HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURAGOV-2012-01-23Ithaca
Urban
Renewal
Agency
Adopted 2/17/12
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
(607) 274-6559 6559
MINUTES MINUTES
IURA Governance Committee IURA Governance Committee
8:30 AM, Monday, January 23, 2012 8:30 AM, Monday, January 23, 2012
3rd Floor Conference Room, City Hall 3rd Floor Conference Room, City Hall
Present: Chairperson Susan Cummings, Kathy Schlather, Eric Rosario Present: Chairperson Susan Cummings, Kathy Schlather, Eric Rosario
Staff: Nels Bohn, Charles Pyott Staff: Nels Bohn, Charles Pyott
Public: None Public: None
I. Call to Order I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Cummings at 8:59 a.m. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Cummings at 8:59 a.m.
II. Agenda Additions/Deletions II. Agenda Additions/Deletions
Given the lack of quorum, Cummings noted, the meeting would proceed as a general
unofficial discussion of agenda items with no action taken, until a quorum can be
formed.
Given the lack of quorum, Cummings noted, the meeting would proceed as a general
unofficial discussion of agenda items with no action taken, until a quorum can be
formed.
III. Public Comments – None III. Public Comments – None
(Rosario arrived at 9:15 a.m.) (Rosario arrived at 9:15 a.m.)
IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes: December 16, 2011 IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes: December 16, 2011
Rosario moved, seconded by Schlather, to approve the minutes of December 16, 2011,
with five minor changes. Carried Unanimously.
Rosario moved, seconded by Schlather, to approve the minutes of December 16, 2011,
with five minor changes. Carried Unanimously.
V. New Business V. New Business
A. Election of IURA Chairperson A. Election of IURA Chairperson
Cummings suggested inclusion of additional language in the proposed resolution to
clarify the history of the selection of the IURA Chairperson. No objections were raised.
Cummings suggested inclusion of additional language in the proposed resolution to
clarify the history of the selection of the IURA Chairperson. No objections were raised.
Moved by Rosario, seconded by Schlather: Moved by Rosario, seconded by Schlather:
2012 Election of IURA Chairperson 2012 Election of IURA Chairperson
WHEREAS, the membership of the IURA shall consist of five Agency members,
including the Mayor of the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the membership of the IURA shall consist of five Agency members,
including the Mayor of the City of Ithaca, and
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 2 of 14
WHEREAS, newly elected Mayor Svante Myrick replaced prior Mayor Carolyn K.
Peterson as an Agency member effective as of the January 1, 2012 inauguration date,
and
WHEREAS, Carolyn K. Peterson had been elected as IURA Chairperson, and
WHEREAS, all previous mayors have served as IURA Chairperson since the inception
of the IURA, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the 2004 determination by Mariette Geldenhuys, IURA legal
counsel, that contrary to past practice the mayor is not automatically the IURA
Chairperson, and
WHEREAS, the IURA Chairperson position is vacant, and
WHEREAS, the mayor serving as IURA Chairperson facilitates communication with the
Common Council and the more effective functioning of the IURA, and
WHEREAS, Mayor Myrick has indicated willingness to serve as IURA Chairperson, and
WHEREAS, at their January 20, 2012 meeting, the Governance Committee
recommended the nomination of Svante Myrick as IURA Chairperson; now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby elects Mayor Svante Myrick as Chairperson of the
IURA.
Carried Unanimously 3‐0
B. Neighborhood Housing Initiative (NHI), Consideration of Homeownership
Investment Committee (HIC) Recommendation
Bohn indicated the 1/11/05 memorandum from Sue Kittel and Tracy Farrell to the HIC
summarizes the rationale for the HIC’s recommendation not to continue the program in
its current form. He reported that the IURA should respond to this recommendation
and determine the future use of the bond proceeds remaining.
He noted the IURA issued $1.050 million in bonds and rehabilitated or replace 6
substandard non‐owner occupied houses; and there remains a balance of approximately
$600,000. The City agreed to guarantee repayment of the bonds. The outstanding
principal balance on the bonds is $870,000 and the City is repaying principal at a rate of
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 3 of 14
$30,000 per year. Per his discussions with City Controller, Steve Thayer, he reported
that the principal repayment schedule of $30,000 per year will remain the same
whether the program continues, modified, or is terminated.
Cummings remarked the presence of blighted properties in the city remains a problem
and the objectives of the original program are still worth pursuing (i.e., to eliminate
blighting conditions, to increase the number and percentage of homeowners in the City
of Ithaca, to convert rental properties to owner‐occupancy status, to physically upgrade
substandard housing, and to stimulate private sector investment in neighborhoods).
Schlather inquired about the underlying statistics of current city blighting conditions, to
which Cummings replied the numbers that are available are not 100% reliable. The list
the Building Department maintains is not comprehensive and does not cover the entire
city. Moreover, the Building Department’s criteria differ slightly from those the IURA
would employ.
Bohn noted there are approximately a dozen dilapidated buildings, but acquiring them
at a reasonable price with a warranty deed can be challenging. Some dilapidated
properties become available through the tax foreclosure process, and the City has
agreed to provide the IURA with early notice in March of each year of tax foreclosed
properties likely to go to auction.
Cummings noted that the current program does not provide affordable homeownership
opportunities, as properties are sold at fair market value. Homeownership has
increasingly become less affordable in the City, so she would like to investigate
continuing the program to deliver affordable owner‐occupied homes that remain
affordable.
Bohn noted that INHS is experiencing difficulty completing their first time homebuyer
assistance program due to the cost of homeownership (acquisition and taxes) in the City
and the fact that HOME‐assisted homebuyer assistance loans cannot be employed for
the same property as a HOME‐assisted development subsidy if New York State is the
source of HOME funds for one program and the City of Ithaca is the source of HOME
funds for the other program. This is because a project address can only be entered into
the Integrated Disbursement & Information System (IDIS) once throughout the
affordability period for a project. As a result, INHS often finds it difficult to match and
package sufficient funding, since it has trouble attracting homebuyers with just a
$30,000 subsidy. An alternative source of funding, such as NHI funds, could help INHS
become more effective.
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 4 of 14
Cummings noted the funds could be very useful to the agency; and there is at least one
property coming onto the market (Plain Street) that would likely be a good match for
the program. Cummings remarked, however, that a philosophical difference remains
among IURA members regarding the utility of the program. One member contends, for
example, that placing these properties into a land trust would lead to an artificially
depressed housing market.
At this juncture, Cummings indicated the Governance committee could report back to
the IURA what it discussed and recommend establishing guidelines to make use of the
funds in the upcoming grant cycle.
Bohn remarked it would be helpful to define the end‐use for any proposed funding.
Schlather asked if it the INHS would consider working with individuals (vs. developers),
to which Bohn replied, no. He noted they have had unsuccessful experiences working
with owner/contractors to gain timely project completion.
Cummings encouraged identifying additional parameters for any future funding. For
example, could it be applied to vacant lots? Bohn replied that the IURA would need to
consult with bond counsel, before altering the parameters in any significant way. He
added the actual implementation of the program would also need to be re‐examined,
since it would no longer be overseen by the HIC.
Rosario expressed agreement with Cummings’ suggestions; and the IURA should
definitely solicit more information from INHS, regarding its land trust. In terms of the
concern over artificially depressing housing prices, he observed, this should not be an
issue, given the small numbers of properties involved.
C. Housing Fund, Funding Round #4, Authorize Disbursement of $30,000 Pursuant to
Executed MOU
Bohn noted the Housing Fund Program Oversight Committee (made up of Cornell
University, Tompkins County, and the City) recently met in round four of the application
review process. The Housing Fund only received two applications: (1) an INHS
application for $30,000 for 314 S. Plain Street and (2) an application from Ishka Alpern
for a youth hostel. The committee unanimously recommended approval of the INHS
project, which the City Administration Committee will review on 1/25/12.
Cummings expressed concern that only two applications were received, to which
Schlather observed there are only so many available developers ― the Housing Fund
will need to find other ways to reach out to potential developers.
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 5 of 14
Bohn remarked that part of the problem is that the program only has two sources of
available funding: (1) the predevelopment loan assistance, which usually has to be paid
back and is not a significant subsidy; and (2) the $30,000 grant per unit, which comes
with affordability‐related restrictions many developers are unequipped to handle.
Cummings indicated it would be helpful to identify the minimum amount of time that
would still provide a worthwhile community benefit, from an affordability perspective.
Bohn remarked that they could investigate modifying the subsidy accordingly, a smaller
one for a longer period of time and a larger one for a shorter period.
Cummings stressed there is definitely a need for these kinds of projects, even if the way
the program is currently structured does not attract as many applicants as one might
have desired.
Schlather asked if an individual would be permitted to apply for funding and agree to be
incorporated into the land trust, to which Bohn replied, to qualify for the land trust it
needs to have created a new housing unit.
Cummings indicated it would be helpful to consult with local developers (e.g., Jack
Jensen, Mauro Marinelli, etc.) and see what their suggestions for improvement might
be.
Moved by Rosario, seconded by Schlather:
Housing Fund, Funding Round #4 – Authorize Disbursement of $30,000 Pursuant to
Executed MOU
WHEREAS, the Housing Fund Program Oversight Committee (POC) met on December
12, 2011, to review applications for funding submitted in November 2011, and
recommended funding for the following affordable housing project from the Housing
Fund, which is jointly capitalized by Cornell University, Tompkins County and the City
of Ithaca:
Applicant Program Project Dollar Amount
Recommended
Number of
Units Location
Ithaca
Neighborhood
Housing
Services
(INHS)
Trust INHS Community Housing
Trust: 314 S. Plain Street
$30,000
(grant)
1 owner‐
occupied
unit
City of
Ithaca
, and
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 6 of 14
WHEREAS, on April 1, 2009, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca authorized the
Mayor to execute a six‐year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City
of Ithaca, Tompkins County and Cornell University to develop, fund, and administer
the Community Housing Affordability Program and the Community Housing Trust
Program (Collectively known as the “Housing Fund”), and
WHEREAS, on April 1, 2009, the Common Council found that the most appropriate
locations for new housing units assisted through the Housing Fund are project sites
located within existing urbanized areas of the County, rather than in new growth
nodes or other areas of the County, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council further found that City contributions to the Housing
Fund should be used to assist projects located within the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Community Housing Affordability Program assists with pre‐
development costs associated with residential, and mixed‐use real estate
development projects primarily benefiting low‐ and moderate‐income households,
and the Community Housing Trust Program provides grants to construct or
rehabilitate homes that will be made permanently affordable to low‐ and moderate‐
income households, and
WHEREAS, City funds committed to the Housing Fund are derived from Gateway Loan
proceeds that originated from sale of City‐owned land for the Eddygate project, and
are held by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, and
WHEREAS, the POC unanimously recommended that the City fund the 314 S. Plain
Street project to demolish the existing dilapidated structure and construct a new
single‐family dwelling to be enrolled in the INHS Community Housing Land Trust, and
WHEREAS, upon City authorization to fund the 314 S. Plain Street project, the
allocation of funding between the sponsor organizations is the following:
Funding Sources ($1,000s)
Cornell Tompkins City of
Funding Round University County Ithaca Total
Round #1 (2009) 145 100 30 275
Round #2 (2010) 75 70 70 215
Round #3 (2011) 100 100 0 200
Round #4 (2011) 0 0 30 30
Totals 320 270 130 720
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 7 of 14
Funds carried forward to Round #5 280 30 170 580
Total 3‐Year Funding Commitment 600 300 300 1,200
and,
WHEREAS, City of Ithaca funding is proposed to be used to fund construction and/or
substantial rehabilitation of single family and two‐family residences, which action
qualifies as a Type II action under the City Environmental Quality Review ordinance
(CEQRO) listed at:
• §176‐5(C)(8): “construction or expansion of a single‐family, a two family, or a
three family residence on an approved lot including provision of necessary utility
connections as provided in Subsection C(10),” and
• §176‐5(C)(2): “replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a facility in kind
on the same site, including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes,“
thus, no further environmental review is required for this proposed action; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby finds that the INHS Community Housing Trust: 314
S. Plain Street project is suitable for up to $30,000 of City funding through funding
round #4 of the Housing Fund, and be it further, and be it further,
RESOLVED, that such funds shall be derived from Gateway Loan Proceeds, and be it
further,
RESOLVED, that the IURA Chairperson, subject to advice of IURA legal counsel, is
authorized to execute a Fiscal Agency Agreement with Tompkins County to
implement a disbursement of up to $30,000 to assist the above‐referenced INHS
project, pursuant to the Housing Fund MOU.
Carried Unanimously 3‐0
D. Adoption of IURA Whistleblower Policy
Bohn indicated that the underlying intent of the policy is to more effectively encourage
and facilitate the reporting of malfeasance, while stopping short of requiring reporting.
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 8 of 14
Moved by Schlather, seconded by Rosario:
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
Whistleblower Policy
1. Purpose
It is the policy of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) to afford certain protections
to individuals who in good faith report violations of the IURA’s Code of Ethics or other
instances of potential wrongdoing within the IURA. The Whistleblower Policy set forth
below are intended to encourage and enable employees and IURA officials to raise
concerns in good faith within the IURA and without fear of retaliation or adverse
personnel action.
2. Definitions
For the purposes of this policy, the following terms shall be defined as set forth in this
section.
a. Employee ‐ any employee paid by the IURA.
b. Good Faith ‐ Information concerning potential wrongdoing is disclosed in “good
faith” when the individual making the disclosure reasonably believes such
information to be true and reasonably believes that it constitutes potential
wrongdoing.
c. IURA official ‐ Any officer, member, or committee member, of the IURA.
d. Personnel action ‐ Any action affecting compensation, appointment, promotion,
transfer, assignment, reassignment, reinstatement or evaluation of performance.
e. Whistleblower ‐ Any Employee or IURA Official (as defined herein) who in good
faith discloses information concerning wrongdoing by another employee or IURA
official, or concerning the business of the IURA itself.
f. Wrongdoing ‐ Any alleged corruption, fraud, criminal or unethical activity,
misconduct, conflict of interest, intentional reporting of false or misleading
information, or abuse of authority engaged in by an Employee or IURA Official (as
defined herein) that relates to the IURA.
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 9 of 14
3. Reporting Wrongdoing
Any Employee who has credible knowledge of potential wrongdoing concerning an
Employee, an IURA Official, or of the IURA itself, is encouraged to report such activity
to their supervisor. If the Employee is not comfortable speaking with their supervisor
or is not satisfied with the supervisor’s response, an Employee is encouraged to speak
with the Director of Community Development, Executive Director or the IURA
Chairperson.
Any IURA Official who has credible knowledge of potential wrongdoing concerning an
Employee, an IURA Official, or of the IURA itself, is encouraged to report such activity
to the Director of Community Development, the Executive Director or the IURA
Chairperson.
All reports of potential wrongdoing shall be managed in accordance with the following
procedure:
a. The individual to whom the potential wrongdoing is reported shall notify the
individual who submitted the claim of potential wrongdoing and acknowledge
receipt of the reported violation or suspected violation.
b. The individual to whom the potential wrongdoing is reported shall investigate and
handle the claim in a timely and reasonable manner, which may include referring
such information to their supervisor, the Director of Community Development, the
Executive Director, the IURA Chairperson, or an appropriate law enforcement
agency where applicable.
c. All complaints will be promptly investigated and appropriate corrective action will
be taken if warranted by the investigation.
d. The identity of the Whistleblower and the substance of his or her allegations will be
kept confidential to the best extent possible consistent with investigation of the
alleged wrongdoing.
4. No Retaliation or Interference
No Employee or IURA Official shall retaliate against any Whistleblower for the
disclosure of potential wrongdoing, whether through threat, coercion, or abuse of
authority; and, no Employee or IURA Official shall interfere with the right of any other
Employee or IURA Official by any improper means aimed at deterring disclosure of
potential wrongdoing. Any attempts at retaliation or interference are strictly prohibited
and:
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 10 of 14
a. An Employee or IURA Official who in good faith discloses potential violations of the
IURA’s Code of Ethics or other instances of potential wrongdoing, shall suffer
harassment, retaliation or adverse personnel action.
b. All allegations of retaliation against a Whistleblower or interference with an
individual seeking to disclose potential wrongdoing will be thoroughly investigated
by the IURA.
c. Any Employee or IURA Official who retaliates against or had attempted to interfere
with any individual for having in good faith disclosed potential violations of the
IURA’s Code of Ethics or other instances of potential wrongdoing is subject to
discipline, which may include termination of employment for an Employee and
suspension or removal from office for an IURA Official.
d. Any allegation of retaliation or interference will be taken and treated seriously and
irrespective of the outcome of the initial complaint, will be treated as a separate
matter.
5. Other Legal Rights Not Impaired
The Whistleblower Policy and Procedures set forth herein are not intended to limit,
diminish or impair any other rights or remedies that an individual may have under the
law with respect to disclosing potential wrongdoing free from retaliation or adverse
personnel action.
Unanimously Carried 3‐0
E. Authorized Signatories on IURA Bank Accounts
Bohn indicated that the signatories authorization is required to take the form of a
resolution, which needs to be adopted every time there is a transition to a new mayor.
The proposed resolution mimics precisely how it has been handled previously.
Moved by Rosario, seconded by Schlather:
Authorized Signatories on IURA Bank Accounts
WHEREAS, to open and close deposit accounts, authorize checks and withdrawals, and
other powers in the name of the IURA at a bank requires that a bank resolution be
adopted by the IURA, and
WHEREAS, at their January 20, 2012 meeting, the IURA Governance Committee
recommended the following action; now, therefore, be it
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 11 of 14
RESOLVED, that Tompkins Trust Company (‘Bank’) is designated a depository of funds
for the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency public benefit corporation (‘Corporation’);
RESOLVED, that any prior resolutions remain in effect except as changed by those
adopted today. The Corporation ratifies all transactions purportedly done on its behalf
with the Bank before the delivery of this resolution to the Bank. Any change(s) to these
resolutions will take effect only after the Bank has received written certification of the
change(s) and has had a reasonable time to verify and act on the change(s);
RESOLVED, that the Corporation agrees to be bound by the Bank’s Commercial Deposit
Account Agreement for each account permitted by these resolutions;
RESOLVED, that the Bank is authorized to honor, pay, and charge the Corporation’s
account(s) for any item purporting to have been signed on behalf of the Corporation
with a facsimile signature that resembles a specimen the Corporation has certified to
the Bank, no matter by whom or by what means the actual or purported signature may
have been made;
RESOLVED, that the persons named below, whose manual and/or facsimile signatures
are provided next to their respective names, are authorized to perform the powers
listed based on number(s) following their respective names. The Bank has no duty to
inquire into any power before executing it, even if the power benefits the signer
individually. The required number of signatures immediately follows the description of
that power;
Powers:
1. Open and close deposit accounts, sign account agreements, and sign contracts for
deposit‐related and other services. Signatures required: 2
2. Sign and authorize checks, drafts, withdrawal slips, and any other orders for the
payment of money, whether by paper, electronic, or any other means, even if
payable to the signer or used to discharge or reduce any obligation of the signer.
Signatures required: 2
3. Borrow money by signing promissory notes, checks, drafts, credit agreements,
agreements for letters of credit, and any other contracts that obligate the
Corporation to repay funds. Signatures required: 2
4. Assign, endorse, discount, transfer, mortgage, or pledge any of the Corporation’s
property as collateral for any obligation, direct or indirect, absolute or contingent.
Signatures required: 1
5. Lease, have access to, and terminate leases for safe‐deposit boxes. Signatures
required: 1
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 12 of 14
6. Give releases, waivers, receipts, and notices of all kinds that relate in any way to any
relationship of the Corporation to the Bank. Signatures required: 1
RESOLVED, that the secretary of the Corporation is directed to certify and deliver a copy
of these resolutions to the Bank, the signature cards bearing the genuine signatures of
the persons named below, and any other documents that the Bank requires.
AUTHORIZED PERSONS. The names and genuine signatures, manual or facsimile, of the
authorized persons, and the powers granted to them are as follows:
NAME TITLE POWERS
Svante Myrick IURA Chairperson 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Susan J. Cummings IURA Vice‐Chairperson 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
JoAnn Cornish IURA Secretary & IURA Executive Director 1, 2, 3, 6
Nels Bohn IURA Director of Community Development 1, 2, 3, 6
Phyllisa DeSarno Deputy Director of Economic Development, 2
City of Ithaca
Unanimously Carried 3‐0
F. City of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan
Cummings observed that the Governance Committee has not yet had the opportunity to
provide any detailed input into the process. Bohn remarked that the Clarion Associates
consultants will return in late February, with information on existing conditions and
other findings, which should be of interest to the IURA. Until then, there is really
nothing substantive for the IURA to review.
Cummings indicated she would like to ensure the IURA has an opportunity to meet with
the consultants, ideally as a separate one‐on‐one meeting. She asked if the consultants
had followed up on IURA’s suggestions about including past chairs and other members
of various City boards and commissions (e.g., BZA, Planning Board, etc.) in the process.
She is concerned the Comp. Plan Committee does not have enough members with
sufficient planning and public policy expertise to be as effective as it should be.
Bohn observed it would be helpful to make that particular suggestion to the consultants
in writing.
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 13 of 14
Rosario remarked that at the GIAC public meeting there also seemed to be some
question as to how productive the overall experience ultimately ended up being.
Participants filled out forms containing numerous questions, but people were unsure as
to precisely how the responses would be meaningfully incorporated into the process.
Rosario mentioned there would be another public meeting, sponsored in part by the
Latino Civic Association, the Ithaca Asian American Association, and Community Leaders
of Color (CLOC) on February 13, 2012.
VI. Old Business ― 2010 City Audit Schedule Report
Bohn indicated that the 2010 audit has not yet quite been completed (strictly speaking,
it should have been completed by the end of September 2011). The auditors require
approximately three more days of fieldwork, before completion, at which point, the
draft audit would be brought before the City Administration Committee in February.
VII. Staff Report
A. HUD Entitlement Program, Schedule for Development of 2012 Action Plan
Bohn indicated the action plan was initially delayed as a result of funding uncertainty;
however, the Agency is now moving forward with it. Approximately $160,000 in CDBG
and $350,000 in HOME funds are expected to be available, with a March 2nd application
deadline. The first of two public hearings for the grant has been scheduled for March
22, 2012, with the Common Council expected to take action on the matter in June 2012.
B. Potential Disposition of City‐Owned Land
Bohn noted the decision was made to delay any action on the disposition of City‐owned
lands for another month, to permit additional time for consideration and comments.
Cummings asked if the IURA had communicated its interest in advising the Common
Council on the subject, to which Bohn replied, yes. Cummings noted the topic should
also be included on the next IURA agenda.
C. INHS Breckenridge Place Project Schedule
Bohn indicated INHS is expecting to close on 5/15/12 and begin demolition on 5/16/12.
INHS will update the IURA at its February meeting on some modest modifications to the
building.
IURA Governance Committee
1/23/12 Minutes
Page 14 of 14
VIII. Other Business
A. Review of IURA Financials: December 2011
Diane’s Automotive
Bohn indicated he met with Diane Russell from Diane’s Automotive, who had agreed to
$450 per month payment (retiring the debt in appr. 14 years), so the business can
continue to operate. He reported that the Economic Development Committee will take
up this issue at their February meeting.
E`2e
Bohn remarked that e2e was one month late in its loan payments (which it had given
the IURA advance notice of), primarily related to its plans to establish a full‐scale
production facility in Geneva, New York. It is anticipated it will be back on track with its
payments in February.
B. Next Meeting: February 17, 2012
IX. Adjournment — Schlather departed at 11:00 a.m., resulting in the loss of quorum. The
meeting adjourned.
— END —
Minutes prepared by C. Pyott, edited by N. Bohn.