HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-20-15 City Administration Committee Meeting Agenda xT1'qc CA Meeting
DATE:May 20,2015
TIME: 6:00 pm
5 i a . LOCATION: P Floor,
411 City Administration Committee City Hall,Council Chambers
AGENDA ITEMS
Item Voting Presenter(s) Time
Item? Allotted
Chair, Deb Mohlenhoff
1. Call To Order *Note: We will review the number of 15 Min*
1.1 Agenda Review No cards received at the beginning of each
1.2 Review and Approval of Minutes Yes meeting and adjust time if needed.
Approval of April 2015 Minutes
1.3 Statements from the Public No
1.4 Statements from Employees No
1.5 Council Response No
2. City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy
2.1 HR—Establishment of Wellness Advisory Yes Leslie Moskowitz, 5 Min
Committee Manager of Organizational Development
2.2 Local Law to Establish a Sustainable Energy Yes Kevin Sutherland, Chief of Staff 10 Min
Loan Program
2.3 Authorization of Agreement for Sustainable Yes Kevin Sutherland, Chief of Staff 10 Min
Energy Loan Program
3. Finance,Budget, and Appropriations
3.1 YB—Request to Amend 2015 Budget Yes Liz Vance, Director 5 Min
3.2 DPW Request to Amend Roster-Fiscal Yes Mike Thorne, Superintendent of PW 10 Min
Manager Position
3.3 DPW-Request for Funding for Divestiture of Yes Tom West,Director of Engineering 15 Min
Various Portions of Elmira Road Right of Way
3.4 DPW-Request to Fund Stewart Park Buildings Yes Tom West,Director of Engineering 15 Min
Priority Plan
3.5 Fire—Request to Establish Capital Project Yes Tom Parsons, Fire Chief 10 Min
3.6 Fire—Request to Amend 2015 Budget Yes Tom Parsons, Fire Chief 10 Min
3.7 Attorney—Request for Permanent Easement Yes Ari Lavine, City Attorney 10 Min
for 327 Eddy Street Proposed Encroachment
3.8 DPW-Cayuga Waterfront Trail—Authorization Yes Tim Logue, Traffic Systems Engineer 10 Min
of Phase II Master Agreement
3.9 Mayor-Approval of TIGER VII Grant Yes Kevin Sutherland, Chief of Staff 15 Min
Application
4. Performance Measures No Kevin Sutherland, Chief of Staff Min
Nothing Submitted
5. Common Council
5.1 Rules of Procedures No All 5 Min
If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting,
please contact the City Controller's Office at 607-274-6576 at least 48 hours before the meeting.
CA Meeting
City Administration Committee
Agenda- Continued
May 20, 2015
6. Budget Process
6.1 Doodle Poll—Draft Budget Schedule No Kevin Sutherland, Chief of Staff 10 Min
7. Meeting Wrap-up All 5 Min
7.1 Announcements No
7.2 Next Meeting Date: June 17th
7.3 Review Agenda Items for Next Meeting No
7.4 Adjourn Yes
(8:35 p.m.)
Committee Charge: The CA committee will:
Review financial and administrative issues pertaining to the City,along with items relating to the City of Ithaca workforce
environment,intergovernmental relations and human resources.
If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting,
please contact the City Controller's Office at 607-274-6576 at least 48 hours before the meeting.
2. City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy
2.1 HR—Establishment of Wellness Advisory Committee
WHEREAS, physical health or wellness is a personal asset that frees one to concentrate on work,
family and relationships, and hobbies, and
WHEREAS, wellness is a dynamic process of learning new life skills and becoming aware of
and making conscious choices toward a balanced and healthy lifestyle, and
WHEREAS, wellness cannot be guaranteed by any set of actions, wellness can be improved and
increased by personal choices, and
WHEREAS, workplace environment, policies, and incentives can support and provide awareness
for wellness choices, and
WHEREAS, Article 47 of NYS Insurance Law requires and envision a partnership between
employer and employees in directing their health insurance, and
WHEREAS, employer and employees are collaborating to fund Health Insurance, and
WHEREAS, the cost of health insurance and personal time lost in doctor's offices are both
directly reduced when its members are in good health; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca seeks to become an active partner with staff in raising
healthy choice awareness,promoting healthy behaviors by providing information and
opportunities, and facilitating wellness action steps, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca establishes a Wellness Advisory Committee that shall
consist of employee volunteers charged with promoting health and wellness of staff and their
family through education and program initiatives that:
• Encourage habits of wellness
• Increase awareness of factors and resources contributing to well-being
• Inspire and empower individuals to take responsibility for their own health
• Recommend action steps to create a workplace culture that encourages environmental
and social support for healthy lifestyle choices
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca's Human Resources Department oversees the Wellness
Advisory Committee and will report progress and activities to the City Administration
Committee on a quarterly basis.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
' CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street Ithaca,New York 14850-5690
OFFICE OF HUMAN RESOURCES /CIVIL SERVICE
Telephone: 607/274-6539 Fax: 607/274-6574 E-mail: hrdept@cityofithaca.org
To: City Administration
From: Leslie A Moskowitz, Manager of Organizational Development
Date: April 3, 2015
Re: Wellness Resolution
One of the Greater Tompkins County Municipal Health Insurance Consortium's(GTMHIC) goals is to reduce
costs by reducing health claims. Research has shown that this can be achieved by encouraging employees to
make healthy lifestyle changes and by supporting an environment where employees can be healthy and
productive. The Consortium's Board of Directors and its members embrace preventative health care as part of
their strategic business plan.
The Consortium's subcommittee"Owning Your Own Health"is encouraging all of its participating
municipalities to adopt a resolution supporting workplace wellness. Adopting the resolution is the first step in
ensuring organizational commitment to wellness and the first step in supporting a wellness culture. The
proposed resolution creates an internal infrastructure by establishing a wellness committee and a reporting
system.
The GTMHIC adopted a wellness resolution at the Board of Director's meeting on August 8, 201.4.
When creating an organizational culture of wellness and owning your own health, it is critical that the support
come from a number of people within the organization. Promoting the wellness advisory committee at the start
signals the Consortium's Board of Directors and the City of Ithaca's support for the culture change. In order for
the wellness committee to be successful, it is essential that it be properly resourced and its action plan be
supported by the elected officials and by management.
Attached are the Greater Tompkins County Municipal Health Insurance Consortium's wellness resolution,the
City of Ithaca's wellness resolution, and The Business Case for Wellness Programs in Public Employee Health
Plans documents.
Enclosures:
GTMHIC Wellness Resolution
City of Ithaca Wellness Resolution
The Business Case for Wellness Programs in Public Employee Health Plans, Elizabeth Kellar, President&
CEO, Center for State and Local Government Excellence
Published September 2012
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
IssuiE BRIEF
(EXCELLENCE
ENTER FOR STATE &
OCAL GOVERNMENT
The Business Case for Wellness Programs
in Public Employee Health Plans
September 2012
r`
i
7
+c-
he rate of health insurance cost increases has slowed—rising by just 2.8
percent in 2011, 3.9 percent in 2010, and 3.8 percent in 2009, according to the
National Journal (McCarthy, September 14, 2012).
While there may be many reasons for the slow down in expenditures, one factor
could be the growth in wellness programs.
As authors Robert L. Clarke and Melinda Sandler Morrill point out in this issue
brief,many local and state governments have introduced wellness programs to improve
employees' health and to reduce health insurance costs.
The bottom line?Public sector wellness programs have reduced annual claims and
also have shown promise in improving employee health. Even retirees can benefit from
wellness programs,though they face some special issues. A study of the California
Public Employees Retirement System found that retirees who participated in a health
education program reduced health risk,used fewer medical services, and had lower
claims costs than did the control group. The program is estimated to have saved $3.2 to
$8 million in annual claims costs.
Wellness programs that pay dividends are carefully designed and often include
financial incentives to boost participation- Who can argue with better health and lower
costs?
The Center for State and Local Government Excellence gratefully acknowledges
financial support from ICMA RC to undertake this research project.
04� IC
W&4,
Elizabeth K Kellar
President and CEO
Center for State and Local Government Excellence
The Business Case for
Wellness Programs
in Public Employee
ROBERT L. CLARK AND
Health Plans MELINDA SANDLER MORRILL*
Introduction 34 percent, while the percentage of workers in plans
where the public sector employer paid the entire pre-
Employers offering health plans to their active and mium for family coverage declined from 25 percent to
retired workers face medical care cost inflation that 12 percent. As a result, monthly employee payments for
continues to exceed the general rate of price inflation health insurance premiums for single worker coverage
while also outpacing the rate of growth of total com- rose from an average of$31.94 to $90. 90, a three-fold
pensation. Figure 1 shows that between 1999 and 2011, increase,while the cost of family plans increased from
premiums for employer provided health insurance rose an average of$152.46 per month in 1998 to $397.32
by 160 percent while worker earnings increased 50 in 2011. In addition to higher premiums,public sector
percent and general inflation increased only 38 percent. workers also faced much higher deductibles in these
State and local governments have the same basic chal- plans. Deductibles for individual workers increased
lenge as private sector employers—how to continue to from a median of$200 in 1998 to $500 in 2011, and
provide adequate health insurance at reasonable cost. deductibles on family policies increased from a median
Although cost shifting from the employing agency to of$400 to $1,000. In the face of higher employee costs,
workers has been the primary means of slowing the the proportion of full-time employees participating in
rate of growth of expenditures on health plans, more state and local government health plans declined from
and more employers are turning towards wellness 86 percent to 82 percent. Thus, over the past decade,
programs and preventative care policies aimed at longer deductibles have been raised, co-payments increased,
term payoffs. These types of efforts have even more rel- and premiums have been introduced and increased.
evance in the public sector,where workers tend to have These changes have slowed the growth of net income
longer careers and it is still common to provide some to public employees, and in recent years, when there
form of retiree health insurance,thus policies with long have been no increases in annual pay, take home
term health benefits should reduce future expenditures income has actually declined.
on health care utilization for many years. As the cost of providing health insurance contin-
BLS (2012) reports the increase in employee cost for ues to rise, many state and local governments have
health insurance offered by state and local governments introduced wellness programs in an effort to improve
from 1998 to 2011 and how it has affected participation the health of their employees and to lower current
in these plans. The proportion of full-time employees and future expenditures for health insurance. A major
in plans where the public sector employer pays the concern for governments that are experiencing revenue
entire premium for individual coverage fell from 49 to declines and trying to manage budget deficits is the
immediate cost of wellness programs. The introduction
of these programs typically requires upfront costs with
benefits accruing in future years. In this issue brief,we
•Robert L.Clark is professor of economics and of management inno- outline the business case of wellness programs within
vation,and entrepreneurship in the College of Management,North health insurance plans for public sector employees.
Carolina state University and Melinda Sandler Morrill is assistant Examples of wellness programs are presented and
professor,Department of Economics,North Carolina state University. studies of the cost and benefits of these programs are
4 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS
Figure 1. Cumulative Increases in Health Insurance Premiums, Workers'Contributions to Premiums, Inflation, and
Workers'Earnings, 1999-2011
180% 6890
160% —�►—
160%
140%
120%
100% 9a ro
80% 9396
60% 0%
40% 24% __
20% _.._. 21%
0%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
-i Health Insurance Premiums
Source:Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits,
1999-2011.Bureau of Labor Statistics,Consumer Price Index,U.S. Workers'Contribution to Premiums
City Average of Annual Inflation(April to April),1999-2011:Bureau t Workers' Earnings
of Labor Statistics,Seasonally Adjusted Data from the Current
Employment Statistics Survey,1999-2011 (April to April). Overall Inflation
examined. While we discuss individual components will use fewer medical services,thus reducing the
of wellness programs, many public employers have employer's cost of providing health insurance to its
adopted comprehensive plans that encompass a num- workers and raising overall employee productivity. Like-
ber of these types of policies.' wise, healthier retirees will use fewer medical services,
reducing retiree health insurance costs. Programs can
be conducted with in-house personnel or outsourced
Wellness Programs: Characteristics to gyms, clinics, and private companies that specialize
and Value in wellness, counseling services, weight management,
and other health-promoting services. Employee partici-
Wellness programs come in many forms including pation can be encouraged through advertisement and
weight management, physical fitness, tobacco cessa- marketing efforts,by directly subsidizing memberships
lion, and regular health assessments. The objective of and services, or by offering financial incentives for
these programs is to improve the health of workers by meeting wellness goals.Linnan, et al. (2008) describe
promoting better nutrition, healthier lifestyles, and pre- the range of wellness programs provided at public and
ventative care. The idea is to focus employee attention private worksites around the country based on the 2004
on certain actions that will improve their well-being National Worksite Health Promotion Survey.
over their career and life, such as losing weight or quit- Methods for encouraging participation vary widely
ting smoking. across the states and include restricting enrollment in
The underlying business premise from the employ- less expensive health plans to those that participate in
er's perspective is that workers who adopt healthier certain wellness activities, offering subsidies for enroll-
lifestyles will become more productive workers who ment and participation, and imposing penalties for
nonparticipation. Naturally,the cost per employee will
' The Affordable Care Act(ACA)includes a number of provisions
that are aimed at promoting preventative care and improving overall 2 ACA changed the rules governing the extent to which employers
health(Koh and Sebelius,2010).As the provisions of this legisla- can"discriminate"based on health behaviors,which has important
tion are implemented,we anticipate that the incidence of wellness implications for the incentives to participate in workplace wellness
programs will increase(Baicker,et al.,2010;Osilla,2012). programs(Koh and Sebelius,2010).
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS 5
depend on the type of program offered and the degree increase in well-being could be achieved through areas
of employer subsidy. such as preventative medicine, diet, exercise, stress
management, smoking cessation, drug and alcohol
Types of Wellness Programs avoidance, and accident prevention. Further,the docu-
ment argued that by creating a healthier workforce the
Many state and local government employers have state will see higher quality work and productivity from
adopted comprehensive wellness programs that address employees, improved morale, reduced absenteeism
due to illness, and lower health care costs. California's
a wide range of lifestyle, dietary, and health manage- Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) coordi-
nates health and fitness promotion and illness preven-
grams and focus on specific issues such as tobacco tion information. Executive Order W-119-95 directed
cessation or weight loss. First, we will highlight some each state department to allocate resources to coordi-
examples broad-based programs. We then describe nate participation in the California WorksWell Health
more targeted efforts. Promotion Program (DPA Health Promotion Program)
One example of a broad-based program is that to achieve the aforementioned goals of improving
instituted by the state of Delaware.'Delaware adopted a employee health and well-being. California WorksWell
comprehensive wellness program, "DeIaWELL,"whose now offers reduced membership rates at health clubs
mission statement aims to "bring about awareness, and discounts for weight loss programs. The website
knowledge, and ultimately changes in personal health for the program lists resources for disease prevention
risk behaviors and overall well-being of employees, in and tips for a healthy lifestyle, including nutrition,
order that the lives of state employees and the welfare weight management, and fitness resources.
of the state as a whole will be significantly improved."
The mission statement highlights both the value of Health Assessments and Preventative
wellness to the individual employees,but also acknowl- Care
edges that all citizens will benefit,presumably through
lower costs of health care for workers. The DenverWellness program is an example of action
Montana has also developed a comprehensive well- by a local government to enhance wellness of its
ness program for state employees,the State of Montana employees.6 This program encourages employees to
Healthy Employee Lifestyle Program (SOMHELP).° complete a series of wellness-related tasks aimed at
The program includes a website for employees that improving their lifestyles. As an incentive, employees
provides information on fitness,weight management, who completed the program in 2010 received$12 per
and tobacco cessation. Employees also have access to month off of their premiums in 2011.According to the
life coaches and receive health screening discounts. 2011 Benefits Guide,the city believes that one of the
Similarly, Ohio has a program called "Take Charge Live main reasons for increased medical costs are the treat-
Well,"whose mission statement includes the charge for ment of illnesses that can be directly attributable to
state of Ohio employees and their families to "maintain unhealthy lifestyles (e.g., diabetes,high blood pres-
optimal health, wellness, and productivity by taking sure,back pain).'One goal of this program is to help
responsibility for their own health and use of the health decrease medical claims, and therefore reduce premi-
care system."5 In order to achieve this, the program ums,by improving the lifestyles of employees.'
focuses on providing health assessments,biometric At the state level, Oklahoma has a similar preven-
screenings, and health coaches. The program includes five care plan called OK Health, introduced in 2005
monetary incentives for participation. to encourage health assessment and monitoring of
Clark and Morrill (2011) describe the wellness employees.' Several full-time health educators conduct
program in California. Executive Order W 119-95
was signed on April 4, 1995 recognizing the need for 6 For more information see the DenverWellness website:
improved physical and mental well-being of the state http://www.denvergov.org/EmployeeResources/Wellness/
ProgramsandServices/tabid/432532/Default.aspx
workforce.According to this document,the desired
The 2011 Benefits Guide is available at:http://www.denvergov.
org/Portals/671/documents/BenefitsLEnrollment/BenefitsGuide2011
3 See the DelaWELL website at:http://delawell.delaware.gov/, pdf
4 See Montana,Health Care and Benefits Division,http://benefits. 8 See Clark,Morrill,and Riche(2011)for a description of three
mt.gov/default.mcpx. local health plans and their wellness efforts.
5 See Ohio Take Charge Live Well,accessed July 2012. 9 For more information,see:https://basweb.ebc.state.ok.us/.
S THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS
telephone interviews with employees during working or take steps on their own to improve their health. If
hours. Employees complete a web-based health assess- they exhibited weight loss and improvements in health
ment that includes a medical history, dietary habits, in future exams, they would not be charged. But if they
and other factors that influence health status. Partici- did not,they had to pay starting in January 2011.
pating employees are eligible for a visit to their primary
care physician for various tests without being subject Physical Fitness and Exercise Programs
to a co-pay. Results of these tests provide a baseline
on employees' health risks. Employees are assigned to Exercise and training programs can promote weight
loss, as well as improving overall physical fitness.
mentor who is available for future telephone conversa-
lions about weight management, stress, and exercise. Many government agencies have attempted to promote
Additional financial incentives and discounts for vari- fitness through subsidized gym and spa member-
ships, and on-site exercise facilities and walking trails.
ous wellness programs are available to participants in
OK Health. Athree-year review of the program by the Employees can be encouraged to meet with trainers
Oklahoma State Department of Health found that there and life coaches and/or take exercise breaks during
the day. Gainesville, Florida established its "LifeQuest"
had been a 21 percent decrease in medical claims, 9
percent reduction in hospitalizations, and a 34 percent Program in 1992 to promote health, diet, and fitness
at no cost to Gainesville employees,retirees, and their
reduction in doctor's office visits (Center for State and families.11 "LifeQuest" operates several fitness centers
Local Government Excellence,August 2010). where employees can meet with a trainer that will
Weight Management and Obesity Programs provide injury assessments and information of rehabs
problems. In addition,participants can arrange consul-
One of the biggest health problems in America is tations with exercise physiologists who develop indi-
obesity and its related health effects. Employers can vidualized exercise programs. About 90 percent of city
promote weight loss through a variety of programs employees participate in "LifeQuest" and consultant
including providing information about healthy diets, reports indicate that the city's costs and premiums are
removing unhealthy items from cafeterias and break below average compared to comparable sized employ-
rooms, and short-run campaigns and competitions. In ers (Center for State and Local Government Excellence,
addition, government agencies can partner with com- 2009).
panies promoting healthy diets and weight loss pro-
grams such as Weight Watchers. Alabama, Delaware, Tobacco Cessation Programs
and Virginia have all developed programs with Weight There is a well-known link between tobacco use and
Watchers and report successful weight loss by their certain diseases,many of which result in lifelong rob-
employees.10 lems and require expensive treatments. Employers can
Kaufman et al. (2012) report how the fifty states encourage employees to stop using tobacco products by
and the District of Columbia cover weight loss interven- having differential health plans or premiums based on
lions in state health plans (also see National Council of whether the person is currently using tobacco prod-
State Legislatures,2012). The report illustrates the wide ucts or has entered a cessation program. The National
range of plans and subsidies that states offer to encour-
age their employees to adopt and maintain a healthier Council of State Legislatures (2012) reported that at
least 9 states now charge, or are authorized to charge,
lifestyle. Some states have penalties if employees do
lower premiums to nonsmokers and higher premiums
not enroll in wellness plans. In one example,Ala-
to smokers. As of March 2010, 39 states had adopted
bama imposed fees on overweight state workers who
tobacco cessation programs and policies aimed at
did not participate in weight reduction programs. The
State Employees' Insurance Board approved chargingreducing tobacco use by employees. One example is
screenings. Virginia's "Quit for Life" program."In this program,
employees if they did not get free health screen
I individuals are given a coach who helps develop a plan
f serious problems with blood pressure, cholesterol,
for the participant to stop smoking. Individuals receive
glucose or obesity were detected,workers had one year
to see a doctor at no cost, enroll in a wellness program, 11 For more information,see:http://www.cityofgainesville.org/
GOVERNMENT/CityDepartmentsNZ/RiskManagmentDepartment/
10 For a description of these programs and outcomes,see:http:// tabid/318/Default.aspx.
www.weightwatchers.com/images/1033/dynamic/GCMSImages/ 12 For more information,see:http://commonhealth.virginia.gov/
WW Newsletter_Fall08-nobox-v2.pdf, [accessed July 2012]. quitforlife.htm.
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS 7
free nicotine replacement patches, gum, or smoking nies for several reasons. First,public employees tend to
cessation gum as long as they stay active in the pro- have longer careers with the same employer compared
gram for up to one year (Center for State and Local to private sector employees. Thus the gains from a
Government Excellence, December 2009). Like many healthier worker can be expected to continue over more
other public sector wellness programs, "Quit for Life" is years. Second, state and local governments tend to pro-
but one component of a much more extensive wellness vide health insurance to retirees so that the benefits of
initiative. healthier individuals may continue into the retirement
years."
To date, most studies evaluating workplace wellness
Return on Investment in Wellness programs have focused on the private sector. Several
review studies have been done that attempt to synthe-
Programs size findings from individual programs and randomized
clinical trials of worksite wellness programs (see, e.g.,
While the costs associated with identifying, implement- Baicker, et al., 2010; Berry, et al.,2010; Goetzel and
ing, and maintaining a wellness program are generally Ozminkowski, 2008; Osilla, et al., 2012). A special issue
straightforward to estimate,the benefits from wellness of the American Journal of Health Promotion on the
programs are harder to measure, particularly in the financial impact of health promotion programs includes
short run. There have been relatively few systematic both analyses of the issues surrounding health promo-
studies of the return on investment (ROI) of wellness lion efforts and includes reviews of previously pub-
programs in the public sector. Recognizing the need lished studies (Goetzel, 2001). Goetzel (2001) concludes
for more rigorous research on ROI, the 2010 Affordable that while value has been demonstrated,more rigorous
Care Act stipulates that the CDC should provide techni- research is required. From an extensive review of the
cal assistance to evaluate employer-based wellness literature,Baicker, et al. (2010) provide an estimate that
programs and should also conduct a survey of existing for every one dollar spent on wellness plans,there is a
programs (Koh and Sebelius, 2010). return of three dollars in cost saving. The U.S. Depart-
The expectation is that the behavioral changes ment of Health and Human Services issued a report
encouraged by state and local government wellness in 2003 examining the wellness programs adopted by
programs can be directly linked to improved health, some of the leading employers in America and pre-
lower absenteeism, and greater productivity, as well sented statistics from these companies on the value
as lower utilization of medical services and lower of the programs.14 For example,the wellness program
expenditures on health insurance for public employees adopted by Motorola was estimated to have saved the
and retirees. Those focusing solely on annual budgets company$3.93 for every$1 invested. In the first 24
and net expenditures may overlook the longer-term months after the adoption of Northeast Utilities We11A
benefits of wellness programs such as lower growth in ware program,lifestyle and behavioral claims were
the cost of health insurance. In addition, gains such as reduced by$1,400,000. Caterpillar's Healthy Balance
increased worker productivity and worksite morale may program was estimated to produce savings of$700 mil-
be difficult to capture on a balance sheet. Healthier lion by 2015.Johnson&Johnson's Health and Wellness
workers and retirees will be less likely to use medical program lowered average annual health care cost by
services and therefore,wellness programs should result $224.66 per employee.15
in lower insurance premiums for any given health plan In the public sector, there are several examples of
offered to workers. Healthier workers should miss fewer successful workplace wellness programs that were
days due to illness thus reducing productivity loss shown to have a positive ROI. King County, Washington
from absenteeism. Healthier workers should feel better (2010) produced a detail study of its wellness program
while on the job and therefore,have higher productiv- that was instituted in 2005. The study reported high
ity during their work day. Of course,improved health
of workers should also improve their well-being and 13 Clark and Morrill(2010)provide a detailed review of state and
attitude,and they may feel better about their employer local retiree health plans and how the cost of these plans varies
who promoted wellness and gave them the opportunity across the nation.
to improve theirs. 14 The report is available at:http://www.aspe.hhs.gov/health/
prevention/.
The benefits of wellness programs to public employ- is Aldana(2001)also provides a meta-analysis of published articles
ers likely will exceed the value to private sector compa- describing private sector workplace wellness programs.
S THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS
participation rates in the wellness program and found One of the committee's recommendations was to
that by 2009, county employees had made improve- establish a wellness program that gave employees
ments on 12 out of 14 health risk factors since the financial incentives of$200 to $500 if they take ini-
program began in 2005. Actual health care costs were tial and annual health risk assessments and take part
$26 billion less than expected expenditures based on in key program activities,including physical fitness,
cost trends prior to 2005. education, and preventive care. The results have been
The Austin, Texas, Capital Metropolitan Transporta- dramatic with 75 percent of the workforce participating
tion Authority16 adopted a wellness program in 2003 for in the wellness program:between 2007 and 2008, aver-
its 1,075 employees.The program consisted of access age annual medical claims dropped from $2,437.44 per
to 24-hour fitness centers; personal trainers, well- person to $2,262.57, and the use of sick days decreased
ness coaches;full body assessments; on-site dietician; by 6 percent.
Weight Watchers classes,healthy eating workshops; Other health improvements that are expected to
walking club,bike loan program; and cash incentives pay dividends have been decreases in blood pressure,
for losing weight and quitting smoking. The program cholesterol, smoking, and obesity. Tobacco use among
also offers weekly discount coupons to be used toward participants fell from 32 percent to 16 percent. Those
purchasing healthy cafeteria food and ensures that with blood pressure greater than 140/90 dropped from
at least 60 percent of vending machine offerings are 62 percent to 32 percent;those with total cholesterol
healthy choices. Smoking cessation classes, free flu above 200 dropped from 44 percent to 14 percent;
shots, and stress reduction workshops are also offered. and those with a body mass index of greater than 25
Evaluation of the program indicated a savings of$2.43 percent declined from 97 percent to 76 percent. Alco-
for every dollar spent on the program since 2003 and hol use also declined with participants who had more
found that health care costs,which had been rising than two drinks per day dropping from 27 percent to 11
precipitously before 2003, slowed and then fell by 4 percent.
percent in both 2007 and 2008, and 5 percent in 2009.
Between 2003 and 2009, they saw a 24 percent net Retirees
increase in health care costs instead of the projected
49 percent increase. Absenteeism,rising prior to 2003, In most state and local government health plans,
fell in each of past five years. Absenteeism rates are 37
percent lower in 2009 than in 2003. retirees and active workers have access to identical
Montgomery,Ohio, found that its employee health health insurance plans, so will therefore qualify for
care costs made up 3 percent of the city's annual bud- the same wellness initiatives. However, even in states
get in 1999 and were rapidly increasing.A Health Care where retirees are pooled with active workers, addi-
Benefits Committee was established to represent the tional wellness programs targeted to retirees have been
employees' health care concerns and to negotiate with implemented. For example,in New Jersey, retirees must
insurance providers, maintain comprehensive cover- Participate in a Retiree Wellness program or pay 1.5
age, and communicate with each work group about key Percent of 50 percent of their highest monthly salary to
health care issues. Four of the committee's members be eligible for the state health plan. Retirees can instead
represent the primary work groups within city govern- sign a"Pledge for Health Living" and complete the
ment and the fifth represents management. requirements associated with this pledge to have the
premium waived."
Similarly, the Ohio Public Employees Retirement
16 Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority:Kim Peterson, System (OPERS) also has a separate wellness program
employee relations manager,and Michael Nyren,risk manager, for retirees."Retirees that participate in the OPERS
Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority;Capital Metropolitan personal health management program earn up to $100
Transportation Authority,"Capital Metro Wellness Program Recog-
nized for Improving Employee Health and Reducing Costs,"Aus-
tin,Texas,June 4,2009;and U.S.Centers for Disease Control and 17 A copy of the letter sent to new retirees and health pledge can
Prevention,A Comprehensive Worksite Wellness Program in Austin, be seen at:http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/pensions/shbp-wellness-
Texas:Partnership Between Steps to a Healthier Austin and Capital program.shtml;the brochure describing the program and its require-
Metropolitan'l1ansportation Authority,"by Lynn Davis,Karina Loyo, ments can be found at:http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/pensions/
Aerie Glowka,Rick Schwertfeger,Lisa Danielson,Cecily Brea,Alyssa pdf/hb/njdirect-wellness-brochure-revised-hat-2011.pdf.
Easton,and Shannon Griffin-Blake,Preventing Chronic Disease:Pub- 18 For more information,see:https://www.opers.org/healthcare/
lic Health Research,Practice,and Policy(April 2009),pp.1-5. wellness/.
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS J
to deposit in their retiree medical account (AMA).
form of subsidized programs offered at the workplace
Individuals earn $50 for completing each of the follow- or small cash incentives to enroll in various programs.
ing activities (up to the$100 maximum): complete a Penalties can be in the form of limiting access to lower
health assessment, undergo an annual physical exam, cost health care plans or direct fees for nonparticipa-
complete a wellness program, and successfully partici- tion. We have reviewed a series of programs adopted by
pate in a disease management program. Funds from the state and local governments.
RMA can be used for qualified health expenses includ- Most of the evidence provided by various gov-
ing medical, dental, and vision as allowed by the IRS ernment agencies indicates that these programs are
and thus are not subject to personal income tax (see successful in improving the health status of employees
Clark and Morrill,2011).
and slowing the growth of health care expenditures
Public sector employers may find that special issues by the employer. However,relatively few agencies
face retiree populations and that specialized programs have conducted detailed and systematic assessments
may be important. Since older individuals typically of these plans. More studies of the costs and benefits
have higher costs,factors facing retirees may be par- of wellness programs are needed to convince skepti-
ticularly important for plans that pool costs for retirees cal lawmakers of the need to fund innovative wellness
and active workers. Retirees face more serious health Programs. Wellness programs are not costless but they
concerns and are often taking multiple, expensive can have long-run benefits that make them effective
prescription drugs. Wellness programs in the workplace Public policies.
might not have a relevant counterpart for retirees,who
are not located on-site. While the cost savings associ- References
ated with lower medical spending for healthier mem-
bers are still important for retirees,improvements in Aldana S. 2001. "Financial impact of health promotion
health of retirees do not provide the same productivity programs: a comprehensive review of the literature."
gains to employers. Still, studies suggest investing in American Journal of Health Promotion, May-Jun
retiree wellness programs is cost effective. For example, 15(5):296-320.
Fries et al. (1994) reported results from a randomized Baicker, Katherine, David Cutler and Zirui Song. 2010.
controlled trial of a health education program in the "Workplace Wellness Programs Can Generate Savings,"
California Public Employees Retirement System (Ca1P- Health Affairs, 29:2, pp. 304-311.
ERS). The study found that participants had a reduc-
tion in health risk,lower medical utilization relative to Berry L.L., A.M. Mirabito, W.B. Baun. 2010. "What's
baseline, and a decrease in claims cost growth relative the Hard Return on Employee Wellness Programs?"
to the control group. They estimated that annual claims Harvard Business Review, 88(12):104-112.
costs were approximately$3.2 to $8.0 million lower Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2012. "How have health
due to the program. benefits changed in state and local governments from
1998 to 2011?"Beyond the Numbers:Pay and Benefits,
Vol. 1, No. 5. http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-l/
Discussion and Conclusions how-have-health-benefits-changed-in-state-and-local-
governments-from-1998-to-2011.htm, [Accessed July 11,
The analysis in this issue brief has shown that many 2012].
states and local governments have adopted various pol-
icies to encourage healthy lifestyles for their employees. Center for State and Local Government Excel-
These policies include encouraging weight loss through lence. 2009. "A Comprehensive Wellness Program in
group programs sponsored by the employer and better Gainesville, Florida,"August 2009. http://slge.org/
Publications/a-comprehensive-wellness-program-in-
eating habits and healthier food in employee cafeterias.
gainesville-florida, [Accessed July 11,2012].
Regular health exams and physical fitness programs are
often components of these programs along with policies Center for State and Local Government Excellence.
to encourage employees to stop all tobacco use. 2010. "OK Health, Health Improvement, and Wellness
All of these programs can be encouraged by finan- for Oklahoma State Employees."August 2010. http://
vial incentives to change behavior or cash penalties if slge.org/publications/ok-health-health-improvement-
the employee does not take advantage of the opportu- and-wellness-for-oklahoma-state-employees, [Accessed
nity to change lifestyles. Incentives typically take the July 27,2012].
10 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR WELLNESS PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS
Center for State and Local Government Excellence. It So Hard To Prove Value?"American Journal of Health
December 2009. "Employee Wellness in the Com- Promotion, Special Issue on the Financial Impact of
monwealth of Virginia,"http://slge.org/publications/ Health Promotion Programs, 15(5): 277-280.
employee-wellness-in-the-commonwealth-of-virginia, Goetzel, Ron Z., and Ronald J. Ozminkowski. 2008.
[Accessed July 27, 2012]. "The Health and Cost Benefits of Work Site Health-
Clark, Robert and Melinda Morrill. 2011. "Health Insur- Promotion Programs,"Annual Review of Public Health,
ance for Active and Retired State Employees: California, 29: 303-323.
North Carolina, and Ohio." Center for State and Local Koh, Howard K., and Kathleen G. Sebelius. 2010.
Government Excellence, June 2011. http://sige.org/ "Promoting Prevention through the Affordable Care
publications/health-insurance-for-active-and-retired- Act," The New England Journal of Medicine, 363(14):
state-employees-california-north-carolina-and-ohio 1296-1299.
Clark, Robert,Melinda Morrill, and Stephanie Riche. Linnan, Laura, Mike Bowling, Jennifer Childress,
2011. "Health Insurance for Active and Retired Garry Lindsay, Carter Blakey, Stephanie Pronk, Sharon
City Employees: Asheville, Denver, and Oklahoma Wieker and Penelope Royall. 2008. "Results of the 2004
City." Center for State and Local Government Excel- National Worksite Health Promotion Survey,"American
lence. September 2011. http://slge.org/wp-content/ Journal of Public Health, August, 09:8,pp. 1503-1509.
uploads/2012/01/NC-State-brief_Health-Insurance_
Cities_12-068.pdf National Council of State Legislatures. 2012. "State
Employee Health Benefits," http://www.ncsl.org/
Kaufman, Nicole,Kristin Younger, Stephanie David, issues-research/health/state-employee-health-benefits-
Christina Hertzog, Orriel Richardson, Jennifer Sheer, ncsl.aspx#wellness, [Accessed July 11, 2012].
Erica Breese, Brittany Plavchak, Chelsi Stevens,Anna
Stoto. 2012. "State Employee Health Benefits Cov- Osilla, Karen Chan, Kristin Van Busum, Christopher
erage for Weight Loss Interventions," Department Schnyer,Jody Wozar Larkin, Christine Eibner, Soeren
of Public Health, George Washington University. Mattke. 2012. "Systematic Review of the Impact of
http://www.stopobesityalliance.org/wp-content/ Worksite Wellness Programs,"American Journal of
themes/stopobesityalliance/pdfs/State_Employee_ Managed Care, 18(2): e68-e81.
Health-Benefits-Plans-Treatment-of-Obesity- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2003.
Interventions.pdf, [Accessed July 11, 2012]. "Prevention Makes Common "Cents,"Accessed July 11,
Goetzel, Ron Z. 2001. "The Financial Impact of Health 2012. http://www.aspe.hhs.gov/health/prevention/
Promotion and Disease Prevention Programs—Why Is
(EXCELLENCE
NTER FOR STATE &
CAL GOVERNMENT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Robert J.O'Neill,Chair
Executive Director, ICMA
Joan McCallen,Vice Chair
President and Chief Executive Officer, ICMA-RC
The Honorable Ralph Becker
Mayor,Salt Lake City
Donald J. Borut
Executive Director, National League of Cities
Gall C.Christopher,DN
Vice President for Programs,W.K. Kellogg Foundation
Gregory J.Dyson
Senior Vice President and Chief Operations and Marketing Officer, ICMA-RC
Jeffrey L.Esser
Executive Director, Government Finance Officers Association
Peter A.Harkness
Founder and Publisher Emeritus,Governing Magazine
William T.Pound
Executive Director, National Conference of State Legislatures
Raymond C.Scheppach,PhD
Professor, University of Virginia Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy;
Former Executive Director, National Governors Association
SLGE STAFF
Elizabeth K. Kellar
President and CEO
Joshua M. Frenzel,PhD
Vice President, Research
Amy M. Mayers
Communications Manager
Bonnie J.Faulk
Program Assistant
CENTER FOR STATE &
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
EXCELLENCE
Helping state and local governments become
knowledgeable and competitive employers
About the Center for State and Local Government Excellence
The Center for State and Local Government Excellence helps state and local governments become knowledgeable and com-
petitive employers so they can attract and retain a talented and committed workforce.The Center identifies best practices
and conducts research on competitive employment practices,workforce development, pensions, retiree health security,
and financial planning.The Center also brings state and local leaders together with respected researchers and features the
latest demographic data on the aging work force,research studies, and news on health care,recruitment, and succession
planning on its web site,www.sige.org.
The Center's five research priorities are:
• Retirement plans and savings
• Retiree health care
• Financial education for employees
• Talent strategies and innovative employment practices
• Workforce development
777 N.Capitol Street NE I Suite 500 1 Washington DC 20002-4201 1 202 682 6100 1 info@slge.org
2. City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy
2.2 A Local Law to Establish a Sustainable Energy Loan Program in the City of Ithaca
LOCAL LAW NO. —2015
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca follows:
Section 1. Chapter 4 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled "Administration of
Government" is hereby amended by adding and Article VII entitled"Energize NY Benefit
Financing Program,"to read as follows:
ARTICLE VII
§4-33. Legislative findings,intent and purpose, authority.
A. It is the policy of both the City of Ithaca (hereinafter, "City") and the State of New York to
achieve energy efficiency and renewable energy goals, reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
mitigate the effect of global climate change, and advance a clean energy economy. The City
finds that it can fulfill this policy by providing property assessed clean energy financing to
property owners for the installation of renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
measures. This chapter establishes a program that will allow the Energy Improvement
Corporation ("BIC"), a local development corporation, acting on behalf of the City, to make
funds available to qualified property owners that will be repaid by such property owners
through charges on the real properties benefited by such funds, thereby fulfilling the purposes
of this chapter and fulfilling an important public purpose.
B. The City is authorized to implement this Energize NY Benefit Financing Program pursuant
to Article 5-L of the New York General Municipal Law.
C. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Energize NY Benefit Financing
Program Law of the City of Ithaca".
§4-34. Definitions
For purposes of this Article, and unless otherwise expressly stated or unless the context requires,
the following terms shall have the meanings indicated:
Authority — The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, as defined by
subdivision two of section eighteen hundred fifty-one of the public authorities law, or its
successor.
EIC — the Energy Improvement Corporation, a local development corporation, duly organized
under section fourteen hundred eleven of the Not-For-Profit Corporation Law, authorized hereby
on behalf of the City to implement the Energize NY Benefit Financing Program by providing
funds to qualified property owners (as defined in this chapter) and providing for repayment of
such funds from monies collected by the City tax collector as a charge to be levied on the real
property and collected in the same manner and same form as the City taxes.
Energy Audit—A formal evaluation or "assessment" of the energy consumption of a permanent
building or structural improvement to real property, conducted by a contractor certified by the
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
Authority, or certified by a certifying entity approved by the Authority, for the purpose of
identifying appropriate energy efficiency improvements that could be made to the property.
Energy Efficiency Improvement—Any renovation or retrofitting of a building to reduce energy
consumption, such as window and door replacement, lighting, caulking, weather stripping, air
sealing, insulation, and heating and cooling system upgrades, and similar improvements,
determined to be cost-effective pursuant to criteria established by the Authority, not including
lighting measures or household appliances that are not permanently fixed to real property.
Qualified Property Owner — An owner of residential or commercial real property located
within the boundaries of the City that is determined to be eligible to participate in the Energize
NY Benefit Financing Program under the procedures for eligibility set forth under this chapter.
Renewable Energy System — An energy generating system for the generation of electric or
thermal energy, to be used primarily at such property, by means of solar thermal, solar
photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, anaerobic digester gas-to-electricity systems, fuel cell
technologies, or other renewable energy technology approved by the Authority not including the
combustion or pyrolysis of solid waste.
Renewable Energy System Feasibility Study — A written study, conducted by a contractor
certified by the Authority, or certified by a certifying entity approved by the Authority, for the
purpose of determining the feasibility of installing a renewable energy system.
§4-35. Establishment of an Energize NY Benefit Financing Program
A. An Energize NY Benefit Financing Program is hereby established by the City, whereby EIC
acting on its behalf, may provide funds to Qualified Property Owners in accordance with the
procedures set forth under this chapter, to finance the acquisition, construction and
installation of Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Improvements and the
verification of the installation of such systems and improvements.
B. The funds provided shall not exceed the lesser of ten percent of the appraised value of the
real property where the Renewable Energy Systems and/or Energy Efficiency Improvements
will be located, or the actual cost of installing the Renewable Energy Systems and/or Energy
Efficiency Improvements, including the costs of necessary equipment, materials, and labor
and the cost of verification of such systems and improvements.
§4-36. Procedures for eligibility
A. Any property owner in the City may submit application to EIC on such forms as have been
prepared by EIC and made available to property owners on the website of EIC and at the City
offices.
B. Every application submitted by a property owner shall be reviewed by EIC acting on behalf
of the City, which shall make a positive or negative determination on such application based
upon the criteria for making a financing enumerated in subsection A of section 5 of this
chapter. EIC may also request further information from the property owner where necessary
to aid in its determination.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
C. If a positive determination on an application is made by EIC acting on behalf of the City, the
property owner shall be deemed a Qualified Property Owner and shall be eligible to
participate in the Energize NY Benefit Financing Program in accordance with the procedure
set forth under section 6 of this chapter; provided that in no case shall a property owner that
has received funds from another municipal corporation for the acquisition, construction and
installation of Energy Efficiency Improvements and/or Renewable Energy Systems be
deemed a Qualified Property Owner.
§4-37. Application criteria
A. Upon the submission of an application, EIC acting on behalf of the City, shall make a
positive or negative determination on such application based upon the following criteria for
the making of a financing:
1. The proposed Energy Efficiency Improvements and/or Renewable Energy Systems are
determined to be cost effective by the Authority;
2. The proposed Energy Efficiency Improvements and/or Renewable Energy Systems will
generate an estimated annual cost savings greater than the annual charge payments;
3. Sufficient funds are available to provide to the property owner;
4. The property owner is current in payments on any existing mortgage;
5. The property owner is current in payments on any existing real property taxes and has
been current on real property taxes for the previous three years; and
6. Such additional criteria, not inconsistent with the criteria set forth above, as the City, or
EIC acting on its behalf, may set from time to time.
§4-38. Opt-in, Energize Finance Agreement
A. A Qualified Property Owner may participate in the Energize NY Benefit Financing Program
through the execution of an Energize Finance Agreement made by and between the Qualified
Property Owner and EIC, acting on the behalf of the City.
B. Upon execution of the Energize Finance Agreement, the Qualified Property Owner shall be
eligible to receive funds from EIC acting on behalf of the City, for the acquisition,
construction, and installation of qualifying Renewable Energy Systems and Energy
Efficiency Improvements; provided the requirements of section 7 of this chapter have been
met.
C. The Energize Finance Agreement shall include the terms and conditions of repayment set
forth under section 8 of this chapter.
§4-39. Energy audit, renewable energy system feasibility study
A. No funds shall be made available for Energy Efficiency Improvements unless determined to
be appropriate through an Energy Audit as defined in Section 2.
B. No funds shall be made available for a Renewable Energy System unless determined to be
feasible through a Renewable Energy System Feasibility Study as defined in Section 2.
C. The cost of such Energy Audit and/or Renewable Energy System Feasibility Study shall be
borne solely by the property owner but may be included in the financed amount if the work is
approved.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
§4-40. Terms and conditions of repayment
The Energize Finance Agreement between the Qualified Property Owner and EIC acting on
behalf of the City, shall set forth the terms and conditions of repayment in accordance with the
following:
A. The principal amount of the funds paid to the Qualified Property Owner hereunder, together
with the interest thereon, shall be paid by the property owner as a charge on its City tax bill
and shall be levied and collected at the same time and in the same manner as City property
taxes, provided that such charge shall be separately listed on the tax bill. The City shall
make payment to EIC or its designee in the amount of all such separately listed charges
within 30 days of the City tax due date.
B. The term of such repayment shall be determined at the time the Energize Finance Agreement
is executed by the property owner and EIC, provided that in no case shall the term exceed the
weighted average of the useful life of the systems and improvements as determined by EIC
acting on behalf of the City .
C. The rate of interest for the charge shall be fixed by EIC acting on behalf of the City at the
time the Energize Finance Agreement is executed by the property owner and EIC.
D. The charge shall constitute a lien upon the real property benefited by the Energize NY
Benefit Financing Program and shall run with the land. A transferee of title to the benefited
real property shall be required to pay any future installments, including interest thereon.
§4-41. Verification and report
A. EIC shall be responsible for verifying and reporting to the City on the installation and
performance of Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Improvements financed
by such program.
B. The City shall verify and report on the installation and performance of Renewable Energy
Systems and Energy Efficiency Improvements financed by the Energize NY Benefit
Financing Program in such form and manner as the Authority may establish.
Section 2. Severability. If any clause, sentence,paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law
shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment shall not
affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder thereof but shall be confined in its operation to the
clause, sentence,paragraph, section, or part thereof directly involved in the controversy in which
such judgment shall have been rendered.
Section 3.This local law shall take effect upon filing with the Secretary of State.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
2. City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy
2.3 Authorizing a Municipal Agreement Between the City of Ithaca and the Energy
Improvement Corporation to Implement and Administer a Sustainable Energy Loan
Program in the City of Ithaca
WHEREAS, by Local Law No. _of 2015, the City of Ithaca created the Energize NY Benefit
Financing Program within the city that utilizes the Energy Investment Corporation(EIC), a local
development corporation acting on behalf of the City, to provide property assessed clean energy
(PACE) financing to assist qualified property owners undertake energy-efficiency measures and
install renewable-energy systems, and
WHEREAS, a Municipal Agreement is required to establish the roles, responsibilities, and
obligations of the EIC and the City in the administration of the Energize NY Benefit Financing
Program; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Mayor,upon review of the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to enter
into a Municipal Agreement with the Energy Improvement Corporation that shall set forth the
duties and obligations of each party in connection with the City's participation in the Energize
NY Benefit Financing Program.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
CITY OF ITHACA
rIT•• 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
MAYOR'S OFFICE
x SVANTE L.MYRICK,MAYOR
Telephone: 607-274-6501
Email: mayor@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6526
MEMORANDUM
To: Common Council
From: Kevin Sutherland,Chief of Staff
CC: Svante Myrick,Mayor,Steven Thayer,City Controller,Joe Del Sindaco,Energize NY
Date: May 8,2015
Re: EnergizeNY Q&A from City Administration Committee meeting on 4/15/15
Several questions were raised at the last CA meeting regarding the EnergizeNY loan program and
the two resolutions related to it were tabled.
I've spoken to Joe Del Sindaco from EnergizeNY and below are the questions raised and the
responses I have come up with. Joe,if I've misinterpreted what we talked about,please let me
know.
What about properties with known contamination?
At the request of the city,EnergizeNY will not finance projects with known
contamination. This can be a part of the mutual agreement.However,the
responsibility of informing EnergizeNY of contaminated sites will fall to the city,
as EnergizeNY does not have this information.
Churches and not for profits-are counties/cities saying they don't want to
foreclose on these types of establishments?
This is a really good question. If these entities take advantage of the loan
program,they could be foreclosed on if they do not make their annual payments.
Are elected officials prepared to foreclose on a not-for-profit? That's a question
you have to ask yourself.
The local law refers to both residential and commercial,yet EnergizeNY is
stating they will only finance commercial.
When the state law was enacted allowing for this,they had assumed residential
homes could participate as well as commercial. The Federal home loan
programs (Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac)have not allowed PACE financing and
therefor Energize NY will not provide loans to residential properties for the time
being. There is a bill in Congress. It is currently stalled,but if and when it does
go through,the State of New York already has a law on the books allowing for it.
At that time EnergizeNY will be allowed to provide this service to home owners.
Also,commercially owned includes LLC's. If an LLC owns a single family
home property it will be eligible.
Is the city the Primary or Secondary lien to be made whole?
The city is the primary lien holder. The EnergizeNY payment is an additional
line item on the tax bill and treated with the same primary status as all other
lines on the tax bill.
I went to the county legislative meeting earlier this week in which they voted unanimously to
approve the local law. This means business owners in Tompkins County with property outside of
the City of Ithaca can now partake in this program. I hope the City Administration Committee will
consider bringing these resolutions back to the floor so that businesses in the city may participate
in the program as well.
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.1 Youth Bureau—Request to Amend 2015 Youth Bureau Budget-YES
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau has applied for funding through the Tompkins County
Workforce Investment Board and will be receiving $151,558.74 in new funding for the
Tompkins Summer Youth Employment Program, and
WHEREAS, the goal of this program is to provide short-term subsidized internships for low-
income eligible teens needing assistance in securing employment; now, therefore,be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2015 Youth Bureau budget contingent
upon confirmation of funding as follows:
Increase anticipated revenue from Tompkins County Workforce Investment Board
A7310-4820-1200 Youth Development Administration $1,000.00
A7310-4820-1202 Youth Employment Service $142,845.64
A7310-4820-1400 Administration $7,713.10
Total $151,558.74
Increase expenses:
A7310-5460-1202 Program Supplies $1,000.00
A7310-5120-1202 Part time/Seasonal $117,838.25
A7310-5125-1202 Overtime $5,000.00
A7310-5425-1202 Office Supplies $1,125.30
A7310-5445-1202 Travel &Mileage $500.00
A7310-5460-1202 Program Supplies $1,532.00
A7310-5120-1400 Part time/Seasonal $849.00
A7310-5405-1400 Telephone $777.00
A7310-5420-1400 Gas & Oil $500.00
A7310-5425-1400 Office Expense $700.00
A7310-5437-1400 Merchant Service $750.00
A7310-5460-1400 Program Supplies $2,090.00
A7310-5476-1401 Equipment Maintenance $401.00
A7310-5480-1401 Building Maintenance $1,507.20
A7310-9030 FICA/Medicaid $9,465.00
A7310-9040 Workers' Compensation $523.99
Total $151,558.74
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
�0vkb Bu`ep41 Ithaca Youth Bureau
o • 1 James L. Gibbs Drive w' a
1
Ithaca, New York 14850 a s Phone: (607) 273-8364
Fax: (607) 273-2817
"Building a foundation for a lifetime." m�tti
To: City Administration Committee
From: Suki Tabor, Deputy Director
Liz Vance, Director
Re: Youth Bureau Budget Amendment
Date: May 15, 2015
We have been advised,by the Tompkins County Workforce Investment Board that we will receive
$151,558.74 in funding for Tompkins Summer Youth Employment Program. Although we are awaiting final
confirmation, we are pleased that we may be able to offer summer employment to additional teens this
summer.
We would like to amend the 2015 Youth Bureau budget, contingent upon confirmation of funding, as
follows:
Increase anticipated revenue from Tompkins County Workforce Investment Board
Account #A7310-4820-1200 Youth Development Administration $1,000.00
Account #A7310-4820-1202 Youth Employment Service $142,845.64
Account #A7310-4820-1400 Administration $7,713.10
Total $151,558.74
Increase expenses:
Account #A 7310-5460-1200 Program Supplies $1,000.00
Account #A 7310-5120-1202 Part time/Seasonal $117,838.25
Account #A 7310-5125-1202 Overtime $5,000.00
Account #A 7310-5425-1202 Office Supplies $1,125.30
Account #A 7310-5445-1202 Travel &Mileage $500.00
Account #A 7310-5460-1202 Program Supplies $1,532.00
Account #A 7310-5120-1400 Part time/Seasonal $849.00
Account #A 7310-5405-1400 Telephone $777.00
Account #A 7310-5420-1400 Gas & Oil $500.00
Account #A 7310-5425-1400 Office Expense $700.00
Account #A 7310-5437-1400 Merchant Service $750.00
Account #A 7310-5460-1400 Program Supplies $2,090.00
Account #A 7310-5476-1401 Equipment Maintenance $401.00
Account #A 7310-5480-1401 Building Maintenance $1,507.20
YES Fringe Benefits $16,850.09
Admin. Fringe Benefits $138.90
Total $151,558.74
Thank you.
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.2 DPW-Request to Amend Roster-Fiscal Manager Position
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works is the largest department in the City of Ithaca, with
a complex funding and accounting structure including six (6) funds (General Fund, Water Fund,
Sewer Fund, Solid Waste Fund, Sidewalk Fund and Stormwater Fund) and 62 separate accounts
throughout its four divisions, and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works receives various revenue streams from Water and
Sewer billings, Streets and Facilities billings,Newman Golf Course, and parking revenues, and
from outside sources such as the Consolidated Highway Improvement Program (CHIPS), and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works is currently supported by one Administrative
Coordinator, one Financial Clerk, and two Financial Management Assistants, with one open
funded position previously held by a recently retired Financial Management Assistant, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has identified the need for developing
consistent financial and accounting procedures within its four divisions for matters concerning
billing, budget preparation, cost tracking, cost reporting,payroll, and budget planning, and that
this consistency can be achieved through a Fiscal Manager position to supervise existing
financial and accounting staff; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Department of Public Works be amended as
follows:
Add: One (1) Fiscal Manager
Delete: One (1)Financial Management Assistant
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the funding for this change shall be derived from existing funds within the
Department of Public Works budget.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
1TKq CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca,New York 14850-6590
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Michael J.Thorne,P.E.,Superintendent
Telephone: 607/274-6531 Fax: 607/274-6587
AT
TO: Common Council
Svante Myrick
Steve Thayer
FROM: Michael J. Thorne, P.E.
Superintendent of Public Works
DATE: May 20, 2015
RE: Fiscal Manager Position for Department of Public Works
Dear Council Members,
A recent employee retirement has opened up a Financial Management Assistant position in our
Streets and Facilities division. However, due to the complexity of the Department of Public
Works organization, its budget, funding sources, revenue sources, and operating accounts, I
would like to replace this position with the higher level position of Fiscal Manager. There are
several reasons for this request:
The DPW has six funding sources to manage: 1) General Fund, 2) Water Fund, 3) Sewer
Fund, 4) Solid Waste Fund, 5) Sidewalk Improvement District Funds, and 6) Stormwater
Fund. Most of these funds have special accounting requirements, and are intertwined
within the 62 operating accounts that DPW manages. Other than myself, there is no
single position within the DPW to oversee our entire financial picture.
In addition to the funding sources, the Department has various revenue streams and State
funding sources that need to be accounted for, including revenue from departmental
billings, Golf Course, parking, and CHIPS funding.
Because there is not a single point of contact for financial matters in the Department,
there is a lack of consistency in how each division (Streets and Facilities, Water and
Sewer, Engineering, and Parking)bills work, prepares budgets, tracks budgets and job
costs, and collects cost data for future budget planning.
Currently, Water and Sewer(W&S) has three employees that work on financial issues: 1
Administrative Coordinator and 2 Financial Management Assistants. Streets and Facilities
(S&F) has I Financial Clerk and 1 open Financial Management Assistant. Our current proposal
would move 1 Financial Management Assistant from W&S to cover the open position in S&F.
The Fiscal Manager would then oversee 1 Administrative Coordinator and 1 Financial
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
Page 2
May 20,2015
RE: Fiscal Manager Position for DPW
Management Assistant in W&S, and 1 Financial Management Assistant and 1 Financial Clerk in
S&F. The Fiscal Manager would support the Assistant Superintendents in W&S and S&F, but
report directly to the Superintendent of Public Works.
Funding for the Fiscal Manager fits into the DPW's current budget. Our recently retired
Financial Management Assistant was paid near the top of the pay grade at approximately
$45,000. The entry level salary range for a Fiscal Manager is between$43,000 and$48,000.
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.3 DPW-Request for Funding for Divestiture of Various Portions of Elmira Road Right
of Way
WHEREAS, the right of way along Elmira Road in the City of Ithaca has a very irregular
alignment, and
WHEREAS, the portions of right of way outside of the area required for public street, tree lawn
and sidewalk are currently licensed for use by abutting property owners, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has determined that there is little or no Public Works
need for these portions of right of way, and
WHEREAS, it is in the interest of both the City and the abutting property owners that those
portions of land be conveyed to the abutting owners at a fair market value, and
WHEREAS, the transfer of said pieces of land will require additional legal services,updated
appraisals and updated surveys with an estimated cost of$52,000, and
WHEREAS, the collection of revenue from the transfer of property should exceed the cost of
legal services; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council directs staff to investigate a mechanism for
transferring said portions of right of way to abutting owners at fair market value, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes expenditure not to exceed $52,000 for legal
services, surveys and appraisals in order to conduct such an investigation and conveyance, and
be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2015 Authorized Budget to account for
said revenue and expense related to the divestiture of property as follows:
Increase Revenue Account:
A0001-2660 Sale of Property $52,000
Increase Appropriations Account:
A1440-5435 Engineering Contracts $52,000
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
0�.1THACy CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
y Telephone: 607/274-6530 Fax: 607/274-6587
RA'P�
To: Mayor Svante Myrick
Common Council
From: Tom West, Director of Engineering
Date: February 20, 2015
Re: Divestiture of City-owned lands— Licensed Properties — Elmira Road
In addition to individual parcels of City-owned land that have been determined to be
surplus and sold there are a number of small pieces of land that the city licenses to
individuals and businesses that could also be put back on the tax rolls. Ten such parcels
can be found along Elmira Road.
The City has licensed use of properties and portions of rights of way since the late 1970's
or early 1980's. Over that time various formulas have been used to establish an annual
fee for use, agreements have been written, fees have been disputed, fees have been
collected and fees have been ignored. Although some of these pieces of land may have
some public works use in the future many are artifacts of past land acquisition that have
little value to the City other than as fee generators. Unfortunately the time and effort to
establish and collect fees probably exceeds the income generated. The balance is further
tipped when those properties are recognized as revenue generators by the County
Assessor and they become subject to County property taxes. It hardly makes good
business sense for the City to keep these properties.
Elmira Road —The right of way for Elmira Road was acquired long before the area was
annexed by the City. Acquisition followed existing property lines and resulted in an
irregular right of way line. (Most rights of way are characterized by parallel longitudinal
lines with the street centered between them.) The City has licensed use of the excess
portion of that right of way to various property owners abutting Elmira Road. Recently
adjustments were made to the fee structure to bring fees more in line with actual property
values so it is no longer a bargain for the abutting owners. However, most of the owners
have permanent improvements on the right of way and are unwilling or unable to abandon
the use to avoid the new fee. I propose that the City sell those portions of the right of way
that serve no further public works function.
A good example of such a property is located at 344 Elmira Road—Fat Jack's (formerly
Garcia's) Restaurant. The property owner appealed his 2012 license fee. Based upon
field measurement and the rationale that the driveway should not be considered a
"licensed use"of the right of way it was calculated that the property owner is using
approximately 3000 square feet (sf). The property owner has been assessed a fee of
$3,236.70.- The fee is based upon an appraised-rental value of,$1 A0 per square foot.
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
I recommend that the City sell the portion of the right of way that the property owner is
using to him. The general appraised value of commercial property along Elmira Road is
$10.00 per square foot (refer to appraisal of 334 Elmira Road by Midland Appraisals,
2003). The property owner could be offered approximately 4400 sf abutting his front
property line for a price of$44,000. Cost of a survey would be about$1,000 and there
would be filing fees. The City would realize an additional $500 - 600 per year property tax
without doing any paperwork, mailings, etc. The property is of little use to the City.
The City licenses approximately 10 such bits of right of way along Elmira Road. Perhaps
the most puzzling arrangement is with Wal-Mart which licenses about 100 square feet of
right of way for their large entry sign. The total portion of right of way utilized or
encumbered by Wal-Mart and the other businesses on this property is approximately
14,000 sf. The appraised value of the parcel is $140,000; we collect about $100 per year
from Wal-Mart and nothing from the other businesses. Property tax income from 14,000
sf would generate about $2,000 per year.
Approximate
ADDRESS Business Sq Ft Value
1 $10.00
344 Elmira Rd Fat Jack's Restaurant(Garcia's) 4400 $44,000.00
340 Elmira Rd Burger King 4225 $42,200.00
338 Elmira Rd Monro Muffler 2790 $28,000.00
Jiffy Lube 650 $6,500.00
334 Elmira Rd Vacant 1260 $12,600.00
328 Elmira Rd Arby's 2180 $22,000.00
326 Elmira Rd Wendy's 2350 $23,500.00
324 Elmira Rd Moe's Southwest 4550 $45,500.00
Walmart 9520 $95,200.00
323 Elmira Rd Denny's (Friendly's) 2678 $28,800.00
Total potential value $348,300.00
The first step in the process of divesting of these portions of right of way is for the Board
of Public Works to determine if there is a public works need for these lands. This step
was completed in late 2012. The Board determined that, in most cases, there is no public
works need, and in two cases the public works need can be accommodated via
easement. The Board recommended that the Common Council sell these properties. The
property line changes do not require sub-division; they can be changed by lot line
adjustment which is simpler.
The surveyor shows the reputed owner of the right of way to be Tompkins County. This
determination is based upon the last recorded deeds for the various properties that were
purchased and assembled to create the Elmira Road right of way. The City obtained the
right of way at the time of annexation of the south west portion of the City. The City has
improved and maintained the right of way since that time. Transfer of ownership could be
made via quit claim deed.
There will be some expenses to make these sales possible. The City Attorney has
suggested that the legal work could be most expeditiously accomplished by engaging
outside legal services. Although the baseline survey work has been completed the
surveys will require update. It would also, perhaps, expedite the sale of the parcels if the
City bore the costs of correcting deeds and property surveys for the buyer. There will
also be filing fees associated with the lot line adjustments and land sale. Lastly, it would
be in the interest of all parties for an appraisal to be conducted to establish fair market
value. I recommend that Common Council establish a budget of$52,000 to initiate this
work; we will certainly have a better idea of the cost of completing the land sales as we
identify and solicit the necessary services.
Here is the survey for the frontage of the parcel currently occupied by Fat Jack's
(Garcia's) Restaurant
t j :rerru 7 }` \ �:r raow s:u.erc a semuc r ! 14 ,'�S 1� /
,GARCiA� '
iwa fin. � .•a'mv a sr mx..'�s'�im.sn ra i. � t:� , .• J yyi.7
°'e MUM, yex;, m /. ell
i RESTA URAMT nm'�
wy }aurr.?t•Yj. 1"
i M.aEziARQR•PN29t ,
- VJr N91p'.w.Tw 5cs uew.:awsm a na cnrp+/ :.: 9.
Y TAX,
0K s12 GAGE i ,•1:.:!;` 5.4✓
TA Nnr tsa-r—x 7 �!"4%.
albW
k
;:.. �- 8 s,s:m•..x,wJn' N+p•9p'tt FRS F
.� T .YIFA�t1.70t AtAC! ,, 4
�,
§# ��••.. I r f l lVV 1 ..is -�::=:•s
1 _T4 j.4 _" _--.-+t_._•. y°�-�_.Y"_ a:..,. �^' '' pe�°''Y .. -.__.' ' _ _ - - - :#arw•.•,.
T1F126awslo am TO SURVEY aome=er> sf Ire
:eenwae �L i AYE MAP
ClTP OF I9'H4CA
x wxu.,A as a..s,
T. ➢&M P.C.
a.Ra"wu' BYWAY PARTNSRS�tVP
e•� 0.
wievYon e e 1b.1+1wa...sere awecs 3w aeons LOMM AT N0.3+4 EWIRA RM
+rei tied«xR r.o.:�er. �ww:uor per C"Or RIMC&70YI10N3 COUNT(•NEW YORN
City of Ithaca, NY Area 2014
lit-
Aa
Ol
Ok"
r.. e , 's s ;p a Cam. :}u_-p�5 t•. �' 1
h.
a
c.�
y 1 1 v
+� . 4'^r
VsCly
'1,�'
4/2/2015 1 3,039 443.22 Feet
City of Ithaca, NY Area 2014
lot
��°'1 i b. _„i '.���'_ ?�Z"" y•,��..q• ��� }�y rr7 Y'.._�r,. � ! - �1' �
n
- - tip` � Il,.
''I -.
180
339
.a
I
rf I
•
•. • _
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.4 DPW-Request to Fund Stewart Park Buildings Priority Plan
WHEREAS, the Ithaca community values Stewart Park and its buildings as a unique resource
worthy of preservation and revitalization, and
WHEREAS, a benchmark document summarizing the condition of the various buildings at the
park will prove a useful tool for program planning, fund raising and preservation of the Stewart
Park buildings, and
WHEREAS, the cost for a benchmark document, including material testing is estimated at
$40,000, and
WHEREAS,programming interests of all stakeholders should be considered during the planning
process, and
WHEREAS, the Friends of Stewart Park and the City of Ithaca have collaborated in applying for
funding for a Tourism Capital Grant for assessment of the buildings and program planning at
Stewart Park, and
WHEREAS, the Stewart Park Buildings Priority Plan has been awarded a$20,000 Tourism
Capital Grant, and
WHEREAS, the additional $20,000 needed for the Stewart Park building assessment can be
funded from Capital Reserve#11, Parks, which has a current balance of$108,000; now,
therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes expenditure not to exceed $40,000 for
undertaking a Stewart Park Buildings Priority Plan, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2015 Authorized Budget to account for
the receipt and expense of said tourism Capital Grant as follows:
Increase Revenue Account:
A7111-2705 Parks and Forestry Gifts/Donations $20,000
Increase Appropriations Account:
A7111-5435 Parks and Forestry Contracts $20,000
and,be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the additional $20,000 needed for said
assessment study be derived from Capital Reserve #11, Parks.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.5 Fire—Request to Establish Capital Project for Equipment Acquisition
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Fire Department has applied for and received notice of award of a grant
through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security under the 2014 Assistance to Firefighters
Grant Program in the amount of$455,000, and
WHEREAS, the grant requires the City to contribute a local cost of$41,363, with the Federal
cost share of$413,637, and
WHEREAS, the grant will provide funding to purchase 65 Self Contained Breathing Apparatus
(SCBA) for the Fire Department, and
WHEREAS, the 2015 authorized Fire Department budget included $44,850 for the purchase of
SCBA and will be used for the local grant match; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby establish Capital Project#819 Fire Department
Equipment Acquisition in the amount of$455,000 for the purpose of said SCBA purchase, and
be it further
RESOLVED, That the sources of funds for said Capital Project shall be:
A3410-5225-12250 $41,363
US Department of Homeland Security
Assistance to Fire fighters Grant $413,637
$455,000
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
.....t....,...----.................b...,a a.—_.........a...b.......jur,..a _ aru.0 uv....
U.S.Department of Homeland Security
Washington,D.C.20472
FEMA
Mr. C Thomas Parsons
City of Ithaca Fire Department
108 E Green St
Ithaca, New York 14850-5614
Re: Award No.EMW-2014-FO-04197
Dear Mr. Parsons:
Congratulations, on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security, your application for financial assistance
submitted under the Fiscal Year(FY) 2014 Assistance to Firefighters Grant has been approved in the amount of
$413,637.00. As a condition of this award, you are required to contribute a cost match in the amount of
$41,363.00 of non-Federal funds, or 10 percent of the Federal contribution of$413,637.00.
Before you request and receive any of the Federal funds awarded to you, you must establish acceptance
of the award through the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Programs' a-grant system. By accepting this
award, you acknowledge that the terms of the following documents are incorporated into the terms of your award:
• Summary Award Memo
• Agreement Articles(attached to this Award Letter)
• Obligating Document(attached to this Award Letter)
• FY 2014 Assistance to Firefighters Grant Funding Opportunity Announcement.
Please make sure you read, understand, and maintain a copy of these documents in your official file for this
award.
Prior to requesting Federal funds, all recipients are required to register in the System for Award
Management (SAM.gov). As the recipient, you must register and maintain current information in SAM.gov until
you submit the final financial report required under this award or receive the final payment, whichever is later. This
requires that the recipient review and update the information annually after the initial registration, and more
frequently for changes in your information. There is no charge to register in SAM.gov. Your registration must be
completed on-line at https://www.sam.g_ov/portal/public/SAM/. It is your entity's responsibility to have a valid
DUNS number at the time of registration.
In order to establish acceptance of the award and its terms, please follow these instructions:
Step 1: Please go to https:Hportal.fema.gov to accept or decline your award. This will take you to the Assistance
to Firefighters eGrants system. Enter your User Name and Password as requested on the login screen. Your
User Name and Password are the same as those used to complete the application on-line.
Once you are in the system, the Status page will be the first screen you see. On the right side of the Status
screen, you will see a column entitled Action. In this column, please select the View Award Package from the drop
down menu. Click Go to view your award package and indicate your acceptance or declination of award. PLEASE
NOTE: your period of performance has begun. If you wish to accept your grant, you should do so immediately.
When you have finished, we recommend printing your award package for your records.
Step 2: If you accept your award, you will see a link on the left side of the screen that says "Update 1199K in the
Action column. Click this link. This link will take you to the SF-1199A, Direct Deposit Sign-up Form. Please
complete the SF-1199A on-line if you have not done so already. When you have finished, you must submit the
of23 4/24/2015 11:35 AM
dew Award Package https:Heservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/fire_a.,
Summary Award Memo
SUMMARY OF ASSISTANCE ACTION
ASSISTANCE TO FIREFIGHTERS GRANT PROGRAM
Application
INSTRUMENT: GRANT
AGREEMENT NUMBER: EMW-2014-FO-04197
GRANTEE: City of Ithaca Fire Department
DUNS NUMBER: 075814608
AMOUNT: $455,000.00, Operations and Safety
Project Description
The purpose of the Assistance to Firefighters Program is to protect the health and safety of the
public and firefighting personnel against fire and fire-related hazards.
After careful consideration, FEMA has determined that the recipient's project or projects
submitted as part of the recipient's application, and detailed in the project narrative as well as the
request details section of the application- including budget information -was consistent with the
Assistance to Firefighters Grant program's purpose and worthy of award. The projects approved for
funding are indicated by the budget or negotiation comments below. The recipient shall perform the
work described in the grant application for the recipient's approved project or projects as itemized in
the request details section of the application and further described in the grant application narrative.
The content of the approved portions of the application— along with any documents submitted with the
recipient's application - are incorporated by reference into the terms of the recipient's award. The
recipient may not change or make any material deviations from the approved scope of work outlined in
the above referenced sections of the application without prior written approval, via amendment request,
from FEMA.
Period of Performance
15-APR-15 to 14-APR-16
Amount Awarded
The amount of the award is detailed in the attached Obligating Document for Award. The
following are the budgeted estimates for object classes for this grant (including Federal share plus
recipient match):
Personnel: $0.00
Fringe Benefits $0.00
Travel $0.00
Equipment $455,000.00
Supplies $0.00
Contractual $0.00
Construction $0.00
Other $0.00
Indirect Charges $0.00
Df23 4/940015 AM
spinre_actnurvaw...
hard Package https://eservices.tema.gov/1-emarirecnanvtiregranvj
State Taxes $0.00
Total $455,000.00
NEGOTIATION COMMENTS IF APPLICABLE (max 4000 characters)
The Program Office has made the following reductions to your grant:
The approved cost for SCBA is $7,000,not $7,191.
Therefore, they have recommended the award at this level:
Total budget$455,000
Federal share $413,637
Applicant share $41,363
Any questions pertaining to your award package, please contact your GPD Grants Management
Specialist: Nancy Cannon at Nancy.Cannon@dhs.gov.
FEMA Officials
Program Officer: The Program Specialist is responsible for the technical monitoring of the stages of
work and technical performance of the activities described in the approved grant application. If you
have any programmatic questions regarding your grant, please call the AFG Help Desk at 866-274-0960
to be directed to a program specialist.
Grants Assistance Officer: The Assistance Officer is the Federal official responsible for
negotiating, administering, and executing all grant business matters. The Officer conducts the final
business review of all grant awards and permits the obligation of federal funds. If you have any
questions regarding your grant please call ASK-GMD at 866-927-5646 to be directed to a Grants
Management Specialist.
Grants Operations POC: The Grants Management Specialist shall be contacted to address all
financial and administrative grant business matters for this grant award. If you have any questions
regarding your grant please call ASK-GMD at 866-927-5646 to be directed to a specialist.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS (IF APPLICABLE) (max 4000 characters)
The Program Office has made the following reductions to your grant:
The approved cost for SCBA is $7,000,not $7,191.
Therefore, they have recommended the award at this level:
Total budget $455,000
Federal share $413,637
Applicant share $41,363
Any questions pertaining to your award package, please contact your GPD Grants Management
Specialist:Nancy Cannon at Nancy.Cannon@dhs.gov.
of23 4/24/2015 11:35 AM
new Awara racxage littps://eservices.lema.gov/Pemal ire(_wantrtiregranVjsp/tire_adnun/aw...
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
OBLIGATING DOCUMENT FOR AWARD/AMENDMENT
1 a.AGREEMENT NO. 2.AMENDMENT 3.RECIPIENT NO. 4.TYPE OF 5.CONTROL NO.
EMW-2014-FO-04197 NO. 15-6000407 ACTION W494333N
0 AWARD
6.RECIPIENT NAME AND 7.ISSUING OFFICE AND ADDRESS 8.PAYMENT OFFICE AND ADDRESS
ADDRESS Grant Programs Directorate FEMA,Financial Services Branch
City of Ithaca Fire 500 C Street,S.W. 500 C Street,S.W.,Room 723
Department Washington DC,20528-7000 Washington DC,20472
310 W Green St POC:Rosalie Vega
Ithaca
New York,14850-5424
9.NAME OF RECIPIENT PHONE NO. 10.NAME OF PROJECT COORDINATOR PHONE NO.
PROJECTOFFICER 6072721234 Catherine Patterson 1-866-274-0960
C Thomas Parsons
11.EFFECTIVE DATE OF 12.METHOD OF 13.ASSISTANCE ARRANGEMENT 14.PERFORMANCE PERIOD
THIS ACTION PAYMENT Cost Sharing From:15-APR-15 To:14-APR-16
15-APR-15 S F-270
Budget Period
From:23-JAN-15 To:30-SEP-15
15.DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
a.(Indicate funding data for awards or financial changes)
PROGRAM CFDA NO. ACCOUNTING DATA PRIOR AMOUNT CURRENT CUMMULATIVE
NAME (ACCS CODE) TOTAL AWARDED THIS TOTAL
ACRONYM xxxx-xxx-xxxxxx- AWARD ACTION AWARD NON-
xxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-x +OR(-) FEDERAL
COMMITMENT
AFG 97.044 2015-F4- $0.00 $413,637.00 $413,637.00 $41,363.00
C111-P4310000-4101-D
TOTALS $0.00 $413,637.00 $413,637.00 $41,363.00
b.To describe changes other than funding data or financial changes,attach schedule and check here.
N/A
16a.FOR NON-DISASTER PROGRAMS:RECIPIENT IS REQUIRED TO SIGN AND RETURN THREE(3)COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT TO
FEMA(See Block 7 for address)
Assistance to Firefighters Grant recipients are not required to sign and return copies of this document.However,recipients should print and keep
a copy of this document for their records.
16b.FOR DISASTER PROGRAMS:RECIPIENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO SIGN
This assistance is subject to terms and conditions attached to this award notice or by incorporated reference in program legislation cited above.
17.RECIPIENT SIGNATORY OFFICIAL(Name and Title) DATE
N/A N/A
18.FEMA SIGNATORY OFFICIAL(Name and Title) DATE
Rosalie Vega 07-APR-15
Go Back,
of23 4/24/2015 11:35 AM
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.6 Fire—Request to Amend 2015 Budget for Donation
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Fire Department has received an anonymous donation in the amount of
$24,000 to be used by the department to purchase a Fire Suppression Skid Unit, and
WHEREAS, this firefighting vehicle will be used in various aspects of the department's
operations and has an estimated cost of$27,000, and
WHEREAS, the additional funds needed of$3,000 will be derived from existing equipment
funds in the Fire Department's 2015 authorized operating accounts; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby accepts the $24,000 anonymous donation and
amends the 2015 authorized Fire Department budget for the purchase of said Firefighting vehicle
as follows:
Increase Revenue Account:
A3410-2705 Gifts and Donations $24,000
Increase Appropriation Account:
A3410-5225-12250 Other Equipment $24,000
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the additional $3,000 needed to purchase the Firefighting vehicle shall be
derived from existing equipment funds in the Fire Department's 2015 authorized budget, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby gives a heartfelt Thank You to the anonymous
donor for the funds.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
4� CITY OF ITHACA
G et 310 West Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850-5497
OFFICE OF THE FIRE CHIEF
Telephone: 6071272-1234 Fax: 607/272-2793
Proposal to Amend the Fire Department Budget:
The Ithaca Fire Department is need of a new Fire Suppression Skid Unit, which will replace the
portable pump and tank skid unit that members of the department built about 15 years ago. The
skid unit is carried inside the body of a four-wheel drive pickup truck. It is used seasonally for
grass, brush and forest fires, as well as fires that occur in remote locations not accessible by a
larger fire truck. The fire pump used with the current unit is in need of replacement. Also,the
water tank used with the current unit is a non-baffled and was not designed to carry water in a
mobile application. The unbaffled tank causes the vehicle, which carries the unit, more difficult
to drive because of the water movement inside the tank. The department was notified that it will
be receiving a private grant in the amount of$24,000. The amount received by the grant in
combination with$3000 of reallocated funds from A3410 5225 account will allow the
department to purchase a new skid unit in the amount of$27,000.
Increase the A3410 5225 program account by$24,000, and increase the revenue account A3410
2705 Gifts and Donations by$24,000.
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.7 Attorney-Request for Permanent Easement for 327 Eddy Street Proposed
Encroachment
WHEREAS, Steve Fontana, as representative of the owner of 327 Eddy Street(Tax Map Parcel
No. 63.-6-24, Stephen A Fontana Trust owner of record, hereinafter"Applicant"), has requested
an encroachment agreement/license from the City into the adjacent Eddy Street right-of-way, and
WHEREAS, applicant requests an easement to permit the following encroachment into the
City's right of way:
An encroachment extending into the City-owned airspace from the fifth floor
of the building located on 327 Eddy Street two feet to the west and extending
twelve feet running north and south, parallel to the building face; and
WHEREAS, City Code Section 170-5 vests Common Council with the authority to convey a
permanent easement across City property, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board has, as part of the site plan review process, expressed its desire
that the applicant include the architectural feature that will be enabled by this easement; and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed encroachment into the City's airspace will not interfere
with the right of way as currently constituted, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works does not anticipate any conflicts in the future
with public works uses or needs and Board of Public Works by resolution on May 11, 2015,
recommended that Common Council authorize granting this easement under the terms described
in this resolution; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the fee for this permanent easement shall be $3,073.84,based on the
Pomeroy appraisal value of$75.77 for one year of use at the current appraisal rate in
Collegetown of$2.87 per square foot, calculated out for a thirty year depreciation period and 2%
rate of inflation, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor, in consultation with the City Attorney, and upon payment of the
fee set forth in this resolution, is hereby authorized to execute all necessary documents to grant
the easement requested by applicant and described above.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
SIT CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street Ithaca New York 14850-5690
a a OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
° Aaron O. Lavine, City Attorney Telephone: 607/274-6504
emoo�e Robert A. Sarachan, Assistant City Attorney Fax: 607/274-6507
AT Krin Flaherty, Assistant City Attorney
Jared Pittman, Assistant City Attorney
Jody Andrew, Executive Assistant
MEMORANDUM
To: City Administration Committee
From: City Attorney's Office
Date: May 1, 2015
Subject: Request for permanent easement into Eddy Street right of way
Steve Fontana, as representative of the owner of the property located at 327 Eddy Street, has
requested a permanent easement into the City's air space over the Eddy Street right of way. Mr.
Fontana proposes constructing a five story building with a portion bumped-out from the building
face on the fifth floor, 24 square feet of such bumped-out portion would be within the City's air
space.
A depiction of the fifth floor lay out, and where it encroaches over City air space is attached with
this memo and the proposed resolution.
Public Works staff and the Board of Public Works have concluded that this proposal would not
impede the City's use or planned use of its right of way.
The fee proposed in this resolution, $3,073.84, is based on the Pomeroy appraisal values for
Collegetown square footage, which the City uses to assess annual license fees. In collaboration
with the Office of the City Controller, we estimated a future value of license payments calculated
out for 30 years, the standard depreciation period used by the City for buildings under State
Finance Law. To factor in the yearly adjustments the City makes for consumer price index
increases on a yearly license fee, we assumed a two percent rate of inflation.
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
- r,
� m
1m
o r
' D
CA
O O w
0 2'-11" 11'-11" 12'-3"
z
IV
D
N ca W cn Z7
I' C�' m
w w D
_ 2'-0"
N o 03 �� �CD T
W
cfl T W --�- E 21
OIOI� ��IOIO
IL _J
m I
Ln -- --
N
n
O
J L
^m^
zOI O
OI O
N D O
to
.. z _- T � N
O
Cn �J
0
z m
D
z
D 2'-11"
w m
N W
m c
(n N
m o
m 1 GD
i cn
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.8 Authorization of a New Master Agreement for the Cayuga Waterfront Trail—Phase 2
WHEREAS, a Project for the CAYUGA WATERFRONT TRAIL—PHASE 2, P.I.N. 395047
(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, on June 13, 2001, Common Council authorized and established Capital Project
#445 (then entitled Cass Park Waterfront Trail) in the amount of$425,000, to design and
construct Phase 1 of the Cayuga Waterfront Trail (Phase 1 being a two-mile loop in Cass Park,
which has now been completed), and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2003, Common Council approved the funding of Phase 2 of the Cayuga
Waterfront Trail, then known as PIN 395024, (which would connect Cass Park to the Farmers
Market) from the same Capital Project as Phase 1, authorized the addition of$677,724 to Capital
Project#445, for the costs of design, right-of-way acquisition and construction of Phase 2, and
authorized the Mayor to execute all necessary agreements or requests for federal funds for Phase
2 (through the Transportation Enhancement Program) and to provide for the administration of
Phase 2 and the funding of the local share, and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2004, environmental review of the proposed design for Phase 2
of the Trail was completed,by the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, the
designated lead agency for such review, and site plan approval for Phase 2 was granted, and
WHEREAS, on May 3, 2006, Common Council amended Capital Project#445,by adding
$50,000 for a feasibility study of Phase 3 of the Cayuga Waterfront Trail (from the Farmers
Market to Stewart Park and the Visitors Center), half of which amount was to be derived from a
New York State Environmental Protection Fund grant, and $10,000 of which amount was to be
derived from non-City funds to be raised by the Cayuga Trails Initiative, and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2006, Common Council re-approved Phase 2 of the Trail, added
$480,000 to Capital Project#445, and authorized the Mayor to execute all necessary agreements
or requests for federal funds for the project(through a SAFETEA-LU member item) and to
provide for its administration and the funding of the local share (with the understanding that the
apportionment of the costs for this portion of the project would be roughly 80% federal and 20%
local), and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2007, Common Council again approved the Project, now including
Phase 3, subject to environmental review (of that phase), added $720,000 to Capital Project#445
to cover the combined cost of the three phases, and authorized the Mayor to execute all
necessary agreements or requests for federal funds for the project and to provide for its
administration and the funding of the local share (with the understanding that the apportionment
of the costs for this portion of the project will be roughly 80% federal and 20% local), and
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
WHEREAS, as part of the 2007 project agreement, the New York State Department of
Transportation combined Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the trail into one Project Agreement (PIN
395024) for administrative purposes, and
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2009, Common Council passed a resolution approving a Supplemental
Agreement for the Trail, amending the administration and management of the project so that the
New York State Department of Transportation would be responsible for the Right-of-Way
acquisition for Phase 2 of the Cayuga Waterfront Trail, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Planning& Development Board, acting as lead agent for
environmental review of Phase 3 of the Trail, voted on July 28, 2009,to determine that Phase 3
of the project would have no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative
Declaration be filed in accordance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the
City's Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, as part of the 2010 City Capital Budget, Common Council approved additional
funding for Capital Project#445 in the amount of$215,000, with the intent that it would be a
match for additional federal funding being sought at that time, and
WHEREAS, in the summer of 2010, Phase 3 of the trail was constructed by contract, and
WHEREAS, on October 6, 2010, Common Council passed a resolution approving a
Supplemental Agreement for the Project, added$857,000 to Capital Project#445, to be matched
by funds in the 2010 approved Capital Budget, with the understanding that 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, on March 6, 2012, at the request of the New York State Department of
Transportation, and through an action of the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council,
Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the Project were separated into two projects again for administrative
purposes, specifically to address administration of Right of Way Acquisition; at that meeting
Phase 3 was given PIN 395024 and a new PIN was created for Phase 2, PIN 395047, and
WHEREAS, as part of the 2014 City Capital Budget, Common Council approved additional
funding for Capital Project#445 in the amount of$300,000, but did not authorize funding in the
first instance for the federal share of funding approved at the Ithaca-Tompkins County
Transportation Council on June 18, 2013 in the amount of$752,400 and
WHEREAS, in 2015, the New York State Department of Transportation provided two new
Master Agreements for the Project for the City to review and approve: one agreement for the
final design, construction and construction inspection of Phase 2, D034161, with a total
authorization of$2,487,524; and one agreement for the Right-of-Way Incidentals and
Acquisition of Phase 2, , D034163, with a total authorization of$510,500 (with the
understanding that the apportionment of the costs for these portions of the project would be 80%
federal and 20% local), and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca desires to be reimbursed for the federal share of the remaining
phase of the Cayuga Waterfront Trail project (i.e., Phase 2); now, therefore,be it
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby re-approves of the above-subject Project, and
be it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby re-authorizes the City of Ithaca to pay in the
first instance 100% of the federal and non-federal share of the cost of Design, Right-of-Way,
Construction, Construction Inspection and Supervision work for the Project or portions thereof,
and it is further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends Capital Project#445, Cayuga Waterfront
Trail (formerly known as Cass Park trail) in the amount of$752,400, with the understanding that
this represents a portion of the federal share and will be fully reimbursed to the City, for a total
project cost of$4,385,956.37, which represents Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 of the three-phase
project, and it is further
RESOLVED, That the sum of$752,400 is hereby appropriated from the issuance of serial
bonds, for a total authorization of$4,385,956.37, and made available to cover the cost of
participation in the above phase of the Project, and it is further
RESOLVED, That as noted in the abovementioned authorizations, the total project authorization
is $4,385,956.37, and shall be made available to cover the cost of participation in the above
phases of the Project, and it is 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 it is further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City of Ithaca, upon consultation with the City Attorney
and other involved staff, be and is hereby authorized to execute new Master Agreements for the
Cayuga Waterfront Trail—Phase 2, including one for Design, Construction and Construction
Inspection; and one for Right of Way Incidentals and Acquisitions, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be and is hereby authorized to execute all other necessary
agreements, 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 Phase 2 or Phase 3 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-eligible Project costs and all other Project
costs within the appropriations therefore that are not so eligible, and be it further
RESOLVED, That except as explicitly amended in this resolution, Common Council's previous
resolutions concerning the Project, as referenced above, still remain in full force and effect, and
be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized and directed to file a certified
copy of this resolution with the New York State Commissioner of Transportation, by attaching it
to any necessary, agreements in connection with the Project, and be it further
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
RESOLVED, That this resolution shall take effect immediately.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Suite 202 Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
ii gig @ i 3
! OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
•��''w Telephone: 607/274-6530 Fax: 607/274-6587
ga�itFv
To: City Administration Committee
From: Tim Logue,City Transportation Engineer-''' L
Date: May 15, 2015
Re: Cayuga Waterfront Trail- Phase 2
The New York State Department of Transportation recently sent me all new
master agreements for the Cayuga Waterfront Trail- Phase 2 project. This project
has a long and complicated history, and I believe they are trying to clean up the
agreements and funding. In reviewing the agreements, I went back to clarify
whether Common Council has authorized all the funding required for the trail. It
seems that this has not happened.
In June 2013, the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council amended its
Transportation Improvement Program to make available additional federal
funding in the amount of$752,400. It seems that though the 2014 Capital Budget
included the matching local share of$300,000,Common Council never
authorized in the first instance the addition to the federal share of the project.
The enclosed resolution both recounts the history of the project authorizations to
clarify the funding,but it also includes an authorization of funding in the first
instance for the $752,400 addition to the federal share of the project. This amount
will be fully reimbursable to the City. Therefore,this resolution does not
authorize any new or additional City funding for the project. The required match
to this federal funding was already authorized as part of the 2014 Final Budget.
As you probably know,the trail is under construction at this time. Though the
contract allows for construction until October 1st,the contractor's schedule calls
for completion mid-August.
If you have any questions,you can reach me at 274-6535 or
TLogue@cityofithaca.org.
)1n Equal opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." C�
3. Finance, Budget, and Appropriations
3.9 Mayor's Office—Request to Approve Funding Match for TIGER VII (Transportation
Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Grant Application
WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation(USDOT) has announced the
availability of 500 million dollars in the Transportation Investment Generating Economic
Recovery(TIGER) 2015 Discretionary Grants (TIGER FY 2015)program, which notice was
published in the Federal Register on April 03, 2015, and WHEREAS, in 2012, City staff
identified the Intermodal Transportation Hub - Accelerating Community Access (ITH-ACA)
project, which included a complete reconstruction of the Ithaca Commons as the major
intermodal transportation hub in the area, and
WHEREAS, in 2012 the City applied for and was successful in obtaining a Federal Transit
Agency State of Good Repair grant, in the amount of 4.5 million dollars, and a New York State
Empire State Development Grant in the amount of 1.8 million dollars, to begin Phase 1 of the
ITH-ACA project, and WHEREAS, the City is currently undertaking Phase I Commons
reconstruction, and is continuing to develop plans for subsequent phases of the ITH-ACA project
in order to enhance the transit network, improve interconnectivity between the downtown transit
hub and Cornell, the region's major educational and employment center, as well as facilitate
economic development, improve public transit reliability, and make transportation more
accessible for all economic classes, and
WHEREAS, the City is interested in applying for a TIGER FY 2015 grant in order to obtain
funding for the second phase of the ITH-ACA project, and
WHEREAS, City Planning and Engineering staff are preparing an application that will include,
but not be limited to, the following components:
• Upgrades to the public transit network that include intelligent transportation system
(ITS)upgrades which would allow for remote real-time transit information, and
• A complete reconstruction of College Avenue and Cayuga Street, including, wider
sidewalks, enhanced opportunities for outdoor commerce, and safer transit routes that
reduce conflicts of parked vehicles and bus and vehicular traffic, and
• Enhancements to the Transit Network, including new bus shelters at the Albany Street
and State Street Stations, queue jumping, signal preemption, upgrades to buses, and
signals that allow for more reliable bus route times, and
• A complete reconstruction of the major transit routes along the Stewart Avenue
Corridor and Albany Street.
WHEREAS, the Phase 11 components of the ITH-ACA project are expected to represent a large
investment in the transportation system that will help maintain a state of good repair for major
transit routes, enhance pedestrian networks, increase livability and sustainability, encourage and
support economic growth and activity, and improve and enhance connectivity between
downtown and Cornell University, and
WHEREAS, State of New York and City of Ithaca environmental quality review laws and
regulations define as "Type II" (i.e., exempt from environmental review) actions that involve
"conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and other studies and
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the formulation of a proposal for
action,provided those activities do not commit the agency to commence, engage in or approve
such action"; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That, as a preliminary step intended to determine the economic feasibility of
transportation improvements, including those listed above, the Mayor of the City of Ithaca, or his
designee, is hereby authorized to submit a TIGER FY 2015 application for funding to the United
States Department of Transportation in accordance with the provisions of the Notice of Funds
Available, and be it further
RESOLVED, That, upon approval of such request, the City shall conduct environmental review
as required, for the projects proposed to be undertaken pursuant to the TIGER FY 2015 grant,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That,upon approval of said TIGER FY 2015 grant to the City, or any portion
thereof, and upon completion of all necessary environmental review of the components of said
project and approval of the same by Common Council, the Mayor, or his designee, is hereby
authorized to enter into and execute a project agreement with the USDOT, or its designee, for the
construction, and construction inspection of the TIGER FY 2015 application as submitted by the
Mayor, approved by the USDOT, and as approved and/or modified by environmental review and
any other applicable City of Ithaca review process, and be it further,
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby confirms its intention to commit funds in an
amount not to exceed$2,500,000 (to be derived from serial bonds), contingent upon an award of
funds from the TIGER FY 2015 program and completion of environmental review.
J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2015\5-20-Agenda.docx 5/20/15
October 2015
October 2015
- . Thu Fri Sat
7 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Budget meeting (8) for 7pm
7pm (10)
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Budget meeting
7pm (9)
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Budget meeting City Admin Budget meeting
7pm (9) meeting 7pm (10)
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Budget meeting Budget meeting Budget meeting
7pm (10) 7pm (10) 7pm (10)
November 2015
November 2015
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Budget meeting
7pm (9)
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 Notes: