Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURA-2013-01-24Approved: 2/28/13  Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 274-6559 (607) 274-6558 (fax) ax)    MINUTESMINUTES  ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY  Common Council Chambers, City Hall  8:30 A.M., Thursday, January 24, 2013    Members: Chair Svante Myrick, Karl Graham, Eric Rosario, Tracy Farrell  Excused: None  Others: Chris Proulx (Common Council Liaison)  Staff:  Nels Bohn, JoAnn Cornish, Sue Kittel, Charles Pyott  Guests:   None  Public:  None    I. Call to Order   Chair Myrick called the meeting to order at 8:31 A.M.    II. Agenda Additions/Deletions  None.      III. Review of Draft Meeting Minutes: December 20, 2012 & January 11, 2013 (Special Meeting)  Farrell moved, seconded by Rosario, to approve the December 20, 2012 and January 11, 2013  (Special Meeting) minutes, with one modification.    Carried Unanimously 4‐0    IV. Governance Committee (GC)  A. IURA Strategic Planning in Response to Projected Future Funding Reductions for HUD  Entitlement Grants  Rosario reported that the committee has been working on drafting the strategic plan, in anticipation  of likely future Federal funding reductions.  The committee will present the draft of the plan at the  next IURA meeting.  IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 2 of 13    B. Response to Delinquent 2011 City Financial Reporting  Rosario reported that the committee originally anticipated the audit being ready for Common  Council action in January 2013; however, it now appears it will not be complete until at least  February 2013, for subsequent Common Council action in March 2013.    Rosario noted the IURA received an official warning from the New York State Authorities Budget  Office (ABO) that the IURA remains delinquent in filing the required financial reports.  As a result,  the committee drafted a resolution to address the issue and underscore the potential consequences  of the situation, if left unresolved (e.g., official public censure of the IURA Board, recommendation  that IURA directors/management be removed, etc.)    Rosario noted that the City auditor recommended satisfying the ABO portion of the IURA’s financial  reporting requirements by preparing financial statements which only cover the City’s “Special Grant  Fund,” that covers IURA finances, at a cost of approximately $1,500.  (This would not, however,  satisfy HUD’s financial reporting requirements).    Myrick asked how frequently the ABO goes so far as to actually terminate state urban renewal  agencies.  Bohn replied that he knows, for example, that the ABO action led to the termination of a  small number of agencies in 2012.  Myrick asked how delinquent those agencies had been.  Bohn  responded that they were extraordinarily delinquent, in most or all areas of operation, as far as he  is aware ― however, Bohn stressed, the most immediate IURA concern is the risk of HUD freezing  the IURA’s ability to draw down CDBG funds.    Rosario asked if the incoming City Chief of Staff would be able to facilitate or expedite the whole  process, in any way.  Myrick replied, yes, at least to the extent she/he should be able to alleviate  some of the City Controller’s budget‐related workload.    Rosario reiterated his concern that the whole issue will have critical fiscal health implications for  both the IURA and the City.    Proulx agreed, observing that the City Controller’s Office is charged with managing a $62M budget  with only two accountant‐level staff persons at its disposal, which may simply not be realistic.   Common Council may have to seriously consider adding another accountant‐level staff person in the  Controller’s Office.    Farrell noted she would like to know if making the IURA’s own staff accountant available to the City  might help facilitate the process.  Bohn replied the City had, in fact, already allocated $30,000 for  the use of the IURA accountant, but more than half that amount remains unused.    Myrick noted that it sounds like a management‐level discussion needs to take place between the  Controller’s Office and IURA staff.   IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 3 of 13  Rosario moved, seconded by Farrell:    Response to Delinquent 2011 City Financial Reporting    WHEREAS, on January 15, 2013, the City of Ithaca was informed that the City audit for FY 2011,  which includes HUD funds administered by the IURA, was not submitted by the September 30,  2012 deadline as required by OMB Circular A‐122, and    WHEREAS, on January 16, 2013, the IURA received an official warning from the New York State  Authorities Budget Office (ABO) that the IURA was delinquent in filing required financial reports  due by March 30, 2012, and    WHEREAS, the majority of funds administered by the IURA are grant funds awarded to the City of  Ithaca, so IURA finances are properly audited as a component of the consolidated financial  statement of the City of Ithaca, and     WHEREAS, the IURA relies on the annual City of Ithaca financial audit to meet financial reporting  requirements of HUD and the ABO, and    WHEREAS, noncompliance with HUD submission requirements for financial reporting significantly  increases the probability that the IURA will be monitored by HUD, which monitoring requires  significant staff resources that could be deployed more effectively, and failure to correct this  delinquency could imperil the ability to draw down federal funds and future grant awards, and     WHEREAS, noncompliance with ABO submission requirements for financial reporting could lead  to additional ABO enforcement actions, including an official public censure of the Agency board,  a recommendation that the directors of the authority and its management be removed, or the  issuance of a subpoena to produce the required reports, and    WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca audits have not satisfied the HUD submission deadline since at least  2004 and the FY 2011 audit is projected to be completed in February for Common Council  approval in March, six months after the HUD submission deadline, and    WHEREAS, given the City’s historic record of late financial reporting, the IURA Governance  Committee concludes that the FY 2012 financial audit will not be submitted on a timely basis, and    WHEREAS, the City auditor, Ciaschi, Dietershagen, Little, & Mickelson (CDLM), suggests that it  would be possible for them to satisfy ABO financial reporting requirements by preparing financial  statements for only the “Special Grant Fund” of the City that cover IURA finances, at a cost of  approximately $1,500, and    WHEREAS, such financial statement could satisfy ABO financial reporting submission  requirements, but would not satisfy HUD financial reporting submission requirements, but could  demonstrate good faith reporting to HUD on grant funds, and  IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 4 of 13    WHEREAS, the IURA Governance Committee discussed this matter at their January 18, 2013  meeting and recommended the following; now, therefore, be it    RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby authorizes procuring professional audit services to prepare  financial statements for the City’s Special Grant Fund to satisfy ABO financial reporting  requirements of the IURA for FY 2011 and FY 2012 at a total cost not to exceed $3,400, and be it  further    RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby requests the Mayor to authorize City payment of the costs for  preparation of FY 2011 financial statement for the Special Grant Fund required due to delinquent  filing of the City’s 2011 financial audit, and be it further    RESOLVED, that the IURA Chairperson, subject to review by IURA legal counsel, is authorized to  execute any agreements to implement this resolution, and be it further    RESOLVED, that the cost of such financial reporting shall be derived from non‐CDBG funds.     Carried Unanimously 4‐0    C. Review of IURA Financials, December 2012  Rosario reported that IURA financials are in good shape, including the consistently good spend‐ down ratio.  The Perfect Screen Printers lease payment continues to lag slightly, which is not  unusual.    Farrell inquired into the status of CD‐RLF loan recipient, Argos Inn.  Bohn replied the owner has  indicated the inn would open in Spring 2013.  Bohn noted the project has been significantly over  budget, which likely delayed its progress; however, the tax credit portion of its funding will become  available once the business opens and should make up for the cost overrun.    D. Committee Chairperson Report  None.      V. Neighborhood Investment Committee (NIC)  A. Authorize Disposition Process for IURA‐Held Surplus Properties Intended for Residential   Farrell remarked that the proposed resolution describes the committee’s recommended process for  disposing of IURA‐held surplus properties, including a detailed sponsor information packet.  She  noted that Sue Kittel would issue the RFP in late February 2013 and the NIC would review the  responses in April 2013.  IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 5 of 13    Farrell moved, seconded by Rosario:    Authorize Disposition Process for IURA‐Held Properties at 203 Third St.,  213‐215 W. Spencer Rd., 402 S. Cayuga St., & 701 Cliff St.    Whereas, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency holds, or will soon hold, parcels at 203 Third,  213‐215 W. Spencer, 402 S. Cayuga, and 701 Cliff Streets, and    Whereas, these properties have all been, or will be, transferred from the City to the IURA so that  these parcels may be returned to housing use, and    Whereas, the Neighborhood Investment (NI) Committee has developed a recommended process  for disposing of properties, including a sponsor information packet, and    Whereas, IURA legal counsel has completed review of sponsor information packet, and    Whereas, the sponsor information packet describes the process and which includes advertising of  requirements, designation of an Eligible and Qualified Sponsor (necessary for the disposition  process), and a 90‐day negotiation period after designation for the selected entity to reach the  stage where it could be ready for approval by the IURA and the Common Council, and    Whereas, the NI Committee proposes that it be delegated the authority to select an eligible and  qualified sponsor and to conduct the negotiations, and    Whereas, if the IURA agrees, a proposal for development of each parcel, in its final form, would  be forwarded to the IURA and then the Common Council for final approval before the properties  can be transferred to new owners, and    Whereas, the recommended process is intended to minimize the length of time the process  takes, eliminating the need for two separate actions of the IURA during the selection and  development stage; now, therefore, be it    RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby authorizes staff to issue a request for proposals and sponsor  information packet to seek proposals to purchase and develop surplus parcels located at 203  Third Street, 213‐215 W. Spencer Road, 402 S. Cayuga Street and 701 Cliff Streets to meet IURA  and Common Council goals for property redevelopment, and    RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby delegates authority to the NI Committee to conduct preliminary  review of responses, designate eligible and qualified sponsors in accordance with section 507 of  General Municipal Law, and authorize the IURA Chair to enter into exclusive negotiation  agreements with sponsors, subject to review by IURA legal counsel, and be it further  IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 6 of 13    RESOLVED, that the IURA also delegates authority to the NI Committee to negotiate with the  selected sponsors to develop proposed disposition agreements to be considered for approval by  the IURA and Common Council.    Carried Unanimously 4‐0    SPONSOR INFORMATION PACKET DISPOSITION OF SURPLUS PROPERTY 203 Third Street 213-215 West Spencer Street 402 South Cayuga Street 701 Cliff Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 274-6559 DATE, 2013 [Page 1 of 6] IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 7 of 13  Dear Potential Sponsor: At their May 2, 2012 meeting, the Ithaca Common Council authorized the transfer of several City-acquired properties to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) so that these parcels could be put back into good use serving Ithaca’s residents. The IURA is now seeking buyers to develop the vacant residential sites at 203 Third Street, 213-215 West Spencer Street, 402 South Cayuga Street and 701 Cliff Street. Under Urban Renewal law, those interested in buying property are called “sponsors.” Therefore, the enclosed materials are referred to as the Sponsor Information Packet, which is intended as a guide to all the steps required for submitting a proposal to purchase a property. The decision-making process is also detailed here. We hope it provides the information you need to develop a plan to purchase and build on these sites. If you have any questions as you consider developing a proposal, please contact: Sue Kittel, Deputy Director of Community Development Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency 108 East Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274-6553 [Page 2 of 6] IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 8 of 13  The Properties At this time, three properties are being offered by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. A fourth property, located in the Cherry Street Industrial Park is being offered through a separate process. That property is intended for commercial development. Information on the Cherry Street property can be obtained by contacting the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. The three residential properties and the requirements attached to them are listed below: Property Address Requirements Basic information 203 Third Street** - Fully taxable owner-occupied housing. Zone: R2-b Lot Size: 37.5’ x 76’ Note: This parcel does not meet the minimum lot size and will require a zoning variance. Information about obtaining a variance is available from the City of Ithaca Building Department at (607) 274-6508. 213-215 West Spencer Street -Fully taxable housing. -Architecturally compatible multi- unit residential development, including affordable housing if feasible. Zone: R3-b Lot Size: approx. 20,660 SF 402 South Cayuga Street -Fully taxable housing. Zone: R3-b Lot Size: 94’ x 86’ Note: An existing right of way cuts through the property and should be considered in preparing a proposal. 701 Cliff Street** - multi-unit residential development (which includes a duplex) -fully taxable housing Zone: R3-a Lot Size: 87’ x 144’ Note: existing 1860’s 3- bedroom house on the lot. Potential buyers responsible for informing themselves on condition. Property can been seen by appointment by calling (607) 274-6553. ** This property was acquired by the City of Ithaca through tax foreclosure in (YEAR). Check with your attorney about the implications for title and title insurance. [Page 3 of 6] IURA Minutes  January  24, 2013  Page 9 of 13  The Process All proposals are due by TIME/DATE. Submissions will be checked for completeness by IURA staff. Complete applications will be forwarded to the Neighborhood Investment (NI) Committee of the IURA. The NI Committee will score proposals based on the selection criteria listed below. Acting on the NI recommendation is a two-phased process. Both the IURA and the City of Ithaca need to approve the sponsor selection. Property Disposition Process Projects satisfying the contingencies of the NI Committee will be reviewed and voted on at the IURA meeting on DATE. Proposals Reviewed and Ranked by the NI Committee on DATE The NI Committee will develop a list of requirements which will include proof of financing, development of elevation drawings and site lay-outs and a description of building materials to be used. Essential approvals will also be identified, including site plan review, where required. Transfer of property to the Project Sponsor. 90-day Exclusive Negotiation Agreement signed with the selected project sponsor for each property allowing the sponsor to finalize required elements. Public Hearing at the City Planning and Development Committee on DATE. Final approval by the Common Council on DATE. All dates are subject to change. The IURA retains the right to amend the process and to reject any and all project proposals. [Page 4 of 6] IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 10 of 13  Selection Criteria Materials submitted will be assessed and ranked by the Neighborhood Investment Committee of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. Proposals will be evaluated as follows: Scoring 50% Community benefits of the project: 1. Extent to which the physical design of the project is thoughtful, innovative and attractive architecturally. 2. Prudent use of the site and the relation of new structures to the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Extent to which the new housing provides accessible, adaptable or visitable units. 4. Quality and durability of building materials selected. 5. Extent to which the project promotes sustainability through the use of green building practices, sustainable technology, and quality design. 6. Other community benefits 30% Qualifications and experience of sponsor /development team to undertake and complete the project in a timely manner: 1. Capacity, qualifications and demonstrated experience of sponsor/development team, including architect. 2. Previous record of performance 3. Demonstration of capacity to complete the project in a timely manner 4. Financial capacity & reasonableness of financing plan 5. Applicant’s record of being current on taxes, free of financial interest in properties with violations of zoning or building code, and a responsible landlord, if applicable. 20% Economic benefits of the project: 1. Purchase Price 2. Generation of future property tax revenues 3. Other economic benefits INSPECTIONS All properties are vacant lots. All interested parties are free to visit the sites at their own convenience and are encouraged to examine any other publicly available records regarding the property during normal business hours. [Page 5 of 6] IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 11 of 13  TERMS OF PURCHASE Upon selection by the IURA and the Common Council, the designee will be given exclusive rights to negotiate with the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency for ninety (90) days to develop the necessary plans and materials to complete the process. During the 90 day period, the applicant must develop acceptable design drawings for the future residence and finalize the finance plan for the purchase and construction. Terms of the sale will be subject to the inclusion of performance requirements stipulating initiation of the work within 180 days of signing a purchase agreement with the IURA and completion of the work within 24 months after closing, along with reversion language for non- performance. The property will be conveyed in “as-is” condition. The IURA intends to convey title to the property by warranty deed. Should title issues preclude conveyance by warranty deed the IURA will explore other options with the successful applicant’s attorney with the goal of completing the transfer. FORM OF THE PROPOSAL In preparing a proposal to purchase the parcel, the sponsors should give primary consideration to how the proposal meets the criteria listed above. The proposal must clearly state the proposed purchase price and any contingencies to be included in a purchase agreement. The attached Sponsor Information Form must be completed and included in any proposal submitted. SPONSOR PROPOSAL DEADLINE Submission of five (5) copies of proposals to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency’s offer to sell these properties must be received by mail or by hand no later than [DATE] to be considered. All responses should be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly labeled “Proposal for Purchase of “, with the property address listed. No extension of this deadline will be offered. Submissions should be delivered to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. The IURA’s offices are on the third floor of City Hall at 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, NY. Mailed responses should be sent to the following address: Sue Kittel, Deputy Director of Community Development Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency 108 East Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 The City of Ithaca and the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency reserve the right to reject any and all proposals. [Page 6 of 6] IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 12 of 13    VI. Economic Development Committee (EDC)  No proposed actions or report.    VII. Other New/Old Business  A. IURA Chairperson Report  None.    B. Common Council Liaison Report  Proulx reported that the City Administration Committee unanimously supported the City/IURA  Agreement Clarifying Roles & Responsibilities for Administration of HUD Entitlement Grants.     C. Staff Report  1. 4‐Year Summary of HUD Entitlement Grant Action Plan Expenditures & Accomplishments  Kittel reported that staff created a 4‐year summary of HUD entitlement grant action plan  expenditures and accomplishments.      Farrell observed that the Public Facilities portion of total spending was a very big share of the  total (although much of that was no doubt due to the GIAC rehabilitation project).    Kittel remarked that the Public Facilities portion of total spending really needs to remain  relatively high.  There is a 15% maximum cap on Public Facilities spending, so staff is always  looking for Public Facilities projects.    2. Other  Board Performance Evaluation Form  Bohn noted that the last sheet in the meeting packet, the Confidential Evaluation of Board  Performance, is required to be completed by the State’s Public Authorities Accountability Law  (PAAL).  Once all IURA Board members have filled out the evaluations, the forms will be brought  back before the Governance Committee, which would examine the results and determine what,  if any, of the areas identified on the form represent areas of potential improvement for the  board.    Recent Program Income  Bohn reported that the IURA recently received program income associated with the sale of the  former Red Cross Emergency Shelter building ($30,000) and INHS’ repayment of its UDAG loan  balloon payment on the Henry St. John Building ($107,000).  IURA Minutes  January 24, 2013  Page 13 of 13    Bohn noted that the $30,000 from the sale of the former Red Cross Emergency Shelter building  had been earmarked for homeless housing.  The plan is that the Rescue Mission would use it for  a homeless shelter for 10‐12 men (open by the end of February 2013).    Farrell inquired into the distinction between an SRO and a shelter.  Kittel replied that SROs  (Single Room Occupancy rooms) are not funded with public funds.  She added that the  Department of Social Services (DSS) will only pay for people to stay at an actual shelter (and  anyone sanctioned by DSS is no longer eligible).    Farrell asked how many people could be housed in the shelter that the IURA funded.  Bohn  replied, 9 in the shelter portion and 16 in an SRO portion of the facility.  Farrell asked if that ends  up helping as many people as were being helped before.  Kittel replied it is difficult to tell; it  depends on the combination being used to maximize the use of beds.  She noted the IURA  receives a monthly report through the Homeless Housing Task Force.    Farrell asked how long the average stay is.  Kittel replied there is no time limit, but individuals are  required to take housing, if found.    Bohn observed that, when the IURA was receiving Federal stimulus funds, the city benefited from  a more proactive, preventative approach to the homeless issue.  He noted, also, that the  homeless population is not stable; it varies considerably from one point in time to another.    Bohn concluded by noting that the other Program Income funds, from the INHS repayment of the  Henry St. John Building UDAG loan, would be eligible for CDBG uses.     D. Next meeting date: February 28, 2013    IX. Motion to Adjourn  The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:20 A.M.  — END —    Minutes prepared by C. Pyott, edited by N. Bohn.