HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1988-09-0721'7
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. September 7, 1988
PRESENT:
Mayor Gutenberger
Alderpersons (10) - Booth, Cummings, Hoffman, Johnson, Killeen,
Lytel, Nichols, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Attorney - Nash
City Controller - Spano
(40001, Deputy City Controller - Cafferillo
City - Clerk- Paolangeli
Director, Planning and Development- Van Cort
Deputy Director, Planning and Development - Mazzarella
Personnel Administrator - Baker
Assistant Personnel Administrator - Walker
Building Commissioner - Hoard
Fire Chief - Olmstead
Ln Acting Police Chief - Pagliaro
Superintendent of Public Works - Dougherty
Iq
Lo PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
m American flag.
Q SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Public Hearing - An Ordinance Amending Section 30.25 of Chapter 30
Entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code - District
Regulations Chart
Resolution To Open Public Hearing
By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider amendment to Section
30.25 of Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal
(awe Code - District Regulations Chart, be declared open.
Carried Unanimously
Alderperson Booth briefly described the proposed amendment as a
series of technical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance which will
clean up some of the ambiguity and provisions, for example, in the
District Regulations Chart, things which the Building Commissioner
and the Board of Zoning Appeals have identified as uncertainties.
He said the Charter & Ordinance Committee view them as technical
amendments; there has been no controversy.
Mayor Gutenberger asked if anyone present wished to speak regarding
the proposed amendment.
No one spoke to the Public Hearing.
Resolution To Close Public Hearing
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That the Public hearing to consider amendment to Section
30.25 of Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal
Code - District Regulations Chart, be declared closed.
Carried Unanimously
Public Hearing - An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map of Chapter 30
Entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
Resolution To Open Public Hearing
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider amending the Zoning Map
of Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
be declared open.
Carried Unanimously
Alderperson Booth explained that this item has been on the Common
Council's agenda for many months. The so- called Watts Lot was pro-
posed for rezoning from a' business classification, B -2a to a resi-
dential. classification, R -2b. The Council has held several public
218
- 2 - September 7, 1988
hearings on it. It requires 8 votes for the Council to pass this
proposed zoning amendment because of a protest filed by the property
owner and the Council has been unable to garner the necessary 8
votes in the past; therefore, they were holding another public
hearing and would have another vote that night.
Mayor Gutenberger asked if anyone in the audience wished to address
Council on the item.
Marjorie Olds, 415 North Tioga Street, President of the Northside
Civic Association, renewed the neighborhood's request that the
Council put a "safety net" in place as a precautionary measure.
If the R -2 zone were in place the neighborhood could work with the
Common Council and City Planning to ensure that the development that
goes in there will meet the citywide housing needs as well as the
needs of the neighborhood, and that whatever development goes in
there will be in scale with the existing neighborhood. She asked
that the Council not gamble with the future but to put the "safety
net" in place in order to have some control over how the development
goes.
Francis Paolangeli, 125 Ridgecrest Road, owner of the "Pogo Parcel ",
addressed the Council, saying he believes that Mark Fickelstein, who
has an option on the parcel, will not exercise his option to purchase
all the parcel. He expressed the opinion that Mark had not received
cooperation regardless of what he proposed. Therefore, if he does
not exercise his option, Mr. Paolangeli told the Council he wishes
to pick up the ball where Mark leaves off, work with Council to come
up with some plan which will work on the parcel. He said he thinks
one year is enough time for Council to decide what they want to-do.
Laura Lewis, 509 Willow Avenue, strongly urge
waffle on this issue, but to for once try to
hoods by rezoning the parcel as residential.
more and more what is going on on a national
little attention to inner cities that people
is happening in Ithaca.
E�d Common Council not to
preserve Ithaca neighbor -
She said she fears that
trend, that is paying so
are moving out of them,
Mark Walker, 513 Willow Avenue, reminded the Council that several
months ago the Council were presented the results of a survey showing
that the majority of the people in the neighborhood favor rezoning
the Watts Lot. He asked that the Council acknowledge the results of
that survey when they cast their votes and let the survey speak for
the neighborhood residents who are interested that they don't have to
face the concerns of high density housing and increased traffic on the
streets near their neighborhood.
Mark Fickelstein, 304 East State Street, explained that until Sunday,
September 11, he will be holder of the option on the Watts Lot "Pogo
Parcel." He said it is not his intention to exercise the option, he
regrets he cannot go ahead under the circumstances as there has been
no agreement reached concerning the parcel. He doesn't believe the
Council's role has been as constructive as the other actors involved
in the process. He mentioned that Alderpersons Romanowski, Lytel and
Cummings voted not to rezone the Watts Lot which took a lot of courage
and he thinks by doing that they stood up for two principles, the
first being an attempt to address the needs for housing in the city;
secondly they encouraged cooperation between neighbors and developers.
He urged the Council to work with Francis Paolangeli in trying to
work out a solution. He said he believes it would be unwise to 11,48)
rezone the parcel.
Resolution To Close Public Hearing
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by
RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing
of Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of
be declared closed.
Alderperson Schlather
to consider amending the Zoning Map
the City of Ithaca Municipal Code,
Carried Unanimously
21.E
-3- September 7, 1988
Public Hearing for Possible Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG)
Wilcox Press
Mayor Gutenberger reported that he had been informed late that after-
noon that Wilcox Press is not interested in pursuing this any
further since there are no longer guaranteed funds set aside by the
current administration in Washington for this particular type of
project. Therefore, the request has been withdrawn at this time.
Intergovernmental Relations Committee
Alderperson Cummings requested the addition of Item 18.1 "Report on
LO Annex Sale on Negotiations." No Council member objected.
Iq
LO Charter and Ordinance Committee
Alderperson Booth advised the Council that Item 14.9, An Ordinance
Amending Chapter 64 Entitled "Cable Communications" of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code, be removed from the agenda because it was not
Q ready to be voted on that evening. He said he realized it would
cause some difficulties in terms of timing of certain agreements with
ACC, but the changes are fairly substantial.
Alderperson Schlather asked if it would be advisable to leave it on
the agenda so that the entire Council can understand what the problems
are, and then pass a motion to table until ready. Alderperson Booth
agreed, and accepted the suggestion.
No Council member objected.
Mayor's Appointments
Alderperson Booth informed Mayor Gutenberger that with regard to an
appointment the Mayor was expecting to make that evening, he intended
to request an Executive Session before voting on it.
For the information of Council Alderperson Booth informed them that
with regard to the Smoking Ordinance a page 6 had been placed on their
desks because it had been left out of some copies of the agenda.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
John Beau Saul, 120 East Clinton Street, President of the Ithaca
Police Benevolent Association, the union that represents 94 percent
of the officers of the City of Ithaca Police Department, read the
following statement:
"Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen, Common Council, the police officers
of the PBA and their families have come here tonight very troubled,
very discouraged to address this board of elected officials in refer-
ence to the innuendo and malicious comments made by one of your
colleagues, Ms. Susan Cummings, concerning our integrity, our honesty,
our ethical being. The politically unsophisticated accusations
have brought our families and us here tonight.
First, we would like our city and the residents of Ithaca, to whom
we are sworn to lay down our lives to protect, to know that we un-
equivocally and categorically deny these aggrievious falsehoods.
Alderperson Cummings, you in your role as an elected official have
perpetrated fraud on the people of Ithaca. You have disfranchised
the people from the Police Department. Far from helping the city
that you serve and the people you represent, you have instead made
the situation worse by taking mere opinion and making it sound like
fact. It is unconscionable; it reeks of character assassination and
guilt by association. Alderperson Cummings, you have misused your
public office.
ADDITIONS
Planning
TO THE AGENDA:
and Development Committee
Alderperson Cummings called attention
to an error in the numbering of
Planning
and Development Committee
agenda items. Item 15.7 should
read "An
Ordinance Amending Article
I, Section 30.3 and Article II of
Chapter 30
Entitled 'Zoning' of the
City of Ithaca Municipal Code
(Cluster
Subdivision)." Item 15.8
should read "Transfer /Baling
Station -
Report."
Intergovernmental Relations Committee
Alderperson Cummings requested the addition of Item 18.1 "Report on
LO Annex Sale on Negotiations." No Council member objected.
Iq
LO Charter and Ordinance Committee
Alderperson Booth advised the Council that Item 14.9, An Ordinance
Amending Chapter 64 Entitled "Cable Communications" of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code, be removed from the agenda because it was not
Q ready to be voted on that evening. He said he realized it would
cause some difficulties in terms of timing of certain agreements with
ACC, but the changes are fairly substantial.
Alderperson Schlather asked if it would be advisable to leave it on
the agenda so that the entire Council can understand what the problems
are, and then pass a motion to table until ready. Alderperson Booth
agreed, and accepted the suggestion.
No Council member objected.
Mayor's Appointments
Alderperson Booth informed Mayor Gutenberger that with regard to an
appointment the Mayor was expecting to make that evening, he intended
to request an Executive Session before voting on it.
For the information of Council Alderperson Booth informed them that
with regard to the Smoking Ordinance a page 6 had been placed on their
desks because it had been left out of some copies of the agenda.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
John Beau Saul, 120 East Clinton Street, President of the Ithaca
Police Benevolent Association, the union that represents 94 percent
of the officers of the City of Ithaca Police Department, read the
following statement:
"Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen, Common Council, the police officers
of the PBA and their families have come here tonight very troubled,
very discouraged to address this board of elected officials in refer-
ence to the innuendo and malicious comments made by one of your
colleagues, Ms. Susan Cummings, concerning our integrity, our honesty,
our ethical being. The politically unsophisticated accusations
have brought our families and us here tonight.
First, we would like our city and the residents of Ithaca, to whom
we are sworn to lay down our lives to protect, to know that we un-
equivocally and categorically deny these aggrievious falsehoods.
Alderperson Cummings, you in your role as an elected official have
perpetrated fraud on the people of Ithaca. You have disfranchised
the people from the Police Department. Far from helping the city
that you serve and the people you represent, you have instead made
the situation worse by taking mere opinion and making it sound like
fact. It is unconscionable; it reeks of character assassination and
guilt by association. Alderperson Cummings, you have misused your
public office.
220
Miss Cummings, do
Cruise, an Ithaca
sible quote in The
walk both sides of
officers.
-4-
September 7, 1988
you know this officer? This is Officer Alan
City police officer for 60 days. Your irrespon-
Grapevine 'police are on the take' and 'police
the street' is directed at Alan as it is at all
Alderperson Cummings, this is Officer Dan Slattery, an Ithaca City
police officer for 4 years and a lifelong resident of this city's
first ward. You have accused him of being on the take, of being a
crooked cop. Dan is the most recent one of us to receive a death
threat. That very explicit assassination threat is a direct result
of drug enforcement in your ward.
Alderperson Cummings, this is Officer Joanie Russell, city police
officer for 3 years. She is one of at least three officers that
live in the very ward that you represent. You have accused one of
your own constituents, a working mother of two, a person who has to
put on a bullet proof vest every day before going to work, of being
corrupt.
Somewhere in the back, Ms. Cummings, is Detective BillBurin who
has been an Ithaca City police officer for 25 years. You have
accused this man, a Juvenile Division detective, a man who provides
shelter, clothing and a home to countless children as a foster parent;
you have accused this man of being a crooked cop. When was he on the
take Alderperson Cummings? When was he selling drugs? One quarter of
a century of service to this city, and you call him corrupt. Do you
realize what you have done?
How would you like to be painted with the same broad brush that you
painted Alan, Joanie, Dan, Bill and all of the 67 people who put their
lives on the line every day for this city and the residents?
Alderperson Cummings, this young lady is Sharon Bowman, married to
Officer Doug Bowman, an Ithaca police officer for 6 years.
You have accused her husband of being corrupt. She has had to deal
with her friends in the community because of your irresponsible
statements. How is she to fend off allegations because of what you
have said as an elected city official?
Alderperson Cummings, also in this group of dedicated men and women
and their families are the children of the city's police officers.
Already some of them, who we consider our most precious possessions,
have been confronted by neighbors, other children and strangers due
to your irresponsible statements. Again, do you realize what you
have done?
What you stated are not merely printed words on a piece of paper,
but rather they have impact far, far beyond what you have said. They
have impacted actual people and our loved ones. The PBA stands ready
to work cooperatively with Common Council as we have always done.
The PBA pledges to do so in a mature, courageous and forthright manner,
notashamed or afraid of what any investigation will uncover since we
have absolutely nothing to hide. But,absent the Common Council undertaking
an investigation we demand these irresponsible allegations and actions
be censured by Common Council. You on Common Council have a responsi-
bility as elected officials to assure and protect the institution of
Common Council from losing its credibility. The social contract you
have with the people of our city demands that you censure Ms. Cummings
for her malicious, unfounded statements of corruption within the
'Ithaca City Police Department. From you Alderperson Cummings, at the
very least, the very least that decency demands is an immediate public
apology."
Scott Wexler, 23 Elk Street, Albany, N.Y. 12207, Executive Director
of the United Restaurant, Hotel, Tavern Association of New York State,
appeared at the request of Richard Leonardo, President of Local Chapter
of Tompkins County United Restaurant, Tavern, Hotel Owners Association
to comment on the proposed Smoking Ordinance and asked the Council to
delay passage until reviewing suggestions provided by him which would
create a more uniform ordinance with other places in the state.
5-
September 7, 1988
221
Mr. Wexler also referred to Senate bill 7959C which, if approved
by the state legislature and signed by Governor Cuomo, will create
a uniform smoking law in the state.
Richard Leonardo, 101 West State Street, spoke regarding the pro-
posed ordinance, asking that Council postpone passage until reviewing
the Association's suggestions and giving them consideration.
At the request of the PBA, and with approval of Mayor Gutenberger,
Alderperson Cummings presented her response to the PBA at this time:
"In American government there is a separation of powers for good
reason so that we can act as checks and balances to each other.
While we all work together for the good of Ithaca we each have very
different responsibilities. Those of an alderperson are different
than those of a police officer or PBA. It is the job and the moral
duty of the PBA to speak out in eloquent support of its membership
and their rights. It is the job of an alderperson similarly to
speak on behalf of his or her constituents' concerns. What we abso-
lLD utely share in common is the obligation to speak truthfully, and
also I think more important in this case, to speak clearly so that
we can each be absolutely certain what it is that we have said to
LD the other. I think much of the crux of the matter lies in the-second
part. We must speak' "clearly and understandably "so that what we
have to say is-not something that is open to misinterpretation. I
Q am sincerely sorry that perceptions held by our officers of my recent
remarks has caused so much personal distress. As you can see, per-
ceptions can be very strong and very destructive. Similarly, many
of my constituents have been concerned by what they have believed to
be true, or fear to be true. I certainly had a range of people'speak.
It is my job as an alderperson to say publicly what it is that many
of my constituents ask me to say. That is a very difficult thing to
do. It is very difficult to stand or sit here in this room before
all of you. I think my constituents have expressed a range of things
to me which I absolutely would not say publicly. That is utterly
inappropriate conduct for an alderperson.It would also be utterly in-
appropriate if I had said 'I know,' ' I believe' that there is ob-
struction in the Police Department. What I have said in every forum
where I have talked directly to a person and said repeatedly is 'my
constituents believe.' There is a perception there of belief on the
part of many, fear on the part of others. That is true. Whether or
not that fear, or in some cases that belief, is based on reality is
not clear. I think it is most healthy for the City of Ithaca to clear
the air. It is definitely damaging to us to have whispered rumor and
innuendo because you all know you cannot confront that directly; you
cannot address it. In order to have a strong, effective, respected
police department we must be able to hear what it is people are saying
out loud, not whispered. You never can deal with what people are
saying behind your back.
I'm genuinely sorry if people feel that I accuse them personally. I
accuse no one. I bring to the public what it is my constituents ex-
pect. Many of them are afr &id. I have spoken to appropriate and
related individuals, asking them whether or not they have heard these
similar rumors. For me, the first time I heard them has been in the
last two months and it was shocking to me. Others said 'oh yes, for
such and such a period of time I have heard it.' I felt it was my
duty as soon as I heard this to speak to people involved, to approach
Police Commissioners, to speak with colleagues on Council, to ask
whether or not people in the Human Services Committee had heard these
rumors, whether or not liaisons to the Police Commission had heard
the rumors, whether or not the Mayor had heard the rumors and I also
have talked to other city officials. Am I the only person hearing
these things? Other people to a much lesser degree and some to a much
greater degree indicated they had. That distressed me. I did not
like being in the position of saying 'I -heard it but I don't 'chow .what
I can do about it.' I think that what we can do about it is talk
about it. I appreciate the dedication which brings all of you here
tonight and appreciate Officer Saul's offer to work together to seek
an answer to the questions which have been raised repeatedly by the
public and which I, on their behalf, have raised."
222
-6- September 7, 1988
Members of the Common Council commented as follows:
Alderperson Lytel, also a representative of the. Second Ward, reported
that he had heard many of the same things as Ms. Cummings and, in
fact, made his own reference to what he heard in the newspaper last
week. He said it disturbed him that the response from the people who
have brought them information is the unwillingness to take it to the
police; he said we need to maintain the credibility of the people who
give us information necessary to do something about the crime problems
that they live with every day. He had his own theory as to how the
newspaper had access to a letter that was not intended to be a public li
document. The response from Acting Chief Pagliaro was to that docume nt
He said the virtual publication of a letter which was never meant to
be made public and the response to that letter has been opportunism
on the part of the news media to take something that looks like a good
issue and blow it way up. He thinks he and Ms. Cummings have exercised
their responsibility to try to maintain the faith that they hope they
have with the people they represent without in any way being accusatory
toward any individual member of the department.
Alderperson Killeen spoke to the point about the request to censure
Alderperson Cummings. He said he cannot in any way agree to that for a
number of reasons. He said he believes she was honestly and genuinely
doing her job as she explained; secondly in so censuring her he would
have to censure himself. Indeed, he would have to willingly see the
majority of council members censure themselves for thinking the same
thoughts and whispering the same things that he has heard over many
years. They shouldn't have truth or creed ascribed to them, but
ascribe something to the fact of the whispering. He said we have the
opportunity with a new chief, the likelihood of a new PBA contract,
a new mission by the police commissioners and a chance to act upon the
Human Services Committee Police report of a year ago which has been
on the shelf; we have a real, genuine honesty and opportunity to get
down to what are the facts. He said the matter of censure is beyond
the scope of his capacity.
Alderperson Booth said he found the whole matter very troubling. As
a member of the Human Services Committee over the last several years
and a participant in the drafting of a report on the Police Department,
he thinks it fair and legitimate to say there are a number of concerns
about the Police Department that have been raised by many members of
the public; this latest round of public discussions has taken a number
of things a number of steps further. He said he didn't read or under-
stand the comments to be an accusation of the police force in general,
or any particular individual, but as expressing concerns. He thinks
in the kind of society-we have public discussion of important issues
often sensitive, difficult, is the only real way we have of getting at
the truth of issues. If we stop doing that, then we severely hurt
ourselves. He thinks that to censure a member of the city legislature
for raising concerns which she or he believes are important simply
would be an erroneous and serious step when trying to get at the truth
about issues which are admittedly very difficult.
Alderperson Schlather added the further dimension that the same First
Amendment which governs the rights of free speech and comment allows
for the comment not only as presented here this evening by Beau Saul
on behalf of the PBA, but it also allows and indeed encourages the
comment that has been in the press recently with respect to this prob-
lem. For the Council to take any steps to chill that right he thinks
will do a greater disservice to this community than to allow this dis-
cussion to continue. He said his only concern is that, in fact,
people have been hurt and to the extent that innocent people have suf-
fered by reason of these comments he doesn't think there is a person
on Council who is not sorry about that. The letter he got from Ms.
Cummings which was addressed to him as chair of the B &A Committee was
clearly stamped "Personal and Confidential," was personally delivered
to him, was in an effort to be as discreet as possible, at least in
these beginning stages, to determine exactly what could be done with
respect to these perceptions and clearly they were just perceptions.
However, it has now become a topic of public debate; it is now in the
public arena; it cannot be simply swept under the rug. He thinks the
223
-7- September 7, 1988
Council as a body should either put the rumors to rest once and for
all through constructive action as opposed to destructive action and
get on with the very important task of protecting our fundamental laws
including the First Amendment, the right of free speech. He said that
although he appreciates the debate at this junction, which certainly
wasn't anticipated at the beginning, he is not inclined to chill that
in any respect through such a vehicle as' censure or other device.
Alderperson Romanowski expressed concern for the context in which the
remarks were taken. He said that even though he doesn't agree with
Susan Cummings a lot of times, he does not believe she did this in a
spirit of meanness. He said during the five years he has been on the
Council, working with various committees and individual police officers,
he doesn't think anywhere in this country they could find a more dedi-
cated police department than the one we have. By and large he believes
this is a great police department, there are outstanding individuals
who work in it to give of their time, sacrifice family and other things
we take for granted. He said he looks for great things happening with
the new chief coming in; He expressed appreciation of Deputy Chief
Pagliaro's dedication, twice stepping in and helping out the City of
Ithaca. He said he had complete faith in the Police Department; he
wishes they would look at this issue a little closer; it is innuendo
LD but they are from the public. Whether malicious or the public believes
it, to make this an even better department we have to put the issue
M to rest, once and for all.
Q Alderperson Peterson added her support because it is the only way they
can go. As chairperson of the Human Services Committee who deal with
many of the police issues, she thinks they have to work together, even
though it may be a little difficult the first few months. She feels
the best way to start that out is to state support for the Police
Department.
Alderperson Hoffman said he understands that the events of the last
week or so have produced very strong feelings; he also sees that the
events of the past few years - the increase in the crime rate, concern
about drug abuse and drug sales in our community have also raised
strong feelings. He thinks it is unfortunate the way these concerns
have come out and he is very sorry that it has caused personal pain
for the individual city employees. He hopes, that in spite of these
strong feelings which need to be brought out, we don't get distracted
from the genuine problems that we all agree exist in our community.
He said we should express our opinions and then get to work on these
other issues. He made a plea to the community and perhaps those
responsible for the remarks that Susan and David made, if they have
any shred of evidence or facts or leads that would point to genuine
wrongdoing they must bring those to people who can act on that - to
members of Common Council, judges or someone they trust. Otherwise
they remain rumor and innuendo; they are very destructive and the
air cannot be cleared.
Alderperson Johnson said that almost every Council member has
probably sat in some meeting when a member of our police force has
been commended. We have all been proud to be a friend or neighbor
of such a person and to have such a person in our community. We
are also aware that we have a lot of difficulties and problems in
our community. Ile said he didn't have all the information but
thinks that the events of the past two weeks create a very sad
situation. Right now we have to continue to look for the way we
can get past this point and stop pointing the finger at either the
Police Department or the Council and seek a way that we can make
our city safe.
Alderperson Nichols commented that none of these allegations regard-
ing the Police Department have come to him so he was amazed when he
read the letter from Susan. If there is truth behind that it is very
shocking and he would agree that it is important to pursue that and
put these innuendos aside. He is hopeful that they are innuendos and
have no basis in fact. He said in his contacts with the police force
he has absolutely nothing to complain about and feel that they are
doing the job to the best of their ability. He said over the years
he had perceived problems with the Ithaca police force, not the
officers, but a less than perfect administration from the top.
224
-8- September 7, 1988
Certainly over the last year with chiefs leaving and coming on, it
can't be a very good situation to get the kind of program going
that we should have. He thinks with an airing in a proper way of
the allegations now that they have been published, and put to rest
we can go on with what has to be done. He added that though he
respects Susan Cummings' intentions in this letter, he didn't
think she went at it in the right way. He certainly doesn't think
that means censuring, he has probably done things in the wrong way
himself. He said they have to recognize as elected officials that
they have a very special obligation to the people who work for the
city, not only the police but the Department of Public Works and
all others, that they are more than just individuals expressing the
First Amendment rights when they bring forth or put into position
of pain or distress people who work for the city of which they are
the officials. They have a very special obligation as to how they
pursue questions of this sort. The thing to do now is to go on
together, hopefully in a constructive way.
Mayor Gutenberger reiterated what he has said since this issue was
brought forth publicly - if there is anyone in this community who
has perceptions, has facts, has rumors, anything, if they would
please come forward. If they don't feel comfortable in going to a
police commissioner who is a representative of the community, or
an alderperson who is a representative of the community, then they
should come to his office. If there is any information we have to
know it, the public demands to know it and most importantly, the
officers of the Ithaca Police Department demand to know if there are
allegations out there that they be made public and give the oppor-
tunity to discuss those things. So far no one has come forward.
To the family members of the Ithaca Police Department present, we
in this community and certainly in this administration of mine
understand and appreciate and are proud of the efforts that your
spouses are doing. We have an excellent Ithaca Police Department,
it is one that this community can take pride in. If there are things
we should know, Mayor Gutenberger thinks the first people on the line
that would be demanding that something be done about any problem is
the PBA. To the family members he said the community is aware of the
act of the dedication your spouses give to this community.
Recess
The Council recessed at 9:25 p.m. and reconvened in Regular session
at 9:40 p.m.
Ken Hughes, 303 East Court Street addressed the Council, telling them
that while most members of Common Council were trying to make up for
the bad things they had said about the Ithaca Police Department, one
member of Common Council said a bad thing about everybody in his pro-
fession which is reporters. Alderman Lytel referred to journalistic
opportunism which he thinks is responsible for Ms. Cummings' comments
so Mr. Hughes said he would like to fill them in on how exactly Cable
News Center 7 came to hear about it and also what he knows about how
the Grapevine picked up on it. He said they heard about it interest-
ingly enough first through the Ithaca PBA, not because they wanted to
spread Ms. Cumming's comments but because Ms. Cummings made her comments
to the candidates for the Chief of Police here in Ithaca. John Beau
Saul of PBA told them what he feared was those candidates would then
go back to their communities and, like human beings, talk and what the
would say is that in Ithaca there is corruption and thus the rumors
would spread. That's how he heard about it first. He said he under-
stood the Grapevine article which was the first public airing of these
charges was done basically from an on- the - record interview with Ms.
Cummings. This talk about a secret letter was news to him. He said
he hasn't personally been following this story for his news organiza-
tion but he did know how they picked up on it.
So, here is what a reporter does when confronted with this kind of
information. When you hear that Ms. Cummings had been saying some
things to some people what you do is you go and you ask Ms. Cummings
about it. That's what we do. When you hear that Ms. Cummings is
sending a letter to various people on Common Council saying something
225
-9- September 7, 1988
about the Ithaca Police Department you go and try to find the letter.
This is not journalistic opportunism; this is journalistic responsi-
bility. This is what the 're paid to do. Go to the source; get to
the fact. He said he was not accustomed to speaking in public; all
reporters are not accustomed to speaking in public in that way.
Because they don't speak politicians and community groups often
blame problems that they have caused on them. Tonight he was tired
of it; tonight he decided to speak.
Doria Higgins, 2 Hillcrest Drive, member of Citizens To Save Our
Parks, spoke to the Council, telling them they have been misinformed
in some instances about the situation concerning the possible trans-
fer of the Festival Lands at Cass Park to the Treman Marina; she
provided copies for filing of the April 6, 1983 Resolution of Common
Council, the January 2, 1985 Resolution and page 2 of the March 21,
1985 License signed by Mayor Gutenberger and Andrew Mazzella of
State of New York Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation.
She said her group think that these three documents read together show
either a lack of understanding on the part of those involved in
writing them or else an attempt to urge Common Council to act on in-
LO complete information. They think all further action on this matter
,q should be scrutinized with care.
LO Ms. Higgins added that the Group would like to support the resolution
from the Conservation Advisory Council that a park be created at the
M site of the old sewage plant. However, it would not be acceptable
Q for the city to offer as substitute land for Inlet Island Park. More
Parks is what we need, not less.
Will Burbank, 222 Utica Street, responded to some of the comments
made by Mr. Wexler regarding the proposed Smoking Ordinance. He
thinks their comments are very late and unfortunately, poorly timed.
He disagreed with Mr. Wexler's statement that it should not be
necessary to have a totally separate and enclosed room in order to
permit smoking in part of a food service establishment.
Addressing the issue of uniformity on the state level. he said a
classic response when you don't want some kind of legislation is to
say, "it's a good idea but it ought to be done at another level of
jurisdiction."
Mr. Burbank encouraged the Council to act that night to go with the
very well thought out and carefully pondered proposed ordinance.
If it needs to be amended at a later date, fine.
Larry Church, owner and operator of Joe's Restaurant and Plum's
Restaurant, informed the Council he has in his employ approximately
100 people with a payroll of $750,000 per year. He said if the
proposed Smoking Ordinance were enacted it would seriously affect
their jobs in that he believes many of their services would have to
be cut back or curtailed. Consequently there would be loss of em-
ployment. He said he didn't think the law should be passed that
evening. He added that we live in a free society where the free
market system prevails. If people would like to exercise a choice
of going to an establishment having a non - smoking policy, let them
do so and let the free market see if that, in fact, will prevail.
He recalled that both New York State and the federal government have
considered bans very similar to this. Neither of those bodies chose
to enact them because they felt that there was a very difficult
(400" problem with their standing any scrutiny from the courts. He said
he happens to agree that this violates many rights and that if Council
enacts it they will get the city into a lawsuit that will be both
costly and unwinnable by the city.
Florence Hoard, 42 Cornell Street, addressed the Council saying her
neighborhood is concerned because Bus #5 is no longer serving their
area. She said the bus is very essential to them and they would like
to have another try at having the bus again.
David Reuther, 1191 East Shore Drive, spoke saying he hoped that
nothing he or anyone else has said tonight distracts us from a very
226
-10-
important issue. Public confidence in the
need to resolve this. Ithaca does have a
growing one. If we don't get underway in
way we are in trouble. He hoped this can
not just accusing each other. We need to
September 7, 1988
police is essential; we
drug problem, it's a
a unified non - accusatory
be settled and people are
work together.
He said he was in Stewart Park a couple of weeks ago and noticed
that some small changes are happening. There is new equipment but
he noted there is no Interim Parks Commission which was supposed to
take care of Stewart Park. He thinks the preservation of the
buildings should be done soon.
He noted there would be discussed that night an emergency over -the-
tracks, over - the -canal access in the South End. He thinks this is
a great idea. However, the population growth seems to be in the
North End, the Lansing side. Not to say that he doesn't approve,
he hoped the proposal would go ahead but he thinks they may also need
an overpass downtown.
Regarding the Developer Impact Fee Program, he suggested the Council
consider that every parking space required in a development, the
developers. be charged a fee equal to the real cost to the city of
providing that parking space. He said it will probably have to be
in a parking structure at this point as there simply isn't any open
land.
Betsy Darlington, chairperson of the Conservation Advisory Council,
welcomed back City.Clerk Paolangeli.
Ms. Darlington urged support from the Conservation Advisory Council
that the old sewage treatment plant site be designated as a neighbor-
hood park which would serve not just the North Central Neighborhood
but the Fall Creek Neighborhood and other areas. She said it appears
that there is a tremendous need for parks in the area.
Valerie McDougal, 315 South Albany Street, commented on the lack of
affordable housing and she urged Council to do something more for
parks because when she can no longer afford a home in the town she
would like a choice of places to sleep in.
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC:
Bus #5
In response to the issue of Bus #5,
issue is before the Board of Public
meeting earlier that day. There is
back to the old situation, being su,
alderperson would be talking to the
Alderperson Nichols said the
Works. It was discussed at their
a possible change, not completely
4gested; he said he assumed the
people about it.
North End Master Plan
Alderperson Cummings spoke with regard to Northside parks integration
of park planning into anything going on in the North End, Watts Lot,
city -owned site. It is something that Planning and Development
Committee has talked about and they need at this point to decide how
rapidly they are going to go ahead with the North End Master Plan.
She said there are amenities in there that need to be enhanced and
can provide recreational opportunities in a mixed use fashion.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR:
Route 96
Mayor Gutenberger reported that he was notified the previous week
that, in fact, the documents have been signed by the Federal Highway
Administration in Washington, D.C. which will allow the process to
go forward. He said he received a call that day from the Regional
DoT that they had, in fact, seen the signatures. The DEIS will be
back from the printer, available to be distributed to the public in
about 4 -6 weeks, or about mid - October. Public Hearing(s) as nece-
ssary will be held in mid - November followed by an additional month
for the public to get written comments to the DoT.
227
-11- September 7, 1988
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS:
Assistant City Attorney
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the appointment
of Margaret Beers Schnock, 18 Dug Road, Lansing, N.Y., as Assistant
City Attorney, to replace Jennifer Saunders who left the community,
for a term of office to expire December 31, 1989.
Resolution
By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Margaret
Beers Schnock as Assistant City Attorney for a term of office to
expire December 31, 1989.
Carried Unanimously
Ms. Schnock took the Oath of Office and was sworn in by City Clerk
Paolangeli.
T.V. Cable Commission
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the appointment
of Richard Herskowitz, 6 Hillcrest Drive, to the T.V. Cable Commis-
LO sion, to replace Betty Burke, for a term of office to expire July 30,
d- 1993. He noted this appointment requires a waiver of residency
LO requirement.
Resolution
M By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
Q RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Richard
Herskowitz to the T.V. Cable Commission for a term of office to ex-
pire July 30, 1993, residency requirement waived.
Carried Unanimously
Board of Zoning Appeals
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of the Council for appointment
of Beatrice Mac Leod, 957 East State Street, to the Board of Zoning
Appeals, to replace Stewart Schnock, for a term of office to expire
December 31, 1990.
Resolution
By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Beatrice
Mac Leod to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a term of office to
expire December 31, 1990.
Ayes (9) - Booth, Hoffman, Johnson, Killeen, Lytel, Nichols,
Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather
Nays (1) - Cummings
Carried
Records Management Officer
Mayor Gutenberger informed the Council that the New York Local
Government Records Law requires the City to appoint a records
management officer by December 31, 1988, appointment subject to
approval of Common Council. The Mayor requested approval of the
Council for appointment of Callista F. Paolangeli, City Clerk, as
the Records Management Officer of the City.
Resolution
By Alderperson
RESOLVED, That
F. Paolangeli
Ithaca.
Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
this Council approves the appointment of Callista
s the Records Management Officer of the City of
Carried Unanimously
Official Band of the City
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for appointment of
the Ithaca Concert Band as the official band of the City.
Resolution
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has a long tradition of enjoyment and
support of music performed by our local community bands, and
22
-12- J��Pirn,,6.t_7, 1988
WHEREAS, Ithaca was the home of the world famous Patsy Conway Band
which not only performed music but also provided the public with an
uplifting cultural education, and
WHEREAS, today the Ithaca Concert Band carries on this rich band
tradition, preserving a link with the past and a valuable cultural
institution, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Concert Band performs to enthusiastic and
appreciative audiences at formal winter concerts as well as outdoor
summer performances; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That in recognition of their outstanding contributions to
the musical heritage of this community the Ithaca Concert Band is
hereby designated as The Official Band of the City of Ithaca.
Carried Unanimously
Ithaca Police Chief
Mayor Gutenberger requested concurrence of Council for appointment of
Harlin Mc Ewen, 422 Winthrop Drive, to the position of Police Chief,
effective October 24, 1988, and approval of salary at $49,940, maxi-
mum of the salary range. Mr. Mc Ewen was recommended for appointment
by the Police Chief Search Committee of Common Council who found him
to be the most qualified candidate of the five candidates who were
being considered. Mayor Gutenberger commented that Mr. Mc Ewen is an
outstanding individual and will serve this community extremely well
and he feels the city is very fortunate to have a person of this
caliber consider the position. He added that all five candidates
were excellent candidates from which to choose.
Resolution Calling for Executive Session
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the Council adjourn into Executive Session for discus-
sion of a personnel appointment.
Carried Unanimously
The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 9:15 p.m. and recon-
vened in Regular Session at 9:35 p.m.
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
WHEREAS, Harlin R. Mc Ewen has been recommended by the City of Ithaca
Police Chief Search Committee and by Mayor John C. Gutenberger as the
person most qualified to fill the vacant position of Chief of Police;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Harlin R. Mc Ewen is hereby appointed to the position
of Chief of Police for the City of Ithaca, effective October 24, 1988,
at an annual salary of $49,940.
Carried Unanimously
J
Alderperson Schlather expressed agreement with Mayor Gutenberger and
commented that this is a very good opportunity for the city to mend
fences. The city has a tremendous opportunity in Chief Mc Ewen
assuming this very important position. He is a top -notch administrator,
comes highly recommended and most importantly, he is able to work with
the community and rally the loyalty of his officers which is most
important at this difficult time.
Mayor Gutenberger expressed his and the community's gratitude to
Walter Pagliaro for again jumping into the.void of not having a police
chief and fulfilling not only his own, but the additional duties of
the chief as well. He said Walter Pagliaro had done one fantastic
job for the community.
CITY ATTOENEY'S REPORT:
Sears Street Demolition Permit
Alderperson Cummings asked City Atty. Nash if he had had a chance to
discuss the request for a Sears Street demolition permit that they
talked about earlier that day. He responded that the permit has not
been granted yet. The applicant was in sometime the previous week
229
-13- September 7, 1988
to reactivate the permit application that was filed more than a year
ago. He said it seemed appropriate to him to have the same waiting
period as a new application. He thinks the Building Commissioner
is in accord with the normal waiting period of 10 days.
Alderperson Lytel asked if there is any legal way to prevent the
demolition and Atty. Nash said there isn't.
Wilcox Property
Alderperson Killeen asked about the Wilcox property at 708 E. Buffalo
Street which appears to continue to be occupied.
City Atty. Nash responded that it is his understanding that there
has not been compliance with the Building Commissioner's order to
Jason Fane, owner of the property. He said they discussed legal
enforcement of that order the previous week. Currently the City
Attorney's office is in the process of drafting accusatories in'City
Court for violations of the Building and Zoning Codes. Responding
to Alderperson Killeen concerning the penalty, Atty. Nash said the
LO City Code provides a $250 -500 fine and each day can be considered a
separate violation of the Code.
LO Mayor Gutenberger said that even though it was not the order of the
agenda, they would take up items concerning the "Pogo" parcel and
M the proposed Smoking Ordinance first. In addition, Alderperson
Cummings requested the Intergovernmental Relations Committee item
Q and the Establishment of the Ithaca Rental Housing Task Force be taken
up early.
CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:
An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map of Chapter 30 Entitled Watts
Lot /Pogo Parcel
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of
Ithaca, New York as follows:
SECTION 1. AMENDING ZONING MAP
1. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca, New York,
as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that all that tract
or parcel of land within the following described area presently
located in the B -2a, Business District is reclassified and changed to
the R -2b, Residential District.
A. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel
number 25 -3 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately
264 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Franklin
Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1,
thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 325 feet along the
west boundary of the right -of -way of Lake Avenue to a point on the
southeast corner of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1, thence southwesterly
a distance of approximately 269 feet along the north boundary of the
right -of -way of Adams Street to a point on the southwest corner of
tax parcel number 25 -3 -1, thence northwesterly a distance of approxi-
mately 330 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of First
Street to the point of beginning. The above described area includes
all of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1.
2. That in accordance herewith the City Clerk is hereby directed
to make or cause to be made the necessary changes on said zoning map.
SEC`T'ION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with
law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11 (B) of
the Ithaca City Charter.
Alderman Schlather commented that Mr. Paolangeli has offered the
olive branch in respect to this parcel and he doesn't think that
should go unheeded. He thinks by this action it shouldn't be con-
strued in any way as a declination to deal. He thinks the city is
230
-14- September 7, 1988
very anxious to work with any owner of that property or any developer
of the parcel in a manner that is consistent with and compatible
with neighborhood concerns and plans. The city has a stake there
as well - the old sewage treatment plant site.
Alderperson Nichols said he would support plans that do not neces-
sarily conform specifically with R -2b in the future as a means of
getting the city's position in negotiations which he hopes will be
cooperative in developing a plan and which will, he hopes, lead to
some kind of affordable housing in the area.
Alderperson Cummings said she shares Alderperson Nichols' concerns
for being able to provide affordable housing in that area as well
as many of the other community requests for open space, green space,
parks, possible mixed use, possible offices, etc. She thinks the
Council should move forward and say exactly what it is they want
and do it with dispatch.
Alderperson Romanowski expressed disappointment at the withdrawal
of the proposals which he thought were exciting, had merit and
should have been discussed further; also, that the R -2c zoning
propositions never came to pass. He is also disappointed that in
a city which needs all kinds of diversified housing sometimes he
heard "not in my neighborhood" syndrome. He asked, "what is afford-
able housing? That term has never been defined for me and I can't
get a grasp on it. Mr. Paolangeli has been both a personal friend
and also someone that I explicitly trust on his business dealings.
I wish to work with him; I had hoped they would come up with some-
thing that would be beneficial for both the community and this city."
Alderperson Lytel commented that the situation has been described
accurately as a stand -off for quite some time with bringing it to
Council and consistently tabling it. He thinks there was a reason
behind that and the feeling was that by immediately going to R -2b
that it would stand in the way of being able to bring forth a
housing proposal that would put housing in that space that would
not necessarily be consistent with R -2b. He said some new things
have happened. The city is considerably closer to having the old
sewage treatment plant land available; they have on their list of
planning priorities the consideration and master planning of a
broader area than just this particular parcel. They had, in fact,
on their agenda that night "cluster subdivision process" which they
didn't have before. He thinks it critical that the city continue to
work cooperatively on the development of the Northside site. There
is adequate space on the entire parcel to include a park component
in addition to housing.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Booth, Hoffman, Johnson, Killeen, Lytel, Nichols,
Peterson, Schlather
Nays (2) - Cummings, Romanowski
Carried
Environmental Review Regarding Proposed Smoking ordinance - Determi-
nation of Non - Significance
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the matter of the adoption of an ordinance regulating I-sj
smoking in public places is currently under consideration by this
'Common Council, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted, in-
cluding the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form
(SEAF) and a Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF), and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted" action
under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), including
the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type I action
under the City Environmental Review Act (EQR Section 36.5 (B) (5)),
and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a signifi-
cant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it
231
-15- September 7, 1988
RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter,
be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and conclusions
more fully set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment
Form and Long Environmental Assessment Form, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency be and it hereby
does determine that the proposed action at issue will not have a
significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental
review is unnecessary under the circumstances, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution shall constitute notice of this
(000." negative declaration and the City Clerk be and she is hereby directed
to file a copy of the same, together with the attachment, in the City
Clerk's office and forward the same to any other parties as required
by law.
Carried Unanimously
Proposed Smoking Ordinance
Alderperson Booth provided the background of the proposed ordinance.
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
Ln (Copy of Ordinance attached to the Minute Book )
Mayor Gutenberger thanked the committee for all the work they have
M done on the proposed ordinance. He commented, however, that he
Q continually receives questions from the public that despite the
committee's efforts, the public at large does not understand what
the proposals are. He said that concerns him. The other concern
is that by reaching out to the Restaurant Association for their continents and
the fact that they had received them tonight, he thinks they should
at least take the time to review those comments before passing the
ordinance. He asked the Council to table the proposed ordinance
for 1 additional month.
Alderperson Schlather commented that there is plenty of time from
the effective date of October 15, 1988 to the enforcement date of
April 15, 1989 for everybody to try to understand the law and to
take whatever corrective action is necessary to ensure compliance.
He said he would not support a motion to table.
Tabling Resolution
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That the proposed Smoking Ordinance be tabled for one
month for further questions and comments from the public and review
of Mr. Wexler's suggestions.
Ayes (4) - Cummings, Nichols, Johnson, Lytel
Nays (6) - Schlather, Peterson, Killeen, Booth, Hoffman,
Romanowski
Motion Defeated
Amendment to the Smoking Ordinance
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
Additional Conditions for Granting Waiver
RESOLVED, That the following subdivision be added to Section 67.10:
A Waiver may be granted pursuant to the provisions of this section
to permit smoking in a place where this ordinance would otherwise
(4000, prohibit smoking, if the owner, operator, manager, sponsor or person
in charge of that place demonstrates that a ventilation or electronic
air cleansing system with odor removing filters installed at that
location will remove at least 900 of the smoke and associated gases
from that place on a continuing basis.
(Industry standards are: 100 -299 cubic feet per person -
8 -10 changes per hour;
300 -499 cubic feet per person - 6 -8 changes per hour;
500 or more cubic feet per person - 6 -8 changes per hour;
Metal Lab Environmental Systems.)
232
-16- September 7, 1988
Discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (5) - Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols, Killeen
Nays (5) - Schlather, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman
Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye, breaking the tie vote.
Carried
A vote on the main motion as amended resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE:
Annex Sale Negotiations - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee met twice, three
members of the committee present each time. There were 4 items
of concern as put forward by the Council at the Council meeting
establishing the negotiating committee. To the committee's satis-
faction they basically solved the first three items dealing with
prohibitions against immediate resale of the annex; insure the
tandem nature of the project including the annex and adjacent
building; question of financing contingencies.
Item #4 which had to do with price - there has been movement, some
progress has been made; the members of the committee received a
letter as did the Mayor and Paul Mazarella.
Alderperson Schlather commented that his assessment of this is that
the negotiations are not going to produce the result that is satis-
factory and that the Council ought to send this back to committee.to
develop a specific set of criteria that they wish to include in a
bid request; then they should readvertise and bid it. He thinks
they are fooling themselves and will simply be wasting another month
if they do otherwise.
Alderperson Killeen asked what they can do now; City Atty. Nash
responded that they can do anything they want to as long as they
sell it for full value. He said they are not bound to any particular
process.
Mayor Gutenberger commented that he personally would oppose very
vigorously any mechanism that considers proposals that came in after
an advertised deadline. The city's credibility is at stake here.
The City of Ithaca offered at public sale a piece of property owned
by the public with an upset price with a number of conditions
attached for people to respond to in their proposals. They went
through that process. He said he thinks it's highly immoral and
unethical once the amount of the bid submissions were made public
for those who want to bid higher to have the opportunity to come in
after everybody else has met the deadline and made their bids known
publicly. The city's integrity is at stake here.
Alderperson Romanowski agreed with Mayor Gutenberger that the City
would be allowing people to gain by not going through the process.
D
Alderperson Schlather said he thought words like immoral and integrity
are awfully strong words to describe this situation. He thinks the
city invited proposals; didn't know that they wanted done with this
building; they weren't sure; they knew they wanted to sell it, that
was the only thing they knew. So they invited people to make pro -
,posals. Hence they got a bushel basket of apples, oranges and pears,
with respect to the buildings and the conditions that were originally
presented. They made it very clear that they reserved all rights to
reject any and all proposals. There is nothing unethical or immoral;
they're dealing here with business people who understand how the world
works. In this particular case he thinks the city has bent over back-
wards with this particular proposal and commented on the bid procedures.
He said they have learned something from this experience and what
they've learned is that now they know what the market is and can now
draft the parameters of an offer, noting the conditions of sale, put
into it the bid document, request people's proposals and not do anybody
a disservice.
233
-17- September 7, 1988
Mayor Gutenberger countered that the time to set the price and
exercise their fiduciary responsibility was the time they did set
the price. Obviously this Council decided the minimum price they
would sell it for was exercising their fiduciary responsibility.
Alderperson Booth echoed what Alderperson Schlather and City Attorney
Nash said, that this is a bargaining process; they amended the law to
give them the authority to go out and make a decision on selling it
to a person that, in addition to full value, met other criteria which
they set. He doesn't see that they're doing anything that's incon-
sistent with that. The reality is that they are considering pro-
posals now that are very different from the criteria they laid out.
He thinks the Mayor characterizes this incorrectly.
Alderperson Nichols commented that he expected a committee report
but they seem to have individual comments. He would like a committee
recommendation.
Alderperson Cummings responded that the complete committee has not
gotten back together after receiving the communication and suggested
LO the committee do that.
Iq
(o Mayor Gutenberger said he would not allow committee work on the floor.
The issue is in committee and he hoped the committee would continue
M to work and bring this to a conclusion somehow with a recommendation.
Q PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Establishment of the Ithaca Rental Housing Task Force
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, two - thirds of Ithaca's housing is rental housing, and
RESOLVED, That a Task Force on Rental Housing be established which
shall be charged with performing the following tasks:
1) to provide a forum for the discussion of rental housing
issues by all parties with an interest in those issues,
2) to investigate current local conditions and trends with
regard to the cost, availability and condition of rental
housing,
3) to investigate issues relating to landlord /tenant relations,
fair housing practices and rental housing occupancy require-
ments,
4) to investigate possible actions that might be undertaken by
either private organizations and /or public agencies, to
improve rental housing conditions in the City of Ithaca,
5) to make recommendations to the Common Council concerning the
implementation of actions that are designed to address
rental housing concerns, including specifically the forma-
tion, construction, stipulated authority, and staff support
of a Rental Housing Board,
6) to review and make recommendations about any other rental
housing concerns that the Task Force determines is important,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That said Task Force shall report its recommendations to
Common Council by no later than six months after its first meeting,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the members including the Chair and Vice -chair of the
Rental Housing Task Force shall be appointed by the Mayor with the
approval of Common Council, and be it further
WHEREAS,
issues relating to
the condition, affordability, and availa-
bility of
rental housing has
been a major concern in the City of Ithaca,
and
WHEREAS,
currently there is
no public agency with specific authority
over rental
housing issues,
policies, and procedures, now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED, That a Task Force on Rental Housing be established which
shall be charged with performing the following tasks:
1) to provide a forum for the discussion of rental housing
issues by all parties with an interest in those issues,
2) to investigate current local conditions and trends with
regard to the cost, availability and condition of rental
housing,
3) to investigate issues relating to landlord /tenant relations,
fair housing practices and rental housing occupancy require-
ments,
4) to investigate possible actions that might be undertaken by
either private organizations and /or public agencies, to
improve rental housing conditions in the City of Ithaca,
5) to make recommendations to the Common Council concerning the
implementation of actions that are designed to address
rental housing concerns, including specifically the forma-
tion, construction, stipulated authority, and staff support
of a Rental Housing Board,
6) to review and make recommendations about any other rental
housing concerns that the Task Force determines is important,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That said Task Force shall report its recommendations to
Common Council by no later than six months after its first meeting,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the members including the Chair and Vice -chair of the
Rental Housing Task Force shall be appointed by the Mayor with the
approval of Common Council, and be it further
234
September 7, 1988
RESOLVED, That the Task Force shall report regularly to the Planning
and Development Committee of Common Council on its activities, pro-
gress, and needs, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Task Force shall have nine voting members of whom
at least four shall be renters, and to the extent feasible shall in-
clude:
1) tenants or representatives of tenants' organizations
2) tenants or advocates of subsidized housing (IHA, EOC, INHS,
DSS, Mental Health, Red Cross, Homeless)
3) a student tenant
4) a member or advocate of the senior citizens' community
5) a rental housing property owner or property manager
6) a realtor or mortgage officer from the banking community
7) a member of organized labor
8) a member of the Planning and Development Board
9) a member of the Planning and Development Committee of
Common Council
10) a member from a neighborhood civic association, as feasible.
Carried Unanimously
CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:
An Ordinance Amending Section 30 25, District Regulations, of Chi
30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson ,icn.iacner
(Copy of Ordinance attached to Minute Book )
A Local Law Pertaining to Failure of Adjoining
Sidewalks: Local Law Laid on Table for Counci
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson
Carried Unanimously
Landowners
Action
Schlather
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1988
CITY OF ITHACA
to Repair
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING ARTICLE 5, SECTION 5.27(2), ENTITLED "SIDEWALKS,
CONSTRUCTION, AND REPAIR" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA CHARTER.
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York
as follows:
SECTION 1. AMENDING SUBDIVISION 2 OF SECTION 5.27 OF THE CITY OF
ITHACA CHARTER.
Article 5, Section 5.27(2) of the City of Ithaca Charter is hereby
amended to read as follows:
2. Duty of Owner
The owner of lands abutting any such street, highway, alley or
other public place in the City, shall construct, repair and maintain
the sidewalks, approaches or street driveways adjoining his lands
and shall keep the same in a safe state of repair and free from defects
and free and clear of and from snow, ice and all other obstructions. Isil
Such owner shall be liable for any injury or damage by reason of
omission, failure or negligence to make, maintain or repair such side-
walk and keep it free from defects or to remove snow, ice or other
' '/obstruction therefrom or for a violation or non - observance of any
ordinance or regulation relating to making, maintaining and repairing
sidewalks and keeping them free from defects and the removal of snow,
ice and other obstructions from sidewalks, approaches and street
driveways.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE
This local law shall take effect immediately after filing in the
office of the secretary of state.
235
-19- September 7, 1988
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Nichols pointed out that the issue was raised as to
problems that might arise on sidewalks in which the city plows
snow back onto the sidewalk after the homeowner has cleared the
sidewalk. This was brought up at the Board of Public Works
meeting. It was stated that it is the policy of the city to clear
such sidewalks and Jack Dougherty was to provide that in writing.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
A Local Law Pertaining to Designating Employees of the Department
of Public Works to Enforce Parking Regulations: Local Law laid on
table for Council action
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1988
LO CITY OF ITHACA
Iq A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 60 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY
(D OF ITHACA TO ENABLE DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS TO ENFORCE PARKING REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF ITHACA AND THE
M STATE OF NEW YORK
Q BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York
as follows:
SECTION 1. ADDING SECTION 60.49 TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY
OF ITHACA.
A new section 60.49 entitled "Enforcement of Parking Regulations'!
is hereby added to Chapter 60 of the Municipal Code of the City of
(Wool Ithaca entitled "Traffic and Vehicles," Article IV thereof, entitled
"Parking, Standing and Stopping" to read as follows:
Section 60.49 Enforcement of Parking Regulations
Employees of the Department of Public Works of the City of Ithaca
duly designated by the Board of Public Works as Parking Regulations
Enforcement Officers shall be authorized to issue appearance tickets
for violation of any provisions of Article IV of Chapter 60 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca and for violation of any pro-
visions of Article 32 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of
New YORK.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE
This local law shall take effect immediately after filing in the
office of the Secretary of State.
City Atty. Nash responded to questions of what they could do: In
addition to meter work, no parking areas, blocking a driveway,
hydrants - just parking violations, citywide, including night time,
if Council decides on this.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
(6wo., Local Laws Authorizing the City of Ithaca to Establish, Own, and
Operate Public Utility Services and to Hold a Public Referendum on
Said Local Laws: These Local Laws laid on table for Council action
Resolution Regarding Consideration of Local Law
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
WHEREAS, Federal Law encourages the construction of Hydropower
facilities by both public and private developers, and the City of
Ithaca, due to municipal preference, has received a permit to
develop hydropower on Fall Creek at Ithaca Falls, and
WHEREAS, construction must begin by September 1991 and be complete
by September 1993 in order to be in compliance with this permit, and
23 f)
-20-
September 7, 1988
WHEREAS, Ithaca Falls is valuable to Ithaca residents and visitors
for its scenic beauty, fishing, rare plants, and historic signifi-
cance, and
WHEREAS, maximizing environmental protection is of paramount concern
in the development of hydropower at this site and the City of Ithaca
wishes to control development in order to maximize environmental
protection, and
WHEREAS, development of hydroelectric power at this site is a source
of long -term revenues for the City, and
WHEREAS, hydroelectric power is a clean, renewal energy source, and
WHEREAS, the final version of the local law was placed on
the desks of the Common Council members on August 30, 1988; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council of the City of Ithaca considers
adoption of the local law and upon adoption of said local
law that the City Clerk be directed to publish this local law in the
Ithaca Journal in accordance with Section 360.5 of the General Municipal
Law, once per week for the six weeks immediately preceding the next
General Election, and
That the City Attorney is hereby directed to submit, within ten days,
an abstract of this local law and a proposition to the local Board
of Elections in order that it might appear on the ballot for the
next General Election.
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1988
CITY OF ITHACA
A LOCAL LAW AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ITHACA TO ESTABLISH, OWN, AND
OPERATE PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES - ITHACA FALLS
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York
as follows:
SECTION 1. The City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York is hereby
authorized to establish, own and operate public utility service
systems within and /or without its territorial limits for the purpose
of furnishing to itself, or for sale to other electric service pro-
viders and for compensation to its inhabitants or inhabitants of any
other local jurisdiction in the State of New York, any service
similar to that furnished by any public utility company specified in
Article 4 of the Public Service Law. Notwithstanding any general or
special law, pursuant to the provisions of subdivision 2 of Section
360 of the General Municipal Law, said City may construct, lease,
purchase, own, acquire, use and /or operate any public utility service
within or without its territorial limits for said purpose.
SECTION 2. The proposed method of providing such public utility
service system is by purchasing and /or condemning real property and/
or water power rights at the following site and constructing and
operating hydroelectric generating and distributing facilities at
said site and by purchasing and /or condemning property and /or
property rights sufficient for the necessary transfer and /or distribu-
tion of the electric power generated by hydroelectric facilities at
such site for sale to other electric service providers and /or the
inhabitants of the City of Ithaca and any other local jurisdictions
in New York State or for furnishing to itself said power. Said
authorization shall include authority to take any of the afore-
mentioned activities in combination with other public and /or private
entities.
Hydroelectric Power Site: The proposed Ithaca Falls Hydroelectric
Project is located on Fall Creek in the City of Ithaca. The proposed
project will reharness the water power that originally provided
237
-21-
September 7, 1988
mechanical power for several mills in the early 1800s. The project
will utilize the existing dam, intake tunnel and raceway /floor, but
will require two new intake structures, penstock, powerhouse and
tailrace. The existing dam is a concrete structure on bedrock
approximately 5 feet high, 140 feet long and is located 115 feet
upstream of Ithaca Falls. The existing intake structure is located
approximately 15 feet upstream of the dam.
Alderperson Booth recommended, because of the two -year extension and
Ln opinions on both sides, delayingthis and not going forward for a year.
I' Alderperson Hoffman reported that the Hydropower Commission made the
LD same recommendation because they felt there if not enough time left
to do an adequate job.
M Alderperson Peterson said she didn't think there is adequate time.
a
Alderperson Johnson asked if postponed, how much time would be needed.
Alderperson Hoffman responded that the Hydropower Commission recom-
mend conducting the referendum November 1989.
Alderperson Nichols said he felt the city should go ahead with the
referendum this year. His impression at the Hydropower Committee
meeting he attended was that the financial data was not satisfac-
torily in hand; they couldn't quite understand it all. He thinks
(400" that has been corrected. He said a lot of work has gone on since that
meeting by Helen Jones, Dominick and the City Attorney which shouldn't
be discarded lightly. All this resolution asks is for the voters to
authorize the expenditure of a sum of money which, if we go ahead,
should be changed. Council can decide at a later time just when to
start. lie gave reasons for going ahead now: pricing mechanisms
are changing on the energy and it is important that we go ahead in
negotiations with NYSEG as quickly as possible. As to the information
available to the public the issue is whether or not it is worthwhile
to expend this money both because it will be economically productive
in the long run for the city, and secondly, because it enables the
city to control what goes on at the plant rather than a private
operator. When people are pressed with the fact that in the next week
or 2 or 3 they are going to have to vote on this that is when they
are interested and that's when the arguments could be presented. He
said he is willing to take a chance on the public's judgment now.
Alderperson Lytel asked Helen Jones for an explanation of the,time
constraints, which she provided. He said that in the interest of
getting the best possible deal for the power, and for political reasons,
he would like to go ahead this fall. He agreed with Alderperson
Nichols that the time when people will be interested is when they
have to vote on it. Next fall there will be a great many local races -
5 council members and all of the county board members. Now is the time
we have the best possible opportunity to have attention focused on the
one local initiative that will be on the ballot.
Alderperson Schlather said he is opposed to delaying the vote on this
and thinks the city should go forward this November. They have
committed a lot of resources, money to studies and updates of the
studies so we could go to vote in November. The delay had made the
other reports stale and he thinks they will be more stale a year from
now. If it loses because it is not properly understood, the city
still has another chance to present it to the voters a second time.
SECTION 3.
The estimated costs of
the aforementioned proposed method
of providing
5.2 million
the aforementioned public
dollars. The maximum
utility service system is
cost of said system authorized by
this law is
5.5 million dollars.
SECTION 4.
This local law shall
take effect upon approval by the
electors of
the City of Ithaca at
the general election to be held
on November
8, 1988 and filing in
the Office of the Secretary of
State.
Alderperson Booth recommended, because of the two -year extension and
Ln opinions on both sides, delayingthis and not going forward for a year.
I' Alderperson Hoffman reported that the Hydropower Commission made the
LD same recommendation because they felt there if not enough time left
to do an adequate job.
M Alderperson Peterson said she didn't think there is adequate time.
a
Alderperson Johnson asked if postponed, how much time would be needed.
Alderperson Hoffman responded that the Hydropower Commission recom-
mend conducting the referendum November 1989.
Alderperson Nichols said he felt the city should go ahead with the
referendum this year. His impression at the Hydropower Committee
meeting he attended was that the financial data was not satisfac-
torily in hand; they couldn't quite understand it all. He thinks
(400" that has been corrected. He said a lot of work has gone on since that
meeting by Helen Jones, Dominick and the City Attorney which shouldn't
be discarded lightly. All this resolution asks is for the voters to
authorize the expenditure of a sum of money which, if we go ahead,
should be changed. Council can decide at a later time just when to
start. lie gave reasons for going ahead now: pricing mechanisms
are changing on the energy and it is important that we go ahead in
negotiations with NYSEG as quickly as possible. As to the information
available to the public the issue is whether or not it is worthwhile
to expend this money both because it will be economically productive
in the long run for the city, and secondly, because it enables the
city to control what goes on at the plant rather than a private
operator. When people are pressed with the fact that in the next week
or 2 or 3 they are going to have to vote on this that is when they
are interested and that's when the arguments could be presented. He
said he is willing to take a chance on the public's judgment now.
Alderperson Lytel asked Helen Jones for an explanation of the,time
constraints, which she provided. He said that in the interest of
getting the best possible deal for the power, and for political reasons,
he would like to go ahead this fall. He agreed with Alderperson
Nichols that the time when people will be interested is when they
have to vote on it. Next fall there will be a great many local races -
5 council members and all of the county board members. Now is the time
we have the best possible opportunity to have attention focused on the
one local initiative that will be on the ballot.
Alderperson Schlather said he is opposed to delaying the vote on this
and thinks the city should go forward this November. They have
committed a lot of resources, money to studies and updates of the
studies so we could go to vote in November. The delay had made the
other reports stale and he thinks they will be more stale a year from
now. If it loses because it is not properly understood, the city
still has another chance to present it to the voters a second time.
23S
-22-
September 7, 1988
Alderperson Peterson asked when the environmental work update will
be ready. Helen Jones responded that it will be ready within the
next couple of weeks.
Alderperson Killeen commented that if the city is obligated to have
a referendum it must be done this November and we should respond to
what they say. They are going to speak because that is what happens
in residential year rather than in mayoral year.
P
Alderperson Nichols expressed the need to amend the figures cited in
of 4.6 million dollars
Section 3, page 2, the conservative estimate
which includes 20% contingency. The other possible costs above that
have to do with whether or not the city would purchase the land from
Cornell or lease it. The estimate for purchase of land and water
rights is $230,000. That would require negotiation. The budget seen
tonight is based upon an annual payment. The other costs have to do
with possible improvements of the land around that area as a park.
That should not be included in here as the cost of the hydropower
development. The proper figures would be the estimated cost of 4.6
million dollars and the maximum would be 5 million dollars. He so
Moved: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather provided the City Attorney
ruled they could amend a local law which has been laid on the table.
City Atty. Nash informed the Council it would take a notation in the
record by the Chief Executive that it is crucial for proper considera-
tion of the matter of public interest to pass it on this date.
Mayor Gutenberger
the figures. Ms.
rights would need
prepared by Roger
included are 4.6
water rights.
asked Helen Jones and Dominick for any change in
Jones responded that the cost of the land and water
to be added in. The figure was based on the plan
Trancik. She said the two costs which.should be
nill-ion dollars estimate and the cost of land and
Alderpersons Nichols and Schlather withdrew their motion for amendment.
Alderperson Hoffman said he thought a hydropower issue would be lost
in the shuffle in a presidential election year.
Alderperson Johnson expressed concern at the expense which has gone
into it and believes it should be on the ballot this year.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (7) - Cummings, Johnson, Killeen, Lytel, Nichols, Romanowski,
Schlather
Nays (3) - Peterson Hoffman, Booth
Carried
Resolution Regarding Consideration of Local Law
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the final version of the local law was placed on the
desks of the Common Council members on August 30, 1988; now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council of the City of Ithaca, consider adoption
of the local law and upon adoption of said local law that the
City Clerk be directed to publish this local law in the Ithaca Journal
in accordance with Section 360.5 of the General Municipal Law, once
per week for the six weeks immediately preceding the next General
,Election, and
That the City Attorney is hereby directed to submit, within ten days,
an abstract of this local law and a proposition to the local Board of
Elections in order that it might appear on the ballot for the next
General Election.
-23_ September 7, 19881,110'1
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1988
CITY OF ITHACA
A LOCAL LAW AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ITHACA TO ESTABLISH, OWN, AND
OPERATE PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES - SIXTY FOOT DAM
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca,
New York as follows:
SECTION 1. The City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York is hereby
(400.1 authorized to establish, own and operate public utility service
systems within and /or without its territorial limits for the purpose
Of furnishing to itself, or for sale to other electric service
providers and for compensation to its inhabitants or inhabitants
of any other local jurisdiction in the State of New York, any
service similar to that furnished by any public utility company
specified in Article 4 of the Public Service Law. Notwithstanding
any general or special law, pursuant to the provisions of subdivision
2 of Section 360 of the General Municipal Law, said City may construct,
LD Lease, purchase, own, acquire, use and /or operate any public utility
I. service within or without its territorial limits for said purpose.
LD SECTION 2. The proposed method of providing such public utility
service system is by purchasing and /or condeming real property
M and /or water power rights at the following site and constructing
Q and operating hydroelectric generating and distributing facilities
at said site and by purchasing and /or condeming property and /or
property rights sufficient for the necessary transfer and /or
distribution of the electric power generated by hydroelectric
facilities at such site for sale to other electric service providers
and /or inhabitants of the City of Ithaca and any other local
jurisdictions in New York State or for furnishing to itself said
power. Said authorization shall include authority to take any
of the aforementioned activities in combination with other public
and /or private entities.
Hydroelectric Power Site: The proposed Hydroelectric Power
Project would be located at the Sixty Foot Dam on Six Mile Creek,
in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York. The Sixty Foot
Dam impounds the Ithaca Reservoir used as a water supply for the
City of Ithaca. The dam is a 220 foot long concrete gravity
structure. The proposed generating facility would utilize existing
civil works at the dam. Flows from the dam would be diverted
through a 1,000 foot pipe to a new powerhouse containing generating
equipment and associated controls.
SECTION 3. The estimated costs of the aforementioned proposed
method of providing the aforementioned public utility service
system is 2.5 million dollars. The maximum cost of said system
authorized by this law is 3 million dollars.
SECTION 4. This local law shall take effect upon approval by
the electors of the City of Ithaca at the general election to
be held on November 8, 1988 and filing in the Office of the
Secretary of State.
Alderperson Booth commented that his sense is this proposal does
not make sense; the city should not go forward with it on sub-
stantive grounds; he urged the Council to defeat it.
Alderperson Schlather agreed with Alderperson Booth's assessment;
it is economically unfeasible; he thinks, however, to keep their
options open, they should simply not put it on the ballot this
fall.
Alderperson Hoffman informed the Council that the recommendation
of the Hydropower Commission was to put this on the ballot this
year but, instead of suggesting figures for construction by the
city, they suggested the project be leased out to a private developer.
If we don't go to referendum this year we may have to relinquish
the license which could go to someone else.
240
-24- September 7, 1.988
Alderperson Nichols said he hopes the city will take action to protect
it from any other development.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (0)
Nays (10) - Booth, Cummings, Hoffman, Johnson, Killeen, Lytel,
Nichols, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather
Defeated Unanimously
Resolution Regarding Consideration of a Local Law_
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the final version of the local law was placed on the,
desks of the Common Council members on August 30, 1988; now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED, That Common
of the local
the City Clerk be dir
Journal in accordance
once per week for the
Election, and
Council of the City of Ithaca, consider adoption
law and upon adoption of said local law, that
acted to publish this local law in the Ithaca
with Section 360.5 of the General Municipal Law,
six weeks immediately preceding the next General
That the City Attorney is hereby directed to submit, within ten days,
an abstract of this local law and a proposition to the local Board of
Elections in order that it might appear on the ballot for the next
General Election.
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1988
A LOCAL LAW AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ITHACA TO ESTABLISH, OWN
AND OPERATE PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES - VAN NATTA DAM
SECTION 1. The City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York is hereby
authorized to establish, own and operate public utility
service systems within and /or without its territorial limits for the
purpose of furnishing to itself, or for sale to other electric service
providers and for compensation to the inhabitants or inhabitants of any
other local jurisdiction in the State of New York, any service similar
to that furnished by any public utility company specified in Article 4
of the Public Service Law. Notwithstanding, any general or special law,
pursuant to the provisions of subdivision 2 of Section 360 of the
General Municipal Law, said city may construct, lease, purchase, own,
acquire, use and /or operate any public utility service within or
without its territorial limits for said purpose.
SECTION 2. The proposed method of providing such public utility
service system is by purchasing and /or condemning real property and /or
water power rights at the following site and constructing and operating
hydroelectric generating and distributing facilities at said site and
by purchasing and /or condemning property and /or property rights
sufficient for the necessary transfer and /or distribution of the
electric power generated by hydroelectric facilities at such site for
sale to other electric service providers and /or inhabitants of the
City of Ithaca and any other local jurisdictions in New York State or
for furnishing to itself said power. Said authorization shall include
authority to take any of the aforementioned activities in combination
with other public and /or private entities.
Hydroelectric Power Site: The proposed Van Natta Dam Hydroelectric
,project is located on Six Mile Creek in the City of Ithaca, New York,
adjacent to the Giles Street Bridge. The Van Natta Dam is an existing
18 foot high concrete structure built on a rock ledge. The abandoned
pump station at Giles Street which formerly produced hydro mechanical
power would be renovated, and new generating equipment and associated
controls would be installed.
SECTION 3. The estimated costs of the aforementioned proposed method
of providing the aforementioned public utility service system is 1.6
million dollars. The maximum cost of said system authorized by this
law is 2 million dollars.
-25-
241
September 7, 1988
SECTION 4. This local law shall take effect upon approval by the
electors of the City of Ithaca at the general election to be held
on November 8, 1988 and filing in the office of the Secretary of
State.
Alderperson Hoffman informed the Council that the recommendation of
the Hydropower Commission was that the vote be conducted this year
but instead of city expenditure we lease the site to a private
developer.
Alderperson Nichols asked City Attorney Nash if the City does not'
develop the project but leased it to another developer, do we need a
referendum? Attorney Nash responded that based upon what he knows at
this point, he wouldn't change his legal opinion to go ahead with a
referendum.
Alderperson Schlather commented that he thought they should vote
against this particular resolution because there are some promising
possibilities with respect to the Sixty Foot Dam site in connection
with other development. We're not jeopardizing anything by delaying
LD this a year and we will simply be confusing the debate this fall by
,q putting this on the ballot.
LD Halen Jones commented that if they delay until 1989 that does not
leave them enough time to start construction and there was one par -
M ticular gentleman in the room that night who is very much interested;
Q he indicated at the Hydropower meeting that if the city did not go
to referendum, he would petition to have us surrender.
Further discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (4) - Lytel, Hoffman, Johnson, Peterson
Nays (6) - Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Nichols, Booth,
Killeen
Motion Defeated
Alternate Side Parking Changes
Alderperson Booth reported that the committee discussed alternate
side parking but did not resolve it. They will continue discussion
on September 15, 1988 at the Charter and Ordinance meeting.
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 64 Entitled "Cable Communications" of
the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
Alderperson Booth reported that City Attorney Nash had sent him
amendments in June or July; other amendments have come since then in
his negotiations with the ACC people. The committee was not able to
discuss the amended ordinance because they did not have it in a form
where all of the amendments were right on the document. Attorney Nash
called him after the agenda was being prepared and asked that it be
put on the agenda so what is there is the amended ordinance and City
Attorney Nash's memos - one to the Mayor, one to Alderperson Booth,and
perhaps a letter to explain the changes. Alderperson Booth feels the
committee should go through it so he said he would not move it that
night. The Charter and Ordinance Committee will meet September 15, 1988.
Tabling Resolution
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That the TV Cable Ordinance be tabled to provide review of
the amendments by the Charter and Ordinance Committee.
Carried Unanimously
242
-26- September 7, 1988
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
Shelter for Homeless at Southside Community Center
By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the Southside Center Board of Directors has requested that
the City of Ithaca designate the Southside Center as a temporary Cold
Weather Shelter for the months of October 17, 1988 through April 30,
1989, and
WHEREAS, the shelter successfully housed homeless individuals in the
early months of 1988, and
WHEREAS, close to 100 individuals have come to Southside Center since
the temporary cold weather shelter closed to seek assistance because
of homelessness, and
WHEREAS, Southside Center seems to fill a need for homeless individuals
who, for some reason, are not allowed in other shelters or who feel
more comfortable at Southside, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is committed to assisting homeless
individuals and owns the building that Southside Center occupies, and
WHEREAS, questions regarding building and fire codes for such building
use have arisen, and
WHEREAS, The Human Services Committee has determined that having any
individual without shelter during cold weather is a significant
emergency and that the building already houses other programs in-
cluding a licensed day care facility that must meet state codes and
that the shelter program mandates staff that is awake during shelter
hours; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council permits Southside Center to be used as a
temporary cold weather shelter from October 17, 1988 through April 30,
1989, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the current operating procedures, including maintaining
security of the building portion that is not used as a shelter and
maintaining at least (2) two staff persons each night, be adhered to
as a minimum.
Discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Sale of Fire Station #5
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca by resolution duly
adopted at its regular meeting on October 7, 1987 declared Fire
Station #5, Tax Map Number 70 -1 -14, 236 West State Street, with an
appraised value of $76,000, to be surplus property and authorized
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency and its Executive Director to solicit
proposals for its sale, to evaluate purchase proposals according to
the stated criteria of purchase price, proposed reuse and appropriate-
ness of any planned alterations to the exterior of the structure, and
recommend to the Common Council its selection of purchaser for Common
Council review and action.
'WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency solicited and evaluated
proposals for the sale of Fire Station #5 and recommended to the
Common Council the sale of Fire Station #5 to Harvey Ferdschneider
and Anne Trovinger for the sum of $80,000, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Common Council accepted said recommendation at
their April 6, 1988 regular meeting; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca declares
that Harvey Ferdschneider and Anne Trovinger are the preferred buyers
for the purchase of Fire Station #5 for the amount of eighty thousand
24:3
-27- September 7, 1988
dollars ($80,000), and in accordance with the terms of the
purchase proposal, and authorizes and directs the Director of Planning
and Development to prepare the appropriate notifications for the pro-
posed sale of said property to be published in accordance with City
Charter Section 3.10(40) so that the Common Council may consider the
actual sale of Fire Station #5 at their November 2, 1988 regular
meeting.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Cummings explained that this is a preliminary vote to
ce accept the terms of the purchase offer, which terms will then be publicly
noticed and the Council will vote on them at the November meeting.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Establishment of a Housing Trust Fund
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
Ln
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has recognized that housing affordability
Ln and housing conditions are serious problems in the city, and
LD WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has responded to these problems by actively
seeking funding from Federal and State programs including the Community
M Development Block Grant program, the Urban Development Action Grant
Q program, the Housing Development Grant program, the Section 17 Rental
Rehabilitation program and the New York State Housing Trust Fund
program, and
WHEREAS, the total funding allocated to Federal and State programs for
affordable housing has steadily diminished over the last decade, making
annual funding uncertain and threatening the continued success of
Ithaca's efforts to address the problems of housing affordability, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca's 1988 Strategic Housing and Neighborhoods
Plan recommended the development of a local housing trust fund for the
purpose of providing a stable, renewable source of funds that could be
used for the development of affordable housing; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca does hereby authorize the creation
of a Housing Trust Fund for the purpose of providing funding for the
development of affordable housing in the City of Ithaca, subject to
review and enactment by Common Council prior to implementation; and be
it further
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca shall seek to develop, fund, and
operate the Housing Trust Fund in accordance with the following ob-
jectives:
1) Programs funded by the Housing Trust Fund shall be targeted
toward assisting low and moderate income households to obtain
affordable housing.
2) Housing Trust Fund programs shall emphasize the creation and
maintenance of good quality, affordable housing that will pro-
vide long -term benefits to those in the community who are in
need of such housing.
3) The administration of Housing Trust Fund programs should be
as efficient and cost - effective as possible.
4) Housing Trust Fund programs that leverage additional public and
private investment and involve the private sector in financing
and construction activities should be encouraged so as to
maximize the housing and economic benefits that accrue to the
community.
5) The Housing Trust Fund should be funded from stable, annually
renewable sources of funds that are adequate to provide a level
of funding sufficient to provide significant impact on Ithaca's
affordable housing problem. This annual funding minimum is
244
estimated to be at least $300,000 annually. Examples of such
sources of funds are UDAG repayments, developer exactions or
real estate transfer taxes. These sources may be supplemented
at any time by funds from other sources.
6. On an annual basis, or as appropriate, distribution of funds
from the Housing Trust Fund shall be made to qualified housing
providers in order to accomplish the housing objectives listed
above and otherwise established by Common Council.
Discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Mental Health /DSS Parking
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Board of Representatives has decided
to locate a new building for Mental Health services on a site in
downtown Ithaca on East Green Street, and
WHEREAS, this site can also sustain new building space for the
Tompkins County Department of Social Services (DSS), and
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca has consistently
supported the concept that the DSS offices should be located in
downtown Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, studies show that it can be economically feasible for the
County to relocate the DSS offices from the current location on West
Hill in the Town of Ithaca returning the facility to downtown Ithaca,
and
WHEREAS, a downtown location will best serve the clients of DSS, many
of whom live within the city, and
WHEREAS, a downtown location will strengthen the central business
district, and
WHEREAS, a downtown location will return this important county service
to a site located in the County seat, and
WHEREAS, some members of the County legislature have expressed a
concern about the need for increased parking for this facility, and
WHEREAS, the State of New York will subsidize seventy -five percent
(750) of both the construction and cost of providing any parking space
to serve DSS; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That on the recommendation of the Planning and Development
Committee, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca strongly supports
the return of the County Department of Social Services to a central
location in the City of Ithaca, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby commits
itself to providing the parking spaces required for the DSS on the
adjacent Woolworth parking lot, subject to the completion of a study
of future parking needs in the Central Business District and the satis-
factory completion of an agreement between the City of Ithaca and
Tompkins County regarding the financing, ownership, environmental
,review, site design, and management of any new parking spaces to be
constructed in the Woolworth lot or suitable alternative.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Amendment
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the last WHEREAS be removed from the resolution.
Ayes (7) - Lytel, Cummings, NIchols, Johnson, Killeen, Peterson,
Booth
Nays (3) Hoffman, Romanowski, Schlather
Carried
245
-29-
September 7, 1988
A vote on the main motion as amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (9) - Lytel, Hoffman, Johnson, Peterson, Schlather,
Cummings, Nichols, Booth, Killeen
Nays (1) - Romanowski
Carried
Central Business District Parking Study
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, a major factor in the continued viability of Ithaca's Central
(moo" Business District is the supply and operation of public parking; and
WHEREAS, numerous issues relating to operational policies, enforcement,
location and impacts on residential areas have been identified by those
concerned about Central Business District parking; and
WHEREAS, the evaluation of parking problems and the implementation of
solutions to those problems is fragmented among several City of Ithaca
boards and departments; and
LD WHEREAS, the creation of a committee to research parking issues and
Iq make recommendations to the appropriate legislative boards would pro -
LO vide the focal point for a more efficient resolution of Central Busi-
ness District parking concerns; now, therefore, be it
M RESOLVED, That this Common Council does hereby authorize the creation
Q of an ad hoc committee to study and make recommendations affecting
parking in the Central Business District and the surrounding area;
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Central Business District Parking Committee shall
be charged with examining, at a minimum, the following issues:
1) The present levels of use of public and private parking in the
Central Business District and the projected changes in both the
existing supply and demand.
2) The present operational policies for public on- and off - street
parking, including cost, allocation to various types of users,
location, physical characteristics and secondary impacts.
3) Issues relating to the enforcement of parking regulations.
4) Analysis of the present policy and legislative decision- making
structure for public parking.
5) Projected future parking demand generated by the location of County
Governmental functions in the Central Business District, and
be it further
RESOLVED, 'That the Central Business District Parking Committee shall
be composed of eleven members including a chair and vice -chair appointed
by the Mayor with the concurrence of Common Council.Representatives
from each of the following groups shall be appointed to the
Committee:
1) Board of Public Works
2) Department of Public Works
3) Planning and Development Board
4) Planning Department
5) Planning and Development Committee
and be it further
6) Police Department
7) DIBA /CAB
8) Neighborhood represent-
atives
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca shall hire a consultant who
specializes in municipal parking issues to design and undertake a
study of local parking needs, and that the Central Business District
Parking Committee shall work with the consultant to develop a final
report, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Central Business District Parking Committee shall
submit a final report to the Common Council and the Board of Public
Works by March 1989.
240'
-30-
September 7, 1988
Amendment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the second to last RESOLVED be removed.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Cummings stated she thinks it is important to bring in an
outside consultant. Mayor Gutenberger agreed.
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (3) - Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman
Nays (7) - Lytel, Cummings, Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Killeen,
Peterson
Amendment Defeated
Alderperson Johnson offered a friendly amendment that the composition
of the committee include a member of the Conservation Advisory Commit-
tee and a commuting worker who parks downtown. Ms. Cummings accepted
the amendment.
A friendly amendment was offered by Alderperson Peterson as follows:
That under the second RESOLVED Item 6) be added to read: the effective
current and projected future demands on the adjacent residential
neighborhoods. Ms. Cummings accepted the amendment.
Alderperson Hoffman commented that this approach is leaning in favor
of simply providing more parking as the solution to increased traffic.
He thinks that eventually the city will have to grapple with the fact
that too many cars in a restricted downtown area is a real problem.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Nichols,
Johnson, Booth, Killeen, Peterson
Nays (1) - Hoffman
Carried
Industrial Park Development
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Common Council is considering the possible sale of the
Ithaca Industrial Park property to Tompkins County to serve as a solid
waste transfer facility, and
WHEREAS, such sale would result in the Department of Housing and Urban
Development's recapture of $151,000 in grant funds originally made
available for the city purchase of the property, and would further
result in the loss of a $150,000 grant to the city from the Appalachian
Regional Commission for the site's development, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council is interested in examining a possible
replacement industrial park site, to be purchased only in the event
that the Ithaca Industrial Park property is sold, which would enable
the city to reallocate rather than lose the grant resources; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council authorizes and directs the Director
of Planning and Development to contract the appraisal of a parcel of
land consisting of approximately thirteen (13) acres, located directly
'south of Cherry Street Industrial Park, at a cost not to exceed three
thousand dollars ($3,000), and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council authorizes and directs the Director
of Planning and Development and the City Attorney to negotiate with
the owner(s) of the property to develop a purchase agreement for the
property, which shall be subject to the final approval by the Common
Council.
Discussion followed on the floor.
247
-31-
September 7, 1988
Amendment
By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
RESOLVED, That "from unrestricted contingency" be added at the end
of the first RESOLVED.
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (9) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Killeen, Peterson, Romanowski,
Hoffman, Lytel, Cummings
Nays (1) - Schlather
Carried
.(600"
A vote on the main motion as amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Killeen, Romanowski, Hoffman,
Lytel, Cummings
Nays (2) - Schlather, Peterson
Carried
Motion to Extend Meeting Deadline
LO By Alderperson Nichols; Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
'q RESOLVED, That tonight's meeting deadline be extended until 12:15 a.m.
LO Carried Unanimously
An Ordinance Amending Article 1, Section 30.3 and Article II of
M Chapter 30 Entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
Q (Cluster Subdivision)
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That the proposed Cluster Development Ordinance be referred
to the Charter and Ordinance Committee
Carried Unanimously
Transfer Baling Station
No Report
BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
Youth Bureau Authorized Equipment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the 1988 Authorized Equipment List of the Youth Bureau
be amended to include the purchase of one refrigerator for the
Stewart Park concession stand, at a cost not to exceed $439, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $439 be transferred within
the Youth Bureau Budget from Account A7310 -105, Administrative
Salaries, to Account A7310 -225, Other Equipment.
Carried Unanimously
Audit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #16/
1988, in the total amount of $44,652.50, be approved for payment.
Carried Unanimously
Printing of Labor Contract Books
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $2,410 be transferred from
Account A1990, Contingency, to Personnel Department Account A1430 -425,
Office Expense, to pay for the cost of printing the C.S.E.A. Labor
Contract Agreement Books, as requested by the Personnel Administrator.
Carried Unanimously
Dental Insurance Plan
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, Common Council had previously authorized the Personnel Admini-
strator to send out requests for proposals for a qualified agent to
provide a dental plan; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That upon receipt of qualified proposals, a Committee con-
sisting of the Deputy City Controller, Personnel Administrator and
Purchasing Agent, will review and analyze the proposals and make a
recommendation to the Mayor and Budget and Administration Committee
no later than November 1, 1988.
Carried Unanimously
248
- -32-
September 7, 1988
Recycling Coordinator Hours
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Recycling Coordinator's allotted hours be in-
creased from 20 hours to 30 hours per week, through the end of 1988,
as requested by the Board of Public Works, effective September 12,
1988.
Carried Unanimously
Traffic Improvements
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the 1988 Budget included a request for $10,000 to replace
the control system on the traffic signal at Dryden and Campus Roads,
and
WHEREAS, the Belle Sherman School neighborhood has requested a flashing
light installation at the Cornell Street crossing, and
WHEREAS, the replacement of the traffic control equipment at Dryden
and Campus Roads will not exceed $5,000, and
WHEREAS, the flashing light installation at the Cornell Street
crossing will not exceed $3,400; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the transfer of $10,000
from A1990, Restricted Contingency, to Traffic Signals Account
A3312 -477, as requested by the Board of Public Works, and be it further
RESOLVED, That any unused portion of these funds be applied to other
safety measures for the safe passage of pedestrians near the Belle
Sherman School.
Carried Unanimously
Bikeway Construction
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the resolution be referred back to
the Budget and
Administration Committee.
Carried Unanimously
Ithaca Housing Authority Comparability
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson
Killeen
WHEREAS, according to Article 3, Section 32(1), of
the New York State
Public Housing Law, it is necessary for the local
legislative body to
approve the compensation of personnel in the local
Housing Authority,
as fixed by the local Housing Authority, and
WHEREAS, this Common Council has received a resolution
from the Ithaca
Housing Authority establishing positions, comparability,
salary range
and salaries for its personnel (though the cited
City increase of 6%
is approximate only);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That this Common
Council approves the
following positions, comparability, salary range
and salaries, as
adopted by the Ithaca Housing Authority, for its
fiscal year October 1,
1988 to September 30, 1989.
Salary Range
Position Comparable Position
and Salary
Executive Director Director of Planning &
/Controller
$37,093 - $54,907
Salary $44,821
Development
'Assistant Director Deputy Director Plan-
$33,047 - $40,207
ning Department
Salary $32,012
Principal Account City of Ithaca C.S.E.A.
$14,954 - $19,679
Clerk
Salary $21,793
Administrative City of Ithaca C.S.E.A.
$13,710 - $18,041
Secretary
Salary $16,978
Site Manager Planner III
$17,190 - $22,621
Salary $19,806
J
- WHEREAS, the City, Town of Ithaca, and the Finger Lakes Region of
the State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
have entered into an agreement to participate in joint
development of pathways for cyclists and pedestrians, primarily
intended to improve access to the area's parks, and
WHEREAS, the city has expressed a preference for an alternate
alinement for the Cayuga Inlet Bike Trail, which would require
construction of a bridge that was unforseen when the agreement
was made, and
WHEREAS, the cost of such a bridge has been estimated to increase
the cost of the project by $50,000 to $100,000 depending on the
scale of the bridge, and
WHEREAS, the preferred alinement would directly benefit the city
and its residents, and
WHEREAS, the Finger Lakes Region has indicated willingness to
accept the city's preference if the city will make a substantial
contribution to the increased costs of the preferred alinement;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That in addition to any costs associated with securing
needed rights -of -way for the Cayuga Inlet Bike Trail, the city
will contribute $50,000 for a bikeway bridge only, or up to
$100,000 for a reinforced bridge capable of carrying emergency
vehicles, such funds to be included in the 1989 Capital Budget
and paid over at such time and in such manner as Common Council
shall agree, in order to promote the expeditious completion of
the Cayuga Inlet Bike Trail.
(4ww" Superintendent of Ithaca School District
Maintenance Salary $23,540
Stock Manager City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $17,270 - $22,725
Salary $18,060
Building Maintenance Maintainer - C.S.E.A. $6.22 - $7.20 hour
Mechanic Ithaca School District * *$17,941 (8.62)
IHA $9.61 +0.T.guarantee6
LO
LO Salary *$20,613
LO Building Maintenance Maintainer - C.S.E.A. $6.22 - $7.28 /hour
Mechanic Ithaca School District * *$17,941 (8.62)
M IHA $9.05 +0.T.guaranteed
Q Salary *$19,412
Building Maintenance Maintainer - C.S.E.A. $6.22 - $7.28 /hour
Mechanic Ithaca School District * *$17,941 (8.62)
IHA $7.67 +0.T.guaranteed
Salary *$16,452
Maintenance Worker City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $5.61 - $6.55
IHA $6.89 +0.T.guaranteed
Salary *$14,779
Maintenance Worker City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $5.61 - $6.55
IHA $6.37 +0.T.guarantee6
Salary *$13,664
Maintenance Worker City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $5.61 - $6.55
IHA $6.23 +0.T.guarantee6
Salary *$13,363
Laborer City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $5.25 - $6.15
IHA $5.77 +0.T.guaranteed!
Salary *$12,452
Laborer City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $5.25 - $6.15
IHA $5.77 +0.T.guaranteec
Salary *$12,452
2 Summer Camp Seasonal
Directors
1 at Northside $8.00 /hour
1 at Southview $8.00 /hour
2 Assistant Seasonal
Directors
1 at Northside $7.00 /hour
1 at Southview $6.50 /hour
2 Senior Seasonal
Counselors
1 at Northside $4.50 /hour
1 at Southview $4.50 /hour
2 Counselors - Seasonal
Northside $4.00 /hour
Section 8 Planner III - C.S.E.A. $17,190 - $22,621
Administrator Salary $20,295
250
-34- September 7, 1988
Salary Range
Position Comparable Position and Salary_
Tenant Selector Administrative Assist- $13,574 - $17,863
ant - C.S.E.A. Salary $13,500
Account Clerk/ City of Ithaca C.S.E.A. $10,464 - $13,771
Typist Salary $10,464
Section 8 Assistant See Site Manager $17,190 - $22,621
(Prorated Salary) Planner III - C.S.E.A. Salary $ 9,903
* Per U.A.W. Union Contract
** No range available from City of Ithaca
Civil Service Office
Audit Contract Committee
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
WHEREAS, guidelines governing the preparation of the City's Annual
External Audit have been amended by the enactment of Statement on
Auditing Standards #61, "Communication With Audit Committees'!; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Budget and Administration Committee be designated
as the City's Audit Contact Committee, in fulfillment of said
requirement.
Carried Unanimously
Developer Impact Program
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is investigating the feasibility of
developing a program of developer impact fees to fund affordable
housing programs, service expansions or infrastructure improvements,
and
WHEREAS, assistance from qualified consultants will help the City of
Ithaca to develop a legally and technically defensible impact fee
program, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Development staff has prepared a Request
for Proposals to solicit consulting services; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, Common-Council-does_ hereby authorize the staff of the
Department of-,Planning and.Development to send the Request
for Proposals, dated August 29, 1988, to consultants who may be
interested in submitting proposals for services, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Planning and Development staff shall report to the
Budget and Administration Committee on the proposals received and
recommendations regarding the hiring of a consultant at the October
27, 1988 Budget and Administration meeting.
Discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
A 7 PR Iql - T,vtPl r'nmmina�. Nir -hnlq. Tnhnson, Booth, Killeen.
-35- September 7, 1988
B. The addition of one Municipal Training Officer. 251
C. The addition of one Administrative Secretary's
position.
D. The total number of positions for the Fire
Department be increased to 60,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the projected operating costs for the base years 1988 -1990
be amended to reflect the total cost related to said increased staffing
level.
Carried Unanimously
REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS:
Conservation Advisory Council
Recommendation and Resolution Regarding Plastic and Polystyrene
Packaging
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That this item be referred to the Charter and Ordinance
Committee.
Carried Unanimously
Conservation Advisory Council Resolution Regarding a Neighborhood
Park on the Old Sewage Treatment Plant Site
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That this item be referred to the Planning and Development
Committee.
Carried Unanimously
City /Town Fire Committee Report
m Alderperson Killeen reported that the new fire station construction
Q and old station renovation schedule is:
Bids Sought Thanksgiving 1988
Bids Received Christmas 1988
Bids Awarded Valentine's Day 1989
Motion to Adjourn into Executive Session
By Alderperson Schlather; Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
(600,el RESOLVED, That the Council adjourn into Executive Session to discuss
a personnel item.
Carried Unanimously
The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 12:10 a.m, and re-
convened in Regular Session at 12:25 a.m.
BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
Labor Negotiation Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca enter into an Agreement with James
Dennis, who submitted the lowest cost proposal, to provide professional
services in the field of labor negotiations (Police Benevolent Associ-
ation), interest arbitration and other assistance, for the period
September 15, 1988 to September 15, 1989, at a cost not to exceed
$2,500, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign such
Agreement on behalf of the City, subject to review by the City Attorney
as to form and content.
Ayes (6) - Schlather, Killeen, Hoffman, Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings
Nays (3) - Booth, Nichols, Peterson
Abstention (1) - Johnson
(WO-e Carried
ADJOURNMENT:
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:27 a.m.
Callista F. Paolangeli'
City Clerk
L.
ORDINANCE NO. 88
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.25, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, OF
i CHAPTER 30 ENTITLED 'ZONING' OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL
CODE.
:'(Woo"
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of
Ithaca, New York as follows:
j SECTION 1. AMENDING SECTION 30.25
Section 1. Section 30.25, District Regulations, of Chapter 30 is amended to
read as follows:
§ 30.25 District regulations
A. The District Regulations Chart is hereby made a part of this Chapter.
Column heads on the District Regulations Chart are defined as follows:....
For the text regarding Columns 1 through 13, see the existing text of
this Section.
Column 14. Yard dimensions. Rear Yard. [ "Percentage of depth."]
[Buildings] Subject to the provisions of the following paragraph, buildings
hereafter erected in each district must have a rear yard of at least the
depth which is the percentage figure listed in this column [, except as
provided in Column 15 and subject to the further regulations of § 30.35] .
Such percentage shall be taken of the lot depth. If the two side lot lines
are of unequal length, the rear yard percentage shall be taken of the average
of the two lengths. ( See Illustration VI on page 2 )
-2
L - A%4=_ � L-OT Dr-r rH
D - RrAX YAKD DerTH -
sTATFO
(Fvom cot- 14)
c3TrcffeT
71
Ill. VI. Rear yard - 7. lot
de•Dth.
ST�c�ET
5{Di= LYE- -• �.,� SIDS
YARD = �•,' YARD
1=-F-ouT YAZD I
5TFtF_ET
Ill- VII. Through -block lot.
2.
[Column 15: Yard Dimensions. Rear Yard. "Maximum required. "] In
applying the lot depth percentage of (Column 14] this Column (see previous
paragraph) , no rear yard shall be required which is a greater number of
feet in depth than the maximum footage figure listed in this column 1; however, ]_
However, rear yards of a greater depth shall not be prohibited.
For some districts the required rear yard dimensions are stated in terms of
minimum footage requirements- In those cases the percentage lot depth
and maximum footage figures do not apply.
On a corner lot or through -block lot the yard on the opposite side of the
lot from the street whose address the lot bears shall be designated as rear
yard. (See Illustration VII, above)
B. General Notes pertaining to Regulations:-
1. [All development plans shall be subject to approval by the Planning
and Development Board and the Common Council.]
9
0
-3-
For minimum lot size requirements stated in Column 6 (Area in Square
Feet) for all residential use districts, each square footage requirement
applies separately to the initial permitted primary use and to each
additional permitted primary use located in a separate building on
the property in question (e.g., in R2b districts, an area of 3,000
square feet is required for a one - family house or a two- family house
and an additional area of 3,000 square feet is required for each
additional one - family house or two - family house on the property.)
2. Land filling and bulkheading plans and procedures shall be subject
to approval of the Board of Public Works. [and Common Council.]
3. Regulations, standards and permitted uses are generally cumulative,
except for the P-1, FW -1 , and- MH -1 districts and except where otherwise
indicated by specific prohibition or omission.
4. Where a variance or special permit is required, or where special
conditions apply, to allow in one district a use which is permitted by right in
another district, the regulations applying to such use shall be those of
whichever district has the stricter regulations, unless otherwise determined
by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
5. All uses permitted or allowed in any district shall conform to the
General Performance Standards as set forth in § 30.40.
6. Any use permitted under this Ordinance shall, if located within the
Fl-i -1 Zone, meet the requirements of Section 30.44 in addition to those
otherwise applicable to it under district regulations.
7. In R -1 and R -2 districts, minor dependent children in the care of a
parent or relative shall be excluded in determining the number of unrelated
occupants in a dwelling unit.
8. In all districts where multiple dwellings are permitted, each multiple
dwelling shall be required to have a rear yard of at least twenty (20) feet
in depth. (This requirement has been imposed so that these structures
comply with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code) .
9. In all districts, the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and
Building Code may impose additional requirements pertaining to the location
of a structure on a parcel of property including, for example, additional
building setback requirements.
I
-4-
10
All columns established by this section are
subject to the supplementar
regulations stated in Article III of this ordinance.
Section
2. The District Regulations Chart established
by Section 30.25 of
this Chapter is hereby amended as follows: _
a.
Column 15 is deleted
b.
Column 14 is retitled "Rear"
The box entitled "% of Depth" is amended
to read "% of lot depth
C.
or maximum footage required, whichever is
less."
d.
For the respective districts, Column 14 is
amended to read as follows:
R -la: 25% or 50 feet
R -1b: 250 or 50 feet
R -2a: 25% or 50 feet
R -2b : 25% or 50 feet
R -3a: 20% or 25 feet
R -3b: 20% or 25 feet
R -U: 25% or 50 feet
C -SU : • 20% or 25 feet
B -la: 15% or 20 feet
B -1b: 10% or 15 feet
B -2a: 15% or 20 feet
B -2b: 10 feet minimum
B -2c: leave as is - not to be amended
B -3: 10 feet minimum
B -4: 15% or 20 feet
B -5: 15% or 20 feet
1-1: 15% or 20 feet
FW -1: leave as is - not to be amended
FH -1 : leave as is -.not to be amended
M -1: 15% or 20 feet
P -1: 10 feet minimum
MH -1: 20% or 25 feet
P�r
Coe
Section 3. Paragraph 3 of subdivision A of. Section 30.33, Height Regulations,
of Chapter 30 is amended to read as follows:
- 3. Towers or - structures -,including satellite dishes, --for -the -transmission------.
or receipt of radio or other electronic signals for the non - commercial use and
enjoyment of occupants of the premises, including television, ham radio,
citizens' band, MARS and similar operations in connection with hobbies and
home entertainment;
Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law
upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca
City Charter.
NOTE: Material in [brackets] is to be deleted. Underlined material is to
be added.
1
Section 1. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council
of the City of Ithaca, New York, that a new Chapter 67, entitled
Regulation of Smoking, be added to the City of Ithaca Municipal
Code to read as follows:
Chapter 67
Regulation of Smoking
A. The City government of Ithaca has an obligation to try
to protect persons from involuntary exposure to public health
hazards and public nuisances.
B. Reliable studies have shown that breathing second -hand
smoke is a significant health hazard for several population
groups, including children, fetuses, elderly people, individuals
with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired
respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with
obstructive airway disease. These health hazards include lung
cancer, respiratory infection, decreased exercise tolerance,
decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction and
bronchospasm.
C. Exposure to second -hand smoke precipitates and /or
aggravates allergic attacks in persons with respiratory
allergies, and accelerates such allergic symptoms as eye
irritation, nasal symptoms, headaches, coughing, wheezing, sore
throats and hoarseness.
D. The preponderance of available evidence and the trends
reflected in that evidence all indicate that exposure to second-
hand smoke is a significant health hazard which exposes members
of the public to increased risk for developing disease and
adversely affects the public health. This exposure has caused,
continues to cause and will continue to cause needless pain,
suffering, and death.
E. The health hazards caused by second -hand smoke are of
variable degree, depending upon such factors as length of
exposure and the age and physical condition of those exposed.
Section
67.1 Purpose
It
is the purpose of
this ordinance to protect and enhance
the public health, safety,
and general welfare by limiting the
exposure
of all persons to
second -hand smoke.
Section
67.2 Declaration of Findings and Intent
A. The City government of Ithaca has an obligation to try
to protect persons from involuntary exposure to public health
hazards and public nuisances.
B. Reliable studies have shown that breathing second -hand
smoke is a significant health hazard for several population
groups, including children, fetuses, elderly people, individuals
with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired
respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with
obstructive airway disease. These health hazards include lung
cancer, respiratory infection, decreased exercise tolerance,
decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction and
bronchospasm.
C. Exposure to second -hand smoke precipitates and /or
aggravates allergic attacks in persons with respiratory
allergies, and accelerates such allergic symptoms as eye
irritation, nasal symptoms, headaches, coughing, wheezing, sore
throats and hoarseness.
D. The preponderance of available evidence and the trends
reflected in that evidence all indicate that exposure to second-
hand smoke is a significant health hazard which exposes members
of the public to increased risk for developing disease and
adversely affects the public health. This exposure has caused,
continues to cause and will continue to cause needless pain,
suffering, and death.
E. The health hazards caused by second -hand smoke are of
variable degree, depending upon such factors as length of
exposure and the age and physical condition of those exposed.
E
F. In addition to the public health problems it causes and
the public health threats it poses, second -hand smoke constitutes
a public nuisance for many people.
G. In some cases, there is a voluntary assumption of the
health hazards and public nuisance impacts caused by second -hand
smoke. In many other cases, however, there is an involuntary or
coerced exposure to these hazards and impacts, and persons are
exposed to second -hand smoke against their will in a wide variety
of places and circumstances.
H. It is understood that regulations addressing the hazards
and undesirable impacts of second -hand smoke will cause certain
economic dislocations and governmental intrusions into private
activities that must be justified by the nature and extent of the
public health hazards and public nuisance impacts presented by
second -hand smoke. Therefore, a balance must be struck between
safeguarding citizens from involuntary exposure to second -hand
smoke on the one hand, and minimizing governmental intrusion into
the affairs of its citizens on the other.
I. It is recognized that certain voluntary efforts have
been carried out independent of government intervention seeking
to address the problem of second -hand smoke and that it is in the
public interest to enact smoking regulations which harmonize with
such efforts so long as they do not compromise the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
J. The widely varying range of conditions under which
persons are exposed to second -hand smoke necessitates tailoring
the regulation of smoking to match various circumstances.
Section 67.3 Definitions
Except where the context requires otherwise, the following
words and phrases shall the following meanings when used in this
ordinance.
A. "Bar" means a place devoted to the serving of alcoholic
beverages for on -site consumption by patrons and where the
service of food is only incidental to the consumption of such
beverages.
B. "Food service establishment" means any commercial
establishment in which food is sold for consumption inside those
premises, including but not limited to restaurants, cafeterias,
coffee shops, diners, sandwich shops, short order cafes, ice
cream and soda shops, and lunch counters. "Food service
establishment" does not include a "bar" as defined in this
section.
0
3
C. "Indoor area" or "Indoors" means any substantially
enclosed area covered by a roof, including a vehicle.
D. "Indoor area open to the public" means any publicly or
privately owned place where members of the public regularly
visit, congregate, conduct business, travel, recreate, eat, pass
time, receive instruction or care, worship, or conduct any other
activities. These areas include all indoor areas used by the
public, regardless of whether or not members of the public
require the permission or consent of some person or entity in
order to be present on the premises in question.
F. "Second -hand smoke" means smoke that comes from a
lighted cigarette, cigar, pipe or any other device used for
smoking tobacco and that is or may be inhaled by any person other
than the smoker (i.e., the person who is smoking the cigarette,
cigar, pipe or other smoking device). "Second -hand smoke"
includes both smoke that escapes into the air from the lighted
end of a cigarette, cigar, pipe, or other smoking device and
smoke that has been inhaled, and is discharged to the air by the
smoker.
E.
"Public" includes all of
those persons who visit, do
business at, attend, congregate or otherwise typically utilize an
indoor area open to the public. Provided, "public" does not
include persons who normally live
at the particular place in
room from other parts of the building in question and a
question,
or their private guests or
invitees, or persons who are
from that room to the ambient air outside the building in which
regularly
employed at that place.
F. "Second -hand smoke" means smoke that comes from a
lighted cigarette, cigar, pipe or any other device used for
smoking tobacco and that is or may be inhaled by any person other
than the smoker (i.e., the person who is smoking the cigarette,
cigar, pipe or other smoking device). "Second -hand smoke"
includes both smoke that escapes into the air from the lighted
end of a cigarette, cigar, pipe, or other smoking device and
smoke that has been inhaled, and is discharged to the air by the
smoker.
I. "Smoke -free work area" means an enclosed room where no
smoking is permitted. Such a room shall have solid walls that
reach from ceiling to floor and separate that room from other
parts of the building in question. All the doors to such a room
must be capable of being shut.
G. "Separate enclosed room" means a room set aside for use
as a smoking room by the owner, operator, manager, sponsor, or
person in charge of a particular facility, which room shall have
solid walls that reach from ceiling to floor and separate that
room from other parts of the building in question and a
ventilation system that removes air, smoke and associated gases
from that room to the ambient air outside the building in which
the room is located. All of the doors to such a room must be
capable of being shut.
H. "Smoke -free area" means an indoor area where smoking is
not permitted by any persons and where smoke is normally
prevented from entering by a combination of walls, doors and /or
ventilation mechanisms.
I. "Smoke -free work area" means an enclosed room where no
smoking is permitted. Such a room shall have solid walls that
reach from ceiling to floor and separate that room from other
parts of the building in question. All the doors to such a room
must be capable of being shut.
4
Section 67.4 General Smoking Restrictions
A. Except as otherwise provided in this ordinance, the
provisions of this section shall govern smoking in all indoor
areas open to the public.
B. No person shall smoke or carry a lighted cigar,
cigarette, pipe or any other form of object or device used for
smoking tobacco in any indoor area open to the public. This
provision prohibits smoking in all indoor areas regularly
utilized by the public. Where a building or other indoor
facility contains some areas that the public regularly utilizes
and other areas that the public does not regularly utilize, this
provision prohibits smoking in the areas commonly used by the
public but not in those areas that the public does not commonly
use.
The indoor areas covered by this provision include but are
not limited to the following types of areas. It is recognized
that many of these items overlap each other (for example,
hallways open to the public exist in many of the specifically
identified types of facilities). The purpose of this listing is
to illustrate the broad coverage of this provision and not to
limit its applicability in any way.
1. museums;
2. theaters or any other area primarily used for or
primarily designed for the purpose of exhibiting any
motion picture, stage drama, musical recital, dance,
lecture or other performance;
3. food markets, stores, food service establishment,
laundromats, banks, and all other commercial service
establishments;
4. arenas, enclosed stadiums, gymnasiums, auditoriums,
clubhouses, service clubs, bowling establishments,
bingo establishments, enclosed areas containing
swimming pools, spas and health clubs, and other
enclosed athletic facilities;
5. elevators, lobbies, stairways, waiting rooms and
waiting areas, restrooms, hallways, and atriums;
6. enclosed bus stops;
7. meeting rooms, offices, and other facilities where the
public routinely conducts business;
8. all public transportation vehicles, including but not
limited to taxicabs; limousines; charter buses; and
interstate, intrastate, and local buses;
5
9. police vehicles while being used to transport members
of the public;
10. hospitals, residential health care facilities licensed
by the State of New York, and all other facilities and
offices that provide health services;
11. schools, including elementary and secondary schools,
colleges, and other educational and vocational
institutions;
12. places of worship;
13. libraries;
14. hotels, motels and all other places of public
accommodation that can accommodate ten or more persons;
15. public buildings.
Section 67.5 Exceptions to General Smoking Restrictions in
Indoor Public Places
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 67.4 of this
ordinance, smoking may be permitted in those places and
circumstances covered by this section. The provisions of this
section shall be interpreted narrowly so that the general
prohibitions of section 67.4 shall have the broadest possible
applicability.
A. Smoking may be permitted in a convention of a private
group or groups where the persons participating in that
convention are individually identified by the sponsor or
organizer of the convention.
B. Smoking may be permitted in any convention, meeting, or
trade show open to the public if the sponsor or organizer gives
(600" notice in any promotional materials or advertisements for that
event that smoking will not be restricted there and prominently
posts notice at the entrance to the convention, meeting or trade
show advising the public that smoking will not be restricted at
that event.
C. Smoking may be permitted in a separate enclosed room or
rooms in a food service establishment, clubhouse, or service
club. Provided, any such room, or any such rooms taken
collectively, that the owner, operator, manager, sponsor or
person in charge of that facility provides for smoking purposes
shall not exceed thirty percent of the seating capacity of that
establishment or of the area occupied by customers in that
establishment, whichever calculation results in the larger area
0
being maintained as a smoke -free area. Where such a room or
rooms is provided for smoking, notice thereof shall be
prominently posted at each entrance to the facility. In those
establishments in which one or more separate enclosed rooms are
provided for smoking, each patron shall be given an opportunity
to state his /her preference regarding where the patron wishes to
be seated.
D. Smoking may be permitted in the concourse area of a
bowling establishment. For the purposes of this provision, the
concourse area shall constitute that area that is behind and
separated from the bowling lanes and the areas occupied by
bowlers while keeping score and actually bowling. Smoking may
not be permitted in any other area of a bowling establishment.
Where smoking is permitted in a bowling establishment pursuant to
this subdivision, notice thereof shall be prominently posted at
each entrance to that facility.
E. (1) Smoking may be permitted in a bar that does not
contain or adjoin a food service establishment.
(2) Smoking may be permitted in a bar that contains or
adjoins a food service establishment only if the bar is in a
separate enclosed room or rooms vis -a -vis that food service
establishment.
(3) Notice shall be prominently posted at the main
entrance(s) to each bar stating the smoking policy established
for that facility.
F. Smoking may be permitted in a bingo establishment,
provided that the organizer or sponsor establishes a contiguous
non - smoking area sufficient to meet patron demand. If at least
70 percent of that establishment's seating capacity is designated
for non - smokers, demand will be deemed to have been met.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, at least 30 percent of the
seating capacity must be designated for non - smokers. Notice
shall be prominently posted at each entrance stating that a
non - smoking section is available.
G. Smoking may be permitted in not more than 70 percent of
the individual rooms rented to guests at hotels, motels, and all
other places of public accommodation that can accommodate ten or
more persons. The owner, operator, manager, or person in charge
of any such establishment where smoking is permitted in certain
individual rooms shall maintain at least thirty percent of the
rooms in that facility as smoke -free areas. Notices advising
guests of the availability of smoke -free rooms shall be
prominently posted in each hotel, motel or other public
accommodation covered by this provision.
H. Smoking may be permitted in retail tobacco stores where
19
O
7
the sale of items other than tobacco is only incidental.
I. Smoking may be
participating in a theatrical
J. Smoking may be permi
rooms in any indoor area open
of such room or rooms is to
occur separate from the other
permitted by performers while
production.
tted in a separate enclosed room or
to the public where the primary use
provide an area where smoking may
public areas of that facility.
K. The judge presiding at a trial may permit smoking in
jury deliberation rooms during that trial, provided that the
rights of non - smokers are protected.
Section 67.6 Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace
A. 1. Every employee who works indoors shall be entitled..to
work in a smoke -free work area at his or her primary work
station. Accordingly, for every employee who works indoors and
desires to work in a smoke -free area, every employer shall
provide a smoke -free work area at that employee's primary work
station, and smoking is hereby prohibited in those smoke -free
work areas.
2. Every employee who is required to utilize a vehicle
during the course of his or her employment shall be entitled to
use a smoke -free vehicle. Accordingly, every employer shall
prohibit smoking, and this ordinance hereby prohibits smoking, in
every vehicle owned by the employer or under the employer's
control that is utilized during the course of employment by an
employee who desires to use a smoke -free vehicle during his or
her employment.
3. This subdivision shall not be deemed to prevent an
employer from assigning an employee to work in a place where
smoking is permitted in accord with Section 67.5 of this
ordinance.
4. This subdivision shall not apply to any work area
covered by the exemptions provided in Section 67.8 of this
ordinance.
B. Within ninety days of the enactment of this ordinance
every employer covered by subdivision A of this section shall
adopt, or if a collective bargaining unit exists, negotiate
through the negotiating process, and subsequently implement and
maintain a written policy regarding smoking in the workplace,
including vehicles owned by or under control of the employer and
used in the course of employment. This policy shall require at
C
least the following:
1. Smoking shall be prohibited in any enclosed indoor
work area occupied by more than one person unless such area is
occupied exclusively by smokers.
2. Smoking shall be prohibited in any vehicle owned by
or under the control of the employer and used by employees during
the course of employment if that vehicle is used by an employee
who wishes to work in a smoke -free area.
3. Smoking shall be prohibited in commonly used work
areas, including but not limited to auditoriums, classrooms,
conference rooms, meeting rooms, elevators, hallways, mail rooms,
supply rooms, recreation rooms, restrooms, employee medical
facilities, and rooms or areas containing photocopying or other
equipment used by employees in common.
4. Contiguous non - smoking areas shall be designated ..in
cafeterias, lunchrooms and employee lounges, which non - smoking
areas shall constitute at least 70 percent of the seating
capacity and 70 percent of the gross floor area of these
facilities.
5. The employer shall use its best efforts to comply
with requests from non - smoking employees to be assigned to areas
where smoking is prohibited by Section 67.4 of this ordinance and
to avoid being assigned to areas covered by Section 67.5 of this
ordinance. The employer shall keep written documentation
concerning such efforts and make such documentation available to
the City upon request.
C. In those areas that constitute both work places and
indoor areas open to the public, the provisions of Section 67.4
of this ordinance shall govern.
D. In those places covered by Section 67.4 of this
ordinance an employer may designate a separate enclosed room or
rooms not open to the public for use by employees as a smoking
room(s).
E. No employee shall be penalized or discriminated against
in any way for stating his or her preference for working in a
smoke -free area or for working in an area where smoking is
allowed, and no employee shall be penalized or discriminated
against in any way for seeking full compliance with this
ordinance in that employee's work place.
F. It shall be the responsibility of every employer to
adequately guarantee the protection of both the rights of smoking
and non - smoking employees.
D
G7
G. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to deny any
employee the right to designate the entire place of employment,
or any portion thereof, as a smoke -free work area, subject to any
employee negotiations pursuant to subdivision B of this section.
H. Every employer shall prominently post a written copy of
the smoking policy for that work place, including any amendments
thereto, in the work place, shall provide a written copy of that
policy to every employee, and shall provide a written copy of
that policy to every prospective employee.
Section 67.7 Posting of Signs
(600e "Smoking" or "No Smoking" signs, or the international "No
Smoking" symbol (consisting of a pictorial representation of a
burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle with a red bar across
it) shall be prominently and conspicuously posted in every place
where smoking is regulated by this ordinance by the owner,
operator, manager, or other person having control of such place.
Such signs shall be protected from tampering, damage, removal or
concealment.
Section 67.8 Smoking Restrictions Inapplicable
The smoking restrictions in this ordinance shall not apply
to the following:
A. Private homes, private apartments and dwelling rooms,
and private motor vehicles (other than motor vehicles owned or
controlled by an employer and used by that employer's employees
in the course of their employment).
B. Any place where a private social function is being held
during which the arrangements, including but not limited to
seating, are under the control of the sponsor of the function and
not the owner, operator, manager, or person in charge of such
place. This exception shall apply only during the course of such
function.
C. Public accommodation facilities that can accommodate
fewer than ten people.
D. Common residential areas in a fraternity house, a
sorority house, a multiple dwelling, a rooming or boarding house,
or a dormitory that are utilized collectively by the residents of
those facilities and /or by members of the public. Common
residential areas in those facilities include but are not limited
to lounges, hallways, recreation rooms, mail rooms, laundry
areas, bathrooms, meeting rooms, dining rooms, cafeterias,
10
elevators, lobbies, stairways, waiting rooms and waiting areas
that are used in common by the residents of those facilities.
Section 67.9 General Provisions
A. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to deny the
owner, operator, manager, or person in charge of any indoor place
(including but not limited to those places covered by section
67.5 and 67.8 of this ordinance) the right to designate the
entire place, or any part thereof, as a smoke -free area.
B. Any question concerning the construction of this
ordinance shall be resolved in a manner that will provide the
greatest protection to all persons from second -hand smoke.
C. This ordinance does not permit, and shall not be
construed in any way to permit smoking in any place where it is
otherwise prohibited by any law, rule, or regulation.
D. The owner, operator, manager, or person in charge of a
place covered by this ordinance shall request compliance with
this ordinance by all persons in such place and shall ask persons
who do not comply with this ordinance to leave those premises.
Section 67.10 Waivers
A. The Mayor or a person specifically designated by the
Mayor pursuant to this section may grant a waiver from the
application of a specific provision of this ordinance, provided
that prior to the granting of any such waiver the applicant for a
waiver shall establish in writing that compliance with a specific
provision of this ordinance would cause the applicant undue
financial hardship or that other factors exist which would render
strict compliance unreasonable.
It is the purpose of this section to provide an
opportunity for waivers to be granted in truly exceptional cases.
It is not the purpose of this section to provide a means for
avoiding the spirit and letter of this ordinance in the usual
cases where compliance with this ordinance will impose some level
of burden on those who must take specific actions in order to
comply with it.
B. Every waiver granted pursuant to this section shall be
stated in writing, shall state the basis for granting the waiver,
and shall be subject to such conditions or restrictions as may be
necessary to minimize the adverse effects of the waiver upon
persons subject to an involuntary exposure to second -hand smoke
and to ensure that the waiver is consistent with the general
purpose and intent of this ordinance.
0
11
C. Waivers granted pursuant to this section shall be valid
for a period of not more than twelve months and may be renewed
upon application. Applications for renewal shall be reviewed in
the same manner as provided for applications for waivers.
D. The Mayor or the Mayor's designee may adopt any
procedure appropriate for consideration of waivers and waiver
renewals under this section.
E. Waivers granted pursuant to this section shall not be
transferred to any other party without prior written approval by
the Mayor or the Mayor's designee.
F. A waiver may be granted pursuant to the provisions of
(400" this section to permit smoking in a place where this ordinance
would otherwise prohibit smoking, if the owner, operator,
manager, sponsor or person in charge of that place demonstrates
that a ventilation or electronic air cleansing system with odor
removing filters installed at that location will remove at least
90% of the smoke and associated gases from that place on a
continuing basis.
(Industry standards are: 100 -299 cubic feet
per person- 8 - 10 changes per hour; 300 -499
cubic feet per person- 6 - 8 changes per
hour; 500 or more cubic feet per person - 6
changes per hour; Metal Lab Environmental
Systems.)
Any waiver granted pursuant to this subdivision shall
contain a condition that the waiver shall be revoked should the
ventilation and /or electronic air cleansing system fail to meet
the above performance specifications or not be adequately
maintained - (i.e. filter changes per manufacturer
specifications.)
Section 67.11 Penalties and Enforcement
A. Any person who smokes in any place where this ordinance
prohibits smoking shall be guilty of a violation and subject to
a civil penalty not to exceed $50.00. Each separate act of
smoking in a place where this ordinance prohibits smoking shall
constitute a separate offense.
B. Any owner, operator, manager, or person in charge of any
place in which this ordinance prohibits or otherwise regulates
smoking who fails to comply with its provisions in the operation
and management of such place (including but not limited to
creating smoke -free areas, requesting that persons who come to
that place comply with the provisions of this ordinance or leave
12
the premises, and posting no- smoking signs) shall be guilty of a
violation and subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $200.00.
Each day that any such owner, operator, manager, or person in
charge fails to comply with this ordinance shall constitute a
separate offense.
C. The City Attorney and the City Prosecutor shall have
authority to prosecute persons who violate this ordinance through
proceedings filed in City Court.
D. In order to enforce this ordinance, the City may seek
appropriate injunctive relief in a court of competent
jurisdiction.
E. As part of other inspections which their departments
routinely conduct, the Building Commissioner and the Fire Chief
shall make provision for inspecting smoke -free areas and no-
smoking signs required pursuant to this ordinance. In addition,
the Building Commissioner and the Fire Chief shall include
standard language in permits or other approvals their respective
departments issue requiring the persons who hold those permits or
approvals to comply with the provisions of this ordinance.
F. The Superintendent of Public Works shall make provision
for inspecting on a regular basis all smoke -free areas and no-
smoking signs required by this ordinance in all buildings and
other structures owned by the City. In addition, the
Superintendent of Public Works shall include standard language in
permits or other approvals issued by the Department of Public
Works for use of City property requiring the persons who hold
those permits or approvals to comply with the provisions of this
ordinance.
G. Where the Mayor determines that any inspection in
addition to those covered by subdivision E or F of this section
is necessary to enforce this ordinance, the Mayor shall have
authority to designate the appropriate City official to carry out
such inspection.
H. Any person who observes what he or she believes to be a
violation of this ordinance may file with the City Attorney a
written complaint concerning the alleged violation.
Section 67.12 Severability
If any provision of this ordinance or the application
thereof is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance and the
application thereof to other persons or circumstances shall not
be affected by such holding and shall remain in full force and
effect.
It
13
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect on October 15, 1988
following publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11 (B)
of the Ithaca City Charter, provided that the penalties and
enforcement provisions set forth in Section 67.11 shall not apply
until April 15, 1989.
OFFICE OF
CITY CLERK
�i
7
CITY OF ITHACA
108 EAST GREEN STREET
ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850
TELEPHONE: 272 -1713
CODE 607
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR GUTENBERGER
ATTY . NASH
ALDERPERSONS
FROM: C. PAOLANGELI, CLERK er
DATE: OCTOBER 20, 1988
SUBJ: ADDITION TO OCTOBER 5, 1988 COMMON COUNCIL MINUTES
Alderperson Nichols has requested that the following
addition be made to the CC minutes of 10 /5/88. After the
resolution on Hydropower - Request to Cornell for Lease of Land
and Water Rights (page 4) instead of "Discussion followed on
the floor ", the following be aided:
" Alderperson Nichols stated that he had been informed by the
Mayor that discussions were already taking place with Cornell
relevant to the proposed request. He would move that the
resolution be referred to the Planning & Development Committee
and the Hydropower Commission with the understanding that the
Mayor will keep those Committees informed about those discussions.."
<V
An Equal Opportunity Employer with an AlGrmalive Action Program'