HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURAGOV-2013-11-15Approved: 12/16/13
108 E. Green Street
Ithaca
Urban
Renewal
Agency
Ithaca, New York 14850
(607) 274-6559
(607) 274-6558 (fax)
MINUTES
ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY
Governance Committee (GC)
8:30 AM, Tuesday, November 15, 2013
Third Floor Conference Room, 3rd Floor, City Hall, Ithaca, NY
Present: Eric Rosario, Susan Cummings, David Whitmore, Kathy Schlather
Excused: Tracy Farrell (IURA Board), Karl Graham (IURA Board)
Vacancy: 1
Staff: Nels Bohn, Sue Kittel, Charles Pyott
Guests: Megan Schmidt, Excellus Blue Cross/Blue Shield
I. Call to Order
Chairperson Rosario called the meeting to order at 8:34 P.M.
II. Agenda Additions/Deletions ― None.
III. Public Comments (3‐minute maximum per person) ― None.
IV. Review of Meeting Minutes: August 16, 2013
Cummings moved, seconded by Whitmore, to approve the August 16, 2013 minutes,
with no modifications. Carried Unanimously 3‐0
(Schlather arrived at 8:37 a.m.)
V. New Business
A. IURA Response to Upcoming Staff Vacancy (Deputy Director)
Cummings noted that, while a job description already exists for the Deputy Director
position, she would like the Committee to discuss the relative merits of seeking another
Deputy Director vs. seeking a more mid‐level position. The Committee should also think
about how best to advertize the vacancy.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 2 of 8
Bohn indicated the Committee could begin the discussion by examining current Deputy
Director Kittel’s job duties over the past 5 years. Kittel noted that she handled a greater
variety of tasks, because Bohn has so many City‐related responsibilities. As a result, she
had to oversee basic operations, communicate with public, communicate with HUD, etc.
Regarding his City‐related responsibilities, Bohn explained they generally involve IURA
activities that coincide with City goals, for which the City does at least partially support
the IURA (e.g., payments from Cayuga Street Garage lease payments, loan repayments
for Cayuga Green sale, etc.). IURA staff is always looking for opportunities to structure
future projects to provide a certain amount of funding for IURA staff. Bohn added he
also works on certain City‐related affordable housing activities and the environmental
remediation of Gun Hill.
Rosario asked Kittel if the percentages listed under item 1 (“Incumbent’s major job
duties”) of Bohn’s 11/13/13 memo to the Committee are accurate. Kittel replied,
approximately, yes.
Rosario noted he believes IURA staff is in the best position to identify how the Deputy
Director position has evolved over time and how the Committee should proceed. Kittel
remarked she does not see IURA having the necessary resources to be able break the
position down into two separate positions. Bohn agreed.
Bohn noted one important early decision would be to identify the future focus of IURA
programming, in terms of what the Committee would most like to see. He indicated
35% of the position’s time would probably need to involve community networking and
outreach, if the IURA wants to maintain its job training and homeless programs. In
addition, regardless of the programmatic focus, the position should be filled by a
generalist, to a great extent, since the position involves such a wide variety of tasks.
Kittel noted she would be loath to see IURA programming regress to strictly housing‐
related issues, without any community outreach and public service component.
Cummings remarked the bulk of IURA funding over the years has gone to housing. The
IURA definitely needs to retain its principal focus on housing and neighborhood
infrastructure (although housing and public services do not necessarily need to be as
separate as they are now). She knows there has been discussion of Ithaca
Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS) projects and whether there has been a decrease
in their neighborhood/local focus. INHS would most likely not have started to provide
rental housing, if it were not for repeated IURA suggestions. At a time when potential
homeowners are being repeatedly priced out of the housing market, she believes it
should continue to be the primary focus.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 3 of 8
Farrell indicated she also sees housing as a really important issue. There has been so
much discussion about the low percentage of home ownership, for example, which is a
tough but really important issue to address. She would not, however, want to see the
IURA abandon its community development efforts altogether. She added it would be
good to cultivate housing more. She is concerned the City/IURA encountered so much
public opposition to the INHS Stone Quarry Apartments project on Spencer Road. It was
a classic example of how things can go wrong, but with stronger neighborhood
connections it would not have been as likely to.
Schlather observed it will be very difficult to find the range of skills Kittel brought to the
position (e.g., construction, community organizing/outreach, etc.) The IURA should
avoid hiring someone who only understands ‘bricks and mortar’; it should be someone
with a broader approach. The IURA also needs to be very clear at the start of the hiring
process what it is searching for and strike a balance between a job desccription that is
too narrow vs. one that is too broad.
Farrell noted part of the solution will be to the relative flexibility of the person who is
selected, including their capacity for critical thinking. She would be willing to surrender
some construction expertise/experience, if a part‐time building manager could be hired.
Kittel responded it would be useful to identify what specific skill‐sets could potentially
be contracted out. One way or the other, the position should not be filled by someone
who limits themselves rigidly to the job description.
Bohn noted he envisions the hiree spending considerable time on the Action Plan, HUD‐
related issues, funding, etc. They will need to manage the Action Plan process, including
developing and administering the funded projects and programs. Kittel stressed that a
community outreach component is also a critical part of the Action Plan.
Rosario remarked that the person’s skill‐set is more important than a knowledge of
housing. Community outreach, communication, collaboration, and coalition‐building
would all be important skills to search for. Kittel added that the ability to represent the
IURA in public would also be very important.
Graham inquired into the timeline for filling the position. Bohn replied he would prefer
not to rush the decision merely to adhere to a given timeline (it is more important to
identify the right person), but the IURA should probably begin actively seeking
candidates in January 2014 and it would seek to fill the position by March 2014. He
added it would help ease the transition, if the IURA funded fewer/larger projects, rather
than numerous smaller projects.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 4 of 8
From the discussion, Schlather observed, it does not sound like the Committee is
seeking to change very much in the position.
Bohn noted it may be possible to find someone with the entire desired skill‐set,
although it is most likely a given candidate would be stronger in one aspect or another,
in which case it would be helpful to know which skill‐set(s) the Committee values the
most.
Farrell replied she could envision hiring someone from Habitat for Humanity, for
example.
Cummings replied that how the candidates define themselves would be important and
the extent to which they see housing as a community‐based activity. Housing definitely
needs to be strengthened in the current IURA portfolio, so she would say housing‐
related skills first.
Schlather replied it should be someone with experience in the public sector. Whitmore
agreed, noting it also depends on the candidate. Furthermore, some skills are
teachable, while others are not. One could teach the right person housing‐ and
construction‐related things more easily than other things.
Bohn observed the IURA has a history of hiring people lacking direct backgrounds in
housing or the public sector.
Cummings noted the person should like other people.
Graham agreed it should be someone with public sector experience, rather than private.
He would be most interested in finding someone with management experience, since it
is an important part of the job, who could maintain optimal operations in the office.
Farrell remarked that management oversight could conceivably be handled by Bohn.
Bohn replied, yes, especially since there are only two other employees.
Cummings noted the IURA should be very clear in terms of establishing an appropriate
probationary period and the accompanying process/documentation. She would also
like to see some aggressive affirmative action‐oriented outreach. Bohn replied that is
the intent.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 5 of 8
Rosario suggested a 3‐month mid‐point evaluation, including a comprehensive review
by all IURA staff and any appropriate external contacts. Also, the current job description
does not list the skill‐sets being sought, so those should be incorporated, which Kittel
should provide input on. Bohn replied he would return to the Committee next month
with a revised job description.
Cummings noted it should also be determined whether Kittel would need to perform
any contractual work for anything, during the transition (both explicitly or
professionally, and implicitly or for general mentoring purposes). Bohn noted Kittel
already expressed willingness to do some training, although that may not be something
the IURA would want to absolutely rely on. He added Kittel will also work on developing
certain programs she is particularly invested in, in her new role at the Park Foundation.
Farrell noted the job description lists one qualification as: “Masters degree in planning,
public administration, architecture or related fields, or bachelors degree and one year of
work experience.” She asked if Kittel had a degree in one of those fields. Bohn replied,
no, she had the relevant experience. The job description was created in 2004 and is due
for updating. Farrell suggested requiring “attention to detail” and experience with the
regulatory process.
Cummings suggested simply stating: “[…] related degrees, for example, x, y, and z.” The
IURA should also seek creativity, associative thinking, and similar skills. Rosario agreed,
suggesting an entire bullet/section should be devoted to skills and temperament.
Rosario remarked that where/how the vacancy is advertized should be determined by
the kind of person being sought.
Bohn asked if any Committee or IURA Board members would like to volunteer for the
Search Committee. Schlather replied, yes. Farrell replied, possibly. Graham replied,
possibly, but he would like to see the timeline first.
(Graham, Schlather, and Farrell departed at 9:35 a.m.)
VI. Old Business
A. IURA Budget & Health Insurance ― Q&A with Excellus Blue Cross/Blue Shield
(BC/BS) Account Consultant Megan Schmidt
Bohn explained that Schmidit was invited to the meeting to help the Committee answer
any remaining health insurance questions it may have.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 6 of 8
Schmidt indicated she could not make any definitive statements about the changes
resulting from the launch of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) web sites. It is her personal
opinion, however, that New York State will be moving forward with ACA, as it was
originally conceived.
Cummings asked if the IURA could save money if it does not pay for health insurance
directly, but pays its staff commensurately more to purchase its own.
Schmidt responded there are pros and cons associated with both approaches. Group
rates are 10‐15% less expensive than individual rates. So while IURA staff could
certainly purchase the same kind of policy, the SimplyBlue Platinum 2 plan, on an
individual/family basis, it would be more expensive. She added that the New York State
ACA web site exchange insurance rates are identical to ones that can be obtained
directly from the insurance provider. The only benefit to using the State’s ACA
exchange would be if someone happened to be eligible for a tax credit.
Bohn asked whether an employer providing its staff with a subsidy to buy health
insurance would also make the it be eligible for a tax credit. Schmidt replied, no.
Bohn asked if a small employer, like IURA, could provide its staff with a choice of plans.
Schmidt replied, yes, it could offer two plans, one of which would be a high‐deductible
plan; however, it could not offer two high‐deductible plans.
Bohn asked if a high‐deductible plan would save employees any money. The IURA
Bookkeeper generated a table, which breaks the costs down and the employer savings
were only modest (if the employer pays for both the premium and the deductible).
(Whitmore departed at 9:45 a.m.)
Bohn asked what the out‐of‐pocket maximum would be for each plan. Schmidt replied,
once an employee pays their deductible, they would typically pay 15% of any costs
beyond that. For the SimplyBlue Plus Gold 6 plan, the premium is paid by the employer,
which would be about $1,200/year cheaper, with the employer paying 20% and the
employee paying 80%. The employer could decide to pay the entire deductible for the
employee, and the employee would then have that money available. Bohn asked if an
employee could ever use that money for non‐medical reasons. Schmidt replied, no, the
employee should only use that money for medical expenses.
Cummings noted if the employee ever used those funds for anything else, they would
probably simply be considered regular income and become taxable.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 7 of 8
Bohn noted that an employee could pay the deductible first, before any co‐insurance
costs kick in, on the other plan; and then it becomes a 50%‐50% split, once they reach
their out‐of‐pocket maximum.
Schmidt noted many co‐pay plans do not limit the amount you would be required to pay
on co‐pays. On the high‐deductible plan, for any plan other than the single‐person plan,
the whole family’s co‐pays could be applied towards to deductible.
Cummings observed, the higher the deductible becomes, the more beneficial it is for the
employee buying the insurance.
Rosario asked what the point would be if the IURA would be paying the full deductible.
Cummings responded the only reason for an employer to do so would be if the
combined cost of the deductible and premium were lower. Bohn noted the IURA would
like to find the optimal point at which the deductible and premium would be the least,
for both the employer and employee.
Bohn noted another issue is that the high‐deductible plan features a different
mechanism: once the deductible has been reached, one still has to pay the co‐pays,
whereas a more traditional plan simply charges a flat fee, so an employee is much more
likely to reach the out‐of‐pocket maximum limit under the high‐deductible plan.
Bohn added that the out‐of‐pocket maximum applies to in‐network and out‐network
services separately; and one of the strengths of BCBS is its nationwide reach so medical
services while traveling will likely be covered as an in‐network expense.
Cummings asked what happens internationally. Schmidt replied that would also be
covered, but on an out‐of‐network basis, though BCBS also has providers
internationally.
Bohn asked how the Silver plan differs from the SimplyBlue Plus Gold 6 plan. Schmidt
replied BCBS offers three plans: a co‐pay plan (SimplyBlue Platinum 2), a co‐
pay/deductible plan (SimplyBlue Plus Gold), where one has a deductible and pays the
co‐pay before anything kicks in, or one would pay the deductible and a set percentage
for office visits. Most employers offering a choice of two plans tell their employees that
they can pay the difference in the premium, and if an employee chooses the high‐
deductible plan, the employer would cover it.
IURA GC Minutes
November 15, 2013
Page 8 of 8
Bohn asked if an employer could pay the high‐deductible plan’s premiums and then also
pay a portion of the deductible, as an alternative to the employee paying 20% of the
premium. Schmidt responded most small organizations can only afford the high‐
deductible plan; some may pay half the premium and not pay anything towards the
deductible at all.
Cummings observed that a healthy employee could benefit considerably from a high‐
deductible plan; but the issue then becomes one of equity. Bohn remarked there are
potential equity issues associated with single vs. family plans, as well.
Schmidt noted it also depends on how one is going to structure the deductible
payments (i.e., from every paycheck vs. another schedule). One disadvantage to the
high‐deductible plan is, depending on how it is structured, an employee getting a
prescription at the beginning of the year would have to pay the full prescription
amount, which may be prohibitive for some people.
Cummings asked if any tax benefit is associated with the employer contribution.
Schmidt replied that some employers choose to institutue a health reimbursement
program, where employees simply file reimbursement claims directly with their
employers. If the staff were healthy, then the employer would save money. Cummings
noted that would also address the equity issue.
Cummings asked if there was a consensus for which plan(s) to choose. Bohn replied the
budget contains enough funds to choose the SimplyBlue Platinum 2 plan.
Schmidt noted it would be ideal to make the decision by December 1st, 2013.
Bohn noted that a full IURA Board meeting would not be necessary to make the decision
as sufficient funding for health insurance is provided for in the adopted budget.
VII. Other Business
None.
VIII. Adjournment (Next Meeting Date: 3:30 PM, Tuesday, December 20, 2013)
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:17 A.M.
— END —
Minutes prepared by C. Pyott, edited by N. Bohn.