HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-12 City Administration Committee Meeting Agenda CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Wednesday,March 28, 2012
6:00 p.m.
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
1. Chairperson Greeting & Opening Statement
2. Announcements
3. Agenda Review and Amendments
4. Approval of Minutes
5. Statements from the Public
6. Employee Comments
7. Common Council Response
8. Workforce Diversity Committee
9. Safety Committee/Workplace Violence Prevention- Report
10. Common Council
10.1 Overview of 2013 Budget—Discussion
11. Attorney's Office
11.1 Amendment to Personnel Roster-Resolution
12. Chamberlain's Office
12.1 Amendment to 2012 Tax Roll—Resolution
13. IURA/Planning and Development
13.1 Sale of Surplus Property- Discussion
14. Human Resources
14.1 Director's Report
15. Finance/Controller's Office
15.1 Approval of 2010 Single Audit—Resolution
15.2 Controller's Report
16. Reports
16.1 Mayor's Report
16.2 Sub-Committee Updates
16.3 Council Members' Announcements
16.4 Next Month's Meeting: April 25, 2012
W �Cd � r� � � � cn � _ � � � � cno � c) > ou0mz -o
o � c --% M --I corn �� n� <n -p o
cn
va p O � W CD a) co ul v � n — t o (nm
� o3 o T
> (D CD c�
c�
CD CD IZ
�C cn o cn 3
N
0
0
� O
0
� I c
N
O
O
co
I I I
® C
cn
Q
O
i
i
® �y
N
O
i
W
N
O
i
�A
N
O
i
11. Attorney's Office
.1 Amendment to Personnel Roster for Deletion of Temporary Position and for Increased
Hours
WHEREAS, the position of Assistant City Attorney had long been a full-time position until
January 2011, and
WHEREAS, at the request of a former Assistant City Attorney, the City reduced her position to
half-time in January 2011, and
WHEREAS, the workload of the City Attorney's Office is such that the City was
thereafter required to hire a temporary, half-time Associate City Attorney to supplement the half-
time Assistant City Attorney's work, and
WHEREAS, the same employee now serves both in the roll of half-time Assistant City Attorney
and of half-time temporary Associate City Attorney, and
WHEREAS, the temporary position of half-time Associate City Attorney will expire on April 3,
2012, and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney's Office can best function if, upon the April 3 expiration of the
temporary, half-time Associate City Attorney position, the half-time Assistant City Attorney
position that does not serve as the City Prosecutor is increased to a full-time position, and
WHEREAS, this increase can be achieved for the remainder of 2012 within the existing 2012
authorized Attorney budget and prior year encumbrances; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the City Attorney's Office be amended as follows:
Add: One (1) Full-time 40 hour Assistant City Attorney Position
Delete: One (1) Half-Time Associate City Attorney (Temporary)
and be it further
RESOLVED, That said roster amendment will be effective April 5, 2012, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the position of City Attorney, the existing full-time position of Assistant City
Attorney, and the existing half-time position of Assistant City Attorney that serves as City
Prosecutor shall remain unchanged, and be it further
RESOLVED, That funds necessary for this roster amendment shall be derived within existing
2012 authorized Attorney budget and prior year encumbrances.
7:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2012\3-28 CA Agenda.doc 3/28/12
12. Chamberlain's Office
.1 Amendment to 2012 Tax Roll
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 554 of the Real Property Tax Law, the Director of Assessment
has investigated an application for the correction of an error in essential fact filed by the owners
of 315 Elm Street, tax map number 77.-1-9 and
WHEREAS, the investigation revealed that an error in reporting of certain income resulted in an
error in an aged exemption; now therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the 2012 Tax Roll for the City of Ithaca be amended to reduce the 2012 City
of Ithaca taxes on the parcel identified as map number 77.-1-9 by $56.89, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Chamberlain is authorized and directed to make the appropriate
refund and changes.
7:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2012\3-28 CA Agenda.doc 3/28/12
Tc IT
# City of Ithaca
�. Office of the Chamberlain
a 108 East Green Street,Ithaca,NY 14850
Ph: 607 274-6580 Fax: 607 272-7348
°
°
A
To: City Administration Committee
From: Debra Parsons,City Chamberlain
Re: Correction to 2012 Tax Roll
Date: March 16,2012
New York State Real Property Tax Law provides that,when an error is discovered in an assessment upon
which a tax has been based,the governing body must approve the correction to the resulting tax roll. I have
been notified that there was an error relating to the assessment and resulting 2012 taxes for 319 Elm Street.
Certain income was reported incorrectly when calculating the aged exemption for this property. This does
reduce City tax revenue by$56.89;however,because the assessment upon which the taxes were calculated
was incorrect,the City has no choice. I have drafted a resolution to correct the change.
WHEREAS,pursuant to Section 554 of the Real Property Tax Law,the Director of Assessment
has investigated an application for the correction of an error in essential fact filed by the owners of
315 Elm Street,tax map number 77.4-9 and
WHEREAS,the investigation revealed that an error in reporting of certain income resulted in an
error in an aged exemption,now therefore,be it
RESOLVED,That the 2012 Tax Roll for the City of Ithaca be amended to reduce the 2012 City of
Ithaca taxes on the parcel identified as map number 77.-1-9 by$56.89,and be it further
RESOLVED,That the City Chamberlain is authorized and directed to make the appropriate refund
and changes.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
■ ■ ■ ' Ithaca
■ ■ ■ Urban
Renewal
0 Agency
108 E. Green Street
Ithaca, New York
(607) 274-6559
To: J.R. Clairborne, Chairperson, Common Council City,Administration Committee JnV ,
From: Nels Bohn, Director of Community Development J�7
RE: Possible Disposition of City-Owned Land
Date: March 21, 2012
The 2012 City budget includes revenues of$120,000 from sale of City-owned property. City&
IURA staff seeks policy guidance from Common Council Committees on structuring proposed
disposition actions for the following properties that have been determined surplus for public
works purposes by the Board of Public Works:
213-215 W. Spencer Street (#93.-7-3 ].-3-5.1)
321 Elmira Road (#122.-2-1)
Cherry Street Extension (#100.-2-1.2)
At this point in time, Common Council Committees are being asked to (1) determine if the
above properties are appropriate for structuring a proposed disposition action, and (2)to
identify public policy objectives for disposition and the preferred method of disposition for each
property.
Property Disposition Guidelines
General Municipal Law generally requires the municipalities to seek the "highest marketable
price" when selling property:
§ 695. Disposition of property. 1. In addition to employing any other
lawful method of utilizing or disposing of an eligible area, a
municipality may sell, lease for a term not exceeding ninety-nine years,
or otherwise dispose of any such real property and appurtenances
thereto, to any person, firm or corporation at the highest marketable
price or rental at public auction or by sealed bids pursuant to the
provisions of any general, special or local laws applicable to the sale
or disposition of real property by such municipality.
1
One exception to this rule is disposition to undertake an urban renewal project. Per §507 of
General Municipal Law, the IURA is authorized to dispose of property to a preferred developer
("sponsor") at a negotiated sales price for a specific end use. A public hearing must be held on
any IURA-proposed property sale following publication of a notice disclosing the terms of the
sale. Common Council approval of the proposed sale is required.
Therefore,there are three major ways that the City can dispose of property:
1. Public Auction,
2. Sealed bid, and
3. Transfer to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency for disposition
Following are major pros and cons of each method of disposition:
Public Auction
Pros: - Low administrative effort
- Low transaction cost
- Open competition, with no strings attached to property, tends to maximize purchase
price
Cons: - Cannot control future use of property
- Cannot screen buyers/developer
- Cannot control future tax status of property
- Often requires non-refundable deposit payment prior to buyer conducting due
diligence, so auctions may be more likely to attract investors seeking to develop
income property
Sealed Bid
Pros: - Medium administrative effort—develop and administer sealed bid offering
- Medium transaction cost—boundary survey&warranty deed
- Open competition, but specified end use may tend to reduce purchase price
Cons: - Cannot screen buyer/developer
- End use must be clearly defined in sealed bid offering
- Cannot negotiate definition and architectural design of end use
Transfer to IURA for Disposition
Pros: - Negotiate end use &terms of sale
- Considers full spectrum of public benefits of property disposition, not just initial
purchase price (property tax revenues, affordable housing,job creation,
architectural design, etc...)
-Screen and select qualified buyer/developer
- May require PILOT if buyer is tax-exempt entity
2
Cons: - Higher administrative effort—RFP, negotiation & structuring of proposed sale,
approvals by both IURA and CC
- Higher transaction costs—boundary survey, warranty deed, legal notice, public
hearing, approvals by both IURA and CC
- Longer time line to complete disposition
I
Planning & Economic Development Committee Discussion
The Planning& Economic Development Committee (P&ED) discussed this matter at their March
14, 2012, meeting and supports pursuing proposed disposition of the following properties as
noted:
321 Elmira Rd.
No preferred end use identified. Sell for highest marketable price.
213-215 W. Spencer Rd.
Prefer method of disposition that results in a residential development that includes affordable
housing. Transfer to IURA for affordable housing use.
Cherry Street Extension
Prefer method of disposition that results in development of property that maximizes long-term
economic development benefits. Transfer 6-acre parcel to IURA to solicit buyer/developers
through a Request For Proposal (RFP) process. Support BPW recommendation to retain rear
wetlands area (2.5 acres) for natural area.
City Administration Committee Discussion
City and IURA staff will structure property disposition proposals for properties selected by the
CA Committee. Please discuss if there is agreement about the appropriateness to consider
disposition of the above listed properties as recommended by the P&ED. For any property that
is proposed to be transferred to the IURA, it would be helpful to know minimum purchase price
(appraised fair market value?) and any public policy goals that differ, or expand upon, those
identified by the P&ED. For a residential end use, issues such as for-sale vs. rental, high-vs.
low-density, architectural style/materials, & parking often come up. For economic
development uses, projected property tax revenue,job creation, living wages, career ladder
opportunities & expansion of local businesses may be appropriate for consideration. If no
further guidance is provided,then the IURA will use its best judgment in negotiating proposed
dispositions.
END
Copy: A.Lavine,City Attorney
J.Dotson,Chairperson,P&ED Committee
J.Cornish,Director of Planning&Development ',,
T.West,Engineering
B.Gray,Superintendent of Public Works
S.Thayer,City Controller
P.DeSarno,Deputy Director of Economic Development
3
213 West Spencer Street, 215 West Spencer Street; Tax parcels 93.-7-3, 93.-7-5.1
These two properties are 0.47 acre
acquired by the City for widening West
Spencer Street to two lanes. The parcels
are zoned R-3b. The combined assessed
value is $124,000. _
R !
A
Prior to acquisition by the City the smaller
parcel had a single family wood frame
residence and the larger parcel had a 12 r"
unit wood frame apartment building. The -
parcels have street frontage on West —
Spencer Street as well as South Cayuga
Street. Although the property has a
dramatic elevation difference from
Spencer to Cayuga this did not preclude
its earlier uses.
220 West Spencer has a multi-unit
residential structure on a 0.21 acre parcel.
It has an assessed value of $350,000 r
which generates approximately $4,000 in ��
property taxes.
Update:
The Board of Public Works determined that these properties are not needed for City of
Ithaca public works purposes on November 9, 2011 . The City has already received
inquires regarding purchase of these properties.
Revised 11/17/11 , tww
Cherry Street, Tax Parcel 100.-2-1 .2
The parcel at the end of Cherry Street contains 8.25 acres and is assessed at
$825,000. The property is bounded on the east by railroad property and on the west
by lands abutting Cayuga Inlet. This wooded parcel is generally flat. The southerly
end of the property contains two designated wetlands of 0.45 acre and 0.32 acre.
The neighboring 2.88 acre parcel at 240 Cherry Street has a land assessment of
$253,000 with a total assessment of $1 ,290,000; this generates over $16,000 in
property tax annually.
The site could be sub-divided into two parcels. Approximately 6 acres at the north end
of the property would provide a very attractive development parcel consistent with the
current industrial zoning designation. By sub-dividing the north portion as a single
parcel the City would have no obligation to extend the street or utilities beyond the end
of the current street. The City can retain easements along one or more of the
development parcel boundaries to complete the loop of water mains in the southern
part of the City (this is an ongoing, funded capital project).
The remaining acrerage at the south end of the property could encompass the two
larger wetlands. The City could also establish easements along one or more of the
development parcel boundaries concurrent with the water main easements to provide
public access to the wetlands without reducing the useful area of the development
parcel.
Revised 11/18/11 , tww
4
,F
pLCOO cON'IROL 6NPN►
650 2
PARK
,moo
CHERRY SiREE
M�
n.7/ 6.0 Acre Parcel
--2.25 Ac.Parce
_77.22.
321 Elmira Road, Tax Parcel 122.-2-1
This 0.4 acre parcel is situated on the south side of Elmira Road between Friendly's
Restaurant and the Honda dealership. The parcel has an assessed value of $189,000.
The small brick sewage pump station on this parcel was recently de-commissioned.
The parcel has a curb cut on Elmira Road. There is a drainage ditch on the north side
of the property.
Update:
The Board of Public Works determined that this property is not needed for City of
Ithaca public works purposes on November 15, 2011 .
Revised 11/17/11 , tww
;r
d
15. Finance/Controller's Office
.1 Approval of 2010 Single Audit
RESOLVED, That the Independent Auditor's Report for the period January 1, 2010, through
December 31, 2010,prepared by the accounting firm of Ciaschi, Dietershagen, Little and
Mickelson& Company, LLP be accepted to comply with all the City's applicable Governmental
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34 and other related audit and single audit
requirements.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2012\3-28 CA Agenda.doc 3/28/12