HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2013-03-11^ Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board
Monday, March 11,2013 at 5:30 p.m.
215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850
Agenda
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2. Report of Tompkins County Legislature
3. Report of Ithaca Common Council
4. Persons to be Heard and Board Comments
5. 5:45 p.m. Public Hearing Regarding Draft Local Law 3 of 2013 Adding Chapter 57
of the Town of Ithaca Code Entitled "Procurement" to Authorize the Use of the "Best
Value Procurement Standard"
a. Consider Adoption
6. Discuss and Consider Setting a Public Hearing Regarding a Request from Ithaca Beer
for a Waiver or Reduction in Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Fee
7. Consider Setting a Public Hearing for the Coddington Road Water Main Replacementn
-I
f i Water Improvement Public Interest Order
r
8. Discuss and Consider Authorization to Award Contracts for the Rebuilding of the
Septage Receiving Facility at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility
9. Consider Approval of Bond Resolutions for:
a. Danby Rd/King Rd W Water Main Water Improvement
b. Public Works Salt Storage Building
c. Public Works Road Projects - Whitetail Dr.
d. Forest Home Dr. at Flat Rock
10. Discuss and Consider Approval of the Revised Joint Youth Commission's Bylaws
11. Discuss and Consider Resolution of Support for a Petition to the NYS Governor and
State Representatives Regarding Actions Related to the Local Government Records
Management Improvement Fund
12. Discuss and Consider a Resolution of Support for the S.A.F.E Act
13. Discuss and Consider Approval and Authorization for the Supervisor to Sign the
Contract for General Code's Municity'''^ Integrated Parcel Management Software
14. Discuss and Consider Appointments for the County Assessment Review Board
I
15. Begin Review of a Preliminary Draft Scoping Document for the Draft ( ^
Comprehensive Plan
16. Review Chapter 1: Introduction and Community Vision Statement of the Draft
Comprehensive Plan
17. Consider Approval of the Revised Grant from the Tompkins County Development
Focus Area Fund
18. Consider Consent Agenda Items
a. Approval of Town Board Minutes of February 25, 2013
b. Approval of Town of Ithaca Abstract
c. Approval of Bolton Point Abstract
d. Appointment of Director of Planning - Ritter
e. Appointment of Senior Planner - Tasman
f. Appointment of Senior Planner - Smith
g. Appointment of Sustainability Planner - Goldsmith
h. SCLIWC - Appointment of Administrative Assistant III - Hughs
i. SCLIWC - Appointment of Water Maintenance Specialist - Trinun
19. Report of Town Officials
20. Reportof Town Committees i \
21. Intermunicipal Organizations
22. Review of Correspondence
23. Consider Adj oumment
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Paulette Terwilliger, being duly sworn, say that 1 am the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of
the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official
newspaper, Ithaca Journal:
□ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Proposed Local Law adding Chapter 57 to the Town of Ithaca
Code entitled "Procurement" to authorize the use of the "Best
Value Procurement Standard"
Location of Sign Board Used for Posting:
Town Clerk's Office
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Date of Posting: 3/6/2013
Date of tion: 3/6/2013
Paulette Terwilliger
Town Clerk
STATE OF NEW YORK)
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS:
TOWN OF ITHACA)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
^ .2013.
day of
Not^ Public
r
Debra DeAugistine
Notary Public - State of New York
NO.01DE6148035Qualified in Tompkins County jiJMy Commission Expires June 19,20 '(
V.Town of tthaca
Public Hsaring
r Notice Is hereby given thatf the llhBca Town Board wtt
hold a Public Hearing for
citizen comments at their|r Match 11, 2013 meeting
" beginning at Si45 p.m. re-2 garding a proposed local
. law adding Chapter 57 to
' the Town ol Ithaca Code
, entitled "Procurement" to
authoiire the use ol the
Best Value Procurement^ Standard. Information
the proposed law Is availa-
2' We at the Town Clerk's of-
' nee during normal working
hours or at
www.town.lthaca.ny.us
Pauielle Terwilliger
Town Clerk
3/6/20t3
TOWN OF ITHACA
TOWN BOARD
SI6N-IN SHEET
DATE: March 11. 2013
(PLEASEPRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE /%rA/rADDRESS/AFFILIATION
T-
Sun l^L M-
^6H/0 ^ R6(^A/<<z,
<L (L< ' Pkc LLl! ^12 Lac f^gccyiL-i-x n £ji , P<S(/
yO/ngJlL Lit / ///
HTqcVv
f)A.O ^^M-IToLC)
\)L\ kaI^iA
Hn i4>a KAr- r'A.v-j-fi
<^t.L<r4- n^C(kr^^^
Qq SViu-A.-Va J^e. l,V,io[:i^y,
7J
(ArifgWT0g^
SVvo-AA'n L^^coPk'y F4-S6>°f
Kg git)'-MtJM>'XTtos -'"
UlOf^Hiu Pb u
// f( /, // n//7 h/^(f^/He i<^^h
CqC v\-v-
lAA/\iby / i\^ ^Ix. S iNQOAA -7-7 a/HA.
5^"AxwcWU 1^
TOWN OF ITHACA
TOWN BOARD
SlfiN-IN SHEET
DATE: March 11, 2013
(PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME
no \kT
PLEASE /%rA/r ADDRESS/AFFILIATION
lft'avt:5Vv
^ >'Ly f O
ffoM^ 4{Df/(\l l^cH^ t(A^J)Ja( MY
Sl
^ Ccrtipr^ / / Hi
,.j^r4 gh
Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 5:30 p.m.
215 North Tioga Street,Ithaca, NY 14850
Minutes
Board Members Present: Herb Engman, Supervisor; Bill Goodman, Deputy Town Supervisor;
Pat Leary, Tee-Ann Hunter, Eric Levine, Rich DePaolo, and Rod Howe
Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning, Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement;
Mike Solvig, Director of Finance, Judy Drake, Director of Human Resources; Paulette
Terwilliger, Town Clerk and Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town
Agenda Item 1 —Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Mr. Engman called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. and lead the assemblage in the pledge.
Agenda Item 2—Report of Tompkins County Legislature—None
Agenda Item 3—Report of Ithaca Common Council—None
Agenda Item 3—Persons to be Heard and Board Comments
Mr. Engman explained that this is the portion of the meeting where the public can address the
Board on any topic and due to the number of people present, asked that comments be kept to 3
minutes and he reminded people that they can give their names and addresses if they would like,
but they are not required to do so.
Pat Dutt (Attachment 1) Prepared statement: Summary—After reading parts of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Minority Report she believes the Minority Report is a little bit more
straightforward in addressing the Town's and particular West Hill's problems with traffic,
housing, food security and general sustainability. She believes the development model that has
been used on West Hill for the past 10 years or so has definitely not worked.
She also asked how the GEIS for the Comp Plan will work and how citizens can get involved
especially with an opportunity for back-and-forth dialogue.
John Littlefield Mr. Littlefield noted that a lot of people were probably here to speak about
the SAFE Act agenda item stating he felt that as a whole it was rushed through the Assembly and
the State Senate, it was passed in the middle of the night; it was printed(60-80pgs) and a vote
forced 45 minutes later which obviously did not leave a lot of time for debate or the people
voting for the law to decide if it would make a difference or not. Consequently the law has been
passed and both the Sheriff s Association and the County Clerks Association have spoken out in
opposition stating that this was not going to help anyone at all. It will hinder law-abiding citizens
in their right to own firearms and the types of firearms that they can own.
He went on to say that the fact of the matter for him is that New York State and Tompkins
County are already very strict. A pistol permit takes 6 months minimum; you have to get
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 11
signatures, go through a background check and all sorts of things and maybe you get your
handgun permit in 6 months. But, it doesn't stop there, then if you want to buy one you have to
bring the receipt to the sheriffs office and then a judge has to authorize your purchase. For rifles
there are background checks etc in place and we have enough laws on the books already. He felt
the problem was they are not being utilized to the full extent that they can be. He thought it
would be much more beneficial for the State as a whole and our County and our Town if these
laws on the books were utilized to the fullest extent that they could be and if that still fails, and
there are still people running around committing crime with guns, then we should add more laws.
He thought it was very troubling that people are voting for it and sponsoring it that who admit
they have never read the law and seem proud of the fact that they have voted on something they
have not read. We vote for them and they are supposed to be voting for us and they are voting
on laws, this one and probably others, that they haven't even read.
Martin Kelley Mr. Kelly felt that the SAFE Act was a good intentioned legislation that
will be a feel good thing for many but with zero effect on fighting crime in New York State and
it will cost local governments more money. The mental health portion it will require County
staff to review recommendations from mental health professionals and then forward them to the
State and it puts local government between the state and the health care system and it is an
unfunded mandate. It also creates a liability for the local governments and if they want to enact
this law they should take the responsibility. He also felt that it was passed illegally as an
emergency legislation and he felt that was an abuse of his power and he does not believe it will
stand but he strongly urged this board not to pass a resolution in support of it.
John O'Rourke,Newfield Mr. O'Rourke asked the Board if anyone had seen or reviewed the
law and Mr. Engman responded that the purpose of this is to get information from the public but
that the Board does not respond to inquiries from the audience.
Mr. O'Rourke noted that this law was passed un-sustained and we have now learned that this
will cost New York State $36 million to sustain this bill and what part of that percentage is
Tompkins County or we as taxpayers going to have to pay. He added that he is on
unemployment now and when he called last weekend, he was notified that extended benefits
will be cut by 10%. This is an attack on New York State gun oweners and we are being asked to
pay for it.
He stated that there are two bills in the Assembly right now, A03908 sponsored by
Assemblyman Ortiz and 503853, sponsored by Senator Parker which says that this bill if passed
would amend the gun law to require gun owners "to obtain and maintain liability insurance in the
amount of$1M specifically covering any damages resulting from any neglect or willful acts
involving the use of such firearms while it is owned by such persons. Failure to maintain such
insurance shall result in the immediate revocation of such owners' registration, license and other
privileges to own such firearms." He noted that the governor already amended the law to exempt
the movie industry to use the same guns he has banned.
Mr. O'Rourke talked about his father's service to the United States and to go along with this bill
and support New York City and asked How can we call ourselves American.... It is wrong and it
should be repealed.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 12
Ian Bishop Mr. Bishop thanked the Board for the opportunity to have input. He was against
the resolution and agreed with the previous speakers regarding the passage of the law without
input and in"emergency legislation" even though the most restrictive parts of the law do not take
affect for over a year so he couldn't understand the sense of urgency.
He went on to say that there are 100+manufacturers of law enforcement types of firearms and
other types of firearms who have pledged not to do business with New York State or any
government entity doing business with New York State.
He went on to say that a lot of people think it is just about guns,but its not, it's about control of
peoples' potential behavior. The New York State Sheriff's Association has come out against the
law. The trivial rules that they put in place to make certain firearms illegal do not reduce the
lethalness of these firearms. The so-called assault weapon are cosmetic in many ways and do not
change the ability of the gun from the rifle you can buy at Dick's right now that is not covered by
this SAFE Act. He encouraged the Board to think about what it would actually do to keep your
children safe, to keep him safe in his home, to keep you safe walking down the road because we
all know, criminals do not obey laws.
Logan Bell Mr. Bell stated that board members are public officials and just like all the
veterans in the room, swore an oath to the Constitution and believes that if the board is going to
vote on this resolution that they should completely understand it and so if you haven't read it or
sat down and talked with Sherriff Ken Lansing and other firearms experts, then you have no
business passing a resolution to support it if your job is to represent your constituents. He noted
that it is on the agenda and hopes all the elected officials have taken the time to understand what
they are voting on.
Un-named gentleman Noted that he is a loyal democrat and has been a resident of
Tompkins County for over 25 years; raised 4 adopted children and his wife founded Love Knows
No Bounds, which is a relief organization to aid the people of New Orleans so he felt he could
not be accused of not being a compassionate person. He stands in staunch opposition to any
proposal that supports the SAFE Act for all the reasons mentioned by the other speakers and
urged everyone to know what they are voting on. He added that if you look at the FBI statistics
it is not going to bring the results they are hoping for by passing this bill.
Un-named lady I do not own a gun and I was brought up to fear guns and I spent the last
year educating myself on guns and I wish I knew more. There was a time when firearm safety
was taught in school; gun racks were in the back windows of trucks in the school parking lot.
She stated that she doesn't understand the law but she is trying. She said she works in a law
office and she sees what criminals do with guns, but it seems this law is taking the rights away
from law-abiding citizens. She added that the criminals are so different now and the drugs are so
different now. She wished she would have been brought up around guns and didn't fear them.
She wished she had more knowledge. She said that she went to a woman's online forum and
they ask the question"Could you take another persons' life,because if you can't, someone could
take that gun from you and take yours." She said that she could not get past that questions so
maybe gun ownership is not right for her, but it is for these other people here tonight and she said
that she hoped that if she was am ever in a dangerous situation she would have one of them
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 13
around to protect her. She did not believe it was anyone's right to take away their god-given
right to protect themselves.
Dan Bechtal Mr. Bechtal stated that he is a policeman by trade but was addressing the
board as an American and a dad. The governor wants to make an amendment for law
enforcement because we need what we have, but so does everyone else. Just because he is a
policeman, he does not believe that should give him any more or less rights than anyone else.
He went on to say that as someone who has responded to several things in progress, they are too
late. He has had to look people in the face and know they were too late; people who expected
them to protect them. He said we train for it, my heart is in the right place, but we are too late
and we have to look at these people who know we were too late. These people need the
opportunity to defend themselves and 7, 8, 9, 10 rounds... it doesn't matter; restricting the
rounds won't do anything.
Mr. Bechtal was very concerned that this is a slippery slope. Restricting the clip is not going to
do anything. In `94 they restricted it to 10; now they want to go down to 7; in another 10 years is
it going to be 3? He said the government says they are not taking away our rights, but what is his
son going to have? He asked that the Board take the time to educate themselves before voting
and make a decision based on knowledge.
Un-named gentleman.
We are all individuals and we are all different. If you had a daughter at university like in
Colorado just recently where a young girl was snatched and tied to a tree and raped for hours,
what if she had had a gun.... Things might have been different. Maybe not, but what gives us
the right to say we can't allow you to have a gun. He said that is exactly what happened when
she went before the University Board and a Republican and a Democrat said thank you for your
story, but we have to think of the feelings of our staff and our students so we can't give you that
right to carry a gun. He said if that was his daughter.... If that's the case... if that's how these
universities are going to be, he wouldn't let his daughter go there.
He went on to tell the history of his mother and two girlfriends who escaped from East to West
Germany by themselves and looked for months for an escape route. She came to this country.
We don't want that. We don't want to lose our freedoms and individualities. Little by little;
from sizes of soda to the right to protect yourself and own a gun you start denigrating everything.
Big government thinks they need to be our parents, because we are too stupid to understand what
is happening, but.... He asked that the Board think about it and make sure it is right because
once you start working with the devil, he just keeps coming in and they just want more and more.
Herb Masser Mr. Masser stated that he is a licensed social worker and for the last 30
years he has dealt with all kinds of depravity and problems in life, some of which has been with
the criminal element; he volunteered at Auburn Correctional Facility. He stated that he knows
how the sociopathic mind thinks; the rules don't count to them. They can do whatever they
want. He stated that he knows this very clearly because his brother is a sociopath and has spent
most of his life in prison. The rules don't count. He said you can pass whatever rules you want,
they aren't going to listen to them. He asked the board to remember that years ago, some well-
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 14
meaning people passed a law saying we can no longer possess alcohol and that immediately
opened up the black market. That didn't stop alcohol. People will get what they want and the
Board is going to be part of creating an underworld and element that is going to instantly come
alive and produce whatever weapon a person wants and whatever ammunition they want and in
the meantime, telling him that he can only have 7 bullets. But that person kicking my door in is
going to have 30, 40, 50 or whatever he wants and he is going to laugh at me with my 7 bullets.
He went on to say that the board would be part of causing him to be a lawbreaker because he is
not going to do it. He said"I am going to have the weapons to defend my home,whether you
like it or not. I am going to defend my wife, I am going to defend my children, I am going to
defend my property and you can pass all the laws you want telling me I don't have a right to do
that, and I think you mean well,but it's a big mistake."
Mr. Masser asked the Board if anyone had ever faced down a gun stating that he had a gun in his
face once and was totally helpless. The guy said"do you want to die tonight?" and he couldn't
defend himself because of laws like this. He said"I know you mean well, but I am asking you to
please, don't disarm the legal citizen because you are not having any effect on the illegal
citizen."
Un-named Gentleman Law Enforcement Officer by trade on the other side of the wall.
He said the state felon inmates are laughing about this law. They are ecstatic . He said he wasn't
going to tell stories or try and shock you, but they are laughing.
He said his concern about this type of law is the spirit of liberty; we value our civil rights in this
country; we value each other's' individualities and life choices and respect ourselves and others.
It seemed to him that we have gotten so far away from these core principles that we all believe
and grew up believing. If the majority says we don't like gay marriage and you are forbidden to
live your life the way you see fit...We don't like guns...I don't care if you like guns...I don't
like it, and I am going to get 30 people to join me and then you can't have guns. We are turning
into a democracy of 3 wolves and 2 sheep deciding on what to eat for dinner and that concerns
him. He stated that he doesn't like guns, but uses one on the job because its necessary. He felt
this is not about guns per se, it is about rules of law and how we feel we should be ruled over.
He went on to say that he doesn't fear an armed person and we shouldn't either. Technology has
advanced as illustrated by the word getting out about this meeting tonight and the technology for
firearms have changed and guns are safe... He asked the board to stand with liberty, stand with
civil rights, stand with the rule of law, stand on the American principles of respecting your
neighbor's choices and letting everyone pursue their own happiness. It thought it was
unconscionable to vote someone's right away or bang a gavel and say we don't allow you to do
what is written in our documents as protected property or behavior to do anymore. He urged the
board to vote their conscious and finished by repeating his favorite quote which was in response
to Governor Hutchinson of the Massachusetts Bay Colony who said"Who are these brace of
Adams who are causing so much trouble for me?" and John Adams wrote "Was it not a pity that
so lowly aggrieved guard the manor while the generous mastiffs and pureblooded hounds are
hushed into silence by the bones and crumbs thrown to them."
Mr. O'Rourke addressed the board again in response to the lady's question"could you take a
life" saying that he couldn't answer that question either until he was presented with that
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 15
situation. He said everyone can act like a billy-the-badass and say I would blow their head off
protecting my family, but you will never know until you are presented with that situation any
more than a 3rd or 4th degree black belt...this is defense. We are not attacking but want
protection. He talked about gun safety and learning it as a child and how he teaches it to his
children. A gun could sit on a table for 200 years and it is never going to hurt someone until
some irresponsible person picks it up and uses it for something other than its intended use.
Un-named lady spoke again wanting to clarify and saying that she meant no disrespect to any
gun owner but the point she was trying to make is that we as a country have made a big mistake
in not training our youth on gun safety. Gun ownership is steeped in our culture and she
respected them for teaching their children gun safety.
Tim Barnhart Mr. Barnhart noted that no one has brought up competition shooting which
he does and a lot of his colleagues are law enforcement and this new law is making them all
felons. They say we can use our firearms at a sanctioned match,but we can't transport them to
and from, so basically we are all felons if we show up at these competitions that have been going
on for years. He said that a lot of the FBI and law enforcement that he shoots with use it as
training and they can't do it either.
Rebecca She stated that the current legislation that Governo Cuomo just passed has
a lot of different things that do not relate to subduing crime, there are some items addressing
mental health but the majority of the items really reduce the law-abiding citizens from having
their, whether it be self-defense, whether it be their sporting or shooting gallery type guns... it
also has a portion that if you purchase any ammo it requires a background check, which she
thought was ludicrous and it also requires that the seller make a record of it, the amount the
quantity and the size and she thought this was a maneuver on the governments side to keep track
of it and managing how much ammo is out there in the public's hands and keeping track of us so
we don't revolt and tell them to go home. She went on to say that there are many, many items in
this resolution that need to be reviewed and addressed. It is not to say that maybe 4 items could
help reduce criminal acts, but in its entirety it needs to be thrown out and redone. She said that
our second amendment was abused in this process in both submission and the items it addressed
and it is totally outrageous and hoped the board would look at it thoroughly and not just the
"reader's digest"version but the full version before making any decision because it needs to be
rewritten.
Board Comments
Mr. DePaolo asked Mr. Engman to reorder the agenda item regarding the SAFE Act resolution to
the fore so the audience could have a determination. Mr. Engman moved the item to right after
the public hearing.
Agenda Item 5
5:45 p.m. Public Hearing Regarding Draft Local Law 3 of 2013 Adding Chapter 57 of the
Town of Ithaca Code Entitled "Procurement" to Authorize the Use of the "Best Value
Procurement Standard"
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 16
Mr. Engman opened the public hearing at 6:20 p.m. and explained that the State passed a law
allowing us to add an additional criteria to our selection of articles we want to buy and this
proposed local law authorizes us to establish those standards. We have not set those standards
yet.
Stacey Black representing the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 241 here in
Ithaca. He had a question on the Applicability section of the proposed chapter 57 where it states
this will not be placed to Article 8 items which would be prevailing wage and labor contracts and
he wondered if that was still true.
Ms. Brock wanted clarity and asked if he was asking if this applicability section stands as is and
said yes it does. The law that authorizes the town to do this says that"best value" cannot be used
on any public works contracts that fall under Article 8 so we do not have the authority to do that
and the Town Board would not be doing that by this law.
Mr. Engman closed the public hearing at 6:22 p.m.
Motion moved by Ms. Hunter and seconded by Mr. Howe for discussion.
Mr. DePaolo asked about the last sentence in section 57-2 which says that all awards based on
"best value" shall require Town Board approval and noting that at our last meeting we abdicated
some authority to grant bids to the Highway Superintendent and wondered if this sends some of
those decisions back to the board or whether he still could make those awards and if so, is that
what the Board wanted. Ms. Brock responded that if he were analyzing an equipment bid and he
based it on best value as opposed to lowest responsible bidder it would come back to the Board
and Mr. Engman added that the authority to award was limited to lowest responsible bidder and
in any case where any other bid was being considered for award it would come back to the
Board.
Ms. Leary asked if the last item, quality of craftsmanship, could give us the justification for
requiring Union labor and Ms. Brock responded that she did not think so. Whether someone is
under contract is not necessarily directly correlated to the quality and she did not see that link as
a legal matter. Ms. Leary responded that Union labor usually requires some training and Ms.
Brock responded that it would depend on what the product is and that could be highly variable.
Ms. Leary asked if we could make the case for it, and Ms. Brock responded that this is a new
provision and she did not know of any case law about what this best value means other than the
definition in NYS Finance Law. She added that having just heard this now and not having done
any research on it, that we could not make the case for it. If you are looking at quality of
materials, it would be difficult to say that that justified union labor.
Mr. Goodman asked what the plan is moving forward and Mr. Engman responded that we are
waiting on the Association of Towns to do some research and give us some advice and then we
will have to move forward with draft our guidelines.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 17
TB Resolution No. 2013 - 033: Adoptinu a local law adding Chapter 57 to the Town of
Ithaca Code entitled "Procurement and authorizing the use of the Best Value Procurement
Standard
Moved: Tee-Ann Hunter Seconded: Rod Howe
Whereas the Town Board seeks to exercise the local option set forth in § 103, Subdivision I of
the New York General Municipal Law as amended by Chapter 608 of the Laws of 2011 and
Chapter 2 of the Laws of 2012 which amendment authorizes the Town to award purchase
contracts and contracts for services subject to competitive bidding under General Municipal Law
§ 103 on the basis of either lowest responsible bidder or"best value" as defined in § 163 of the
New York State Finance Law.
Whereas the Town Board held a public hearing regarding this local law on March 11, 2013 to
solicit public comment.
Now therefore be it
Resolved that the Town Board adopts Local Law 3 of 2013 adding Chapter 57 to the Town of
Ithaca Code entitled"Procurement" and authorizing the use of Best Value Procurement Standard
with Town Board approval as described within the law.
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, Howe, Engman, Goodman, DePaolo, Levine and Leary
Agenda Item 12 moved up
Discuss and consider a Resolution of Support for the S.A.F.E. Act
Ms. Leary moved the resolution for discussion and Mr. Goodman seconded.
Mr. DePaolo started by saying he hoped the board had looked at the materials he sent around this
weekend. He said he is not a gun owner or a second amendment expert and he is not going to
oppose this resolution on constitutional grounds, but he is going to oppose the resolution on a
couple of very simple grounds or basic principles that he believes are essential to this body and
to our democracy, one of which is open government. He noted that the board just afforded the
audience an opportunity to tell us their opinions on our potential action tonight and he doesn't
believe they were given the same opportunity at the State level and whether you are for or
against the SAFE Act or its implications, he thought that it is essential that whatever becomes of
this happens in the light of day and that was not the case.
Mr. DePaolo went on to say that he understands that there is a lot of passion in the room and
although he in not very passionate about guns, he is passionate about other things and he
understands that people are motivated by passion and it is important to distill or cut through the
passion and look at recent history. He referred to the materials he sent around with particular
respect to the regulation of the rifle category, that rifles are used in a very small percentage of
homicides in NY; there are more people killed by hands and feet and knives than there are by
rifles and turning what was a lawfully owned and operated and maintained weapon yesterday and
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 18
turning it into an assault rifle today because it also has a certain kind of grip or it doesn't .... It
doesn't have an effect on the potential of the weapon to kill or the willingness of the owner of
the weapon to use it...He felt that this Act was off-base and although he understands that the law
was intended to do good things and understands that it was a reaction to a very horrific incident
in Connecticut, he thought it was born out of emotion and did not follow public process and he
didn't think it was grounded in statistics and he did not feel it will do much good.
He added that he does believe there is a handgun problem in this state and more attention needs
to be paid to the use of handguns in crime, but he felt that turning a million new Yorkers into
criminals because they possess a weapon that looks a certain way is not what we ought to be
supporting. If that is what comes out of a public process, in the light of day, then that will be the
law,but until the residents of this state are satisfied that they have had an opportunity to express
themselves, he was not satisfied that this resolution has any merit whatsoever.
Mr. Howe stated that he was going to abstain from voting because although he appreciates the
intent of the SAFE Act, he hasn't had enough time to research it and doesn't have enough data.
Ms. Hunter agreed saying that she has not had enough time to research this topic and didn't think
that this was an issue that at this level she would have to grapple with. She noted that she
doesn't own a gun and never has but she is a process person so she does question some of the
procedural steps that were taken in Albany and although she thinks we have a gun problem in
this country, she did not feel sufficiently informed to be rendering judgment.
She went on to say that we often have these types of resolutions we are asked to pass for types of
things over which we really don't have jurisdiction so our actions here will result in a letter
going out in support or not in support of the SAFE Act which is somewhat for naught.
Mr. Engman spoke next stating I know a lot about guns and Igrew up hunting, fishing, trapping
and learned from the very best, my father ,who was an award-winning outdoorsman in
Pennsylvania but I remember that the things he killed he killed to eat or to skin to help sell the
furs to support his family. He went on to say I am very familiar with what we call the "gun
culture"today and I has no fear of guns, has shot guns and knows how to use them and has
immense respect for them. But having said all of that, he supports this resolution because he
doesn't know what else to do. He has heard no good advice from anyone else on how to solve
this problem. He recalled that when he went hunting as a child, they went hunting with single-
shot 22's, single-gauge shotguns, maybe once in a while a 12 gauge double barrel but that was
about it. This escalation of firepower is bizarre in this country. We don't need weapons like
that. He agreed that we need training. If people are trained to use guns then you don't need even
10 bullets in a clip, you should be able to handle the situation with many fewer than that. The
only purpose of guns with that many bullets in a clip is to kill people and to kill lots of them and
that is what is happening in this country.
So we have to figure out something to do about it. If you came up with a better idea, I'd say
yeah. But the legislature came up with something to do and this argument that somehow this
was done overnight is also strange since we have been debating this since at least the time when
President Reagan was shot and we passed a ban on assault weapons in this country which was
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 19
left to expire because there was a lack of interest in it but there is no need for the type of fire
power we have now.
We heard tonight that there were folks that were afraid of the government, but the government
has always outgunned us people. If a Bradley fighting machine show up at your doorstep, no
matter what size automatic weapon you have,you don't have a chance. And that hasn't
happened in the past couple hundred years and I don't think it is going to happen in the next few
hundred. With today's technology, a drone could drop a bomb on your house and you wouldn't
even have a chance to even get to your weapons so the fear of government is a very strange thing
I think.
He went on to say he is afraid of the privacy we are losing and he is afraid of the class warfare
that the corporations started against us decades ago; they're winning. Most of our salaries have
fallen behind what they were decades ago and the reason is corporations are taking that money
away from us; that's what he is concerned about. He is concerned about the lack of privacy in
our communications; the fact that almost any of our communications can be intercepted and used
against us. He is concerned about that. He would like it if people would shift their efforts from
guns, which for the most part are recreational and turn them towards some of these other things
which are truly threatening this country. He said he understands the idea that people do want to
use their weapons for hunting or for target shooting and felt that there was nothing that he has
seen in this law that prevents that. There is very little that changes in this law; people can still
have their shotguns and their long rifles, that doesn't change. What does change is the escalated
capacity of the weapons that aren't geared toward hunting and he maintains are a very lousy
home protection device. Mr. Engman stated that most people who are killed in the home are
killed by someone who knows the person being killed and that is pretty clear in the statistics.
The number of people breaking into the house are very few compared to the people inside.
Don't be afraid of the people outside,be afraid of your relatives; those are the people that are
doing a lot of the killing.
So he felt that we need to start facing some facts and start recognizing that we have to have
better ideas if you want other activities to take place other than what the New York State
Legislature has done. So up until we have a better idea, he wants to support the Legislature and
added that the court will decide whether it was done legally or not, not us, and after that, he
assumes there will be some changes in the law because no law is perfect. He noted that we pass
a lot of them here and two weeks later we find that something is not quite right and we have to
change it. He thought this law is the best that we have at the moment and he is willing to
continue to support it so that at least we have tried to do something about this problem that we
have.
Mr. Goodman spoke stating that he supports the resolution not because he thinks it is perfect
legislation, but having served on this Board for a number of years now and drafted legislation,
you are never going to get perfect legislation and he urged those who felt there were problems to
work with their legislature to try and amend the law. He agrees in general with the aim of the
law and a lot of the provisions and by supporting this resolution he was not necessarily saying
that he agreed with how the law was passed,but as Mr. Engman said, the Courts will decide
whether it was passed legally or not and in terms of the substance of the law, he supports in
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 110
general the provisions of the Act and the fact that it might not be 100% effective, well, that's a
problem we face with all of our laws. We can try and legislate to improve the quality of people's
lives, but anything we pass is not going to be 100% effective.
Mr. Levine addressed the Board stating that he was very impressed with the number of people
who came out and the passion with which they spoke and this is what government is about. He
stated that this is one of his favorite parts of being on the Board, when people come in and talk to
us. He went on to say that he agrees with a lot of things that the public stated and he didn't think
that the law as it is written necessarily stops a lot of the things that people are doing and it
doesn't necessarily make people criminals for what they possess. It was his understanding that
Governor Cuomo rushed through this law because he felt that if there was a lot of notice of the
law,people would go out on shopping sprees and stockpile a lot of weapons that were about to
become illegal so that was his justification and he was going to take his word on it. He agreed
that perhaps it is not a perfect law,but the law in existence is better than no law and if it can be
improved, we should work toward that. He is going to support the law, and urges people to offer
suggestions to make it better.
Ms. Leary made a comment about the fiscal impact of this law, noting that someone said that it
would take money away from unemployment benefits and she did not think that it had any
correspondence with this law and other state programs. It is a free-standing law and the budget
is the budget and they move items around the budget all the time.
TB Resolution 2013- 034: Support for the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms
Enforcement Act of 2013 (NY SAFE ACT)
Whereas, the United States has the highest rate of gun ownership in the world(88 per 100
people) according to the international Small Arms Survey(Geneva, Switzerland); and
Whereas, gun violence, including mass shootings, in the U.S. far exceeds that of other
industrialized nations: among 23 high-income countries, 80 percent of all firearm deaths occur in
the United States; U.S. firearm homicide rates are 19.5 times higher than 22 other countries
(World Health Organization Mortality Database, analyzed for UCLA School of Public Health,
Los Angeles, California, 2003); and
Whereas, 60 percent of homicides in the U.S. occur using a firearm; and
Whereas, based on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, deaths from
firearms in the United States are projected to rise to 33,000 per year by 2015, exceeding deaths
from motor vehicle accidents; and
Whereas, the United States Supreme Court (most recently, in Heller v. District of Columbia,
2008) has ruled that the Second Amendment does not limit prohibitions on the possession of
firearms by felons and the mentally ill,penalties for carrying firearms in schools and government
buildings, or laws regulating the sales of guns, and in fact, in prior decisions, has questioned the
applicability of the Second Amendment to state law; and
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 111
Whereas, ample legislative precedent throughout the history of the United States has placed
limitations on the receipt, possession, and transportation of firearms; and
Whereas, the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013 (NY SAFE
ACT)requires universal background checks on most private gun transfers, strictly defines and
bans assault-type weapons, bans high-capacity ammunition clips,bans direct Internet purchases
of ammunition and tracks high-volume purchases, increases the penalty for possession of a
firearm on school grounds and school busses from a misdemeanor to a felony, increases
protections for first responders and victims of domestic violence, including forfeiture of guns by
individuals subject to orders of protection, requires regular recertification of handgun and assault
rifle permits that would allow up-to-date cross-checking against databases, and provides for
other measures to help prevent the use of firearms against people while not infringing the Second
Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens
Resolved, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca supports vigorous enforcement of the SAFE
Act, commends the governor and New York State legislature for passing this comprehensive
legislation in a timely way, and urges the Town of Ithaca's elected representatives at the national
level to enact similar legislation, and
Further Resolved, that copies of this resolution be sent to the Governor's Office, Town of
Ithaca representatives in the NYS state legislature, Tompkins County Legislature, City of Ithaca
Common Council, and the media.
Vote: Ayes—Herb Engman, Pat Leary, Eric Levine and Bill Goodman
Nays—Rich DePaolo Abstentions: Tee-Ann Hunter and Rod Howe
Agenda Item 6
Discuss and Consider Setting a Public Hearing Regarding a Request from Ithaca Beer for a
Waiver or Reduction in Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Fee
Mr. Howe moved the resolution for discussion and Ms. Hunter seconded.
Mr. Engman explained that we have received a request from Dan Mitchell of Ithaca Beer for a
waiver of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy fee which was needed because the milling
room was not quite finished and the stormwater runoff mitigation was not quite done either. Our
rules state that we have to hold a public hearing if we are going to consider the request.
Ms. Brock noted that our Town Law has the criteria we need to go by if granting a waiver or
reduction.
TB Resolution 2013 - 035: Setting a Public Hearing Regarding a Request from Ithaca Beer
for a Waiver or Reduction in Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Fee
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Tee-Ann Hunter
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 112
Whereas a request has been received from Dan Mitchell of Ithaca Beer regarding fees he has
incurred for Temporary Certificate of Occupancies relating to his Ithaca Beer expansion project
and
Whereas Town of Ithaca Code requires that a public hearing be held prior to action on this type
of request
Now therefore be it
Resolved that the Town Board will hold a public hearing at their meeting on April 8, 2013 at
5:30 p.m. to hear public input on the request and directs the Town Clerk to publish a notice in the
official newspaper.
Vote: Ayes—Engman, Hunter, Goodman, Leary, Levine, DePaolo and Howe
Agenda Item 7
Consider Setting a Public Hearing for the Coddington Road Water Main Replacement
Water Improvement Public Interest Order
Ms. Leary moved the resolution for discussion and Mr. Goodman seconded it.
Mr. Levine noted that the residents on Coddington Road have requested that the sewer line be
extended up Coddington Road and asked that if there is going to be work on the road anyway,
can we see if this would be a time to look at extending sewer. He noted that petitions with 50
or so signatures have been received in both 2006 and 2009 as well as a letter from the Tompkins
County Health Department in support of the sewer extension based on the water quality for
failing septic systems. The fact that we are going to be doing work there and that interest rates
are historically low and contractors are still coming in with low bids, he requested that Mr.
Weber at least look into what it would take for the extension.
Ms. Hutner noted that the financing and budgeting of this project have already been allotted for
and asked Mr. Weber what the financial implications would be. He responded that it would be
an expansion of the current sewer district so it would have to go through the Comptroller's
Office and based on his experience they do look into whether the current users can support any
changes to it. So his projection is that since the area is not currently served, there would have to
be a mechanism defining who is going to pay for the new service above and beyond the current
users and the numbers from the last proposal back in 2006 and looking at 5,300 feet of sewer
with required pump stations -4,000 on Coddington Rd and 1,300 on King Rd–it would be $1.2
- $1.5 million plus easements because Coddington Road is a use by right road for transportation
purposes only and a timeline of 3-4 years.
Mr. Levine asked about extending it just a ways but not all the way up to King Road if you
didn't go past the dip and kept with the gravity flow. Mr. Weber responded that the current pipe
is not deep enough as it is and to extend it would mean lowering the next section and a pump
station would be needed to pick that flow up. There are also other topographical considerations
to be thought through.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 113
Mr. DePaolo asked about sewer coverage in the area of the proposed neighborhood on the
proposed land use map. Would any or all of that area be served by current sewer infrastructure?
Ms. Ritter responded that it would depend how the person connected to the sewer. If they
connected to Troy Road, they would need a pumping station but if a developer came in and could
identify a way to get over to Coddington Road, then they could be served by connecting to the
preexisting sewer. Mr. Weber added that it was his understanding that that triangle of property
already has access and could be served right now. Mr. DePaolo then asked if the area that Mr.
Levine is talking about, how many do not have access and Mr. Levine said he wasn't sure but
there were approximately 50 signatures on the petitions so at least that. Mr. Engman added that
this has been put on the Public Works Committee Agenda and they will try and get some of these
answers. He thought that the other times this has been brought up, it seemed to him that it was
technical difficulties holding it back, not fiscal and if indeed the technical difficulties can be
overcome, then it becomes a question for other considerations, including costs and we need to
get some clarity on that.
Mr. DePaolo brought it back to the fact that we have the Comprehensive Plan out there and if
that neighborhood is deemed to be a potentially viable neighborhood in the end, does this help or
hinder any of that.
TB Resolution 2013 -036: Order Setting a Public Hearing Regarding a Proposed Water
Improvement in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York,pursuant to Article 12-C
of the Town Law,to be known as the Town of Ithaca Coddington Road Water Main Water
Improvement
WHEREAS, a plan, report and map, including an estimate of cost, have been duly
prepared in such manner and in such detail as has heretofore been determined by the Town
Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York, relating to the creation and
construction, pursuant to Article 12-C of the Town Law, of water system improvements to be
known and identified as the Town of Ithaca Coddington Road Water Main Water Improvement,
and hereinafter also referred to as "Improvement,"to provide such water Improvement including
extensions, to the present Town water improvement, such water system Improvement to be
constructed and owned by the Town of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, said plan, report and map, including estimate of cost, were prepared by a
competent engineer, duly licensed by the State of New York, and have been filed in the office of
the Town Clerk of said Town, where the same are available during regular office hours for
public inspection, and
WHEREAS, the area of said Town determined to be benefited by said Town of Ithaca
Coddington Road Water Main Water Improvement consists of the entire area of said Town
excepting therefrom the area contained within the Village of Cayuga Heights, and
WHEREAS, the proposed Improvement consists of the water improvements set forth
below, and in the areas of the Town as set forth below, and as more particularly shown and
described in said plan, report and map presently on file in the office of the Town Clerk:
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 114
The proposed project will install 14,100 L.F. of new 8"water main on Coddington Road
from Hudson Street, City/Town Line, to Burns Road. This will result in the replacement of the
existing water main and related ancillary facilities. The project will be divided into two phases;
Phase 1 will replace 9,640 L.F. from the Northview Water Tank to Burns Road and Phase 2 will
replace 4,460 L.F. from Hudson St. to the Northview Water Tank. This work will be constructed
in 2014 and 2015 prior to the County's reconstruction of Coddington Road, and
WHEREAS, the maximum proposed to be expended by the Town of Ithaca for the
aforesaid Improvement is $2,300,000.00 The proposed method of financing to be employed by
said Town of Ithaca consists of, at the option of the Town, temporary financing under use of
available reserves or a bond anticipation note, and upon maturity of a bond anticipation note, the
issuance of serial bonds of said Town of Ithaca to mature in annual installments over a period not
to exceed 40 years, or directly by the issuance of such bonds, such notes and bonds to be paid
from assessments levied upon and collected from the several lots and parcels of land in said
Town of Ithaca water system benefited area which are deemed benefited by said Improvement,
so much upon and from each as shall be in just proportion to the amount of the benefit which the
Improvement shall confer upon the same, and
WHEREAS, it is now desired to call a public hearing for the purpose of considering said
plan, report and map, including estimate of cost, and the providing of the Improvement, and to
hear all persons interested in the subject thereof concerning the same, all in accordance with the
provisions of Section 209-q of the Town Law;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, by the Town Board of the Town of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, as follows:
Section 1. A public hearing shall be held by Town Board of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,New York, at the Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, in Ithaca,New York, in
said Town, on the 8th day of April, 2013, at 5:30 o'clock P.M., Prevailing Time, to consider the
aforesaid plan, report and map, including estimate of cost, and the question of providing the
Improvement, and to hear all persons interested in the subject thereof concerning the same and to
take such action thereon as is required by law.
Section 2. The Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause a copy of this
Order with a Notice of Adoption to be published once in the official newspaper, and also to post
a copy thereof on the town signboard maintained by the Town Clerk,not less than ten (10)nor
more than twenty(20) days before the day designated for the hearing as aforesaid, all in
accordance with the provisions of Section 209-q of the Town Law.
Section 3. This Order shall take effect immediately.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly put to a vote on roll
call, which resulted as follows: Herb Engman, aye; Pat Leary, aye; Bill Goodman, aye; Rod
Howe, aye; Tee-Ann Hunter, aye; Rich DePaolo, aye and Eric Levine , aye. The resolution was
thereupon declared duly adopted.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 115
Agenda Item 8
Discuss and Consider Authorization to Award Contracts for the Rebuilding of the Septage
Receiving Facility at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility
Mr. Howe moved the resolution for discussion and Mr. Goodman seconded.
Mr. Engman gave an overview of the improvements going on at the Facility noting that they will
increase our capacity and allow us to capture more methane gas which will be captured and used
to help heat the plant so although pricey up front, they will be cost effective after they are done.
Mr. DePaolo asked if these improvements allow leachate to be accepted or are there any
constraints for it and Mr. Engman said that we accept leachate from landfills but not banned
substances.
TB Resolution 2013 - 37: Authorization to Award Contracts for the Rebuilding of the
Septage Receiving Facility at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2012, bids were received by the City of Ithaca on behalf
of the three municipal owners of the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility(IAWTF) for the
rebuilding of the IAWTF's septage receiving facility, and
WHEREAS, the lowest qualified bid for Contract #12-001 and its alternate 12-001A for
General construction was submitted by McPherson Builders, Inc., 129 West Falls Street, Ithaca,
New York 14850, in the amount of$1,919,000 and $1,936,000, respectively, and
WHEREAS, the lowest qualified bid for Contract #12-002 for Electrical was submitted
by Nelcorp Electrical Contracting Corporation, 2500 Watson Boulevard, Endwell, New York
13760, in the amount of$339,250, and
WHEREAS, the lowest qualified bid for Contract #12-003 for Heating, Ventilating and
Air Conditioning was submitted by John W. Danforth Company, 930 Old Dutch Road, Victor,
New York 14564, in the amount of$524,000, and
WHEREAS, at its November 14, 2012 meeting, the Special Joint Committee
recommended to the IAWTF municipal owners that the three prime contracts be awarded to
McPherson Builders, Inc. for General construction (with the recommendation that Contract #12-
001 be used, not its alternate, #12-001A), to Nelcorp Electrical Contracting Corporation for
Electrical, and to John W Danforth Company for Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning, and
WHEREAS, these three companies have agreed to hold their bid prices until April 1,
2013, and
WHEREAS, on January 7, 2013, the Ithaca Town Board adopted a Public Interest Order
authorizing and establishing the Town of Ithaca Septage Receiving Facility Renovation Sewer
Improvement at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility ("Improvement") for this project,
with $1,258,071.78 as the maximum proposed to be expended by the Town of Ithaca for the
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 116
Improvement, including costs of rights of way, construction costs, legal fees and other expenses,
and
WHEREAS, more than 30 days have passed after the adoption of the Public Interest
Order and no petition for a referendum has been filed, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes the IAWTF septage receiving facility
rebuild in an amount not to exceed $3,077,475.00, which includes a 10% contingency, with the
Town of Ithaca's share not to exceed $1,258,071.78 based on the following schedule, which
allocates costs based on each municipal owner's respective allocation of permitted capacity in
the IAWTF:
Municipality Percentage Proiect Cost
City of Ithaca 57.14 $ 1,758,469.22
Town of Ithaca 40.88 $ 1,258,071.78
Town of Dryden 1.98 $ 60,934.00
$ 3,077,475.00
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes the award of contracts for its Improvement
and this project (with General Contract #12-001 awarded, not its alternate) to the following
contractors in amounts not to exceed their respective bid amounts, plus the amounts of any
approved change orders, provided that the total project cost, including the contract, engineering,
legal and other expenses, does not exceed the maximum authorized cost of the project, all subject
to the final approval of the contract documents by the Town Engineer and Town Attorney:
General construction McPherson Builders, Inc.
Electrical Nelcorp Electrical Contracting Corporation
HVAC John W. Danforth Company
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is authorized to execute such contracts upon such
approval, and be it further
RESOLVED, that funding for the Town of Ithaca's Improvement shall be acquired
through the issuance of serial bonds by co-owner City of Ithaca to pay for the City of Ithaca's
share of septage receiving facility improvements at the IAWTF as well as for the Town of
Ithaca's Improvement, based on the above schedule allocating costs based on each municipal
owner's respective allocation of permitted capacity in the IAWTF, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca will not co-issue or be liable on the serial bonds
issued by the City of Ithaca, and that the Town of Ithaca will reimburse the City of Ithaca
through a contract between the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca, with the Town of Ithaca's
payments to the City of Ithaca to include pro-rated interest on the serial bonds issued by the City
of Ithaca for this project, and be it further
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 117
RESOLVED, that funding for said project is contingent on the approval of the City of
Ithaca and Town of Dryden of this project, and be it further
RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be provided to the City of Ithaca Mayor, the
Town of Dryden Supervisor, and the Chairperson of the Special Joint Subcommittee.
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Bill Goodman
Vote: Ayes—Rod Howe, Bill Goodman, Herb Engman, Pat Leary, Tee-Ann Hunter, Eric Levine
and Rich DePaolo
Agenda Item 9
Consider Approval of Bond Resolutions for:
a. Danby Rd/King Rd W Water Main Water Improvement
TB Resolution No. 2013-038: BOND RESOLUTION In the Matter of the Town of Ithaca
Danby/W. King Road Water Main Water Improvement Area Improvements, in the Town
of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, pursuant to Town Law and the Local Finance
Law
At a regular meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York,held at Town Hall, in Ithaca,New York, in said Town, on the 11th day of March,2013,
at 5:30 o'clock P.M.,Prevailing Time.
The meeting was called to order by Supervisor Herb Engman, and upon roll being called,
there were present: Supervisor Herb Engman, Councilpersons Rich DePaolo, Bill Goodman, Rod
Howe, Tee-Ann Hunter, Patricia Leary and Eric Levine
The following resolution was offered by Bill Goodman, who moved its adoption,
seconded by Pat Leary to-wit:
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $850,000 SERIAL
BONDS OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK, TO
PAY THE COST OF THE DANBY/W. KING ROAD WATER MAIN WATER
IMPROVEMENT AREA IMPROVEMENTS OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA,
TOMPKINS COUNTY,NEW YORK.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the proceedings heretofore duly had and taken in accordance
with the provisions of Article 12-C of the Town Law, and more particularly a resolution dated
December 10, 2012, said Town Board has determined it to be in the public interest to establish
the Danby/W. King Road Water Main Water Improvement Area(the "Area") and to make
certain improvements therefore at a maximum estimated cost of$850,000; and
WHEREAS, said improvements have been determined to be an Unlisted Action pursuant
to the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, which it has been
determined will not result in any significant environmental effects; and
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 118
WHEREAS, it is now desired to provide funding for such improvements for said Area;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,New York, as follows:
Section 1. For the specific object or purpose of paying the cost of water system
improvements, for the Danby/W. King Road Water Main Water Improvement Area consisting of
construction and installation of approximately 2,602 feet of new 8-inch Ductile Iron Pipe (DIP)
water main on the west side of Danby Road and 1,809 feet of new 8-inch DIP on W. King Road,
between Danby Road and Stone Quarry Road, resulting in the replacement of 4,411 feet of
existing water main, together with related ancillary facilities, as well as other original equipment,
machinery, apparatus, appurtenances, and furnishings, incidental improvements and expenses in
connection therewith, at a maximum estimated cost of$850,000 there are hereby authorized to
be issued $850,000 serial bonds of said Town pursuant to the provisions of the Local Finance
Law.
Section 2. It is hereby determined that the plan for the financing of said specific
object or purpose is by the issuance of the $850,000 serial bonds of said Town authorized to be
issued therefore pursuant to this bond resolution.
Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the
aforesaid specific object or purpose is twenty years,pursuant to subdivision 1 of paragraph a of
Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law. It is hereby further determined that the maximum
maturity of the serial bonds herein authorized will exceed five years.
Section 4. The faith and credit of said Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York,
are hereby irrevocably pledged to the payment of the principal of and interest on such bonds as
the same respectively become due and payable. There shall be annually apportioned and
assessed upon the several lots and parcels of land within said Danby/W. King Road Water Main
Water Improvement Area which the Town Board shall determine and specify to be especially
benefited by the improvements, an amount sufficient to pay the principal and interest on said
bonds as the same become due, but if not paid from such source, all the taxable real property in
said Town shall be subject to the levy of ad valorem taxes without limitation as to rate or amount
sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on said bonds as the same shall become due.
Section 5. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law, the power to authorize
the issuance of and to sell bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of the
serial bonds herein authorized, including renewals of such notes, is hereby delegated to the
Supervisor,the chief fiscal officer. Such notes shall be of such terms, form and contents, and
shall be sold in such manner, as may be prescribed by said Supervisor, consistent with the
provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 6. The powers and duties of advertising such bonds for sale, conducting the
sale and awarding the bonds, are hereby delegated to the Supervisor, who shall advertise such
bonds for sale, conduct the sale, and award the bonds in such manner as he or she shall deem
best for the interests of said Town, including, but not limited to the power to sell said bonds to
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 119
the New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation; provided, however, that in the
exercise of these delegated powers, he or she shall comply fully with the provisions of the Local
Finance Law and any order or rule of the State Comptroller applicable to the sale of municipal
bonds. The receipt of the Town shall be a full acquittance to the purchaser of such bonds, who
shall not be obliged to see to the application of the purchase money.
Section 7. All other matters, except as provided herein relating to such bonds,
including determining whether to issue such bonds having substantially level or declining annual
debt service and all matter related thereto, prescribing whether manual or facsimile signatures
shall appear on said bonds, prescribing the method for the recording of ownership of said bonds,
appointing the fiscal agent or agents for said bonds, providing for the printing and delivery of
said bonds (and if said bonds are to be executed in the name of the Town by the facsimile
signature of the Supervisor, providing for the manual countersignature of a fiscal agent or of a
designated official of the Town), the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates,
place or places of payment, and also including the consolidation with other issues, shall be
determined by the Supervisor. It is hereby determined that it is to the financial advantage of the
Town not to impose and collect from registered owners of such serial bonds any charges for
mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged by the fiscal agent, and
accordingly,pursuant to paragraph c of Section 70.00 of the Local Finance Law, no such charges
shall be so collected by the fiscal agent. Such bonds shall contain substantially the recital of
validity clause provided for in section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law and shall otherwise be in
such form and contain such recitals in addition to those required by section 52.00 of the Local
Finance Law, as the Town shall determine.
Section 8. The Supervisor is hereby further authorized, at his or her sole discretion,
to execute an application, a project financing and/or loan agreement, and any other agreements
with the New York State Department of Health/or the New York State Environmental Facilities
Corporation, including amendments thereto, and including any instruments (or amendments
thereto) in the effectuation thereof, in order to effect the financing or refinancing of the specific
object or purpose described in Section 1 hereof, or a portion thereof, by a serial bond or note
issue of said Town in the event of the sale of same to the New York State Environmental
Facilities Corporation.
Section 9. The power to issue and sell notes to the New York State Environmental
Facilities Corporation pursuant to Section 169.00 of the Local Finance Law is hereby delegated
to the Town Supervisor. Such notes shall be of such terms, form and contents as may be
prescribed by said Town Supervisor consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law
Section 10. The intent of this resolution is to give the Supervisor sufficient authority to
execute those agreements, instruments or to do any similar acts necessary to effect the issuance
of the aforesaid serial bonds or notes without resorting to further action of this Town Board.
Section 11. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested
only if:
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 120
1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said Town is not
authorized to expend money, or
2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of
this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding
contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the date of such
publication, or
3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.
Section 12. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes
of Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no monies
are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set
aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose described herein.
Section 13. This resolution which takes effect immediately shall be published in
summary form in the official newspaper, together with a notice of the Town Clerk in
substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly put to a vote on roll
call, which resulted as follows: Herb Engman, aye; Pat Leary, aye; Bill Gooddman, aye; Rod
Howe, aye; Tee-Ann Hunter, aye; Rich DePaolo, aye and Eric Levine , aye. The resolution was
thereupon declared duly adopted.
b. Public Works Salt Storage Building
SEQR
TB Resolution No. 2013—039: SEAR--New Salt Storage Building at the Public Works
Facility
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Bill Goodman
WHEREAS this action is the is the approval of the construction of, and the bonding for
the new salt storage building at the Town of Ithaca Public Works Facility and
WHEREAS this is an unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Town Board is acting
in an uncoordinated environmental review with respect to the project and
WHEREAS the Town Board, at a public meeting held on March 11, 2013, reviewed and
accepted as adequate the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Parts I and II for this action
submitted by the Town Engineer;
Now therefore be it
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 121
RESOLVED: that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby makes a negative
determination of environmental significance, in this uncoordinated environmental review, in
accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above
referenced action as proposed based on the information in the EAF Part I and for the reasons set
forth in the EAF Part II.
Vote: Herb Engman, aye; Pat Leary, aye; Bill Gooddman, aye; Rod Howe, aye; Tee-Ann
Hunter, aye; Rich DePaolo, aye and Eric Levine , aye. The resolution was thereupon declared
duly adopted.
Bond Resolution
Mr. DePaolo asked about the tax implications and what his tax bill is going to be in 5 years and
although we are taking advantage of historic low rates and the rest, at some point it would be
good to have a heads-up on what the tax bill is going to be. Ms. Hunter agreed, asking for some
kind of extrapolation of the bonding we are doing. Mr. Solvig responded that as part of the
Capital Budget process he wants to expand the process to specifically sit and talk about the
projects with the full board and projections. He added that he is working on a 5-yr projection on
both capital and operating budgets and Ms. Hunter asked if there is a matrix for prioritizing these
projects or consistent criteria we use and Mr. Solvig responded that there isn't right now. Some
projects are done on emergency basis, others go through and evaluation of sorts at the Public
Works Committee level and others are bumped or down to coincide with other municipalities'
work that we can piggyback on. Mr. Engman noted that all of these projects were budgeted for
during the budget process and some discussion took place then also.
TB Resolution No. 2013-040: BOND RESOLUTION (Subiect to Permissive Referendum)
In the Matter of the Proposed Construction of a New Salt Storage Building at the Public
Works Facility, in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, pursuant to Town
Law and the Local Finance Law.
At a regular meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York,held at Town Hall,in Ithaca,New York, in said Town, on the 11 th day of March,2013,
at 5:30 o'clock P.M.,Prevailing Time.
The meeting was called to order by Supervisor Herb Engman, and upon roll being called,
there were present: Supervisor Herb Engman, Councilpersons Rich DePaolo, Bill Goodman, Rod
Howe, Tee-Ann Hunter, Patricia Leary and Eric Levine
The following resolution was offered by Eric Levine, who moved its adoption, seconded
by Pat Leary to-wit:
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING, SUBJECT TO PERMISSIVE
REFERENDUM, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SALT STORAGE
BUILDING AT THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY IN AND FOR THE
TOWN OF ITHACA, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK, AT A
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 122
MAXIMUM ESTIMATED COST OF $800,000, AND AUTHORIZING
THE ISSUANCE OF $800,000 BONDS OF SAID TOWN TO PAY THE
COST THEREOF.
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter
described, including compliance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review
Act, have been performed; and
WHEREAS, the capital project hereinafter described has been determined to be a
Unlisted Action pursuant to the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the
implementation of which as proposed, it has been determined will not result in a significant
adverse environmental effect; and
WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize the financing thereof,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,New York, as follows:
Section 1. The construction of a New Salt Storage Building at the Public Works
Facility, located at 106 Seven Mile Drive, Ithaca,New York, in and for the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,New York, including incidental improvements and expenses in connection
therewith, is hereby authorized at a maximum estimated cost of$800,000.
Section 2. The plan for the financing of the aforesaid maximum estimated cost is by
the issuance of bonds not exceeding $800,000 of said Town, hereby authorized to be issued
therefor pursuant to the provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the
aforesaid specific object or purpose is twenty-five years, pursuant to subdivision 11(b) of
paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law. It is hereby further determined that the
maximum maturity of the serial bonds herein authorized will exceed five years.
Section 4. The faith and credit of said Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York,
are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such bonds as
the same respectively become due and payable. An annual appropriation shall be made in each
year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds becoming due and payable in
such year. There shall annually be levied on all the taxable real property in said Town, a tax
sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds as the same become due and payable.
Section 5. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law, the power to authorize
the issuance of and to sell bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of the
bonds herein authorized, including renewals of such notes, is hereby delegated to the Supervisor
of said Town,the chief fiscal officer. Such notes shall be of such terms, form and contents, and
shall be sold in such manner, as may be prescribed by said Supervisor, consistent with the
provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 123
Section 6. All other matters except as provided herein relating to the bonds herein
authorized including the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, within the
limitations prescribed herein and the manner of execution of the same, including the
consolidation with other issues, and also the ability to issue bonds with substantially level or
declining annual debt service, shall be determined by the Supervisor, the chief fiscal officer of
such Town. Such bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in
Section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law, and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such
recitals, in addition to those required by Section 5 1.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the
Supervisor shall determine consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 7. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested
only if:
1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said Town is
not authorized to expend money, or
2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of
this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or
proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the
date of such publication, or
3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.
Section 8. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes
of Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no monies
are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set
aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose described herein.
Section 9. Upon this resolution taking effect, the same shall be published in full or
summary form in the official newspaper of said Town for such purpose, together with a notice of
the Town Clerk in substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law.
Section 10. THIS RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED SUBJECT TO PERMISSIVE
REFERENDUM.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly put to a vote on roll
call, which resulted as follows: Herb Engman, aye; Pat Leary, aye; Bill Gooddman, aye; Rod
Howe, aye; Tee-Ann Hunter, aye; Rich DePaolo, aye and Eric Levine , aye.
The resolution was thereupon declared duly adopted.
C. Public Works Road Projects—Whitetail Dr.
Mr. Engman noted that the reason this is more expensive than usual is the base was not properly
built when it was first put in so it needs a major overhaul. Mr. DePaolo asked who built the
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 124
substandard road and if it was a developer, why aren't we going after them. Mr. Weber
responded that it was a developer but the statute of limitations is long past and there is also the
implied responsibility of the Town to provide adequate and proper inspections so once we accept
a road we accept it as it is. Mr. Engman agreed and noted this is an example of why we are
stricter now and people complain, but this is why we do it; so we don't have problems like this in
20 years. Mr. Levine asked about the particulars of the project because he drive that road often
and does not consider it a particularly bad road. Mr. Weber responded that the road is settling
and the catch basins are higher than the roadway so there are drainage issues as well as plowing
issues and damages to our equipment.
d. Forest Home Dr. @ Flatrock
Mr. Weber clarified that although the title says "reconstruction",this was identified in the budget
as a maintenance overlay of the roadway so the project consists of surface treatment and millfill
within the existing limits of the roadway. Reconstruction implies total removal and total
reconstruction and that was not the original intent of the budget item.
TB Resolution No. 2013-042: BOND RESOLUTION (Subiect to Permissive Referendum)
In the Matter of the Proposed Reconstruction of Forest Home Drive at Flat Rock, in the
Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York, pursuant to Town Law and the Local
Finance Law.
At a regular meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York,held at Town Hall,in Ithaca,New York, in said Town, on the 1 lth day of March,2013,
at 5:30 o'clock P.M.,Prevailing Time.
The meeting was called to order by Supervisor Herb Engman, and upon roll being called,
there were present: Supervisor Herb Engman, Councilpersons Rich DePaolo, Bill Goodman, Rod
Howe, Tee-Ann Hunter, Patricia Leary and Eric Levine
The following resolution was offered by Rod Howe, who moved its adoption, seconded
by Pat Leary to-wit:
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING, SUBJECT TO PERMISSIVE
REFERENDUM, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF FOREST HOME DRIVE
AT FLAT ROCK, IN AND FOR THE TOWN OF ITHACA, TOMPKINS
COUNTY,NEW YORK,AT A MAXIMUM ESTIMATED COST OF
$250,000,AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $250,000 BONDS OF
SAID TOWN TO PAY THE COST THEREOF.
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter
described, including compliance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review
Act, have been performed; and
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 125
WHEREAS, the capital project hereinafter described has been determined to be a Type II
Action pursuant to the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the
implementation of which as proposed, said regulation provides will not result in a significant
adverse environmental effect; and
WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize the financing thereof;
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,New York, as follows:
Section 1. The reconstruction of Forest Home Drive at Flat Rock, in and for the
Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York, including curbing, landscaping and other right-
of-way improvements and other incidental improvements and expenses in connection therewith,
is hereby authorized at a maximum estimated cost of$250,000.
Section 2. The plan for the financing of the aforesaid maximum estimated cost is by
the issuance of not exceeding $250,000 bonds of said Town, hereby authorized to be issued
therefor pursuant to the provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the
aforesaid specific object or purpose is fifteen years,pursuant to subdivision 20(c) of paragraph a
of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law. It is hereby further determined that the maximum
maturity of the serial bonds herein authorized will exceed five years.
Section 4. The faith and credit of said Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,New York,
are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such bonds as
the same respectively become due and payable. An annual appropriation shall be made in each
year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds becoming due and payable in
such year. There shall annually be levied on all the taxable real property in said Town, a tax
sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such bonds as the same become due and payable.
Section 5. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law, the power to authorize
the issuance of and to sell bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of the
bonds herein authorized, including renewals of such notes, is hereby delegated to the Supervisor
of said Town, the chief fiscal officer. Such notes shall be of such terms, form and contents, and
shall be sold in such manner, as may be prescribed by said Supervisor, consistent with the
provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 6. All other matters except as provided herein relating to the bonds herein
authorized including the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, within the
limitations prescribed herein and the manner of execution of the same, including the
consolidation with other issues, and also the ability to issue bonds with substantially level or
declining annual debt service, shall be determined by the Supervisor, the chief fiscal officer of
such Town. Such bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in
Section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law, and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 126
recitals, in addition to those required by Section 5 1.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the
Supervisor shall determine consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 7. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested
only if-
1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said Town is
not authorized to expend money, or
2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of
this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or
proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the
date of such publication, or
3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.
Section 8. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes
of Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no monies
are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set
aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose described herein.
Section 9. Upon this resolution taking effect, the same shall be published in full or
summary form in the official newspaper of said Town for such purpose, together with a notice of
the Town Clerk in substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law.
Section 10. THIS RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED SUBJECT TO PERMISSIVE
REFERENDUM.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly put to a vote on roll
call, which resulted as follows: Herb Engman, aye; Pat Leary, aye; Bill Goodman, aye; Rod
Howe, aye; Tee-Ann Hunter, aye; Rich DePaolo, aye and Eric Levine , aye.
The resolution was thereupon declared duly adopted.
Agenda Item 10
Discuss and Consider Approval of the Revised Joint Youth Commission's Bylaws
TB Resolution No. 2013 - 043: Accepting Amendments to the Joint Youth Commission
Operating Guidelines
WHEREAS the Joint Youth Commission (JYC) was created by resolution of the Board of the
Town of Ithaca and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing in 1991 pursuant to Articles 95
and 13 of the General Municipal Law and
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 127
WHEREAS Article 95 charges Youth Commissions with the responsibility for coordination of
youth programming within the municipalities and Article 13 enables municipalities to create
joint recreation commissions which may include youth service programming as well and
WHEREAS the JYC members have recommended various changes to the Operating Procedures
Now Therefore Be It
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca approves the changes to the Operating
Procedures as submitted.
MOVED: Rich DePaolo SECONDED: Pat Leary
VOTE: Ayes—Engman, Goodman, Leary, Howe, Levine, Hunter and DePaolo
Agenda Item 11
Discuss and Consider Resolution of Support for a Petition to the NYS Governor and State
Representatives Regarding Actions Related to the Local Government Records
Management Improvement Fund
TB Resolution 2013 - 44: Petition the New York State Governor and State Representatives
to Authorize the Application Process for Grants through the Local Government Records
Management Improvement Fund and Terminate the Seizure of Funds Collected for a
Dedicated Purpose
WHEREAS, New York State has long understood the importance of efficient records
management policies and procedures to ensure the continuity of government, protection from
liability, and preservation of historical documents, and
WHEREAS, in 1987, the Local Government Records Management Improvement Fund
was created in New York State with the clear intent to provide funding for programs for local
governments to establish, create, and maintain procedures and programs to ensure the integrity
and preservation of government records, and
WHEREAS, County Clerks across New York State collect this money on recording of
land records and civil court filings and forward all such money so collected to the New York
State Commissioner of Taxation& Finance to be placed in a DEDICATED FUND in accordance
with statute, and
WHEREAS, a total of$3,394,000 has been taken from this dedicated fund to offset
deficiencies in the New York State Budget for at least the last four years, and
WHEREAS, in addition to the sweeping of funds, this year the Budget Division has
refused to authorize the application process for the 2012-2014 cycle, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Town Board does hereby petition the Governor of the State of New
York and our state representatives to direct that the New York State Division of Budget
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 128
authorize the application process for grants through the Local Government Records Management
Improvement Fund,
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board does hereby petition the Governor of the
State of New York and our state representatives to immediately end the practice of sweeping
money collected for a dedicated purpose and using it for other purposes,
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk send certified copies of this Resolution to
the Governor of the State of New York and our state representatives.
Moved: Tee-Ann Hunter Seconded: Rod Howe
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, Howe, Goodman, Engman, Leary, Levine and DePaolo
Agenda Item 12 Discuss and Consider a Resolution of Support for the S.A.F.E Act
Moved to before Item 6
Agenda Item 13 Discuss and Consider Approval and Authorization for the Supervisor
to Sign the Contract for General Code's MunicityTM Integrated Parcel Management
Software
Mr. DePaolo had a question about the access to our system to fix any problems and Ms. Carrier-
Titti responded that they have to schedule access with her. Mr. DePaolo also had a question
about the cancellation fees for scheduled installations and Ms. Carrier-Titti explained that
referred to an implementation timeline that we will work out and this would cover them if we
had to cancel an appointment for which they have committed manpower to without enough
notice there is a fee that we would pay. Ms. Brock noted that she has not reviewed this yet and it
is extensive and she requested that the clause "subject to the approval of the Attorney for the
Town"be added to the last resolved.
TB Resolution 2013 -45: Authorization for the Town Supervisor to Sign the Contract with
General Code's MunicityTM Integrated Parcel Management Software
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Bill Goodman
Whereas staff has reviewed numerous software applications to replace the Town's aging
patchwork of databases and
Whereas staff visited other municipalities using various software applications for similar
purposes and narrowed the selection down to two applications and
Whereas staff reported to the Town Board on the processes and reviews held and recommended
that it would be in the Town's best interests to select MunicityTM Integrated Parcel Management
Software
Now therefore be it
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 129
Resolved that the Town Board hereby selects Municity and authorizes the Town Supervisor to
enter into a contract, subject to the approval of the Attorney for the Town, with General Code for
their MunicityTM Integrated Parcel Management Software for the application and support to be
installed in 2013 and not to exceed the budgeted amount of$55,000 for the initial setup and
implementation.
Vote: Ayes—Howe, Hunter, Engman, Goodman, Leary, Levine and DePaolo
Agenda Item 14 Discuss and Consider Appointments for the County Assessment
Review Board
TB Resolution No. 2013 - 46: Appointments to Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review
WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review will hold their
review proceedings in May 2013, date TBA, at Ithaca Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca,
New York; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca appoint two
representatives to attend the said proceedings;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints Eric Levine and Rich
DePaolo to serve on the Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca appoint Rod Howe to serve as
Alternate Representative; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a
certified copy of this resolution to the Tompkins County Assessment Department.
Moved: Herb Engman Seconded: Bill Goodman
Vote: Ayes - Goodman, Engman, Leary, Levine, Howe, DePaolo and Hunter
Agenda Item 15 Begin Review of a Preliminary Draft Scoping Document for the Draft
Comprehensive Plan
Sue gave over view reminding the Board that the environmental assessment form and
environmental impact statement process are geared toward site-specific projects and one of the
reasons the State recommends that towns do a GEIS for their comprehensive plans is that the
form does not adequately address all the impacts of a comprehensive plan. She went on to say
that that is what she essentially sees us doing now. Discussing the potential impacts in the GEIS
and providing the public input avenue through the GEIS process.
So keeping that in mind, she wanted to say that we see the future zoning which will be the
implementation of the comprehensive plan, that we would do another GEIS that would be more
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 130
specific and would have specific numbers and densities than the overall scope of the
comprehensive plan.
She brought the Board's attention to the general scope developed by staff which gives general
impacts that we want to explore in the GEIS. Ms. Ritter also reminded the Board that the
comprehensive plan is generally updated in 10-15 years and that is the timeframe they are
looking at in this draft scoping document and unlike an EIS where a developer would prepare the
scoping document and the Planning Board would decide whether it is adequate or not, this Board
is the Lead Agency deciding if the scoping document is adequate and you will also be the one to
decide if the GEIS does address everything you decided it would address as laid out in the
scoping document. So it is a little different of a relationship between the steps.
Ms. Ritter thought the way it would work at this point is the Board would review and adapt the
draft scoping document and once they determined it was complete enough and in final draft
form, it would be released to the public for comment. Once those comments are received and
incorporated, then the final scoping document would be prepared.
Mr. Engman asked why the timeframe indicated on the draft scope was 2030 which is 17 years
when Ms. Ritter had just stated that comprehensive plans are reviewed every 10-15 and Ms.
Ritter responded that the 10-15 years is an ideal but realistically,we don't get to it in that
timeframe and 2030 seemed a nice round number to shoot for. Mr. Tasman added that the
census is done in 10 year increments and it is easier to make projections using those numbers so
we decided on 2030.
The Board turned their attention to the draft scoping document provided.
Mr. Howe asked if it would be beneficial to add another section such as 2.10 to talk about the
economic impacts or what the plan would likely do to promote economic vitality. He thought it
was an important aspect of the plan. He added that he did see it mentioned in the Goals and
Recommendations but he thought it was equally important as some of the other categories.
Ms. Ritter asked if he felt there would be an economic impact and Mr. Howe thought that we are
starting to define where economic growth may happen. Mr. Tasman stated that with the scoping
document you are really looking at potential adverse environmental impacts and looking at
economic impacts, they may or may not be adverse. If you felt that the economic impacts would
be negative you would look at that or if you felt the economic impact would be so large that it
would spur massive development with associated environmental impacts,you would look at that.
Mr. Howe responded that he did not see some of the other items as adverse, such as housing; it is
worded in a very positive way and he thought the economic impacts would be framed in the
same positive way.
Ms. Brock added that economic impacts are not environmental impacts per se and are not
generally looked at in EIS process unless you thought it would lead to blight. If we want to look
at it we can and see if it fits. Mr. Howe thought that if it didn't have a clear fit, that is fine, but
he thought it should be kept in mind. Ms. Brock added that it might come out in physical
changes that might affect a community's character and some of that might happen but she wasn't
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 131
sure we could have a section titled economic impacts due to the constraints on the guidelines
given by the state.
Ms. Hunter asked if this was the time we look at viewsheds because she did not see that in the
draft. Mr. Tasman responded that we do have a Scenic Resources Plan that identifies various
viewsheds and the impact on individual viewsheds would probably be more appropriate on a
project by project basis. He wondered how she was thinking it could be looked at in the scope.
Ms. Hunter responded that the impacts on the viewsheds by the proposed densified
neighborhoods and she would like some assessment of the impacts on viewsheds in those
identified areas. Mr. Tasman thought that could be worked into the community character area if
she felt that viewsheds were a defining element of the Town. Ms. Hunter responded that they are
definitely defining elements of certain neighborhoods and asked that that be added.
Ms. Hunter then asked about the issue of runoff and Mr. Tasman responded that that is in natural
resources. She asked about utility infrastructure based on the Brittain brothers' comments on the
amount of energy it will cost to supply water to these increase densified areas.
Ms. Hunter then asked Ms. Ritter about her earlier comment, asking if we are basing this on a
full build-out or are we making some projection on what we think will happen and basing the
GEIS on that? Ms. Ritter responded that her recommendation would be to look at the life of the
comprehensive plan and not a build-out scenario because in 20 years we are going to look at the
plan again and determine if we are going in the right direction and modify it. Ms. Hunter voiced
her concern about that scenario even though she valued her opinion and understands the logic of
it, she stated that she has lived in many communities that have been hit by development that
comes out of now where and they were not prepared for it. We can estimate what we think it
might be but Toll Brothers could come in here and buy up large quantities of land and almost
reach full build-out in two seasons. She would be very cautious and she would like us to look at
full build-out because we are granting land use rights and it is very difficult to retract those rights
once property owners have been given those rights and if we find ourselves hurtling down that
road and we haven't anticipated the environmental impacts that could conceivably happen, we
could get ourselves in a bad situation.
Mr. Ritter responded by saying our growth has been steady over the past three decades and we
have entrenched large employers that don't change as much as other employers and if some burst
did happen, that would be managed through zoning. If something drastic were to happen the
Plan could be revisited but this is a general document covering 10-15 years. Ms. Hunter was not
convinced that not looking at full build-out was appropriate.
Ms. Leary asked what the response of staff was; doing full build-out or not? Ms. Ritter stated
that it was Staff's opinion that we do not use a full build-out scenario and we do not know what
the zoning will be and this is to talk about impacts and given our growth rate, a full build-out,
even in areas designated for growth, are going to take us through this century and into the next.
Ms. Leary strongly agreed stating that it using a full build-out would be ridiculous.
Ms. Leary went back to the discussion on Scenic Views and asked if the Board had elevated
scenic views to be a completely separate element or is it incorporated into community character?
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 132
Mr. Tasman responded that they have identified some alterations of some scenic vistas as a
significant impact due to the clustering versus the spreading out of building development. Ms.
Leary asked if staff was assuming that there were negative aspects of all of these that need
mitigation, because she thought Mr. Howe's point was a good one when he brought up economic
impacts because she didn't see that as a negative or a positive but rather just something to look
at. Mr. Tasman responded that some things are neither a negative or a positive but just an impact
and something that is different. Some impacts are just different and the decision will be made
whether they are positive or negative or neutral.
Mr. Engman noted that time is moving along and wanted to say that he thought the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and thus the environmental review has more to do with the intent of this
Plan to direct development, not to either create or encourage it. We are trying to direct
development for very particular purposes and it is that impact that is very important and for that
reason the logical estimated growth is what we really should be looking at because if we do total
build-out then we are looking at the entire town and every conceivable parcel and that's not what
this Plan does. He felt it was restricting development more than promoting it and that is the
environmental impact we are trying to judge and the overall impact is going to be very positive
and that is the way to look at it.
Mr. Goodman wanted to put a thought in everyone's mind because at the end we get into
mitigation measures, especially about traffic, and we will be proposing mitigations and he asked
Ms. Brock if this document could be used in the future to get mitigation fees from developers.
He recalled in the past we had discussions on the possibility and he thought it was the Town of
Colonie that had done it in the past and we should look into that avenue. Ms. Brock responded
that there are some constraints and it is quite difficult and there are constitutional issues in trying
to require improvements that are offsite. She was not saying we couldn't,but there are some real
limits to what we can do and we have to be really careful and deliberate if we do. Some
discussion followed with Ms. Hunter recalling that the zones had to be very defined which this
Plan and land use map seem to lend itself to and Mr. Engman recalled that it was very expensive,
something around $500,000 per area so that was off putting also.
Mr. DePaolo asked about Section 2.3 which implies extrapolating from existing traffic studies
and he asked if we envision doing additional studies or there is enough data out there? Ms.
Ritter felt that there was enough data out there and we have a lot of traffic models from various
agencies and developments that have gone through. Mr. Tasman responded that we have not set
out a specific methodology but he was thinking we would take a baseline and then look at the
densified areas and the housing mix and associated household sizes and use our projections.
Mr. DePaolo then talked about scenic views and if we could can have a basis in the Plan to
provide for the protection of scenic views and establish that we take our viewsheds seriously.
Discussion followed. Ms. Leary wanted to make sure that scenic views not be used as an
exclusionary tool and raise it above everything else that we are considering because it could be
elitist.
Agenda Item 16 Review Chapter 1: Introduction and Community Vision Statement of
the Draft Comprehensive Plan Moved to next meeting
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 133
Added Items for Public Works Equipment
TB Resolution No. 2013—047: Approving the Purchase of Rubber Track Compact
Excavator, 12,000 lbs. Minimum
Moved: Rich DePaolo Seconded: Rod Howe
WHEREAS: the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department has identified the replacement of
"Rubber Track Compact Excavator, 12,000 Minimum" equipment described within the 2013
Budget as a Mini-Excavator, and
WHEREAS: the Public Works Department advertised and opened bids for the replacement of
this piece of equipment, and
WHEREAS: three responsible bids were received, all within the budgeted amount, and
WHEREAS: the lowest bid received failed to meet the minimum specifications for a number of
items, and the equipment thereby would not be able to meet the Town's intended use, meaning
the bid is "non-responsive", and
WHEREAS: Town Board Resolution 2013-012 authorizes the Town Superintendent of
Highways to spend amounts not to exceed those identified for specific equipment in the 2013
Town Budget, without the prior approval of the Town Board, except when the lowest responsible
bidder is not selected, and
WHEREAS: because the lowest bid received was "non-responsive", the Town Superintendent
of Highways wishes to seek Town Board approval for the equipment purchase,
RESOLVED: that the Town Superintendent of Highways is authorized to award the bid to
Milton Cat, 55 Industrial Park Drive, Binghamton,NY 13904 for a total cost not to exceed
$86,436.00 (base bid plus attachments)
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, Howe, Engman, Goodman, DePaolo, Levine and Leary
TB Resolution 2013 - 048: Approving the Purchase of Tractor Mower
Moved: Rich DePaolo Seconded: Bill Goodman
WHEREAS: the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department has identified the replacement of
"Tractor Mower" equipment within the 2013 Budget, and
WHEREAS: the Public Works Department advertised and opened bids for the replacement of
this piece of equipment, and
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 134
WHEREAS: one responsible bid was received from O'Hara Machinery Inc. of 1289
Chamberlain Road, Auburn,NY 13 02 1, in the amount of$77,420, which exceeds the budgeted
amount of$60,000, and
WHEREAS: the bidder included a"trade-in" amount of$17,500.00, for the existing equipment,
bringing the total bid amount to $59,920.00, and
WHEREAS: the 2013 Town of Ithaca Fleet/Equipment budgeted amount, $617,000 will not be
exceeded and the anticipated revenue from the sale of surplus equipment, $25,000 should be met,
and
WHEREAS: Town Board Resolution 2013-012 authorizes the Town Superintendent of
Highways to spend amounts not to exceed those identified for specific equipment in the 2013
Town Budget, without the prior approval of the Town Board, except when the lowest responsible
bidder is not selected, and
WHEREAS: because the amount listed in the 2013 Town Budget for the Tractor Mower is less
than the amount of the bid received, Town Board approval is needed for its purchase,
RESOLVED: that the Town Superintendent of Highways is authorized to award the bid to
O'Hara Machinery Inc. for the Tractor Mower for a total cost to the Town not to exceed
$59,920.00 (bid plus trade in).
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, Howe, Levine, Leary, Engman, DePaolo and Goodman
Agenda Item 17 Consider Approval of the Revised Grant from the Tompkins County
Development Focus Area Fund
Ms. Ritter explained that two of the major participants of this grant project are also volunteers on
City committees and their Ethics Policy will not allow them to work on the grant. The proposal
on the table is to remove the City's participation and they have reviewed the proposal and
changed some pieces of the project such as reducing the hours for review of existing City plans
and shifted some tasks to the second phase which they believe will be covered by a different
grant to account for that loss of funding. Moved and seconded for discussion.
Ms. Leary was against continued support noting that the city gets a free ride and we pay the same
as well as the principal people work for the City and have a City orientation. She felt that the
City would get benefits that we are paying for. Mr. DePaolo asked if she had an alternative and
she responded replacing the people. Ms. Ritter noted that Mr. Demarest developed this grant and
project and we would still be getting a lot of benefit from the study for a relatively a small
amount of money. Mr. Engman added that this started out as an intermunicipal cooperation to
see if we could test out the idea of form-based zoning over a broad area including cityscape and
ruralscape and the County learn from it and be able to advise other municipalities about it so he
felt the results would be very useful for a wide variety. Ms. Hunter added that it will also
provide an opportunity for city and town planning people to get together and anytime that
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 135
happens that is a good thing. Discussion followed. It was noted that the two people in question
are on voluntary committees and this is because of the City's rather restrictive Ethics code.
TB Resolution No. 2013 -49: Authorization to accept a revised grant from the Tompkins
County Development Focus Area Fund
WHEREAS, following adoption of the Tompkins County Development Focus Area Strategy the
County Legislature offered a matching grant funding opportunity to local municipalities for
planning related initiatives consistent with the recommendations outlined in the Strategy
document, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca-based consulting firm, STREAM Collaborative, along with several
partners,proposed to undertake a study involving the Town and City of Ithaca, focusing on the
Cayuga Inlet valley and portions along the Black Diamond Trail, and within a defined
demonstration area, to determine the effectiveness of using form-base zoning across municipal
boundaries, and
WHEREAS, the STREAM Collaborative project was awarded the County grant funding for
Phase I of the proposed City/Town form-based project, with the Town of Ithaca identified as the
lead agency, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board, at a meeting on December 17, 2012, granted the Town Supervisor
the authority to sign a contract agreement for acceptance of the County Development Focus Area
Matching Fund grant providing up to $8000 (50% of the project costs)with match contributions
from the Town of Ithaca and City of Ithaca,proposed as $4000, and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the Supervisor signing the agreement on December 13, 2012 the City
of Ithaca determined that a conflict of interest existed because one member of the STREAM
Collaborative serves on the City Planning and Development Board and another serves on the
City Conservation Board Advisory Committee and according to City ethics rules, members of
boards and committees cannot enter into a professional contract with the City for compensation
of services, and
WHEREAS, after considering the matter, the County has agreed to still fund the project at $8000
with only the $4000 match from the Town of Ithaca(and no contribution from the City), and the
STREAM Collaborative has agreed to move the project forward, maintaining the City and Town
project study area and the overall goals of the project, but by reducing some of the project costs
such as limiting the background review to key City and Town studies and documents, shifting
several aspects of the project, such as the Smart Code calibration and the refinement of the
regulating plan to Phase II of the project, and eliminating a formal presentation, and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Planning Department has provided a contract addendum to
reflect the changes to the project(attached),
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 136
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca is hereby
authorized to sign the contract addendum for acceptance of the revised County Development
Focus Area Matching Fund grant, of up to $8000, for the purpose of having the STREAM
Collaborative undertake a study to examine the potential for implementing a Town and City of
Ithaca coordinated form-based zone in a defined demonstration area within the municipalities.
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Rod Howe
Vote: Ayes—Engman, DePaolo, Hunter, Levine, Howe and Goodman Nays—Leary
Agenda Item 18 Consider Consent Agenda Items
TB Resolution 2013 - 50: Consent Agenda
Moved: Tee-Ann Hunter Seconded: Rod Howe
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or
adopts the following Consent Agenda items:
a. Approval of Town Board Minutes of February 25, 2013 PULLED
b. Approval of Town of Ithaca Abstract
c. Approval of Bolton Point Abstract
d. Appointment of Director of Planning
e. Appointment of Senior Planner—Tasman
f. Appointment of Senior Planner—Smith
g. Appointment of Sustainability Planner—Goldsmith
h. SCLIWC—Appointment of Administrative Assistant III—Hughs
i. SCLIWC—Appointment of Water Maintenance Specialist—Trimm
TB Resolution 2013 -50b : Town of Ithaca Abstract
WHEREAS, the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town
Board for approval of payment; and
WHEREAS, the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board;
now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said
vouchers in total for the amounts indicated.
VOUCHER NOS. 3424 - 3464
General Fund Town wide 120,224.95
General Fund Part Town 1,622.38
Highway Fund Part Town 10,155.74
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 137
Water Fund 904.31
Sewer Fund 831.21
Forest Home Lighting District 594.94
TOTAL 134,333.53
TB Resolution 2013 -50 c : Bolton Point Abstract
WHEREAS, the following numbered vouchers for the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal
Water Commission have been presented to the governing Town Board for approval of payment;
and
WHEREAS, the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board; now,
therefore,be it
RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said
vouchers.
Voucher Numbers: 1550-1612
Check Numbers: 14427-14435, 14437-14490
Burdick Hill Tanks Project $ 11,792.94
N. Trip Rd T-main Project $ 0
Operating Fund $ 65,384.33
TOTAL $ 77,177.27
Less Prepaid $ 10,120.12
TOTAL $ 67,057.15
TB Resolution 2013 —50 d : Permanent Appointment of Director of Planning.
WHEREAS, the Town Board on January 1, 2011 provisionally appointed Susan Ritter,
to the position of Director of Planning,pending results from the next civil service exam; and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Personnel has provided the certificate of eligible
listing for the title of Director of Planning, and Susan Ritter was one of the top three candidates;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca does hereby appoint Susan Ritter to the position of
Director of Planning in the permanent status with no change in current compensation or benefits;
and,be it further
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 138
RESOLVED, an eight (8) week probationary period applies, with no further action by the
Town if there is successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the Town
Supervisor.
TB Resolution 2013—e : Permanent Appointment of Senior Planner-Tasman.
WHEREAS, the Town Board on January 3, 2011 provisionally appointed Daniel Tasman
to the position of Assistant Director of Planning,pending results from the next civil service
exam; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board in 2012 reclassified the Assistant Director of Planning
position to a Senior Planner position and appointed Daniel Tasman to that position provisionally;
and
WHEREAS, Tompkins County Civil Service has provided the certificate of eligible
listing for the title of Senior Planner, and Daniel Tasman was one of the top three candidates;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca does hereby appoint Daniel Tasman to the position
of Senior Planner in the permanent status with no change in current compensation or benefits;
and, be it further
RESOLVED, a twenty six (26)week probationary period applies, with no further action
by the Town if there is successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the
Director of Planning.
TB Resolution 2013 —50 f: Permanent Appointment of Senior Planner-Smith.
WHEREAS, the Town Board in October 2012 created a second Senior Planner position
when restructuring the Planning Department; and
WHEREAS,the restructuring was designed to have the second Senior Planner position
be filled from a lateral promotion for Michael Smith from Environmental Planner to Senior
Planner pending the civil service exam for Senior Planner; and
WHEREAS, Tompkins County Civil Service has provided the certificate of eligible
listing for the title of Senior Planner, and Michael Smith was one of the top three candidates;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 139
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca does hereby appoint Michael Smith to the position
of Senior Planner in the permanent status with no change in current compensation or benefits;
and, be it further
RESOLVED, an eight (8) week probationary period applies, with no further action by the
Town if there is successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the Director
of Planning.
TB Resolution 2013 —50 g : Permanent Appointment of Sustainability Planner-Goldsmith.
WHEREAS, the Town Board on July 16, 2012 provisionally appointed Nick Goldsmith,
to the position of Sustainability Planner, pending results from the next civil service exam; and
WHEREAS, Tompkins County Civil Service has provided the certificate of eligible
listing for the title of Sustainability Planner, and Nick Goldsmith was one of the top three
candidates;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca does hereby appoint Nick Goldsmith to the position
of Sustainability Planner in the permanent status with no change in current compensation or
benefits; and,be it further
RESOLVED, a twenty six (26) week probationary period applies, with no further action
by the Town if there is successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the
Town Supervisor.
TB Resolution 2013 —50 h : Appointment Administrative Assistant III-SCLIWC.
WHEREAS, there is presently a vacancy in the part time position of Administrative
Assistant III in the Administration Department at Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Finance Manager, General Manager, and Human Resources Manager
interviewed candidates from the eligible listing available from Tompkins County Civil Service;
and
WHEREAS, the said have determined that Julie Hughes possesses the necessary
knowledge and skills to satisfactorily perform the duties of an Administrative Assistant III; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Hughes was appointed by SCLIWC at the March 7, 2013 meeting based
on a part time level of 25 hours per week, effective March 21, 2013;
Now, therefore, be it
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 140
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby ratify SCLIWC's
appointment of Julie Hughes as a part time Administrative Assistant III for the Administration
Department; and be it further
RESOLVED, this is a 25 hours a week position, at the hourly wage of$20.67, which is
an estimated annual salary of$26,871, from account number SW8310.101,with part time
benefits; and be it further
RESOLVED, a twenty six (26) week probationary period applies and shall end effective
September 19, 2013, with no further action by the Commission or Town Board, if there is
successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the Finance Manager.
TB Resolution 2013 — 50 i : Appointment Water Maintenance Specialist-SCLIWC.
WHEREAS, there is presently a vacancy in the full time position of Water Maintenance
Specialist in the Distribution Department at Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Distribution Manager, General Manager, and Human Resources
Manager interviewed 7 candidates from the open recruitment for the position; and
WHEREAS,the said have determined that Hugh Trimm Jr. possesses the necessary
knowledge and skills to satisfactorily perform the duties of a Water Maintenance Specialist; and
WHEREAS, Hugh Trimm Jr. was appointed by SCLIWC at the March 7, 2013 meeting
based on a full time level of 40 hours per week, effective March 25, 2013;
Now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby ratify SCLIWC's
appointment of Hugh Trimm Jr. as a full time of Water Maintenance Specialist in the
Distribution Department; and be it further
RESOLVED, this is a 40 hours a week position, at the hourly wage of$15.36, which is
an estimated annual salary of$31,948, from account number SW8340.101, with full time
benefits; and be it further
RESOLVED, a twenty six (26)week probationary period applies and shall end effective
September 23, 2013, with no further action by the Commission or Town Board, if there is
successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the Distribution Manager.
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, Howe, Levine, Leary, DePaolo, Goodman and Engman
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 141
Report of Town Officials
Mr. Engman reported that the Industrial Development Agency(IDA)has set a
public hearing regarding a PILOT for a proposed hotel on Aurora Street and we have had some
strong feelings on PILOTs in the past and since he was planning on attending, he could deliver a
message if we had one. He understood that the proposal is a 10 year pilot with the exception of
the current assessment as a vacant lot so 100% first year with a 10% added each year. He also
understood that they would be looking for a waiver of the mortgage recording tax. Mr. Engman
went on to say that we have a vested interest because this would affect the County and school
taxes which we all would feel. Their reasoning is that building in the city is very expensive but
he was concerned because there are a number of hotels being built in the City in the next few
years and whether this is going to be the first of many.
Ms. Leary agreed and added that there was another communication from the Tompkins Workers
Center and the City did have a stipulation about a living wage for the lowest wage workers and
they no longer have that and the agreement doesn't say anything about it. She stated that she
spoke with Will Burbank who is on the IDA about this and he told her there was some kind of an
agreement that the lowest paid workers of the hotel would be paid 150% of the minimum wage
which would bring them up to a living wage and that they would be provided health insurance
and she was concerned that it would be expensive insurance or a sham. She stated that at a
minimum she would want the living wage or 150% as part of the agreement. She then spoke to
the larger question of whether they should get a pilot at all; you could answer that they are
getting the advantages from building downtown and the marketability of that so although it may
cost more to build initially, it will be fine in the long run so why do they need enticement. She
was leaning against granting one because if you give one to one enterprise, they will all ask.
Mr. DePaolo agreed stating that in general he frowns on tax abatements and as a developer you
have to be able to assume the financial costs of building where you want to build and the IDA is
too fast and loose with abatements and takes job creation less seriously than it ought to. It is
costly to build in the City but your take is more too and that is what your investment is.
Ms. Hunter asked what parcel it is and Mr. Howe explained that it is a tiny site next to the
cinema. She thought we should at least get a contribution towards fire protection or that portion
of the tax bill. She asked if we knew what the assessment was but no one did. She thought
maybe we should ask for a shorter term than 10 years and noted that with a building cycle, you
always get free time without taxes until the first assessment period so the first 0%period should
be during the building year.
Mr. Howe suggested that we ask the IDA to come in and explain their reasoning. Mr. Engman
responded that they are appointed by the county and we do not get notification of anything or
generally hear from them at all.
Ms. Leary added another concern thinking that hotels are notorious for changing ownership and
they could do that after the PILOT and the next one would ask.
Mr. Engman stated that he had a good idea of the feeling of the Board and he would bring those
to the public hearing.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 142
County Land at former Biggs Building—Mr. Engman felt that we should give them some sort of
feedback on where the project is heading. Mr. DePaolo explained that the County put out an
RFP for 6 of the 26 acres they own for a cluster development and the only response they received
proposed an income-qualified rental residence. They have adjusted their income threshold but
that doesn't address the hole in the market that we have identified. There is a clause to allow
people to purchase the properties after 15 years and there would be an incentive to do so. It's
about as good as you can get for a low-income high density subsidized development but we need
to decide if we want to tell them to go back to the drawing board or if this potential rent-to-own
scenario could be vetted out or redo the RFP because others may have responded under those
guidelines.
Mr. Engman added that we had made it clear that we weren't thrilled with the location of this
development because it is not where we have identified densifying in our Plan and the original
proposal was for 20% subsidized housing and 80%market rate and now it has flipped. He felt it
was the wrong project in the wrong place and we need to give some feedback to the County.
Ms. Hunter talked about the expiration of affordability requirements such as with our current
developments and what happens when they go to market rate? We lose our affordable housing
and another comes in that gets abatements and breaks. Mr. Engman thought that in most cases
by the end of the period they need major renovations and a similar company comes through and
does it all over again with the same thresholds to ensure the funding to do the renovations.
Mr. Goodman noted that his sister is familiar with this 15-year model and there is a company in
Syracuse that has built some of these residences and he will o and look at them. The Board
decided to invite Mr. Marx to the next meeting on March 25t .
Report of Town Committees
Mr. Bates reported that the contractor for the clean-up of the Pine Tree Rd property has backed
out due to the insurance requirements requested by the Attorney for the Town. He has contacted
the other person but they haven't responded. He asked if we should advertise for the clean up.
Mr. Levine stated that his company has this need also so he will forward the names.
Meeting was adjourned upon a motion and a second at 8:56 p.m.
Adopted 3/25/2013 Page 143
Letter to Town Board 3-11-13 0
First, I would like to thank the members of the Town Board for all the hard work they do.
I have read parts of the Comprehensive Plan and The Minprj|;^ and I'd like to sign
onto The Minority Report. The Minority Repo"^ is more straightforward in addressing
the Town's, and particularly the West Hill's, current problems of traffic, housing, food
security and general sustainability. The Report brings up many good points such as the
Town's 7 % vacancy rate, the need for keeping our greenspace and agricultural lands for
food production, the need for buying and hiring locally, and the potential need not for
large developments that ghettoize people, but for smaller, low-impact .mixed income
developments that can be integrated into our existing communities. The development
model that has been practiced on the West Hill for the past 10 years has impacted
negatively on our community and has hurt both current and new residents. That model
simply does not work.
On another note, I have a question about the GEIS: what is the scope of the plan? How
can citizens get involved in identifying subjects to be under discussion and participate in
a real conversation — with back-and-forth questions and answers?
Pat Dutt, 135 Weslhaven Road
Murders by Weapon, US, 2005-2011Source (http://www.fbi.g0v/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s)Totalh irearmsK.nives orTotal(typecuttingOtherHands, fists,Yearmurders'firearmsHandgunsRiflesShotgunsunknown)instrumentsweaponsfeet, etc.200514,86010,1007,5434425171,5981,9141,954892200614,99010,1777,7954364811,4651,8222,158833200714,83110,0867,3614504551,8201,7962,095854200814,1809,4846,7553754441,9101,8971,938861200913,6369,1466,4523484181,9281,8251,864801201012,9968.7756,0093583732,0351,7041,772745201112,6648,5836,2203233561,6841,6941,659728Totals98,15766,35148,1352,7323,04412,44012,65213,4405,714% all murders67.6%49.0%2.8%3.1%12.7%12.9%13.7%5.8%% firearms murders72.5%"^^' 4:1%4.6%18.7%Murders by Weapon, NY, 2005-2011Source (http://www.fbi.g0v/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s)TotalM rearmsts.nives orTotal(typecuttingOtherHands, fists,Yearmurders'firearmsHandgunsRiflesShotgunsunknown)instrumentsweaponsfeet, etc.20058685004281010521881077320069214003081487014135129200780050011312936614212434200883547510712203361841472920097794811178133431661092320108605171356123641731482220117744453945163016014326Totals5,8373,3181,60267881,5611,1541,129236% all murders27.4%1.1%1.5%26.7%19.8%19.3%4.0%% firearms murders48.3% 1;:' 2.0%2.7%47.0%
Murders by Weapon, US, 2005-2011n Handgunsn RiflesMurders by Firearm Type, US, 2005-2011-Shotgunsn Firearms (typeunknown)Knives or cuttinginstrumentsn Other weaponsn Hands, fists, feet,etc.n Handgunsn Rifles" Shotgunsn Firearms (typeunknown)Murders by Weapon, NY, 2005-2011n Handgunsn RiflesMurders by Firearm Type, NY, 2005-2011-Shotgunsn Firearms (typeunknown)n Knives or cuttinginstrumentsn Other weaponsn Hands, fists, feet,etcHandgunsI RiflesShotgunsI Firearms (typeunknown))
PROJECT ID NUMBER
PART 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION
617.20
APPENDIX 0
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
for UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor)
SEQR
1. APPLICANT / SPONSOR
Town of Ithaca
2. PROJECT NAME
New Salt Storage Building
3.PR0JECT LOCATION:
106 Seven Mile Drive, Ithaca NY
Municipality
Tompkins
County
4, PRECISE LOCATION: Street Addess and Road Intersections, Prominent landmarks etc - or provide map
See attached Map
5. IS PROPOSED ACTION :^ □New I I Expansion ["^ Modification / alteration
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
Replace Existing salt storage building with a new building. New building footprint will closely match the
existing building.
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
initially 11.73 acres Ultimately 11.73 acres
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS?
□ Yes No If no, describe briefly:
Variances received from ZBA for Building Height, for total number and square footage of accessory buildings on the
parcel, and for the lack of sprinklers
□
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? (Choose as many as apply.)
0 Residential 0 Industrial | ^ [Commercial [Agriculture |^\ Park/ Forest /Open Space | |Other (describe)
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING. NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL
AGENCY (Federal, State or Local)
0 Yes I I No If yes, list agency name and permit / approval:
Town of Ithaca Building Department permit
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
0 Yes I |No If yes, list agency name and permit / approval:
Town of Ithaca Planning Borard site plan approval and Town of Ithaca variances
12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/ APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?I IyoS [/] No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOV^LEDGE
Applicant / Sponsor Name
Signature
If the action is a Costal Area, and you are a state agency,
complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
PART II - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT fTo be completed by the Town) ^
A. Does proposed action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12?
YES NO X If yes, coordinate the review process and use the full EAF. ^
B. Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6?
YES NO X If no, a negative declaration may he superseded by another involved agency, if any.
C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following:
Cl. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste
production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
The proposed salt storage building replacement is not expected to impact air quality, surface or
groundwater quality or quantity, or create noise, traffic, solid waste, or flooding issues. The proposed
building will be an improvement over the existing storage building, as salt dumping and filling areas
will be completely contained within the structure, rather than outside the structure as in the current
condition. The Department of Public Works will install appropriate sedimentation and erosion controls
to mitigate any impacts associated with the replacement.
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources? Community or
Neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
The proposed structure will be an aesthetic improvement over the existing structure and will be in
character with the area.
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish, or wildlife species, signiOcant habitats, or threatened or endangered species?
Explain briefly:
The proposed salt storage building will be in the exact same location as the existing structure and is not
expected to disturb significant vegetation or any animal or plant habitats. The building is also not
expected to disturb the stream that is located on the south side of the property, as it will be located
outside the required 50-foot stream setback buffer.
C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other
natural resources? Explain briefly:
The proposal is permitted with site plan approval from the Planning Board and variances from the
Zoning Board of Appeals.
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain
briefly:
The purpose of the proposed replacement is to provide safe, indoor space for the storage of salt that is
used for winter maintenance of the Town's roads and parking areas.
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C5? Explain briefly:
No adverse effects anticipated.
C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy) Explain briefly:
No adverse effects anticipated.
D. Will the project have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a Critical
Environmental Area (CEA)?
YES NO X If yes, explain briefly:
E. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts?
YES NO X If yes, explain briefly:
PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca)
Instructions; For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important, or otherwise significant Each effect should be
assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope, and (f)
I \
I ]
magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting material. Ensure that the explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant
adverse impacts have been identified and adequately address.
Check here ifyou have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then
proceed directly to the full EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration.
JL_Check here ifyou have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that
the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AI^D provide on Attachments as
necessary the reasons supporting this determination. y
Name of Lead AgencyName or Lead Agency Freparer's Signature(If different from Responsible Officer)
ne.rWt^ ByQ %uy\ S:|^CxScr
Name SlftiJile of Responsihlei)fficer In Lead Agency ^ Sign
Prep
e of Responsib fficerin Sign
nature of
ature of Contributing Preparer
DATE: ^A^/O
fficer in Lead Agency
Town of Ithaca
Department of Code Enforcement
Monthly Activity Report for February 2013
Category Description Entries
Building Permit Inspection In the Field inspection tied to a building permit 109
Building Permit Consultation In-office or in-fieid consultation w/project managers or
contractors regarding building proiects
36
Building Permit Review Review and processing of building permits 141
Compiaint New Investigation New complaint investigation 0
Complaint Foilow-Up Processing of complaints 2
Continuing Education Training, seminars, CEU's 4
Fire incident Investigation Fire Incident Investigation following dispatched call 2
Fire Safety/Operating Permit
Inspection
Fire Safety inspection for and/or operating permit.
Processing of notes and issuance of permit.7
Fire Safety/Operating Permit
Re-Inspection
Processing of Fire Safety re-inspection notes and
issuing operating permit/follow-up.1
Legal Processing Order to Remedy, issuing Appearance
Tickets, and actual court appearances 0
Meeting Attendance at Departmental meetings. Board
meetings. Committee meetings & Staff meetings, etc.25
Miscellaneous Counter service, phone calls not associated with an
active file.71
Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan Review Field Inspection/Report
0
Zoning Board of Appeals Review and research of ZBA applications 3
Addresses (911)Aii related work for address changes 0
Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Monthly Report
02/01/2013 - 02/28/2013
Building Permits Issued
BP#
9544
Date
2/5/2013
Value Description
$121,300.00 Minor alterations to convert 1 st floor of
Terrace 13 from residence hall (R-2) to
office (B)
fee
$600.00
category
Renovations &
Additions to
Commercial
9553 2/7/2013 $220,000.00 Build 2 family home - Foundation only $450.00 New 1 & 2 Family
Homes
9554 2/7/2013 $220,000.00 Build 2 family home - Foundation only $450.00 New 1 & 2 Family
Homes
9555 2/7/2013 $220,000.00 Build two family home - Foundation only $450.00 New 1 & 2 Family
Homes
9556 2/13/2013 $8,000.00 Enclose existing carport attached to
garage for unheated work space with
windows, entrance door & electric
$65.00 Miscellaneous
9547 2/13/2013 $6,000.00 Construct a gable roof over front entry of
house approx size 8' wide x 8' deep.
$65.00 Renovations and
Addition to 1 & 2
Family Homes
9542 2/13/2013 $8,966.40 install a 12 panel, 2.94 kw grid
connected, roof mounted solar
photovoltaic system, & 3 collector, roof
mounted solar thermal pane
$65.00 Renovations and
Addition to 1 & 2
Family Homes
9543 2/15/2013 $201,000.00 Build a new two family house $900.00 New 1 & 2 Family
Homes
9558 2/21/2013 $11,400.00 Strip off roof shingles to bare deck &
install metal roofing. Existing metal roof,
on approx 1/8 of roof area, to remain,
install
$80.00 Renovations and
Addition to 1 & 2
Family Homes
9560 2/22/2013 $38,000.00 Installation of two exibits requiring
electrical and plumbing infrastructure
$200.00 Miscellaneous
9549 2/25/2013 $9,236.57 install 18 panel 5.886kW grid-
connected, roof mounted solar
photovoltaic system.
$65.00 Renovations and
Addition to 1 & 2
Family Homes
9559 2/26/2013 $12,500.00 11 X 20 addition to existing home $80.00 Renovations and
Addition to 1 & 2
Family Homes
Thursday, February 28,2013
Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Monthly Report
02/01/2013-02/28/2013
9557 2/26/2013 $19,911.00 Remodel kitchen $80.00 Renovations and
Addition to 1 & 2
Family Homes
Totais 1 $1,096,313.97 1 $3,550.00
Certificates of OccuDanov issued
BP#Address Description CO Temp
8802 126 HonnessLn 2nd dwelling unit In basement 2/5/2013 □
9326 2 Saunders Rd Construct 168 sq ft addition using
existing deck foundation
2/5/2013 □
9059 123 Holly Creek Ln Construct 2-story townhouse 2/6/2013 □
9050 107 Holly Creek Ln Construct 2-story townhouse 2/6/2013 □
9055 113 Holly Creek Ln Construct 2-story townhouse 2/6/2013 □
9496 53B Lois Ln Add window in west wall of study 2/8/2013 □
9452 117 RoatSt Install 2, ground post mounted
Photovoltaic arrays, each 3.75 kw in
back yard.
2/8/2013 □
9031 136 Grant Egbert Blvd E Install cart}on monoxide devices 2/11/2013 □
9030 126 Grant Egbert Blvd E Install Carbon Monoxide devices 2/11/2013 □
Thursday. February 28,2013 Page 2
Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Monthly Report
02/01/2013 - 02/28/2013
9289 127 Grant Egbert Blvd Replace existing smoke and heat
detectors in Emerson Hall dormitory with
new.
2/11/2013 □
8977 651 Dryden Rd Install 2 new temporary boilers 2/13/2013 □
9035 300 Hayts Rd Construct 672 Sq ft 1 story attached
garage onto existing structure
2/14/2013 □
9276 110 Apple Blossom Ln Replace damaged exterior covering.
Repair roof damage.
2/15/2013 □
9379 1486 Trumansburg Rd Tear off existing roof cover and replace
with like material.
2/15/2013 □
9149 380 Bostwick Rd Construct 4800 sq ft bam for hay
storage - agriculatural use only.
2/15/2013 □
9196 911 Taughannock Blvd Reroof low-sloped portion of roof 2/15/2013 □
9309 197 Bostwick Rd Replace exterior siding damaged by hail
storm
2/15/2013 □
9339 177 Seven Mile Dr Replace damaged roof shingles & siding
on existing structure
2/15/2013 □
9494 183 Seven Mile Dr Remove and replace roof covering on
house and garage. Remove and replace
siding on south side of structure.
2/15/2013 □
9469 190 Seven Mile Dr Remove and replace exterior siding with
like material.
2/15/2013 □
Thursday, February 28,2013 Pages
Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Monthly Report
02/01/2013-02/28/2013
9130 1105 East Shore Dr Rebuild existing deck 2/19/2013 □
9522 1305 Hanshaw Rd Demolish garage and attached shed 2/19/2013 □
9129 950 Danby Rd Change in use of easting space.
Remove server room and install new
pass door to create media room
2/20/2013 □
9158 11 Chase Ln Tear off roof cover over front porch,
garage & Connecting hallway. Replace
roof cover tear-off area. Install 2nd layer
on main hou
2/20/2013 □
9466 950 Danby Rd Construct free standing bus shelter in
parking lot
2/20/2013 □
9419 118 Snyder Kill Rd Extend existing deck at front door not t o
exceed 8 ft by 15 ft
2/21/2013 □
9523 118 Snyder Hill Rd Add R30 blown-in insulation in attic to
existing insulation. Remove & replace 3
exterior doors and storm doors.
2/21/2013 □
9018 1422 Slatervllle Rd Recover roof and install ventilation
system
2/22/2013 □
9420 115 Northview Construct 110 sq ft unheated sunroom
addition and modify existing deck to
attach to sunroom.
2/22/2013 □
9530 145 Honness Ln Install 7.848kW grid-connected, roof
mounted solar photovoltaic system
2/25/2013 □
8503 Grant Egbert Blvd Ithaca College street lighting for Grant
Egbert Blvd, Conservatory Dr and Tower
Skyline Dr
2/26/2013 □
Thursday, February 28.2013 Page 4
Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Monthly Report
02/01/2013-02/28/2013
9349 110 Renwick Dr Renovate bathroom 2/28/2013 □
9125 389 Stone Quarry Rd remodel kitchen, upgrade heating,
electrical and plumbing associated with
remodel
2/28/2013 □
9394 209 Christopher Ln Master bathroom remodel and second
floor deck repair.
2/28/2013 □
Compiaints Received
Date Address Complaint Type Disposition
2/7/2013 129 Muriel St property maintenance
2/14/2013 1059 Danby Rd fire Other
2/21/2013 202A Northview Rd West building code
2/23/2013 101 Harris B Dates Dr fire Pending
Existing Building CO
Thursday, February 28.2013 Pages
Town of Ithaca Codes Department
Building Permit Applications Received February 2013
DateRec'd CEO BP#St#Street Name Status
2/1/2013 MK 9556 114 Clover Ln Issued
2/5/2013 MK 9557 306 Salem Dr Issued
2/7/2013 MK 9558 105 Konness Ln Issued
2/11/2013 BB 9559 471 Bostwtck Rd Issued
2/12/2013 BB 9560 1259 Trumansbuig Rd Issued - Aquaria tanks only
2/22/2013 BB 9561 850 Five Mile Dr Pending
Thursday, February 28,2013 Page 1 of 1