspeakable odds, and an unwavering commitment to community that is in keeping with the vision of Dr. Carter G. Woodson, founder of Black/African-American History Month; and WHEREAS, the late Alderperson J. Diann Sams was a heralded civil rights leader, longtime public servant, and the first African-American woman who also was a person with a disability to serve on Common Council, including as the first Black woman to serve as acting mayor; and WHEREAS, Common Council first bestowed this honor in 2004 on Alderperson Sams following her retirement after representing the Second Ward and the City’s populace for a decade; and WHEREAS, Common Council renamed this annual recognition posthumously in 2007 in honor of Alderperson Sams for her tireless efforts on behalf of people of color, the underrepresented, and other marginalized populations in and around Ithaca while, as a single parent, raising two boys who later established careers in law enforcement; and February 5, 2020 2 WHEREAS, since 2004, outstanding leaders across the greater Ithaca area have received this recognition from Common Council as being “a person who advocates for social justice and change, racial equity, and fairness in the judicial and educational systems while also demonstrating a willingness to speak out publicly on behalf of the aforementioned objectives”; and WHEREAS, the names of each of these recipients are emblazoned on a plaque affixed in the Common Council Chambers and included with each year’s resolution, which list set a standard of excellence for this recognition beginning in 2005 with Dr. James E. Turner -- professor emeritus, world-renowned scholar, and founding director of the Africana Studies and Research Center at Cornell University; and, in 2006, Mr. Calemeze (Cal) D. Walker, community advocate, visionary leader with the Village at Ithaca, foster parent with his wife Glenda Walker to scores of children across the greater Ithaca area, and current chairman of the Community Campaign for the United Way of Tompkins County; and WHEREAS, Dr. Woodson’s lifelong devotion to educating African Americans about their own culture and history as part of U.S. history led to the modern-day, month-long observance of Black, or African-American, History Month that highlights the positive impact people such as this award’s recipients have had on society; and WHEREAS, an individual who has made such an indelible stamp upon Ithaca history and is so revered that he is worthy of community acknowledgement is Dr. Sean Eversley Bradwell, educator, elected official, and community member committed to educating the masses about the invaluable benefits of diversity and inclusion, equity in education, and justice in the community and beyond; and WHEREAS, Dr. Eversley Bradwell began his education service in the Ithaca area as a director for the Kaplan Educational Centers in 1995 before joining the Ithaca City School District (ICSD) in 1996 as faculty member with the Lehman Alternative Community School; and WHEREAS, this graduate of the University of Rochester established his niche with education among this community’s young people as a social studies teacher and assistant to the principal for Multicultural Affairs, as well as with the community when he helped moderate the Tompkins County Search Conference on Racism in 1997; and WHEREAS, after later obtaining his Ph.D. from Cornell University, this advocate of public education joined the community of Ithaca College beginning as a lecturer in its Center for Teacher Education and rising through the academic ranks to his present status as assistant professor in the Department of Education, while also helping lead the College’s Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Scholars Program and helping create the Center for Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Social Change (IDEAS); and WHEREAS, through this ascension at Ithaca College, Dr. Eversley Bradwell has worked tirelessly at educating and implementing change on campus through his involvement with numerous advisory bodies that helped shape not only education for the College’s students but also for the climate experienced by students, particularly those of color, at the College; and WHEREAS, Dr. Eversley Bradwell has extended his reach into this community through involvement with bodies including academic bodies at the ICSD, Cornell University, the Village at Ithaca, and the History Center of Tompkins County; and WHEREAS, most notably, Dr. Eversley has presented locally as well as across the United States including across New York and in North Carolina, Illinois, California, and more on topics including racism, diversity and inclusion, history, and the effects of these on public education and society and published -- by himself and in collaboration with colleagues -- articles, chapters, and commentary locally and from coast to coast across; published commentary and book chapters on hip-hop culture, and contemporary history including the presidency of the nation’s 44th President Barack Obama; and has February 5, 2020 3 narrated the full-length film “Civil Warriors” that details the story of Black men who came to Ithaca to enlist for military service in the Civil War; and WHEREAS, Dr. Eversley Bradwell took his commitment to public education, equity, and justice to a higher level with his election to the Ithaca City School Board where he has led the committees of Policy and Facilities and is currently the school board’s vice president, helping spearhead change in the district’s delivery of educational service to its students and families, particularly to those in Black and Latino/a communities; and WHEREAS, along the way, various bodies have heralded publicly the involvement of Dr. Eversley Bradwell rewarding him with, among other honors, the ReRe Hassett Award from the Multicultural Resource Center, Mentoring and Empowerment Award from Ithaca College, and the Making Local History Real and Impactful Award from The History Center of Tompkins County; and WHEREAS, Dr. Eversley Bradwell has helped raise his family, helped strengthen community by opening his home with his wife Nicole Eversley Bradwell with events for many years that welcome new residents -- particularly professionals of color and their families -- to the Ithaca area, while dealing with professional and personal setbacks but never letting those stop his work in advocating for equity, inclusion, and justice throughout our community; and WHEREAS, in considering Dr. Eversley Bradwell’s nomination, the panel of past recipients of this award noted that he has “been an advocate of equity in education, helping open the eyes and shift to a new way of thinking of leveraged people on the (Ithaca City) school board,” now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council bestows upon Dr. Sean Eversley Bradwell the 2020 J. Diann Sams African-American History Month Recognition during this February and urges all citizens to recognize the invaluable contributions of this positive, affirming, and dedicated citizen who also is a stalwart example of the many prominent figures we celebrate throughout history; and, be it further RESOLVED, That in so doing, Dr. Sean Eversley Bradwell is worthy of honor not only each year in February but throughout the entire calendar year. Carried Unanimously Recipients of the City of Ithaca Common Council’s J. Diann Sams Annual African American History Month 2005: Dr. James E. Turner, world-renowned scholar and founding director of the Africana Studies and Research Center at Cornell University 2006: Mr. Calemeze (Cal) D. Walker, community advocate and visionary leader with the Village at Ithaca 2007: the late Mrs. Frances Eastman, first woman of color supervisor of medical records at the former Tompkins County Hospital and Tompkins County “Senior Citizen of the Year” recipient 2008: Ms. Lucy J. Brown, a dedicated citizen with an unwavering commitment to social justice and promoting local civic collaboration and participation 2009: Mrs. Marcia J. (Fort) Baum, longtime director of the City’s Greater Ithaca Activities Center (GIAC), so honored for her steadfast advocacy for the voiceless and oppressed of our community and elsewhere 2010: Mr. and Mrs. Abraham A. and Denise C. Dendtler Lee, longtime career educators in the Ithaca City School District who lend their time, talent, and personal resources to create or further local achievement for area children February 5, 2020 4 2011: Mr. Karl A. Graham, longtime community and youth-education advocate whose work pushes for access and social improvement for all local residents 2012: Mr. Kenneth E. Glover, an ardent supporter of Town-Gown relations to achieve success through education, employment, and community involvement for area youth and young adults 2013: Mr. William (J.R.) B. Clairborne, Jr., and Mrs. Leslyn E. McBean-Clairborne, elected officials whose public service advocates for social and economic justice through inclusion, fairness, and accessibility to government services for – and sensitivity to – those in need 2014: Elder Ronald Benson of Ithaca’s Baptized Church of Jesus Christ, whose longtime civic involvement and ministry in the pulpit, prisons, and television has exemplified leadership through faith 2015: Ithaca Police Lt. Marlon T. Byrd (ret.), advocate of community-oriented policing as standard operating procedure, graduate of the FBI National Academy, the department’s first Black investigator, and supportive mentor to officers, community members, and family 2016: Mrs. Millicent L. Clarke-Maynard, retired educator from the Ithaca City School District who remains a tireless community servant and youth advocate who walks her talk daily in the betterment of the local community 2017: Ms. Jacqueline E. Melton Scott, a lifelong community educator and advocate who continually brought together families, community, and government in the focused effort of holistically educating children 2018: Mrs. Janice F. Turner, retired Assistant Dean in the College of Arts and Sciences at Cornell University, known for shepherding scores of students not only through Ithaca College and Cornell but also into medical fields across the nation as well as remaining active with youth in and around the City of Ithaca 2019: Ms. Christine M. Barksdale, the first Black woman to serve as corrections officer with the Tompkins County Sheriff’s Office and, later, the first Black woman police officer with the Ithaca Police Department who also became the department’s first Black woman to serve as its Neighborhood Policing Officer, investigator, hostage negotiator, and its first female Senior Investigator, who also served the community as an entrepreneur and involvement through numerous human-service agencies Mayor Myrick thanked and acknowledged former Alderperson J.R. Clairborne for his work and dedication to ensure that this award tradition continues. Mr. Sean Eversley Bradwell thanked Common Council and the nominating committee for this honor. He commented on how humbled he was to receive this recognition and the lessons that J. Diann Sams taught him regarding fighting for justice. He thanked Jack Bradley Nelson, Joe Nelson, and all the past recipients of the award for their love and support. Jack Bradley Nelson, son of J. Diann Sams, congratulated Mr. Eversley Bradwell on his award and thanked him for the incredible contributions he has made to the Ithaca community. Proclamation Mayor Myrick proclaimed February 5, 2020 as Sorority Alumni Chapter Day in the City of Ithaca. Members of the Delta Sigma Theta Alumni were present to receive the proclamation and asked for everyone’s assistance in making Ithaca an even better community than it already is. February 5, 2020 5 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 5.1 Reports of Municipal Officials Tompkins County Legislator Richard John reported on the following: • The Conference Center resolution was voted on by the County Legislature last night. He stated that he supported the legislation and encouraged Common Council to approve it. He reported that there was a robust debate related to the risks involved and the impact on new jobs, the proposed room tax, property values, and sales tax. He voiced his belief that this is a very good investment for the Commons and the local business owners. The Tompkins County Development Corporation voted to devote a $50,000 grant for project management if this project goes forward. He acknowledged reservations about the financial model for the project but noted that committing time and effort on financial planning in the early stages of the proposal will help alleviate those concerns. • Legislator John thanked Alderpersons McGonigal and Nguyen for their regular reports to the Tompkins County Legislature. Alderperson Brock expressed her gratitude to the Development Corporation for their pledge of $50,000. She asked if the Tompkins County Legislature put a value on what their contribution would be. Legislator John responded that the County is willing to participate in the planning process of the project and is prepared to make a $1.5 million contribution per year toward rent if there is a shortfall. Pursuant to the financial pro forma, any financial deficits would be covered through the reserves first and then the County would support the City. Alderperson McGonigal stated that he attended the Legislature meeting and it appeared as if there was significant reluctance from the County to partner with the City on this project. He noted that the adopted Resolution said that the County would participate in the process but would not make any guarantees until the financial planning had been completed. Legislator John responded that the Resolution passed with a vote of 9-4 indicating true support for the project and noted that the people who voted in opposition were concerned about the uncertainties related to the finances. He stated that the commitment was that the County would negotiate in good faith and reach an agreement with the City. He highlighted this opportunity to work together and negotiate well to make a difference in the community. Tompkins County Legislator Martha Robertson agreed that it was a strong conversation with the Legislature that was well informed by the business owners, employees, the hotels, and tourism professionals who spoke about the jobs that were going to be on the line. She noted that the conference center would even out the current seasonal business environment and stated that the team that has been working on this has been steadfast and diligent, and an incredible amount of work has been completed to date. She further stated that that this is a generational investment in the community and with everyone sharing a financial component, the risk is manageable. She highlighted other successful collaborative models such as TCAT and noted that the next step is for staff to work out the details so the governing bodies can give their final approval. Legislator Robertson also urged Common Council to approve the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) legislation as proposed. She noted that people want to live in the City of Ithaca, and this would assist them in finding a home in the residential neighborhoods. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: The following people addressed Common Council: Ellie Pfeffer, Colin Cepuran, Baxter Hamilton, Hannah Feyen, Eva Milstein, Ithaca, voiced support of the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) legislation but opposed the owner occupancy requirement. John Spence, Town of Newfield, voiced support for the Tompkins Giant and provided a history of the proposal process. February 5, 2020 6 Karl Graham, City of Ithaca, addressed accusations made against past J. Diann Sams African American Award winners and black police officers including Lt. Marlon Byrd, Officer Derrick Moore and most recently Investigator Christine Barksdale. He requested that the City provide Investigator Barksdale with the due process she deserves. Herb Dwyer, City of Ithaca, provided a pro forma on the proposed ADU legislation that addressed multiple scenarios. Dave Ritchie, City of Ithaca, voiced support for the ADU legislation with the owner occupancy requirement. He further urged Council to keep the Overlay Districts in place. Kathleen Woodcock, Theresa Lyczko, Sally Lockwood, Ann Sullivan, Ashley Miller, Karl Pillemer, Pam Mackesey, Jed Sheckler, Neil Schwartzbach, and Howard Botwinizk voiced support for the ADU legislation with the owner occupancy requirement. Kellie Cartmill, Cayuga Heights, voiced support for the Conference Center proposal. Teri Tarshus, Cayuga Heights, voiced support for the Conference Center proposal and thanked Council for their work on the OurBus relocation, noting that it is working out well. Edith Ryan Griffin, Town of Enfield, spoke of her personal experience with Investigator Barksdale and the letter to the Editor written by Alderperson Brock regarding this topic. Lauren Gaffney, Town of Lansing, promoted the “Give a Chance Day” event which involves giving away $6,500 to local not-for-profit organizations on March 3, 2020. Brett Bossard, Cathy Hart, Peggy Coleman, Ken Jupiter, Deirdre Kurzweil, Joseph Galeotalanza, Fred Schoeps, Ashley Cake, Mack Travis voiced support for the Conference Center proposal. Eric Rosario, City of Ithaca, voiced support for the ADU legislation but shared concerns about short-term rentals and Air B & Bs. Theresa Alt, City of Ithaca, voiced support for the ADU legislation as it is currently proposed (with no owner occupancy requirement). She further urged Council not to hold up the Green Garage project up for the problematic conference center. Alex Hyland, Town of Ithaca, voiced his appreciation for the Apprenticeship Program and noted that the construction of the Conference Center Project should include the use of local labor with prevailing wages. Todd Bruer, City of Ithaca, voiced his support of the Apprenticeship legislation, noting the he would work to make this program successful. He also voiced his support for the Conference Center project. Sheryl Swink, City of Ithaca, voiced her support for the Community Gardens legislation. She further voiced her support for the ADU legislation. Madeline Young, City of Ithaca, voiced her support of the ADU legislation with owner occupancy regulations. She further spoke in support for the development of neighborhood plans. Kenneth Young, City of Ithaca, voiced his support for the ADU legislation with owner occupancy regulations and further spoke in favor of the Conference Center Project. Robert Lynch, Council person for the Town of Enfield, voiced his opposition to the Conference Center project due to the risk of taxpayers having to pay for the project. Deb Justice, City of Ithaca, spoke in favor of the ADU legislation, noting that the current regulations are too complex. February 5, 2020 7 PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR: Alderperson McGonigal thanked the speakers, noting that he learned a lot of new perspectives. He invited the Cornell students who spoke earlier to a South Hill neighborhood meeting to hear more about the issues. He further addressed comments made regarding the Conference Center project, stating that he wants the project to make sense financially. He stressed that participation from the County is needed. He encouraged business owners to do things to attract local residents, as soon there will be 500 new downtown residents. He voiced his support for the use of local labor on development projects. Mayor Myrick noted that the young people who spoke were very well educated on the issue. He commented that 75% of City residents live in rental units. He expressed fear that people who live in rental units are being judged by homeowners and stated that this learning process flows both ways. Alderperson Murtagh explained that the City has had legislation that governs accessory units since the 1980s; however, only twelve properties have developed apartments under it. He stated that this is an attempt to relax those regulations to make it easier for homeowners to build these types of units and stressed that it was never the intention of this legislation to overturn the overlay districts. Alderperson Brock thanked the speakers. She noted that she disagrees with Alderperson Murtagh’s interpretation of the South Hill Overlay Zone and what the proposed Ordinance would do with regards to that. She further remembered Mr. Ralph LaPadula who recently passed. Mr. LaPadula was a former member of the Community Police Board and was a strong family man, businessman, and member of the community. She celebrated the passion he brought to the community and his life, well lived. Alderperson Kerslick thanked the speakers, noting that he’s learned a lot from the thoughtful input that has been shared. He further appreciated the comments made regarding the Ourbus relocation. Mayor Myrick announced that the 2020 Annual Disclosure forms for elected officials are available for review by the public in the City Clerk’s Office during regular business hours. Mayor Myrick further recognized the loss of former Cornell University President Frank H. T. Rhodes. He noted that President Rhodes was a very charming, thoughtful, and eloquent speaker and a very powerful presence at the University and in the community. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: City Administration Committee: 8.1 Youth Bureau – New York State (NYS) Grant for Enclosure of Cass Park Rink Project - Resolution By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Smith RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca applied for financial assistance from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (“OPRHP”) under the Environmental Protection Fund Grant Program for the purpose of funding the Enclosure of Cass Park Rink project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to accept these grant funds in an amount not to exceed $523,269 for the project described in the grant application; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to agree to the terms and conditions of the Master Contract with OPRHP for such Enclosure of the Cass Park Rink project; and, be it further February 5, 2020 8 RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to agree to the terms and conditions of any required deed of easement granted to OPRHP that affects title to real property owned by the municipality and improved by the grant funds, which may be a duly recorded public access covenant, conservation easement, and/or preservation covenant; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the governing body of the municipality delegates signing authority to execute the Master Contract and any required deed of easement to the individual(s) who hold(s) the following elected or appointed municipal office(s) or employment position title(s): Mayor and/or City Controller. Carried Unanimously 8.2 Police Department – Request to Amend 2020 Budget for Grant - Resolution By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, the Ithaca Police Department recently received a $10,000 grant from the Jason Sokoloff fund of the Jewish Commercial Fund; and WHEREAS, the grant is to be used for a ground control and arrest training room, which will improve the hands-on skill for the officers during arrest situations; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2020 Authorized Police Department budget for said grant as follows: Increase Revenue Account: A3120-2705 Police Gifts and Donations $10,000 Increase Appropriation Account: A 3120-5435 Police Contracts $10,000 Carried Unanimously 8.3 Request to Fly Pan-African Flag - Resolution By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission was tasked with developing a policy regarding the flying of advocacy and commemorative flags on City facilities; and WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission has reviewed an application to fly the Pan-African flag on City Hall during the month of February 2020 and has forwarded its recommendation of approval to Common Council for its consideration; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby approves the request to fly the Pan-African flag on City Hall during the month of February 2020. Carried Unanimously PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 2020 Annual Common Council Concurrence that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board be Lead Agency in Environmental Review for Site Plan Review Projects for which the Common Council is an Involved Agency Resolution By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Lewis WHEREAS, 6 NYCRR Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Law and Chapter 176.6 of the City Code, Environmental Quality Review, require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law; and WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action; and WHEREAS, State Law also specifies that when an agency proposes to directly undertake, fund or approve a Type I or Unlisted Action undergoing coordinated review with other involved agencies, it must notify them that a lead agency must be agreed February 5, 2020 9 upon within 30 calendar days of the date that the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) or draft EIS was transmitted to them; and WHEREAS, Projects submitted to the Planning Board for Site Plan Review and Approval, at times involve approvals or funding from Common Council, making Council an involved agency in environmental review; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the State Environmental Quality Review Law and the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, involved agencies are provided with project information and environmental forms for their review, as well as all environmental determinations; and WHEREAS, Common Council did consent to the Planning & Development Board acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for site plan review projects for which Common Council has been identified as an Involved Agency since 2015; and WHEREAS, in order to avoid delays in establishing a Lead Agency and to make the environmental review process more efficient, it is desirous to continue the agreement in which the Planning Board will assume Lead Agency status for such projects; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby consent to the Planning & Development Board acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for site plan review projects for which Common Council has been identified as an Involved Agency through December 31, 2020; and, be it further RESOLVED, That for any future project Common Council may withhold or withdraw its consent should it so desire. Carried Unanimously 9.2 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Gardens A. Designation of Lead Agency – Resolution By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law; and WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, which requires environmental review; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the proposal to amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Gardens. Carried Unanimously B. Declaration of Environmental Significance – Resolution By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering a proposal to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements; and February 5, 2020 10 WHEREAS, the proposed action is an “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), Parts 1 and 2, dated December 9, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has reviewed the SEAF prepared by Planning Staff; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form, dated December 9, 2019; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. Carried Unanimously C. An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Gardens By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Smith ORDINANCE NO. 2020-_ BE IT NOW ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325, Section 325-3, Definitions, be amended to add a new definition of Neighborhood Garden and to amend the existing definition of Community Gardens, to read as follows: § 325-3. Definitions and word usage. [COMMUNITY OR ] NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN. An area used by several individuals or families, operating in association with each other and under sponsorship by a nonprofit or voluntary organization, primarily for seasonal production of vegetables and other garden produce for home consumption by the individuals or families directly engaged in such production or for food donations. [Added 7-10-1985 by Ord. No. 85-6] COMMUNITY GARDEN. A lot that is specifically intended to be gardened by a group of people, with membership open to the public, operating in association with each other and under sponsorship by a nonprofit or voluntary organization utilizing either individual or shared plots on private or public land. The land may produce fruit, vegetables, and other garden produce; culinary, medicinal, or beneficial plants; and/or ornamentals. It may also contain structures intended to support year round gardening, community events or education of the gardening process. February 5, 2020 11 Section 2. Chapter 325, Section 325-9, Special Permits, be amended to remove Community Gardens from this section, to read as follows: § 325-9 Special Permits B. Applicability. (1.) The uses listed under the district regulations in §325-8, District Regulations, which require a special permit from the Planning and Development Board are as follows: (m) [Community or neighborhood] Neighborhood gardens in all districts. F. Expiration and Renewals. (1.) Special permits do not expire, with the following exceptions: (d) A [community or] neighborhood garden special permit shall expire automatically if the site is not used as a [community or] neighborhood garden, as defined in §325-3, for one complete garden season. (1) If a [community or] neighborhood garden special permit should expire, a new application must be submitted pursuant to §325-9C of this chapter. Section 3. Chapter 325, Section 325-10, Additional Conditions for Special Permits, be amended to remove Community Gardens from this section, to read as follows: §325-10 Additional Conditions for Special Permits B. Applicability. All uses allowed by special permit shall be subject to the criteria set forth in §325-9, Special Permits. In addition, accessory apartments, bed-and-breakfast homes, bed-and-breakfast inns, [community or] [n] Neighborhood gardens, and schools and related uses shall be subject to additional conditions as set forth in §325-10C. C. Additional Conditions. (3) [Community or n] Neighborhood gardens. The following specific conditions shall be applicable to all special permits for [community or]neighborhood gardens: (n) Approved special permits for [community and] neighborhood gardens shall be reviewed by the Director of Planning and Development or designee at least annually for compliance with the above noted conditions and other conditions specific to each permit’s approval. If, following such review or investigation of any complaint, the Director of Planning and Development or designee determines that a substantial violation exists, notice of such violation shall be mailed to the designated contact person, requiring that such violation be corrected within 15 days. If satisfactory correction is not made, the special permit may be revoked by the Director of Planning and Development or designee. (o) In consideration of the fact that such gardens may be of an interim nature, may occupy only a portion of a parcel and may be located on property unsuited for other uses permitted under this chapter, the district regulations specified for permitted uses under §325-8 of this chapter shall be superseded, where applicable, by the following regulations for [community or] neighborhood gardens: Section 4. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local February 5, 2020 12 law is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. Alderperson Murtagh explained that this legislation creates definitions for neighborhood gardens and the community gardens. A vote on the Ordinance resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously 9.3 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” In Order to Establish Regulations for the Development of Accessory Dwelling Units A. Declaration of Lead Agency – Resolution By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law; and WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action; and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendment is a “Unlisted” Action pursuant to the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires environmental review; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the establishment of regulations regarding accessory dwelling units. Carried 9-0 Alderperson Kerslick Absent from vote B. Determination of Environmental Significance – Resolution By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick WHEREAS, demand for additional housing development has resulted in an increase in residential infill development within neighborhoods in the City; and WHEREAS, the City would like to allow for appropriate levels of residential development of accessory dwelling units, while also protecting neighborhoods from development that is out of scale and character with the surrounding neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, in August 2019, staff held a community conversation on accessory dwelling units and solicited comments from the public; and WHEREAS, staff evaluated all of the public feedback and spent several months evaluating options to regulate accessory dwelling units, while taking into consideration public concerns; and WHEREAS, staff has drafted an ordinance that will establish guidelines for developing accessory dwelling units in the R-1 and R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), dated November 22, 2019; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is a “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance; and February 5, 2020 13 WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has reviewed the FEAF prepared by planning staff; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Full Environmental Assessment Form, dated November 22, 2019; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. Ayes (9) McGonigal, Nguyen, Murtagh, Gearhart, Fleming, Smith, Kerslick, Mohlenhoff, Lewis Nays (1) Brock Carried (9-1) 9.3 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” In Order to Establish Regulations for the Development of Accessory Dwelling Units By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, in 2017, the City established the South Hill Overlay District (SHOD) in response to concerns that were raised by the South Hill neighborhood rapid in-fill development of multiple primary structures (in the neighborhood and the impacts on both the aesthetic qualities and the character of the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the SHOD was intended to be a temporary measure to prevent further development until the City could establish regulations for this type of infill (ADUs); and WHEREAS, in the interim, similar concerns about development pressure were raised throughout the City; and WHEREAS, City staff were directed to research how infill (ADUs) development is regulated in other municipalities; and WHEREAS, Planning Staff spent several months researching other communities and developing proposals to encourage the development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that would protect neighborhoods while allowing for housing options that could provide property owners with additional income; and WHEREAS, on August 29, 2019, a community meeting was held, with approximately 70 people in attendance, who offered opinions on options to allow the development of appropriate ADUs; and WHEREAS, staff has considered feedback from the public, the Common Council, and other communities and has developed a set of regulations allowing property owners to develop ADUs, where appropriate, and the means to protect neighborhoods from the negative impacts of over development; now, therefore ORDINANCE NO. 2020-___ BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled, “Zoning”, be amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325-3B of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, entitled “Definitions and Word Usage”, is hereby amended to add the following new definitions: February 5, 2020 14 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)— A second dwelling unit located in the rear or side yard on a lot with any one-family dwelling in R-1 and CR-1 zoning districts, or in any one-family dwelling or two-family dwelling in R-2 and CR-2 zoning districts (see Section 2F (3)(d). The second unit is created secondary to, and is always smaller than the primary one-family dwelling. The unit includes its own independent habitable space including provision for sleeping, cooking, and sanitation, and is designed to be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant, independent of the primary dwelling unit. 1. Attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (AADU) – A room or set of rooms, basement, or any other space that is located within a primary structure, but is established as a separate dwelling unit. AADUs may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. 2. Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (DADU) – A separate dwelling unit that is constructed on a single family lot that is not connected to the primary structure. DADUs may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. 3. Out Building Conversion - A separate dwelling unit that is converted from an existing garage, carriage house, or other accessory structure. Out Building Conversion’s may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. Contiguous Green Space - Green Space on a lot that is uninterrupted by structures or paved surfaces. Contiguous green space must be at least 15’ in width. Section 2. Chapter 325-8 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled “District Regulations”, is hereby amended to add a new section F, entitled “Additional Restrictions in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 Zoning Districts”, to read as follows: F. Additional Restrictions in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 Zoning Districts. (1) Intent. This section authorizes the installation of accessory dwelling units in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 districts. The purpose and intent of permitting accessory dwelling units is: (a) To provide homeowners, especially those of low and moderate income, with a means of obtaining through rental income, companionship, security and services and thereby to enable them to stay more comfortably in homes and neighborhoods they might be forced to leave. (b) To add inexpensive rental units to the housing stock to meet the needs of smaller households, both young and old. (c) To make housing units available to low and moderate income households who might otherwise have difficulty finding homes within the City. (d) To develop housing units in family neighborhoods that are appropriate for households at a variety of stages in the lifecycle, thereby lessening fluctuations in neighborhood demand for services. (e) To preserve and allow more efficient use of the City’s existing stock of dwellings while ensuring healthy and safe living environments. (f) To allow for the creation of additional housing, while minimizing impacts to surrounding properties. (2) General Restrictions. (a) In the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 Zoning Districts, only one primary structure is permitted as of right. February 5, 2020 15 (3) Additional Requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (a) All Accessory Dwelling Units that have any exterior changes to existing structures or any new ADUs that are new construction are subject to site plan review. (b) Number of Accessory Dwelling Units. Only one accessory dwelling unit, attached or detached, is permitted on a lot. (c) Parking. No additional parking is required for accessory dwelling units. (d) Location. Accessory Dwelling Units may be located on any lot in the CR-1 or R-1 zoning district that contains a one-family dwelling and on any lot in the CR-2 and R-2 zoning district that contains a one- or two-family dwelling. ADUs are permitted in any side or rear yard but not in the required front yard. Corner Lots shall be considered to have two front yards. (e) Additional Requirements for Detached ADUs. [1] Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, Setbacks for ADUs are consistent with existing zoning setbacks for primary structures [2] A DADU may not be placed less than 5 feet from the primary structure. [3] ADUs are not subject to the maximum lot coverage requirement, however, properties with ADUs are required to maintain 35% contiguous green space. . (f) Number of Residents. Accessory Dwelling Units may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. (g) Appearance of Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory Dwelling Units should not disrupt the overall architectural character of the neighborhood. A similar architectural style and roof pitch should connect the primary structure to the accessory dwelling unit. [1] Location of Entrances. New or additional front entrances are discouraged, but in any event must be compatible with the architectural style of the existing structure. Detached accessory dwelling units (DADU) are exempt from this standard. (h) Size Allowances. February 5, 2020 16 [1] Detached Accessory Dwelling Units- The maximum size of a DADU may be no more than 75% of the habitable area of the primary structure or 800 square feet, whichever is less. [2] Attached Accessory Dwelling Units- The maximum size of an AADU that is added onto the existing structure may be no more than 33.3% of the habitable area of the primary structure. AADUs which do not change the exterior appearance of the primary structure have no maximum size limit. [3] Out Building Conversion- Outbuilding conversions are exempt from all area requirements, including maximum lot coverage requirements, minimum green space requirements, and any setback requirements. Section 3. Chapter 325-10 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, entitled “Accessory Apartments”, is hereby deleted in its entirety. Section 4. The City Planning and Development Board, the City Clerk and the Planning Department shall amend the district regulations chart in accordance with the amendments made herewith. Section 5. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local law is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 6. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. Alderperson Murtagh noted that there are several homes in the South Hill neighborhood that are being used as Air B&Bs and no one is living there. He agreed that it is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. He explained that when newly built housing is used as Air B&Bs, it takes away from the local housing stock. He stated that he has consistently not supported the owner-occupied requirement and explained that currently the R-2 zone does not have an owner-occupied requirement and property owners are allowed to rent both units. Amending Resolution: By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Smith RESOLVED, That the Ordinance be amended by adding a final Whereas clause to read as follows: "WHEREAS, this Ordinance will not repeal the South Hill Overlay District, which will remain in place until such time that the City is able to conduct a neighborhood plan for South Hill." Alderperson Brock stated that when the overlay zone was approved, it was indicated that it was to remain in effect until the completion of the South Hill Neighborhood Plan. The desire of the neighborhood is to retain a tool that would allow the continuation of the Overlay District once the neighborhood plan is completed. The original Ordinance that was circulated to the public included the limit of one primary structure per lot. The recent discussion of allowing multiple primary structures per lot by special permit, would result in the loss of a tool that would extend the protections of the overlay zone once the neighborhood plan is completed. Alderperson Murtagh explained that multiple primary structures on a single lot is currently allowed in much of the City if the lot is large enough to accommodate them. The intention of this legislation is to keep the South Hill Overlay District which prohibits multiple primary structures on a single lot in South Hill until a neighborhood plan is completed, and create a system for the rest of the City that would require a special permit for multiple primary structures on a single lot. February 5, 2020 17 Alderperson Fleming noted that the legislation as written says “in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, CR-2 Zoning Districts only one primary structure is permitted as of right”. She expressed her concern that even if the South Hill Overlay Zone is preserved, this legislation would not protect the East Hill or West Hill neighborhoods until there are additional remedies. Alderperson Smith stated that this solution would provide reassurance that design guidelines would be in place before any further changes were made with respect to the overlay district. Alderperson Brock stated that the concerns are not related to what the buildings would look like, they had to do with the development itself. She stated that the neighborhood would like the legislation to state that the Overlay District can continue even after the design guidelines and the neighborhood plan is developed. Alderperson Smith contended that he believes the design guidelines are important to the neighborhood based on the comments he heard from residents regarding preserving the character of the neighborhood. Alderperson Murtagh noted that Alderperson Fleming’s comment pointed out an error in the proposed legislation. Alderperson Kerslick stated that more discussion is needed on how this legislation would impact the different neighborhoods in the City as there are many unresolved questions. He noted that he couldn’t support its adoption tonight. Alderperson Murtagh noted that the reason that East Hill is not experiencing some of the issues that South Hill faces is because duplexes are not allowed in the R-1 zone, all you can build is a single-family home with two unrelated people living in it so the profit margin is less. He stated that there are a lot of good examples of this type of development throughout the City; however, he believes it should be required to go through the Planning Board with a site review process. Alderperson McGonigal reiterated the intention of the legislation and noted that he would like more information on what the requirements for the special permit are, as he believes it should be a high bar. He stated that he would like to get to a place where it is easier to build an ADU and harder to build multiple primary structures on a single lot. A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) Brock, Nguyen, Murtagh, Gearhart, Fleming, Smith, Mohlenhoff, Lewis Nays (2) McGonigal, Kerslick Carried (8-2) Amending Resolution: By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Lewis RESOLVED, That Section 2 of the Ordinance, 325-8, F, 3 (h)[2] be amended to read as follows: [2] Attached Accessory Dwelling Units- The maximum size of an AADU that is added onto or contained within the primary structure may be no more than 40% of the habitable area of the primary structure. Amendment to the Amending Resolution By Alderperson Brock: Seconded by RESOLVED, That the Amendment be amended to read as follows: [2] Attached Accessory Dwelling Units- The maximum size of an AADU that is added onto or contained within the primary structure may be no more than 800 square feet or 40% of the habitable area of the primary structure, whichever is less. Failed for lack of a Second Alderperson Gearhart questioned how the size limits were derived and what the average sized properties in the City are. He stated that he is not comfortable trying to consider this legislation with so many changes being suggested and would like to receive more statistical information from staff. February 5, 2020 18 Alderperson Kerslick asked what the reasoning was for recommending a larger attached ADU than a detached ADU. City Planner Phillips asked if Council was interested in restricting when an ADU could be built on a new development, such as 1-2 years. Alderperson Brock asked at what point is the ADU considered a duplex. Discussion followed on the floor regarding whether the consideration of the Ordinance should be tabled and what additional information was being requested. Alderperson Mohlenhoff stated that she would like more information on the short-term rental issue and when and how it could be addressed. Alderperson Lewis voiced her preference to table the legislation to clarify some of the proposed amendments. She noted that this is a very complex issue that has been discussed for over a year and she would like the opportunity to get it right. Alderperson Kerslick stated that he would like more information about the competition between local home buyers and developers. He would like to find a balance for ADUs while minimizing negative impacts to the neighborhoods. Alderperson Fleming pointed out that improvements have already been made making it easier for homeowners to build ADUs: homeowners can now live in the smaller unit and rent out the larger unit; the requirement to renew a special permit every 3 years is being removed; and the required parking space is also being removed. She voiced her support for keeping the owner occupancy requirements. Alderperson McGonigal agreed with Alderperson Fleming and asked for information about what staff thinks would be good requirements for the special permit. Planning and Development Director Cornish stated that staff was preparing that information for next week’s Planning & Economic Development Committee meeting. Alderperson Gearhart stated that he agrees with Alderpersons McGonigal and Fleming on the owner-occupancy requirement and would like to know if there are ways to help property owners develop ADUs more easily and efficiently. Alderperson Lewis stated that she continues to oppose the owner-occupied requirement and that she is also interested in receiving information about short-term rental guidelines. Alderperson Brock stated that she would like more information on pocket neighborhood options. In addition, she would like to address stormwater runoff in the ADU and the need to have a stormwater plan requirement. Alderperson McGonigal reminded staff that the larger rental properties have stopped accepting Section 8 housing and wanted to know if there were ways to provide an incentive to developers/homeowners who were willing to accept Section 8 housing clients. Alderperson Smith voiced his support for tabling the legislation, in order for people to feel that there has been an adequate amount of discussion, but asked that staff not become buried in analysis to the degree that the adoption of this legislation is delayed indefinitely. Alderperson Murtagh referred to a resident who would like to convert a shed into an accessory apartment but needs guidance. He voiced his frustration regarding the amount of time that it has taken to have this legislation considered and stated that he would not support sending the legislation back to committee. Alderperson Brock noted that she respects Alderperson Murtagh’s passion to support his constituents but noted that the legislation was only circulated to the public in December, right before the holidays, and residents have not had a long time to digest and comment on it. She urged Council to take the time to do this right. February 5, 2020 19 Motion to Table: By Alderperson McGonigal: Seconded by Alderperson Gearhart RESOLVED, That this item be tabled and referred to Planning and Economic Development Committee for further discussion. Ayes (7) Brock, McGonigal, Gearhart, Fleming, Kerslick, Mohlenhoff, Lewis Nays (3) Nguyen, Murtagh, Smith Carried (7-3) RECESS: Common Council took a brief recess and reconvened at 9:50 p.m. Vote to Extend Meeting By Alderperson Kerslick: Seconded by Alderperson Lewis RESOLVED, That Common Council extend the meeting until 10:45 p.m. Carried Unanimously CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 City Apprenticeship Incentive Program for Public Works Contracts – Resolution By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Gearhart WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca, from time to time, undertakes construction contracts which involve the construction, reconstruction, improvement, or rehabilitation of buildings, facilities, and structures in the City of Ithaca; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is making considerable efforts to increase the number of jobs in the city, and is consistently advocating for quality employment opportunities for city residents, in particular young people in the city; and WHEREAS, maintaining a qualified and skilled labor force is essential to a healthy and dynamic local economy; and WHEREAS, per Common Council resolution of January 2005, the City previously required all contracts in excess of $500,000 to include apprenticeship programs, repealing that requirement in December 2010 due to the “substantial expense incurred by the City … without a showing that this extra expense resulted in the local job creation that was originally intended; internal administrative problems associated with the selection process for qualified bidders …”; and WHEREAS, the City has successfully implemented and/or funded other workforce development programs such as the Hospitality Employment Training Program, the Finger Lakes ReUse Job Skills Training program, and an internship program in the City’s Department of Public Works, each of which have successfully developed a talent pool of benefit to the City; and WHEREAS, the Common Council is committed to providing such additional funding to pending, already-funded 2020 projects as may be necessary to cover the expenses of this Program’s cost arising from those projects; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby establish the City Apprenticeship Incentive Program as follows: 1. Any contractor that is awarded a contract by the City of Ithaca, and any subcontractors to that contractor, shall thereafter be eligible to participate in the City Apprenticeship Incentive Program for purposes of fulfillment of the awarded contract, thereby receiving: a. An incentive of $5 per hour for each hour worked by an eligible apprentice on the awarded contract, subject to a minimum of 100- hours of apprentice work on the project per Program-participating contractor or subcontractor, b. up to an aggregate project-wide maximum of 2% of the total contract amount. February 5, 2020 20 2. In order to qualify under the preceding paragraph, the contractor and/or subcontractors must: a. reasonably demonstrate as part of its application to the Program that the eligible apprentices to be employed on the project are either (or both) i residents of the City of Ithaca, or ii residents of Tompkins County who also either satisfy the definition of “minority group member” in New York State Executive Law Section 310(8) or are women (or both), and b. maintain or participate in a bona fide New York State Apprentice Program approved by, and with a graduation rate of at least thirty percent as determined by, the Division of Apprentice Training of the Department of Labor for each apprenticable trade or occupation represented in their workforce and must abide by the apprentice to journeyman ratio for each trade prescribed therein in the performance of the contract, ; and, be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council directs that the City Apprenticeship Incentive Program be funded by the department responsible for funding of each associated contracts, except that where the City has agreed to bid out a contract for an outside entity (generally, a non-profit organization), which outside entity is in fact paying the cost of that contract in part or whole, the outside entity shall also be responsible for reimbursing the City for the out-of-pocket costs of the Program incurred by the City in connection with that contract; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the department responsible for accepting the certified payroll of the contractor pursuant to any given public works contract shall also be the department responsible for administering the Program with respect to that project, in accord with a Program Participation Agreement, including by tracking the per-project costs of this Program; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Engineering Office of the Department of Public Works together with the City Attorney’s Office and the Controller’s Office shall prepare a template Program Participation Agreement for use under this Program, containing recommended terms not inconsistent with this resolution; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution shall take effect 90 days after passage. Alderperson Mohlenhoff acknowledged and thanked the local labor union representatives that assisted in crafting this program. She noted that there were great discussions and consensus from all sides that resulted in the creation of an incentive for contractors to hire local labor. This incentive program will help reach the city’s goals of increasing employment opportunities for city residents and underrepresented populations in our community. She listed city projects that would qualify for this program. City Attorney Lavine noted that the trade representatives suggested that the program include a 30% graduation rate from the apprenticeship program to qualify. He stated that this program could not only reach the goals identified by Alderperson Mohlenhoff but should also result in reasonable construction costs for the city. Alderperson Brock applauded the City Administration Committee for bringing this initiative forward. Discussion followed on the City’s prevailing wage requirement that applies to all projects considered public works, regardless of who the project manager is. Alderperson Mohlenhoff noted that the $5 would boost ongoing recruitment efforts for the apprenticeship programs. February 5, 2020 21 City Attorney Lavine affirmed that the $5 is a trial figure and may require adjustment in the future. He further clarified that this program would apply to a broad range of projects, but only ones that the City of Ithaca has awarded a contract for pursuant to bid. Alderperson McGonigal stated that he supports this program completely and likes the flexibility of the proposal. He recommended that the City actively promote this program. A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously 10.2 City Controller’s Report City Controller Thayer deferred his report due to the late hour and noted that he would distribute it to Council via e-mail. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: 13.1 Alderperson Brock - A Resolution Authorizing Implementation and Funding in the First Instance 100% of the Federal Aid-Eligible Costs and Program-Aid Eligible Costs, of a Transportation Federal-Aid Project, and Appropriating Funds Therefore By Alderperson Brock: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick WHEREAS, a Project for the Hector Street Complete Street, P.I.N. 395063 (the “Project”) is eligible for funding under Title 23 U.S. Code, as amended, that calls for the apportionment of the costs of such program to be borne at the ratio of 80% Federal funds and 20% non-federal funds; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca desires to advance the Project by making a commitment of 100% of the non-federal share of the costs of all phases of the Project; and WHEREAS, on July 5, 2017, Common Council authorized Capital Project #846 for this Project in the amount of $331,800 for preliminary engineering/final design of the project, with the understanding that the City share would be $66,360 to be covered by Sidewalk Improvement District #5; and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works, acting as the lead agency, declared on May 15, 2018, that the project would not have a significant negative environmental impact in accordance with the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act; and WHEREAS, on August 7, 2019, Common Council authorized an amendment to CP #846, Hector Street Complete Street, to bring the total authorized budget to $2,500,000, which included $1,400,000 in federal aid, and $1,100,000 in non-federal aid, which was comprised of City general fund borrowing, Sidewalk Improvement District (SID) 5 funding (both operating and financed), NYS Consolidated Highway Improvement Program (CHIPs), and Town of Ithaca funding; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2020, construction bids were opened and the qualified, low-bidder’s price was $2,264,689, which, in addition to Engineering and Construction Inspection costs, requires a total project budget of $2,740,000 in order to award the construction contract, a difference of $240,000 from the authorized budget; and WHEREAS, staff has identified the following additional funding sources that can be applied against this $240,000 difference, namely, an additional $50,000 from Town of Ithaca and approximately $70,000 in additional fund balance from SID 5, leaving a gap of $120,000 to be filled; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby approves the above-subject project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby authorizes the City of Ithaca to pay in the first instance 100% of the federal and non-federal share of the cost of all phases of work for the Project or portions thereof; and, be it further February 5, 2020 22 RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends Capital Project #846 in the amount of $240,000 for a total project authorization of $2,740,000, of which addition it is expected that $120,000 will be General Fund borrowing in addition to the $350,000 previously authorized in the 2019 Capital Budget; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the sum of $2,740,000 is hereby appropriated from the issuance of serial bonds and made available to cover the cost of participation in the above phase of the Project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this project be undertaken with the understanding that the final cost of the Project to the City of Ithaca General Fund will be roughly 17% of said portion, currently estimated at $470,000 of the $2,740,000 authorized for this portion of the project, in monies and in-kind services as managed by the Superintendent of Public Works and monitored by the City Controller, with the balance of other funds currently estimated as follows: • $1,400,000 in federal-aid • $360,000 approved via 2019 SID #5 capital project cost • $205,000 approved via SID #5 (Fund Balance for Hector St) • $209,000 from CHIPS reimbursement • $70,000 Town of Ithaca for share of work in Town • $26,000 from 2020 SID #5 Work Plan ; and, be it further RESOLVED, That in the event the full federal and non-federal share costs of the project exceeds the amount appropriated above, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca shall convene as soon as possible to appropriate said excess amount immediately upon the notification by the NYSDOT thereof; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City of Ithaca be and is hereby authorized to execute all necessary Agreements and the Superintendent of Public Works is hereby authorized to execute all necessary certifications or reimbursement requests for Federal Aid on behalf of the City of Ithaca 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; and, be it further RESOLVED, 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; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this Resolution shall take effect immediately. Alderperson Brock asked what the Town of Ithaca’s contribution was. Sidewalk Program Manager Licitra responded that the Town’s total contribution to the project is $70,000. Sidewalk Program Manager Licitra thanked Council for their prompt consideration of this Resolution, explaining that there is a March 31st deadline for any tree cutting due to the existence of the Northern long eared bat, and this project will include tree work. A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously 5.2 Special Presentation to Council Regarding the Conference Center Deputy Director of Economic Development Knipe and Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA) Executive Director Gary Ferguson made a presentation on the proposed downtown Conference Center. February 5, 2020 23 The project would include the construction of a 49,000 square foot, 2-story, conference center. The project costs include a $31 million construction budget with $5 million of soft costs. The project will be funded from the following sources: $24 million – private financing $5 million – NYS grant $2.5 million – in accrued lodging industry revenue DIA Executive Director Ferguson explained that the project is designed to break even. He noted that conference center operations generally lose money, the operating costs and revenue streams don’t always match but that doesn’t mean they aren’t break even projects. They are often supplemented with a lodging industry stream of income. The conference center would be built and owned by the Vecino Group and would be leased to the Downtown Ithaca Alliance. The DIA would create a non-profit organization with a steering committee and a board that would help to organize and execute this project. He further explained that the City would seek authority to execute a city room tax through the New York State legislature. If approved, the room tax would be applied to the lodging and hotel industry and patrons would pay an extra fee for this. The other revenue stream option would be the creation of a tourism improvement special assessment district. The recommendation is to implement the lodging tax. It is calculated that $1.9 million would be collected and used as part of the capital funding for the project. Additional parts of this funding would be put aside in a contingency reserve for the City. Once the project is up and running, this money would be used for operational costs and the payment of debt service. This funding source would also create various other reserves to protect the funding partners. The Conference Center Committee is also asking the City to work with Tompkins County on a financial guarantee for the lease of the project. Private financing will be used to build the center and then the project would be asked to pay their share of the lease. Proceeds to make those payments would come from the revenues of the conference center and the city room tax. Deputy Economic Development Director Knipe reviewed the risk-mitigation factors for this project: • Construction budget – includes an 8% contingency ($1,025,000 on hard costs and an additional contingency on soft costs) • Reserve Funds – multiple reserves will be created at the outset of the project that include an Operating Reserve Fund; FF&E/Capital Replacement Fund; Rental Reserve Fund; and a Developer Operating Reserve Fund • Lodging Revenue Projections – projections are based on known figures from 2019 and historic County room tax collections. These revenues are assumed to be flat for the life of the project in the pro forma. • Cost of Financing – the cost of financing quoted by the lender is at 200 basis points above the 30-year treasury yield. The lender indicated that the final cost of financing could come in lower based on the strength of municipal guarantor commitments. • Operating pro forma – the pro forma builds in a ramp-up period when losses will be greater in the first several years. It was based on actual comps from similar sized facilities in similar communities. Some feel, based on their experience, these projections are conservative, and the Center could perform better than projected. • Professional operator – an experienced professional operator will be hired to run the center. Performance clauses will be built into the contract to ensure financial targets are met. • Marketing – funds have been built into the project pro-forma to help drive business to the new facility • Additional City Reserve – An additional City reserve account could be built up using room tax revenues collected prior to project completion. If the room tax February 5, 2020 24 were set up two years prior to the date of opening, a projected amount of $1.3 million could be added to this reserve account. Motion to Extend the Meeting By Alderperson Fleming: Seconded by Alderperson Nguyen RESOLVED, That Common Council extend the meeting until 12:00 midnight. Carried Unanimously Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the concerns of Tompkins County legislators, the use of local labor/prevailing wages, the desire to mitigate financial risks for city residents, the impact the center will have on businesses and the growth of the local economy, the need for affordable rents for the use of space, the value of the center as a community asset, the need to diversify the local economy, the level of access to the City Hall parking lot, the use of space for DPW equipment storage and a parking office, the level of contributions from the County, DIA, and hotels, potential changes to the economy that could modify the pro forma both positively and negatively, the vetting of potential conferences and the restriction of trade, and the likelihood of getting a city room tax approved. Further discussion followed regarding the need to amend Item 13.2 to state that the Memorandum of Understanding with Tompkins County regarding financial guarantees would be brought back to Common Council for approval. City Attorney Lavine suggested the following language: Amending Resolution By Alderperson Brock: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick RESOLVED, That the sixth Resolved clause in Item 13.2 be amended to read as follows: RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council authorizes the Mayor, subject to review by the City Attorney, to negotiate and thereafter propose for Council approval, a memorandum of agreement with Tompkins County outlining roles and responsibilities on the shared financial guarantee for the Conference Center lease; and, be it further Carried Unanimously 13.2 Mayor Myrick - Community Conference Center Project - Commitment To Pursue A City Of Ithaca Hotel Occupancy Tax And Commitment To Provide A Shared Financial Guarantee With Tompkins County - Resolution By Alderperson Smith: Seconded by Alderperson Nguyen WHEREAS, a Conference Center Organizing Committee comprised of multiple stakeholder groups including Tompkins County, the City of Ithaca, the Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce, the Ithaca Tompkins County Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), the Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA), the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA), the Tompkins County Strategic Tourism Planning Board (STPB), Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD), and the local hotel industry has been meeting regularly for over a year to create a financially feasible and operationally sound strategy for developing and funding a conference center project; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes the importance of the tourism and hospitality economy to Tompkins County as a major economic sector, which in 2018 generated $227 million in economic activity, over $16.7 million in local taxes, supported $746 per household in property tax savings, and supported over 2,600 in direct local jobs; and WHEREAS, two market demand and feasibility study projects were performed in the last year and funded through County Tourism Program funds, and both of these studies demonstrated the market demand for a new conference center in Ithaca and projected the appropriate size and capacity of the center; and WHEREAS, Tompkins provided funds for a consulting engagement between the CVB and Civitas to assist in the creation of a viable and reliable lodging industry stream of income for a conference center project; and February 5, 2020 25 WHEREAS, a successful Community Conference Center project will be an asset for the City of Ithaca resulting in significant increased room tax and sales tax revenues, the addition of new direct and indirect jobs; significant economic impact beyond center operations through the purchase of supplies and services; an estimated 22,000 new room nights as well as annual visitation of over 63,000 after center operations are stabilized in year five; and WHEREAS, recognizing the economic development value to the City, County and Southern Tier Region, the State of New York has awarded the Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce Foundation a $5.0 million grant through Southern Tier Regional Economic Development Council to establish base equity in support of the Community Conference Center project; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA) has voted to support and endorse possible ownership of the project and, if required, will provide a baseline guarantee of fiscal support up to $25,000 per year to ensure that lease payment obligations are met; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that Vecino Group would own the Green Street Garage property and enter into a 30-year lease with the DIA for the conference center portion of the project and that the DIA would hire a professional operator to run the center; and WHEREAS, a municipal financial guarantee has also been requested from the City of Ithaca and Tompkins County for the approximate annual $1.5M lease payment for the duration of the debt project financing period to secure project financing for the Community Conference Center; and WHEREAS, a City hotel room occupancy tax - which requires the adoption of a state enabling law specific to the City of Ithaca as well as the adoption of a new local law - is the preferred means of securing a new source of annual funding from the lodging industry to support the financing, operations and reserves for the Center; and WHEREAS, a City tourism improvement district (TID), has been identified as a secondary option in lieu of hotel room occupancy tax for generating the required revenues from the lodging industry for the conference center, which does not require action by the State Legislature; and WHEREAS, the project plan includes the development and long term management of several reserve funds that would serve to protect all involved parties, including: • Operating Reserve Fund - to provide assurance to operator during years when the annual operating loss exceeds revenues for direct conference center operations • FF&E/Capital Replacement Fund - to ensure replacement, repair, and replenishment as needed of all furnishing, fixtures, and equipment of the conference center • Rental Reserve Fund - to ensure additional protection for DIA to mitigate any cash flow concerns and ensure two months of lease payments are available to DIA at all times • Developer Operating Reserve Fund - to be established and held by Vecino as required by their lender, and maintained to equal two months’ rent throughout lease term; and WHEREAS the Tompkins County Legislature has expressed its willingness to enter into an agreement with the City of Ithaca to support the City’s financial guarantee for the annual project lease payments throughout the life of the lease; and WHEREAS the Tompkins County Legislature has agreed that should the new City of Ithaca hotel room occupancy tax or TID revenues not cover annual lease payments, and all reserve funds are depleted, and the DIA financial support is exhausted, the Tompkins County Legislature will commit revenues from County hotel room occupancy February 5, 2020 26 tax for the purposes of generating additional funds to support a portion of the City financial guarantee for annual lease payments; and WHEREAS, the aforementioned reserve funds except for the Developer Operating Reserve Fund will be managed by the Downtown Ithaca Alliance, or its subsidiary, as project owner; and DIA or its subsidiary shall report the balances of each fund to the City of Ithaca on at least a quarterly basis; and WHEREAS, there is a deadline of February 6, 2020 for the IURA, in consultation with Vecino Group, to decide whether the Community Conference Center project has a financially feasible and implementable plan for moving forward as part of the overall Green Street Garage project; now, therefore be it: 1. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council supports the development of the community conference center project; and, be it further 2. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby express its commitment to provide a financial guarantee for the project financing to be shared with Tompkins County throughout the life of the lease, and behind a limited financial guarantee of the Ithaca Downtown Alliance, subject to establishment of a City hotel room occupancy tax or tourism improvement district revenue source in an amount sufficient to pay rent and projected operating deficits; and, be it further 3. RESOLVED That the City of Ithaca Common Council commits to pursuing New York State authorization for the establishment of a new City hotel room occupancy tax and subsequent adoption of a new local law to provide the necessary revenues from the lodging industry to support the conference center project; and, be it further 4. RESOLVED, That in the event that the New York State does not support the establishment of a new City hotel room occupancy tax as anticipated, the City of Ithaca Common Council expresses its interest and support for instead pursuing a City tourism improvement district which can be established through local action; and, be it further 5. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca will explore additional methods for mitigating risk to the City, including, but not limited to establishing a reserve fund at the City to be capitalized with initial City hotel room occupancy tax funds to be used for risk mitigation and future funds dedicated to the long term fiscal support of the project; and, be it further 6. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council authorizes the Mayor, subject to review by the City Attorney, to negotiate and thereafter propose for Council approval, a memorandum of agreement with Tompkins County outlining roles and responsibilities on the shared financial guarantee for the Conference Center lease; and, be it further 7. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council authorizes the Mayor, subject to review by the City Attorney and satisfaction with the terms of the City-County MOU on the roles and responsibilities for the shared financial guarantee, to execute a memorandum of agreement with Vecino Group to commit to enter into a legally binding lease guarantee for the Conference Center, and further requests staff to continue its work with the conference center organizing committee to ensure the best possible project be planned, developed, and operated on behalf of the residents of the City of Ithaca. Carried Unanimously February 5, 2020 27 13.3 Resolution to Approve Artwork for the Tompkins Giant No. 1 proposal in Cass Park By Alderperson Smith: Seconded by Alderperson Lewis WHEREAS, Plan Ithaca, the City’s comprehensive plan, identifies public art as an important cultural resource that contributes to quality of life and economic vitality and calls for the City’s continued support of public art (see Cultural Resources); and WHEREAS, Community Arts Partnership has submitted a proposal to install a freestanding sculpture in Cass Park; and WHEREAS, the creation of the sculpture has been privately funded by the project organizer; and WHEREAS, City staff including City Forester, Jeanne Grace, Recreation Supervisor, Jim Dalterio, and Planner, Alex Phillips, visited Cass Park on September 06, 2019 and identified a specific site in the park that would not impact any surrounding natural or recreational features; and WHEREAS, the City Code §8-13 Duties, tasks the Community Life Commission, to advise on issues related to art and public art in Ithaca, including public art displays, programs, and exhibitions, the Community Life Commission accepted staff’s request to circulate the Tompkins Giant No. 1 proposal at its meeting on September 16, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works heard the public art proposal at its meeting on September 17, 2019 and approved Cass Park as a potential site for sculpture at its meeting on October 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission extended the public comment period for the sculpture proposal at its meeting October 21, 2019 to consider the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission input given the proposal’s placement in a city park; and WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, considered the proposals and raised concerns to the Community Life Commission regarding safety (climbing), appropriateness of site, and maintenance; and WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission and staff addressed the concerns identified by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission along with the mixed responses from public comment at its meeting on November 18, 2019. The Community Life Commission determined the proposal worthy of consideration for the Planning and Economic Development Committee; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council addressed the concerns identified by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council accept the proposal by Community Arts Partnership to create a sculpture for the city in Cass Park; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the selected artist may proceed with the installation of the sculpture upon the execution of an agreement with the City as reviewed by the City Attorney. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the potential renaming of this piece of art. Mayor Myrick suggested that the item be adopted as written and referred back to the Community Life Commission to revisit the name of the artwork. Amending Resolution: By Alderperson McGonigal: Seconded by Alderperson Smith RESOLVED, That the name of the Tompkins Giant be stricken, and Community Life Commission be directed to engage a public process to change the name of the artwork. February 5, 2020 28 Ayes (5) McGonigal, Smith, Murtagh, Fleming, Lewis Nays (5) Gearhart, Nguyen, Kerslick, Mohlenhoff, Brock Mayor Myrick voted No breaking tie Failed (5-6) Alderpersons Fleming and McGonigal agreed to take this issue to the Community Life Commission for further discussion. Alderperson Kerslick, Liaison to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources (PRNR) Commission, stated that he would not support this Resolution due to the sentence “Common Council addressed the concerns raised by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission”. He stated that the PRNR Commission did not support this issue as they wanted to develop a policy about public art in public parks and this process has not allowed them that opportunity. Alderperson Brock, who is also a Liaison to the PRNR Commission, noted that she shares Alderperson Kerslick’s concerns. A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) Nguyen, Murtagh, Gearhart, Smith, Mohlenhoff, Lewis Nays (4) Brock, McGonigal, Fleming, Kerslick Carried (6-4) 13.4 Common Council Resolution Opposing Relocation of Downtown Post Office By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Lewis WHEREAS the Downtown Ithaca Post Office represents a key civic institution that is of vital importance to City of Ithaca residents and employees; and WHEREAS the Downtown Ithaca Post Office is an extremely busy destination that serves businesses and residents in the City of Ithaca, including residents of limited means who would find a bus or car trip to a more remote post office to be burdensome and costly; and WHEREAS, over the past 15 years Downtown Ithaca has been one of the region’s and upstate New York’s fastest growing districts, with over 1,000 new residents and over a half billion dollars in new downtown investment; and WHEREAS, this growth is expected to continue in the foreseeable future with the pending redevelopment of the Green Garage superblock, which will add at least another 400 units of housing; and WHEREAS, Downtown Ithaca has emerged as a center of technology and commerce, supporting some 100 retail businesses, 65 food and beverage businesses, and over 400 professional and office businesses employing approximately 3,500 people, many of whom rely on quick, walkable access to the post office and who utilize Post Office services for their on-line packaging fulfillment needs; and WHEREAS, within walking distance of Downtown Ithaca reside over 10,000 people, representing some six different neighborhoods who utilize the different services of the Post Office, including post office boxes, money orders, and mailing/packaging services; and WHEREAS, Downtown Ithaca serves as a transit hub connecting over 21,000 Cornell students, 6,700 Ithaca College students, and thousands of other City of Ithaca residents who do not have cars; and WHEREAS, this area is known for its walkability, for both residents and employees; and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Common Council is concerned that the relocation or moving of the Post Office out of Downtown Ithaca would materially affect the operations of businesses and the lives of the many residents, including many international students living in and around the downtown core, who currently depend on this Post Office to be February 5, 2020 29 centrally located and within walking distance and adjacent to our community’s transit hub; and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca has reported that the Post Office has re-signed a lease for only a two-year period and may want to seek alternative locations outside of Downtown; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby express its concern about any possible plans to relocate the U.S. Post Office out of Downtown Ithaca; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council respectfully requests the U.S. Postal Service to retain a downtown location in the years to come in recognition of Downtown’s status as the commercial and social center of the Ithaca community; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca will work with local stakeholders and local and federal officials to ensure that the Ithaca Post Office remains in Downtown Ithaca, and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City Clerk be directed to forward a copy of this Resolution to Congressman Reed, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Schumer, and the Federal and Local Postmasters. Carried Unanimously MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS: 14.1 Appointments to Public Safety and Information Commission – Resolution By Alderperson Kerslick: Seconded by Alderperson Gearhart RESOLVED, That Peter Thorman be appointed to the Public Safety and Information Commission to replace Mark Spadolini with a term to expire December 31, 2021; and, be it further RESOLVED, That Mike Brindisi be appointed to the Public Safety and Information Commission to replace Kenneth McLaurin with a term to expire December 31, 2020, and, be it further 14.2 Reappointments to Cable Access Oversight Committee – Resolution RESOLVED, That Wayles Browne be reappointed to the Cable Access Oversight Committee with a term to expire December 31, 2022; and, be it further RESOLVED, That Gossa Tsegaye be reappointed to the Cable Access Oversight Committee with a term to expire December 31, 2022. Carried Unanimously MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS: Approval of the January 8, 2020 Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution The minutes of the January 8, 2020 Common Council Meeting were deferred until the March meeting. Approval of the January 15, 2020 Special Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution By Alderperson Kerslick: Seconded by Alderperson Smith RESOLVED, That the minutes of the January 15, 2020 Special Common Council Meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Motion to Enter into Executive Session to Discuss Potential Litigation By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by Alderperson Fleming RESOLVED, That Common Council enter into Executive Session to discuss potential litigation. Carried Unanimously February 5, 2020 30 RECONVENE: Common Council reconvened into Regular Session with no formal action taken. Request to Amend 2020 Budget for Litigation Expenses: By Alderperson Lewis: Seconded by Alderperson Smith WHEREAS, it is in the City’s interest to satisfy an outstanding litigation judgment and associated interest and costs (“judgments”), and to fund a settlement, which collectively will resolve costly litigation and legal obligations on the part of the City, and WHEREAS, funds necessary to the foregoing exceed the 2020 budgeted operating expenses for the claims and judgments account, and WHEREAS, the City will employ various funding sources to fund the above-referenced judgment and settlement, including encumbrances, current operating budgeted expenses and fund balance; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the Mayor to resolve litigation judgments and settlements on such terms as advised by the City attorney within the budgetary limits of the 2020 Judgments and Claims Account, as amended by this resolution, and, be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the City Controller to transfer to the 2020 Judgments and Claims Account an amount not to exceed $954,124.29, and to make any necessary 2020 budget amendments to account for said transfer and associated resolution of litigation. Ayes (9) Brock, McGonigal, Nguyen, Murtagh, Gearhart, Fleming, Smith, Kerslick, Lewis Nays (1) Mohlenhoff Carried (9-1) ADJOURNMENT: On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:10 a.m. ______________________________ _______________________________ Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC Svante L. Myrick City Clerk Mayor