Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2011-08-22 Study Sessionof the Ithaca Town Board Monday, August 22, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Minutes Board Members Present: Herb Engman, Supervisor; Bill Goodman, Pat Leary, Tee- Ann Hunter, Eric Levine, Rich DePaolo, Absent: Nahmin Horwitz The meeting was called to order at 4:32 p.m. Review Draft Agenda for Regular Meeting Mr. DePaolo asked when the discussion regarding the study of West Hill was going to happen. Discussion followed with Mr. Engman stating that there is a budget concern about it and Ms. Ritter will be here shortly so we can talk about it under budget and go from there. Town Official’s Reports Mike Solvig – The bond sale was held and agents for Tompkins Trust were the lowest bidder at 2.955% which is the best rate we have on any of our bonds. He had hoped for st. under 4% and to be under 3% is really great. The closing will be September 1 Mr. Engman asked Ms. Drake to explain Smart Work. She explained that it is a way of going through processes that some County agencies have been using which are consultants through TC3 to see what is causing backlogs, redundancies etc. and evaluating what hanging up certain processes. We are going to try it with building permits. Mr. Engman added that although it isn’t a part of it, he would like to add a survey for customers. Discussion followed on the credentials of the consultants and Ms. Drake explained that basically what they do is prepare by looking at the existing background and process and taking an outside look at the big picture, which takes personalities out of the equation and look at what could be done when there is no money or extra staff to throw at it. Mr. Engman reported that we did receive the $21,000 check from Ulysses and now we still have to negotiate water loss on both sides of the border. He suggested and asked the Board to approve keeping the same team of Eric Levine, Jim Weber and himself ast he negotiating team. The Board agreed. Mr. Engman reminded the Board about the report and action plan sent out by Katie Stoner which is scheduled for October. Mr. Engman moved the action items before Reports. Consider Town Hall/HVAC Air Quality Study TBS 8-25-2011 Page 2 of 9 Mr. Weber reviewed the scope of the RFP and what they are going to report. The solutions or mitigations and any associated costs are not included in this contract. They will be taking samples at start-up and shut-down of the system(s) since it seems there are issues then and they will test throughout the work day at different periods. Discussion followed. TB RESOLUTION No. 2011- 132: Authorization to Award Contract and Establish a Capital Project Fund for the Town Hall HVAC/Air Quality Project WHEREAS the Operations Committee and the Safety Committee recommended a study/investigation be done on the Town Hall HVAC/Air Quality and WHEREAS on January 10, 2011 the Town Board agreed to move forward with an RFQ to determine a cost for the investigationand WHEREAS on July 20, 2011 the Town of Ithaca Director of Public Works/Highway Superintendent received 3 proposals for the Town Hall HVAC/Air Quality Study ranging from $18,000+/- $20,000+/- and WHEREAS: The members of the Operations Committee have reviewed the proposals and qualifications of the responding firms and determined that O’Brien & Gere meet the qualifications sought and WHEREAS the Operations Committee recommends that the project be awarded to O’Brien & Gere at the submitted cost of $18,382.00 for the total project and now therefore be it RESOLVED: that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorizes the award of the contract for the Town Hall HVAC/Air Quality to O’Brien & Gere, of Syracuse New York, subject to final approval of the contract documents by the Town Engineer and Attorney for the Town, and be it further RESOLVED: that the Town Supervisor is authorized to execute said contract upon such approval; MOVED: Rich DePaolo SECONDED: Bill Goodman VOTE Ayes: Engman, Goodman, Leary, Hunter, Levine, and DePaolo Absent: Horwitz Motion passed unanimously. TBS 8-25-2011 Page 3 of 9 Consider Setting a Public Hearing for a Noise Permit for St. Catherine of Siena Parish Carnival TB RESOLUTION NO. 2011- 133: Set Public Hearing for consideration of a Noise Permit for the St Catherine of Siena Festival WHEREAS the Town of Ithaca has received a Noise Permit application from St th Catherine of Siena Parish Festival on September 17 from 11am to 9 pm and th September 18 from 11 am to 6 pm, Therefore be it RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hold a public hearing at the th Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, on the 12 day of September, 2011, at 5:45 p.m. for the purpose of considering the above Noise Permit., and FURTHER RESOLVED , that at such time and place all persons interested in the proposed permits may be heard concerning the same; and FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of such public hearing in the official newspaper of the Town of Ithaca and to post a copy of same on the signboard of the Town of Ithaca. MOVED: Bill Goodman SECONDED: Rich DePaolo VOTE Ayes: Engman, Goodman, Leary, Hunter, Levine, and DePaolo Absent: Horwitz Motion passed unanimously. Consider Approval of Recognition of United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 2300 as Exclusive Representative for the Non-Management Technical, Office and Clerical Staff of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission Ms. Drake explained and the Board questioned if this was surprise and both Ms. Drake and Mr. Engman explained that there has been some turmoil for a while at Bolton Point and it is about stability and security not a wage or benefit issue and the result may be some better processes. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2011- 133: Set Public Hearing for consideration of a Noise Permit for the St Catherine of Siena Festival WHEREAS the Town of Ithaca has received a Noise Permit application from St th Catherine of Siena Parish Festival on September 17 from 11am to 9 pm and th September 18 from 11 am to 6 pm, Therefore be it TBS 8-25-2011 Page 4 of 9 RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hold a public hearing at the th Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, on the 12 day of September, 2011, at 5:45 p.m. for the purpose of considering the above Noise Permit., and FURTHER RESOLVED , that at such time and place all persons interested in the proposed permits may be heard concerning the same; and FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of such public hearing in the official newspaper of the Town of Ithaca and to post a copy of same on the signboard of the Town of Ithaca. MOVED: Bill Goodman SECONDED: Rich DePaolo VOTE Ayes: Engman, Goodman, Leary, Hunter, Levine, and DePaolo Absent: Horwitz Motion passed unanimously. Consider Consent Agenda Items TB RESOLUTION NO. 2011-135: Consent Agenda BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or adopts the resolutions for the following Consent Agenda items: Town of Ithaca Abstract a. Approval of Minutes of July, 25, and August 8, 2011 b. MOVED: Bill Goodman SECONDED: Eric Levine VOTE Ayes: Engman, Goodman, Leary, Hunter, Levine, and DePaolo Absent: Horwitz Motion passed unanimously. Report from Committees Budget Committee – Mr. Engman reported that there are some hard choices to be made and he asked Mr. Solvig to hand out a spreadsheet that was discussed. It will be reviewed in detail as a discussion item later in the meeting. Codes and Ordinances Committee – Mr. Goodman reported that they have not met since last study session but will be finishing up garages and conservation zone language and moving them to the Board. Comprehensive Plan Committee – Mr. Engman reported that they have not met, but will have a large packet for the next meeting to begin reviewing. Planning Committee – Mr. DePaolo reported that they met and talked exclusively about the Conifer proposal and made significant progress in some elements of the law, particularly putting on putting income levels in the law as opposed to referencing the TBS 8-25-2011 Page 5 of 9 federal and state regulations and they are waiting for comments from Susan Brock and Conifer to come back. There is also a special meeting on Thursday to discuss the design elements of the law. Personnel Committee – Ms. Hunter reported that Dan Thaete has been hired as the new civil engineer and interviews for the new typist at Bolton Point were held. Ms. Hunter asked Judy to explain the ancillary benefit discussion. Ms. Drake reported that some members of the Consortium have better ancillary benefits and she has been reviewing those; she is especially interested in the dental benefit that CSEA has; the larger the group the better the rates. Ms. Hunter reported that they began talking about the salary and benefits component of the budget, assuming going over the 2% cap as well as looking at the Coaching and Discipline policy we have in preparation for union negotiations. Public Works Committee – Mr. Goodman reported that prior to the meeting, he and Mr. DePaolo met with Mr. Mecenas and Ms. Emilian and Ms. Edmondson who have complained about drainage issues caused by Mr. Mecenas’ construction. Mr. Mecenas presented some mitigation plans but the results won’t be evident until next spring. Some residents from Forest Home talked about some features of the traffic calming that were not to their liking. Mr. Goodman said they might try to meet with the Forest Home Association to get a feel for what everyone thinks and also to relay that some of their complaints are not on the Town’s portion of the road(s). There was some discussion on changing the color of the Town Hall roof which was upon recommendation from Ms. Stoner, our Sustainability Planner. There was some discussion on this subject. There is no historic issue. Mr. Goodman added that they had an update on projects and the Penny Lane parking local law will be considered at the next Town Board meeting. They also reviewed the Danby Road Preservation Law and they are following what happens with the County’s attempt. Because there are so many drafts and/or templates out there, the thought is to wait and see because we can do it quickly if needed. Mr. Engman again cautioned that we need something in place to set the stage for negotiating a Road Use Agreement with developers. Because we do not allow drilling, the most affected might be developers such as the LINaC project coming up by Cornell. It will give the Town some input on establishing the haul routes. Discussion followed. DISCUSSION ITEMS Redistricting – Mr. Engman reported that he attended two of the recent meetings and made the point that the Town would prefer to have fewer representatives that truly represent our town instead of slivers of the Town being portioned out. There is another meeting tomorrow night in Varna at 5:30 p.m. He added that someone asked about Villages and off-the-cuff he responded that Villages should be considered part of the town in which they reside, but then it got confusing. There was some discussion on the independent commission and its makeup that is making this decision/recommendation. TBS 8-25-2011 Page 6 of 9 Initial Budget Discussion – Mr. Solvig explained the packet (Attachment #1) The spreadsheets explained the different tax levy increases under different scenarios. The first page was 2010 and 2011 YTD to give background especially regarding 2010 and the new Highway tax and a large amount taken out of the Fire Protection Fund to keep a low levy increase. In 2011, the tax rate for Fire Protection went back up 50% and the Highway and General stayed the same with a 6% increase in tax. The next page showed the budget with the 2% tax cap and he is very worried about the Fire Protection and Highway Funds that would not be funded to a level he is comfortable with for dealing with emergencies. He thinks we need to get the level back to the 2009 level. His projections are under the premise that the basic fire tax rate has to go back up. Different scenarios were explained with General Fund supporting the smaller increases in different funds and that is not sustainable. Increasing only the Fire Protection Fund to get it back to where it should be is a 4.9% increase in the tax levy. Just that puts the Town over the 2% level. We can still use some of the General Fund, but again, that is not sustainable and leaves us vulnerable to unforeseen emergency expenditures. The Board discussed the unknowns such as the growth in assessments, NYS Comptroller information and “escalator” that have not come out yet etc. Budget implications and discussion on SEQR and West Hill Study Ms. Ritter explained what she has proposed for the budget. Through the Comprehensive Plan Committee, a West Hill Neighborhood Plan which would require a regulatory plan for the area based on meetings with the land owners and residents in the area and establish a different kind of zoning, such as Form-Based Zoning which requires a charette. A charette is a process where you bring in designers who visualize and put on paper what people are saying and come up with a regulatory plan. She has talked to a few companies and the cost is approximately $100K and another $100K to put it into a regulatory plan. She added that it is unlikely that this would be finished in a year. The usual is 9 – 18 months for the process. Discussion followed. Ms. Ritter detailed the charette; it is very intense and very costly up front. She added that in talking with the people who do these, they say it is very interesting what comes out of these studies and interactions with the residents and landowners because the tables are kind of turned and they have different terminology that residents understand and use and have a lot of success getting buy-in from residents. She added that the West Hill is the only area she feels needs a charette; East Hill has a plan envisioned and driven by Cornell, South Hill has only one major landowner and he has a vision already and he likes mixed use also. So those other areas can probably be done by planned development zones or taking their plans and putting them into a regulatory plan. West Hill is the most contentious with many owners and different views and plans already started and so that is the priority. TBS 8-25-2011 Page 7 of 9 There is also the SEQR process for the Comprehensive Plan and/or the Form Based Zoning because some areas will be upzoned. A traffic study and service/utilities study would be needed. Discussion followed on possibly using local designers to build the team might lower the price. Mr. DePaolo commented that we are assuming a charette will work and the plan is going to accommodate a certain number of people, but we can spend less money and answer the fundamental questions of whether or not that kind of plan can work given what we are dealing with already on West Hill. He thought the board had a disconnect because it still hasn’t answered the question of whether the concept of a neighborhood is good for the area because you predict a population range and range of vehicles; so answer the question first. For example: We are thinking of putting 2K people here in this geographic area. How does that pan out in terms of vehicles? What do we have and what do we need in order to make that happen? Instead of saying “plan a neighborhood” for $200K. Ms. Ritter joined in saying that we need parameters like where and how many and how much commercial. Mr. DePaolo thought it was easier to deal with ranges because right now we are assuming it will work. He wants the fundamental questions asked and answered before getting into the level of detail involved in a charette. That is a whole lot of planning and minutia that in a general sense might not work. Mr. Engman commented that he thought they have gotten very close to some of the answers to some of those questions through the Comprehensive Plan process. There have been traffic counts for the roads leading into the City and the intersections in the City. Sewer and water have been looked at for the projected growth also. What else? Ms. Hunter responded that we are in the middle of a comprehensive plan that will result in a plan for a suggested land use map, not a detailed plan. She was concerned that this West Hill Study talked about during the moratorium was supposed to be a feasibility study and it seems to be morphing into a planning exercise and since we have to do a gEIS on the Comprehensive Plan anyway. Ms. Hunter thought we should be studying these things and assessing feasibility as we go instead of in a hindsight fashion stating that she would hate to have us arrive at and adopt a Comprehensive Plan and we don’t do a full gEIS, go to the expense of updating our zoning, then do the gEIS on the zoning and find out there are a multitude of affects and potentially non-mitigatable impacts. We are going down the road without assessing the feasibility as we go. In recommending the West Hill Study, it was supposed to be a feasibility study. Ms. Ritter responded that we have had this money for over 2 years and the hangup has been what are we doing on West Hill and therefore what are we going to study? She didn’t know how to get past that. Ms. Hunter responded that you propose some increases in population and increases in commercial activity and you assess the impacts of those increases and study the impacts and if they are absorbable then you move forward with a plan. Discussion followed. Ms. Hunter felt that we should do a GEIS on the Comprehensive Plan for public comment. Mr. Engman said this is a subject that needs to be continued at another meeting. TBS 8-25-2011 Page 8 of 9 Mr. Engman brought the topic back to the budget and wanted everyone to start thinking about fringe benefits because that is the most dramatic increase in the town, from approximately 30% to 50% and we are going to have to start thinking about that. With the stock market collapse the retirement costs may not come down and we need to think about how to slow the growth of our benefit package. This is not a discussion for tonight, but something we have to think about. PILOTs – Mr. Engman started the conversation by stating that he found out that TCAD had been working with Ithaca Beer for two years and we didn’t know about it. We need to be more in tune with what TCAD does and has in the works. Discussion followed. Mr. Goodman reported that he went to the public hearing regarding the PILOT for IB and did communicate to TCAD that we have no representation or communication with them to keep informed and educated. Discussion followed on ways to accomplish this and the Ms. Hunter asked if the PILOT language is in the local law for the proposal for Conifer. Mr. Engman was not sure but that is the type of thing we need to watch for. Mr. Goodman thought you would not put the PILOT in the local law but it should be worked on along with the local law and Ms. Hunter rejoined that knowing about any PILOT needs to happen before considering the local law/pdz. Deputy Supervisor – Mr. Engman explained that he has discussed with Mr. Goodman expanding the role of the Deputy Town Supervisor with Mr. Goodman attending more meetings, being available to fill in for Mr. Engman when necessary, learning more about management and supervision of staff and the other administrative responsibilities of the town. Mr. Engman proposed taking 20% of his salary in the administrative line and there would be no net change in the budget. Similar to what Cathy Valentino and Mary Russell did in the past. He asked the Board to let him know their thoughts or comments. Mr. Engman gave an update on the Hayts Chapel and Schoolhouse, stating that Historic Ithaca is taking another look at attempting to take over the historic site. Review of Correspondence – None Other – Mr. Engman gave an update on the costs for dog control stating that in 2012 the town’s costs will be down about $4K and hopefully down a bit more when the new contract is negotiated. The variable is that many of the smaller municipalities have found that their share is higher than expected and if any leave, the town’s costs will go up again. It is a very shaky and tenuous partnership right now; many of the smaller municipalities have essentially been subsidized by the city and the town. Trumansburg Water Issue – Mr. Engman reported that he and Mr. Weber met with the health department and the next step would be to meet with the town of Ulysses who are very antsy and want to move this along, but there are a lot of offshoot angles to think about and consider. TBS 8-25-2011 Page 9 of 9 West Hill Study - Mr. Goodman asked when the discussion is going to be held and at what level? Mr. Engman thought it was already decided that the Planning Committee would start the discussion and Ms. Hunter asked if or when the correlation between the Study and the Comprehensive Plan and the SEQR process and how this particular study will happen. Mr. Engman responded that the Comprehensive Plan Committee hasn't even seen the whole plan yet, but will at the next meeting. Ms. Hunter felt that the assessment of the impacts has to play a role in the planning. Discussion followed. Mr. Goodman added that the Planning Committee could begin discussions, and there are usually more than the three board members there and it could be a start. The general consensus was to start the discussion at the Planning Committee meeting and continue it at the next study session. Civil Service - Ms. Drake explained the new Tompkins County Civil Service website and schedule which will allow for expanded lists for open positions. Motion made by Pat Leary to adjourn and seconded by Tee-Ann Hunter at 6:48 p.m. Unanimous. Respectfu PauHefte Terwrniger Town Clerk