Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-GPA-2013-08-12GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. August 12, 2013 PRESENT: Alderperson Mohlenhoff - Chair Alderpersons (4) Murtagh, McCollister, Smith, Proulx OTHERS PRESENT: Alderpersons (4) Brock, Fleming, Dotson, Kerslick City Clerk — Conley Holcomb City Attorney — Lavine Manager of Electronic Communications - Kronenbitter ADDroval of the Minutes of the Julv 17. 2013. 2013 GPA Committee Meetinas - Resolution By Alderperson McCollister: Seconded by Alderperson Proulx RESOLVED, That the minutes of the July 17, 2013 GPA Committee meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Public Comment: Larry Roberts, Chair of the Disability Advisory Council (DAC), reported that the DAC voted last week in full support of the new sidewalk improvement program proposal. He stated that he believes the new system will result in a reduction in disputes between the city and property owners thereby increasing time efficiencies; that it will be easier to communicate the new policy to the public; and that it allows sidewalk improvement priorities to be set by the people in the neighborhood, the DAC, Board of Public Works and Common Council. Larry Beck, local property owner and manager, voiced his concern that not enough people were involved in the development of the proposed sidewalk improvement program. He stated his belief that sidewalk improvements will be subsidized by a class of people (owners of multi -unit buildings), and that an assessment of $.60 per linear foot would be easier to calculate. He noted that the legislation is subject to a permissive referendum and expressed his disappointment that he cannot initiate a petition because he does not physically reside in the City of Ithaca though he owns property in the city. Charter and Code Revisions: 2.1 A Local Law Concerning Sidewalk Improvement Districts: Chair Mohlenhoff opened a question and answer period with City Attorney Lavine. City Attorney Lavine offered the following clarifications: • The term "low foot traffic lot" is used to describe one & two family homes based on the designation provided by the Tompkins County Assessment Department. The designations are considered by use, not zoning. The term "low foot traffic lot" is intended to depict how much a property benefits from the overall sidewalk improvement district, not how many people walk past the property. • The frontage fee schedule was amended to $30 for each 55 feet of lot frontage or portion thereof instead of 50 feet. • Projects subject to the Site Plan Review process could still be required to construct sidewalk at the owner's expense in the same manner as under current law. The costs so incurred for those types of improvements are not eligible for past work credit under the proposed law. • Cornell University has an extensive network of private roads and sidewalks and has a good track record of maintaining the public ones. If they were included in this proposal, the City would become responsible for maintaining them. There has been no indication that the City is interested in doing that. • This proposal includes city- owned, county- owned, and school district property and those entities will be expected to pay into the sidewalk districts. • Snow and ice removal on sidewalks remains the responsibility of the adjacent property owners. • The Downtown Ithaca Alliance can apply for past sidewalk work credit, in the same way that individual property owners can, for work they funded on Cayuga Street within the BID. There is a distinction between sidewalks and a pedestrian mall. • The square footage of a building(s), used for the calculation of the fee, will be determined by the Tompkins County Assessment Department. The Assessment Department does not charge for program administration services. • Replacement materials for damaged slate sidewalks in historic districts will be determined by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, the Board of Public Works and Common Council as per the current policy. • The definition of sidewalk maintenance includes construction, inspection, and repair and is specific to sidewalks, including curb cuts. A Local Law Entitled the "City of Ithaca Local Law Concerning Sidewalk Improvement Districts." By Alderperson Murtagh: Seconded by: Alderperson Smith Local Law No. -2013 WHEREAS the City's current sidewalk policy, in which the full cost of sidewalk construction and repair is assessed against the abutting property owner, results in unpredictable, large, lump -sum charges against property owners, and as a result has discouraged the construction and repair of sidewalk throughout the City, and WHEREAS a comprehensive and high - quality network of sidewalks is beneficial to residents, businesses, organizations, and individual property owners beyond the abutting property owners, and WHEREAS pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law Section 10(1)(ii)(c)(3) the City of Ithaca is authorized to adopt a local law relating to the authorization, making, confirmation, and correction of benefit assessments for local improvements; now, therefore BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Legislative Findings. Intent. and Purpose. Pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law Section 10(1)(ii)(c)(3) the City of Ithaca is authorized to adopt a local law relating to the authorization, making, confirmation, and correction of benefit assessments for local improvements. Under the City's current policy, the abutting property owner is responsible for the full sidewalk construction and repair costs. This policy has led to the construction of very little new sidewalk in the last twenty years, and the enforcement of the repair policy is administratively difficult and leads to repair delays. The Common Council makes the following findings of fact: A. Residents, businesses, organizations, and individual property owners beyond the abutting property owner are benefited by a comprehensive and high - quality network of sidewalks. B. Abutting property owners are better served by paying an annual assessment for the construction and repair of sidewalks near their property, rather than face unpredictable, large, lump -sum assessments for construction and repair of abutting sidewalk. C. Sidewalks are appropriately designated as a local improvement for which property owners may be assessed in proportion to the benefit the property receives, and such assessments are necessary to defray the cost of construction and maintenance of sidewalk in the City. The Common Council finds that the creation of several Sidewalk Improvement Districts is the most efficient and effective way to meet the need for sidewalk construction and repair and to recognize the proportional benefits and enhanced property value received by property owners due to such work. The Common Council also considers sidewalk accessibility to be an important goal that is supported by this local law. Section 2. Charter Amendments. Section C- 114(A) of the Ithaca City Charter is hereby amended as follows: LOCALIMPROVEMENT Any public improvement or work, the expense of which is directed by the Common Council to be assessed in whole or in part upon the property or properties deemed benefited. TAX In addition to its usual meaning, includes water rents or rates[ an,d assessments or reassessments for IonaI imnrn�iomontcl Section 3. Previous Sidewalk Assessment Policy. Existing Section C -73 of the City Charter is hereby redesignated as Section C -73.1, entitled "Sidewalks Not Included in Sidewalk Improvement Districts," and is amended to include a new subsection F as follows: F. Those provisions of this Section C -73.1 compelling owner construction or repair of sidewalk shall not apply to lots or parcels located in a Sidewalk Improvement District and subject to an assessment for work performed in that District pursuant to Section C -73 of the Charter; provided, however, that those provisions of this Section C -73.1 regarding the abutting landowner's duty to maintain the sidewalks adjoining his or her property free and clear of snow, ice, and all other obstructions, and the landowner's liability for injuries or damages arising from the landowner's failure to do so, shall continue to apply to all Lots in the City; provided further that this Section and related provisions in the City Code shall continue to apply to the construction or repair of driveway cuts or aprons regardless of whether a lot or parcel is located in a District or is subject to such an assessment; and provided further that should a court of competent jurisdiction hold, or the City so concede, that Section C -73 of the Charter in its entirety or any District created by that Section in particular is invalid or unconstitutional, or that any particular property within any District is not subject to that Section, any property thereby determined not to be subject to Sidewalk Improvement District assessments pursuant to Section C -73 shall be subject to the provisions regarding sidewalk construction or repair set forth in this Section C -73.1. Section 4. Sidewalk Improvement Districts. Section C -73 of the City Charter is hereby renamed "Sidewalk Improvement Districts," and is amended to read as follows: A. Establishment of Sidewalk Improvement Districts; Map. (1) The City is hereby divided into five (5) Sidewalk Improvement Districts ( "Districts" or "SIDs "): District #1, District #2, District #3, District #4, and District #5. The Districts are bounded as shown on the map titled "Official Sidewalk Improvement District Map of the City of Ithaca, New York" (hereinafter "SID Map "), and which accompanies in printed format and is hereby made part of this Section. (2) The Superintendent of Public Works or his or her designee shall prepare, maintain, and keep current the SID Map in accordance with amendments made thereon pursuant to action of the GPA Committee August 12, 2013 Common Council. (3) Where uncertainty exists with respect to the boundaries of the aforesaid districts as shown on the SID Map, the rules established for interpreting the Official Zoning Map as set forth in Section 325 -6 of the City Code shall be used to interpret the SID Map. B. Construction or Repair of Sidewalks in Districts. (1) The Board of Public Works shall recommend, subject to amendment and approval by the Common Council, a budget and a schedule of Sidewalk Construction or Repair to be performed in each SID as part of the City's budget for each fiscal year; provided, however, that the budget for the first fiscal year following the year of enactment of this Local Law shall be recommended and approved on such schedule as deemed practicable by the Board of Public Works and Common Council. The Board shall have the authority to include in such budget all or any portion of the cost for past sidewalk construction or repair performed by the City on a property located in and subject to assessments as part of a SID, so long as said cost has not been assessed upon the abutting property owner prior to the effective date of this Section. Along with such budget and schedule of work, the Board shall recommend to Council any adjustments it deems desirable to the assessment formula set forth in Subsection C hereof. Such budget may include the issuing of, and payment of the maturing principal of and interest on, any obligation issued pursuant to the Local Finance Law for the purpose of financing the construction or repair of sidewalks pursuant to this Section. (2) Before the budget and schedule of work required by Subsection B hereof are given final approval by the Board, the City Clerk shall give notice by publication three (3) times in a local newspaper of a public hearing thereon on a date specified, which date shall not be less than ten (10) days from the first publication. Before the date of public hearing, any person may file with the City Clerk written objections to such budget or schedule of work or any part thereof, which objections shall be presented to the Board before action shall be taken on such budget and schedule of work. At the time so appointed or at such other time to which it may adjourn for that purpose, the Board may hear the allegations of any person interested who shall have filed such objections and may take proof in relation thereto. Such allegations and proofs shall be confined to the matters stated in such written objections. The Board may thereupon alter or correct any assessment as justice may require, finally approve the same and file a schedule thereof with the Common Council, which may amend and confirm the same by local '61 C GPA Committee August 12, 2013 law after a public hearing, and if so confirmed, the amount of each assessment as derived from the Assessment Formula shall be a lien upon the real property so assessed. Such assessments and, if required, any reassessments, shall be collected in the manner provided in this Charter and the City Code for the enforcement, levy, and collection of City taxes. (3) The Board of Public Works or Common Council may include construction or repair of sidewalk curb cuts and curb accessibility ramps in the local improvements to be made in a SID. The Board of Public Works or Common Council shall not include construction or repair of driveway cuts or aprons, which shall remain the financial responsibility of the abutting property owner. (4) Work performed in a SID pursuant to this Section shall be deemed a local improvement, and Common Council declares and finds that the Assessment Formula in Subsection C assesses each property in each District in proportion to the benefit received by that property from the construction and repair of sidewalks in its respective SID, and that such assessments are necessary to defray the cost of construction and repair of sidewalk in the respective SIDs. (5) Nothing herein shall be construed to modify or alter any power of the Common Council, Board of Public Works, or Planning and Development Board to require a property owner to bear the full cost of sidewalk construction or repair as part of the site plan review process pursuant to Chapter 276 of the City Code, regardless of whether said property is located within a SID. Assessment Formula. (1) Definitions. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE The Annual Maintenance seventy dollars ($70.00); forty dollars ($140.00). COST OF PAST WORK Fee for Low - Foot - Traffic Lots is for all other Lots, it is one hundred and The total sum, including labor and materials, actually paid for Past Work; provided, however, that none of the following shall be included: (i) costs exceeding fifteen dollars ($15.00) per square foot of Past Work completed; or, (ii) any overhead fee, interests or penalties imposed for failure to perform Sidewalk Construction or Repair pursuant to the Charter or City Code, including but not limited to Section C- 73.1(E) of the Charter. FRONT FEET LOT GPA Committee August 12, 2013 The length of perimeter, measured in feet, by which a Lot abuts the line of the public street or streets. Lot or parcel of land, as set forth by the current City of Ithaca Tax Maps on file with the Tompkins County Department of Assessment. LOW- FOOT - TRAFFIC LOTS Those Lots with a Property Class Code of 210, 215, 220, 240, 250, or 270, or substantially identical successor designations. PAST WORK Sidewalk Construction or Repair performed on a Lot located in and subject to assessments as part of a Sidewalk Improvement District, and permitted by and performed in accordance with the general drawings and specifications established by the Office of City Engineer, provided that such work is (i) performed at the cost of the property owner of the Lot upon which the work is performed or (ii) funded by documented contributions made to a business improvement district established by Chapter 149 of the City Code by the property owner of a Lot located in said business improvement district for the sole purpose of performing Sidewalk Construction and Repair; and provided further that work completed as required by a site plan review pursuant to Chapter 276 of the City Code is excluded. PROPERTY CLASS CODE The property type classification code, as defined by the New York State Office of Real Property Services in the Assessors' Manual, assigned to a Lot by the Tompkins County Department of Assessment, as may be updated by that Department from time to time. SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION OR REPAIR Construction or repair of any public sidewalk or footpath intended for the use of pedestrians in a City park or approximately following along the line of the street or streets upon which the Lot fronts, including but not limited to sidewalk curb cuts and curb accessibility ramps, and, other actions determined by the Board of Public Works to be necessary to the construction or repair of said sidewalk or footpath, including but not limited to, any paving, earth work, drainage, rA GPA Committee August 12, 2013 and appurtenances; provided, however, that the construction or repair of driveway cuts, aprons, or a pedestrian mall (as that term is defined in Section C -89(B) of the Charter) is excluded. SQUARE FOOTAGE The total square footage of all buildings on a Lot as recorded by the Tompkins County Department of Assessment. (2) Each Lot in a SID shall be annually assessed for work to be performed in the district as follows: Annual Maintenance Fee plus Square Footage Fee plus Frontage Fee less Past Work Reduction. (a) Square Footage Fee. The Square Footage Fee for all Low - Foot- Traffic Lots shall be $0.00. For all other Lots, the Lot's Square Footage Fee shall be equal to the Lot's Square Footage times $0.015. (b) Frontage Fee. The Frontage Fee for all Low - Foot - Traffic Lots shall be $0.00. For all other Lots, the Frontage Fee shall be $30.00 for each fifty -five (55) feet of Front Feet or portion thereof. (c) Past Work Reduction. A Lot's assessment under this Section shall be reduced as set forth herein. [1 ] A Lot is eligible for a reduction for the Cost of Past Work for twenty (20) years from the date the Past Work was substantially completed ( "Reduction Period "). In each year of the Reduction Period for which an assessment, if any, is made pursuant to this Section, the Lot's Past Work Reduction shall be an amount equal to one - twentieth (1/20) of the Cost of Past Work. Should the allowable reduction for the Cost of Past Work be greater than a Lot's assessment under this Section in any given year, the Lot owner shall not be entitled to the difference, and the difference shall not apply to the assessment for any other year. [2] The Lot owner must provide sufficient evidence to the Superintendent of Public Works or his or her designee of the nature and location of the Past Work performed, the Cost of the Past Work, and the date the Past Work was substantially completed. Such evidence must be provided no later than May 1 of the year preceding the fiscal year for which the owner seeks a Past Work reduction; provided, however, that in the first fiscal year following the year of enactment of this Local Law, such proof must be provided no later than the deadline, if any, established by the Board of Public Works, and if no such deadline is established, such proof must be �'3 GPA Committee August 12, 2013 provided no later than February 1 of that fiscal year. If the request is approved by the Superintendent of Public Works or his or her designee, the Past Work reduction shall automatically recur in each remaining year of the Reduction Period. The Lot owner may appeal the determination of the Superintendent of Public Works or his or her designee to the Board of Public Works at an open meeting thereafter. D. Appeals and Reassessments. (1) No action or proceeding to set aside, vacate, cancel, or annul any assessment for a local improvement shall be maintained, except for total want of jurisdiction to levy and assess the same on the part of the officer, officers, board, or body authorized by law to make such levy or assessment or to order the improvement on account of which the levy or assessment was made. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction finds such total want of jurisdiction, this Section shall be deemed repealed, and the sidewalk assessment policy in Section C -73.1 of the Charter shall automatically take effect. (2) No action or proceedings shall be maintained to modify or reduce any assessment for a local improvement, except for fraud or substantial error by reason of which the amount of such assessment is in substantial excess of the amount which should have been lawfully levied or assessed. (3) Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any determination of assessment for a local improvement pursuant to this Section may have the decision reviewed by the Supreme Court of New York in the manner provided by Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. (4) Whenever any assessments made under the provisions of this Section shall be set aside or shall be decided by any court having jurisdiction thereof to have been improperly or illegally made or whenever it shall be ascertained that the proceedings under which said assessment has been made shall have been so far irregular and erroneous as to make the collection of such assessment illegal, then a reassessment shall be made with the same force and effect as if it had been an original assessment; provided, however, that in the event that no assessment is thereafter successfully levied, those properties affected shall be subject to Section C -73.1 of the Charter. E. Duties of Owner. Nothing herein shall modify or abolish the duty of the owner of lands abutting any street, highway, alley or other public place in the City to keep the sidewalks, approaches or street driveways adjoining such lands free and clear of and from snow, ice and all other 01 GPA Committee August 12, 2013 obstructions, nor shall anything herein modify or abolish the liability of such owner for any injury or damage caused by reason of omission, failure or negligence to keep such sidewalk free from snow, ice or other obstructions as set forth in Section 73.1(B)(1) of the Charter. Section 5. Prior Written Notice Amendment. Section C -107 of the Ithaca City Charter is hereby amended as follows: The City of Ithaca shall not be liable for damage or injury sustained by any person in consequence of any street, highway, bridge, culvert, sidewalk, crosswalk, park, playground, stream, pond, lake, reservoir, building or other City- owned property or structure being out of repair, unsafe, dangerous or obstructed by snow, ice or otherwise or in any way or manner, including but not limited to protruding pipes, metal plates or covers or other objects, unless written notice of the defective, unsafe, dangerous, obstructed or concealed conditions of said street, highway, bridge, culvert, sidewalk, crosswalk, park, playground, stream, pond, lake, reservoir, building or other City -owned property or structure shall have been given to[ the Board of Publi , Works o+fl the City of Ithaca by delivery to the office of the City Clerk[ or to the Off ir•o of the Superintendent of P bliG Works] at least 24 hours previous to said damage or injury. This section applies to claims of infants and all other persons. Any and all actions maintained for damages or injuries to person or property caused or sustained as aforesaid shall be commenced in accordance with the requirements of §§ 50 -e and 50 -i of the New York State General Municipal Law. Section 6. Severability Clause. 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 portions of this Local Law, except as otherwise provided in Section 3 and Section 4(D). Section 7. Effective and Operative Date. This Local Law shall take effect forty -five (45) days after its adoption, and after filing in the office of the Secretary of State. This Local Law is subject to referendum on petition pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law Section 24. Further discussion followed on the floor regarding the Task Force's recommended district map, which does not include Stewart or Cass Parks. City Attorney Lavine noted that the suggested amendments resulted in increasing District 5's levy to $92,000 from $55,000 or to 14% from 8% of the overall assessment. WE GPA Committee August 12, 2013 Alderpersons Brock and Dotson stated that they believe that District 5 should have more properties allocated to it, noting that it is more expensive to build sidewalks in that area due to the topography and there are a smaller number of residents paying for a smaller sidewalk network. Questions arose regarding funding options. Each district has the authority to bond for work in their district but this should be used extremely carefully due to the years of debt repayment required. The collected funding needs to be spent each year and cannot be encumbered for larger projects. Negotiations between districts is not allowed. A vote on the Local Law with the Task Force's Recommended 5- District Map resulted as follows: Ayes (4) Mohlenhoff, Smith, McCollister, Murtagh Nays (1) Proulx Carried (4 -1) Alderperson Proulx stated that he supports the proposal but opposes the tight timeline in which it is being considered, noting that the two Alderpersons who are most impacted by the recommended sidewalk improvement districts (Brock & Dotson) didn't have a vote at this meeting. 2.2 Taxi Legislation Update: Alderperson McCollister and City Clerk Holcomb reported on their recent meeting with the Tompkins County Council of Governments (TCCOG) regarding approaching taxicab regulation as a regional issue. The Town Supervisors and County Legislators all agreed that a County -wide effort was a reasonable approach, and would like to pursue New York State enabling legislation to give Tompkins County the authority to regulate taxicabs and liveries. A sub - committee was created to begin work on this issue that includes Alderpersons McCollister and Murtagh, County Legislators Michael Lane and Carol Chock, Newfield Town Supervisor Richard Driscoll, Village of Cayuga Heights Mayor Kate Supron, and City Clerk Holcomb. 2.3 Common Council Rules of Procedure: Chair Mohlenhoff led a discussion on Section II of the Common Council Rules of Procedure entitled "Order of Business ", as it relates to public comment and Common Council's privilege of the floor. The following recommendations were made: • Stay with existing rules regarding "lending" time to others. • Promote the rules that allow for a spokesperson of 3 or 4 people to speak for 5 minutes / a spokesperson for 5 or more people may speak for 7 minutes. • Stay with the existing rules about disrespectful language /behaviors • Give Committee Chairs and the Mayor 2 or 3 options to follow if public comment is expected to last for more than 1 hour • Promote good meeting management practices • Educate the audience on the protocol regarding interactive discussions 11 GPA Committee August 12, 2013 Provide more flexibility in agenda structure so that important or controversial items are discussed toward the beginning of the meeting and the more routine issues /announcements are at the end of the meeting. Council member privilege of the floor: comments should be concise and targeted 4. Public Information and Communications: 4.1 E -mail System Replacement Project: City Clerk Holcomb and Manager of Electronic Communications Scott Kronenbitter addressed the Committee to present the findings of their e -mail system replacement project. After the issuance of a Request for Proposals, vendor demonstrations with the workforce, and extensive research and cost comparisons, the City Clerk's Office is recommending the purchase of Microsoft Exchange, through the Computing Center for e -mail; and the Razorsafe e -mail archiving system through Mirapoint /Critical Path. City Clerk staff reviewed the advantages and disadvantages of each system that was considered and reviewed the associated costs forecasting 5- 10 years which is the likely life expectancy of the system. The Microsoft Exchange /Razorsafe hybrid solution is the most cost efficient system in the long -term but will require an additional initial investment of $70,000 over the $83,000 already approved as a 2013 Capital Project. After a brief question and answer period, the GPA Committee gave their approval of the recommended e -mail and archiving software. This matter will be forwarded to the City Administration Committee for consideration of the additional funding needed to implement this project. 5. Meeting Wrap Up — Announcements — Review Agenda Items for Next Meeting : Items for the next agenda include continued work on the Common Council Rules of Procedure, and the analysis of city boards and committees. The City Clerk's Office will distribute the memo approved by the GPA Committee in July, to all committee Chairs and a chart of all the boards and committees will be included in the September agenda packet. Adjournment: On a motion the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Julie Conley Holcomb, CIVIC City Clerk 12 Deborah Mohlenhoff Chair